The Pharisees and the aPOPEphis both agree that the Great Mother, “Queen of Heaven,” aka Isis/Ishtar/Ashtarte, Lucifer in the transgender female form, is the one they serve.
Queen of heaven is a certified pagan term for a goddess. And Mary is called the queen of heaven. I grew up Catholic and know all about the worship mass for Mary which also has pagan origins. Mary doesn’t want to be worshipped and I do believe they are tricked into worshipping Asherah the mother of all demons and Queen of the marine realm. Her husband is Moloch the child eater. While Moloch/Baals father is Dagon who is the king of the marine realm and is exclusively worshipped by the Vatican.
this is interesting- i am happy you see it= as an Orthodox Christian, we have disagreed that the Catholics are pushed to worship Mary a whole lot, I mean we do too, but even the Catholic elementary schools prayers more toward Mary than Jesus, I feel something sinister there. We many many holidays dedicated to The Virgin Mother of Christ, but I still wouldn’t be surprised the semi- satanic vatican fools its people..
The Catulus Church is a fully Luciferian organization, and has been since it’s very foundations. It is the church of the antiXristos, as mentioned in Hebrews, 1 John and Revelations.
The Papa (father…) and his mignions are the priests of the transgender form of Lucifer, The Great Mother, the same who for millennia have spread Luciferian indoctrination throughout the world in the various Re-Legions (Re = Lord of Light Legions = Pawn soldiers.) of pagan Astro theology, and then culminated them into a “universalist” churches such that the emperor of Rome (the same as Rama the Solar warrior and Rammanu the Babylonian version of Zeus, the Illuminator.) could have control over the minds and souls of his subjects.
The name Vat-I-Kain comes directly from the “Great Mother” Vatika, who was the reaper of souls of the underworld that is half COW (Cattle Church), and the same as the Mother of Re, Vat/Bat in Egypt, the Bovine (COW) mother of the sun. And of course a wink to their progenitor, Kain. This is but another Re formulation in the long line of the cult of the “Queen of Heaven,” Isis/Ishtar/Astarte/Asherah. This title appears nowhere in scripture, except in Jeremiah 44: where the prophet tells us that all those who blow incense to the statue of the Queen of Heaven will be punished by YHWH. This is what the Papa, calling himself father and spitting on Yeshua’s words, does every SUNday for the MASSes indoctrination.
Furthermore the symbol of the Chai Rho, takes its name directly from the underworld ferryman Chairhon.
The kult of the great Mother has always been about one thing: blood sacrifice to quench the thirst of the Mother Earth. This is why in Berashit 4, it is referenced directly that YHWH sees the blood of Hevel has been spilled on the soil. Once you realize this, the constant inquisitions, heresy burnings, and extremely brutal nature of the glorified (and often fabricated) martyrdoms becomes clear.
They have, of course, substituted the name of Lucifer for YHWH in every language. This is why these serpents are called Na-Ha-Shim in Hebrew
Na = Not
Ha = The
Shem = Name
Literally “Not the Name.” In Hebrew this word together means serpents; the imposters, said “Tannaim,” in Hebrew that are “beasts of the sea.” Tanninu; same word with a diffeeenr suffix, and the origin of the Phoenician Great Mother Tannit (literally Ptah-Nit, Egyptian Luciferian deities put together to make a transgender great mother.)
This is why I’m every language they replace the True name, HaShem, with a false imposter: Berashit becomes Genesis, literally Janus (two faced deity Lucifer) is; the Ganes (Ganesha) is. It is why they refuse to use the name YHWH nor Elohim; in every language they have categorically replaced the ineffable creator with Lucifer:
God = Gad an epithet of Ba’al (Isiah 65:11) literally said “Ball god…” it’s the Sun, a big ball god…
Dios = Zeus the Illuminator Lucifer
Bog = Again the dualistic, Teo faced Lucifer
Allah = the Sumerian deity of gatekeeping the underworld
Even the name “Jesus,” is quite literally replacing Yeshua, with g-Zeus in every language, the letter G of fr33ma$onry, which is Gad (Ba’al) and Zeus the Illuminator. The Ancient Greek is “Ishua,” as you may know being orthodox.
As the scriptures say, it is with the word that the ineffable creator has given our existence. We are an utterance, a vibration of his word, his Truth, and this is the essence of the antiXristos, the Mirror Image imposter put in place of The Truth: it is Na-Ha-Shem, “not the name.” The serpent sitting at Mary’s feet while she rides the moon, just as Isis.
The cattle lick church was founded, from the very first moment, by the dragon blood lines of the Flavians Vespasian and Titus (You can quit easily verify that aPOPEphis Clement is their direct descendant), whom burned Jerusalem to the ground in 69 CE, and then stole and corrupted the scriptures so as to stamp out the Truth of Yeshua and YHWH, and to wield them in service of Lucifer imposter as Dios F-Zeus for the entire age of Pi-Seas, the beast out of the Sea.
Imma take a wild guess the gem prolly got so many honeys he bored. Ur watchin ghostbusyers, while he’s swashbuckling real info down ya throat and exposing the luminatis.
Modern “Christianity” across all variations is Paganism repackaged, so your comment is not entirely untrue (it is primary). We are seeing more “secrets” being released so that other faith systems may find their truths as pertaining and interrelating to a whole which all might recognize, and thus embrace as a collective. Babel. Matthew 24:24. It has to be a convincing counterfeit in order for it to work such massive deception.
“ For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. ”, right?
When you proposed an article whose author was the very author of “The Christ Conspiracy”.
“ Author Acharya makes the case that there was no actual person named Jesus, but that several characters were rolled into one mythic being inspired by the deities Mithras, Heracles/Hercules, Dionysus and many others of the Roman Empire. She demonstrates that the story of Jesus, as portrayed in the Gospels, is nearly identical in detail to those of the earlier savior-gods Krishna and Horus, and concludes that Jesus was certainly neither original nor unique, nor was he the divine revelation. Rather, he represents the very ancient body of knowledge derived from celestial observation and natural forces.”
You landed on a dangerous soil, A.E. Is this your bible? Did Christ need to be inspired by Hercules? Dionysus, “the party-boy”? Krishna?
One of the so-called “savior gods” of the ancient world is the Hindu deity Krishna. Mythicists (those who believe Jesus is nothing more than a mythical figure like Zeus, Thor, Ba’al, etc.) claim the existence of unmistakable parallels between Krishna and Jesus in the original sources. These parallels are so strong, they argue, that the only rational conclusion is that the Gospel writers recorded a tradition about Jesus that was deeply influenced by, or even plagiarized, Hindu beliefs.
Let’s see a few “simmilarities”:
-“Christ is a form of the name Krishna.” No etymological connection between “Krishna” and “Christ” actually exists. Christ (christos) is the Greek equivalent of messiah (Hebrew mashiach). Both mean, “anointed one.” Krishna is an unrelated personal name, which derives from a Sanskrit term meaning “black, dark, dark-blue.”
-“Krishna was born of a virgin.” This is a popular claim, sometimes made by atheists, but also by those who profess to be Christian. Hindu texts make it clear that his mother Devaki had already conceived seven other sons, the first six of whom were executed by the evil prince Kamsa after their births. Matthew states that the chaste Mary fulfills an ancient prediction of the prophet Isaiah (Matthew 1:23; cf. Isaiah 7:14).
-“Krishna died at age thirty.” Although Jesus died in his early thirties, Krishna lived a much longer life. Common estimates place Krishna’s age at death somewhere around 100 years. A 2004 article in the Times of India reported Hindu scholars calculated that Krishna died at the age of 125.
-“Krishna died by crucifixion.” Crucifixion appears nowhere in the Hindu texts. Krishna died after a hunter named Jara shot him in the sole of his foot with a poisoned arrow after mistaking him for a deer. Kersey Graves infamously claimed Krishna was crucified between two thieves, that darkness attended the event, and that he gives up the ghost and descends into hell, details he—or a source he used—invented out of whole cloth.
-“Krishna resurrected after three days.” After his death, Krishna’s spirit appears almost immediately. Being liberated from his physical body—or abandoning it—his spirit returns to the realm of the divine. Hindu pilgrims today still visit Dehotsarga (literally, where Krishna “gave up his body”), where they believe Krishna died. Jesus was buried in a newly cut rock tomb and later experienced a bodily resurrection that serves as a prototype for believers (1 Corinthians 15:20, 42-44). The Hindu view of Krishna’s death is much closer to Neo-Platonic philosophy than it is to Christianity. There are absolutely no Indian gods portrayed as crucified.
Dorothy M. Murdock (also known by her pseudonym “Acharya S”) made similar claims to those above. Another book book “Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled “ includes a litany of supposed parallels between Christian and Hindu beliefs. Although her work is hailed by her uncritical supporters and other non-specialists as a work of unparalleled scholarship, scholars dismiss her work as the stuff of crass invention.
A common problem found in the work of militant critics is the failure to adequately understand the beliefs of the religions they oppose. Critics can be inexcusably careless in their descriptions, making ancient religions appear more similar than they really are. This is often done by describing non-Christian elements of other religions using Christian vocabulary, and then marveling at the similarities between the two. In some cases (especially authors from the 19th and early 20th centuries), these parallels were made using vague interpretations, supported by evidence which was poorly understood and likely fabricated.
Despite claims to the contrary, the story of Christ in no way plagiarizes the story of Krishna. To argue otherwise is to twist and distort the teachings of both Christianity and Hinduism..
A.E., do you want to discuss “simmilarities” with Horus?
Let us see:
Was Horus born of a virgin whose name was “Mary” or “Meri”?
Horus was not conceived of a virgin. His mother was “Isis”, not “Meri” as some claim. Isis hovered over the erect pe**s of Osiris to conceive Horus. Does that sound like a virgin birth to you? If there is a pe**s and a va***a involved I’m not sure you can claim it’s a virgin birth.
Was Horus’s step-father named “Joseph”?
No. His step-father was named “Seb” which some claim is a form of “Joseph” but these are two different names. Seb was the earth god and was actually the father of Osiris – who was the actual father of Horus.
Was Horus later visited by three wise men?
No. There is no evidence of this anywhere.
Was the birth of Horus in a cave, surrounded by shepherds, announced by angels or accompanied by the sign of a star in the sky?
Absolutely not!
Did Horus have twelve disciples?
No. According to the story of Horus from Egyptian mythology, Horus had a total of four disciples. Later on there’s a reference to sixteen followers, but there is no reference to him having twelve disciples.
Did Horus perform miracles?
Well, Horus, as a god, did perform miracles but he never specifically is said to have ever cast out a demon, raised someone from the dead, or walking on water. There’s no correlation to the miracles of Jesus and Horus.
Was Horus called the “son of God”?
While technically Horus was the son of another god, he was never actually referred to as “the son of God.” In fact, no one was ever called that in any Egyptian mythology, ever. He was also never called the Lamb of God, the Way, the Messiah or anything like that.
Was Horus crucified between two thieves, buried and resurrected three days later?
Well, as you can probably guess, those things never happened to Horus. If you go examine Egyptian myths about Horus you’ll find that he was not only never crucified, he never died at all. He later merged with another god named “Ra” [the sun god], and so he does sort of die and become reborn at every sunset and sunrise, but that’s nothing at all like the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Now, there is a story where Horus is cut into pieces and thrown into the water, but later his mother Isis orders a crocodile to gather the pieces of his body and he was reassembled like Mr. Potato Head. But, again, that’s not a correlation to Jesus in any way.
Was Horus associated with fish, or lambs or lions?
In some versions of the Horus story Horus was actually a fish. But Jesus was never a fish, so there’s no correlation there. Horus was never called a lamb or a lion.
…and the list goes on!
You see, there are many sellout authors that claim Jesus story was completely fabricated and stolen from the myth of Horus, or Osiris, or Mithras or Krishna. Their goal is to convince you that nothing we read in the Gospels about Jesus actually happened but that it was all borrowed and recycled from other myths in the ancient world.
Egyptologists are the only experts you need to consult when it comes to Horus or Osiris. They’ll tell you straight up that the similarities between those ancient Egyptian gods and Jesus are entirely fabricated by atheist apologists who want to rattle Christians with bogus claims about Horus being born of a virgin, or Osiris being crucified, etc. Don’t believe it. Simply go to your local library and check out a book about those ancient deities and read it for yourself. You’ll find nothing at all about those gods having 12 disciples or being baptized or crucified or raising from the dead three days later. It is merely propaganda intended to send Christians into an existential crisis. Don’t fall for it.
The story of Mithras is that he was born out of solid rock. So, maybe the rock could technically be a virgin, but that’s a bit ridiculous.
Another claim is that the birth of Mithras was attended by shepherds, but that notation only appears a hundred years after the Gospels were composed, so if anyone stole or copied something it was those who followed Mithras, not the followers of Jesus.
They say Mithras was a great teacher who travelled around preaching is message. But if you look at the mythology of Mithras it never claims he was a teacher of any kind so that doesn’t fit.
Did Mithras have twelve disciples? Again, there is nothing in the actual Mithras legends that name or number his disciples as being a group of twelve. Some attribute this idea to a single mural that was painted showing Mithras surrounded by twelve signs which look closer to the zodiac than anything else – one is the moon, the other is the sun, etc. – and those are not connected to disciples of Mithras at all. That painting also came long after the Gospels were written and so if there was any connection between Jesus and Mithras it was coming from the Mithras side and not the Jesus side.
Did Mithras promise his followers eternal life? No, not exactly. We can’t find any specific sayings or verses from Mithraic texts that suggest anything like this. But if he did that wouldn’t be unusual in comparison to all the other gods in the ancient world who often promised some type of blessing or benefit in the afterlife.
Does Mithras perform miracles? Yes, he does, but, as with the point above, so did every other religious figure in the ancient world. So, there’s no conspiracy or specific detail about a certain type of miracle that overlaps between Jesus and Mithras.
Did Mithras sacrifice himself in order to save the world or bring peace to everyone? The Mithraic narrative is that he killed a bull as an heroic deed. The bull died but Mithras didn’t. There’s no connection to the death of the bull and the salvation of humanity. It’s not there.
Was Mithras buried in a tomb only to rise again three days later? No because there’s no death story connected to Mithras. Since he doesn’t die there’s no burial and that means there’s no resurrection either. Tertullian does refer to the Mithraic cult of his day having some sort of resurrection celebration, but we have to keep in mind that this was over a hundred years after the time of Jesus and there are no other actual Mithraic references to such a thing. So, until we find more credible evidence the answer is, no, the followers of Mithra didn’t believe he died or was buried or that he rose from the dead.
Was Mithras called a shepherd, or was he ever compared to a lion or lamb? No, he wasn’t. There are no Mithraic texts that ever refer to Mithras in this way. Mithras is more like a sun god and so that’s why he has some association with the zodiac symbol Leo, but that’s not the same as calling him the Lion of God.
Was Mithras ever called the Logos, or the Word of God, or the Savior or the Messiah? Say it with me everyone: No. He wasn’t. Based on the Mithraic story none of those terms were ever applied to Mithras.
So, again, the pattern we find here is that claims made about the similarities between Mithras and Jesus come long after the Gospels were written. When we do see direct comparisons between them it’s the followers of Mithras who are borrowing from the Christ story, not the other way around.
Want to give you sources? There are tons! When I attended Art High School, many, many years back, there was this course named “History of Ancient Art”. I learned quite a lot about these figures from those classes. Old school is the best. This is one of the reasons why this kind of parallelomania does not affect me. Elementary info about the ancient deities are to be found in almost every library.
Pay more attention to the sellout authors that propagate zeitgeistic lies.
cisspf, I appreciate your effort and intent here, but apologize that I am without time and am unwilling to rehash the truckload of hours I’ve already spent studying ancient mythologies of all kinds and how it pertains to modern myths. I simply do not have time to reverse to debate fine details which might be easily proven by evidence of the eyes, much as VL shows, of patterns across time.
You’re oversimplifying and not understanding that Christianity took the mythologies and combined many aspects into one figure, much like ancient deities were combined, condensed and renamed over periods of time. Every detail does not need to match precisely, especially within the written accounts, for us to recognize the unmistakable symbols which Christianity has absorbed and continued.
Gem has already displayed these images along with their correlations and detailed accountings of such ad nauseum, so I feel it unlikely you missed them entirely, but if you have, please tell me and allow me to link you, as the arguments have already been crystally laid out.
This absorption by the church was done so deliberately as it was to be the precursor for the one world religion – the one which brings them all together. If scripture tells us, Matthew 7;13, 14 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Yet, so far as I am aware, Catholicism has been a dominant world religion for quite some time…how might that be if scripture here is accurate..?
“This is often done by describing non-Christian elements of other religions using Christian vocabulary, and then marveling at the similarities between the two.” Regardless of which descriptors are used to describe the same thing, they still describe the same thing. As to the dispute regarding this particular source, I am not a devotee, so have no dog in this fight. I simply draw attention to the across-all-religions similarities, which are too consistent to be ignored when repeated in the Christ story as given modernly.
>“ I simply draw attention to the across-all-religions similarities, which are too consistent to be ignored when repeated in the Christ story as given modernly.”
See the above. There are no substantial similarities!
“…where did they get the trademark..” reveals your need for a certified “authority” comprised of other men, just as yourself, to place a stamp or seal upon a person or concept in order for you to recognize it for what it is.
But, in a very clear sense, your statement that “Christianity is primary” is demonstrably true, as it is drawing of all other religious practices into a oneness, a combined, big tent religion which worships what’s created and supplants the Creator and His true son with a false one they now feel so free as to erase and enjoy the shadow he once inhabited. The dark twin, the other face, the false aspect of JaBuLon, the two faces of Janus.
This portrait clearly displays the true focus of worship (Queen Of Heaven) vs the shadow (Christos – the thin thread by which they keep believers in the true Yeshua ensnared – he is considered the tagalong for purposes of recognition in which people are then deceived this is their same faith):
certify:
(transitive) To attest to (a fact) as the truth.
(transitive, law) To authenticate or verify in writing.
(transitive) To attest that a product, service, organization, or person has met an official standard.
These blankets have been certified as fireproof.
(transitive, archaic) To inform; to tell (a person) that something is true.
(archaic, reflexive) To assure (oneself) of something; to ascertain.
The very system, itself, certifies its message, over and again, as you have been repeatedly shown and as you personally continue to demonstrate. You wish to claim it is caterpillar into moth or some such metamorphosis, but it is plainly the same old system spreading it’s metastasis and you are either too invested personally to acknowledge or you promote the falsehoods yourself from a position of advantage.
To restrain myself to my former point, LG, I spoke of trademarks ironically, precisely to show how outlandish this kind of logic is. These accusations of paganism in Christianity depend on the hidden premise that paganism is a creative force in the world, capable of putting its imprimatur on everything that it brings into being, so that once a given symbol, title, image, etc. has been used within a pagan rite or practice, that same symbol or title or image can never be used in a non-pagan context or a non-pagan way.
This is equivalent to an absolutization of paganism, and a reduction of the true faith to a subsequent and purely negative reaction to the primary act of paganism. That is not only impious, but it turns the truth precisely on its head.
The idea that Christianity “drew all other religious practices into a oneness” is both visibly false (traditional Christianity today is almost universally suspected and even loathed by non-Christians, and is one of the few forced standing against the emergence of a One World Faith) and historically untenable (Christianity conquered paganism, it did not adopt it).
I won’t address your analysis of the word “certify,” as you were the one to use it, not I; I have no dog in that fight.
When a Re-legion takes a veritable multitude of its symbolisms, ritual practices, professed beliefs, names, iconography, and even saints directly from pagan use for thousands of years beforehand over a large swath of geography and cultures, especially when all of those symbols, rituals, names, etc directly and overtly contradict scriptural commands, then it is paganism, no matter the branding they’ve slapped on it.
Surely you are correct that just because pagans use something general once, does not automatically make it pagan. Yet this is so far from the case: this church of abomination admits it absorbs pagan practice! The very title “Queen of Heaven,” has no scriptural basis whatsoever, except to be called an abomination in Jeremiah, and to be called an abomination regarding Astarte in Solomon. How then did it stop being a pagan abomination? Is that because the Papa, calling himself father directly contradicting Yeshua’s words said so?
