When I was a young chap, barely out of short pants, I thought I knew it all when it came to religion. There was no doubt in my mind that I knew more about the Bible than any of the good folk who attended the church I was raised in. In fact, I was convinced that I knew a lot more than even the pastor, who looked uncomfortable when I posed any of the questions that were bothering me. He may have learned Hebrew and Greek (and German too, the lingua franca of Lutheran scholarship) but he sure as heck wasn't drinking from the deep spiritual wells of Tomorrow's World and the Ambassador College Correspondence Course.
Garner Ted Armstrong was never backward in making claims for the edifying effect of WCG literature. "Read this booklet and you'll know more about what the Bible says than your minister, blah, blah." This from a man who didn't even know how to keep his fly zipped!
Nothing cures post-adolescent arrogance like age. Pity the man or woman in their mature years who still clings to that kind of ego-infused conceit.
I thought I'd bought a Lamborghini, but I was mistaken. It was definitely a Lada.
Worrying about which church is most correct is like arguing about who makes the best pizza. We all know it isn't Pizza Hut, but that doesn't stop anyone from dropping by every now and then when there's a special on. I know some poor deluded souls who think there's nothing nicer than Hell's offerings (and you know who you are!) but they obviously haven't scored a cheese burst crust with meatballs from Domino's.
The competing COGs are like fast food franchises, each trying to carve out a niche by trumping the opposition with whiz-bang gimmicks and special offers: Christianity meets the consumer. "We're the Philadelphians," "we're republishing Mister Armstrong's books," "we've got the restored truths," "we've got an apostle," "we've got stuffed crust." Okay, so everybody else seems to be doing it from Joyce Meyer to Franklin Graham, but that doesn't make it any prettier to watch. It'd be nice to say it was just an American problem but (1) McChristianity is globalised and (2) even New Zealand has Bishop Brian Tamaki.
Surely there's got to be something more meaningful out there than that. Wherever it might be, you can be pretty sure it won't be found on Sunday morning TV.
20 comments:
"I thought I'd bought a Lamborghini, but I was mistaken. It was definitely a Lada."
Growing up Presbyterian where the social aspects were very comforting but the biblical teaching or even explaining what was in the Bible rather limited, caused me to see WCG as very true.
WCG taught me what was IN the Bible and how to find it. It wove it's tale of what it all meant (death, hell, resurrection, prophecy, church traits, leadeship in the Bible etc..very well compared to anything I had ever experienced in the Presbyterian church.
It took me three decades to come to see that the Bible is a flawed docuement. It is full or errors both historical and scientific. It is not written by the person's, for the most part, whose names grace the headers and the idea there ever was in history, one happy, unified, all one body we church of God is fiction.
A fellow approached me this week knowing my background and change of views and said to me "well one thing I know. The story is of Jesus death and resurrection after three days in the grave is absolutley unique to history and it is upon that I base my faith."
I hardly had the heart to tell him how wrong he was and that the story of Jesus is the story of many previous god/men in human history as they took their theological concepts from the sky and the journey of the Sun through the 12 months of the zodiac. As above, so below has never been more understood than it is today.
How many lives are the COG's screwing up with "prophecy" taken from one othe most astro-theological books ever written for the Christian faith...Revelation where the Sea of Glass is the Milky Way before the throne of Casseopea across from which we find the seven stars and spirits of God in the form of the seven stars of the Big Dipper.
Moses made the Israelites eat the Golden Calf because the age of Taurus the Bull and all it's associated worship forms were ending and the Age of Lambs eat oats and Does eat oats and little lambs eat ivy....which is why Jesus ended Aries (2000-0 BC)as the sacrificed Lamb of God just as Taurus (4000-2000BC ended as the bull sacrfice of Mithras.
"Behold I am with you even unto the end of the AGE" which was Aries now going into Pices the Two Fish (a great feeding motiff of the Gospels)where the Church would become "fishers of men" for the next 2000 years or so until the Age ends again and goes into Aquarius, the Water Man.
From the Sun's death three days before Xmas to entering January the month of the Waterman at about 30 degrees (years old) before going on to summer to defeat darkness (Satan) though tempted not to, it's all going on over our heads. Jesus ministry was only one year (Three in John) because the journey (ministry) of the Sun is complete in one year. And so on in amazingly more detail than I can mention here and I know you are mostly tired of it anyway.
