Translated? (Enoch)

[george]

Without truth or insight about reality and life and laws spirtual and physical, where would you or anyone else be?

You would call it 'religion'. But where would you be without the light of truth?

thats an interesting thought to ponder actually. with so many truths and insights though things get very confusing. heck just the words we use are confusing once you start to "change the mind" (forget everything we thought we knew and start over. repent?) for instance: "light of truth" not unlike "state of kansas", or the constitution "of" instead of the constitution "for".

not to say that I think you are being deceptive at all allodial, Im grateful you are here and to be able to converse with you about these things! and youre at least part of the reason that i even notice what i might have not before, had you not been posting your truths here and elsewhere.

I'm not talking about perversion of truth for immoral political ends and objectives. Do you want the chaos of the heretical Gnostics where everything goes even murder is OK? Probably not.

TBH it doesnt seem we are too far from that now and in many ways we are there. men acting as cops and soldiers seem to get away with murder often, no? and this is a large part of the reason I now question everything including my own long held beliefs in jesus. its not easy (very few could even deal with the thought of this even) life was much easier prior but this is where im at now and that is subject to change too.

where would we be? a different world, that is near certain.

As for cursive writing being used to hide something that makes little sense.

yes, but i meant not so much the cursive part (but that does have the element of curse it seems) the hieretic but that is all new to me so more investigation needed.

In my studies it seems that cultures that were highly stratified with a small ruling elite and a large underclass promoted pictographic writing. Consider China (why is it that there is so little talk about the political structure of China in the MSM?), they have thousands of hieroglyphic characters. Typically the wealthy and elite learn them all or most of them or know way more and the 'plebes' who are left with a small and meager vocabulary. In contrast there is phonetics. In the USA, since WWII, there has been a trend to undermine phonetics in education and to instead teach the asinine "word picture" or "whole word" style of reading. The idea of using 'cursive' to hide something makes little sense and to suggest such seems very misleading because there is little difference in uncial and cursive in that they are both fundamentally phonetic. I have studied linguistics for decades. If you look at John Taylor Gatto's book The Underground History of American Education he gets into the phonetics vs. 'word pictures' style of teaching reading. Hiding something would probably tend to focus on pictographics vs phonetics.

A book that gets into development of "Hebrew" (aka Chaldee): Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew by Joshua Blau.

see, this is why Im grateful and thankful to converse with you here. Im just now realizing that linguistics is a key, if not the key needed to unlock a major portion of life's mystery and so having the opportunity to discuss with those who have so much experience is invaluable. Im so glad you are here and share it with us allodial.

As for ancient Egyptian in the book of Genesis: Genesis 1-2 In Light Of Ancient Egyptian Creation Myths. Beware of the Babylonians because they have been claiming to be the source "of all things", when that might not be true. They try to claim Babylonian origins of Genesis, etc. when evidence is quite to the contrary--ancient Egyptian words that predate Babylon are found in the text.

will check that out and probably have more questions too. thanks

Want to hide something with cursive writing? LOL--nonsense. You could make your own language or script instead. Consider this instead (as contrasted with phonetics):

Word pictures, like hieroglyphics would tend to hide the phonetic nature of speech and etymology of words.

yes I see, for the longest time Ive thought that hieroglyphs pre-date written word.

If you study linguistics you'll see how its possible to control a people's entire reality through the words you teach them or don't teach them. Understand vs overstand (they left that one out). Consider 'upon' vs 'on' vs. 'in'--in and on are much the same word in other languages. (He was "upon the land", he was "on the land" vs "he was in the land". )

yes, i agree, it is certainly a worthwhile study.

Regarding religion and such: IT WAS (PROGRESSIVE) HORACE MAN "FATHER OF COMMON (COMMUNIST) SCHOOLS" IN AMERICA THAT FIRST ATTACKED PHONETICS AS A METHOD OF TEACHING READING SKILLS. SURPRISE: THE FATHER OF COMMON SCHOOLS (OR PUBLIC EDUCATION) WAS ALSO THE FIRST TO ATTACK A SOUND APPROACH TO READING SKILLS -> IT SEEMS THAT DUMBING PEOPLE DOWN WAS HIS PRIMARY OBJECTIVE ALONG WITH HIS COHORT JOHN DEWEY.