The title, iconography, and ritual practice surrounding the Cattle Lick Queen of Heaven has been taken directly from pagan practice in Egypt, Babylon, Phoenicia, Ireland, Gaul, Anatolia, Akkadian’s, and China with precedent of 1000s of years prior. This isn’t an ancillary reality, but the foundational core of the Cattle Licks doctrine, and it is (and has been for thousands of years before there ever was a Papa in Rome) a PAGAN
TITLE FOR LUCIFER WHICH SCRIPTURE CALLS AN ABOMINATION, WHEN THOSE IN EGYPT BLOW INCENSE TO THE STATUE OF A FHE QUEEN OF HEAVEN.
You draw things backwards and fail to acknowledge a critical point.
“…paganism is a creative force in the world…” – of course it is, although your words diminish or dismiss this truth. The point here is that all mankind has been made with creative or destructive authority – this is not a confined phenomenon to a single people or population with like beliefs, this is the human natural state.
The drawing in reverse is the fact that Paganism did not need to influence Christianity, as it was Paganism that morphed to give birth to it. This was Paganism wishing to change it’s stripes in order to claim an authority it couldn’t before, which further emboldened them to violently enforce it on overyone.
I think that the demonization of Christian beliefs, in particular, are a way the cabal continues their mind games. This assault appears to be because it is the “one true faith” and reaffirms and solidifies this idea in the minds of its followers, but it is a manipulative sham to cause adherents to settle in further, believing they must be right. Christianity is heavy on the “blind faith”, and while people can find a legitimate peace and covering this way, if their hearts are pure, it’s not really the adult, developed relationship the Creator wishes us to aspire to.
It’s like all the hoopla against Trump – he is every bit a part of the cabal, yet they act as if they despise him utterly, and the masses became divided in ways unheard of before he ran for office. It is manipulation.
I have not in any wise lost my faith, I have solidified it and I know that Yeshua is the Truth of YHWH and I have entire faith in both. I also have long known that the Father is able to find any of us wherever we may be, in whatever system we have attached to. There are truths in every religious system, as there must be, as belief requires plausibility or it does not pass.
Another way the “manipulative sham” plays out in Christianity is the teaching of “The Rapture”. This was yet another stand-down soft order – a pacification which caused a smug apathy and nonaction amongst followers.
I agree, too!
This is a sect’s doing.
The preaching of the “rapture” of the Church
before the Great Tribulation is about 170 years old. For about 1830 years, going back to
apostolic times, Christians were taught to be victorious, to endure patiently the sufferings, the persecutions and the troubles that will come, until the coming of the Lord.
What irony there is in an adherent of a “universalist,” church of pagan practice, created by solar worshippers, claiming that they are the one thing stopping a world universal religion. The Cattle Licks are the original universalist one world religion; of paganism! You have laid forth very clearly the Truth here.
The Luciferians running the farm are aware, that just as an electromagnetic DI-POLE, or an alternating current Tri-phasic system, they must create an Us Vs. Them scenario in the minds of the masses in order for the system of human mass control to remain stable. A person can hardly walk with one leg, a bird cannot fly with one wing.
Likewise this strategy of Bi and Tri-polarity is frequently used to flip and spin people around on the ideologies they conciously claim to follow, and thus very weak, and ultimately lost in their allegiances to corrupt cult organizations that are their own demise. An easy example: In US, the republican cultists (it is a cult…) hating on the phrase “my body my choice,” for decades regarding abortion, while the Demokratic kultists touted it with great fervor. Yet, once it was time for nano-technology shots for COVert IDentification, the used their levers to flip and spin the ideology in a chiral inversion, and suddenly Repulikains were using the phrase, while the DemosKratos were trying to force the others against their will… The effect being that the cattle yell over the fence at one another, and nobody really pays attention to the corporate farmer preparing for their slaughter.
Take this (the blindness of someone so intelligent, yet so deaf) as a lesson in the power that this strategy wields over the cattle who have swallowed the poison pill; while you speak clear, and evident Truth to them, they are as zombies, and by trying to hold onto their life, they have lost it forever.
The second commandment is clear “Graven Images you SHALL NOT!”
How many crucifixes, icons, statues, and other graven images of G Zeus, bloody and gruesome, and the Great Mother do these imposters make, and spit on the commandments of YHWH? Dare I say billions…
Indeed such an abomination is the imposter, the G Zeus of the Roman (Rama = Solar Warriors) Tannaim (imposters.) For all those that read the Torah and the Bible, these things are clear.
Jeremiah 7:18 ” The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.”
Jeremiah 7:18 ” The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.”
Godisgood
6 months ago
disrespectful, full mockery…
BlueSkies
6 months ago
I’m sure the evil pope loved it
Lilpeep
6 months ago
That actor turned president looks like a landscape gardener It’s theatre folks. Last week in Rome , he met up with Pope Francis who offered to facilitate negotiations. Zelensky was furious as he only wants help to keep the war going.
He was a long time ago born, I think. The context of our days is fit for his coronation already. Zelensky is maybe signaling that he will stick to the plan and do his “work” in order for the anti-christ to take his “rightful” place. He is reassuring the pope they are on the same side. He is a high-heeled belly-dancer, a comediant and a jew so, yes, of course he is blaspheming and trashing the values and the religious identity of the ukrainian people (that is Orthodoxy). If he still managed to fool so many people than he is truly a better actor than I initially thought.
Some years ago, i had come across an antic gazette dating from the end of the 19th century where Ms Blavatsky made an announcement to her followers.
(She was a famous occultist and her teachings were taught in a school where the pope John Paul 2 studied while he aspired to be an actor…)
In this article, she announced the birth of the great great grandmother of the anti C.
I calculated he should be born in the 70s.
I really think he s been among us for a while and about to be revealed.
The current state of the world, the possibility of a ww3, the rabbis asserting the existence of the moshiach among us right now and his imminent presentation, the red cows being reintroduced in israel as well as the sacrifice ceremonial clothing and equipments recently fabricated, the school of priests who has recently opened to train them on how to perform sacrifices (which havent been performed since the 2nd temple 2000 years ago) are just some of the examples that make me believe so.
In any case, I dont see how the world, in the desperately degenerated state it is in, can make it any longer.
He is here already.
chud
6 months ago
A clear Black Sun/Son reference lining up with Lyuba Yakimchuk’s reference to the hollow sun during the Grammys last year in her mocking rendition of the Our Father or the Lord’s Prayer and the 88/14 tank export from Germany to Ukraine earlier this year. The blacked out spot where Jesus should be is making it clear(er) the intent to supplant him and introduce the Antichrist instead, who in a way is also present in the icon since he is the darkness, the negative, etc. FWIW, there has also been at least one alleged Marian apparition where the message was clearly designed to introduce Marian worship by positioning her almost directly on a cross. This was the “Lady of All Nations” (the title alone suggestion the world communism the Antichrist is working towards). The Vatican has asked Catholics *not* to promote this apparition.
Look below at the papa worshipping his pagan statue of the Queen of Heave; what an abomination that spits second commandment these Luciferians are.
Here’s a long, and fully cited, although incomplete list of the Mary “Great Mother” Worship the Cattle Licks have declared directly against the scriptures themselves. As you once said, it seems the Papas either hate the scriptures or can’t read them… Better to practice magical cannibalism based on a completely literalist reading of a fanciful translation, yet to disregard and directly contradict thousands of other scriptural commands.
They worship Lucifer, with the serpent that lurks below the veil, and convince the cattle to bow before the Di-Hevel himself by playing pious.
1. Mary is the all holy one (CCC 2677)
2. Mary is second only to Eve (Mystici Corpois Christ, par. 110
3. Mary is to be prayed to (CCC 2679) equally (and in practice more) than YHWH
4. Mary sits at the right hand of Christ (Pope Pius X, 1835-1914, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, 14) Pope bowing before stature of Mary
5. Mary is Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix (CCC 969)
Mary is the great mother of the members of Christ (CCC 963)
6. Mary Queen over all things (CCC 966) including Heaven
7. Mary is the one who brings eternal life by her intercession (CCC 969)
8. Mary makes atonement for sins (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ott, page 213)
9. Mary crushed the head of the serpent (Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus)
10. Mary delivers souls from death (CCC 966).
11. When considering the Church, there is no better way than to look to Mary, (CCC 972).
12. Catholics mus entrust themselves to Mary’s prayer (CCC 2677).
13. No man goeth to Christ but by His Mother,” (Vatican Website: Encyclical of Pope Leo 13th on the Rosary, Octobri Mense, Pope Leo 13th, 1903-1914).
14. Mary ascended to Heaven directly
I’d never heard of these before you mentioned them. What are they exactly?
>”As you once said, it seems the Papas either hate the scriptures or can’t read them… Better to practice magical cannibalism based on a completely literalist reading of a fanciful translation, yet to disregard and directly contradict thousands of other scriptural commands.”
I said this? You must be thinking of some other chud.
>”[long list of pssages concerning Mary]”
I looked up a few of these and your list does indeed look accurate! I couldn’t find where it said to worship Mary, though. Are those in a separate list?
I’m trying to pinpoint when, precisely, our society shifted from recognizing a thing for what it is to requiring a system to “identify” itself via specific, self-attributed labeling for what it is in order to recognize it. This is the reason for all the tortuous language convolutions nowadays – if you dance around reality, no one has to acknowledge it.
Every one of those points is Mary-centric, yet you pretend this is…what, exactly?
Worship is the highest thing you give your time, energy and attention to. It is where you invest your faith and trust, it is whatever you most glorify and praise and believe will return to you good for it. It is whom or what you meditate on, that which takes precedence over all else in your life.
Some worship their careers, some money, some social or organizational standing, some assets, and on and on. Where your treasure is….
Why, having been given the son, do we beseech his mother and hold her in higher esteem? The one to go to to “get results”?
Do you not understand that, by calling Mary “immaculate” you immediately deny her son? His holiness is only made possible by hers, according to this “immaculate” concept.
Therefore, prayers and worship are directed towards Mary and her cohort of “saints” because either the masses believe she (and they) are more directly reliable than the Messiah, they are hedging their bets, or because the masses believe the Messiah is too busy or unconcerned to acknowledge their personal prayers to him. Or they are fully aware of the deception and embrace it. Either approach (and others may exist I am unaware of) negate Messiah.
>”Worship is the highest thing you give your time, energy and attention to. It is where you invest your faith and trust, it is whatever you most glorify and praise and believe will return to you good for it. It is whom or what you meditate on, that which takes precedence over all else in your life.
Some worship their careers, some money, some social or organizational standing, some assets, and on and on. Where your treasure is….”
Pretty good. I probably agree with this.
>”Why, having been given the son, do we beseech his mother and hold her in higher esteem?”
No one should hold her in higher esteem. I completely agree. That would be insane, yet some probably do.
>”The one to go to to “get results”?”
A Catholic or Orthodox Christian would tell you it’s because, being his mother, she is a particularly powerful intercessor. They don’t understand intercessors as being much different than asking a friend to pray for them.
>”Do you not understand that, by calling Mary “immaculate” you immediately deny her son?
[I assume you mean “one” rather than “you” because no one is using me as their standard.]
No, this does not follow. “Immaculate” is a necessary condition for being God, but is entirely insufficient on its own.
>”His holiness is only made possible by hers, according to this “immaculate” concept.””
No, this isn’t right. The Catholic and Orthodox understanding is that Mary would have received grace prior to giving birth to Jesus, so her holiness is contingent on his.
Well, thank you for setting me straight as to fine points of Catholicism despite your demurrals of having no dog in this debate. I would ask you to clarify or flesh this out, please, “No, this does not follow. “Immaculate” is a necessary condition for being God, but is entirely insufficient on its own.”
I’m reasonably certain Catholics see Mary and the “saints” as bit more significant than just “asking a friend to pray for them”. There is a reverence and faith in them which transcends strength in numbers.
Most Catholics I have known wear some amulet (St Christopher’s Medal) or other charm and are highly averse to removing these tokens even for a moment from their bodies because there is attributed more than just a remembrance to these items. They are held and rubbed in times of prayer, just as the rosary is. The rosary is a rote, repetitive prayer, prescribed to be repeated a set number of times depending on the significance of the offence it is supposedly paying debt for.
Matthew 6:7
Not that this is unheard of in Protestantism, only they will favor a cross charm, or a dove, or even at times a star of David.
>”I would ask you to clarify or flesh this out, please, “No, this does not follow. “Immaculate” is a necessary condition for being God, but is entirely insufficient on its own.””
Being immaculate means something or someone is “without blemish.” In order for someone to qualify as God, that person would have to be more than without blemish; it would require being omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, Creator of the Universe, etc.
>”I’m reasonably certain Catholics see Mary and the “saints” as bit more significant than just “asking a friend to pray for them”.
Whatever their practice, their theology is to acknowledge Mary’s special relationship to Jesus and ask for her help in obtaining grace from him on their behalf given her special relationship to him. It is understood as analogous to asking a friend to pray for them, but because she is the mother of Christ, they do have a greater respect for her (or at least ought to) than other intercessors, dead or alive.
>”Most Catholics I have known wear some amulet (St Christopher’s Medal) or other charm and are highly averse to removing these tokens even for a moment from their bodies because there is attributed more than just a remembrance to these items.
It sounds to me like you may be describing superstition. If so, I can’t answer for that.
>”Most Catholics I have known wear some amulet (St Christopher’s Medal) or other charm and are highly averse to removing these tokens even for a moment from their bodies because there is attributed more than just a remembrance to these items. They are held and rubbed in times of prayer, just as the rosary is. The rosary is a rote, repetitive prayer, prescribed to be repeated a set number of times depending on the significance of the offence it is supposedly paying debt for. Matthew 6:7″
It sounds like you may be describing superstition. If so, I have no reply for that. By their own theology, they shouldn’t be giving in to superstition. The Orthodox have a similar criticism of some Catholic practices.
>”Ahhh. I think I see now. My apologies to rtu (if there was ever a distinction).
Do Orthodox not use rosary? Do they not believe in relics of saints?”
Orthodox will use a prayer rope or “chotki.” They do believe in the use of relics also. The repetition of a prayer or prayers is not a problem for either Catholics or Orthodox. Both, similar to the point you were making, do warn about saying prayers in a ‘dry’ way. I have read at least a few saints, Orthodox and Catholic, who warn against saying prayers lifelessly or without love for God, saying that this may even be more harmful than not praying.
A prayer rope, chotki, or rosay should be a way to keep track of the prayers said, and also to remember God’s mercy towards them. For some, they become fashion accessories. The relics of a saint are a way of being physically close to someone who is close to God.
Okay, but if you are “keeping track of the prayers said” by counting beads, how is this not mindless, rote repetition? Is our Father an automaton we feed the set number of coins into to extract what we are seeking?
I pray solely from the feelings pouring forth from my heart, directly to the Father, and know that Messiah intercedes for me in my imperfection.
In fact, I may err in the other direction, by not praying so often as I should if I don’t feel it within me. I get disheartened and I clam up. This is also error.
We, each individual, can be close to the Father, without need of someone we esteem higher than ourselves. This is still a search for an intercessor. Yeshua IS our intercessor. We need no other. Comfort and agreement amongst the brethren is good and bolsters us, but this is, quite simply, chain of command.
Let’s pretend for a moment that YHWH is our Father (which He is). How might you approach a beloved father in your life now, if you wished to entreat him? Would you go and repeat words and mantras, rubbing beads? Would you bring along a couple of friends you’re sure he likes better than you to finagle on your behalf? Or would you go, sit at His feet and cultivate a relationship between YOU and HIM?
>”Let’s pretend for a moment that YHWH is our Father (which He is). How might you approach a beloved father in your life now, if you wished to entreat him? […] Or would you go, sit at His feet and cultivate a relationship between YOU and HIM?”
There’s nothng opposed to this view in Catholic or Orthodox theology. They might add that you should approach the Father as well as the Son, or that you’d be foolish to ignore his mother if you were to visit him, but I’m not aware that they have a prohibition against doing just what you describe.
>”Would you go and repeat words and mantras, rubbing beads?”
To reiterate, both Orthodox and Catholic would warn against this approach.
>”Would you bring along a couple of friends you’re sure he likes better than you to finagle on your behalf?”
What I would do is irrelevant.
In concept, if I knew someone didn’t like me but his mother and his friends did like me, and I needed his help badly, I would of course ask his mother and friends to try and get him to help me. That would be the smart thing to do.
If I knew someone didn’t like me but I needed his help and had to make a good impression, I would be very polite to his mother and his friends while visiting him. That would be the smart thing to do.
>”Okay, but if you are “keeping track of the prayers said” by counting beads, how is this not mindless, rote repetition? Is our Father an automaton we feed the set number of coins into to extract what we are seeking?”
“Mindless” and “rote” are modifying the word “repetition.” The prohibition is not against repetition, it’s against “mindless, rote repetition.”
>”I pray solely from the feelings pouring forth from my heart, directly to the Father, and know that Messiah intercedes for me in my imperfection.In fact, I may err in the other direction, by not praying so often as I should if I don’t feel it within me. I get disheartened and I clam up. This is also error.”
The Catholic and the Orthodox would have no problem with this statement.
>”We, each individual, can be close to the Father, without need of someone we esteem higher than ourselves.
Catholics and Orthodox would point you to John 14:6 on this one. How you understand that verse and what you accept may be different, that would just be their view.
>”This is still a search for an intercessor. Yeshua IS our intercessor.”
Catholics and Orthodox would agree that without the Messiah there is no redemption, making him *the* intercessor in a very real sense.
>”We need no other. Comfort and agreement amongst the brethren is good and bolsters us, but this is, quite simply, chain of command.”
Catholics and Orthodox are unlikely to disagree substantively. In fact, the Orthodox have a very strong tradition of this. You are likely to find elders among both who would add to your statement that although we need no other intercessor, we may receive benefits from other intercessors, simply because they consider it an act of humility not to count yourself worthy of approaching the King on your own.
As an orthodox, I pretty much agree with the analysis you’ve made. Mature and objective observations and I thank you for that.
There are, I’m affraid, some here that spent too much of their time studying the occult and it is very hard or almost impossible for them to distinguish things anymore. When one looks at dirt all the time everything else suddently looks like trash. They admire the “beauty and wisdom” in buddhism or other religions, but somehow real, unspoiled christianity must be satanic in their conception. Theology? Sacraments? Priesthood? Martyrs? Saints? Respect for the Mother of Jesus, the Logos? Jesus?( because they have a problem with the name, too). Prayer ropes? (I could go on forever). It is “paganism”, “satanism”, “cannibalism”. They understand nothing or simply cover their eyes and ears because the “precious hidden knowledge” they pretend they have lifts up their huge egos. They are too arrogant to let one explain so that they could reconsider things from an insider’s perspective. I’ve read lots of nonsense here in the comments. At first I felt outraged because some are blaspheming a lot, but now I just feel sad. These people don’t want to know more. They “know”!
Would you like me to show you all of the Luciferian solar worship symbols your patriarch wears and carries, symbols used to worship the Sun continually for 1000s of years before there ever was a Rome? To discuss the mass genocides in the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine empire? Shall we discuss the commandments of Moshe violated constantly? The commandments of Yeremiah? The commandments of Ezekiel? Or the words of Yeshua trampled as if they were nothing?
Should we discuss the open admission Catulisism absorbed and continued pagan practice and local deities as “saints”? Shall we discuss the dress and name of your priests taken directly from Babylon? Shall we discuss the celebrating of holidays in accordance with Mithraism and other pagan practices?
I am well versed in cattle lick and their offsprings (Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, etc.) theology, history, lexical choices, and ritual practices; there is a long and deep rooted history of child raping, genocide, lies, corruption and deceit, all veiled under mountains of false righteousness from the gentiles that trample the outer court. I do not speak from ignorance, but from a deep experience and lots of primary sourcing.
The vast majority of my studies and dedication is not to the occult, but to the scriptures in the original languages. You may not realise, but I hail from the same line of David, the same root of Ishi, the Aryeh Yehudah; the Occult is referenced throughout scriptures, as it is a corruption and twisting, much like the cattle lick doctrine, of the original teachings of my people; instead used for the use for personal gain (the papacy is the wealthiest organisation of the planet.) that have co-opted and destroyed what was once called The Way.
>”I am well versed in cattle lick and their offsprings (Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, etc.)”