One of the great truths of spirituality is to have the guts to call off the search for religious understanding. We will never be satisfied. If we become satisfied, we are not true.
If we every knew the real why and how's of anything, we'd probably ask, "why that?" and "How can that be?"
WCG took me from crayons to perfume. The turmoil caused by the Armstrongs and the Tkache's too me to a traumatic and yet tranquil realization that the only truth I ever need,for me, is to be myself. To be as authentic as I know to be and to enjoy the search.
A good spiritual teacher in life really only reminds you of what you already know inside and have suspected all along, but the tribe scorned it out ofyou.
Humans evolve their religions and their texts to fit the angst that humans have about "what's going to happen to ME." They have always gotten the story of the Sun of God with his 12 disciples overcoming darkness after a dramatic birth where the outcome was iffy but the Sun wins. After reaching his apogee in Summer he Transfigures and shines the brightest only to wane into fall, be betrayed and stunk by the scorpion, pierced by the archer , die on Dec 21st and after his three days 'in the grave' come forth again, born of Virgo to start his ministry again.
To ME this is so. It does not have to be true for you as we are all in different places and filter our needs through different filters of religion. What is my proof? It just seems right to me.
Fall to spring is a great time to see the story of the SUN of God played out in the sky. You'll never see the Gospel story of Jesus the same.
So while I also felt I had bought a Lambroghini and ended up with a Lada, it caused me take a good look at the whole topic of cars and I'd rather have a Prius now.
PS I won't belabor the Astro-theological nature of the Jesus story again. I just find it fascinating and englightening to the origins of the stories of all the Godmen of history whose feats match those of Jesus in the details.
I'll probably be winding up my AW commenting in the near future as well and moving on the best I can.
To me AW is great for ranting on others who deserve it as they lead badly and hurt people spiritually. But I can't do that the rest of my life either and enjoy more sharing understandings or ideas about what might be so, which don't seem much a part of the responses one gets here at this time...Lada, lada, lada...:)
Too bad about that Lamborghini but I never liked those too much anyway. However, I think you have that astro-theology pretty much figured out Dennis.
One thing's for sure, if you work your fingers to the bone trying to enlighten people, you'll get your reward: bony fingers.
I've put a lot of effort into trying to show the fundies a few facts that totally knocks their religion in the head. Then along comes someone else and lies about it and they immediately believe the liar.
It's all in what they want to believe, the truth or a lie, and the lie is more comforting so they choose the lie over the truth every time.
Those who really and honestly want the truth of a thing will find it, without any help at all.
Did I ever make a difference? I don't think so. I have confirmed to some what they already knew or suspected but that's it.
What can you do with people who think that scientists in the field of evolutionary biology are stupid and ignorant of nature? It's ludicrous, but worse, it's dangerous. Denying science is what caused the dark ages. How soon people forget.
But I'm done, I give up. I know what I know to my satisfaction and I have kind of lost interest in trying to help the willfully ignorant. They say, "ignorance is bliss", I say let them be blissful.
"The story is of Jesus death and resurrection after three days in the grave is absolutley unique to history and it is upon that I base my faith."
If it's true. Yesterday, a co-worker who is a "liberal" Christian was trying to show just how wise and open-minded he was by telling me that the Bible is 'inspired', but not 'inviolate'. You see, to him it is biologically impossible for passed-out Lot to get an erection...therefore, the account of Lot's daughters taking advantage of him is not true, and is perhaps a cover-up of forcible incest. He kept parroting that this was okay, it's Inspired, but not Inviolate (go think on that). Anyway, I made the point that it is even more biologically impossible for a man, dead three days, to rise from the grave. Why is that account taken literally, but the account of Lot is a lie? He said he didn't have an answer.
I read the first half of Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism and thought it silly. You can't rescue the Bible, or the God of the Bible, from the Bible. If you claim that the God of the Bible would never really order the deaths of the Cannanites, or condemn homosexuals,or the other things ascribed to him, then you are dealing with a different God. Only the Bible defines the God of the Bible...outside of the Bible he doesn't exist. The best thing to do, if one has a problem with this God, is to get a new God, or just get rid of the need for a god at all.
Paul
The problem with this is, of course, is that there are too many gods: Islam has its god, whatever it is, Catholics their's, three of them in one, each Protestant religion a set of their own, the Jews their own, depending upon the sect, and all the other religions of the world.
