Why the Angels Rebelled: A Perspective

[allodial]

Why the Angels Rebelled: A Perspective

Full 7-page PDF document here.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4565[/ATTACH]
Those who are making war on mankind may very well be reflecting and carrying out the mission of the fallen angels. Long ago, someone suggested that Communism was purposed as a way tool to promote White (skin-color) Supremacy as in a crafty way to control brown-skinned people of the planet en masse and to stifle spiritual development but by making the subjugated think it to be a good thing for them. So now the resurgence in "racial strife", White Supremacy, BLM (coincidentally) just in time for a "solution" (Communism?) to be 'announced'. Many suggest that the same who are pushing for Communism are the same inflaming White Supremacist sentiments and strategically setting both 'Whites' and 'Blacks' up for a trap in a pincers movement. Also, many suggest that it has been Communists (rather than orthodox Christian whites) who have stifled and destroyed economic prosperity of so-called "African American" communities and other communities at least since the late 1800s. Its uncanny that many White Supremacists refer to brown-skinned people as "muds" or "the muds". Of course, the idea of all "Whites" being out to keep all Brown people down is IMHO errant.

Page 1 of 7


Page 2 of 7


Page 3 of 7


Page 4 of 7

[xparte]

leaving the first estate it all seems rabbinical a war in heaven over one Man and his rib the fact Christ was made flesh and sits on the right indicates the left is vacant office.Its extremely interesting how A monarchy in heaven is necessary to image and the impersonation of God so it is below so it is above.How can the world be influenced bye God when its just a word in the beginning its a word nobody dare speak . Dust to Dust then stardust i say were the fallen crew why else is a redemption necessary only to sit on the right side of God who is it still welcoming a left side but us. Do we have elections in heaven is a Demon/o/cracy demonocracy (plural demonocracies). A government by or of (supernatural) demons, such as the government which in some mythologies exists in Hell.SUPREME BEINGS run the Monastery are the Monarchs the monotheistic kingdom has God upstairs or the right hand of the king knows full well what the left hand is doing.I give Christ the credibility he has shook hands with the devil this is a fair fight. We leave hell for heaven or heaven for hell.Look at natural selection and evolution white folks have god telling them to kill all aboriginals natives and africans and some irish like he told the Hebrews kill all those ites GODS standing army or maybe just send Christ the mechanic now i am being philistine but issuing a left and right explanation is mysterious for believing in a god or a group of gods and following the rules of a religion or Church & State spiritual value is parables and paradise or how the spirit moves you.

[BLBereans]

God is pro-choice...

The "ites" you speak of were the target of destruction due to the fact that they were ALL beings NOT intended to exist by God's Will. The Genesis 6 account of those who "left their estate" in the heavenly realm to dwell, and take wives, in the earthly realm, created a race of beings which were outside of the scope of God's Plan - against His Will. Without knowing and accepting that truth, anyone can read into scripture of the slaughter of the "ites" by God's chosen people as the will of a bloodthirsty, ravenous, murderous and destructive god.

However, when placed into the context of those who are "hell-bent" on rebellion against their Creator and who vainly attempt to disrupt God's Plan to redeem His children by the life and sacrificial work of Jesus the Christ, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear can easily deduce that God is ALWAYS Just and Righteous when He has others fulfill His Will.

All sin begins with the notion that one: IS God, has the desire to be God or can become God. I AM THAT I AM is a title reserved for only the Pre-Existent Being and Creator of ALL things; no creature of God can obtain, or legitimately use, that title. Folks... it's called REBELLION and the knowing and willing REBELLION against the Position, Nature and Authority of the God of the Bible and Creation is BLASPHEMY - the un-redeemable sin. That is why the "ites" were destroyed utterly; they were the un-authorized offspring of willingly rebellious angelic beings whose intent was knowingly EVIL.

As to the opinion of "white" men being told by "god" to "kill all aboriginals natives and africans and some irish..."; that was at the behest, and under the influence, of the leader(s) of the Beast - the Harlot Roman Church of the anti-christ. NOWHERE will you find Jesus, any of His disciples or any of God's True Nation of People, forcibly converting others to the faith or instructing others to do so under God's command. Any "religion" that partakes in, encourages, or is otherwise indifferent to "conversion by the sword" is NOT of the God of the Bible. That is the work of Satan and he has many "churches" of all belief systems knowingly and/or unknowingly working against the One True God and His True Church.

