The East India Company: The Original Corporate Raiders

The (British) East India Company: The Original Corporate Raiders
For a century, the East India Company conquered, subjugated and plundered vast tracts of south Asia. The lessons of its brutal reign have never been more relevant

Attachment 3889

One of the very first Indian words to enter the English language was the Hindustani slang for plunder: “loot”. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, this word was rarely heard outside the plains of north India until the late 18th century, when it suddenly became a common term across Britain. To understand how and why it took root and flourished in so distant a landscape, one need only visit Powis Castle.

The last hereditary Welsh prince, Owain Gruffydd ap Gwenwynwyn, built Powis castle as a craggy fort in the 13th century; the estate was his reward for abandoning Wales to the rule of the English monarchy. But its most spectacular treasures date from a much later period of English conquest and appropriation: Powis is simply awash with loot from India, room after room of imperial plunder, extracted by the East India Company in the 18th century.

There are more Mughal artefacts stacked in this private house in the Welsh countryside than are on display at any one place in India – even the National Museum in Delhi. The riches include hookahs of burnished gold inlaid with empurpled ebony; superbly inscribed spinels and jewelled daggers; gleaming rubies the colour of pigeon’s blood and scatterings of lizard-green emeralds. There are talwars set with yellow topaz, ornaments of jade and ivory; silken hangings, statues of Hindu gods and coats of elephant armour.

Such is the dazzle of these treasures that, as a visitor last summer, I nearly missed the huge framed canvas that explains how they came to be here. The picture hangs in the shadows at the top of a dark, oak-panelled staircase. It is not a masterpiece, but it does repay close study. An effete Indian prince, wearing cloth of gold, sits high on his throne under a silken canopy. On his left stand scimitar and spear carrying officers from his own army; to his right, a group of powdered and periwigged Georgian gentlemen. The prince is eagerly thrusting a scroll into the hands of a statesmanlike, slightly overweight Englishman in a red frock coat.

The painting shows a scene from August 1765, when the young Mughal emperor Shah Alam, exiled from Delhi and defeated by East India Company troops, was forced into what we would now call an act of involuntary privatisation. The scroll is an order to dismiss his own Mughal revenue officials in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa, and replace them with a set of English traders appointed by Robert Clive – the new governor of Bengal – and the directors of the EIC, who the document describes as “the high and mighty, the noblest of exalted nobles, the chief of illustrious warriors, our faithful servants and sincere well-wishers, worthy of our royal favours, the English Company”. The collecting of Mughal taxes was henceforth subcontracted to a powerful multinational corporation – whose revenue-collecting operations were protected by its own private army.

It was at this moment that the East India Company (EIC) ceased to be a conventional corporation, trading and silks and spices, and became something much more unusual. Within a few years, 250 company clerks backed by the military force of 20,000 locally recruited Indian soldiers had become the effective rulers of Bengal. An international corporation was transforming itself into an aggressive colonial power.

Using its rapidly growing security force {*ARMY*} – its army had grown to 260,000 men by 1803 – it swiftly subdued and seized an entire subcontinent. Astonishingly, this took less than half a century. The first serious territorial conquests began in Bengal in 1756; 47 years later, the company’s reach extended as far north as the Mughal capital of Delhi, and almost all of India south of that city was by then effectively ruled from a boardroom in the City of London. “What honour is left to us?” asked a Mughal official named Narayan Singh, shortly after 1765, “when we have to take orders from a handful of traders who have not yet learned to wash their bottoms?”

We still talk about the British conquering India, but that phrase disguises a more sinister reality. It was not the British government {but who was the BEIC an agent of?} that seized India at the end of the 18th century, but a dangerously unregulated private company headquartered in one small office, five windows wide, in London, and managed in India by an unstable sociopath – Clive.

(Source/more)

Related:
Commodore Perry and Japan (1853-1854)

Thanks again.

I was viewing that in terms of Dutch v. British rule over VOC. Either way, as you point out, a breach of trust to have a privately operated military force.

P.S. This brings up the history of Executive Order, especially warring without the prior approval of Congress. More recently I would say the execution of the three-day Bankers' Holiday upon 30-day Judgment of my Bill of Exchange; like I have pointed out, 371 years after my ancestral patent. I recall the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act being cited while BUSH rammed the new War on Terrorism down Congress' throat.


I am of course anxious that somebody may mention the dead Presidents at my feet to the Secret Service:

Attachment 3891

Attachment 3892

I have mentioned WASHINGTON and even entertain the esoteric that George was killed in New York early in the Revolution, and replaced with Adam WEISHAUPT; albeit not seriously enough to defend. But we might examine some of the mischief arising out of killing LINCOLN prior to him declaring the Extraordinary Occasion over...

Pennsylvania - ROBINSON V COUNTRYWIDEAttachment 3893

I recall noting at the time, 153 years (the first Cube Sum Number Lock after 1) passing between April 15, 1861 and 2014.


Attachment 3894

It is most fetching how thin the veneer might actually be, between the Constitution (extraordinary occasion clause) and the original Charter of 1629?

The phantom of the opera in the perfect image of a priest.

You make me wish I had paid more attention to the metaphors.



P.S. Zechariah transfigured across the Veil, only to become mute for the gestation period of John the Baptist. Is this so that uttering the Name of the Prophet would not interfere with the Creation Process?

Dutch West Indies company was chiefly
to exploit the indigenous peoples pun intended Starting a New World Order in 1654 New Amsterdam and Newport Rhode Island as the D-W-I-C headquarters yet the commercial instinctive truth is our merchandising monopoly
were prevented by ordinances issued by governor of NEW YORK forbearance
in the domestic economy however no federal reservations or reserves act yet. Discretion was
quickly discovered that the territory inhabited by the
Indians would be a fertile field there were no laws preventing the Dutch W I co from
trading with the Indians.The trading with the enigmatic enemies act was a few beads barrels blankets away.Carpetbaggers a ALEXANDER HAMILTON process was in the new world.A revolutionary war and a few more masonic lodges later we got a commercial constitution a paper freedom that only bye signature and citizenship the declaration and state has been prepared bill of lading or Bill of rights its in exchange for what DEMAND or DEBT Tribe of Danny Boy the pipes a major factor is materialistic gain what does one gain with this knowledge that truth will set things right or beyond materialistic truth and its freedom to set a soul free,Greed has everything to gain for the greedy should i be surprised with spiritual greed .Do i need a lawful excuse to refuse legal judgement can i pay to the order do i belong too this order.Questioned freedoms and bills of exchange trading with the enemy endorsed signatories land titles treatises or trespassing. Profiteering Privateers the water mark its as pagan and as private as this kingdom can be yours beneath one materialistic sky however lookup the competition this flight has been commercially oversold .Delivered = Accounting who pays for ignorance the claimant.Who ignores the claimant becomes the claim . Masonic lodge and or Haudenosaunee longhouse 1722 (or thereabouts), the Tuscarora Nation from the region known as North Carolina, was admitted to the Confederacy under the sponsorship of the Oneida Nation. The Five Nations of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy thus became the Six Nations. The people of the Six Nations, also known by the French term, [Iroquois ] Confederacy, call themselves the Hau de no sau nee (ho dee noe sho nee) meaning People Building a Long House. Located in the northeastern region of North America, originally the Six Nations was five and included the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas. The sixth nation, the Tuscaroras, migrated into Iroquois country in the early eighteenth century. Together these peoples comprise the oldest living participatory democracy on earth. Their story, and governance truly based on the consent of the governed, contains a great deal of life-promoting intelligence for those of us not familiar with this area of American history. The original United States representative democracy, fashioned by such central authors as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, drew much inspiration from this confederacy of nations. In our present day, we can benefit immensely, in our quest to establish anew a government truly dedicated to all life's liberty and happiness much as has been practiced by the Six Nations for over 800 hundred years. Nations were formed for commercial trade with this in mind trading a foreign state or interstate controlled commerce . Regarding the origination of the word Iroquois,
Another matter that surprised many contemporary observers was the Iroquois' sophisticated use of oratory. Their excellence with the spoken word, among other attributes, often caused Colden and others to compare the Iroquois to the Romans and Greeks. The French use of the term Iroquois to describe the confederacy was itself related to this oral tradition; it came from the practice of ending their orations with the two words hiro and kone. The first meant "I say" or "I have said" and the second was an exclamation of joy or sorrow according to the circumstances of the speech. The two words, joined and made subject to French pronunciation, became Iroquois. The English were often exposed to the Iroquois' oratorical skills at eighteenth-century treaty councils. Yankee slick pass the talking stick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

Dutch West Indies company was chiefly
to exploit the indigenous peoples pun intended Starting a New World Order in 1654...

The trading with the enigmatic enemies act...


The two words, joined and made subject to French pronunciation, became Iroquois. The English were often exposed to the Iroquois' oratorical skills at eighteenth-century treaty councils. Yankee slick pass the talking stick.

---

Trading with the Enigmatic Enemies Act (1917) - It is tempting but I will refrain from stealing that.

Thank you for the Canadian perspective! Here we have all land westward of an eastern seaboard river granted to the US by the Iroquois Federation. - I thinks this is the perfect example of your point:

Attachment 3898


Feeding on the ignorance about geography makes me wonder how the cajoling PETERS was affiliated with the VOC?



P.S. I have long associated the Treaty of Fort Stanwix with "consecration of the altar" as in sanctifying the transplant vineyard.


Attachment 3899

Creation and communication are synonyms. Only beings of like order can truly communicate.