As for the church of gods, it is well named for it has at least one god for each group.
Gerald Flurry's Philadelphia Church of God has its own peculiar god: Heck, maybe it's Gerald Flurry for all we can tell, being That Prophet.
Wade Cox is god.
Roderick Meredith's Living Church of god has its god.
David Pack is fearful of letting his god down in the Restored Church of God and is desperate to force things to work out, even though it brings him no peace and is leaving him bankrupt.
Mark Armstrong has his own god and so do all the other minor players.
We're not so sure about United. It looks like each person can pick a god for themselves and be happy with it, just as long as they keep coming to church and paying the ministers' salaries and paying into their retirement, no matter where their god leads them, even deep into the heart of Texas.
Each one has their own "Greater god" -- better than anyone else's and they have bragging rights.
However, as for the effective intervention of each of these gods, there is little to say. Miracles seem to be in short supply, as does the supply for money, for the most part.
One would think that the Great Eternal Father One True God would give of His bounty generously that His children would live the more abundant life, but it does not seem to be: All the worshippers have of their gods is the vain glorious confidence that some how their god is better than those ancient pagan gods demanding human sacrifices instead of sacrificing your life for a god who doesn't seem to do much for you personally and is so very high maintenance.
The beauty of life, and in being a human being is that we all have the inherent capacity for independent choice.
While I am not supporting Pack et.al. I do believe it is the perogative of an indivudal to pick and choose whatever flavor or type of pizza he wishes to choose. Gavin, just because you do don't like that paricular kind or type of pizza, does not make it wrong for that individual to choose to partake of it, if it is attractive and appeals to them. Some like Ladas! Why denegrate them? Its their choice.
If one finds a better brand of pizza, and they enjoy pizza, let them have at it.
Religious worship should be a matter between the individual and his God. Why make fun of that, as long as they don't impose their beliefs on others?
In my opinion, Pizza Hut pizza is a cut above dog food!
That's right Corky. It's one person at a time, looking themselves in the eye and asking themselves just what will they give themselves to believe? Beliefs are not truths as we should know. Beliefs evolve with information to arrive at truth. Many COG's confuse the two and since evolution of truth is out (Dave Pack, the same yesterday, today and forever etc...) they get stuck in beliefs.
What is hilarious to me is the contradictions in the minds of those that pick at me from time to time. The same fellow at work who struggles with me over the Bible not being literally true, dates multiple women leading each on to think they are the ony one. The one who told me "God said, I beieve it that does it for me" and that "Dennis, you are going to hell," often told me when a good looking woman walked in how much he'd love to...well you know, someone like that. When I told him he needed to separate his "God said it, I believe it.." from "I'd like a piece of her..." into at least two unconnected sentences, He said, "well I do like my women."
People are hilarious.
It's absolutely true that everyone has the right to choose their own path. I doubt we at AW have convinced one person to rethink their position on WCG or RCG OR PCG or all other COG's. Actually who cares what they do. We are processing our own experience. I had to be there and then I had to get out. I stayed too long for my own reasons and I think got a good case of PTSD for my trouble that AW has helped me process and put into some kind of perspective.
The astro-theological origins of the Osiris-Mithris-Christ story is satisfying to me. It explains a lot to me and just seems right to me. And since there is a way that seeeeeeeeems right to a man...it works! I'm certainly not afraid of any hell or lake of fire for non compliance to mythological or magical thinking.
We always ask if we believe in God and Jesus. Maybe we need to ask God and Jesus if they believes in us and then suggest they act like it.
DD
Anonymous said...
...Yesterday, a co-worker who is a "liberal" Christian was trying to show just how wise and open-minded he was by telling me that the Bible is 'inspired', but not 'inviolate'. You see, to him it is biologically impossible for passed-out Lot to get an erection...therefore, the account of Lot's daughters taking advantage of him is not true, and is perhaps a cover-up of forcible incest. He kept parroting that this was okay, it's Inspired, but not Inviolate (go think on that).
Anyway, I made the point that it is even more biologically impossible for a man, dead three days, to rise from the grave. Why is that account taken literally, but the account of Lot is a lie? He said he didn't have an answer.
And this tells you what? He was wrong about Lot?
Or just not thinking about a bodily resurrection?