Many orthodox "jews" and Christians were slaughtered by the will of the Papacy, the "Popery of Evil", for not submitting to the Roman Church's "authority". The "Pope" of any era never was, and never will be, the representative of Jesus the Christ on earth. He is a false christ and is of his father the devil who was a murderer from the beginning.

God knows the hearts of men; He does not force anyone to love and obey Him - God is pro-choice.

[allodial]

The "ites" you speak of were the target of destruction due to the fact that they were ALL beings NOT intended to exist by God's Will. The Genesis 6 account of those who "left their estate" in the heavenly realm to dwell, and take wives, in the earthly realm, created a race of beings which were outside of the scope of God's Plan - against His Will. Without knowing and accepting that truth, anyone can read into scripture of the slaughter of the "ites" by God's chosen people as the will of a bloodthirsty, ravenous, murderous and destructive god.

The details show that true god of true Israel gave transgressive societies upwards of 500 years to repent (i.e. change course for the better) before executing judgment. However, men have readily executed mass judgment multiple times in a single century on those far off who they have never met, based on hearsay. Not to mention the carpet bombing of German cities during World War II.

At 27:17 evidence of WWII's anti- orthodox (bible-based) Christian waged against German civilians.

However, when placed into the context of those who are "hell-bent" on rebellion against their Creator and who vainly attempt to disrupt God's Plan to redeem His children by the life and sacrificial work of Jesus the Christ, those who have eyes to see and ears to hear can easily deduce that God is ALWAYS Just and Righteous when He has others fulfill His Will.

I met someone who described a fiction-styled manuscript he had been writing, he put a space fleet commander on a mission in search of a rebel general named Shay and clues led him to a blue planet. Because Shay and his cohorts had woven such a tight web of protection around the planet, the attempts to send out landing parties kept resulting in the the fleet commander or the King having to go to the surface themselves. Interestingly the entire manuscript was his encoding the entire fallen angel story as it had been related to him. He said that one day he came home and his entire computer was missing, nothing else. The fleet leader was named Michael and the King's name -> Joshua. Consider in the story Shay knew the purpose of certain special planets and set out to co-opt a particular blue planet to raise his own 'army' against Joshua and Michael.

Many orthodox "jews" and Christians were slaughtered by the will of the Papacy, the "Popery of Evil", for not submitting to the Roman Church's "authority". The "Pope" of any era never was, and never will be, the representative of Jesus the Christ on earth. He is a false christ and is of his father the devil who was a murderer from the beginning.

That the "holocaust" period around WWII included those called orthodox Jews I don't deny. However, far more victims were orthodox or Protestant Christians. Its worth noting that Germany had been at the center of the Reformation. It seems to be intentionally hidden that the Bolsheviks had made it as far as Bavaria in 1918.

As to the opinion of "white" men being told by "god" to "kill all aboriginals natives and africans and some irish...

The idea of orthodox Christians promoting slaughter of natives in the Americas is fallacy (see The Requiremento; also the record suggests that Rome demanded that the American Natives --thousands of miles across the Atlantic and the Med. from Rome--pay rent to Rome or die). I have read and studied both sides of the American Revolution. In history books one might find stories of Jesuits (French) promoting American Natives tribes in the midwest to attack the British or Dutch (non-Catholic or orthodox Christian) colonies. American Natives were divided into separate nations and were not a monolith. Some supported Britain vs. some supported France in various wars. There was clearly some party interested in thwarting the establishment of an orthodox Christian society in the Americas. Consider that many of the American Natives that Spanish slaughtered may have been speaking Hebrew. Reading books such as How the Irish Became White, one finds evidence that "Blacks" and "Whites" didn't have a widespread sense of race (and even in prisons didn't divide along 'racial lines') like these modern times until the late 1800s when Eastern European and anti-Christian philosophies that stirred strong in the mid-1700s bigotry started infiltrating American society. Even Benjamin Franklin's ideas of race were rather unique to himself. Furthermore, Georgia banned slavery in 1732. The other colonies banned slavery until the mid or late 1600s. It was non-Christian influence lobbying to change laws.

The formation of New Zealand began with a cooperative effort between the Moari and the British (which degraded over time) but if you look to influences seeking to undermine Christian governmental underpinnings from the mid 1600s and revving up in the mid 1700s and even more red hot in the early 1800s, the racist bigotry will more than likely evidence itself as stemming from anti- orthodox Christian ideals. Just maybe "anarchist" is code for Antichrist.