They attacked that societies weren't overly-centralized and that power wasn't centralized in a few--and they attacked existing religion as part of their objectives.

thats probably who got rid of teaching parsing. I never even knew what parsing was until discovering David-Wynn: Miller, he mentioned it and why it was stopped from being taught. he has a very unique insight into laguage for sure if not the most unique.

"Secularism" ...communism. "State as God". Maybe that's the kind of religion you might prefer instead, george?

i dont think so, at least not "state as god" and dont know enough about secularism. communism is interesting only becasue I worked with three men from russia for a while who had been through alot over there then made it to america (their dreams come true or so they thought) and had been here for a couple of years and they left to go back to russia with a very bad taste in their mouth from our system. even said that communism sucked but was much better than the ways here because of the nickel and dime to death operations of our governmental system. said they actually had better living circumstances in soviet russia than here in the early 2000s these were good guys too, very intelligent and hard workers so that has always stuck with me and I could relate so much to the nickle and dimed to death, havnt looked at comunism the same since then either but Im not ready to endorse it yet either.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3339[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3340[/ATTACH]

Also:

• Why Do Students Regard Reading as Torture?
• Decrypting Education In America

thanks for the suggestions here and the time and effort youve spent again too. also, please forgive me if I might make you angry or disgusted from time to time, not my intent at all. just trying to learn and not the best writer either.


thanks

edit:

Genesis 1-2 In Light Of Ancient Egyptian Creation Myths

OK, this is an interesting read.. all new to me the egyptian creation stories. what I noticed was that in all these creation stories, the water preexists/wasnt created, no? also, I thought Id read that elohim was plural and that is why some text read "let us create him"

also more aware now of an opposing story, that of the babylonian origin which obviously you dont subscribe to but since im not familiar with it or exactly why one or the other matters, I think I need to look it up now too. if you can further clarify any of this, it would also be helpful.

thanks

[allodial]

Spiritual . . . But Not Religious

"Fearlessness is the first requirement of spirituality. Cowards can never be moral." -- Mahatma Gandhi Without truth or insight about reality and life and laws spiritual and physical, where would you or anyone else be? Theodore Nottingham: The Knowledge of the Essenes The Essenes were an advanced and highly evolved race of people," Nottingham observes. "Much of their time was devoted to the study of ancient texts, various branches of the healing arts, (and) there were also those who travelled far and wide through the various centers they maintained."

In very modern terms, Nottingham explains how, "(l)ike many of the ancient gnostic groups, the Essenes believed that humankind was made up of three aspects: the body, mind and emotions." "The ultimate goal of the individual," he explains, "was the evolution, not only within him or herself, but also in regards to the planet and universe as a whole. The body was the outer means through which this was expressed, while the mind was seen as the inner manifestation, and creator of thoughts and emotions, which the body then responded to and acted upon. Thought was therefore considered to be the highest, most powerful force in the universe, as it was seen as the instigator of both feeling and action.

"The Essenes," Nottingham points out, "therefore trained themselves to harness this power in a positive way, knowing that each thought effected the lives of everyone on the planet through the vibrations they sent into the collective unconscious." It appears to me that wealth and how much one required forgiveness for that wealth. it was the greatest need that both spiritually and morally Men became wealthy within the church. Spiritually Christ has little need for a latin mass or a protest and Reformation of the word. When Christ cant accept himself he would have just become religious and thats just not acceptable Spiritually.I impart the obligation is pure of heart.

There was more than one sect known as "The Essenes". A most fundamental principle is to do with reaping and sowing (i.e. reaping what one sows). The Bible doesn't tell necessarily tell you that you CANT sow things that would come back and destroy you, instead the good priest and good shepherd encourages those under his care to AVOID doing things that would result in a 'destructive reaping cycle'. Homosexual males hate the idea of someone telling them that engaging in sexual practices can cause disease and destruction. But just because they hate it, it doesn't change the law of reaping and sowing. "ignorance" instead of referring to "lack of knowledge" might be instead referring to active "ignoring or avoiding" any input associated with the truth as a way of avoiding liability (i.e. to practice cluelessness as a lifestyle so as to have a reason for lacking accountability.)

[george]

I impart the obligation is pure of heart.

that of the Essenes? as you have described them here, i think so too.

There was more than one sect known as "The Essenes".

how so?