You fail to follow through on the implications of what you write below:
I read the first half of Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism and thought it silly. You can't rescue the Bible, or the God of the Bible, from the Bible. If you claim that the God of the Bible would never really order the deaths of the Cannanites, or condemn homosexuals,or the other things ascribed to him, then you are dealing with a different God. Only the Bible defines the God of the Bible...outside of the Bible he doesn't exist.
The best thing to do, if one has a problem with this God, is to get a new God, or just get rid of the need for a god at all.
Paul
Several assumptions loaded in your premise.
1) The bible is divinely inspired compilation by early Catholic Church Fathers. Yet I doubt if you follow Catholic doctrine.
2) Ideas about God do not change through the centuries and that the same ideas of God existed in OT Israel as they did in Paul's time.
3) You ignore any idea of historical trajectory as it pertains to the development of mankind and its ideas of the Deity.
Is the God of the Bible who tells Israel to do genocide, really the same God of the Bible who says turn the other Cheek?
Is the God of Revelation who destroys a sinful world, the same God of the Bible who said to turn the other cheek?
If the Son of Man saw fit to treat women and men as equals, why does Paul's writings appear to treat women as 2nd class Christians?
You can't stick the Bible into the blender and claim its homogenous and that there's just one IDEA of God presented.
Yes Dennis, it is that evolution of truth that's important. Jesus may be "the same yesterday, today and forever" but I'm not. I'm way different than I was 30 years ago and will be even more different in the future.
That's because Jesus is stuck in a book full of words that don't change (well, actually they do but they don't want us to know that) and I'm free to change. Mainly FREE and that's what feels good to me.
Oh Lot you nut!
Gen 19:
" 3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.
Lot was taking these men into his home in typical hospitality mode, for their safety and for his reputation.
4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.
Pretty darn hard to find a town like this that is 100% gay. The men showed up because strangers were a threat to the clans. Maybe spys with ill intentions.
5 They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them."
The way you humiliate a stranger is to treat him like a woman. You rape him. Not in the gay mode, but in the "since we don't trust you, let this put you in your place and don't try anything in our town."
6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, "No, my friends. Don't do this wicked thing.
Lot was worried about his reputation as a hospitable man and that any MALE guests in his home would be safe and well cared for.
8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them.
DOH! Woman are property and daughters expendable. He didn't offer any sons to the gay crowd. (Of course this proves he had none..uh huh) and few sermons have ever been given condemning this piece of sh--father Lot who was willing to give his daughters over to the men to be raped, sacrificed or made mentally ill by morning.
No one seems to ask, "hmmm, Lot must have forgotten the whole town of men were gay. Why would they want his daughters...ewwwwwww."
"But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."
Because this tale is a hospitality tale, not a gay somdom tale.
9 "Get out of our way," they replied. And they said, "This fellow came here as an alien, and now he wants to play the judge! We'll treat you worse than them."
They were giving these aliens and untrustable visitors the alien treatment, not the gay check them out treatment. Lot used to be an outsider and if he was not careful, they'd put him his place as a "woman" and worse.
Ezekiel evidently had not heard about the sexual sins of Sodom or all the gay guys.
Ezek. 16:46-50
"Your elder sister is Samaria, who lived with her daughters to the north of you; and your younger sister, who lived to the south of you, is Sodom with her daughters. You not only followed their ways, and acted according to their abominations; within a very little time you were more corrupt than they in all your ways. As I live, says the Lord GOD, your sister Sodom and her daughters have not done as you and your daughters have done. This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me; therefore I removed them when I saw it."
Only Evangelical and Western Fundamentalists would think a whole town Promise Keepers, I mean, men and boys were gay. They also stop telling the sermons short of Lot's hideous counteroffer to turn his girls over to the crowd because they were virgins and hadn't even had sex yet!
Perhaps Lot's daughters were attempting to screw up dad's Karma for his loving offer of their virgin selves to the crowd. Mrs. Lot turn back because she did not want to go to yet another town with Butthead/
Can you imagine the family dynamics after Lot's ridiculous behavior? Kinda like Isaac not wanting to go with his dad on any more camping trips where "God will provide the sacrifice don't you worry your little head." :)
Good thing none of this ever really happened in space and time.
Ordering up pizza like beliefs is fine, but it looks like the franchise selling the pizzas with poison mushrooms sure has a following.
For the moment anyway: The venue is rather self-limiting.
And in the church of gods, most survived because they didn't swallow it all in the first place -- although their vision will never be the same [the stuff makes people go blind first before killing them].