Unlike Islam or the like, White and Black orthodox Christians were a formidable obstacle to chattel slavery as a business: thus the drive to destroy peaceful societies of White & Black orthodox Christians who got along just fine. (The idea of a White-Black Christian England being multi-culturalism is nonsense). Getting Blacks to blame whites and getting Whites to blame blacks has been about pitting the true ecclesia against itself in America. But they day is coming where they realize who their true enemies are.

There is a website called www.fatimamovement.com that may discus a particular Roman Catholic view on the King James Bible and the God of the OT--though it be just one faction. They perhaps don't realize that LORD is explained in the footnotes as a placeholder for a name.

P.S. I have met Catholics who have asserted that they are not Christian or don't consider themselves to be Christian. Its worth noting that Simon Magus and his follows, the Simonians, were opposed to orthodox Christianity but also called themselves Christians. There has been an unmistakable plan and effort to blame orthodox Christians carried out by those who are opposed to orthodox Christians. A man claiming to be a Freemason (and there are various flavors of Freemasonry) once said to me (who knows why) that outwardly that many of them pretend to be bible-based, orthodox Christians while secretly practicing Islam. Go figure.

Related:
Alien Interview

[Michael Joseph]

The answer is to CONTROL....they rebelled to Control: Let the Trumpet Sound for Unity.


David Merrill: Regarding the above Skype conversation with Anonymous I awaken, wondering how to respond to the Messianic Pastor's demand to "Know who you are." at Rosh HaShannah tonight. He is also First Foursquare, merged for economic survival.


Michael Joseph: He is trying to CONTROL this reality. Once he tries to control he loses touch with reality and becomes an individual. To say "Know who you are" is akin to being a Master of Reality. For then, one could know every aspect of one's relationships. And how boring would that be? Love is letting go of the reigns in hope and in search of reality. What I mean is to "let go" in search of true intimacy. A real relationship that is built upon the NOW and not the past or the potential future - but merely enjoying each other for what that is worth today.

And you know this "To Day" business is interesting too. For enjoying implies pleasure but that too is an idol. For why is pain no less enjoyable? How can I know extreme pleasure if I don't know pain. So now is the pain unwelcome?

The Scriptures relate that there was ONE RIVER flowing out of Eden. And we know that a garden exists Eastward in Eden, thusly Eden represents the All [The Self Existing One] and the garden the pleasant portion. Now it is given that mankind was granted a Self and this consciousness is "sort of" below this one river - Wisdom. And it is this Wisdom which is the Self [or Own] of the Self Existing One.

Therefore to know thyself is not to know God for God is above [my]self. But to know thyself is a means to a BETTER RELATIONSHIP with God. For God is neither He, She or It. Those are only descriptions of which we strain at to get a grasp [control] over the concept of God.

Indeed the Trumpet shall Sound - and some will say "just be you" - but what does that mean? Who is "you" except that which is shaped by society and civilization. But what of these two forces? Are these not merely an externalization of the human consciousness?

Look at the greedy. Is it no wonder that a Ceasar would rise to rule them all? As above-so below. If we give away Self and do not try to control or know or keep self secure, then we are in LOVE. Is this not the message of Jesus?

In giving away the stone of control we loose the anchor and we connect to reality. Else we are static in a sea of possibility - carving out our meek existence as we control our surroundings and thus our relationships.

Can we allow those who control their reality to dominate ours? What a slippery question. For if I say no, then I am back to controlling mine. If I say yes, it also implies control. So now what if I choose not to answer the question? I would then just say, I should Live.

And in this living I am either in the Graces and Mercy of God or not. Thusly in the Scriptures I see only two trusts. Found at Jeremiah 17:5 and 17:7. Letting Go is finding life.

Therefore it is not to know thyself - but rather it is to be pleasantly surprised and amused by self. In the latter one may boldly say, I wonder how God will manifest to me today. In the former, one may look in the mirror and say "hello God" for, in the former, one stands in the temple of God - showing himself to be God - the former is a fraud. For the former is Self-ISH. Language is wonderful.

Nevertheless, one must rightly divide the Scriptures and there is a maturation process where the natural man described above only thinks of Self first. But the transformation work converts this one into a Spiritual being from outside - in. But then later, the Spiritual Being merges into God and in a sense becomes the Self of God for he [mind] is now in the One River to such a degree that there is no difference between the self of this one and God's Self. Therefore said being is Celestial. And said being is now in the true ecclesia the church called Man of which he is "son of Man."