P.P.S.


https://youtu.be/ooomyvwkUkc


https://youtu.be/bRBiolyAREQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

Dutch West Indies company was chiefly
to exploit the indigenous peoples pun intended Starting a New World Order in 1654 New Amsterdam and Newport Rhode Island as the D-W-I-C headquarters yet the commercial instinctive truth is our merchandising monopoly
were prevented by ordinances issued by governor of NEW YORK forbearance
in the domestic economy however no federal reservations or reserves act yet. Discretion was
quickly discovered that the territory inhabited by the
Indians would be a fertile field there were no laws preventing the Dutch W I co from
trading with the Indians.The trading with the enigmatic enemies act was a few beads barrels blankets away.Carpetbaggers a ALEXANDER HAMILTON process was in the new world.A revolutionary war and a few more masonic lodges later we got a commercial constitution a paper freedom that only bye signature and citizenship the declaration and state has been prepared bill of lading or Bill of rights its in exchange for what DEMAND or DEBT Tribe of Danny Boy the pipes a major factor is materialistic gain what does one gain with this knowledge that truth will set things right or beyond materialistic truth and its freedom to set a soul free,Greed has everything to gain for the greedy should i be surprised with spiritual greed .Do i need a lawful excuse to refuse legal judgement can i pay to the order do i belong too this order.Questioned freedoms and bills of exchange trading with the enemy endorsed signatories land titles treatises or trespassing. Profiteering Privateers the water mark its as pagan and as private as this kingdom can be yours beneath one materialistic sky however lookup the competition this flight has been commercially oversold .Delivered = Accounting who pays for ignorance the claimant.Who ignores the claimant becomes the claim . Masonic lodge and or Haudenosaunee longhouse 1722 (or thereabouts), the Tuscarora Nation from the region known as North Carolina, was admitted to the Confederacy under the sponsorship of the Oneida Nation. The Five Nations of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy thus became the Six Nations. The people of the Six Nations, also known by the French term, [Iroquois ] Confederacy, call themselves the Hau de no sau nee (ho dee noe sho nee) meaning People Building a Long House. Located in the northeastern region of North America, originally the Six Nations was five and included the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas. The sixth nation, the Tuscaroras, migrated into Iroquois country in the early eighteenth century. Together these peoples comprise the oldest living participatory democracy on earth. Their story, and governance truly based on the consent of the governed, contains a great deal of life-promoting intelligence for those of us not familiar with this area of American history. The original United States representative democracy, fashioned by such central authors as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, drew much inspiration from this confederacy of nations. In our present day, we can benefit immensely, in our quest to establish anew a government truly dedicated to all life's liberty and happiness much as has been practiced by the Six Nations for over 800 hundred years. Nations were formed for commercial trade with this in mind trading a foreign state or interstate controlled commerce . Regarding the origination of the word Iroquois,
Another matter that surprised many contemporary observers was the Iroquois' sophisticated use of oratory. Their excellence with the spoken word, among other attributes, often caused Colden and others to compare the Iroquois to the Romans and Greeks. The French use of the term Iroquois to describe the confederacy was itself related to this oral tradition; it came from the practice of ending their orations with the two words hiro and kone. The first meant "I say" or "I have said" and the second was an exclamation of joy or sorrow according to the circumstances of the speech. The two words, joined and made subject to French pronunciation, became Iroquois. The English were often exposed to the Iroquois' oratorical skills at eighteenth-century treaty councils. Yankee slick pass the talking stick.

---

Interesting how you have mixed useful history into suggestion and allegorical metaphors. Thank you. I am picking this apart sentence by sentence.


Attachment 3900


Attachment 3901


Attachment 3902

Note: By the time you reach the end of the post, its important to have in mind that it was the (Roman Catholic) Habsburgs that were outsed during the Dutch Revolution.
It might be helpful to consider that DEIC, DWIC and BEIC may have been each 'states' in fact. Or as Philip J. Stern put it regarding BEIC specifically: "A State in the Disguise of a Merchant" (entered as titled to a segment of a book).

The authority for BEIC in India had to do with a Portugese cession regarding Portugese India. Let it be very clear that alongside BEIC or VOC/DEIC/DEWC there was the Portuguese East India Company (1628–1633). Could it be that the (Calvinist) Dutch and (Anglican) British got their idea for BEIC and VOC from Holy Roman Empire models?

Re:xparte, treatment of "natives"
Was DEIC and DEWC though allegedly of a Protestant nation simply carrying out Roman Catholic Canon law? As in did they incorporated it or adopt it despite all appearances, allegations or notions to the contrary?

Re: Enemy
Perhaps that means "enemy of Christ" though the meaning of the term may have varied wildly.

Quote:

---

One of the justifications for enslavement was the concept of "enemies of Christ", who could be enslaved according to a series of Papal bulls. This tended to be very widely interpreted to include, as well as Muslims, Eastern Orthodox Christians in military situations, and Slavs, Africans and Americans who opposed conversion.

---

So begs the question, from a neutral observer-spectator perspective, what might any of this have to do with the actual identity of the harlot in the Book of Revelations and not just the identify of the harlot but of her children or daughters (ala Book of Revelations)? How do events which play out after the 1700s relate to the rise of or permitting of the proliferation of speculative religion?

Did BEIC and VOC borrow from the Holy Roman Empire model?

Related:

• The Truth About the Catholic Church and Slavery (The problem wasn't that the leadership was silent. It was that almost nobody listened)
• Slavery Incorporated Into (Roman Catholic) Canon Law - Catholic Church and Slavery (touches upon Islam and more)
• Dum Diversas

Quote:

---

P.S. Though there may be zero connection, note the similarity....

Attachment 3904
The flag of the Gujarat Sultanate (of India)

Attachment 3905
The flag of Washington, D.C. with its three stars (or triple crown?)

Attachment 3906
The flag of Austria.


Attachment 3907
George Washington coat of arms.


Attachment 3908
But then again, there was such a thing as Habsburg India and .. the Austrian East India Company. Was the 'obsession' with India to do with gaining sovereignty or right of control over "Indians". What was India's relation or connection to Egypt or Ethiopia? (a very interesting one no doubt)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

So begs the question, from a neutral observer-spectator perspective, what might any of this have to do with the actual identity of the harlot in the Book of Revelations and not just the identify of the harlot but of her children or daughters (ala Book of Revelations)? How do events which play out after the 1700s relate to the rise of or permitting of the proliferation of speculative religion?

---

Gnosticism/Humanism rears it's ugly head again...

from this source

Thomas Harris (1967/1973)

I would like to suggest that a reasonable approximation of this objective moral order, or of ultimate
truth is that persons are important in that they are all bound together in a universal relatedness
which transcends their own personal existence. Is this a reasonable postulate? The most helpful
analytic concept in attempting to answer this question is the concept of comparative difficulties. It
is difficult to believe that persons are important, and it is also difficult to believe they are not…. We
cannot prove they are important. We have only the faith to believe they are, because of the greater
difficulty of believing they are not. (p. 254)

On the surface such a statement on the value of humans suggests a high level of morality. In
reality, it lacks all virtue since there is no longer any external ?measuring stick, no objective law
which determines such absolute definitions. All of history recounts what happens to persons
when subjective feelings are used as the ?final solution? in defining the worth of individuals.
Adoration degenerates to mere respect and finally to contempt with its logical and awful
consequences. Jonas (1958) lays the blame for such anthropological degeneracy at the feet of
Gnostic teaching:

Among the reproaches which Plotinus raises against the Gnostics… is that they lack a theory of
virtue; and he maintains that it is their contempt of the world that prevents them from having one….
Their doctrine… holds in contempt all the laws down here and virtue which has risen among men
from the beginning of time, and puts temperance to ridicule. (p. 266)

At its worst, humanism is seen as human nature possessing a core of evil; at its best, humanism
can only generate a pseudo-value system since the formulation of values is simply a subjective
experience with some sort of governmental entity as the final social arbitrator. But when these
forms of governance arbitrate, it tends to bring out this inherently evil human core rather than the
hoped for idealistic peace so sought after by the humanist. The end result of this is a subjective
subjectivity, a sort of sophisticated solipsism or, more classically, an existential view of reality.
The existential, nihilistic, humanistic world-view then brings us to the door of Fourth Force
Psychology. For the mystical religions of the East claim to hold an answer for the ultimate
humanistic dilemma.

and further...

The religions of the West are not sufficiently esoteric to be included in a ?science of psychology,
a concept which must be maintained for psychology to remain credible in this culture. Thus a
?fourth force in psychology has emerged to provide this ?science of the soul with a tie to the
religions of the East. Note how the various Eastern religions of today try to pass themselves off
as scientific (Yoga, faddish Transcendental Meditation, and Zen Buddhism) in the same way that
the Gnostics who were quasi-scientific for their age tried to be identified as religious. Those who
are encouraging this merging of science and religion describe the trend in this way:

An integration of science and eastern religion is clearly emerging. If science and religion are so
broadly similar, and not arbitrarily limited in their domains, they should at sometime clearly
converge. I believe this confluence is inevitable. For they both represent man's efforts to
understand his universe and must ultimately be dealing with the same substance. As we
understand more in each realm, the two must grow together… But converge they must, and
through this should come new strength for both. (Townes, 1976, pp. 10-19)

The Gnostic influence here is unmistakable. The password used to gain entrance into our
sophisticated scientific age by those wearing the cloak of religion is quantum physics. Emerging
from this is a new psychology, Fourth Force Psychology, which is represented as a ?science of
consciousness (Pelletier, 1978, pp. 32-66). This is exactly what the ancients experienced as
metaphysics (Aristotle) or speculative physics, the same concept that was used in the earlier
discussion of nature philosophy.