"ignorance" instead of referring to "lack of knowledge" might be instead referring to active "ignoring or avoiding" any input associated with the truth as a way of avoiding liability (i.e. to practice cluelessness as a lifestyle so as to have a reason for lacking accountability.)

yes, i also think that is what ignorance means and it seems obvious, and in that same way one who lacks knowledge would be twice ignorant i guess since the knowledge was possible.


thanks

[allodial]

thats an interesting thought to ponder actually. with so many truths and insights though things get very confusing. heck just the words we use are confusing once you start to "change the mind" (forget everything we thought we knew and start over. repent?) for instance: "light of truth" not unlike "state of kansas", or the constitution "of" instead of the constitution "for".

There might be many perspectives or observations but I dunno how there can be "many truths" in the sense of two things holding true but conflicting.

On the topic of 'state of Kansas'..."Kansas" (like "Florida" or "Bavaria" or "Belgium") is technically is the name of a nation. The estate they formed was called State of Kansas. "Constitution of the State of Kansas" is a title of the document. However "Constitution of the State of Kansas" can also refer to its collective makeup (principles, laws (written and unwritten), etc.). The Federal Government calls its districts states. The Constitution of the United States is a general reference to the jurisprudential makeup of the Federal State known as "the United States". The Constitution for the United States of America refers to a document because that very same document bears such self-reference. That which constitutes --constitution. The by-laws of the State of Kansas set forth by the nation (i.e. the association of People which call their association "Kansas"). Kansas is not the State of Kansas. The (e)state of Kansas comes out of (is 'of') Kansas the nation. First one has to determine what a "Kansas" is...it is a name of a nation--the name of an association of people who associate under or through the name "Kansas" (not much different than a tribe). Federal districts of (associated with) Kansas are regarded to be states also.

IMHO terms like "Kansas Constitution" should be viewed with caution because they don't necessarily mean what they seem to mean. As in "Constitution of the State of Kansas" and "Kansas Constitution" aren't necessarily the same. With "Kansas Constitution", "Kansas" seems to act as a modifier of "Constitution". "citizen of Kansas" and "Kansas citizen" don't strike me as being the same. Similarly, "Constitution of Kansas" is not the title of a document based on the document called "Constitution of the State of Kansas". Constitution of Kansas appears to be a reference to the general makeup of the order, realm, nation, real, state or people associated under the name "Kansas".

The term "state of Kansas" is a generic reference to the estate of the nation called Kansas ("the People of Kansas") which is formally known as "the State of Kansas"--the name of the state as distinct from the state itself. The independent and free state of Missouri (the nation) is stiled "The State of Missouri". What they left out of high school is that Missouri, Florida, Georgia are nations. Missourian is a nationality. "The State of Missouri" is not the same as "the State of Missouri". In the first "The" is not operating as "the". A Missourian is technically foreign to the United States. The People don't necessarily live in the estate they formed. Just because you and I buy land and declare certain areas to be "commons", that doesn't make our private dwellings part of that estate, does it?

Despite all of the progressive thinking, I'm not sure how the United States could be regarded as an organic nation.

Linguistics can be used as a weapon. Attention to detail is an important part of defense IMHO.

TBH it doesnt seem we are too far from that now and in many ways we are there. men acting as cops and soldiers seem to get away with murder often, no? and this is a large part of the reason I now question everything including my own long held beliefs in jesus. its not easy (very few could even deal with the thought of this even) life was much easier prior but this is where im at now and that is subject to change too.

That's militant atheism arising out of heretical gnostic ideas. They will not get away with it. They only seem to, but they are mistaken as to the consequence. The longer it takes the rock to fall....

where would we be? a different world, that is near certain.

Among other things, the evidence is that brown-skinned Christian and fair-skinned Christians tended to get along quite well until the heretical Gnostics started meddling with things. There are rumors suggesting the "Gay Agenda" is an indirect tactic of "White Supremacy"--a tactic to diminish the rights of brown-skinned people by associating with persons who claim cultural affinities based on their sexual fetishes (how does one identify primarily with a sexual fetish and call it a culture?). Or is it a tactic to diminish the rights of everyone? Seriously, as much intelligence and potential a man can have, for one to based his identity on how he sexually pleasures himself seems to be bottom rung. A society of engineers, a society of doctors, a society of seamstresses, makes sense. But a society of buggerists, felatioers or strap-oners? How does that happen? The association of traditional sexual taboos with "Blacks being free" seems to be a type of assault.