Therefore, this is akin to raising the serpent upon the brass pole in the wilderness and looking upon it and being saved. For now one is not dependent or reliant upon one's own self. There is no confidence or trust in one's own. For as we can see as we look around does it seem that society is bent toward mutual benefit or does it seem that some have and others do not have?

Seeking our Own leads to self-ish-ness, pride in self, greed and these support our lusts and desire. If the society lusts for pleasure, then one will rise to rule society. I know of a man who thinks highly of himself. He wonders why it is that women choose other men and not him. Professing himself to be wise [handsome] he is merely a fool - as he doesn't realize that he is the joke in the room. If he were to read this email, he would not recognize his self for he loves the IDEA of SELF more than true relationship. What great blinders do pride place upon the "eyes". He even fancies himself to be adept in emotional intercourse. I wonder if he could see, if pointed out to him, that while he "seems" to be giving, what he is really doing is "stroking the ego of self." His giving is just an illusion, for he gives only to feel good about himself. And this feeling temporarily fills the void of emptiness within his psyche. Because he gives to get. Thusly he is as a hamster on a wheel. Thinking to help others, he never deals with the void in self. Therefore all external relationships are void and in vain. And these never yield fruit for said man. Because in thinking himself to be somewhat, in the end he is left with his hand for comfort.

Why must the man control the woman or the woman the man? Can these two just be one? If he chooses her or she chooses him - what of the aforementioned interloper? What of his thoughts which throw ripples on the pond of life? Is he not left with his hand? For external beauty will one day fly away like a little bird. And what is left is a Way of Being. Is it not wonderful when a woman chooses a man for just being? And vice-versa? If the choice is conditioned upon some external "temporary" manifestation of being, then the relationship is void and is already in vanity.

So I say - Be True. Above all is TRUTH. For Jesus said "the Truth shall set you free." I remain in hope of the possibility that We may choose Life in Love. For then, what of the pride and vanity of the external body? Is it not a joke? For it is vanity. And why can this be so - for the physical [earthen body] had a beginning - and thus an ending. What now of pride? Is this pride merely a manipulation of the beast mind to obtain, to take, to get from the unsuspecting and the ignorant? For Pride rooted in the seed bed of desire is easily manipulated.

In Unity we remain in Love - else there remains Individuality in the plurality of desire and lust. Indeed Selfishness is a horrible stink. God Is - therefore the only question is : To Be or not To Be. We are IN GOD or we are outside of the body. Being outside of the body is a choice. We can see this reflected in State.



Shabbat Shalom,
MJ

[xparte]

every man must admit the right of the higher mysteries to rule his life in the
last resort but some things such as the language of Scripture and how would we
leave the mysteries rather too mysterious for immediate application
well some like the Catholic theory of social Authority and deliberately
clarified so that they can be applied the idolatry of the sacred writings
actually paved the way for the idolatry of all writing.
Without superstition in kissing rings and kissing the Bible
there's now even more superstition in consulting the dictionary too many
people think that anything that has got itself printed has somehow passed an
examination and received a diploma as somehow shown itself to be true
he says they'll believe encyclopedia against an eyewitness they'll believe a
newspaper against the naked eye St Thomas and civil disobedience is
rational because because law is an ordinance of Reason past with a common
good what is truth was
Pontius Pilate the first theologian /OT/NT Bible the greatest book in all the world more influential more inspiring
more enigmatic than any other collection of printed pages it's a book that we
cannot do without but it's also a dangerous book because we cannot risk
misunderstanding it did and even the ones who do know how to recite scripture chapter and verse miss
one very important point that the Bible is a document of the Catholic Church NT/KJB
English literature and not only
is English literature completely filled with biblical references but one of the
greatest works of English literature is the Bible that is the translation of the
bible during the reign of King James the first published the dawn of the 17th
century around the COLONIAL explanation for a WASP mindset that took cast for literary society
the English Bible the big bones of English
literature alagoricaly then literally being Gods commercial attorney
but it is a translation and a translation that has more than a few
flaws in it there's no question that 16th century english sounds more
dignified than modern English a bound copy of the King James
Version fell from heaven exactly as the golden plates of the book of mormon fell
out of the sky on the other hand there are those who attack the Bible I am attending too its misconduct .
but will be defending something good in my undertaking and it's not hard to
figure out where my sympathies lie in this matter. I would lean
towards neither of these two kinds of Biblical extremists when it comes to the bible
the Bible smashers and the Bible worshippers
as with most extremist they are remarkably alike even though they seem
to be opposites they missed the point in two different directions but they are
wrong for the same reason they are both guilty of idolatry one extreme regards
the Bible as an Idol to be worshipped and the other as an idol to be destroyed
what is idolatry the preference for the incidental?
good over the eternal good which it symbolizes our
elementary underlying mathematical and moral heresy that the part is greater than the whole or a cast is named

