Abraham & Sarah Never Happened?

[David Merrill]

P.S. This of course opens the door for commercial priestcraft.

[xparte]

Throughout his ministry he was accused of being a glutton, a madman, a drunkard, a deceiver, a demon or possessed of the devil, a friend of prostitutes, tax collectors and sinners. He was excommunicated from the synagogue and several times threatened with stoning. His home folks sought to throw him over a cliff.Finally he was betrayed, deserted by his friends, suffered the worst kind of flogging, and was nailed publicly to a wooden cross. He is described in the Bible as "a man of sorrows and familiar with suffering" (Isaiah 53:3). If Jesus is God, then God knows all about suffering.For whatever reason God chose to make people as they are - limited and suffering and subject to sorrows and death - he had the honesty and courage to take his own medicine. Whatever game he is playing with his creation, he has kept his own rules and played fair. He can exact nothing from us that he has not exacted from himself. He has himself gone through the whole human experience, from the trivial irritations of family life and the cramping restrictions of hard work and lack of money to the worst horrors of pain and humiliation, defeat, despair, and death. When he was man, he played the man. He was born in poverty and died in disgrace and thought it all worthwhile.joy is the central feature of life and sorrow is peripheral, because in the gospel the fundamental questions of life are answered and it is the peripheral ones that are relatively unanswered. For the atheist, sorrow is central and joy peripheral, because only the peripheral questions have answers and the central ones remain unanswered.

It is significant that Jesus rose from the dead with a body that still bore the marks of his sufferings in his hands, his feet and his side. Throughout all eternity he will bear those scars. It is because of them that you and I may, if we choose, share that eternity with him as "co-heirs" of his glory (Romans 8:17).Standing somewhere in the shadows you'll find Christ.

Standing somewhere in the shadows you will find him,as you discover yourself
And you'll know him by the nail prints in his hands.Remove Christ and the knowledge of God is questionable. If the knowledge of God is questionable, trusting this unknown God becomes questionable... My Suffering is the evidence against God, and my only reason not to trust him. Christ is our suffering knowledge and is the evidence for God, the reason to trust is eternal The world suffers for trust. Secular/Government has initialized guilt as virtue, When grace is our inherent virtue. As Christ struggled against questionable authority with no trust no contract it exists only without the grace of God. Obtaining. With any legal licence contract getting it and the creation of it, is without grace, not suffering.

[BLBereans]

Last night in Christianity Explored I brought up the crux of the religious notions, that Christianity is a guilt based religion.

The churchman in charge insists that the Passover Lamb is a sacrifice. I disagree. If you did not have a big enough family to finish the lamb, then you pooled with your neighbor so to finish the lamb in one sitting. Then again, if there were leftovers the remains were to be burned to ash by morning light. So you have a prescribed menu of lamb, with special instructions to use the blood at slaughter for IDENTIFICATION purposes only; which is to say that the Angel of Death would pass the house over, seeing the lamb's blood on the doorposts. So there seems to be a default condition around human error. If your eyes are bigger than your stomach, the excess is burned like sacrifice.

So I must concede that there might be room for the guilt/sacrifice model around the Passover Lamb, and so the Christians will tell you Jesus fulfilled the Law by his sacrificial Blood after the model of the First Passover. Interestingly the fellow resorted to making my point, by resorting to Hebrews - that passage about Melchizedek. That is my point - a choice - the Levite priests were all about guilt and sacrifice while Melchizedek is Elect of God, pleasing to God.

One would think that message is something Abraham would of picked up on since he actually encountered Melchizedek and recognized him for who he was, unless...

one is of the opinion that "Abraham and Sarah Never Happened".

That opinion would also be of the ilk who would suggest that there no difference between a leopard who kills by basic animalistic instinct and man who kills for the purpose of sacrifice because he believes His Creator would find him unacceptable otherwise, however misguided that thought process may be.

[David Merrill]

Thank you BL;


Abraham and Sarah may be allegorical metaphor, in my opinion. It is the lesson, the mystery and finding the proper key that seems important.

So with Xparte I once thought the same thing, and thus projected and reflected back through my filters an according interpretation. This is wonderful because I had to rely on the supernatural such that Allodial is doing too. The nice thing is that I do not have to push this on others. I simply let it out there and now people give me feedback and I process that.

The wonderful part is that if you were to view the Roman crucifixion, right side up anyway, as a severe three-hour torture it makes sense - a lot of things. Now we find that Mark, the first Gospel describes Pilate as surprised to hear Jesus was dead and now Joseph of Arimathea is fitting to be in Pilate's company begging for Jesus' body. The Road to Emmeas is where Jesus, hiding his identity finds two men bemoaning the loss of the King whom they were so hoping would free Israel from not only Roman occupation but the Herodean Guard on the Temple Mount, along with all Jewish influence was Babylonian and especially with contracting the drachma and shekel coins were blatantly against the intent of the religion that David had set up there...

It goes on and on. But what I am saying is how if you engage a convolution so that Jesus survived, then spent three years with Paul, Mark as Peter's scribe and Peter in Damascus writing the Book of Mark, as the exiled King of Israel hoping somehow to regain the throne, or at least to preserve his Bloodline with Mary MAGDALENE in Gaul (France), the entire series of events make a lot more coherent sense.