[ATTACH]3341[/ATTACH]

Speaking of hieroglyphics, word pictures and art.... ^

Foundations of Language by Ray Jackendoff

Speaking of linguistics: there is the use of linguistics as weaponry, subversion through modification of original meaning or intent. Take the term "homophobia" which means fear (phobia) of the same technically but is redefined to mean "hatred of homosexuals". Disgust is redefined by the same Bolshevik politicals as 'hatred'. Because someone might be disgusted should one stick one's finger ones arse and pick one's nose right or because someone suggests doing to same to be disgusting or could make you sick --that is simply disgust and concern. But the politicals behind the Gay Agenda use have been attempting to redefine 'disgust', 'fear' as 'hate'. The same have spent quite a lot of energy to redefine 'gay' from the original meaning of 'happy' to refer to someone who has a penchant for buggery or other associated sexual fetishes.

This gets more to the OP: There are 'occultists' who suggest things like words or letters having power in and of themselves. Perhaps they know the truth and are operationally bent on hiding it. In any case, it seems rather evident to me that words and letters are tools of expressing meaning. The word 'word' itself is similar to the word 'veritas' or 'verdad' (in Espanol): which means truth. But when we say 'word' we mainly are referring to letters assembled to mean something. gay means happy. But to the Gay Agenda psychologists, politicians and spin-doctors: gay refers to men who identify with unhealthy sexual practices. In all honesty, there is really no such thing as a lesbian--at least not among females who have yet to reach menopause.

In warfare, disrupting communications by jamming useable radio frequencies is not an uncommon tactic. Politically or on the PYSOPS level, attempts at the the same kind of jamming or disruption has been carried out through attacking 'meaning'.

Related:
What Is Militant Atheism?

[xparte]

It appears to me that wealth and how much one required forgiveness for that wealth.[reaping what you sow ]it was the greatest need that both spiritually and morally Men became wealthy with reaping what was planted in there head within the church. Spiritually Christ has little need for a latin mass or a protest and Reformation of the word. When Christ cant accept himself he would have just become religious and thats just not acceptable Spiritually.I impart the obligation is pure of heart.The Bible doesn't tell necessarily tell you that you CANT sow things that would come back and destroy you, instead the good priest and good shepherd encourages those under his care to AVOID doing things that would result in a 'destructive reaping cycle'. Homosexual males hate the idea of someone telling them that engaging in sexual practices can cause disease and destruction. a spiritual destruction is not just a religious taboo all good shepherds prey on ignorance not intellect why a good priest is moral or cowardice is a spiritual choice perversion of truth is a Man,s agenda what section of the essenes that are politically correct is of no spiritual wealth knowing a man thats gay or ig noring all ignorance is still of no spiritual wealth tell a guy not to be gay is who,s ignorance or fetish if millions of christians were spiritual the pedophil priest would never sheperd cowards formless and void thats the spiritual or ritualistic nonsense being slung the moral void is truth not forming it i impart the obligation is pure of heart. we created the void where ever cowards form the greater the void what sect does it for me Christ row 3 section 7 season tickets and ignorance.

[BLBereans]

Harvard's Original Purpose:

Let every Student be plainly instructed, and earnestly pressed to consider well, the maine end of his life and studies is, to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottome, as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and Learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisedome, Let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seeke it of him (Prov. 2:3).

Every one shall so exercise himselfe in reading the Scriptures twice a day, that he shall be ready to give such an account of his proficiency therein, both in Theoreticall observations of Language and Logick, and in practical and spiritual truths, as his Tutor shall require, according to his ability; seeing the entrance of the word giveth light, it giveth understanding to the simple (Psalm 119:130).



First, you remove God and the notion that we need His revelation in order to transcend our own reasoning and to know "His Way"



Then, you hide the truth by: replacing God's Word with "man's word" and intentionally breeding illiterates through "modern" education controlled by those who hold sway in governmental capacity or through influence therefrom.

Has the agenda changed since the lie in the garden?