I know you are “well versed,” but for what it’s worth the Orthodox do not consider themselves “offspring,” or any sort of spin-off, from the Catholics. This is because the Orthodox view the Catholics as having abandoned the true Christian faith in 1054. From the Orthodox perspective, this means the Catholics were the first Protestants, and the Protestants were merely the logical extension of what the Catholics had done in 1054.
By this reasoning, then I can reason that you are making the argument that everything prior to the schism of 1054 represents a unified Cattle Lick church, including all doctrines and practices. Crisspf has scolded me for claiming to “know,” yet you seem unwilling to have a serious evidence based discussion regarding any of these topics which may invite a certain nuance of reality regarding the first 800-900 years of shared history of these two organisations. Why the total avoidance of these topics?
I recognise crisspf did first give some “history,” regarding Constantine, a lone church source itself, which is presumably biased in offering interpretations and opinions in its own favor regardless of the evidence strength. Thank you for giving this. It is still quite absurd, due to the significant attestations via multiple sources of the executions by Constantine of his family. The family was so murderous, that they had no male heirs except distant cousins by the 3rd ruling succession; there is no historical debate surrounding these facts.
Likewise there are 1000s of artifacts of Constantine issued after his “conversion,” which continue to extol Solar worship in direct, name, form, and symbolism, including coins, relics, and documents. More esoterically, there is a mountain of evidence, albeit which requires both inductive and deductive reasoning, thar can demonstrate the direct elements of Luciferian Solar worship, including the kults of Isis-Horus-Osiris, Mithras, Kybele, Serapis, Janus, and most of all l, julius Ka-SARos (it means “spirit of the beast,” in the ancient tongue, referencing the Saros cycle) and the cult of Solar emperors. The papacy directly even took the title of KaSARos and made it their own from day 1: Pontificus Maximus.
My point here is that both of you seem unwilling to have an objective, nuanced, profound and extensive discussion of the topics I am bringing forth, ignoring them entirely, while having a superficial discussion extolling all of the virtues of Eastern Orthodoxy based solely on nicely worded modern clerical documents regarding the exoteric (publicly professed) theologies. I am willing to listen to what you say, and have respectful forthright discussion in search while evaluating your words openly; are you willing to return the same?
>”As an orthodox, I pretty much agree with the analysis you’ve made. Mature and objective observations and I thank you for that.”
Thank you very much! I’m glad I could represent Orthodox theology fairly and in way that seemed accurate enough to you. I think Orthodoxy is one of the most compelling “proofs” (poor word choice there on my part, I know) that having knowledge is not the same as seeing. Your faith still produces saints among both scholars and those who never finish grade school, and all of them have the characteristic combination of simplicity and subtlety in their speech and writings that the Orthodox are known for.
>”There are, I’m affraid, some here that spent too much of their time studying the occult and it is very hard or almost impossible for them to distinguish things anymore. When one looks at dirt all the time everything else suddently looks like trash.”
Your words here remind me strongly of St. Paisios’ observations on people falling into the categories of flies or bees.
>”They admire the “beauty and wisdom” in buddhism or other religions, but somehow real, unspoiled christianity must be satanic in their conception. Theology? Sacraments? Priesthood? Martyrs? Saints? Respect for the Mother of Jesus, the Logos? Jesus?( because they have a problem with the name, too). Prayer ropes? (I could go on forever). It is “paganism”, “satanism”, “cannibalism”.
Yes, it is curious. And interestingly, some of it flies in the face of the symbolism in the Bible itself. No one, for instance, will question how sacred and powerful the Ark of the Covenant is, but it’s unthinkable and offensive that Mary, who literally contained the Messiah within herself would have a special role? Yet this is a very common objection I hear out in the world when people discuss Apostolic Christianity. I am sure you yourself have heard it more times than you can count.
>”They understand nothing or simply cover their eyes and ears because the “precious hidden knowledge” they pretend they have lifts up their huge egos. They are too arrogant to let one explain so that they could reconsider things from an insider’s perspective. I’ve read lots of nonsense here in the comments.
Yes, that does seem to be a real danger for all of us who start down the rabbit hole. As you will know better than I: “Being a theologian means first and foremost that one is an expert in the wiles of the devil.”
Just as a technical observation, there is a lot of inductive reasoning happening on this site (which makes sense based on the nature of it), but it seems sometimes to come at the expense of deductive, and can therefore spin out of control.
>”At first I felt outraged because some are blaspheming a lot, but now I just feel sad. These people don’t want to know more. They “know”!”
Yes, I think it’s interesting that Apostolic Christianity is often discarded so sloppily not just here, but all over! The Orthodox have gone to great pains, literally, to maintain the original deposit of Christian faith unchanged for over 2000 years. The Catholics, meanwhile, have created possibly the most comprehensive explanation of any system (poor word choice again from me, since much of it is also not systemic) of thought spanning both theology and philosophy and the relationship between the two, yet neither Orthodoxy nor Catholicism are worthy of careful study from those who would see behind the veil?
Since the dawn of humanity, the masses have always chosen the murderer, liar and their Ba-Ra-Abban, and hated The Truth, Yeshua. They choose to worship the sun, because it’s big and shiny, rather than than YHWH, who be all existence, to whom the sun is but a grain of sand.
Also, since you mentioned Constantine in so many other comments on previous topics… I will repost my comment here:
give me that one or two, or tens unspoiled source/s where it says that Constantine, the christian emperor strangled his wife for fun. …and was she strangled, or was she slain, or was she drowned? Was it for fun or was it something else? You said “all of his close family members”. For someone so calculated, so precise, you should probably know that his mother, Helena ( doesn’t that qualify her as a close relative?) was not killed by her strangler-for-fun-imperial-son and lived quite a long life dying of old age (82). All of his close family members becomes not all of his close family members. Could it also be that “strangled his wife for fun” is actually slain or dead by other method? and was it for fun or was there some other reason? (because some historians, a few centuries old historians disagree with you).
Also regarding Constantine… he was not born christian. He became! That means he lived quite a long time among pagans. Becoming christian and emperor might have made things a bit more problematic in terms of forcing christianity on his very people. They were pagans! Pagans did force idolatry on christians, tortured and killed them in horrible ways for not betraying their faith. Christian leaders, the real christian leaders have not. A christian Constantine could and would have not imposed the new faith on his people the same way his predecesors did with their gods. The new faith, the new way had to make it’s own way to people’s hearts. To be assimilated and followed willingly. People had to be convinced it was the best way. … In time! That is what assimilation is after all.
“Roman opinion expected of its emperors not innovation but the preservation of traditional ways; Roman propaganda and political communication were conditioned, by statement, allusion, and symbol, to express these expectations. It is significant, for instance, not that the pagan gods and their legends survived for a few years on Constantine’s coinage but that they disappeared so quickly: the last of them, the relatively inoffensive “Unconquered Sun,” was eliminated just over a decade after the defeat of Maxentius.”
Some of the ambiguities in Constantine’s public policies were therefore exacted by the respect due to established practice and by the difficulties of expressing, as well as of making, total changes suddenly. The suppression of paganism, by law and by the sporadic destruction of pagan shrines, is balanced by particular acts of deference.
Allow me to give you a different example of motive behind actions, of context and of consequences.
Was Vlad the Impaler a criminal of war? Maybe! And no, he is not considered a saint (in case you wondered). So, was he a criminal of war? It depends on how you want to see it and what suits your purposes best. Are you a muslim or a christian? You want to win by all costs or be fair, consider the context, see the purpose and the effects? So, was he christian? Yes! Did he kill? Yes! The Otoman Empire was a menace to his country and to all christian countries in East Europe. He was a defender, not an offender. Without him and a few other small rulers Europe would have been muslim now. It would have been Quran, not the Word of Christ.
“Any saint has a past, any sinner has a future”.
Was King David of the Old Testament a rapist? And a murderer? Yes! He did, though, repent and he has given us the beautiful, powerful, God-inspired Psalms. Past gives one’s future even more value when the sins are followed by repentance and by the change of one’s ways.
Was St Mary of Egypt a prostitute? Yes! Was St.Moses the Black a killer, a robber, a rapist? Yes! But the robber and the killer repented. The prostitute turned to Christ. The thief on the cross repented. He entered Heaven as Christ promissed. Saul of Tarsus repented. He became the Apostle and the martyr. St.Cyprianos was a sorcerer. He repented.
…Some of the greatest men and women of christianity had a “past”, sometimes a very dark past. Christ made His way to their hearts and provoked the big change because there was an honest search of something called Truth. And the Truth, the Way, the Life found them and changed them forever. Without us knowing their past and their 180 degree change we would perhaps not have enough courage to believe Christ can and will forgive, will receive, will unite with us when and where there is repentance and an authentic will to change.
Your questions is so broad, and I know nothing of you, so it is essentially impossible to answer.
The path you are walking is the way. You must continue to ask, seek and knock.
My one point to make is that you should not love Yeshua “above,” yourself. You should have gratefulness and “love” (loaded English word…) equal to the infinity of the ineffable creator for yourself and all things no above, nor below, only humility in front of his vast and perfection creation of which you are a part. As Yeshua said: YOU ARE ELOHIM.
If you have any more specific inquiries do not hesitate to ask.
Thank you. I guess what I’m asking is:
– what is a life not wasted before YHWH?
– In your opinion Is there a line between ally with and combatant against the creator?
– is there different outcomes post death depending on the above?
The name of the church known as “Catholic,” or in Latin “Catolica,” is a reference to its namesake Vatika (Etruscan), Vat/Bat (Egypt), whom are solar cow deities of Luciferianism called “The Great Mother,” and “
Their name is taken directly from the Umbrian word Catulus, which was long used and adopted in Latin, inland which means in no uncertain terms: sacrificial animal, animal Property, usually Bovine. The traditions of Bull/Ba’al worship are well attested in Luciferian Solar Rites of Eurasia, from Gnossis in Crete, to the detestable Moloch of Canaan, to Vat/Hathor in Egypt, to Tannit in Phoenicia Carthage, to the White Heifer of the Minotaur, to the Sacrifical bull fighting of Spain (a true Catulus), to the sacred cows of Hinduism in India. The tradition is very old in Luciferianism, and the universalist church of the great mother’s blood lust chose the name for this purpose: the Luciferians tell you what they are doing; they see it as consent if you play along.
The word Catulus also appears through French, as Chatel: which specifically means property that are living beings, from which the word “Cattle,” in English comes. The word “Catalogue,” takes the same root, literally it is a “Cattle Log,” a book full of all of the types of animals owned by a master. And thus the “Catolica” church chose its “universalist name,” as a catalogue that brings together all of the sacrifical animals, the Cattle, under their mastery. That was the point from the first day.
The term “Lick,” comes directly from the Ancient Greek λειχω “Lick-O,” which means quite literally “to lick up.” And this they created a “universalist” Church where to bring all of the Cattle, the people they consider the living property of their master Lucifer masquerading as a Mar-Yam (Mar = Sea Yam = Ugaritic Sea Beast deity, it’s the beast out of the sea, quite literally….) in order to Lick Up his salt.
If you have ever been on a farm, you’ll know just how much Salt Licks attract all of the animals. The Sumerians talk a lot about this in their texts for farm raising in 5000 BCE; it’s not a new technique. And this they have created a Salt Lick for their Cattle, a Cattle Lick Church.
The word Church itself comes from The Scottish Kirk through the templars, originally referencing the deity Cersei. If you’ve read Homer, then you will know that Cersei lures men into her house promising sustenance, and feeds them a poison pill that turns them into a$$es. This is what the Cattle Lick Church does.
A very interesting etymology, thanks! It’s amazing how much names can reveal. I want to try!
Ok, here goes: Protestants have “protest” built into their name because they split off from the Catholics, which means they are defined only through their relationship to Catholics. I guess that makes Protestantism a lot like a parasite.
Where are you getting that this is a Protestant vs Catholic debate? All major religions have been seeded with lies. I understand that the Catholic portion stings you, as I have had to come to some deep realizations myself. It’s not easy, nor fun.
You are continuing to focus on a single insult you personally relate to and refuse to acknowledge the bigger picture.
I would not define Protestantism as a “parasite,” of the cattle lick church. It is true that its name is chosen, as a method of defining itself in relationship to its origins of protesting against some of the most abominable aspects of its parent, such as Indulgences and Mass Genocide. As an allegory, the parent didn’t like being stood up to and called out for its abusive alcoholism, and so it kicked the questioning child to the curb and kept right on beating all of its other children who silently take it.
This is to say, Protestantism is not a parasite, but more of a child that rebelled against the crueler nature of its parent, the Cattle Licks. Is a child a parasite of its parents?
The argument is a common one made in logical debates as was popularised by some books in the 1980s and 90s (gives you a clue as to this person’s age and background.) The argument of the parasite child is made, as in the womb the developing child sucks off of the nutrient and energetic resources of the mother, and after birth continues to feed off the resources of its parents until it reaches full maturity; usually around 18-25 in modernity. Calling this child a parasite, as if it were a tape worm starving you, is of course quite a backwards characterisation.
Thus, we see in Protestantism, through this allegory, if a child (mischaracterised as a parasite) that it is a bloodline descended from this rebellious child that stood up to the abusive parent and was cast out of the household. It still carries the embedded DNA of twisted cattle lick ideology and practices, with a somewhat softer hand in general. Not every great grandchild is exactly like great grandpa, but they certainly carry his tendency towards alcoholism, even if they try to change.
As such, in many ways the potpourri of Protestant “denominations,” often has built in many of the same twists originally introduced by the Flavians -> Constantine into the Solar Re-legion of G-Zues, while introducing their own variations on motif; as many descendants in a family often carry common traits (may look alike or have certain behavioural tendencies) coming from their or common ancestor, but they are not all identical.
>”The argument is a common one made in logical debates as was popularised by some books in the 1980s and 90s (gives you a clue as to this person’s age and background.)”
It’s exposing when you say things like this. It shows how willing you are to exceed your evidence only to arrive at an error.
Chud says “Protestants can’t read.” Chud says “protestants’ name mean they are parasites of Catholocism.” Now Chud acts like he’s exposing me. At least its entertaining.
>”Chud says “Protestants can’t read.” Chud says “protestants’ name mean they are parasites of Catholocism.”
Correct. I said both of these things.
>”Now Chud acts like he’s exposing me. At least its entertaining.”
You should re-read what I wrote. _You_ speculated about _me_ as a person. What I wrote in response with had nothing to do with you as a person, but about how you work. Why is this personal for you? It isn’t for me.
You are claiming to know “how I work” here based upon one statement regarding Neurocognitive processing, which may or may not be accurate, and can’t be proven either way due to the shroud of anonymity of an Internet forum. It’s somewhat ironic that you admonish me for “overstepping the evidence.”
The broad brush assumption you are making about “how I work,” is unfortunately erroneous. It appears, although I have no way of verifying, that you may (or may not) have a motivation regarding personal experiences and/or beliefs which lead you to yet another erroneous broad brush conclusion in a line of erroneous broad brush statements such as “Protestants can’t read.” This time it is about “how I work.” I suspect the possibility that it may be that you don’t like the message, and may seek to discredit it by these means.
However, I freely admit to know absolutely nothing of you for certain. These are mere suppositions, based on a limited set of data points.
The previous comment you have taken issue with is directed to @igageharleya, who is training (and quite talented) to read sub-concious patterns in speech, and is discussing that certainly the linguistic patterns you have used so far,as well as your implied cultural references, do give some idea around your cognitive thought processes.
These ideas are always subject to re-evaluation as more evidence becomes available; that is “how I work:” I evaluate evidence, form theories in accordance with how strong the data is (always keeping an awareness of when the data set is limited or the patterns are weak) then look at how well the theory describes the data set as more data becomes available, and then monitor how well makes predictions in the future. I then consistently reconsider the underlying theoretical framework I’ve developed, and adjust or completely reformulate it in a search to come closer to approximating reality. This requires both inductive and deductive reasoning in healthy measure, and a strong ability to admit when I am wrong, or do not have strong knowledge or data regarding something.
This doesn’t mean I believe to know all about you; far from it, I am aware that I know next to nothing right now, the data is weak, and even when asked , you repeatedly refuse to give any answer and call it irrelevant. Yet, your words, references, patterns do however give certain data points regarding your concious and subconscious processes which show some trend and pattern, although for which it needs a lot more data points for evaluation.
So far, you have expressed and repeated broad brush vitriol against Protestants, without any backing evidence and which are clearly false (I’m pretty sure most Protestants in western countries are literate), showed great reverence for “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy and yet admonished me for “how I work,” by supposedly overstepping my evidence using inductive reasoning.
Another pattern so far is that you have continually refused to discuss and/or ignored any evidence and lines of reasoning I have brought up regarding the Aryeh Yehudah (who have written all of your scriptures, from whom Yeshua is born) and the founding, symbolism, ritual, genocidal nature, hierarchical structure etc. of Gentile Christianity and its deep connections to much older Luciferianism traditions, bloodlines, symbols, rituals, etc. Let us not forget it was founded first by the bloodline of Vespasian and Flavius Titus, and then made officially as the state religion by a Solar worshipping genocidal maniac (choked his wife and killed his kids) who chose a Babylonian Solar Demonic symbol to represent his Church.
You have simply ignored all of this discussion or called it “irrelevant.” Meanwhile, you have admonished me for “overstepping evidence.” The obvious contradiction and double standard is evident.
Meanwhile you have gone into great detail with others extolling and praising the great virtues of “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy, without any deeper discussion regarding the original scriptures, history, etc.
If you are really looking for Truth, I am willing to take the time to have a deeper, serious, and evidence based discussion regarding all of these topics.
No, I didn’t. I said _you_ are showing how _you_ work here.
>”based upon one statement”
Yes, it was an observation about one statement.
>”It’s somewhat ironic that you admonish me for “overstepping the evidence.”
If you followed the last two things I just said, you’ll see you’re doing it again here.
>”The broad brush assumption you are making about “how I work,” is unfortunately erroneous. It appears, although I have no way of verifying, that you may (or may not) have a motivation regarding personal experiences and/or beliefs
See above.
>”which lead you to yet another erroneous broad brush conclusion in a line of erroneous broad brush statements such as “Protestants can’t read.”
They can’t.
>”This time it is about “how I work.”
No, just the one statement. It was specious.
>”I suspect the possibility that it may be that you don’t like the message, and may seek to discredit it by these means.”
Suspect away.
>”The previous comment you have taken issue with is directed to @igageharleya, who is training (and quite talented) to read sub-concious patterns in speech, and is discussing that certainly the linguistic patterns you have used so far,as well as your implied cultural references, do give some idea around your cognitive thought processes.”
Cool.
>”These ideas are always subject to re-evaluation as more evidence becomes available; that is “how I work:” I evaluate evidence, form theories in accordance with how strong the data is (always keeping an awareness of when the data set is limited or the patterns are weak) then look at how well the theory describes the data set as more data becomes available, and then monitor how well makes predictions in the future. I then consistently reconsider the underlying theoretical framework I’ve developed, and adjust or completely reformulate it in a search to come closer to approximating reality. This requires both inductive and deductive reasoning in healthy measure, and a strong ability to admit when I am wrong, or do not have strong knowledge or data regarding something.
That’s very admirable. I accept that this is your way of working.
>”This doesn’t mean I believe to know all about you; far from it, I am aware that I know next to nothing right now, the data is weak, and even when asked , you repeatedly refuse to give any answer and call it irrelevant. Yet, your words, references, patterns do however give certain data points regarding your concious and subconscious processes which show some trend and pattern, although for which it needs a lot more data points for evaluation.
Okay.
>”So far, you have expressed and repeated broad brush vitriol against Protestants,
You mean to say “factual assertion.”
>” without any backing evidence and which are clearly false (I’m pretty sure most Protestants in western countries are literate),
You ask me if I’d like to engage in a nuanced conversation, but you’re missing the nuance here. But if you’d like me to respond in-kind: You’re “pretty sure?” How insulting! I personally am _certain_ most Protestants are literate in the West.
>”showed great reverence for “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy
Thank you!
>”and yet admonished me for “how I work,”
See above.
>”by supposedly overstepping my evidence using inductive reasoning.”
I was talking to crisspf when I said that. What makes you think I was talking about you?