[David Merrill]

P.S. Perhaps nobody explained this survival to Jesus. Sedated by hyssop, fainting in pain with a vinegar sponge bath on his cuts, then you awaken a day or two later in a tomb by yourself. Since you were expecting all along that you would be assassinated and revived somehow three days later - the Worthless Shepherd prophecy can you blame Jesus for thinking he was alive because of Resurrection?

[BLBereans]

Since you find it "nice" that you do not have to push "this" on others, I continue to be only slightly amused by the assertions put forth with such confidence. You are certainly convinced that not only, Jesus "survived" the cross (meaning no death and no resurrection), but also there exists far less coherence if your version of events surrounding Jesus' life and death is not adopted.

Wild, weird stuff indeed!

Have a little fun with this http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/9634_10647.pdf ; it may shed some light upon the tired notion of Jesus supposedly living out the rest of his life in hiding after Calvary as you suggest.

[xparte]

It is not a question between mysticism and rationality. It is a question between mysticism and madness. For mysticism, and mysticism alone, has kept men sane from the beginning of the world.It is only the Mystic, the man who accepts the contradictions, who can laugh and walk easily through this world.Christ is just to Mystic for some Its us the walking contradictions all acting partly truth and partly fiction skepticism and spiritual ecstacies is a perfectly human and intelligible problem to state, though it may be a difficult problem to solve Christ being God is self contradiction

[David Merrill]

Thanks for the Link. During the Passages exhibit here (Bible Historian Collection) I debunked all the debunking of the Film. There are many distortions and incongruities in these skeptical reviews of the movie. Mostly it is as though nobody reviewing the movie even watched the movie. Even the introduction distorts because the movie is not about how or where Jesus lived after the Crucifixion. It is about the tomb. There are implications but that is not what the documentary is about.

I have the video on disk.


The Lost Tomb of Jesus.

Snippets.

[David Merrill]

It is not a question between mysticism and rationality. It is a question between mysticism and madness. For mysticism, and mysticism alone, has kept men sane from the beginning of the world.It is only the Mystic, the man who accepts the contradictions, who can laugh and walk easily through this world.Christ is just to Mystic for some Its us the walking contradictions all acting partly truth and partly fiction skepticism and spiritual ecstacies is a perfectly human and intelligible problem to state, though it may be a difficult problem to solve Christ being God is self contradiction

I like this - crazy!

[allodial]

That post sat for a few hours. I was interrupted.

Looking at it, to finish it, I realize it was finished.

That is one source of guilt - letting good food go to waste. I suppose that you could cook it well and it might be good for breakfast or lunch...

This is really the point that jumps out for me though; as I look at the post above. Guilt is the cause of all feelings of separation from God - please call it sin for a moment. We have it ingrained to think of sin as actions but a leopard can viciously kill a baby zebra without sin. Even leave most of it for subsequent animals of the jungle all the way down to the bacteria carried by the flies. There is no associated guilt.

Therefore the LORD gave instructions to sacrifice, should you feel the guilt. Otherwise the natural state is unity. Identify yourself to be of God and in the condition and character of His MESSIAH - Jesus Christ of Nazareth - by whatever name, this condition of balance between the base and the divine.

First and foremost: animals like that are carnal. However, I have observe animals like that in the wild thousands of times and surprisingly they are not as cruel as the MSM lie that has been told. For example, although a group of lions took down an elephant, the moment they got it down and BEFORE they ate it THEY SUFFOCATED IT by placing their mouths over its trunk to make it pass out then finally die. I discerned that they would not be so cruel as to eat it alive. I myself as my experience has shown when walking in the wild, animals will look at me and keep going. I one case, an animal charged me, I stood my ground, it went RIGHT AROUND ME and kept going. In another, more common, an animal came up rubbed its nose on me and then went about its business. I suppose its my tuning in with God as monks in India suggest they are able to walk among lions because they keep certain things in mind. Mankind was made on a higher level. Beast-level guiltlessness isn't IMHO good for deriving a comparative edification for mankind because men were not intended to be mere beasts. However, they can go down that "beast path" individually of their own election.

The leopard by killing the baby zebra is seeking to feed itself. It is not trying to make a market or engage in baby zebra futures market for speculative purposes. (It might be that 99% of mankind also isn't involved in futures trading, only a select few, but a few 1% just in it for $ rather than for feeding people probably feel guilty at times and aim to pass it off on the 99%.) Similarly, the husband out to feed his family is one thing, but guys just killing deer for fun -- that is obnoxious and against nature IMHO. The North-American 'natives' were more like Hebrews when it came to that kind of thing. They asked for what they needed and the many stories is that an animal would actually come around offer itself to them after their prayers. Again, this wasn't for 'fun' but for to eat.

This is really the point that jumps out for me though; as I look at the post above. Guilt is the cause of all feelings of separation from God - please call it sin for a moment. We have it ingrained to think of sin as actions but a leopard can viciously kill a baby zebra without sin. Even leave most of it for subsequent animals of the jungle all the way down to the bacteria carried by the flies. There is no associated guilt.