[xparte]

[Michael Joseph]

We know this is not the FIRST ESTATE of man for that would mean there is a grave error in the Bible - Ref Isaiah 45:18. But consider the base nature of man's consciousness - how art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer. Man likes to externalize himself and point the finger at others. But now we see the five aspects of carnality which brought man low into Base Consciousness. Man fell from the Mountain into the Valley of the Shadow of Death.

There was never and will never be a "talking snake". This is the Central Nervous System in man. Man choose to experience this Planet Eden thru this Carnal Nature. A reset thusly was made roughly about 12k years back.

In the Scripture Man is a Title. A Man is one who is Spiritually Conscious. Dominion is therefore granted to Man NOT the beasts of the field - those who walk in base consciousness! Clearly there is a problem with the historical model. Human's today cannot get close to building the structures of yesteryear and some would have that we are at the peak of technology? Hardly.

Nothing leaves the law boundary of the Husbandman! All things are made subject to His Dominion.

Gen 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

Gen 9:2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.

Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

[BLBereans]

We know this is not the FIRST ESTATE of man for that would mean there is a grave error in the Bible - Ref Isaiah 45:18. But consider the base nature of man's consciousness - how art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer. Man likes to externalize himself and point the finger at others. But now we see the five aspects of carnality which brought man low into Base Consciousness. Man fell from the Mountain into the Valley of the Shadow of Death.

There was never and will never be a "talking snake". This is the Central Nervous System in man. Man choose to experience this Planet Eden thru this Carnal Nature. A reset thusly was made roughly about 12k years back.

In the Scripture Man is a Title. A Man is one who is Spiritually Conscious. Dominion is therefore granted to Man NOT the beasts of the field - those who walk in base consciousness! Clearly there is a problem with the historical model. Human's today cannot get close to building the structures of yesteryear and some would have that we are at the peak of technology? Hardly.

I see no error in the first estate of man being Eden. Isaiah 45:18 refers to the notion that God does not create the earth in vain; not to be a wasteland of confusion and shame as is the "end-game" for the idol makers/worshipers He spoke about in earlier verses (context!).

Pointing the finger at others so as to avoid responsibility for one's own actions is one thing, claiming that there are NO external forces in the unseen realm working against us is yet another. You seem to bounce back and forth between denying the literal and accepting it. There does exist a prime entity whose goal is to spread evil; we are NOT God's only creation. There is the Heavenly Host who is His Divine Council in the unseen realm and they too are responsible for their own actions. Some chose to follow the adversary in revolt and rebellion against their Creator since they did not find favor with God's new created family of man whose original estate is earth and who was granted great authority.

The "talking snake" polemic is an old and tired argument. The nachash is obviously NOT a "talking snake"; it is a serpentine-like shining being who obviously did not cause Eve to marvel as to why she was conversing with a "talking snake". The account in scripture makes it clear that she did not find the "serpent" being as unusual in her realm nor a being whose ability to speak was out of the ordinary. Heaven and earth were close and communion between the two realms was normative in Eden. God walked with them daily until the expulsion.

The "structures of yesteryear" were attempts by man to re-create Eden on his own terms (humanism - the lie of the garden) by re-gaining access to the Heavenly realm. I am NOT impressed with said "technology" when the inspiration behind it was for sheer rebellion and the religion of "ME" manifesting by way of assistance and "knowledge" from the fallen members of God's Heavenly Host. Any knowledge gained that is NOT directly from God is an abomination and should be regarded as such.

[allodial]

Unraveling the mystery of the talking snake is rather easy: a humanoid priest or representative of the Cult of Snake Worshipers. If the serpent represents a carnal mind then it can easily be equated with a totally-carnal involved in serpent worship (i.e. the other man's carnal mind and carnal nervous system being the Serpent--devoid of the higher mind). The serpent worshiping occultist 'eats of the dust' the false doctrines quench not thirst. Coincidentally, it comes to mind that mirages are associated with dry desert places.

Regarding Harvard
Kaballists infiltrated the English/British royal courts (~1500) via John Dee. Calvin infiltrated the Protestant movement (i.e. a widespread realization that encouraged the saints of Western Europe to return to original, non-Roman doctrinal roots) bringing usury into Western Europe. Some say it went downhill (in Britain) from there. The American Colonists probably thanks to George III (who was committed to a mental institution probably because he disagreed with the occultists) escaped. Eventually the same occultists would lay siege against the United States and would infiltrate U.S. Government more solidly by the late 1800s.