Therefore psychology has come full circle from speculative religion (the Eastern mysteries)
through speculative philosophy (the Greeks), speculative science (the Gnostics), speculations
concerning human nature (dualism), speculative philosophy again (Freudian and Jungian
psychoanalysis), speculative human nature again (humanistic psychology), speculative science
again (quantum physics), and finally to speculative religion (the Eastern mysteries).
The underlying problem to this circular dilemma is how humanity has handled the Gospel.
This was the problem of the Gnostics in specific and humankind as a whole both before Christ
and after. When the Resurrection is considered the central theme in Christian doctrine (I
Corinthians 15) the distinction is clear between what Christ taught and experienced and what the
Gnostics, Eastern mystics, and modern metaphysicists speculate. It is the case of the
Resurrection versus a belief in reincarnation.

Reincarnation is implied in Gnosticism and certainly represents the basis of Eastern
religions. Life becomes extremely insignificant to the Gnostic and the Eastern mystic, but to the
Christian life is the basis of resurrection. Life is real and the world is real. We begin at
conception but we die in the end, at death. It is only the Resurrection of Christ that gives life. All
is not an illusion; we are not an emanation; we do not reincarnate or transmigrate. Life is
important and, indeed, it is all that we have.

Training in virtue and, in particular, the training of moral courage was an absolute necessity and it was held to be of paramount importance. Owing to lack of time, One cannot enlarge upon this today, but there was a conviction that knowledge can only benefit the world when what can be done by a man who knows, is done only by one who is good. However improbable that seems to people who look on earlier ages as barbaric and try thinking that nowadays we have made such wonderful progress — so wonderful, in fact, that thousands are bathed in blood every week since in Gods name we are trusting good men like Cortez Columbus State led by those who had undergone the moral training and discipline spreading the Doctrine .The modern age is not adapted for directly applying such a principle. Just imagine how such a principle might be realized today when everyone says what he knows as soon as possible — or even has it published — and no one can prevent it. It would be illusory to think that anything, social institution or whatever, could stop it. Today is the day of publicity. What, then, must replace this older principle of only allowing men who had undergone moral discipline to attain Knowledge? It must be replaced with the assurance that the imparted knowledge itself must contain a certain force that brings forth good through itself, actually and really to bring forth of itself what is good. Spiritual Standing is a good knowledge of what holding a dollar bill in a heathens face without the knowing in God I trust.Commercial Corruption of Spiritual Standing the Americas is a great place for hypocrites on both sides .Heads rolled before european exploitation just the doctrine was vigilance yet paganising. Rejected as inquisitive customs the Spanish inquisition hits a mirroring.Who Creamed your Corn.

That touches on a point that I discovered in high school contemplating life with my buddies.

Before the phone and TV I would have relied on somebody, usually a stranger for news about what was happening where he had been. - From wherever he had come traveling. I would of course repeat what he had said and this "gossip" would become news. If he lied to me, I would lie to others. If somebody had lied to him, he would be lying to me in turn...

So it seems that a man was actually held to a higher standard about his honor and word back in the "crude" time of the past, of which you speak. The day of social media emotionalism was preceded by a Western Bible Belt (Colorado Springs) wave of Prophets and then a spasmic Patriot Guru named Tim TURNER (in prison until 2027 I hear). It really amazed me how one named Monte JUDAH made some prophecies, then admitted to his following he was a false prophet when they failed, and still had the exact same following. But what really got me was watching all the false prophets during that charismatic phase just ignore or somehow rationalize that the transform through which they were interpreting information was simply something other than the Holy Spirit of God. And the congregants would ignorantly just brush it off too.

That is why the primary instruction for discerning the spirits was a question as to whether Jesus/Y'shua the Anointed came in the flesh or not. Because to deny that would be to deny the incarnation, death, resurrection and ascension altogether. Clearly there are those who hold or who have held to the notion of only a 'wraith like' or 'spirit form' having come or, alternatively, the idea that he never came ever. Falling for mere manifestations of power or psychic experience isn't sufficient.

Quote:

---

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. --1 John 4:3 (KJV)

---

So that entire camp that denies he and the Messiah ever came is described by reference (they are waiting for a different Messiah--whether they call him "Christ" or "He" or "Him" is irrelevant). Could there be such a thing as subscribers to a proverbial Worthless Shepherd function?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

Could there be such a thing as subscribers to a proverbial Worthless Shepherd function?

---

This could go somewhere and get right back to the Topic because I have integrated the Worthless Shepherd prophecy into my interpretation of the Book of Mark. The attached rendition is suggested by The Nazarene Gospel Restored and is a slight rearrangement of Zechariah verses so to explain how the Worthless Shepherd Prophecy effected the events at the Last Supper.

In context or alone like I quoted you, I am getting nowhere matching up a "Worthless Shepherd function" with your point. Albeit I am intrigued. My habit is to find reproducible mental models (math) and apply the math to discover useful revelation behind otherwise encrypted parable; dispelling ILLUSION.

ILLUSION

1) parable
2) myth
3) fable
4) hallucination
5) legend

The list goes on and on but I like categories of FIVE.

My take on math: symbols for expressing and record patterns that we might observe. As in who rejected Jesus/Y'shua perhaps became or become subscribers to a 'Worthless Shepherd function' it keeps producing predictable results: misery for subscriber and even for those they might adversely affect. Whether its misery from searching for grandeur and riches in Amway or misery of seeking liberty in black magic only to be caught up in dark Karmic cycles and so forth.

Quote:

---

“And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.” 1 Samuel 8:7 (KJV)

---

See also: Bar Kokhba revolt (or Zechariah 11 Fulfilled). Generally: adultery and indirection.

***

Quote:

---

Bar-Kokhba is said to have severely persecuted Christians who "did not deny Jesus as the Messiah and blaspheme him."...

Convinced that Eleazar, Bar-Kokhba’s right hand man, wanted to surrender Bethar, the city in which Bar-Kokhba put forth his last stand, Bar-Kokhba kicked the priest with his foot and killed him. Immediately thereafter in fulfillment of Leviticus 24:19-22, a heavenly voice is recorded to have been heard quoting Zechariah 11:17: “Woe to the worthless shepherd that leaveth the flock! The sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye! Thou hast paralyzed the arm of Israel and blinded their right eye; therefore shall thy arm wither and thy right eye grow dim!”[16] The paralyzing of the arm of Israel mentioned above may be illustrated by the fact that Bar-Kokbha required the soldiers of his army to bite off their right fingers in order to prove their loyalty to him.[17]

Bethar was soon captured by the Romans and Bar-Kokhba was killed on the ninth day of Av–the very same day in which the first and second Jewish temples had been destroyed. A Cuthean then brought Bar-Kokhba’s head to Hadrian. Hadrian then ordered the man to bring him his body. When the Cuthean returned, he found a serpent wrapped around Bar-Kokhba’s neck. When the man relayed this story, Hadrian replied, “If his God had not slain him who could have overcome him?”

---

Interestingly enough, it was Hadrian that renamed Judea (to) Palestine (as in Philistines ..Dagon).

ones handshake is honoured only if your a Man of your word the handshake is symbolic of some trust and a healthy fear of God and his internal word. Material handshake spiritual handshake two hands around someones neck is not a legal handshake without lawful excuse . Its A miracle Christ never shook hands with the Church Moses tapping a ROCK and the BROAD at the well asking Christ how he is going to help without a bucket both rivers of life Moses people thirst a burning knowledge /and a rock questioned. Christ what Rock you stand with or the one the church is hiding under is just been questioned with Moses as the Church we all thirst for some handshake it hides the fear of God as agreement between men or a deal in the eyes of God is just materialistic and its the word thats spiritual .No blessing required no swearing .Deals are as old as the paperwork .AZTECS and political power came from KERNEL CORN THE harvesting hearts thats a church thing SEPHARDIC HEBREWS were no match for CATHOLIC exploitation and expulsions when your Crown couldn't pay its debts it literally ripped a beating heart out of Any merchant mariner or those banking merchants of Venice MEXICO VIA Holland the VENETIANS WOODEN SHIPS NOT SHOES and the rest is justified handshakes .Discovering America is joining our underestimated past.Truth is just a regional bank where we store blame. one church at a time if offensive and defensive were just a handshake it would be just so much less to remember. If its written its just hidden within the words. in the beginning WAS without WAS in who's being or in what beginning . A happy being needs a tragedy of wordsmiths or a smile needs a wipe.musings or muskets.Gringo

Quote:

---

My take on math: symbols for expressing and record patterns that we might observe. As in who rejected Jesus/Y'shua perhaps became or become subscribers to a 'Worthless Shepherd function' it keeps producing predictable results: misery for subscriber and even for those they might adversely affect.

---

What is mathematics, Really? by Rubin HERSH clarifies - The study of reproducible mental models. Which is what you said, as I read it.

You took me to revisit these two 1928 Century Magazine articles and be reminded that Jesus is Idumean in the multicultural setting of Israel. Edomite, presuming my take true that Jesus was the bastard son of young Archelaus HEROD, son of Idumean Jew Herod the Great. This article seems bereft of the distinction between Jews and Israelites as in the Books Ezra and Nehemiah. Without factoring in Nebuchadnezzar's mental capture I doubt the article will suffice for my purposes this wonderful High Sabbath morning.

Jesus being Edomite adds a new lens to a mixed reaction to public coronation.

Quote:

---

Mar 11:27 And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders,
Mar 11:28 And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?
Mar 11:29 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
Mar 11:30 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me.