Separating any Bible from your church and then make the Bible more important than
the church the bible is not greater then Christ .So we never conceded too a separation of church and state the book has.

[allodial]

The KJV was translated on the watch of James I no doubt. However, before that was Tyndale's translation, Geneva, the Septuagint, Hebrew texts and Aramaic texts and various materials that can be crossed reference to come to truth. Logic has it that all English editions are translations, therefore as Proverbs and other scriptures suggests, the true student and believer will study to show himself approved and will search things out: learning some Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew/Chaldee/Phoenician and even old dynasty Egyptian. The Bible speaks of principles and precepts of the Father to his sons (not necessarily a biological meaning) and daughters (not necessarily a biological meaning).

Learning to read Bibles written in Jaccobean English makes one better with the English language and improves ones communication skills. A dictionary showing the meanings of words in those times is very important and at least once has been available for free on the Internet even back as far as 1994. I would not suggest it to be a book intended to appeal to intellectuals. It is meant be read with the interpretative assistance of the Holy Spirit (see Secrets of the Cherubim).

Christianity promotes good social order founded on keeping God and man at a higher value than mammon, stuff, things or trinkets. I fix my neighbors roof because he is ill for two months and his wife and kids are unable to make ends meet: some dare call that extremist--extremely adherent to the truth and wisdom (word) of God. The undesirable extremists are those who would undermine that for 30 shekels or who wield the book as took for deceptive, manipulative political control.

...even the ones who do know how to recite scripture chapter and verse miss one very important point that the Bible is a document of the Catholic Church NT/KJB.

Without any bias against the RCC, I have yet to find hard-core proof of the Roman Catholic Church being the source of the Bible (inspired scripture collections). The authors or the Inspiror would be sources would they not? The KJV was based on the Textus Receptus rather than on the Latin Vulgate. It must also be understood that the word 'catholic' means universal among other things (it is a Greek word). The terms Roman, Greek, Swedish don't seem to connote 'universal'.

catholic (adj.) - mid-14c., "of the doctrines of the ancient Church," literally "universally accepted," from French catholique, from Church Latin catholicus "universal, general," from Greek katholikos, from phrase kath' holou "on the whole, in general," from kata "about" + genitive of holos "whole" (see safe (adj.)). Applied to the Church in Rome c. 1554, after the Reformation began. General sense of "of interest to all, universal" is from 1550s.

If it be true that Rome opposed the translation of the inspired scriptures, how could Rome be the source? Most realize the KJV is a translation into English from Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew/Chaldee texts, etc.

compiled by Erasmus from several manuscripts older and more authoritative than the Latin Vulgate

The Textus Receptus is the text that has been used for 2,000 years by Christians. This is also the text that agrees with more than 95% of the Bible Manuscripts in Koine (common) Greek. It is known by other names, such as the Traditional Text, Majority Text, Byzantine Text, or Syrian Text.

Related:
1560 Geneva Bible
1590 Geneva Bible with commentary and notes
Textus Receptus

[xparte]

My point is integrity in interpretation Grammar being greek then latin the great lengths ROME went on with commercial conquest crusades then Protestant colonialism was invented from this.King James Bible is a document of the Catholic Church allegorical the protesting of Catholicism its monopolies on Gods word or inspiration of the literary.BASILICA Greek for Court royal house.