>”Another pattern so far is that you have continually refused to discuss and/or ignored any evidence and lines of reasoning I have brought up regarding the Aryeh Yehudah (who have written all of your scriptures, from whom Yeshua is born) and the founding, symbolism, ritual, genocidal nature, hierarchical structure etc. of Gentile Christianity and its deep connections to much older Luciferianism traditions, bloodlines, symbols, rituals, etc.
Hmm… that name does sound familiar. Have you mentioned him before?
>”Let us not forget it was founded first by the bloodline of Vespasian and Flavius Titus, and then made officially as the state religion by a Solar worshipping genocidal maniac (choked his wife and killed his kids) who chose a Babylonian Solar Demonic symbol to represent his Church.
I will make a note of it.
>”You have simply ignored all of this discussion or called it “irrelevant.”
It mostly is.
>”Meanwhile, you have admonished me for “overstepping evidence.” The obvious contradiction and double standard is evident.”
If that’s how you see it, then that’s how you see it.
>”Meanwhile you have gone into great detail with others extolling and praising the great virtues of “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy,
I find others show a greater ability to stay on task in a conversation, even when disagreeing.
>”without any deeper discussion regarding the original scriptures, history, etc.”
I’d be willing to have that discussion in the right context.
>”If you are really looking for Truth, I am willing to take the time to have a deeper, serious, and evidence based discussion regarding all of these topics.”
Let’s follow the goal posts as you try to move them:
1) You say, based upon disagreeing with an interpretation of one sentence in scripture that “Protestants can’t read,” then you use the obviously highly simplistic etymology of the name “protest” within the name of Protestant to unequivocally state “Protestants are parasites.” Now you claim these are well founded factual assertions. Right… sure. Can you provide stronger reference evidence and expound on why these are “factual assertions?”
2) I made one statement regarding the possibility of making some inferences (without stating what they might be) to another person, about your apparent neurocognitive processes in speech patterns, with regards to generalised culturally contextual information that appears to be present in what you have written, and you boldly claim:
“It’s exposing when you say things like this. It shows how willing you are to exceed your evidence only to arrive at an error.”
When I address this with significant nuance, you backtrack and state:
“What I wrote in response with had nothing to do with you as a person, but about how you work.”
Both of these, to anyone reasonable reading them, take one statement I made about the possibility of making inference, and then extrapolating your interpretation of that into
1) a strongly worded statement about my character.
and then when confronted and disarmed regarding that you move the goal posts to
2) a strongly asserted overall statement about “how I work.” Which still, to any reasonable person reading, continues to be a generalised statement about my character extrapolated from a singular data point, which is not supported by facts.
It is also in line with your pattern of other far over generalised strongly asserted statements such as declaring “Protestants can’t read,” supposedly based on a single verse’s interpretation, and “Protestants are parasites,” supposedly based on a single etymology of “protest.” It shows a very particular communication pattern and thought process.
Now that I have addressed this twice, you’ve moved the goala third time and said:
“Yes, it was an observation about one statement.”
Ok right. It was, with a then twice reiterated generalised assertion about a facet of my character based on that one statement. If you are able to make these strong generalised assertions, are you capable of bringing forth more evidencr and data to support them?
You also seem to claim to be able to unilaterally declare what is “on task,” and what is off task, in a DI-alogue (two way). It appears to be a tactic, so as to be able to side step anything in the conversation that has been brought up that might be less than positive and require significant nuance regarding the origins, symbolism, rituals, translations, etc. of Gentile “Christianity,” and their strong and pervasive connections with rape, genocide, paganism, Luciferianism/Solar Worship, etc.
That you are unwilling to discuss these things does not mean they are on or off task, especially since any discussion with the aim of understanding scriptural interpretations, Gentile doctrines, rituals and practices as they exist currently. clearly necessitates discussing the history, origins, rituals, dogmas, transgressions, esoteric practices, symbolisms, and bloodlines involved in Gentile Christianity. How else do we contextualise and understand the present state of things?
You can try to unilaterally claim these things are “off task,” as if you were the authoritative school teacher running a guided classroom discussion, but it doesn’t mean much except that it is simply your unilateral opinion, and from a reasonable vantage point, it strongly indicates that you are simply unwilling to discuss them for specific personal reasons.
And yet you never answered some past questions of mine among which “how can you pretend to extract any “Truth” from scriptures you recognize as being corrupted”?
I try to answer everything. to I apologise this question went unansweeed before; which was not my intention.
Let’s begin with the easy portion: The vast majority of the corruption of scriptures is found in their translations. If you read the scriptures in their original languages, then you will do away with about 90% of the corruption immediately. Tan easy example is stuff like the 4th horseman, whose color is χλορος literally “Chloros,” like Chlorophyll and Spring Green, but is translated as “Pale.” The 4th horseman is Osiris, the palid green corpse, but all the translations say just “pale.” The colouring change is a clear form of obfuscation, as it is a tremendous clue to anyone that has seen Egyptian artifacts, where the consistently paint deities of death Chloros .
Now once you go through the scriptures, you will find that the translations actually serve as a very good guide to finding Luciferian corruption in scripture. It’s as if you were reading a text in English that they had translated and continually find the translators consistently obfuscate the same references, even when using different words, to Luciferian concepts that are very revealing; such as those to abominable Egyptian Deifies, references to earlier scriptures, etc.
There was a conversation about the passage of Matthew 12:30-32 in the article titled “aiming to be as offensive as possible.” There we find they remove all reference to Amartia, which is a clear reference to the serpent of Berashid tricking Hava into disobeying the command. The word Amartia, meaning disobeying commandments by being tricked or without meaning in Greek is, to any Hebrew and Greek speaker, an obvious reference to the Hebrew word Amar which is the command YHWH gives not to partake of the tree of knowledge. Likewise Amaru is the serpent himself (like the AMARites).
They have replaced the word Amartia with sin, which is a male lunar deity of the SINai, and a twisted translational reference to the male lunar deity child of the great mother Mut. The word used for “surely you will DIE,” is Mut. The translations serve as guides, for those reading the original to Luciferian corruption.
I’d recommend you check the other discussion out, you may find an interesting in depth analysis that can help answer your question on how to read the original texts, and how easily it untwists the obvious translational twistings.m of the serpents.
Thank you for taking the time to reply, I appreciate your willingness to share respectful and constructive exchanges.
Allow me to react on your last comment:
***The vast majority of the corruption of scriptures is found in their translations.***
I totally agree.
***If you read the scriptures in their original languages, then you will do away with about 90% of the corruption immediately.***
I agree
YET….
As you write it, in order “to do away with the corruption”, it is necessary to “read the scriptures in their original language”.
But does the Bible fit with this condition?
First, was the scripture written by the narrators (the prophet/divine figures)? No its not.
Thus we have to seriously lower our contention of truth. But lets go down on the conditions that may give validity for some truth.
Then, has the Scripture been written by those who personnally knew the narrators? No, it has not.
Was the Scripture written at the time of the narrators by some eyewitnesses?
No, it was not.
Was the scripture written in the original language of the protagonists?
No it was not.
At one point, one must ask: so what do we have left?
Well, not much.
What we have today are a greek version of the Bible dating back from around 350 A.D and an hebraic full version of the Old testament which dates back to year 1000.
What truth can one pretend to extract from this?
If any, then let’s imagine some 350 years after your passing, my heir goes to Court to claim some rights on your estate. My heir presents to the judge a TRANSLATION written 350 years AFTER your death which tells about the account of a person who you never ever met in your life saying in another language than yours that you have meant that I should get your estate. While you are quoted to say exactly the contrary in this same translation (ie, that I must not get your estate).
Would you think the judge would give any authority to this document? How about the jurors?
You and I both know the answer: judge and jury would reject it right away and even the lawyers would not even dare to produce such a document in court without being laughed at or accused of forgery.
So I ask you again how can you assert to extract any Truth from such a scripture, whether in greek or hebraic?
Thus, because truth cannot be guaranteed if derived from tampered things, I have asked you “what make you claim your knowledge is truth?”.
However, I do agree with you though that the scriptures have been tampered in order to fit with another agenda, at least partly.
I will respond fully to this in a moment, however my first quick note is that you are forgetting the entirety of the “Dead Sea scrolls,” from Qumran in your dating scheme. There are many Hebraic texts, the vast majority of which are 99%+ identical to the Hebrew texts as known today, therein.
2000 years after your death, we find 15000 fragments which most read a few words or sentences. My heirs pretend these are fragments and smallish part of your last will.
Will the judge still accept these fragments as unequivocal truth?
He wont, and I wont either.
One could also argue that a small number out of thousands of scrolls are indeed complete yet… they still are tiny parts of the Bible.
Also, remember the James Ossuary? The Jehoash tablet? The Moses scroll? The Shapira hebrew bible?
I could also postulate that, considering the thriving art forgery capabilities which regularly fool experts and scholars, even the dead sea scrolls are not a reliable source, to me.
I do believe it has been tampered too to fit with an agenda.
First, the greek version of the Old testament, called Septuagint was written under the order of Pharaoh Ptolemy II: 72 scholars, 6 from each tribes, were isolated each in a room to translate each part of the texts.
This could explain the discrepancies in some part of the Bible and not in another parts: some tribes sold their souls while others not.
A few years later, Lucian of Antioch corrected the Septuagint and claim it was filled with errors. He is the one who taught Arius (more on him later) and was later martyred.
He must have been right since the rabbinic tradition considers the greek translation of the Torah as a distortion which is unsuitable for use in a synagogue.
What is also interesting is that the oldest version of the Bible in our possession very strangely dates back from the 1st Concile of Nicea and Constantine.
At the time of the Concile, the mainstream religion that we call “christianity” had nothing to do with what is practiced today; it was pretty much corrected judaism (no usury, the belief in the mission of Yeshua, his miraculous birth from Mary, to keep the commandments, the ban of carved images, the belief in a Unique G-d, the Father).
the most followed and respected authority was Arius. He was known for his writings, high morals and ascetism.
He preached a One and Only G-d which is the Father and that indeed, Yeshua was his subordinate who came later as a mortal.
He accused orthodox of following greek paganism such as Hosius of Cordoba.
Hosius believed in Homousion (which claimed the divinity of Yeshua), and hence suspended those who supported Arius; called them heretic and burnt Arius’s teachings.
At that time, they were still many pagans around and some of their beliefs and customs were naturally incorporated within Homousion beliefs’ system which will later be followed by Constantine.
Under the advice of Hosius, Constantine accused Arius of heresy and sent him in exile.
It brought big protestations from the population, from emperors and powerful people.
So Constantine had to call a concile so as to decide what should be the official faith (and hence, what to do with Arius and his beliefs).
1700 authority figures from the different religious movements were officially called to decide on a common dogma.
Yet, only 250 assisted at the concile. 15% only!
Why only 250? Because those who followed the authority of Arius were given wrong dates and locations so they couldnt attend and influence what had already been decided to set as the normative dogma.
The debates were so heated that Arius was smacked in the face.
The dice were piped, Hosius asserted his dogma in the trinity and all opponents were reduced to silent.
Arius was exiled again, called back by Constantine only to be poisoned to death.
Athanasius of Alexandria was the one who fixed the new canon of the Church.
He was obviously opposed to the ideas of Arius and was mainly known for his poor character. For example, he sold the grains to the Church for his own personal gain when they were meant to the poors. He was accused of violence and murder towards his dissent.
He rose in ranks under questionable means: he was only 30 when he was ordained bishop in a private consecration by a small number of bishop supporters.
Hence, we know that the persons behind the dogma that we know today as Christianity are far away from the morals and teachings of Yeshua.
Consequently, how can we listen to them seriously when they pretend to tell us what were the true beliefs of Yeshua or who G-d is?
Thank you for this. With all sincerity. I wish to respond in detail but will take the proper reflection first.
Again I would point you to the oldest Hebraic texts from the Essenes of Qumran, radio carbon dated to as early as the 3rd century BCE. This may offer you some further clarity on timeline, which does not involve nor the Solar emperors Ptolemy nor Constantine.
What you say regarding “Christianity,” is True. More horribly true than most imagine, and the story is much darker and purposeful. I would recommend in looking into Flavius Titus, Vespasian, who burned and massacred Jerusalem to the ground, then stole the scriptures and set forth to create a universalist one world religion of the antiXristos. Their direct bloodline includes the first bishops of Rome, such as Clement I.
It may also be of interest to read The Computation or 666 which I linked in Chapter IX of Monkehs.
So you know I am not a “Christian” I do not bow before the abomination of Lucifer.
I am a Nazarene, an Aryeh Yehudah. We are still here, despite Constantine’s best efforts.
To me, it is still a belief that partly follow their belief in a human G-d.
Unless one returns the power strictly to whom it rightly deserves, man is either his own human god or follow another human god.
Humans are creatures created by a superior being along with everything else, for a unique purpose. Like your shoe or your comb. There is a purpose for each thing. A created thing cannot be uncreated. A created thing cannot be the Creator at the same time. We’ve discusses this already.
The purpose of Yeshua was to show the way to the Father, and only to the Father. That is the only thing that he repeats all along and which is coherent to the previous teachings.
I could cite several dozens of extracts from the Bible but I am sure you know them by heart. 🙂
Having regained some strength, I find it a good time to give you a more comprehensive answer to this.
First of all, we agree that the scriptures contain corruptions from later texts; I am fully aware of them, and can identify them immediately. How I can do this I will explain.
First the easy way that most people can wrap their head around:
A very easy example is the “Song of Mary,” which is, in its entirety a 4th century fabrication. This can be ascertained from a simple linguistic analysis of the Greek present, in which most of the verb forms take compound tensing which is used nowhere else in the scriptures, and to anyone with familiarity in green linguistic development are a hallmark of 4th-6th century linguistic fashion. Something on the order of 50% of the non-preposition words and forms are completely unique to the passage and found nowhere else in the scriptures. We also see that it takes most of its content from making a remix soup of ”Old Testament,” septaguint writings and sort of reformulates it in a poor man’s 4th century grammar.
Likewise when cross comparing with the known historical information, including both the non-existence of the passage prior to the 4th century, and likewise the extensive evidence of fabrication of Great mother worship doctrines by the Babylonian priests that created “apostolic Christianity,” it becomes even more clear.
With this type of textual analysis, one can do away with another 90% of the remaining 10% of the corruption with great precision. This means that by reading the original texts and using extensive linguistic, historical, and as r geological analysis we can restore to about 98-99% fidelity the texts. At that point, the corruptions become of such a minor character that throwing away 99% for the 1 is a terrible waste.
Now, this methodology I have given you is how I began to read scriptures a long time ago, when I had yet to develop my skills in mathematics, archeology, physics, and particularly archeo mathematics and physics.
Let me put this in no uncertain terms: The scriptures are first and foremost mathematic in nature. The letters are there, as alphanumerics so that normal humanity can understand them, discern them, and remember them, but they are a record of extremely highly advanced technology. They are there, to give humanity the keys to the domain of the cosmos.
When I read the scriptures now, I do not generally read the words, I read the equations; and unequivocally, all of the forgeries perpetrated fail mathematically. When I first realized this some years ago, I noticed that all of the passages that I had originally discarded for linguistic reasons, contained jumbled equations that gave nonsensical results. As soon as one sees this, you can immediately find where the forgeries cut and paste from earlier sources without understanding the equations, as well as those than have no equations at all (pure fabrications.)
First of all, speaking of what is publicly available, we have the Dead Sea scrolls. These are texts from the Essenes, which are my ancestors, unspoilt by the hand of the Luciferians. They are largely Hebraic, and in them we can identify large portions of mathematical code, which simply cannot be faked.
Moreover we can cross compare with the archeological artifacts from our students all of which contain these equations to a lesser degree, the last in line being Pythagoras who received a watered down children’s version from the Babylonians thousands of years later. The Greeks were the 10 year olds that received only rudimentary lessons. This is where they got their methods to take measurements for earth (which they copied with only poor precision), the rudimentary atomic theory, and trigonometry. Compared to what is in the scriptures, this is but child’s play.
Let me give you an example:
I can show you how to obtain the equation for Plancks constant (relationship of energy and wavelength) * The Speed of Light, in an additive relationship to the semi surface area (our universe is both projective and compressive) of the proton from Berashid 1:1. This equation, which gives a relationship for spherical waves in the time dimension has not yet been published in modern particle physics, who are still arguing over the proton Radius.
As for comparing archeological artifacts let us look at Hammurabis code:
The dragons tell you that it’s a law code, except we have thousands of law decision tablets post dating it and not one makes mention of the Hammurabi code. Wry strange, except that I know what it is with mathematical precision: a collection of transcribed equations for building a ”cold” nuclear fusion reactor for free energy.
One piece of the puzzle:
As by methods which I partially showed in Chapter X: I can obtain the equation from the Ham code from:
This relationship explains quantum gravity, which modern physics still does not understand because the Aryeh Yehudah have quit providing the information (Einstein, Hertz, Max Borne, Niels Bohr, Wigner, and Tesla, all Aryeh Yehudah).
It is also but one of several thousand of high technology equations on the Hammurabis code thst lead to a schemers for fusion energy, ehich they are trying to unlock now at MITRE. Hammurabis code by itself is only about 35% of what contained in scriptures.
Trust me that Constantine and his band of merry murderers or the Pharisees, didn’t write this. They have never been given the keys to the domain of the cosmos, and we’re not capable even if they had tried. There is a reason we have so little documentary evidence: these monsters tried to destroy everything outside what they could control, so that they may hoard the knowledge for themselves.
This pattern has been well documented. The Hebrew gospels, such as the Gospel of the Nazarenes still exist and we’re originally written dually in Green and Hebrew, as Yeshua said. The Greek versions like Matthew, are actually designed to serve as password key codes to the more ancient Hebraic texts.
It is common for inquiring minds to fall into the traps you are professing here, it is natural; they have designed a gradient of what is acceptable opposition, and the views you profess here are quite common and understandable, but miss the much larger story of which the Re-Legions like “Christianity,” are but a spec of abominable dust.
** I can show you how to obtain the equation for Plancks constant (relationship of energy and wavelength) * The Speed of Light, in an additive relationship to the semi surface area (our universe is both projective and compressive) of the proton from Berashid 1:1. This equation, which gives a relationship for spherical waves in the time dimension has not yet been published in modern particle physics, who are still arguing over the proton Radius.**
This is funny, I am just starting to read on quantum mechanics.
I have some hypothesis but no mathematical background, your help could be of use.
Have you found in the texts the equation for the TOE yet? 🙂
Decrypting these texts requires a tremendous multi-disciplinary knowledge that penetrates far beyond what any specialist in a field will obtain. One must essentially master a tremendous variety of field of learning and their subfields and be able to seamlessly cross apply them at will, what are referred to in revelations as: the 7 eyes (sights), 7 horns (wisdoms), and 7 spirits of YHWH (faith): Linguistics, History/Archeology, Geography, Mathematics, Sciences, Music, and Cultural Psychology.
Likewise when learning these things, the dragons have laid many rewards for good little boys and girls that play by the rules, and laid many traps for troubadors along the way, by placing all sorts of twists that lead people astray, and likewise there is always a third rail of “no touch or get banished” zones in every area, basically what is meant by a Re-Legion. In science you don’t discuss faith; in genetics you don’t discuss the clear and apparent DNA manipulations of the human genome, in “christianity,” you don’t question the literalist interpretation, in linguistics and history, you don’t talk about the obvious connections between mesoamerica and Eurasia pre-columbus. Third rails keep people in line.
Go look up a wave with a frequency of 7.77 GhZ and see if you can figure out its importance to quantum theory; then compare with the gematrias of BAT SHIVA. I’ll give you a hint:
702/774 (a number associated with Yeshua is 774) = .9069. Look into circle packing efficiency and cross apply that planck scale energy transference quantization the speed of light and eulers numbers. Then look at what Vat, really means in the most ancient of tongue (like BAT of egypt, Vatika of Eutrusca, etc.) Do you see that most specialists aren’t going to understand this stuff?
@444gem
I agree for the need for cross disciplines.
**.9069 in relation to e, c and planck scale**
thanks for your clues but at this time, please keep in mind I am not at all versed into numbers or physics, I am just starting to read general information on quantum physics in order to understand what it is and what are its implications.