---

John, the King's (Archelaus - Antipas and Philip were Tetrarchs) Prophet had crowned Jesus from Administrative Headquarters in Exile - the "wilderness" East of the Jordan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

ones handshake is honoured only if your a Man of your word the handshake is symbolic of some trust and a healthy fear of God and his internal word. Material handshake spiritual handshake two hands around someones neck is not a legal handshake without lawful excuse . Its A miracle Christ never shook hands with the Church Moses tapping a ROCK and the BROAD at the well asking Christ how he is going to help without a bucket both rivers of life Moses people thirst a burning knowledge /and a rock questioned. Christ what Rock you stand with or the one the church is hiding under is just been questioned with Moses as the Church we all thirst for some handshake it hides the fear of God as agreement between men or a deal in the eyes of God is just materialistic and its the word thats spiritual .No blessing required no swearing .Deals are as old as the paperwork .AZTECS and political power came from KERNEL CORN THE harvesting hearts thats a church thing SEPHARDIC HEBREWS were no match for CATHOLIC exploitation and expulsions when your Crown couldn't pay its debts it literally ripped a beating heart out of Any merchant mariner or those banking merchants of Venice MEXICO VIA Holland the VENETIANS WOODEN SHIPS NOT SHOES and the rest is justified handshakes .Discovering America is joining our underestimated past.Truth is just a regional bank where we store blame. one church at a time if offensive and defensive were just a handshake it would be just so much less to remember. If its written its just hidden within the words. in the beginning WAS without WAS in who's being or in what beginning . A happy being needs a tragedy of wordsmiths or a smile needs a wipe.musings or muskets.Gringo

---

Thank you for walking me through some symbols I have not tried applying for some years now. Moses tapping the rock, to bring forth water - why not just render that action inert? How in the world would it bring forth water? By Moses' WILL and WORD? I want that magic wand!

Attachment 3923


Attachment 3924

Several issues:

1. most if not all non-Judah tribes of Israel (save Benjamin at Galilee) were most likely in exile or scattered or the like at the time Jesus arrived (Judah and Israel as kingdoms had separated and were on different 'judgment clocks');
2. the idea of any organic Judahite being in exile at the time with John in the wilderness may have been because the Edomites didnt' want anything to do with the original doctrines (see #9);
3. the notion of Y'shua/Jesus being the son of an Edomite-Judahite is highly questionable (see #7);
4. the notion of Y'shua/Jesus being clearly non-Edomite makes more sense as to why the Edomite-Judahite factions may have been against him.
5. I recall analysis pointing to Y'shua/Jesus having been hanging out with the Benjaminites and the Essenes in northern Judea.
6. there are those who assert that those called for the death and crucifixion of Y'shua seem to have identified themselves with Essau/Edom by admitting that they had never been in captivity which might be true of Edom/Essau's or even Ishmaelites rather than being true of Israel (Judah-inclusive);
7. its important to avoid blurring the distinctions between Jesus son of Julius Pantera and the Y'shua the Anointed;
8. The saints aren't referred to as being gentiles in the Bible but as "formerly gentiles";
9. Edomites were incorporated into Judah under John Hyrcanus, even if Israel or Judah ceased to see distinction, the Edomites may have maintained distinction of themselves;
10. Syncretism ala Darius may have not necessarily been a good thing.

Quote:

---

When, Herod, the son of the Idumean, Antipater "received the kingdom, he slew all the members of this Sanhedrin" Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

Several issues:

1. most if not all non-Judah tribes of Israel (save Benjamin at Galilee) were most likely in exile or scattered or the like at the time Jesus arrived.
2. the idea of any organic Judahite being in exile at the time with John in the wilderness may have been because the Edomites didnt' want anything to do with the original doctrines;
3. the notion of Y'shua/Jesus being the son of an Edomite-Judahite is highly questionable;
4. the notion of Y'shua/Jesus being clearly non-Edomite makes more sense as to why the Edomite-Judahite factions may have been against him.
5. I recall analysis pointing to Y'shua/Jesus having been hanging out with the Benjaminites and the Essenes in northern Judea.
6. there are those who assert that those called for the death and crucifixion of Y'shua clearly identified themselves with Essau/Edom by admitting that they had never been in captivity which might be true of Edom/Essau's or the Edom-Cain lines rather than being true of Israel/Jacob;
7. its important to avoid blurring the distinctions between Jesus son of Julius Pantera and the Y'shua the Anointed;
8. The saints aren't referred to as being gentiles in the Bible but as "formerly gentiles".

---

Thank you Allodial. That is all great food for thought.

I believe some of the "issues" are resolved by separating out Edomites and Jews. This might be why young Archelaus HEROD, an Edomite not a Jew was so disgraced when he got young maiden Mary (BRAIDER) MAGDALENE pregnant. Here we find that Jesus was the bastard son between an Edomite and Judah - which could mean either a Jew, or an Israelite. There are two kinds of people of the Eretz, the Land in Israel. There are Israelites with captured minds, the Jews. And there are Israelites who stayed working and living the land, who never went into the Babylonian captivity. After seventy years the Jews returned, fought for the Temple Mount for eleven years and won, capturing the Temple Mount. Then in 50 BCE Rome appointed Herod the GREAT on the Temple Mount.

This is what I was reminded of in the articles about Paul. The other article about Idumean culture reminded me how multicultured Israel was at the time of Jesus.

My idea about John being a Prophet is from the Gospel of Mark. That he was a Levite is clear too. I deduce that typically the King of Israel had a traditional prophet. After some thirty years in exile, Archelaus had a slam-dunk conviction of the Pretender (Tetrarch Antipas) in idolatry with the other Tetrarch's (Philip) wife Herodias. - For which John apparently voiced the accusation, for one reason or another.

Through the affiliation and adoption of the Bastard, it would seem that politically, Jesus ascended to the throne. This is why I quote Mark chapter 11.

It would seem I cannot tie this directly back to the thread topic, but it usually happens from sleep related contemplation. I look forward to explaining it in terms of the "issues" you have brought up.

Most excellent!!

More points added since your post. Another important bit which reverberates with your analysis of history from the book of Nehemiah and which further underscores important distinctions from the survey drawn in time:

Quote:

---

"The return from Babylon and the introduction of the Babylonian Talmud mark the end of Hebrewism and the beginning of Judaism." --Rabbi Stephen F. Wise, (1874-1949)

---

Here is a timeline pertaining to Joseph Hyrcanus and Herod Archelaus:

Quote:

---

142 BC - Exiles of Judah won independence under Maccabean kings
125 BC John Hyrcanus conquers Edomites incorporating them into his kingdom if they adopted Judaism
69 BC Antipater, Edomite chieftan and founder of the house of Herod rises to power, gains favor of Rome, made Procurator of Judea
37 BC Herod I gains almost complete control of Judea
4BC-6AD Herod Archelaus holds governorship over Judea; Scepter departs from the house of Judah; Y'shua born

---

There were many named "Y'shua" or "Joshua" at the time. So it would have been easy to pick out any prominent-born "Jesus" and try to mingle his background with Y'shua the Anointed's to make confusion or to defame or to obfuscate.

Quote:

---

The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. Genesis 49:10

---

Attachment 3926

Related:
When the Scepter Departed from Judah (Genesis Messianic Prophecy Fulfilled)

Quote:

---

9. Edomites were incorporated into Judah under John Hyrcanus, even if Israel or Judah ceased to see distinction, the Edomites may have maintained distinction of themselves;
10. Syncretism ala Darius may have not necessarily been a good thing.

---

Well taken into account...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

More points added since your post. Another important bit which reverberates with your analysis of history from the book of Nehemiah and which further underscores important distinctions from the survey drawn in time:



Here is a timeline pertaining to Joseph Hyrcanus and Herod Archelaus:



There were many named "Y'shua" or "Joshua" at the time. So it would have been easy to pick out any prominent-born "Jesus" and try to mingle his background with Y'shua the Anointed's to make confusion or to defame or to obfuscate.



Attachment 3926

Related:
When the Scepter Departed from Judah (Genesis Messianic Prophecy Fulfilled)

---

Thanks! I see an issue there but will look for resolution before developing any differences.

After reading the link allodial posted (Jesus son of Julius Pantera), something curious struck me:

Whenever the term "bastard" is used to describe 'Jesus', within this post and others, it is the name "Jesus" that is used. However, the same party who espouses that "bastard" theory also sometimes writes the name 'Yehoshuah' in other commentary.

What is interesting is that the name 'Yehoshuah' is never used in conjunction with the "bastard" theory by said party. Makes one wonder regarding the obfuscation allodial wrote about.

The test is easy: will anyone disparage the real name of the anointed Christ and Son of God, born in Bethlehem as scripture prophesied, by calling him a bastard?

I would bet not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLBereans

After reading the link allodial posted (Jesus son of Julius Pantera), something curious struck me:

Whenever the term "bastard" is used to describe 'Jesus', within this post and others, it is the name "Jesus" that is used. However, the same party who espouses that "bastard" theory also sometimes writes the name 'Yehoshuah' in other commentary.

What is interesting is that the name 'Yehoshuah' is never used in conjunction with the "bastard" theory by said party. Makes one wonder regarding the obfuscation allodial wrote about.

The test is easy: will anyone disparage the real name of the anointed Christ and Son of God, born in Bethlehem as scripture prophesied, by calling him a bastard?

I would bet not.

---

There are so many people who have never researched out Jesus' Hebrew name Yehoshuah. Those who do, often called Messianic Jews, abbreviate and (Talmudic) slur Yehoshuah to Yeshuah; which actually removes the theophoric prefix:

Attachment 3948

Even changing it to Yehushuah is a slur against Jesus being Godly in nature.

I note as supermoderator you avoid mentioning me on "my own" website by name. I understand that. I like to believe that in my own firsthand access to source materials around Colorado Springs (Masonic library and federal repository etc.) that I can spot when a member writes things that might lead to prison, or even be degenerative to the other members finding prosperity. Also, on top of that I keep bots, phishers and spammers from even getting one post out.