Therefore the LORD gave instructions to sacrifice, should you feel the guilt. Otherwise the natural state is unity. Identify yourself to be of God and in the condition and character of His MESSIAH - Jesus Christ of Nazareth - by whatever name, this condition of balance between the base and the divine.

While you might be right to associate "Christianity" in the sense of Simonianism or Gnostic Spindoctoring that is posed as "Christian" (i.e. of the Anointed of God) for hundreds of years as "guilt-oriented". Cain and his progeny used religion as a political tool--to make people controllable and feel guilty. Ergo your observations.

As for the true saints these days from what I have learned the very same OT doctrines are in the NT. The saint's religion isn't about guilt but about GUILT AVOIDANCE and the Blood of the Lamb has an identifying factor ala atonement. The Blood of the Lamb impedes witchcraft and sorcery which in my observation a foundational factor for disdain for the saints: that something or something "dares exist" that cannot be overcome or controlled (SUCH 'INSOLENCE'!) by the mere psychic emanations of those who regard errantly themselves to be God--well it pisses them off or they see a 'challenge' failing to realize the terrible danger they place themselves in by waging war against the Divine. That is because the Divine Mind is supernatural and it is supercarnal.

Its almost mind-boggling that heretical Gnostics could express so much hatred for their very creation and handiwork but yet blame it on those whose identity they aim to malign --those they falsely impersonate and to their very own hurt and demise. But then from observation heretical Gnostics tend to hate creation anyway.

I reiterate, for the saints it is about avoiding guilt rater than guilt. That is the salvation plan is about guilt-avoidance rather than guilt: "Here I will help you remain pure and holy and encourage you and instruct you in the lifestyle to maintain such". And the witches and sorcerers can't breach the walls of a holy household so they encourage sexual depravity--things to put 'holes in the aura' so to speak. Cain's political-tooling "religion" is about guilt and fearmongering. The truth of the Gospel is highly pragmatic. Mistaking the Nimrod and Cain's infrastructure of control for the Christ's lawful assembly is exactly that, a mistake.

If you think theocracy is bad, just consider what it might be like should lawless mage-ocracy ever takes over without Divine Embassy to be found, anywhere.

Imagine heretical Gnostic paradigms ('creation is bad', 'sex is bad', 'the material world is profane', 'everything is bad', 'you should feel guilty for existing', 'you should feel guilty or having children'--this stuff is not scriptural its Gnostic and heretical from the scriptural perspective) in a mix with sound Biblical doctrine and you have a heretical 501(c)(3) Gnostic minister whose purpose is to make everyone feel guilty on Sunday, filling his tip jar on the way out they can assuage the guilt. They don't talk about gifts of the spirit or spiritual warfare--identification by Blood and the intense spiritual covering it would wreck the mind control and sorcery. Blaming the saints for the heretic infiltration seems just not right.

Consider what some are saying about Billy Graham:

He is on public record supporting homosexuality, abortion, his disbelief in a literal hell [which is where we are now -100777.com], his support and practice of infant baptism to save children, his support for the Catholic church's worship of Mary (yet he calls himself a Protestant). He has repeatedly praised infidels and apostates as great Christians. He actively supported the American government policy to fight the Vietnam War. He would not challenge the idea that the Bible is mythology, when directly questioned. The deception doesn't stop with the Protestants, Catholic supporters have been kept in the dark about his abortion views. The deception goes way beyond Protestant, Catholic beliefs.

An insightful Freemason elucidates the meaning of the so-called "Star of David" (has nothing to do with king David of ancient Israel):

Each individual who is involved in a group is influenced by these egregores. For those that reach for a spiritual connection, the egregore assists and facilitates that connection. This process is unconscious, but is intensified through the initiatic process, which is designed to open the mind to the spiritual through the egregore.

A symbolic representation of this may be had in the examination of the Star of David, an emblem of the divine. The top triangle points the heavens, and to the spirit. The bottom triangle points down, to the material and profane. United, they form a new entity, the six-pointed star that represents the unity of the two, from material to the spirit, connection to the divine.

There is nothing in the Bible that suggests the material to be innately profane. That the material ought not be the object of your adoration or worship, obviously part of the message: but wait a minute the Cain control system can't have you NOT worshiping the material because that might result in loss of control so porn is plentiful, drugs too, "get money" --all pretending to be the doctrine of the saints and alleged "proof" for embarrassment to God of Israel when the Bible suggests no such thing. But the material itself is seen as good. So then people go on and on hating Bible believers when the idea of hating sex or feeling guilty about enjoying life isn't even in the Bible. So its seems mind-boggling to hear a Gnostic express his hatred for what his fellows invented and hold out to be 'Christianity'.

The irony, God made sex so pleasurable, far more interesting and less taxing to roll around with some cute chic of a wife than going about killing your fellows and warmongering. Nope but some geniuses just had to come along to ruin the simple joys in life. Not to mention that Augustine managed to found a way to make warmongering kosher "to the Christian masses".

Moreover Azazyel taught men to make swords, knives, shields, breastplates...