Re: Eve's Discourse With the Serpent
See above re: attacking meaning. The Gay Agenda is 100% a religious movement--even the blatant use of Sigil Magic is obvious in many Gay Agenda logos. If A is in the original estate and B wants to remove A to B's diminished estate, one trick might be to get A to adopt the meanings and language of the diminished estate. This is exactly what the Gay Agenda proponents are doing. The Gay Agenda is an arm of a religious movement--even if the 'average Joe' gay guy doesn't realize such the truth remains. They are attacking the First Estate using spiritual/mental methods: the attack is on meaning and is a subtle form of subversion. (See also: militant atheism.)

Gay Agenda, Magickal Rites & Political Control
Now there are those who want to run to defend the Gay Agenda but it has nothing to do with effeminate men wanting to get along with everyone. Buggery has been tolerated for a long time in the USA and Europe. The Gay Agenda is a subordinate, satellite movement to a subtle religious agenda. Their objective is to destroy the original estate. The Gay Agenda is in part about attempts to redefined to say 'sodomization of one man by another' to the extent that it is regarded to be the same as solemnization of marriage on the same level as male-female copulation. To push the adoption of the Magickal Rite of Sodomy by the 50 States and to displace the original Roman, Christian or Universal ideals of marriage.

The outward show of the Gay Agenda and the MSM hides the subtle maneuvering aimed at opening the door to institutionalize the ownership of men by men (i.e. sexual and chattel slavery) and to make the act of sodomy into a governmentally institutionalized rite of ownership. Consider a Muslim once told me that it was OK for them to have sex with their slaves wives. So it makes you wonder about slavery in America? Was it Christians? Or was it Islamists all along disguised as Christians? So the idea if you don't get it folks: there are those who claim to own everyone as slaves, and they believe that they have the right to sodomize their male slaves, to sodomize their female slaves, to have sex with their slaves' wives (why do you think they attack marriage and promote divorce?) Of course, since it all about power and control, their ideal is to control and desecrate men (as their crown prize of ownership) through slavery "sealed with the kiss" of sodomy. And ritually they aim to infuse their spirits into the man they sodomize and lay control of him--to make him more susceptible to their 'magnetic influence' (See mesermism). Of course, they aren't going to say this outright in the MSM--but their objective has been made clear by their own confessions and not only that it is easily discernible from a study of the historical record as well as their own texts.

The Hate Is From Them
Those who want to distract from the point will try to massage this into a "message of hate". Believe me, they hate anyone who isn't interested in their Gay Agenda. The hate is toward the innocent or those disinterested in their sex worship and political sodomy agenda. They want to hide the truth that it really isn't about expanding rights in the good sense, its about making a mockery of the rights of others. I have never any more hateful, disgusting and obsessed than gay men who having set their sights upon a man who is politely disinterested in their sexual fetishes, cannot tolerate his disinterest and will use drugs an all kinds of nefarious antics to destroy his life--even relationships with women (even to destroy those women) to get their "dreams". In all fairness, there are plenty of gay men who will leave well enough alone--but there are those who are obsessed and capable of becoming destructively and criminally obsessed with sodomizing their targets. In 15 years of observation, less than 85% of the gay males are interested in leaving others alone. Disinterest is 'hate' for them. What that means when they cry 'hate' is that they hate those who don't agree with them, so they imagine the other to hate them in order to reconcile or justify the hatred they already feel. (See: projection.)

I used to see things a lot more neutrally, but I realize there are some very dangerous people. As a matter of fact, among one Pentecostal congregation's members there were warnings about casual ministering to gay males because they would become very violent should anyone disagree with them. The general idea was to pray for the well-being of others but some you might avoid ministering to them. And that was from back in the mid 90s. Men loving men is natural and normal. However, one a man can love a man or woman without any sexual contact whatsoever being involved.

A gay male took over a coffee shop chain in the South (Caribou Coffee) and made a point to fire any male employees who would not allow themselves to be sodomized. But aren't these supposed to be reasonable, modern men who are for choice and liberty? Not at all. That is hate. If you didn't allow them to sodomize you, you were fired. Workers at the coffee shop said it was like a religion: if you didn't convert you were forced out of a job. And this was the mid to late 90s. But the MSM doesn't tell you this. Even back then, innocent, harmless men would become target of gay men who would stalk them to look for opportunities to spike their drinks or food. If their victim took revenge and beat them, they would call it "gay bashing".