You are refreshing BLBareans. Thank you for reminding me how conditioned we are to receive the legal term bastard as a nasty or otherwise unworthy person. I deserve the reminder, meaning I have earned it. The point is well taken and the readers here deserve an explanation. There is a scene from Kingdom of Heaven. It is difficult to accept this allegory for evidence, I am sure. However there is something important in my life history about using the State of Colorado Great Seal that led me to hold the scene where Liam asks forgiveness of his bastard son, and in turn the son forgives his biological but absentee father. Reconciliation and the redemption was found in the son enjoying an elaborate estate in Jerusalem.

The Secretary of State warned me that if I was not AFFILIATED with state business I was committing a class 5 felony in Colorado:


Attachment 3949


This is an act of love. Another way to view it is to adopt the state in breach of trust, as a wayward son; meaning that it is no longer under the parentage of the People. Breach of trust opens the opportunity for a resulting trustee.

Sometimes I will meet one of you, maybe even not a suitor, who will stop me in mid-sentence and say, "I know, I read this." - Meaning that there are "buddies" out there who have been entertaining themselves, and educating themselves as well now for years, upon my writings. So this is why I feel that maybe I have been enjoying the conditioning, that I have a better-than-conditioned definition for "bastard" to throw around.

When somebody shuts down hearing my point, I feel that I am right because I am using the term "bastard" in a legal sense and in my Bible Dictionary education about the life and times of Yehoshuah H'Mashiach - Jesus CHRIST.

The models I believe not only have Jesus surviving the Cross by hiding in the family tomb for two days, but the way he got there was for one of two reasons, the King of Israel was passing that crown to him, as the biological but bastard heir to that throne. Allodial has helped me hash through the multicultural environment and even get some insights into the political climate too.

My point, before I go into that, is that Archelaus HEROD either died or was accusing through John the Baptist that Antipas was in blatant adultery with the other Tetrarch, not King, Philip's wife so to impeach Antipas and either regain the Jerusalem throne, or put Jesus on it as the rightful heir the Wise Men (Magi) had indicated upon Jesus' birth when Jesus was a toddler.

Now I am integrating that Caesar had instated Herod the GREAT upon that throne as an Edomite King. This would mean that Jesus was a mixture of Levite maiden, and Edomite. Whether or not Mary the BRAIDER - MAGDALENE was Jewish or Israelite may be my next solution to work out. Either way, it is very productive to do so with minds like yours working through various issues with and for me. I have a good memory but my genius if any is right there between your ears and more specifically in my (our) brain trust of suitors, who by and large have published evidence they are courts of competent jurisdiction and enjoy the pure right of refusal (R4C) as such.

So please be clear that I believe Jesus was Son of God, named Yehoshuah. You will find this agrees with Young's, Strong's and Richardson's concordances. It is this man and the Son of God who I am calling a bastard.

arguments over historical accuracy rarely if ever yield any fruit. I liken these arguments to taking a side against abortion. I refuse to enter the arena as there is never any winner. Thusly I let no man judge me. Consider the wisdom in that statement. Let no man judge you!

As for my house, by careful study of Scripture I have come to understand trust law and how it works. In other words, the players are mere actors and I know if the kingdom is righteous THEN certain aspects have to be. I need no justification in terms of one placating me with "you are right" because I know I'm right!

I'm right for me. Now you go be right for you! The cry goes forth who will help the widows son? Which pisses off some folk because they don't understand who is the widow and who is the son. Elijah knew. Therefore John the Baptist knew!

Constantine the first beast compiled 50 bibles, legalized Christianity and set up the false prophet (pope). King James the second beast, born 6/1566, 6th of Scotland, authorized a bible in 1611 that now has 66 books to control the people with, an image of God's word. Wisdom is not knowledge. Wisdom is ?action?. It is information converted into behavior.? A theologianS wisdom and behaviour is dangerously religious with world views, sacred texts, holy places, ethics, and societal organisation that relate humanity to what an anthropologist has called "an order of existence". having ones predictable behaviour or actions just mistakenly religious morality. Now ones scripture knowledge and his spiritual works are eternal not a preached wisdom. the letter J is not used till 1524 J- added ESUS the world and its materialistic messiahs Moses freedom EGYPT JEREMIAH FREEDOM BABYLON CYRUS THE GREAT BABYLON CHRIST GREEK ROME the church wants to J THE GAULISH GOD ESUS OR HESUS bastardisation of christos GREEK church ROMAN CHURCH is keeping it commercial. God reminding us eternally WHO HIS SON IS.I know in the beginning it was ,WAS THE WORD notice not IS the word. I have no issues with names u own a gun your a gunfighter u own a piano your a pianist you own a book its in the scriptures book of jeremiah chapter 10 some heavy timber being cut.GREECE ORTHODOX HEATHENS HELL-ENISTIC kristos In this context "Chresto" is mentioned. Some scholars see this as a likely reference to J -esus Chrestos in Pagan Antiquity

In reality, the term "Chrestos" or ??????? has been used in association with a plethora of people and gods, beginning centuries before the common era. Chrestos and its plural chrestoi were utilized to describe deities, oracles, philosophers, priests, oligarchs, "valuable citizens," slaves, heroes, the deceased and others. Importantly, chrestos appears to have been the title of "perfected saints" in various mystery schools or brotherhoods, associated with oracular activity in particular.

This word ??????? or chrestos appears in ancient Greek sources such as those of playwright Sophocles (497/6-406/5 BCE), who discusses ? ???????, "the good man," in Antigone (520). Also composed during the fifth century BCE and containing numerous instances of chrestos are playwright Euripides's works Heraclidae, Hecuba, Troiades and Iphigenia. Other ancient writers such as Herodotus, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Xenophon, Pseudo-Xenophon, Plato, Isocrates, Aeschines, Demosthenes, Plutarch and Appian likewise use this term chrestos or "good," sometimes quite often. In an anonymous tract discovered among the possessions of historian Xenophon (c. 430–354), the "Old Oligarch," modernly styled Pseudo-Xenophon (fl. c. 425), contrasts "the good man" (chrestos) with "the wicked man" (poneros), a common juxtaposition throughout classical antiquity that found its way into the New Testament as well (e.g., Lk 6:35).

Socrates the Chrestos

The fact that Plato (424/423-348/347 BCE) frequently mentions "the good" (???????) when discussing various figures (e.g., Plat. Rep. 5.479a) serves as an indication of the word's importance among philosophers and religionists. This association is especially germane considering the exalted place afforded Plato among spiritual seekers for centuries into the common era, including many Christians and assorted "Neoplatonists." Indeed, Plato (Theaetetus 166.a.2) uses the word to describe famed philosopher Socrates: ? ???????? ? ??????? - "Socrates the Good."

"In the fifth century BCE, Plato referred to the famous Greek philosopher of Athens as 'Socrates the Chrest.' The religious is God righteous or what.

Most scholars assume that the disturbances mentioned by Suetonius in the passage were due to the spread of Christianity in Rome.[22] These disturbances were likely caused by the objections of Jewish community to the continued preachings by Hellenistic Jews in Rome and their insistence that Jesus was the Messiah, resulting in tensions with the Jews in Rome.[18][30]
Some scholars think Suetonius was confused and assumed that as the leader of the agitators, Chrestus, was alive and lived in Rome at the time of the expulsion.[11][30] The notion that Chrestus was instigating Jewish unrest suggests that the Chrestus reference is not a Christian interpolation, for a Christian scribe would be unlikely to think of the followers of Christ as Jews, or place him in Rome at the time of Claudius.Should real Pagan Rome be afraid nope feed some lions and chase knowledge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

There are so many people who have never researched out Jesus' Hebrew name Yehoshuah. Those who do, often called Messianic Jews, abbreviate and (Talmudic) slur Yehoshuah to Yeshuah; which actually removes the theophoric prefix:

Attachment 3948

Even changing it to Yehushuah is a slur against Jesus being Godly in nature....

So please be clear that I believe Jesus was Son of God, named Yehoshuah. You will find this agrees with Young's, Strong's and Richardson's concordances. It is this man and the Son of God who I am calling a bastard.

---

I would tread more prayerfully than carefully. There were many named 'Jesus'. Consider that the Talmudic stories about a son of Pantera didn't necessarily exist until the 2nd century A.D. Some if not many or most might fail to realize the link to the name at Exodus 3:14 which was put there for a reason. The names Hosea and perhaps even Isaiah are related to the discussion. The Hebrew/Chaldee/Phoenician words for savior and deliverer are 'yeh-shah' and 'howshea'. Add 'yeh' or the like to the beginning of 'howshea' and you get 'yeh+howshea' which is hardly a slur. However "Yehushuah " perhaps you have a point. Referring to someone as a bastard isn't a slur? A bastard according to whose standard?

In Hebrew/Chaldee/Phoenician the tidbit "shua" can connote: "sink or be bowed down, or humbled". However 'shea' is sometimes transliterated to 'shua'. 'shaua' refers to a 'cry for help'. However 'yeshua' means 'salvation' (rel. fem. noun). Also related are: shoa (free man or noble), yesha (salvation) and teshua (deliverance/salvation).

As for hijinx concerning names and name games of concealing true names, that some ancient Babylonians had complexes over the truth and were prone to demand to be worshiped and prostrated to seems plain in the historical record. No surprise at all if their progeny seem to follow suit. How much from Babylon can be deemed to be reliable? How do first and second century interpretations somehow manage to trump thousands of years of Ancient Old Dynasty Egyptian (remember Moses wrote using ancient Egyptian words) and Hebrew teachings and writings?