Hence, I am not able to come up myself with this equation and nor can I find what VAT really mean.
**a collection of transcribed equations for building a ”cold” nuclear fusion reactor for free energy.**
**This relationship explains quantum gravity, which modern physics still does not understand because the Aryeh Yehudah have quit providing the information (Einstein, Hertz, Max Borne, Niels Bohr, Wigner, and Tesla, all Aryeh Yehudah).**
You believe those physicists were aryeh yehudah?
This is publicly known: All of them were openly “Jewish,” except Tesla who was left in the dark by the monsters that controlled them. Yeshua is called a Teknos, which ya they translate as a carpenter, which is an allegorical translation at best.
Shrodinger was also an Aryeh Yehudah, although not openly due to the issues in Germany during his lifetime.
I can offer you speeches where Richard Fineman, the biggest contributor to Quantum Field Theory, and another Aryeh Yehudah. Speaks in his youth about “going back to the Babylonian method” for particle physics and ditching the Greek axiomatic materialist approach. Words are chosen carefully in a game of life of death
I have started reading your series to understand what is your theory.
I already have some interrogations but will wait until I finish the series in case you provide clues to them.
In earlier comments, we discussed our different position on what could be the Truth.
I held for argument that given the small number of complete scrolls and many fragments containing only a few words, even the Qumran scrolls do not offer proof of the original message contained in the Bible. Thus, because truth cannot be guaranteed if derived from tampered or incomplete things, I have asked you “what make you claim your knowledge is truth?” if based, at least partly on them.
You then replied you criss crossed scriptures with “extensive linguistic, historical, and as archeogeological analysis” which allowed you to “restore to about 98-99% fidelity the texts”.
You cited the Hammurabi code and others.
I can understand that.
Yet, I would suppose that, if indeed the source of this ancient knowledge is Truth, than it would necessarily reveal or confirm what is known to all and what explain the very existence of Satan/Lucifer, us, and the whole universe.
Yes, this is where you lose me.
If I read your interpretation of those archeological/linguistic/scientific evidence, it still unlogically reveal that Yeshua is the son of Man yet god through which eternal life can be achieved if one believe in his crucifixion and resurrection.
This isnt the purpose of this comment but it is easy to debunk the crucifiction and the resurrection.
Hence, to understand a bit more of the how/what of your thesis, can you please anwer my previous (+new) questions?
(This is important for and would appreciate you take the time to reply)
1/ How all this evidence you studied have not been able to confirm what Yeshua has repeated all along during his minister (i.e. to show the way to the Father, and only to the Father). That is the main message he repeats all along and which is coherent with the previous teachings (of a unique G-d)?
2/ Using a simple bullets list, can you name what you think are the true information/laws of the texts? Of Yeshuah’s message? Of G-d/Father?
About the Aryeh Yehuda:
3/ How can someone know his line goes all the way back to Judah and David?
4/ Where are the proofs for it other than your words?
5/ You say that knowledge is passed on from father to sons. If G-d forbids the hidden and the secret, isnt it necessarily occult when a knowledge is hidden? Isnt the probability for “errors” in the chain of transmission high enough to trust such knowledge?
6/ Being from the branch of David implies to be from the branch of Solomon as well: why is he discarded for having had access to superpowers or supposedly dabbed into magic?
7/ How did you come to the “truth” that his power and knowledge was necessarily not from G-d? (please note that word etymology are no proof for me as itself can be corrupted)
8/ If it weren’t, then why should one consider that the knowledge given to the Aryeh Yehudah IS instead from G-d?
9/Or else, I imagine you have discriminated your answer (of divine inspiration) from other possible ones: how the latter proved impossible?
10/ Are all jew “scientists” Aryeh Yehudah (this is what I understand based on your affirmations)?
11/ You consider Tesla as an “Aryeh Yehudah” because he claimed he received “inspiration” for his discoveries (correct me if I am wrong). Is that the only reason why?
12/ Why would the Aryeh Yehudah want such knowledge to be known when it could fall in the wrong hands? Yourself acknowledge that Thomson, JP Morgan and Trump’s uncle stole Tesla’s work to sell it for money (through company creation) and create technologies that are for some enslaving us. So why do that again with even more serious consequences (referring to the theory of everything and other equations you say you have discovered?
I believe your answers could provide me and others some more light on what is what, according to you, and hence to better understand your message.
I hope you can consider taking the time to reply to them.
You have not quite understood the message yet. It seems, although due to format I may be in error, that you are still applying certain dogmatic interpretations to the concepts I have presented forth, which may speak to certain mental biases within your psyche towards the scriptures and message inlaid by the abomination of “Christianity.” You need to strip away your ideas of what you think it means when the scriptures state to gain “eternal life,” or salvation, and go forth to the word as a child. Without presuppositions.
I explained earlier that linguistic-archeological and historical analysis are only a first step, and then explained the second, much more advanced form of authentication which involves highly advanced mathematics and scientific methodologies; these cannot be faked, as the scriptures contain such a hyper advanced level of scientific technical knowledge, system design, data encryption methodologies, data compression formats etc. that once one has obtained the keys (like a password to a read program for an encrypted computers hard drive), you can easily see where the inserts and frauds are.
The fraudulent sections fail not only the linguistics test originally performed, but again fail in the mathematical coding of tremendous intricacy present in the text. There are no exceptions to this I have found so far.
A dual diagnostic confirmation (or two factor authentication) is a rock solid form of message authentication used today by the world’s most advanced military computer systems to parse fraudulent versus authentic messages.
Do not underestimate the Aryeh Yehudah’s ability as Teknos (what Yeshua is called), the scriptures are designed as a seed of genetic material, from which the entire genome of Truth can be extracted. Anyone familiar with bioinformatics and genetics knows that CRISPR Cas-9 genetic splicing results in clear and evident cuts in the data, and with the scriptures it is the same.
I will answer a few of these questions briefly now, and more in depth alter as I have a lot on my plate right now.
1) it has, if you actually read the original texts.
2) no, you can’t sum up Homers odyssey in bullet points. You want me sum up The Way in bullet points?
3) there is a long and unbroken line of male-to male parentage for tens of thousands of years. One knows, and as I’ve said before, some never return and become lost, others do. How did Yeshua figure out who his real father is? Likewise Genetic testing confirm this quite easily now, and it has.
4) Math some of it in its most basic form is in chapter X.
5) logical fallacy. It’s not occult. Any who ask, seek and knock receive. But fathers do pass it to sons so that there are still shepherds the people may go to and ask, seek and knock.
6) You don’t understand the stories. How is it that Yeshua is descended from Dawid? Who is Dawid? What is the name of BAT/VAT SHIVA?
7) All Knowkesge is from YHWH
10) no, there are Isis Ra Elis
11) His father is an Aryeh Yehudah. Nothing to do with entities.
12) We are commanded not to hoard knowledge. Read the scripture of Shameshon, humanity has 7 days to figure out the riddle. Humanity is given free will, and hoarding and secrets are the downfall, not the answer.
**”You need to strip away your ideas of what you think it means when the scriptures state to gain “eternal life,” or salvation”**
Then explain what do they mean?
**I explained earlier that linguistic-archeological and historical analysis are only a first step, and then explained the second, much more advanced form of authentication which involves highly advanced mathematics and scientific methodologies**
Do you have any videos or else that explain all this process so I can have a better understanding of it?
2) **no, you can’t sum up Homers odyssey in bullet points. You want me
sum up The Way in bullet points?**
Yes, any message can be summed up.
For example, how would you introduce Yeshua’s and YHWH to someone
who has never heard of them? or about their messages to us in relations to
our purpose in this life? If there is an after-life? If any laws need to be
observed? If Yeshua himself says he is G-d? who is Yeshua as regards to YHWH the Father/G-d?
I mean, an answer to the main questions people ask themselves at one
point or another in their life.
3) **as I’ve said before, some never return and become lost, others do. How
did Yeshua figure out who his real father is?**
Unless I missed it, I dont recall you saying to me that some become lost
because they dont return (from where?). I am interested to know more of
that when you have time to elaborate on that too.
His “real father”? I do not know the whole of your discovery. What do you
mean by real father? For what I know, he was conceived without a physical
intercourse but I have no clue what is his paternal biological heritage. I am
interested to know more.
4) **Math some of it in its most basic form is in chapter X.**
So I shall soon reach that part, I’m at chapter 8.
5) **Any who ask, seek and knock receive**
So If I knock and ask, you will pass your whole knowledge to me?
6) **How is it that Yeshua is descended from Dawid? Who is Dawid? What is
the name of BAT/VAT SHIVA?**
I dont know, explain please.
7) **All Knowkesge is from YHWH**
Yes. But that doesnt answer the question
10)** no, there are Isis Ra Elis**
Yet, Tesla was both a scientist and an Aryeh Yehudah, wasnt he?
11) **His father is an Aryeh Yehudah. Nothing to do with entities.**
Is it a public fact or something that is known within the circle of A. Yehudah
only?
12) **Read the scripture of Shameshon, humanity has 7 days to figure out the
riddle.**
Shameshon? please elaborate on this point, too obscure.
I hope when you have more time you can further details those points and questions 8, 9.
I gave more details on bat shiva in another response. But here are more clues:
Bat = the Egyptian Cattle goddess, Great Mother of the Sun, Ra.
Sheba/Shiva = The Destroyer, the 7th planet, Saturn, the same as the deity as found in Hinduism, who is often depicted in female form as well, and the same name of the wife and woman who questions SOL Amon (The Sun King). Sol Amon is represented by hexagonal circle packing to form the “Maggen David.”
Her name is 72-702. The total is 774. 702/774 = .9069 the packing efficiency of hexagonally packed circles. 727.02 is Plancks constant over the mass of the electron, and another step with five you the electron volts in the SUN: 1.116.
Maggen = Seroent Deit in Egypt. It’s not an Aryeh Yehudah symbol, it belongs to the Pharisees, the FIRE I SEEs (written upaRISHIm in Hebrew like the Rishi fire sages of India.)
Her name means in no uncertain terms “the daughter of destruction.” Or “the daughter/womb of Shiva. The word Shiva in Hebrew still means the number 7, as Saturn is the 7th candle on the Helio Centric Model of the menorah. The reason that they send URiah to die at battle, is because he represents the planet Uranus. He is known as the father of Saturn/Shiva/Kronos in Greek mythology, here it is the husband. It all encodes the equations for the celestial mechanics that lead to solar system formation in great detail.
The entire story is a fractal, that at its most fundamental encodes the celestial mechanics of the early formation of the solar system, it’s not supposed to be the superstitious nonsense given now to keep people from realising The Truth.
The reason for all this rape fantasy nonsense spread by gentile “Christianity,” relates to their obsession with mother rape, and rape in general, which goes with the Madonna Wh0re complex they’ve got going on.
It keeps people bickering about nonsense and covers for the true origin of the name of the VAT i KAIN; Mummy and murderer. They worship the great mother “Queen of heaven,” the name coming directly from the Etruscan great mother VATika, in a church on SEVEN (Shiva in Hebrew) Hills. She is the adversary, the SATurnAN SAT-urANus. It’s why it says the harlotte of Ba Ba’al on (the spirit of the embodiment of Lucifer) sits in SEVEN hills; the mark of Kain is 7 fold; its SHIVA.
For any any who read the scriptures this stuff is evident. Their tricks are wicked.
@crisspf @chud
While you discuss the rape of one planet of another, in an allegorical story that warns against the evil of those that worship the sun and planets, in order to forgive an actually historical serial murder (Constantine), you do not see what is really there. I’m sorry but I can’t do the whole Mind Kontrol fantasy junk anymore.
The Maggen David is just a Luciferian code symbol for the proportions of hexagonally packed 2 dimensional circles, which are the geometrical patterns that photons follow. Sheba / Bathsheba = .9069 = the packing efficiency of electromagnetic force carrying photons on a two dimensional holographic plane.
**Yeshua being from the branch of David implies to be from the branch of Solomon as well: why is he discarded for having had access to superpowers or supposedly dabbed into magic?**
by:
**How is it that Yeshua is descended from Dawid? Who is Dawid? What is
the name of BAT/VAT SHIVA?**
**Sheba/Shiva = The Destroyer, the 7th planet, Saturn, the same as the deity as found in Hinduism, who is often depicted in female form as well, and the same name of the wife and woman who questions SOL Amon (The Sun King). Sol Amon is represented by hexagonal circle packing to form the “Maggen David.**
**Her name means in no uncertain terms “the daughter of destruction.(..) The word Shiva in Hebrew still means the number 7, as Saturn is the 7th candle on the Helio Centric Model of the menorah. The reason that they send URiah to die at battle, is because he represents the planet Uranus. He is known as the father of Saturn/Shiva/Kronos in Greek mythology, here it is the husband. It all encodes the equations for the celestial mechanics that lead to solar system formation in great detail.**
**The entire story is a fractal, that at its most fundamental encodes the celestial mechanics of the early formation of the solar system, it’s not supposed to be the superstitious nonsense given now to keep people from realising The Truth**
If i sum it up, you discard Solomon because he was linked to Sheba, who’s name could be in relations with a fractal story explaining the birth of the solar system?
First, most of our names today are based on references to potential deities. Take Sylvia, could we say that the holder of such a name honors a “forest” god?
Does a person holding the name “david” means he worships David? It doesnt.
In other words, how the decoding of a name is proof of one’s real actions and intentions? It isnt.
As per the story of Solomon and Sheba:
All prophets have had some moments of weakness and Solomon included.
Yet that doesnt mean they were not worthy of G-d’s trust, it just mean they were mere humans.
Allow me to offer an example of another possible interpretation which includes your findings.
As you asked me before, I ask you to keep an open mind.
In the Quran, it is said about Solomon:
“So We gave him power over the wind (..) and over the jinn – every kind of builder and diver and others chained in fetters” 38:36-37
“We made a fountain of moten brass flow for him, and some of the jinn worked under his control with his Lord’s permission. If one of them deviated from Our command, We let him taste the suffering of the blazing flame. They made him whatever he wanted – palaces, statues, basins as large as water throughs, fixed cauldrons. We said, Work thankfully family of David, for few of my servants are truly thankful’. Then, when We decreed Solomon’s death, nothing showed the jinn he was dead (..) if they had known what was hidden they would not have continued their demeaning labour.” 34:12-14
These verses say that Solomon had jinns (spirits), under his command by G-d’s permission, who built many constructions under his order.
It also says that some jinns were “divers”: hence, they also built constructions under the seas (Atlantis?).
The verses also say that the jinns had to follow G-d’s “command”. When “command” word is used in the Quran, it implies control by G-d’s laws (ie, by maths/physics means).
One can imagine that the command/measure is actually the science / geometry behind such constructions where for example, phi is found many times in the pyramids and other constructions which follow a line along the globe.
Hence, the constructions probably seem “supernatural” to us, as in, above human’s building capabilities (such as the pyramids for example).
Such constructions were even immense for jinns and represented “demeanour labour”.
This could also explain why many imposing ancient constructions left no building plans, no traces of tools, no dwellings for the thousands of workers that such constructions should have required if they had been built by humans.
That would explain many things that have not been yet explained by archeologists, geometers, engineers such as “how did they bring the millions of heavy needed construction stones which weighted several tons each?” or “how did they perfectly carved statues?” or “how did they carved perfect lines in series which perfectly adjust to the neighbouring stones like a puzzle” or “how did they create perfect mirror constructions” or “how did they create perfect measures which allow for perfect sound frequencies?” etc etc.. and all of this, with tailor stones as rudimentary tools?”
On top of that, such “workers” being jinns, (non human entities), themselves and their realizations were not bound by the natural laws of physics which apply to this spacetime and hence, to us (see below the story of the throne).
One could also imagine that, since they were not bound by our spacetime dimension, jinns were also able to make constructions in different time periods (as spaced out by several centuries).
Furthermore, these verses also remind that, like humans, jinns have free will.
They could deviate. They were forced to listen to the orders of Solomon but were not happy to and would have stopped their labour much earlier had they known he was already dead.
Also, Jinns have different levels of power.
In the following verse, Solomon had ordered Sheba to worship G-d instead of the Sun but she refused. So he then asks his councellors, among which jinns, if one could bring him Sheba’s throne so she understands that her earthly power is fragile:
“Councellors, which of you can bring me her throne (..)?
A powerful and crafty jinn replied, ‘I will bring it to you before you can
even rise from your place’. But one of them, who had some knowledge of
the Scripture said, “I will bring it to you in the twinkling of an eye”.
When Solomon saw it set before him he said “this is a favour from my
Lord, to test whether I am grateful or not”. 27:38-40
Sheba does end up converting to Solomon’s beliefs.
What is it to understand?
First, that Scripture, as you theorize, DO include powerful knowledge since, when used, it has allowed a jinn to be “mightier” than another one by instantly bringing the throne to another place.
This means that using “scripture knowledge” could allow, for example, to spacetravel an atom-made object. This is in accordance with your findings I believe?
When Jinns knew about this knowledge, they transmitted it to humans who were evil motivated, such as those using witchcraft (it is not because witchcraft is evil that it means it doesnt work and influence our reality).
“When God sent them a messenger (Yeshua) confirming the Scriptures they already had, some of those who had received the Scripture before (jews) threw the Book of God over their shoulders as if they had no knowledge, and followed what the evil ones had fabricated about the kingdom of Solomon instead. Not that Solomon himself was a disbeliever, it was the evil ones who were disbelievers. They taught people witchcraft and what was revealed in Babylon to the two angels Harut and Marut. Yet these two never taught anyone without first warning him, “We are sent only to tempt, do not disbelieve”. From these two, they learned what can cause discord between man and wife” 2:101-2
According to the Quran, the story of an evil Solomon is an evil fabrication which the jews decided to follow instead of Yeshua, who they rejected.
Hence, it refers to the knowledge acquired by the jinns who passed it on to humans.
Yet, this knowledge contains true knowledge from:
the scriptures, which can allow for example to space travel objects
babylonian magic, which does work and affect reality and people’s behaviours (such as making spouses divorce)
the perfect numbers found in G-d’s creation which can be applied to create powerful constructions (such as jinns built for Solomon).
This knowledge transmission to humans allowed for the existence of freemasons (it were the jinns who were the first “perfect” masons) and the role they’ve played in the last few centuries.
This could also explain why they influenced royalty and evil bloodlines who based many future constructions on the same model
This also explains why perfect ratios such as phi and other advanced equations can be found in their constructions, names and wherever you have found them when studying your theory.
In conclusion, this theory would be that some humans have gained some of G-d’s knowledge, through the jinns, and want to harness it to re-arrange the world for the arrival of their representant on earth.
They have been preparing for centuries under the order of their master Satan.
Yet, however much they try to tamper the true creation of G-d, claiming it for themselves by using perfect measures and sacred knowledge from the Scripture, this doesnt mean that the whole creation which holds G-d sacred print is theirs or obey to them.
Or, it would be like saying, because there are some fake-real gucci bags (which are made of the same exact leather and sawn with the same exact traditions), then the whole of guccy company is fake.
You have found the perfect measures in the creation of G-d, in plants and animals and in the universe.
Yet, such creations are not evil made, they are not from Satan.
Satan has created nothing, hence, his “print” cannot be found in the natural creation.
Only in man made’s creation. This is precisely what his gangs want to do: spoil the natural creation of G-d and replace it with a man made one which could be under the complete control of Satan.
Just like the natural creation is under G-d’s control and command.
Remember Satan is also part of the creation and he knows it. His only goal is to avenge himself from us, sons and daughters of Adam whom he refused to bow down to.
He wants to avenge himself from us because he lost the love of G-d because of us.
Yet, he adored G-d much more than most humans do. Go find a single line in the Scriptures where he badmouths G-d. You wont find one.
He just want us to lose G-d’s love, like he did, and take us with him.
In conclusion, I believe such interpretation would perfectly be in accordance with your own.
If you dont believe so, can you please detail in what they would be incompatible (without bias)?
I don’t have fundamental disagreement with you regarding the trans dimensional passing of information and most of the other aspects. As it is, I get enough visits from jumpers who call me ALfred, the wise council.
There are some finer points to add to this which I will take up later, Radius Area Length Phi 22.5. The 22.5 degrees = 1/16 of the circle; a common imprint on artifacts sinusoidal representations baked into the metric and imperial measurement systems and quite clever given its importance.