Righteous Lot...
2 Peter 2:4-10 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.
And speaking of pizza, note: The Lord knoweth how to deliver.
Fresh and HOT!
Perhaps a bit more brimstone than most would tolerate, but note that New Zealand has Hell's Pizza. [The Lord of the Rings and Zena, Princess Warrior they want us to remember, The Power Rangers, not so much.]
"And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;)"
I never thought the day would come where I knew something was somewhere and couldn't think of where! I was looking for "that righteous man Lot" scripture!
Well the good news is that if he can make it into the heroes of Faith..anyone can! Woo hoo...
Just so long as you don't speak evil of dignities.
If you know of any.
"And this tells you what? He was wrong about Lot? Or just not thinking about a bodily resurrection?"
What it tells me is that he picks and chooses which parts of the Bible to take literally. It also shows that he picks and chooses which kind of critera to use in order to decide which parts are literal and which parts aren't.
"Several assumptions loaded in your premise.
1) The bible is divinely inspired compilation by early Catholic Church Fathers. Yet I doubt if you follow Catholic doctrine.
I'm an atheist. I don't believe that the Bible was inspired, period. However, most Christians do to some extent, like my co-worker.
"2) Ideas about God do not change through the centuries and that the same ideas of God existed in OT Israel as they did in Paul's time."
I'm an atheist. God doesn't exist. But for the Christian, the only source of information about God is the Bible, and according to this Bible, which according to the itself is given for instruction and doctrine, God does not change. Period. Christians can ignore this or try to weasel around it. The God of the OT IS the God of the NT, no?
"3) You ignore any idea of historical trajectory as it pertains to the development of mankind and its ideas of the Deity."
Christians, if they see the Bible as the Word of God, aren't allowed that luxury.
"Is the God of the Bible who tells Israel to do genocide, really the same God of the Bible who says turn the other Cheek?"
According to the Bible, he is. Accept it, ignore it, or weasel around it. I admire those who accept it.
"Is the God of Revelation who destroys a sinful world, the same God of the Bible who said to turn the other cheek?"
See above.
"If the Son of Man saw fit to treat women and men as equals, why does Paul's writings appear to treat women as 2nd class Christians?"
This is a problem for the Christian.
"You can't stick the Bible into the blender and claim its homogenous and that there's just one IDEA of God presented."
In the Bible, there is no IDEA of God...there are clear descriptions of God written by God-directed men, no? For the Christian, this book is either the divinely inspired Word of God, or it isn't. If it isn't, then how on earth can you trust any of it?
Paul
But for the Christian, the only source of information about God is the Bible
No, throughout history and still today, most Christians have believed that the Bible is just one of our sources of information about God.
But otherwise I respect and appreciate your understand of just what is at stake when it comes to Christian doctrines of biblical inspiration.
"No, throughout history and still today, most Christians have believed that the Bible is just one of our sources of information about God."
I am unaware of any other sources (outside of the apocrypha).
Paul
Anonymous Paul wrote:
In the Bible, there is no IDEA of God...there are clear descriptions of God written by God-directed men, no? For the Christian, this book is either the divinely inspired Word of God, or it isn't. If it isn't, then how on earth can you trust any of it?
Paul
My apologies, I misperceived where your line of thinking was heading.
Your line of argument is very similar to the ones many Bible literalists use, although with an atheist bent.
I would simply argue that blaming God for the Bible (by saying its inerrant God breathed writing) is ridiculous notion. I wouldn't even attribute its inconsistencies to you.
I would say there are some "inspired writings" in the Bible. I'd also say that about more than a few non-Biblical texts like Shakespeare. But I wouldn't take the witches in Shakespeare any more literally than some of the fables of the Bible. How does one determine? That's kind of a personal quest I suppose, those texts that tell you something about mankind and life in general I suppose. Those things that shed light on the human condition.
And sometimes, a fictional story (and Jesus used them a lot) is often the quickest path to truth.
It not whether story A is literally true, or person B literally did this or that, and if that's the depth of one's search for truth, you have no business reading the Bible to begin with. But there are plenty of people who think that way so they believe ridiculous things to be true, even to the point of denying sound scientific evidence.
The whole purpose of the brief 2nd book of John is to admonish followers not to listen to the many people who were telling them the simple truth that Jesus never existed in the flesh. Quite a problem to come up so soon in the life of the Church.