The Hidden Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus IV Connection
Also, one might do well to consider the Idumean attack on Israel (FROM WITHIN) and subsequent taking of Judea (with the help of Rome and Pompey) then capture of the Temple (130BC to 0AD ) and destruction (70AD) in view of your model concerning Nebuchadnezzar [two hundred years vs twenty]. The coming of the one predicated by Israel in Genesis was purposed to thwart Babylonian-Edomite attempts at 'taking heaven' (they couldn't do it by way of the Tower, so they went after the Temple and the Holy of Holies (as a gateway or portal)). All of such preceded by Antiochus IV Epiphanes who besieged the Jerusalem temple and slaughtered a pig there. The same Idumeans (Herodian line) helped siege the Jerusalem temple YET AGAIN ~63 B.C. But that is what Antiocus IV did only a 100 years or so before. Pompey (Roman general) with Hyrcanus (Herodian) help overcome Aristobulus and eventually himself entered the Holy of Holies too!

The problem for the Babylonians is that they weren't necessarily experts in Egyptian. They have attempted to claim origination of that which was written in a language which predates Babylon: fail.

Quote:

---

Three and a half years the Shechinah abode on the Mount of Olives hoping that Israel would repent, but they did not; while a Bath Kol [the voice of God] issued announcing, ‘Return, O backsliding children [Jer. 3:14]. Return unto Me, and I will return unto you [Mal. 3:7],’ When they did not repent, it said, ‘I will return to my place [Hosea 5:15]’ (Midrash Rabbah Lamentations Proems 25. Ernest l. Martin also states that the church historian Eusebius may have also mentioned the fact that the Shekinah or Glory Cloud left the Temple and settled on the Mt. of Olives in?Proof of the Gospel: “Believers in Christ congregate from all parts of the world, not as of old time because of the glory of Jerusalem, nor that they may worship in the ancient Temple at Jerusalem, but . . . that they may worship at the Mount of Olives opposite to the city,?whither the glory of the LORD [the Shekinah] migrated when it left the former city.” (Eusebius Proof of the Gospel 6.18.) Though Eusebius seems to echo the Midrash, these words taken in context appear to convey a different message. Eusebius means that the Shekinah left the Temple and settled on the church who he believes is represented by the Mt. of Olives, not that the Shekinah literally settled on the Mt. of Olives in A.D. 66 as Martin claims.)

---

It was an Idumean army that arrived in 68AD. How 'convenient' that the details of the 60 AD to 70AD periods have been left out of the discussion in "Christian churches" for so long. So begs the question: how can the "Jews" (Judeans, those of the house of Judah) that rejected Jesus and who were either taken into captivity or slaughtered at Jerusalem also be the very same "Jews" (Idumeans) who brought an army against Jerusalem together with the Romans? Mind you: Israel was predominantly in captivity or exile at the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

arguments over historical accuracy rarely if ever yield any fruit.

---

The main persons arguing are the ones aiming to deny the truth or to overlay (cover) it with something else. Consider those who deny Edomite Herod's slaughter of the Innocents when ancient 350BC text written in latin (for which, 'conveniently', English translations are hardly available online except behind a pricey paywall or campus restricted context) that records Augustus responding to the news of the Slaughter of Innocents perpetrated by Herod and saying that he'd rather be a pig (hus) than one of Herod's sons (huios) (some leave out the text about the slaughter of infants under the age of two years, again, 'conveniently'). When leaders of a religion, philosophy or political system deliberately mislead 'followers' even to the extent of omitting over 160 years from the calendar--for the purpose of concealing the truth--, how reliable can their testimony be? What is there then to argue? Lies vs truth. Yielding to the truth yields fruit, no arguments then.

Consider those who spend lots of time hiding Middle Eastern artifacts in order to thwart proof of Bible historical accuracy. Not to mention that Joseph (Imnhotep) wasn't just an imaginary symbolic figure--he really lived and the evidence is all over the place. Who is arguing but those who want a different 'truth'. If those who tell us that its "all relative" really believed that--they would leave others alone, but they don't tend to unless checked.

Quote:

---

Cum audisset inter pueros quos in Syria Herodes rex Iudaeorum intra bimatum iussit interfici filium quoque eius occisum, ait: Melius est Herodis porcum esse quam filium. --from Macrobius' Saturnalia

Note that by the time of Macrobius' writings, Syria Palaestina would have referred to the merger of Judea and Syria into a singularity.

---

Quote:

---

Later, in 135 AD, in the aftermath of the Bar Kokhba revolt, Syrian province was merged with Judea province, creating the larger province of Syria Palaestina.

---

Related:

• Yeshua In the Tanakh (The Name of JESUS in the Old Testament)
• The Appearance of Christ in A.D. 68

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

arguments over historical accuracy rarely if ever yield any fruit. I liken these arguments to taking a side against abortion. I refuse to enter the arena as there is never any winner. Thusly I let no man judge me. Consider the wisdom in that statement. Let no man judge you!

As for my house, by careful study of Scripture I have come to understand trust law and how it works. In other words, the players are mere actors and I know if the kingdom is righteous THEN certain aspects have to be. I need no justification in terms of one placating me with "you are right" because I know I'm right!

I'm right for me. Now you go be right for you! The cry goes forth who will help the widows son? Which pisses off some folk because they don't understand who is the widow and who is the son. Elijah knew. Therefore John the Baptist knew!

---

As we both teach on www.lawfulmoneytrust.com I feel it necessary to explain this discrepancy, but after some sleep and in the peaceful quiet of the early morning. Xparte however seems to disagree, as he asserts history with the opening sentences of his post; so my commentary follows:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

Constantine the first beast compiled 50 bibles, legalized Christianity and set up the false prophet (pope). King James the second beast, born 6/1566, 6th of Scotland, authorized a bible in 1611 that now has 66 books to control the people with, an image of God's word. Wisdom is not knowledge. Wisdom is ?action?. It is information converted into behavior.? A theologianS wisdom and behaviour is dangerously religious with world views, sacred texts, holy places, ethics, and societal organisation that relate humanity to what an anthropologist has called "an order of existence". having ones predictable behaviour or actions just mistakenly religious morality. Now ones scripture knowledge and his spiritual works are eternal not a preached wisdom. the letter J is not used till 1524 J- added ESUS the world and its materialistic messiahs Moses freedom EGYPT JEREMIAH FREEDOM BABYLON CYRUS THE GREAT BABYLON CHRIST GREEK ROME the church wants to J THE GAULISH GOD ESUS OR HESUS bastardisation of christos GREEK church ROMAN CHURCH is keeping it commercial. God reminding us eternally WHO HIS SON IS.I know in the beginning it was ,WAS THE WORD notice not IS the word. I have no issues with names u own a gun your a gunfighter u own a piano your a pianist you own a book its in the scriptures book of jeremiah chapter 10 some heavy timber being cut.GREECE ORTHODOX HEATHENS HELL-ENISTIC kristos In this context "Chresto" is mentioned. Some scholars see this as a likely reference to J -esus Chrestos in Pagan Antiquity

In reality, the term "Chrestos" or ??????? has been used in association with a plethora of people and gods, beginning centuries before the common era. Chrestos and its plural chrestoi were utilized to describe deities, oracles, philosophers, priests, oligarchs, "valuable citizens," slaves, heroes, the deceased and others. Importantly, chrestos appears to have been the title of "perfected saints" in various mystery schools or brotherhoods, associated with oracular activity in particular.

This word ??????? or chrestos appears in ancient Greek sources such as those of playwright Sophocles (497/6-406/5 BCE), who discusses ? ???????, "the good man," in Antigone (520). Also composed during the fifth century BCE and containing numerous instances of chrestos are playwright Euripides's works Heraclidae, Hecuba, Troiades and Iphigenia. Other ancient writers such as Herodotus, Sophocles, Aristophanes, Xenophon, Pseudo-Xenophon, Plato, Isocrates, Aeschines, Demosthenes, Plutarch and Appian likewise use this term chrestos or "good," sometimes quite often. In an anonymous tract discovered among the possessions of historian Xenophon (c. 430–354), the "Old Oligarch," modernly styled Pseudo-Xenophon (fl. c. 425), contrasts "the good man" (chrestos) with "the wicked man" (poneros), a common juxtaposition throughout classical antiquity that found its way into the New Testament as well (e.g., Lk 6:35).

Socrates the Chrestos

The fact that Plato (424/423-348/347 BCE) frequently mentions "the good" (???????) when discussing various figures (e.g., Plat. Rep. 5.479a) serves as an indication of the word's importance among philosophers and religionists. This association is especially germane considering the exalted place afforded Plato among spiritual seekers for centuries into the common era, including many Christians and assorted "Neoplatonists." Indeed, Plato (Theaetetus 166.a.2) uses the word to describe famed philosopher Socrates: ? ???????? ? ??????? - "Socrates the Good."

"In the fifth century BCE, Plato referred to the famous Greek philosopher of Athens as 'Socrates the Chrest.' The religious is God righteous or what.

---

There follows a very edifying recitation of history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xparte

Most scholars assume that the disturbances mentioned by Suetonius in the passage were due to the spread of Christianity in Rome.[22] These disturbances were likely caused by the objections of Jewish community to the continued preachings by Hellenistic Jews in Rome and their insistence that Jesus was the Messiah, resulting in tensions with the Jews in Rome.[18][30]
Some scholars think Suetonius was confused and assumed that as the leader of the agitators, Chrestus, was alive and lived in Rome at the time of the expulsion.[11][30] The notion that Chrestus was instigating Jewish unrest suggests that the Chrestus reference is not a Christian interpolation, for a Christian scribe would be unlikely to think of the followers of Christ as Jews, or place him in Rome at the time of Claudius.Should real Pagan Rome be afraid nope feed some lions and chase knowledge.

---

Allodial illuminates us with more history, but extends some useful advisement about approaching prayerfully, (in trust) rather than carefully. So not to exceed 10,000 characters I am going to comment in the next post.