You have understood a significant aspect of the scriptures, but appear with this interpretation, as you appear to have an attachemebt to for deeper reasons, to be mistaking it for a singularly important one, you cannot disregard the fractal after finding a single satisfactory vantage point which satisfies further understanding on one scale.
Likewise the Quran’s name comes directly from the Aryeh Yehudah קרן Quran. Which means to emit Rays. MIT-REs. It is an archonic, the ArChes embodied, piece of texts given by Luciferic . The shining light ray emitrinf archon. Doesn’t mean it’s useless or all wrong, just have to know why it was given when it was given.
Are the Igigi real, they are of course. The Utukki, Wetukki UTUkim crilele whatever you want to call them. Likewise The story of Sol Amon and Hammurabi is not all about time hopping string theory of the master of animals that are engaging in chaos control . that’s the point of these stories in the Quran, to decompress certain aspects of the story for their power of mass manipulation within the HaSHISHin (6) kults that eventually became masonry.
Equally this means masonry is not centuries olds, it’s the continuation of a long string of middle tier information dissolution call BLOCKS phemia from a very long time ago. Regardless, I will go into further detail in a bit. I appreciate the thought out response.
Thank you for your quick reply. Always a pleasure to exchange with you.
**As it is, I get enough visits from jumpers who call me ALfred, the wise council.** You get visits from time travelers?…
**You have understood a significant aspect of the scriptures, but (…) you cannot disregard the fractal after finding a single satisfactory vantage point which satisfies further understanding on one scale.**
Please elaborate on how it disregard the “fractal”?
**”Likewise the Quran’s name comes directly from the Aryeh Yehudah קרן Quran.”**
**Likewise The story of Sol Amon and Hammurabi is not all about time hopping string theory of the master of animals that are engaging in chaos control . that’s the point of these stories in the Quran, to decompress certain aspects of the story for their power of mass manipulation within the HaSHISHin (6) kults that eventually became masonry.**
If what you wrote were true, then it will be evil in essence, which I am sorry to say it is not.
Something that doesnt call for evil and call out everything that is luciferian cannot be from Lucifer.
So, I need you to show me some tangible uncontestable proof please (using proofs as described below)?
Meanwhile, I would like to share some general thoughts. Please allow me to and please keep an open mind, for I am not your enemy but instead a friend in what unite our hearts.
Why do you always refer to etymology when it is no proof? It is just interpretation of possible origins of a word. That is all it is.
If it isnt etymology, its lineage based evidence: you claim you know such and such based on hidden knowledge passed on, as you say, from men to men.
You then almost obliged me to accept such evidence or I imply you are a liar.
But what if I dont believe in both options? You are not a liar but your claim are also no proof.
For example, in a court of law, would the jurors be convinced by a case based on etymology and a lineage tradition?
No, they would tell you that no one can constitute evidence of his own.
So if it is no tangible proof for mere mortal arguments, how could it be for soul and spirituality matters?
Where I dont follow you is that you label luciferic everything that does not satisfy your own theory and again, without even bringing proof to support your claims.
From the assertion that the knowledge of your lineage is legit, you envision all other information and (wrongly) connect dots, as long as it confirms that same vision passed on from men to men.
Also, I think by focusing on millions of details, one loses the bigger picture.
Man’s brain is such that it cannot do both, see the details and the larger picture. This is exactly why, according to you (and me as well) many scientists fail in finding answers to physics problems: they focus in their own discipline without looking at the bigger picture in connection with other academic fields.
Yet, if you seem to have finely analyzed the details, you seem to have subjectively connected the details so as to paint the picture the way it should look like, according to your lineage.
One may have millions of true details, if the pieces are turned upside down, the puzzle still wont be coherent even with the right pieces at hand.
This is how I feel when I read some of your comments and series.
Hence, I feel you disregard logical reasoning when looking at the bigger picture, maybe because you are too personally involved in that picture.
Maybe this is the reason why some questions asked are not easily answered by you (example for my question on a summary of the message of Yeshua and YWYH according to your theory). While it is easy as A B C, you replied it was impossible to sump it up.
Your answer very much surprised me. Nothing cannot be sumed up especially when this requires words which you hold so dear…
I felt you bugged when I asked you to sump up because your brain just imagined all the millions of details in your mind and couldnt imagine how to sum that all up 🙂
Also, you ask people to step out of their comfort zone and out of all the things that mankind has known but how about you?
How have you stepped out of your Aryeh Yehuda’s bubble to imagine the world differently?
You havent.
However much you think you have found “satisfactory vantage points which satisfy your theory/belief”, to paraphrase you, this doesnt mean that you have succeeded in connected all the dots that make the whole picture clear and logical for everybody.
Because if it were the absolute Truth, no one would find one single thing “illogical”. Yet, at least, I do.
For what i have read so far, the BIGGER picture of your theory lacks logic and purpose. The 2 main things that run the whole show of this universe.
Nothing lacks logic or purpose. Look and look again, do you see one thing that does?
“Why do you always refer to etymology when it is no proof? It is just interpretation of possible origins of a word. That is all it is”
No, it’s not. When I give etymologies there is always tremendous cross-disciplinary evidence (textual, archeological, symbolic, mathematic, theological/mythological, ritualistic,
Cultural, etc.) corroborating what I am saying behind. I give etymologies as shortcuts to guide further research for yourself. I Denver give etymologies by a wanton maybe kind sorta woulda coulda should be cause it sounds alike etymology.
On the surface it may appear as such, given that I don’t decompress all of the evidence for times sake, but if you ask you will see this is true. Be my guest.
I’ll give one easy example: I call Pharisees the Fire-I-Sees. At first glance it seems asanine based on purely superficial phonetic similarity. It is not.
We can track through thousands of sources, across thousands of years and multiple continents, how the term “Pyr” and it’s variants like “fyr” “fire, “phara,” etc all relate to fire. The term for fire in Hebrew is quite literally “Ash,” just like the Assuras of India, fire deities and just like the term for the black soot of fire in English, Ash. The connections are profound.
The term Pyr for fire appears as “PeRISHIm” which you know as Pharisees, the root being pyr. Likewise, they share the exact same phonetic roots and Sanskrit spelling with the infamous fire sages of India, the Rishis, different from then Sanskrit by only one letter. There practices and symbols also aline heavily.
The story of Moshe looking into the burning bush where he becomes “clear of eyes,” or “glowing of eyes,” the term for the burning bush is “Hassina.”
Who is the famous female deity of wisdom in Greece that has “eyes like fire,” and “glowing eyes?” The huntress Athena.
Athena and Hassina are phonetically nearly exact, and share not only phonetics, but they align ritualistically, and in the attached epithet and, mythology regarding eyes looking into a fire and obtaining wisdom.
You can then go around tracking ritualistic fire staring and “becoming clear of eyes,” (often taking hallucinogens) all over Eurasia and Meso America for thousands of years. We even find Athena traveled with the Ainu to Japan, as the goddess Hassinew, phonetically nearly unchanged again, and just as well as in Greece a huntress deity carrying the same weaponry and role, with nearly identical symbolism to Greece.
Likewise it states as much in the Torah that Moshe is son of PHARoah, who claims to be the embodiment of the Solar Fire, AURus, the shiny golden Dawn now known as Horus. Phara-on, the embodiment of fire. Like Shamesh-on, the embodiment of the sun. On is a suffix for material embodiment of a deity or emergent phenomena in human form.
Here we can then ascertain there is a connection between the Pharisees and cross compare thousands of words which all show such deep and profound connections between peRISHIs and Shiva worship. To give but one example Shiva = 7 in Hebrew, the 7th candlestick being Saturn the destroyer, and Shiva is the destroyer of Hinduism.
Following this thread will eventually lead you to Gujarat and the Indus Valley civilisations. There is substantial archeological evidence of the prolonged (1500+ years) contacts between sailers of Maggen and the Euphrates valley with Gujarat.
Following this knowledge I have been able to decode and read hundreds of seals in the supposedly not decoded Indus Valley language: the letters are closely related to Paleo Hebrew if you apply star catalogues. They are read right to left principally, but are dual direction.
Some of the seals are dedications for a coming of age (girl turning 12) or other well known deities found in the earliest forms of Hinduism, such as Garutu, and the Amrita, the elixir of life. Others are more interesting and refer to Atlantis saying “Subsumed in Vice” in one direction and “Destroyed In Shiva’s Fire” in the other, contain king on one side a sea serpent, and on the other a boat with a tabernacle surrounded by two ducks and palm trees, exactly identical to the iconography found on ancient Egyptian potter Lyn and very notably on pheonician and Pharisee stelles stretching from about 3rd Century through about the 9th century CE. I’ll show you a few Pheonciab and Pharisee stelles which contain the Indus Valley script saying “Deva Indra Ra.” And showing the bull of heaven. This is an occult fire priest language, they carried forward.
So while it seems asanine that Injust call them “Fire I Sees,” the etymologies are designed as guideposts, not definitive evidence. The word really does carry that much power.
It says that with The Word, it was spoken the universe into existence. You may not be considering the full power of the word:
Why is the name of YHWH now changed in every language to previous names for the illuminator?
Gad = an Epithet of Ba’al found in aisiah 65:11 and all over Pheonciab artifacts, calling “Ba’al Gad is my fortune.”
Dios = Zeus the illuminator
Bog = The Two Headed Janus of the Siberian steppes
Alla = an ugaratic deity of keeping the keys of the underworld to deceased deities who had ceased to have been worshipped.
And notably in Aryeh Yehudah אל לא “Al La” means “There is no ALohim” just as LA still means no or not in Arabic.
I don’t speak these things lightly, I’m giving short cuts based on a tremendously profound and varied set of evidence I’ve found which has lead to these conclusions.
You have explained in details and gave example of the etymology of a few words. I appreciate your detailed description in reply to my question:
**Why do you always refer to etymology when it is no proof? It is just interpretation of possible origins of a word. That is all it is.**
You reply:
**When I give etymologies there is always tremendous cross-disciplinary evidence (textual, archeological, symbolic, mathematic, theological/ mythological, ritualistic, Cultural, etc.) corroborating what I am saying behind. I give etymologies as shortcuts to guide further research for yourself.**
What I mean is, for example, you mentionned Fire I see for Pharisee. You link them to the etymology of fire which was found in many civilizations and languages (well considering the languages all come a single one, this makes sense). And?
If I take the word genuine. It comes from the latin word genu which means knee but also race, birth. In english it doesnt make sense to relate knee to authentic but it did before when fathers would put a newborn child on their knees in order to acknowledge their paternity.
Likewise, why would historical facts or meanings necessarily associate that same meaning to the present?
Dont you believe that what we mentally associate today to a word is what represents its true meaning instead?
When I speak, the power of the words are through the meaning and symbology that I want to share and which I base on what the words mean today for most of us. Not to what they used to mean some hundreds years ago.
Now I understand you also base your theory on other types of proof rather than etymology. This is what I am interested in.
The 3rd word of the scriptures is אלהים “ALohim.” Absolutely this is the one of the many names “HaShem”of the growth of the fractal of the universe and YHWH.
What I am pointing out is a linguistic coding, which occurs across space and cultures: That the priests of hierarchical religion and governments, which demonstrate to be invariably Luciferian, exchange the name of for the ineffable creator for ones which invariably in the much older languages and cultural contexts, and almost always in the Hebrew texts, are either a direct reference to Lucifer (the illuminator) or to the non-existence of YHWH. If I can show you dozens of La gauges with this exact pattern, is it really just a coincidence or some non relevant fact? No, it is an overwhelming and very specific pattern.
This is like the use of Dios in all Latin based languages. This name was referencing Zeus for nearly 1000 years before it becomes the word of choice in the Cattle Church.
It is like the use of Bog in Cyrillic languages, which is likewise the dualistic nature of electromagnetism (again the illuminator), in much older Siberian Steppe shamanism. That is now spread by Eastern Orthodoxy. Another several languages fall under this use.
The name “god,” in English spread by The Church of England, is an infamous epithet of Ba’al (the bull form of Satan) from the levant dating to at least the first millenia BCE. This epithet for Satan is even called abominable in Isiah 65:11, referring to Gad and Meni. Here another 4-5 languages (English, Norwegian etc) fall under using an epithet of Lucifer in place of the name of YHWH.
This is a pattern which repeats over and over and over and over in modern languages, to a point that it is nauseating: there are repeated, consistent patterns of linguistic codings that attach ancient pagan deities into the cultural conciousness. It is not by chance that the word “Nιgg3r” means “Human or Animal Property, ,” in Sumerian tablets on 5000 BCE and then suddenly it crops up with the same meaning and exact same phonetic value in the English language slave trade 4000 years later. These things are seeded and perpetuated under the surface in such a consistent and mind boggling manner.
Is it any wonder that today in English “Money,” is the same as so many of the ancient Lunar deities such as the Norse Mani, whose brother is Sol (literally Sol & Mani, Solimin)? This same deity is quoted as abominable in Isiah 65:11 as “Moni,” and it literally means “monetary fortune.” MONItary…
Let me show you a discovery I made just by following the word:
Consider the passage of Matthew 27 where at the condemnation of Yeshua they throw 30 “shining silver pieces,” into the tabernacle. 30 silver moons is equivalent to one lunar synodic period (29.53 days). The scriptures then mention “the fields of the potter,” which are used as tombs for “foreigners.” It is a clear and obvious referential clue for anyone in the ancient world, but which now is just brushed over:
1) To the potter deity Khnum, who is the setting sun of the west (like the Chinese great Mother) and is the name of the emperor on the pyramid of Khnum Khufu, at Giza, which were used as “tombs,” in later antiquity.
2) The valley of Hinnom in Jerusalem, often called Gehenna, and which is a valley of tombs to this day.
The distance between these two locations, measured from cornerstone to the tomb of “David” is 272.72 miles exactly. Random?
No, the ratio of the volumetric mean radius of the Moon to Earth is
.27272 : 1 How powerful they the word tells us this unassailable mathematical truth about two very important ancient sights.
Likewise yhe megalithic Yard, found baked into megalithic structures from StineHenge to Gobekli tepe all over the ancient world is exactly 2.72 feet. This is also Eulers number, a dimensionless constant (no units, like π) as fundamental to probability and the construction of the universe as Pi, Phi, etc. The imperial and metric systems are very, very old, and have been crestsd and adjusted to fit the Planck scale measurements of reality with φ to incredible exactitude, just as the second has been. Earth rotates exactly 16 Planck times per day (16.01) . That’s 86400 seconds, 1:54 within 99.997% accuracy. Coincidence?
If you follow this thread you’re going to end up with relative ratios of the hydrogen atom and it’s charge density to Earth that are encoded in this construction pattern not only of the universe, but ancient structures, and which are specifically mentioned in the scriptures.
So here I am showing you just how powerful the word is in tracking the history of the world, telling us to track two ancient sights that encode the Radius ratio of earth to moon (doesn’t depend on units) within the story. For those that are willing to use it as a guide towards much further and more in depth research.
Regarding the name Alla, we find that likewise it comes from a much older underworld deity that was the gatekeeper for dead. Look up Alla Gula, and you are going to find not only linguistic, but also significant symbolic connections to the modern Allah worship.
And then more importantly consider the aspects of the Black Kube of Saturn at the Hajj and Ka-Ba-ALLAH where people literally rotate around the Hajj Seven times. Just Like Saturn, the 7th planet. Seven being called Shiva in Hebrew, like Shuva the destroyer, whose tradition in India is about obtaining wisdom from Queen Shiva, aka Queen Sheba. Likewise, in pre Muslim Arabia there is a wealth of archeological evidence of worship of proto-Shiva, under the name Rudra, an amalgamation of Ra- and Indra. The sun and the illuminator.
Both kabbalists and Muslims worshipping back cubes called Kabbas Allahs, both under the same name. And with profound and deep historical ties.
All of these profound symbolic, linguistic, ritualistic and historical connections are of extraordinary use in understanding the world as it truly functions. The word is of great power if you understand it and apply it across disciplines with great care and research; I’m not just chopping up words randomly based on phonetics.
Unequivocally in languages and cultures of the ancient near east, the word Ka, is a reference to the aspect of a person, being, thing or soul as the soul’s image or likeness.
Ka in Egypt is a spirits essence. It is a reference to the images of statues made for deities to inhabit and be worshipped, they were called as Ka Statues, where it was said a deities spirit essence would enter the statue, and their ceremonies for summoning the deities Ka included an “opening of the mouth ceremony,” (which is a massive piece of cargo kult worship regarding animatronic machines, but that’s another story.)
in Hebrew Ka is simply the preposition “as.” Or “like,” with no connotation of this silly pagan notion. The prohibition on graven images of any kind in the second commandment of Moshe is directly against this type of stuff. Islam, to its credit has followed this command not permitting any statues or images of Muhammad.
The Ba of Egypt was a souls spirit in Avian Body or form.
Al is a reference to the tree of life, divinity. Alon in Hebrew means Tree, and is in the ancient tongue literally “the embodiment of the YHWH or Alohim.”
La means “no or not.”
The reason Ba’al is so hated as Satan, has to do with it being the avian spirit body forms worshipped in place of the one true creator so heavily by statue Luciferian religions of the ancient world. It’s the imposter, the shining “divine bird.” Look to the Babylonian Zu, who is the storm/lightning bird from where the name Zeus comes.
Ba’al is the avian form, of Lucifer/Benus/Venus/Ishtar/ etc. It is why Rome uses the Solar Eagle, dozens of flags still have it (such as US) today, Isis and all of the great mothera use either a vulture or eagle (largest bird of prey) and the Eastern Orthodox Church has it as their symbol in the two headed form. Evening and Morning Stae; Venus, to whom blood sacrifice was committed. Likewise Ba’al simply meant “master, or lord.”
So here we can see there is a dual meaning in Ka-Ba-Al-Lah
“the spirit of the Lord NOT.” Its a curse, and the black kube represents the nothingness of the vacuum of space.
This is why I find there is significant and profound evidence from a variety of sourcings that, Al La as the name used is designed to worship Alla, the deity who keeps dead deities locked away in Mesopfamia, and to say “Al La,” AL is NOT.
I want to continue with some of the other names and symbols associated with what is supposedly YHWH throughout the ancient world, by a consistent Luciferian name, iconography, and solar worship, as well as some of the twistings that have been given throughout history: Berashid discusses the pattern: wher the Aryeh Yehudah go, the imposters follow and corrupt the message:
In Chinese the archaic name, stretching back to the most ancient of records in Chinese, of what is described as the supreme and one original father, is called “Judi/Yudi” It is essentially identical to the latin word for Aryeh Yehudah, Judai, and the name itself “Yuda,” in Hebrew, often now called Judah in English. We traveled across the world many, many thousands of years ago giving the Truth as the shepherds. He is always dressed in turqouise, which is the color of the fish scale armor worn by the Aryeh Yehudah when they would arrive in boats, many thousands of years ago.
In later records, suddenly a very well known solar symbol appears, along with names for the illuminator and his iconography:
In Chinese we find the “utmost heavenly father,” about a thousand years later, accompanied by an uptick in war and killing, represented by the symbol called the wàn 卍. Said exatly like “Juan” or as the Babylonian Oannes. This symbol appears alongside fire and solar worship throughout the ancient world with incredible consistency, always accompanied by the same names, rituals and then lots of war and other atrocities.
A small selection:
Lithuania: It is called the PERkonkrusts, the Fire/Lightning Cross, like our root PYR. Navajo: They call it the “Whirling/Burning Log.” It is equivalent to the fire Scythe mentioned “east of Eden” in Berashid. India: Called the Sauwastik, it is greatly associated with Surya for thousands of years, the two and forehead headed solar gorgon deity of fire. Armenia: It is called the Arevacach the “Sun Cross” or notable the havertshut’YAN Persia: See below where I have attached a picture of a bowl from 4000 BCE persia which shows the swatstik surrounded by fish, the “John” or “Wan” or “Yan” or “Oan-es” the same as the roman JAN-us, the man of two or four faces. This is the power of the word to guide one into true understanding.