[Michael Joseph]

Pontius Pilate the first theologian /OT/NT Bible the greatest book in all the world more influential more inspiring more enigmatic than any other collection of printed pages it's a book that we cannot do without but it's also a dangerous book because we cannot risk misunderstanding it did and even the ones who do know how to recite scripture chapter and verse miss one very important point that the Bible is a document of the Catholic Church NT/KJB

Yes, I agree when the Scripture was placed in the hands of the people that was good and bad. For when the priest went astray, like Eli sons did, then they lost the ability to teach and they only show now in ritual. Nevertheless, when I consider Genesis 6 and I consider the Internal Man, then I consider the "Ben Ha Elohim" to be the THOUGHTS OF GOD. And a very strict reading of the texts will show that the abstract term "daughters of men" is way to vague. For in fact it reads DAUGHTERS OF HA AW-DAWM. Which renders DAUGHTERS OF THE MAN.

When one then sees daughters are akin to Desires and sons to Thoughts then one can see that the giants born are philosophies or religions. And one can now see the Religio-Political bodies arising in the Earth - GIANTS. Whether or not giants in size and stature actually walked this earth is not my concern. For how does that relate to our condition this day? I see no 12 fingered beings on the Earth today. Nevertheless, I do see systems of control which are GIANT in regard to the manipulation of billions of people.

If one relates a Man as a Church or a State, then one can get an understanding on "Men of Renown." When one focuses their attention to the external only, then in my opinion, one misses the boat. And now later we read that the Angels are returning and already one who is looking to the Internal Man can already sense the RIVERS OVERFLOWING as doctrines are being propagated all over the Earth. This information propagation may only breed more confusion [BBL].

Since an Angel is a Messenger in relation to the Word we can see now of John the Baptist that he relates to the External Sense of the Word as a Representative of the Word and thusly the Lord. And therefore when his head is removed so too is prophecy concerning the Lord for now is the Lord manifest.

Concerning John, Elijah, Moses and Elisha, E. Swedenborg wrote : Click Here


Concerning Nephilim: Click Here and Click Here

[xparte]

Because Man is made flesh and angels are spirit .The created haven't just been blessed with flesh but immortal flesh Why Lucifer was never made flesh or was he both Adam /Eve are a good substitute for rebellion.The white and black is a board game the Christian Chessboard is black versus white pagan vs saved north vs south.The debate is why its profitable to control salvation/Christ wasn't profitable until 300 years after a literary license or Patent a government authority or license conferring a right or title for a set period, especially the sole right to exclude others from making, using, or selling an invention. The Scriptures didnt invent Christ and Christ never invented Christian integrity.

[xparte]

I have no description of scripture its of this world or in it how transparent can good be.Evil explanations for people doing good mysterious organizers hardly.I have faith in good when it comes without explanation.

[allodial]

My point is integrity in interpretation Grammar being greek then latin the great lengths ROME went on with commercial conquest crusades then Protestant colonialism was invented from this.King James Bible is a document of the Catholic Church allegorical the protesting of Catholicism its monopolies on Gods word or inspiration of the literary.BASILICA Greek for Court royal house.

Good points. The idea of there existing this "Christendom" divided between Protestants and Roman Catholics I find questionable since the true ecclesia existed before Constantine's time. There were those among the British Isles and other locations who had known the doctrines of the Apostles long before Augustine or any Roman missionary had arrived. The third category: the orthodox bible-believer, bible-observant saints who don't necessarily have anything to do with either Protestantism or Roman Catholicism. The third category I have found to be more rare to find but they do exist and I have witnessed amazing things and much great love among them. However, overall I have found true believers to be scattered throughout a variety of congregations. Technically Baptists might actually be outside of the classification of Protestant. Protestant organizations would be ones that specifically protested against the Roman Catholic Church.

The idea that Protestantism became a wedge to destroy the integrity of orthodox Christian societies, seems plausible: the doors opened for usury, mammon worship, etc. Thirty Years War, Colonialism, Darkside Occultism using pseudo-gospel as a front door...WWI, WWII, etc. That there were those co-opted the Reformation who had insidious intents, plausible also. A war against the saints de jure: stopping the manifestation of the sons of God on the planet has been a major objective of those who until recently primarily lurked in the shadows.

re: the KJV
I recall someone suggesting that in the KJV was a point made to specifically legitimize a system of clergy-laity. While I don't necessarily take their viewpoing, it might be that I found myself unable to actually find the word 'bishop' in the Greek. There is the role of the elders or an elder in a congregation. The Episcopalians simply kept the word in tact.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4567[/ATTACH]
(source)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4568[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]4568[/ATTACH]
(source)

To reiterate, I could not in all of my learning find the proper resolve of the word 'bishop' and how it could quite be derived from episcopos except with a bit of creativity. However, at one point I came to learn that the word 'vishap' in Armenian means dragon. The best wikipedia gives on the word 'bishop' is that it is:

(seen by many as an interchangeable term with episcopos or overseer)

The parenthesis appear in the Wikipedia article. Taking a look at etymonline.com even they are flipping through loops to arrive at how episkopos becomes bishop (especially consider that Yeshua becomes Jesus in Greek--but yet somehow with episcopos we find a 'sh' carrying into bishop somehow. 'Episcap'..could make more sense, no?).