Continued...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

I would tread more prayerfully than carefully. There were many named 'Jesus'. Consider that the Talmudic stories about a son of Pantera didn't necessarily exist until the 2nd century A.D. Some if not many or most might fail to realize the link to the name at Exodus 3:14 which was put there for a reason. The names Hosea and perhaps even Isaiah are related to the discussion. The Hebrew/Chaldee/Phoenician words for savior and deliverer are 'yeh-shah' and 'howshea'. Add 'yeh' or the like to the beginning of 'howshea' and you get 'yeh+howshea' which is hardly a slur. However "Yehushuah " perhaps you have a point. Referring to someone as a bastard isn't a slur? A bastard according to whose standard?

In Hebrew/Chaldee/Phoenician the tidbit "shua" can connote: "sink or be bowed down, or humbled". However 'shea' is sometimes transliterated to 'shua'. 'shaua' refers to a 'cry for help'. However 'yeshua' means 'salvation' (rel. fem. noun). Also related are: shoa (free man or noble), yesha (salvation) and teshua (deliverance/salvation).

As for hijinx concerning names and name games of concealing true names, that some ancient Babylonians had complexes over the truth and were prone to demand to be worshiped and prostrated to seems plain in the historical record. No surprise at all if their progeny seem to follow suit. How much from Babylon can be deemed to be reliable? How do first and second century interpretations somehow manage to trump thousands of years of Ancient Old Dynasty Egyptian (remember Moses wrote using ancient Egyptian words) and Hebrew teachings and writings?

The Hidden Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus IV Connection
Also, one might do well to consider the Idumean attack on Israel (FROM WITHIN) and subsequent taking of Judea (with the help of Rome and Pompey) then capture of the Temple (130BC to 0AD ) and destruction (70AD) in view of your model concerning Nebuchadnezzar [two hundred years vs twenty]. The coming of the one predicated by Israel in Genesis was purposed to thwart Babylonian-Edomite attempts at 'taking heaven' (they couldn't do it by way of the Tower, so they went after the Temple and the Holy of Holies (as a gateway or portal)). All of such preceded by Antiochus IV Epiphanes who besieged the Jerusalem temple and slaughtered a pig there. The same Idumeans (Herodian line) helped siege the Jerusalem temple YET AGAIN ~63 B.C. But that is what Antiocus IV did only a 100 years or so before. Pompey (Roman general) with Hyrcanus (Herodian) help overcome Aristobulus and eventually himself entered the Holy of Holies too!

The problem for the Babylonians is that they weren't necessarily experts in Egyptian. They have attempted to claim origination of that which was written in a language which predates Babylon: fail.



It was an Idumean army that arrived in 68AD. How 'convenient' that the details of the 60 AD to 70AD periods have been left out of the discussion in "Christian churches" for so long. So begs the question: how can the "Jews" (Judeans, those of the house of Judah) that rejected Jesus and who were either taken into captivity or slaughtered at Jerusalem also be the very same "Jews" (Idumeans) who brought an army against Jerusalem together with the Romans? Mind you: Israel was predominantly in captivity or exile at the time.



The main persons arguing are the ones aiming to deny the truth or to overlay (cover) it with something else. Consider those who deny Edomite Herod's slaughter of the Innocents when ancient 350BC text written in latin (for which, 'conveniently', English translations are hardly available online except behind a pricey paywall or campus restricted context) that records Augustus responding to the news of the Slaughter of Innocents perpetrated by Herod and saying that he'd rather be a pig (hus) than one of Herod's sons (huios) (some leave out the text about the slaughter of infants under the age of two years, again, 'conveniently'). When leaders of a religion, philosophy or political system deliberately mislead 'followers' even to the extent of omitting over 160 years from the calendar--for the purpose of concealing the truth--, how reliable can their testimony be? What is there then to argue? Lies vs truth. Yielding to the truth yields fruit, no arguments then.

Consider those who spend lots of time hiding Middle Eastern artifacts in order to thwart proof of Bible historical accuracy. Not to mention that Joseph (Imnhotep) wasn't just an imaginary symbolic figure--he really lived and the evidence is all over the place. Who is arguing but those who want a different 'truth'. If those who tell us that its "all relative" really believed that--they would leave others alone, but they don't tend to unless checked.




Related:

• Yeshua In the Tanakh (The Name of JESUS in the Old Testament)
• The Appearance of Christ in A.D. 68

---

Back to MJ's opening sentence:

Quote:

---

arguments over historical accuracy rarely if ever yield any fruit.

---

Yet we all study history in order to communicate on the "same page". In the opening videos the studied historian met with somebody in the Q&A reciting a contradiction, You and I read different books.

And so I can get to my point - to reconcile Michael Joseph's approach in a manner so to be edifying, and for the right to be right not to be violated. - Or at least only infringed upon.

There is a point in the Bible, as I study it, that the allegorical metaphor takes over. A rib taken out of Adam and fabricated with dust into Eve is a bit difficult for me to swallow literally. Here again I need to bow homage to carbon-dating; history. The evidence of Jesus being a man who lived in and around Israel and the accounting of the political climate brings the history, fact, law and truth to life for me. Five years of A Course in Miracles without any direct reading of Ken WAPNICK, who commercialized the work product of LSD dosing by Bill THETFORD on victim Helen SCHUCKMAN taught me well that we do not all simply disperse to find our own truths (plural) or even to experience the obvious, that we all settle for the Truth (objective) from our individual perspectives. The Voice of Jesus, directly channeled through Helen by such objective double-blind and scientific means makes it clear on several occasions that there is only One Objective Truth to be found; best expressed that God is Love and to find God one needs to Forgive.

The premise about this Objective Truth is that Communication and Creation are synonyms and so therefore what we are up to here is communicating/creating. In the next sentence or two the Voice explains that only beings of like Order can truly Communicate. This is interesting that we have simultaneously the Thread about Pay to the Order of...

So I was setting in a restaurant with a man, whom I admire his transforms. He is actually the glue holding together the unfathomable manufacturing process of near-infinitely complex machinery. In other words, he interfaces with mechanics and engineers who have never worked in their garages, on their cars. The normal transforms operate in subsets and subsystems that are in turn so complex that they "specialize". This engineer specializes in general. So I feel a certain kinship with this fellow, in that he is invaluable but feared, as the people who need him do not understand why they need him, or how his mind works so that he can actually dance around in genius, completely immune to the finite boundaries of "discipline".

But as I returned to the table he took time to thank me for all he had learned, mostly here, from my writings. That meant the world at the moment. Still does.

So to throw in the towel that we may all seek our own truth strikes me as the cop out resorted to in ACIM when confronted with the National Security Archives reports in MK-ULTRA declassified sub-projects proving Bill was dosing Helen with LSD - "That is your truth, David Merrill." Actually they like to call me Planet, for Planet Merrill so that I can more easily be dismissed.

I propose that this does nothing to avoid the emotional confrontation, only postpones the altercation while we both quietly build our arsenals with more and more history. I say it is better to accept only one objective history and forgive ourselves and each other so immediately we no longer even detect differences in our perceptions as attacks on each other.

P.S. Thank you Allodial;


Your library is quite admirable I am sure. You have clarified a few crucial points for me. It may be tainted with projection but my intuitive interpretation of the Book of Mark through Christianity Explored stands intact. You cast aspersions on Babylonian and Nebuchadnezzar interpretations wisely. [A man attributed with changing names and even altering the alphabet, disabling communication, is to be watched closely regarding his honor.] I however still honor the Prophet Daniel BELTESHAZZAR mostly out of NASA's SkyGlobe freeware showing these celestial events actually were happening, and even then, they depict a different story than adopted by the Constantine Christians.

In that demonstrates the need for Keys. - Which is Michael Joseph's bailiwick as I understand things. MJ has a wonderful gift of describing the Keys found in the Information concealed in parable and other allegorical metaphor.

My thanks is extended to all three of you.

Re: Disabling communications
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyjJbhuwGkU

Back in the 80s and 70s on, in "African-American" media one would find discussions of topics even on talk radio that were unheard of in MSM then but now are widely discussed or mentioned on Youtube and blogs. Its interesting how the psychology used to disregard a community or a group might really work against the group who disregards because self-disabling of communication to the extent that that kind of truth or talk fails to reach one's ears possible to detriment. Among the same it was mentioned how the Romans changed the Zodiacs and attempted to revise Astrology to conceal the underlying truths. Once upon a time, I happened upon Mazzaroth or, the Constellations by a Frances Rolleston. Always nice to have an actual ancient book and a grain of salt to take with something you hear on talk radio. That is to say: Frances Rolleston's book was an excellent find IMHO.

So take something like segregation that came to Tulsa in the 1890s. Was segregation really about disabling communications? Buildings were burned, businesses were destroyed ...eventually (come 1921). Adversarial disabling of communications might lurk in places we might not suspect.

http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/attac...4&d=1422696360
The Moscow library known as INION—the Institute of Scientific Information on Social Sciences—went up in flames on the evening of Jan. 29, 2015 A.D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

You cast aspersions on Babylonian and Nebuchadnezzar interpretations wisely. [A man attributed with changing names and even altering the alphabet, disabling communication, is to be watched closely regarding his honor.]

---

Consider, they couldn't even make solid and true interpretations without Daniel's help--he had keys. The spirit of God being key to the adequate interpretation rather than human intellect. Though the Spirit can lead one's intellect and intuition to the right references, etc. upon which to build formidable foundations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Yet we all study history in order to communicate on the "same page".

---

Surveys are made with reference points. Without cornerstones or landmarks, what use are they. Thus, the Bolsheviks and the like attack meaning--even the meaning of 'cornerstones' or landmarks--again 'disabling communications'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Merrill

There is a point in the Bible, as I study it, that the allegorical metaphor takes over. A rib taken out of Adam and fabricated with dust into Eve is a bit difficult for me to swallow literally.