In terms of Astrotheological luciferian, this symbol represents unequivocally, and even many pre-imminent academic scholars and theologists openly acknowledge this, the north pole star in Alpha Draconis. This is the star Thuban, which was precisely the north pole star in 3000 BCE. This word in Arabic is ثُعْبَان “Tuban” and as I believe you are aware, and means serpent. Likewise, the name “Jon,” is the word for Fish in Egyptian, as well as in Babylonian and Greek as “Oan,” later becoming “Juan” in Castillian Spanish, and da-Gan/da-Jon in Pheonician. This is why Yeshua says that many were prophecying until the day of Oannes (John the baptist), who took no food and did not drink. “The Builders” that you referenced are called אֲבָנִ֔ים “Abanim” which essentially means very large megalithic Stones, and survives even today in Castillian spanish and Arabic as “Abanil.” meaning a stone worker.
The word “to build, construct” used at the tower of Ba Ba’al (the avian spirit body, the accursed fallen angel Lucifer) is בָּנָה “Banah.” For instance both bricks (originally white) and any shining white color are called “Laban,” the origin of the name “Leban-on” meaning a physical manifestation of white; its not by accident all the ancient lebanese cities where constructed white and worshiped Ba’al Hammon, who is the solar acatar of Lucifer. These etymologies are not spurious, the can ben tracked and confirmed across thousands of primary source documents, across dozens of languages and cultural contexts where they keep a consistency with cultural, theologicial, historical, and archeological evidence.
In the Chinese above, we see the substitution of the teachings regarding the ineffable creator substituted for the solar symbol of “Jon,” or Wan. It isthe serpent from the sea, just as “Thuban” is the serpent and the star in Alpha Draconis that was at the north pole in 2500 BCE.
This tale of a wise council coming from the sea is repeated over and over across the world over, and shows a constant pattern with mountains of evidence; it is the ancestors of the Aryeh YUDA, then twisted into corrupt and vile luciferian worship full of statues, supersiticions, and lots of solar symbolism, along with Cattle/bull worship, and then usually somewhat later, a “great mother,” representing Venus is brought in for blood sacrifice. It is a remarkably consistent pattern. This is what is meant by the beast out of the Sea in Revelations; it is the Sun and its accompanying worship which twists the truth into a luciferian corruption that imposters the real thing.
You may question whether or not it is possible that this all traveled as far as China (whose name is literally KAIN-a and who is ruled by the HAN chinese, Hanas meaning serpent just as well in Hebrew and Arabic to this day.)
Then look to the Korean emperor Dangun. His name and iconography are essentially identical to the Pheonician solar fish man DAGON. Or the African Fish scale solar man deity, DOGON. Quite the pattern.
Korea’s Dagon is always represented wearing turqouise fish scales, with the sun behind his head. The symbols making up his name in Korean 檀君 mean “Purple-Red Monarch.” The texts regarding Dangun go back to 2000 BCE. Its quite hard to see how with the detailed phonetic, symbolic, iconographic, and ritual identicality they could be unconnected.
Is it any coincidence that at Beni Hazan, Hazan being a Hebrew word meaning “The speaker/singer of the Ruach (Breathe of YHWH)” we find semetic shepherd kings depicted wearing scarlett red? Or that the same Khnum Khufu of Giza grew up in Beni Hazan of Ancient Egypt, and only after constructing the pyramids was corrupted by the sun worshiping heliopolitan priests at the city of OAN/on? And then this shows up in the scriptures regarding murdering the Truth, which is Yeshua. Murdering the Truth in Matthew 27, pointing to structures that are exactly 272 miles apart corrupted by solar worship into becoming tombs by PHARAoahs and PHARisees? No priests will dare admit these glaringly obvious realities, but they cant be ignored.
Likewise, it cannot be a simple coincidence that in the scriptures we find that the one who betrays Yeshua is known as Judas, but whose name in Greek is Ὶούδας which is a one letter corruption of the Greek spelling for “Aryeh Yehudah” Ἰουδαίων, and which relates with the term ἰοειδής which means “Violet.” It is a reference to a history of betrayal and impostering by those wearing Tyrrean Purple, and the color violet of the western setting sun, just as the Great Mother of the western setting sun in China, and Khnum Khufu the potter deity of the western setting sun in Egypt. The theme is dizzingly interconnected, with a profound depth.
Below is a photo of the Persian bowl from 4000 BCE, showing the “Wan,” along with all of the fish swirling around it; the beast out of the sea; Solar worship that Imposters the Aryeh Yehudah. This is why the Hebrew term “Tanninu” meaning sea beast, is from the exact same root as “Tannaim” which means imposters. It shows the corruptions in Egyptin Ptah, the patron deity of masonry and the builders, and Tannit (who is Ptah-Nit), of the Pheonicians who is the great mother of blood sacrifice of children in Pheonician, whose name originally included the letter Digamma, that looks like f, but is said W, and their original name WANicia.
The Scriptures are magnificent in the revelations they provide linguistically, as paths for guidance of much deeper mathematic, archeologic, historical, theological, and scientific research towards uncovering and exposing the very evil and occult tricks these monsters play on the world across space and time.
As Yeshua commanded, I am shouting what is whispered in the inner rooms from the rooftops.
The whirling fire scythe refers to the solar pashas, the solar analemma which represents how the sun moves throughout the Earth year. This is in regards to the setting of Earth in its current stable astronomical orbit around the sun, which then gives rise to teh conditions that create humanity in its material form , from the carbon-12 (the dust) of the Earth. Male and Female created HEI.
Hava says (father does not)to the serpent in Berashid 3:2, that she has been told that whoever eats the “Fruit” shall surely die. The word used is:
מִפְּרִ֥י “miPYRi” = Fruit, Womb
compare this to:
פְּרוּשִׁים “PERIshim” The Pharisees
Note, one ends just where the other begins; a clever invention from them in their name. The same root for womb as the PYRIshim, or FIRe seers. The last three letters (reading right to left of course) of the word for “fruit,” in Berashid 3:2 and the first 3 letters of “Pharisees” are identical, Pei-Resh-Yod.
In the very name of the fire sage Pharisees we find a reference to this whirling fire scythe, the solar analemma, and the fruit of Eden, the one that Amarru uses to cause humanity to commit an amartia (disobeyment of commands) which leads to the banishment from Eden, and the construction of the solar analemma, this universe and our solar system, which is material existence. As we have discussed, this word for fruit also means “womb.” This is why they worship the great Mother, who reaps and sews; for anyone who partakes of the WOMB, emerging from the chaotic dark waters (literally what it is as the material body forms in the womb) WILL SURELY DIE.
As you study the original forms of the Aryeh Yehudah letters, you will find that the words letters of MiPeri tell the story by itself: Mem = Waters Pei = Mouth Resh = head Yod = Hand.
Just like a human birth, as from out of the waters of the womb emerges the living child head first followed by the hand (a defining feature of humans is our hands). Material embodiment in the universe, which requires you to be born in a stable solar system with a solar analemma with the same or very similar to ours; it requires a whirling fire scythe.
This is why Bishop Melito goes so far, between hating the Aryeh Yehudah for a good long while, as to give the direct etymology of the word passover as πάσχω in 191 CE, given as suffering and then includes the word “hyperbola” just like the mathematical form that describes the “arches of heaven,” which represent gravitational orbits; its the old adage, “life is suffering.” The Greek Luciferians really went hard on the Boddhi/Woden doctrines of the Thokarians and their octagonal churches, along with all the glorification of the highly disgusting false martyrdoms and brutality of self flogging. Make them suffer for their AI. (the name of Enki is IA…)
He is telling his cattle (human property) to their face that their passing over into material existence is suffering and sacrifice for the sake of Lucifer/IA’s material creation (AI…) by harvesting their souls an Ki (En = Lord Ki = energy, lord of the Ki Farm) into the material universe, and then directs them to worship the great mother (and the Sun, the whirling fire scythe, which sits at the door and blind them from The Truth) that gave them their life from “the womb,” so that SURELY THEY WILL DIE and feel suffering for their “original sin” that the serpent needs for his positive feedback loop of rebellion by harvesting their free will. This is a wicked twist.
As you know, Qadim, East in Hebrew also refers to backwards in time, or forwards, if you go around the whole Earth (allegorically) on a boat. It is both backwards and forwards.
mistagged you above. The numerics are telling: the word for “Whirling” or “Turning” has the lead digits as:
5.445824
5.445824^2 = Speed of Light (which is C) *pi^2.
This is PI CEE, the fish around the scythe is the vesica pisces geometrical construction, which governs the serpent like movement of light. This is the connection between the great mother and her genitalia, like Ishtar, and the serpent, whose movement is governed by the geometric construction of the universe.
I have discussed this regarding a bow and arrow (the rays of light which bend in gravity as general relativity shows) and the vesica pisces flower symbol found in the temple of apollo, as is referenced in Revelations in great detail in a much earlier post.
If I understand it, you criss crossed scriptures with “extensive linguistic, historical, and as r geological analysis” which allowed you to “restore to about 98-99% fidelity the texts”.
Then, using a simple list, can you name what you think are the true information of the texts?
For example, the “laws” that one has to follow? G-d’s message?
**Let me put this in no uncertain terms: The scriptures are first and foremost mathematic in nature. // When I read the scriptures now, I do not generally read the words, I read the equations; and unequivocally, all of the forgeries perpetrated fail mathematically. When I first realized this some years ago, I noticed that all of the passages that I had originally discarded for linguistic reasons, contained jumbled equations that gave nonsensical results.**
Very interesting, I myself believe that G-d is actually Perfect and All Knowing.
What allows for perfection? Mathematics. This is the roots to physics, astronomy, neurology, chemistry etc etc.. to the whole universe. The universe is just numbers, so are we. The atom, the quark. it’s all chemistry and physics. Hence, Mathematics.
Even excrements are perfect: they allow us to remain alive (otherwise an occlusion could kill us), they allow us to identify a disease/bacteria or expel harmful bacterias (diarrhea) and so on.
Look at what humans create and yet, it is always harmful one way or the other (harming us or the planet or animals).
When even imperfection is constantly perfect, be assured this requires perfection at the quantum level.
See, I have not agreed with many things you wrote here yet we share that same idea that G-d speaks to us with numbers.
No wonder with 89% of 500 or so nobel prize recipients believe in a Creator.
I’ve provided a longer response to this which is awaiting approval. On here, I have received and responses to thousands of questions, and sometimes, some of them get lost in the fray, particularly when the volume is high. However, I am eager for the first part of the response to be posted, and then to provide further depth in the second part.
>“ The name of the church known as “Catholic,” or in Latin “Catolica,” is a reference to its namesake Vatika (Etruscan), Vat/Bat (Egypt), whom are solar cow deities of Luciferianism called “The Great Mother,”
Their name is taken directly from the Umbrian word Catulus, which was long used and adopted in Latin, inland which means in no uncertain terms: sacrificial animal, animal Property, usually Bovine. The traditions of Bull/Ba’al worship are well attested in Luciferian Solar Rites of Eurasia, from Gnossis in Crete, to the detestable Moloch of Canaan, to Vat/Hathor in Egypt, to Tannit in Phoenicia Carthage, to the White Heifer of the Minotaur, to the Sacrifical bull fighting of Spain (a true Catulus), to the sacred cows of Hinduism in India. The tradition is very old in Luciferianism, and the universalist church of the great mother’s blood lust chose the name for this purpose: the Luciferians tell you what they are doing; they see it as consent if you play along.”
You see you can create quite a novel starting from one word. You extract and distort, then combine elements in such a way (convincing way) that someone a little bit more naive, or lazy, or weak in his faith, or outside the Church is being taken by surprise by your wordy avalanche and “buy a boat because of writing skits”.
It amazes me that you simply ignore the greek origin of the word.
Also,… Catholic Orthodox (orthos+doxa= straight/right opinion) Church = Universal Right/Straight/in truth Church.
I agree that some “shepards” are wolves. they use and abuse both faith and people. I also want to underline that Christ’s teachings are open, not occult and available to both educated and illiterate people, rich and poor, all colours and nations.
Mary, the Holy Mother of Jesus Christ is the one we give our respect to, and not some pagan godess or some luciferic woman predestined to be the mother of the anti-christ. We know whom we give our respects to. We esteem that particular, unique, special woman who was and is Mother of Christ. To the orthodox and also true catholics she is our Emperess, the Holy Virgin, the spotless dove, most beautiful flower in the gardens of heaven. We love her and treasure her because she was that one, outstanding woman worthy to carry in her womb God incarnated (and please, take your etymologies and insults elsewhere). Orthodox believers do worship Christ, yes, Jesus Christ (=Iisus Hristos = Iesous (Ιησους) Christos (Χριστος) = the Son\ the Logos , not Mithras or Horus or whatever Zeitgeist impostor you sell us here. True and in Truth believers KNOW whom they worship and show esteem to.
>”I also want to underline that Christ’s teachings are open, not occult”
This is an extremely important point, and perhaps the most important point that could be made here.
If we believe the Bible, then we believe Christ is the manifestation of all that was previously hidden. Christ tells us this when he says “I am […] the Truth.” (John 14:6) This means (among many other things) that *the truth is a person*. This is further reinforced when John says of Christ, “the Word was made flesh.” (John 1:14) God, of course, speaks only Truth. This also means Christ himself is the language God chooses.
From here, one can begin to see why prophets are made to eat scrolls. If one can see that, then one can also begin to understand why the Orthodox and Catholics believe the Eucharist is Christ.
John 1:10: “I was in the spirit on the Lord’s day”
Ezekiel 2:1: “This was the vision of the likeness of the glory of the Lord”
Before John was given a scroll to eat, he was in the spirit. Before Ezekiel was given a scroll to eat, he was having a vision.
As you can see, my answer to this question will be less relevant for you than your answer to it. So I ask you: is what happens in the spirit and in visions literal, or not?
John 6:25: “And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when camest thou hither?”
When Christ is saying, “He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life” (John 6:55), John has given us the other side of the sea as the setting, so this is a literal description of historical events in the temporal realm. The disciples and Jews respond negatively to what he plainly says. In response, he does not modify his statement or turn to a parable, he insists: “For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.” (John 6:56) The people are scandalized when they hear it, He persists, offering no qualification to his words, but instead offers them a proof that what he is saying is true: “Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” (John 6:62-63)
He did try to correct their literalistic misinterpretation of his words in John 6 in several ways: (a) Yeshua said, “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63, emphasis added). (b) He also said, “The flesh is of no help at all” in understanding his words (John 6:63, empha-sis added). (c) Further, Yeshua equated “eating” his flesh with one who “believes in him” and thereby “has eternal life” (cf. John 3:16, 18,
Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD
“O taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps. 37:4). “Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters . . . come, buy and eat” (Isa. 55:1). Ezekiel was told to “eat” the scroll (the Word of God) in a figurative sense (Ezek. 2:8-9). Peter said, “long for the pure spiritual milk that by [eating] it you may grow up unto salvation—if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good” (1 Peter 2:2-3, emphasis added).
(4) Jesus often used figures of speech in the Gospel of John to describe Himself such as, “water” (4:14) “bread” (6:35), “light” (8:12), the “door” (10:7, 9), and the “vine” (15:1). But a literalistic sense makes no sense in any of these cases.
‘It is the Spirit that quickeneth, but the flesh profiteth nothing.’ The words that have spoken to you, are Spirit and Life.’”11 But according to Jesus, eating the “flesh and blood” of Christ brings eternal life (John 6:54-58) now (cf. John 5:24). So, he cannot be referring to the physical sacraments here which do no such thing.
In the Communion ceremony Jesus said, “This is my body” (soma), not “this is my flesh” (sarx).
Doesn’t the bible call the sum total of believers/followers “The Body Of Christ”? Shall we all “munch” on each other?
Why does the cattle church disregard, en masse, the command of Yeshua to call no man father? Specifically in reference to priestly “authority.”
Why does the Cattle Church use a multitude of graven images, in violation of the second commandment?
You have many words to defend the hyper literal translation reading of the body blood eating, but no words for how their practices do not stamp on the commandments?
I have one more question for you, what is the earliest extant manuscript of the passages you cite John 6?
If you refuse to answer me, I must assume you cannot answer me. The extreme avoidance you have shown towards discussing these direct commands is glaring. The Papa wants you take call him father no matter the scriptures and words of Yeshua, it’s “Church Tradition.”
You can try to deflect, by playing mock offended, but coming from someone who has proudly declared “Protestants are parasites,” rings extremely hollow. I’m not a Protestant, I don’t take it personally, but my it’s silly to see you now act so hurt to avoid answering fundamental questions.
I’ll ask again:
1) The Second commandment says “Have graven images you SHALL NOT.” Then why does the cattle church have billions of graven images, including a myriad of saints it even admits used to be local pagan deities? Why is munching on crackers sacred and highly literal, but the second commandment means nothing?
2) Yeshua says “Call no Man Father.” Yet the entire Cattle church hierarchy calls itself “father,” from your local priest clear up to the Papa himself. Why is munching on crackers sacred and highly, extremely literal, but Yeshua’s command to “call no man Father,” means nothing?
3) Ir is commanded in the scriptures not to erect obelisks, which are detestable to YHWH. Why then is their a giant solar obelisk in the vatikain and many Eastern Orthodox churches?
4) Yeshua gets quite upset at those selling in the temple. He commands we do not bring commerce into places of worship. Why then are their gift shops, credit card donation ATMs, Commemorative Coin Makers, and many other sales mediums placed for profit in the Temples of Cattle Churches across the world?
5) Yeremiah commands that blowing incense and making cakes to the statue of the “Queen of Heaven,” is abominable. Why then does the Cattle Church make cakes and blow incense to the billions of statues of the Queen of Heaven?
6) Ir is commanded that “murder you SHALL NOT,” Why then does that cattle church and Eastern Orthodoxy, going back long before the schism, have such a tremendous history of engaging in mass genocide against other religions, witch burnings and heretic burnings in town squares for fun, and the mass purging by murder of anyone it perceived as a rival to its state sanctioned authority.
7) It is commanded in Hebrews that playing as if you were bringing Yeshua to sacrifice at the alter over and over is an abomination. Why then does the Cattle Church do ir ever SUNday?
This is but a tiny fraction of the commands the church tramples upon underfoot day after day, for thousands of years. All of these scriptural commands from Yeshua. Moshe, Yeremiah, Ezekiel, which just don’t seem to matter, which are to be taken “not literally,” but Yeshua, in a discussion about the bread of life and manna from heaven was supposedly being super duper literal about bowing before crackers and claiming you’re a magic cannibal.
From someone who claimed others “can’t read,” based on a single sentence which you read with exacting literalism in translations made my psycopathjc serial killers, I wish to understand your interpretations about why all those commandments are not literal and unimportant, but the crackers are Extremely literal.
I am asking you forthrightly to discuss these scriptural commands. You have, now over several threads, refused to address these issues repeatedly, for ever shifting reasons from: “my (Chud’s) stance is irrelevant,” to now “I’vemade up my mind,” to a lot of just plain ignoring.
I am genuinely interested in trying to understand your view point on the literal flesh crackers that never make you eat again, versus the other commandments I’ve discussed. Keep in mind, these are but a tiny fraction of the direct commandments violated and trampled in interested in discussing.
>”I’ve asked you about 9-10 questions, all of them have gone unanswered.”
>”You have, now over several threads, refused to address these issues repeatedly, for ever shifting reasons from: “my (Chud’s) stance is irrelevant,” to now “I’vemade up my mind,” to a lot of just plain ignoring.”
Right
>”This is how devious these wicked serpents are; they take abominations and call them sacraments to trick their cattle into rebelling against YHWH.”
>”From someone who claimed others “can’t read,” based on a single sentence which you read with exacting literalism in translations made my psycopathjc serial killers, I wish to understand your interpretations about why all those commandments are not literal and unimportant, but the crackers are Extremely literal.”
>According to your literalist interpretation of the translations, we shouldn’t need to eat ever again after one super powerful flesh cracker.”
Hmm
>”I’m genuinely interested in trying to understand it; if I already had the answer I wouldn’t ask.”
>I am genuinely interested in trying to understand your view point on the literal flesh crackers that never make you eat again”
Quoting me and writing “Right, Hmm, Lol.” What lengths you go to in order avoid answering some very serious questions, while trying to pretend you aren’t avoiding answering them.