They're knocking themselves out to try to get to how 'episcopos' become 'bishop'. OK sure, in a way, I could see how something or another could be lost in translation..maybe more like 'bischap' became 'bishap'. But with 'bi' 'epi' is lost in the sense of 'overseer'. That 'vishap' means dragon in Armenian is....hmmmm. Isn't that Grand Vishap or Grand Dragon what members of the KKK are called? Anyways, ya know how languages can be. I've seen words in a RTL language become common words in a LTR language but the only difference they are pronounced and written backwards.

Nonetheless, the word 'bishop' was a generic term for a high priest so it would make sense if in a given locality they used terms with which they were familiar. However, the word 'elder' or 'overseer' would have sufficed.

***

Any way you look at it blaming innocent third party with the results of a conflict in which they are not necessarily effectively involved doesn't seem quite right.

Related:

• Organization of the Local Church
• The Pulpit
• Starting A Church
• The Rule of Bishops: Authoritative or Exemplary?
• The Examiner: Volumes 1 through 8

[BLBereans]

Yes, I agree when the Scripture was placed in the hands of the people that was good and bad. For when the priest went astray, like Eli sons did, then they lost the ability to teach and they only show now in ritual. Nevertheless, when I consider Genesis 6 and I consider the Internal Man, then I consider the "Ben Ha Elohim" to be the THOUGHTS OF GOD. And a very strict reading of the texts will show that the abstract term "daughters of men" is way to vague. For in fact it reads DAUGHTERS OF HA AW-DAWM. Which renders DAUGHTERS OF THE MAN.

When one then sees daughters are akin to Desires and sons to Thoughts then one can see that the giants born are philosophies or religions. And one can now see the Religio-Political bodies arising in the Earth - GIANTS. Whether or not giants in size and stature actually walked this earth is not my concern. For how does that relate to our condition this day? I see no 12 fingered beings on the Earth today. Nevertheless, I do see systems of control which are GIANT in regard to the manipulation of billions of people.

If one relates a Man as a Church or a State, then one can get an understanding on "Men of Renown." When one focuses their attention to the external only, then in my opinion, one misses the boat. And now later we read that the Angels are returning and already one who is looking to the Internal Man can already sense the RIVERS OVERFLOWING as doctrines are being propagated all over the Earth. This information propagation may only breed more confusion [BBL].

Since an Angel is a Messenger in relation to the Word we can see now of John the Baptist that he relates to the External Sense of the Word as a Representative of the Word and thusly the Lord. And therefore when his head is removed so too is prophecy concerning the Lord for now is the Lord manifest.

Concerning John, Elijah, Moses and Elisha, E. Swedenborg wrote : Click Here


Concerning Nephilim: Click Here and Click Here

Is it possible to believe that GIANTS really means actual GIANTS and still comprehend that the systems of control manipulate millions of people? You seem to opine that these two ideas may be mutually exclusive whereby belief in actual events being depicted results in "missing the boat" of understanding.

Why can't both be true? Why be so dismissive of these events depicted in scripture as being actual occurrences? What is the benefit of discarding these events as actual?

[allodial]

The Simon Magus perspective was of a special, exclusive school of OT interpretation when in fact the literal events are telling the story. its already a given that the worlds were framed by the word of God (word meaning truth and wisdom) and it is rather well known in certain circles that words and writing are expressions of will and thoughts. Consider interpreting Adam and Eve as merely conscious mind and subconscious mind respectively. There are those who regard the conscious mind to be "God" therefore you have worship of the feminine. When in fact, it is very obvious that the feminine was made to be linked up with the masculine by design. The soil doesn't own the crop the farmer does. The soil doesn't own the farmer, the farmer owns the field.

Sure you'll have those that say that the idea of men owning women to be terrible or antiquated but believe me, I've yet to come across an unregenerate female who has a problem with the idea of owning a man or with the idea of fleecing a man of his resources and then regarding him to be 'stupid' if she gets away with it. Furthermore, the state blatantly claims ownership of its female persons. In other words, liberation of women was to 'liberate' them in the sense of freeing them from the protective coverture of the lawful private household to the public harlotry of state animal farm ownership.