***

The Gay Agenda is mentioned because it is a glaring and obvious example of a movement that is being used as part of another movement to attack and undermine: meaning, purpose and intent. To attack meaning and intent is to attack purpose. If the original directive is to go from point A to B, if they can deceive you into accepting their new definition of B---well you get the idea. I was once taught that although Satan has no formidable, true power, he still has the 'power of the lie'. Redefining meaning is a tactic to get someone to believe a lie.

{BLBereans replying to Michale Joseph}You seem to bounce back and forth between denying the literal and accepting it.

There is this thing called a double bind:

Introduction of a 'student' to two conflicting ideas as a subtil technique to introduce a third maxim typically done secretly (the real objective of some teachers is to introduce someone to something new for the purpose of blanking the mind of the student in order to clear the way for the real implant). The period that the student holds the conflicting ideas is a period of cognitive dissonance. The double bind technique is designed to destroy first two systems to which the conflict pertain while all along the teacher's hidden intent was to establish a third maxim, belief or the like. (As in, the first injection is purposed create a conflict which leaves a hole for the third.) I'm not suggesting MJ to be actively creating double binds but, that kind of back-and-forth brings the double bind and things related to such to mind. Those going back and forth might also be in a period of struggling with inner conflict.

Related:
This is hate: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...to_prop_8.html

[Michael Joseph]

We know this is not the FIRST ESTATE of man for that would mean there is a grave error in the Bible - Ref Isaiah 45:18. But consider the base nature of man's consciousness - how art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer. Man likes to externalize himself and point the finger at others. But now we see the five aspects of carnality which brought man low into Base Consciousness. Man fell from the Mountain into the Valley of the Shadow of Death.

There was never and will never be a "talking snake". This is the Central Nervous System in man. Man choose to experience this Planet Eden thru this Carnal Nature. A reset thusly was made roughly about 12k years back.

In the Scripture Man is a Title. A Man is one who is Spiritually Conscious. Dominion is therefore granted to Man NOT the beasts of the field - those who walk in base consciousness! Clearly there is a problem with the historical model. Human's today cannot get close to building the structures of yesteryear and some would have that we are at the peak of technology? Hardly.

Nothing leaves the law boundary of the Husbandman! All things are made subject to His Dominion.

Gen 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

Gen 9:2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.

Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Pro 31:21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet.


Joh 18:35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?

Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Comment: Here Pilate - lower mind - only sees externally. Thus he only sees labels of people - Jew.

Joh 18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.

Joh 18:38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all.

Comment: Carnality is a "land of confusion" - BBL. "Yea though I walk thru the Valley of the Shadow of Death". A place where truth is bound up FROZEN. How can one be baptized in Truth [Water] if said water is frozen [snow]?

Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.


Pro 31:21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet.

[David Merrill]

Nebuchadnezzar's trust formed by typical law. In 604 BC he began the invasion of Israel; in 586 BC he took the Temple from the Kingdom (of David/Solomon). Twenty years.

The spiritual kingdom was represented outside Babylon. That is the deliverance promised by Jesus; a return to Israel prior to Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of carnal ego mind. Of course one can register the Kingdom and Crown as completely divine in propagation. But I have looked into it and Jesus was the bastard son of Archelaus HEROD, king of Israel. Then in his early thirties Jesus was re-adopted into the royal family - affiliated again.

Hollywood caught this in Kingdom of Heaven:

[David Merrill]

Uncle denies Nephew to redeem his bastard.

[BLBereans]

But I have looked into it and Jesus was the bastard son of Archelaus HEROD, king of Israel. Then in his early thirties Jesus was re-adopted into the royal family - affiliated

Well, I guess that settles it then. Case closed everybody, Jesus is NOT the incarnate God as He claimed; he is only the bastard son of Archalaus HEROD.

Who wants to break the news to the rest of Christendom?

I gotta hand it to ya, you gotta way my friend.

[David Merrill]

It robs Jesus of divinity not. I find it refreshing to understand the truth. Jesus said that the Kingdom is at hand and that heaven is within.