The Catholic Bible dates the 2nd book of John to 90 A.D. Thus apparently it was a big problem only a few decades after the alleged time of Jesus.
Here was the problem that arose in the Church.
2 John 1:7-11 "Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take him into your house or welcome him. Anyone who welcomes him shares in his wicked work."
Thus, soon after Jesus allegedly existed, many people were claiming that he didn't exist in the flesh. That is, Jesus was not a flesh and blood human being ever. (This is not a scripture speaking of some Jesus coming into hearts) And rather than approach these unbelievers in a rational manner and present them with overwhelming evidence that Jesus really had existed just a short time ago, and all the miraculous things said to have happened really did happen, the writer instead admonishes his readers to stay away from these people.
"Do not take him into your house or welcome him."
The writer stigmatizes these people as "the deceiver" and "the antichrist" who do "wicked work," and further stigmatizes anyone who should listen to them.
Thus, even very early on, whenever 2 John was written there was a big problem of many people saying Jesus never existed,and the author's chosen way to refute these claims was by administering admonition and fear into the hearts of the believers.
Even so today. When bad news about the teachings of a Church circulate within and without the Church, the way you handle it is to warn people not to listen to it. Not listening makes it untrue.
The human life of Jesus was the greatest story ever ignored by contemporary writers of his time. The few extra Biblical references are second hand or added by zealous church fathers anxious to find something about Jesus outside the Bible. We call those forgeries.
Remember, Paul wrote of his Cosmic Christ with no knowledge of a human Jesus first. Then Mark is written after Paul dies to flesh out Jesus life in a very basic form. Matthew and luke copy Mark 91% and 53% respectively for their 'inspiration.'
The fact is that we know precious little of a man called Jesus even using the NT and then only a brief one or three year stint depending on whether you believe the synopics (1) or John (3).
He started in the sky as the Christ or Sun/Son of God. The literalist Church brought him down to earth as a baby that had no childhood and got him back into the skies quickly after a short lived human who went back to being the Christ and Sun/Son of God complete with all the traits of the literal sun that comes up every morning
If there was ever a time we are blinded to the truth of the Sun of God, it is when it hits us right in the eyes at Sonrise.
September to December is the best time to understand the Apostles Creed.
"born of the Virgin Mary, (Virgo)
suffered under Pontius Pilate,(Libra..weighed in the Balances)
was crucified, (Fall Equinox) died, and was buried. (stops going south Dec. 22nd)
He descended into hell. (Dec 22nd-24th
The third day He arose again from the dead. (Dec 25th)
He ascended into heaven (Is born or resurrected)
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty,"
Ok, sorry, big amazing story (to me of course)which I wish someone had shown me years ago.
Even in the text, there is evidence the death of Jesus was a Fall event ("for it was not the season for figs") and Spring the time for the 'resurrection' event following the motiff of the Sun overcoming the sins of the world which is the darkness of winter.
Ok ok, I promise to never bring this up again! Soon now, I will dissssaaaaaaaappppppeaaar......:)
Maybe Dennis should consider the properties of the ancient mystical roulette wheel.
This mystical wheel has 36 numbers. One half of them are red, representing the lake of fire/death while the other 18 are black, representing the grave, but ultimate resurrection.
The mystic number 36 can be divided by 2, 3, 4, 6, 12, and 18 – How many other numbers can be divided like this? 12, the number of the apostles, 18 significantly just 1 short of 19, 3 the number that became associated with the idea of the trinity. Do I even need to spell out the meaning of 4 and 6?
Of course although most think of this wheel as having 36 number, in reality there are 37 (indeed, on some 38). These extra numbers represent the unpardonable sin, if the lot falls on these numbers there is no return.
Many myths and legends are based on this ancient symbol. One of the most well known is 25th December. December is the twelfth month – 25 plus 12 gives – amazingly 37 the number of the unpardonable sin.
Of course the final, unarguable proof of the roulette wheel is the most significant. Don’t believe me, try it for yourself; just add up all the numbers from 1 to 36 – what do you get – 666. Enough said.
Gavin,
I have actually met Bishop Brian Tamaki and his wife, Hannah,at a Botany Downs coffee shop.
Very sincerely, I congratulated them on their work.Hannah said "we like to give people another option".
Once again,you demonstrate your fair-mindedness and impartiality.
Seamus
Post a Comment