Its important to realize why it is possible that Eve sinned but Adam was not responsible wholly: because they were made twain, the idea of Adam and Eve as a couple is false. Lawful marriage doesn't result in couples it results in merger of the male (mostly conscious active incarnation of mankind) and the female (mostly subconscious passive incarnation of mankind). They were a unity and that is plainly stated in Genesis. They were joined together as one, Adam went with Eve.

[allodial]

In the beginning God had his first thought, his Ennoia, which was female, and that thought was to create the angels. The First Thought then descended into the lower regions and created the angels. But the angels rebelled against her out of jealousy and created the world as her prison, imprisoning her in a female body. Thereafter, she was reincarnated many times, each time being shamed. Her many reincarnations included Helen of Troy, among others, and she finally was reincarnated as Helen, a slave and prostitute in the Phoenician city of Tyre. God then descended in the form of Simon Magus, to rescue his Ennoia, and to confer salvation upon men through knowledge of himself. --Epiphanius of Salamus's Panarion

The Simon Magus (see quote from Panarian above) perspective was of a special, exclusive school of OT interpretation when in fact the literal events were telling a story much like a dance in a royal court or a ritual conveys a story or meaning. Its already a given that the worlds were framed by the word of God (word meaning truth and wisdom) and it is rather well known in certain circles that words and writing are expressions of will and codification of thought. So that means a chair or an aircraft is the result of thought.

There are those who regard Adam and Eve as being merely conscious mind and subconscious mind respectively having nothing to do with any real men or real women. But consider that which I was taught long ago: that Adam and Eve seeing themselves as naked may have been evidence of injury eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil had done: they began to fail to see the distinction between themselves and their bodies which are likened unto garments of flesh (spiritual death started setting in). There are those who regard the subconscious mind to be "God" and perhaps this relates to the idea of worship of the feminine or passive. However, it seems rather obvious that the feminine was made to be linked up with the masculine by design. The soil doesn't own the crop the farmer does. The soil doesn't own the farmer, the farmer owns the field.

Those who promote the idea of the subconscious mind being "god" seem to miss or disregard the significance of the will, emotions and imagination. The vagina is 'god' how? Consider that the female nervous system has to yield part of its subconscious (sympathetic?) function for 9 months for gestation and birth to occur. But yet nothing occurs unless the male acts or wills to act first. Does that suggest the female be disregarded? Of course not. But the significant point highlighted pertains to one of male and female coming or acting together in harmony: one/unified.

Sure you'll have those that say that the idea of men owning women to be terrible or antiquated but believe me, I've yet to come across an unregenerate female who has a problem with the idea of owning a man or with the idea of fleecing a man of his resources and then regarding him to be 'stupid' if she gets away with it. Furthermore, the state blatantly claims ownership of its female persons. Think: Police State having a strong correlation to State husbandry. In other words, liberation of women perhaps served to to 'liberate' them in the sense of freeing them from the protective coverture of the lawful private household and removing them to be mere breeders in the Public Animal Farm. And I'm not suggesting it to be either good or bad.

Its important to realize why it is possible that Eve sinned but Adam was not responsible wholly: because they were made twain, the idea of Adam and Eve as a couple is false. Lawful marriage doesn't result in couples it results in merger of the male (mostly conscious active incarnation of mankind) and the female (mostly subconscious passive incarnation of mankind). They were a unity and that is plainly stated in Genesis. They were joined together as one, Adam (mostly conscious/active) went with Eve (mostly subconscious/passive).

Dark side occultists know this. They know that when a man and a woman have sex there is a connection that develops. This a method of control. The masters of the coven gang bang the female member with the intent to spiritually link with the female's body (in science there is a phenomenon called 'action at a distance' to which this correlates). Then they deploy her as a weapon to defeat the unwitting male victim's hedge. Men who are sexually chaste they seek to try to get them with a hooker or the like of their choosing. The politicians who think they are 'getting something' when they are delivered a hooker are being actually given a trojan horse: the prostitute's nervous system will link with the target male and the dark side occultists will use this to gain control.

It must be first understood that when a manchild is born there is a protective hedge. In simple, the promotion of sexual promiscuity is designed to defeat this hedge.