---

The basis is very scientific and widely appreciated among certain Islamic sects. In the body of a man, where does blood originate? In the very marrow itself. It is said that blood is the life of the body. Blood cells, in fact are intelligent or intelligently regulated to the extent that broken bones and wounds in the skin are repaired in this manner: a blood cell approaching the injured area will shed its hemoglobin and other 'parcels' to revert back to undifferentiated cell (primordial...stem cell) and then take on the characteristics needed to repair the breech. It is the blood itself that repairs the breech. I, like Poncaire (?), came to the realization of this process. Every cell has some element of the nerve system in it. The kind of modern stem cell research is about robbing fetuses when stem cells are produced readily in the body. But shhhhhh 'don't tell anyone'.

P.S. What bone that is a strong source of marrow can you take out of a man's body without crippling, hobbling or disfiguring him in some way? Vertebrae? Finger bone? Femur? Jaw? Skull portion? Pelvis? One of the ribs? Unlike other bones in the body, there is something very unique to ribs and the periosteum (i.e. the surrounding tissue). If you look into the use of ribs in bone grafts, you might find some very interesting information.

allodial,

your comment about blocking the sun does not go unnoticed in my camp. when I find a writing or book that I deem very educational, in my house, we get it printed in black/white. The day may come when electronic devices may be disabled. Already folks have access to the "global brain" thru the use of their hand [cell phones - computers] the days come when there may exist a neural network. But any technology is completely dependent upon maintenance and administration. And that of course begs trust in the administration.

David Merrill,

I teach that the Crown holds the beneficial interest in the 2nd Testamentary Trust established under Unam Sanctum. Therefore any claim in Jubilee that I issue will also notice the triune city-states [London, Washington, Vatican]. I may even notice the Administrators of the original grant the Franciscans.

Three different men told me they were reading Leviticus 26 yesterday morning - as was I. Amazing.

IMHO to try to understand faith by and thru the senses, science or philosophy is to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I need only the following verse to confirm my position.



Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

==================


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb_HrTBjwJI

No claim - no benefit. Funny how diligent are some to study man's codes to set themselves free [find remedy] but then they have zero knowledge of the Divine Law. There is no Canon Law absent Divine Law. A great key for those who recognize the season.

Shalom,
MJ

Quoting Swendenborg as follows:

In ancient times those were called "serpents" who had more confidence in sensuous things than in revealed ones. But it is still worse at the present day, for now there are persons who not only disbelieve everything they cannot see and feel, but who also confirm themselves in such incredulity by knowledges (scientifica) unknown to the ancients, and thus occasion in themselves a far greater degree of blindness. In order that it may be known how those blind themselves, so as afterwards to see and hear nothing, who form their conclusions concerning heavenly matters from the things of sense, of memory-knowledge, and of philosophy, and who are not only "deaf serpents," but also the "flying serpents" frequently spoken of in the Word, which are much more pernicious, we will take as an example what they believe about the spirit.

[2] The sensuous man, or he who only believes on the evidence of his senses, denies the existence of the spirit because he cannot see it, saying, "It is nothing because I do not feel it: that which I see and touch I know exists." The man of memory-knowledge (scientificus), or he who forms his conclusions from memory-knowledges (scientiae), says, What is the spirit, except perhaps vapor or heat, or some other entity of his science, that presently vanishes into thin air? have not the animals also a body, senses, and something analogous to reason? and yet it is asserted that these will die, while the "spirit of man" will live. Thus they deny the existence of the spirit.

[3] Philosophers also, who would be more acute than the rest of mankind, speak of the spirit in terms which they themselves do not understand, for they dispute about them, contending that not a single expression is applicable to the spirit which derives anything from what is material, organic, or extended; thus they so abstract it from their ideas that it vanishes from them, and becomes nothing. The more sane however assert that the spirit is thought; but in their reasonings about thought, in consequence of separating from it all substantiality, they at last conclude that it must vanish away when the body expires. Thus all who reason from the things of sense, of memory-knowledge, and of philosophy, deny the existence of the spirit, and therefore believe nothing of what is said about the spirit and spiritual things. Not so the simple in heart: if these are questioned about the existence of spirit, they say they know it exists, because the Lord has said that they will live after death; thus instead of extinguishing their rational, they vivify it by the Word of the Lord.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michael Joseph

your comment about blocking the sun does not go unnoticed in my camp. when I find a writing or book that I deem very educational, in my house, we get it printed in black/white. The day may come when electronic devices may be disabled. Already folks have access to the "global brain" thru the use of their hand [cell phones - computers] the days come when there may exist a neural network. But any technology is completely dependent upon maintenance and administration. And that of course begs trust in the administration.

---

There is a survivalist forum where guys discussed printing books in super tiny 2pt to 4pt print in order to preserve them. Though electronic, you might appreciate Apache Solr for creating local search engines for PDFs, ebooks and the like for your private library.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allodial

There is a survivalist forum where guys discussed printing books in super tiny 2pt to 4pt print in order to preserve them. Though electronic, you might appreciate Apache Solr for creating local search engines for PDFs, ebooks and the like for your private library.

---

wow thanks for the link to Apache Solr.

Interesting! A library in contemplation of necessity. One might use the last few charges of a notebook to load up a few thumbdrives and pass them on to family and friends. I thank you too for the link.

I believe you know MJ that I am taking the Jubilee literally, by and large on your intuitive enthusiasm.

Albeit Teunis Jansen Laenan VAN PELT piloted (chartered) the Red Tree (Rosebaum) carrying seventy souls to Manhattan, it becomes questionable if he actually made claim as Patroon. He apparently already held quite an estate on Brooklyn at the time of the sailing. Therefore immunity from the British (hostile) takeover of the Dutch East Indies Trading Company, and then followed by an unorganized anointing of young Peter VAN PELT after the Revolutionary War might actually represent a new, prior solution to the authority problem.

What I am getting at is that George might have been preserving a claim that precedes the Charter of 1629?


Attachment 3950

In other words, where would the authority to grant a perpetual inheritance come from? Is this not Adam's prerogatory? - To name things?

Attachment 3951

Attachment 3952

Big surprise! [On Planet Merrill they are getting rare.]

Quote:

---

View this message in your browser
(http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/bu...n-2016-13.html)

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (http://www.occ.gov)

OCC BULLETIN 2016-13

Subject: Communications Technology
Date: April 27, 2016

To: Chief Executive Officers and Chief Risk Officers of All National Banks and Federal Savings Associations, Department and Division Heads, All Examining Personnel, and Other Interested Parties

Description: Guidance for Banks' Maintenance of Records, Records Retention, and Examiner Access

Summary

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is issuing this bulletin to remind national banks and federal savings associations (collectively, banks) of their obligations related to the maintenance of records, records retention, and examiner access to records. The OCC has become aware of communications technology recently made available to banks that could prevent or impede OCC access to bank records through certain data deletion or encryption features. Use of communications
technology in this manner is inconsistent with the OCC’s expectations regarding data retention and availability.

Note for Community Banks

This guidance applies to all OCC-supervised banks.

Highlights

This guidance reminds banks that

* the OCC has full and unimpeded access to a bank’s books and records pursuant to its authority in 12 USC 481 (national banks) and 12 USC 1464(d)(1)(B)(ii) (federal savings associations).

* communications technology should not be used in a way that limits examiner access to bank records.

Maintenance of Records, Records Retention, and Examiner Access

The OCC has authority under 12 USC 481 to require prompt and complete access to all of a national bank’s relevant books, records, or documents of any type.[1] For federal savings associations, the OCC’s authority is under 12 USC 1464(d)(1)(B)(ii).[2] Also included within the scope of its authority is the ability of OCC examiners to communicate freely with a bank’s employees, officers, or directors.[3] To meet their supervisory responsibilities, OCC examiners need timely access to bank records and need to communicate freely with bank personnel.

The OCC supports responsible innovation in the banking industry that is consistent with OCC expectations and safe and sound banking practices. Certain available communications technology contains data deletion and encryption features that can be used to prevent or impede OCC access to a bank’s books and records. For example, the OCC is aware that some chat and messaging platforms have touted an ability to “guarantee” the deletion of transmitted messages. The permanent deletion of internal communications, especially if occurring within a relatively short time frame, conflicts with OCC expectations of sound governance, compliance, and risk management practices as well as safety and soundness principles.

Bank management must ensure that its adoption of any communications technology continues to allow for examiner access to appropriate bank records. Record retention practices that are consistent with OCC expectations will enhance effective oversight by banks’ compliance and internal audit functions as well as comply with established governance, compliance, and risk management practices.

Further Information

Please contact Lisa Vojtecky, Acting Director for Governance and Operational Risk
Policy, at (202) 649-6550.


Bethany A. Dugan
Deputy Comptroller for Operational Risk

---

Religious mentioned arguments over historical accuracy rarely if ever yield any fruit.again the seed who plants his-story the highest and the lowest seed free will inheritance gardening I have faith in God in the fact historically no man is greater than God. Mans historic fear the Christ teachings however churched are received only as instruction pathways not journals become narrative the entire thread lends entitlement and endorsement for a greater knowing or how di/agnostic ones religious beliefs might be obstructions. Too beware of greeks mythology bearing gifts Ethical and ethnicity all from the same seed.When the word Christ is used remedying kingdoms make mine the one without any historical documentation Jesus Christ needs no better truth then the declaration and worship of false idolatrous NAMES scripture is the journeys end for this kingdom .Babylon is that churched kingdom messiahs for this kingdom are golden eggs.I will take a passover on the pagan hoarding of material and the wisdoms imparted from a ROMAN GRECO basket. We should remember only the voice as identification eternal my voice I am.

Yes. A man good for his word - I AM.