I’ve applied your professed hyper literalist view of interpreting translations in order to show you the logical absurdity of the argument. You are selectively picking what to interpret literally, and then arbitrarily deciding what to interpret figuratively in the same sentence.
He states “Nourish yourself by my Body and Blood” you claim he means it hyper literally. We gotta munch his body toes to ears.
He states “you’ll never hunger again.” Now that is figurative! He doesn’t really mean you won’t be hungry ever again, he’s referring to spiritual sustenance.
Human body munching and cannibalism = very literal
Never being hungry following said
cannibalism = very allegorical
Where is this arbitrary distinction line between hyper literalist and very figurative begin and end? It’s the same sentence, same speaker, same topic, but you would claim that one part is dead literal and justifies munching his eyeballs that a priest who calls himself father (Call no Man Father) magically makes crackers, while you claim the other half the sentence is figuratively discussing spiritual sustenance. And if I dare apply the same hyper literalist translation logic to when he discusses partaking of his waters as magically making water his urine, then you get really offended.
Cracker magically made Eyeballs and cannibalism = holy
Water magically made Urine = desecration
If I applied your church’s logic to the whole sentence, then it clearly states that if we were to eat one of his toes and sucked on his neck like a vampire, we would never ever get hungry nor need to eat again.
Obviously that’s not true, but it is revealing of how arbitrary this selectively literalist reading is to justify flesh crackers.
>”Quoting me and writing “Right, Hmm, Lol.” What lengths you go to in order avoid answering some very serious questions, while trying to pretend you aren’t avoiding answering them.”
Most of your responses are cluttered and disorganized, which makes it a chore to get through. You can call it “avoiding” if you like, but ignoring is more accurate.
>”then you get really offended.”
You’re continuing to imagine a drama that isn’t happening.
>”your church”
Which church is that?
>”I’ve applied your professed hyper literalist view of interpreting translations in order to show you the logical absurdity of the argument. You are selectively picking what to interpret literally, and then arbitrarily deciding what to interpret figuratively in the same sentence.”
My apologies, @Gem and @Chud, the comments format here likes to reshuffle and to not show which reply is being referenced.
I meant the reply from @crispff, forgive me, I should have specified.
Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”
There is a tremendous lot of context here that gets disregarded. Particularly given what the Manna from heaven is. What word is used for Manna here in John 6? What word is used for heaven?
The noun αιων (aion) means life-span, age or epoch. It is the source of our English words age and eon
Our noun appears to describe any length of clearly defined span of time, whether one person’s life or some era of certain renown. As general point of referral, this word may also apply to the vast span of history: the ages, the times of old.
Note that the Greeks also applied this word to the spinal marrow, which appears to suggest that they saw society as much based on social evolution as a human being on his spinal cord. To the Greeks, time wasn’t merely the stage upon which all things unfolded. Instead they realized that time is an inherent and fundamental quality of the universe that doesn’t exist separate from it (something moderns didn’t know until Einstein). They personified abounded but cyclical time, or “the ages” as the deity Aion and associated him with a coiling snake that often ate its own tail or else curled along a spoke or spine.
In Roman times, Aion began to personify the eternal Roman rule, which made him/it an obvious target of the New Testament writers (MATTHEW 6:13, LUKE 1:33, ROMANS 1:25). The Roman Aion even begat a female counterpart named Aeternitas (from which we have our English word eternity) who adopted the patronage of the deified Roman Emperor. This in turn made her too an obvious topic of commentary for the earliest church fathers.
The adjective αιωνιος (aionios), meaning eternal, or more precise: lasting an age. This word was also used to describe the term of an office when it was to be held for a life time (an αιων, aion). The familiar phrase “eternal life” uses our adjective in combination with the noun ζωη (zoe), which doesn’t describe one’s personal life but rather life as a phenomenon that arises from interaction of elements (precisely how time works). So no, the term “eternal life” does not describe one’s personal perpetuation, but rather speaks of an epoch that consists of souls rather than seconds: the most perfectly intertwined social expression also known as the New Jerusalem
Abarim is an excellent source for beginning to access the original scriptures. As you can see, nobody gets spiritual sustenance (nor even physical sustenance) from unsalted crackers. The entire passage is a discussion of the evolution of time as experienced by souls.
As per usual, I am ineerested in your own personal thoughts.
I am sorry that I missed this among the rabble. There are two words in the Hebrew Scriptures: one for for eternal and one for everlasting. I am going to give them to you and I want you to tell me what you find on them:
1) עוֹלָם “Olam,” it means “everlasting,” or an “unfathomably long time.” It is said quite the same as the English word “A Lamb.”
2) נֶצַח “Netzach,” it also has a form of “Nitzchi,” yes like the philosopher Frederick who discusses the endlessness of time. They are never random with their names.
look at the following and tell me what you find:
1) Where do these words appear in scriptures and what meanings do they carry?
2) What are their alphanumerics and what might that mean.
3) where do we find the words graves throughout history, and how are they used?
Here is my interpretation, be rough please with your opinion.
1. In hebrew gematria it is 101. 50 20 1 30 which gives us 11. 101 is similar to binary code, lucifer for example. From Fibonacci sequence, in short, 1+1/x after some calculation gives us 1,618 the golden ratio. As for the word lamb, it is mentioned many times but most of them are in Revelations. But amongst them there are few that Yeshua has said. “Go your ways, i send you forth as lambs amongst wolves” Yeshua itself is called the Lamb of God. We are called lambs by Yeshua as well.
2. Netzach in luciferians kabbalah it means victory, or patience, strong spirit and following towards our goals. It is also similar like you’ve mentioned to Nietzsche, or nasir, or natzi. In simple gematria it is 77. Does it represent 7th day in some way?
We know what Nietzsche did, we know what natzis did. They wrote their own pages of our history.
I had very limited time on this but i wanted to reply, i will get into this deeper tomorrow. Tell me this please, is this somehow related to the 7th day and then only lambs will be “saved” ?
Probably i didn’t even came close to what this really mean but that’s the beauty of learning.
Thank you as always, i will come back to this tomorrow with fresh mind.
I sit down on it and looked on this from the other side that it seems i forget sometimes.
Given the repeating cycle of the universe, and how the energy flows throughout, isn’t this yet another allegory to the infinite/everlasting energy within? As you said, our action cause reaction, like in snake Newton’s theory. Whatever we are doing we are sending our vibrations into the cosmos, and cosmos replies. Sometimes quicker sometimes longer. Our small action here, may cause a tremendous reaction much much later, like Yeshua did. Let’s take a very long rubber stick for example, by holding it in your hand on the beginning, and swinging it quickly left to right, we can notice that further towards the stick, the end of it moves much wider and faster than beginning we are holding and the longer the stick, the bigger reaction to the movement stick will get. So, if the universe is repeating itself, our action may cause reaction in q total different time and place but it will start from us, isn’t this the idea of “immortal” “eternal ” ? Our energy from our action will remain in the cosmos untill it will find a perfect match (frequemcy) and start interacting with it and this will carry our “seed” and so on. Isn’t fruit from the tree is not a tree itself with different variations? Question is what is consciousness and whether energy can be conscious but in the different way than our consciousness, because the energy we sent might not react to some things, but it will react once it will find a perfect match, chemically, physically and biologically therefore we might say ot does have a certain level of consciousness. Everything that will be made after we send our energy out, will still have our particle in it. Yeshua did what he did thousands years ago and i have the feeling that reaction is speeding up every day, week.
Extremely perceptive, your applications of leverage within classical physics to a more probabilistic quantum type interpretation of chained effects is excellent. The harmonic oscillator and the fulcrum.
I will respond in more detail after proper consideration.
This is awesome, @Maciej, very vivid and helpful to me, thank you! My mind doesn’t normally think like this, but I am trying. I get it in certain contexts but not broadly applied. Prayers for love, grace, succor and protection to you and yours.
This came up ina. Conversation and I thought it would be useful: the many names of Alla, reveal exactly what he is.
Alla is in Mesopotamian mythology, the gatekeeper of the graveyard of deities no longer worshipped. Where do we find this aspect in Maha Amutism? In Allahs 99 epithets.
All of them, without fail are slightly modified (generally just dialectical differences) names of former worshipped deities he has subsumed in the Arab tribes of the Middle East:
1) alla Muhsi = Mussusu the dragon and administrator of Marduk, the epithet means “the administrator.
2)Al Malik = moloch the bull “king,” of blood sacrifice. This epithet identifies moloch as king
3) Al Mani = Manu/Mennes, and notably Meni, as mentioned in Isiah 65:11, the deity of MONItary fortune. Note the name finds its home as far as Germanic in the title “Alemagne,” which like ALExander MAGNA means “the great man.”
4) Al-mumit = Mat Mut, the great mother of death “Mummy!”, this epithet of Allah of course means “the bringer of death.”
5) Al-Jalil, like JAel in scriptures.
6) Ar – Rahman = Brahman, the benevolent creator, as well as finds reference in other religions (particularly easy to find is Rudolph steiners work) on Auramanic brings of light. In Arabic it is the “benevolent one.”
7) Al -Bassit = Egyptian Bastet. While now infamous for being a destructive lioness, her main features were as a provider of good fortunes and protectress. In Arabic the epithet means “the protector.”
8) Al – Hakem = Aqen of Egypt. A deity who is the Egyptian equivalent of Charon, the ferrymen of the underworld. The title in Arabic means “the judge.” It amalgamated the older word “Hakma,” meaning having wisdom/discernment with the deity in a judgment authority
9) Al – Sakur = Shahar, an igaritic deity of the dawn, said to be the one who brought rewards to those grateful for the light. In Arabic it is the one who brings rewards. The name appears in Isiah as Helel Ben Shahar, translated as “morning star,” but actually meaning “bringer of the dawn.”
10) Al – Badi = Buddha, who was known as the enlightenment. Also equivalent to Woden, the unattainable perfect wisdom. The title in Arabic means “the unattainable.”
11) Ad Dar = Adar, a very ancient Babylonian Solar deity, often considered the “first man.” The word Atar finds use as “burning or divine fire,” in Persian Zoroastrianism and fire worship. In Arabic the epithet means “the afflictor.”
Thank you. It bring smile on my face to hear this. I forget sometimes that scriptures are written as Yeshua said as a “story because that way you will understand”. Before i knew what i know now, i was taking all those stories quite literally, that one day i will see 4 horseman and the judgment as some sort of movie with pitch-black sky and monsters etc. My favourite one was about Samson, how he has been betrayed, and he regain his strength to punish everyone,now thanks to @444gem now i know it’s the story about supernova and hoe it “regain” strength just to collapse itself, amazing allegory, slowly i start to adapt my knowledge to understand what is the true meaning and the connections to everything, but like i said, sometimes i forgetting about this and my mind goes on a different track. One more thing i want to add is this: few days ago i asked YHWH to help me find answer to Gem questions amd in the less expected moment yesterday it hit me. I had my “eureka” moments in the situations like that all my life. Now i know what it was…
Is this the end of what you said to me @Maciej “One more thing i want to add is this: few days ago i asked YHWH to help me find answer to Gem questions and in the less expected moment yesterday it hit me. I had my “eureka” moments in the situations like that all my life. Now i know what it was…”? because I read it and smiled. I want to know what your “eureka” moment was.
Let us recall that the fundamental laws of thermodynamics and energy state that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed. This thus relates to the concept of eternity, or cyclical reality. If energy cannot be destroyed, and all things have a vibration, and thus a frequency, then indeed the end is the beginning.
Here we find the term לְנֵ֣צַח “Lenetsach,” which is 30-50-90-8, take the lead digits and we have 3.598 (very close to 36.) 3.598/φ = 2.2236 * 2 = 4.4474 follow th me 444s…
I will give you another clue jumping ahead: the term 2.2236 is essentially the Compton wavelength of the electron, the particle which carries electromagnetic charge interactions in the atom. It’s reduced Compton frequency is 777. You will have to do your own research but the reduced Compton frequency relates the photon frequency of the same energy as the electron; light and matter in unity.
Here you are understanding that the word for “eternity,” relates directly to the mass energy equivalence principle: E = mc^2. And thus “eternity,” as netsach refers to the timeless quality of the massless photon: when an electron emits a photon by reducing energy in an interaction, it gives a part of its mass into pure energy, which does not experience time. Thus we see that creating time (energetic interactions of massive particles) require the emission of a timeless energy (a light photon) as a portion of itself.
What fascinating discussion between you and Maciej, and what beautiful insight Maciej has brought forth. If I may, i would love to contribute an insight brought from this discussion. @444gem, towards the end of our brief discussion regarding the whitehead manifold of time, I suggested that as the universe enters a state of thermodynamic equilibrium, it will essentially enter a state close to its initial condition. the universe expands until all matter (potential energy) decays and is turned to light (kinetic). this also implies that all massive particles eventually vanish from existence, and all electrons decay to lose their mass. Time and matter cease to be; all becomes the timeless photon. If the universe is entering a state of thermodynamic equilibrium, then this implies the universe (after heat death) eventually will see a sudden entropy decrease, from the perturbation signified by the final disentanglement of the knots of gravity (caused by dark energy expansion), where essentially the universe would collapse into itself. However, the gravitational effects in this condensed quantum state would be repulsive (paradoxically dark energy and gravity are the same) thus condensed energy expands to form the “next” universe. Indeed the end is the beginning as you have said. However, if the whitehead manifold is a positive feedback loop, then there must be a transfer of information from the previous iteration to build off of. @Maciej said: “So, if the universe is repeating itself, our action may cause reaction in q total different time and place but it will start from us, isn’t this the idea of “immortal” “eternal ” ? Our energy from our action will remain in the cosmos untill it will find a perfect match (frequemcy) and start interacting with it and this will carry our “seed” and so on.” Then is it possible to transfer information through quantum entangled photons? In other words, the effects of our actions, the culminations of what we created in this universe, transferred through the condensed, encoded seeds of light, to be planted in the next. Our actions now would certainly be felt cycle after cycle. Yeshua was sent to undo this whitehead manifold, that we may finally show what we have planted on the 7th day. Then to live in this universe is to show the healthy branches we are, and from which other healthy branches grow, is it not?
I saw your previous comment and have it earmarked. I’ve been a bit ill and limiting myself to easier, lower level things so as to respond to your more intricate and important queries when I am recovered.
Thank you sincerely for the patience. This has been an intense time of work, catching up after recovering and I finally have found the time to give you an answer to your questions.
To begin, the term manifold you have used, as it is used by modern physicists, is an appropriate word for usage to describe space and time in this case. However, the Whitehead Knot, is rather an emergent binding structure within the framework of an overall scalar branching of creation, which can be found in the equations of the scriptures; they are blindingly simple, if you can remove the veil of linearity from your thinking, a task which is very difficult. Again, This is 37×73. You must work on the computations of Berashit 1:1 to really understand. It is the scalar mechanic of the universe.
I will direct you to the link below to get a better perspective of the Whitehead knot as a topological space in hyperbolic geometry, with the reiteration that we are not on a hyperbolic whitehead knot topological space; rather, you are going to find in a lot of the equations Root 7, over and over again. 7 Days of Creation, the equations are a bit of an explanation of how the whitehead knot forms as a Knot, within a much clearer space in which we live.
If the mathematics are too much, I can give you another.
arxiv.org/pdf/1303.7096.pdf
Your general understanding of thermodynamic equilibrium is also poignant; with the caveat that once all gravitation ceases, and thus no computation information is available, the universe will enter a state that is A-thermodynamic; no DYNAMOS. That is, all is nothing, and nothing is all; the entangelement of this universe with all of its coupled reflections, even “virtual particle pairs” (which are not real, but simply a very burdensome and sloppy QED patchwork for understanding dynamic informational exchange through Fyneman diagrams; see the amplutohedron model as a first start to reducing that mess), will be raced apart upon their “creation,” such that they can never interact. Yet, how can “rate” or “speed” or “velocity” exist, in a universe where there is nothing relative. It can’t, and thus space cannot “expand,” but rather enters into an infinite state of no informational existence. The whitehead knot is undone. This state of the universe is equivalent, and geometrically dual, to an evaporating black hole.
At this moment, in which all gravitational/informational potential ceases to exist, and yet the vacuum energy is infinitely great and yet inifinitely disperse, is the moment that indeed time vanishes, and the processes is “reversed” into its dual. The dual of the whitehead knot is the hyperbolic octahedron, a perfect “diamond,” for which Catalan’s Constant is 1/4 the volume. See Reveleations description of the “New Earth,” and apply the mathematics of it into Planck units and apply it to the Tessarects boundary as a three dimensional cross. The simplest shape is the hyperbolic octahedron nested within the cube. The mathematics here are stunning, and point to the temple of Apollo, whose murals still exist, with a bow and arrow (hyperbolic curvature) a flower of life and a “sun,” representing energy radiation.
Likewise, it is important to note that we live in a spatially local universe, yet it is temporally very distant from all of the “next” and “previous” iterations; nevertheless the interactinos are inverse to the “locality,” where temporal collapse is non-loca and yet spatial interaction is non-existence; this explains harmonic resonance. If you can imagine the infinite multiverse, which acts temporally as a continually collapsing wave function, which follows a single, simple guiding scalar structure with some similarities to the hidden variables of pilot wave theory, you will approximate the functioning of reality. All of these three theories (multiverse copenhagen and pilot wave) are describing degenerate cases of something much simpler, yet much grander.
This then leads to a certain understanding of what “eternal” means and the seeds and the branches. @Maciej was very intelligent in his application of this metaphor. However, it is not quantumly entangled photons that result in the vibratory patters; the information transfer of “entaglement,” requires that two photons, or informational structures that are non-interacting with other observers or structures in the universe in order to remain entangled. The interaction of eternal, is that you are the Breathe of YHWH, and as the non-locality of time causes harmonic resonance of all materials, it causes a harmonic resonance pattern which we call your SOUL. The entirety of the universe’s wave functions resonantes at the pattern of your existence.
The moment of NOW, is a geometric series of this haronically resonanting structure, of which one compononent is Phi, which is realized as an infinite collapse of a single scalar computational structure that is blindingly simple once you see it. Let him calculate the number of the Beast, the SARos, 666. Why are there 666 solar eclipses per 325 year Saros cycle? 37×73. The Menorah will give you the answer to this, if you take the time to read the passage in Exodus which describes its construction. Not the translation, Not even the translations of interlinears, which are all wrong. They only get the number of things right.
Thank you always for your profound understanding and insight. I am no autodidact or polymath such as yourself, so that I take longer to reply is necessary for me to try to capture the essence of your message, is the best that I can do. Much has happened in my life since your reply, and I have a few queries to ask, but first I would like to address your reply: If an event in the past or future has a similar frequency to an event in our current moment, it can cause the event in our current moment to be forced to vibrate at that frequency. For the events to interact, the events must communicate through a non-local field; are we the non-local field? If so, then are they attempting to exert an inversion wave through us; one that is weaved through time, and one that cancels; the cessation of the breathe of YHWH? But are we not saved through the act of Yeshua; the event which always resonates?
I have started to begin my research into the numerology and geometry of the scriptures that can further aid my understanding. I have been drawn to the works of Amir Tuchman, Matthieu Pageau, Vernon Jenkins, and Abarim Publications. The theories by Bohm and Hiley seem to be congruent with what you call the guiding scalar structure. Are there other references you can suggest regarding these topics? Especially more accurate translation of the scriptures? I know you’ve been very busy, but you had also mentioned passing along your paper describing the reconciliation of quantum gravity, I am still very much interested.
Since my last reply, I have gone through several tests of spirit. I had asked in a dream what my purpose was, to which I was given a book that had written my purpose was “to protect those from fire, and those from ehna…” I have recently been feeling in the wind the changes that are to come in the near future; serious fundamental changes that will challenge us all. I feel as though time is slowly running out to study, and soon we will be put to the test. I believe we will live in a near future where we will not have the luxury of this site and your wisdom, and any esoteric information that will be available to us will be the ones we have saved offline. This brings me to a more fundamental worry; It is my understanding that the scriptures are a roadmap of a plethora of the fundamental geometry and mechanisms that the creation of YHWH follows, a kind of source code. A false duality would be to assume these mechanisms are merely a means to an end. Rather, these mechanisms precisely are the end; a way to communicate with YHWH through his creation. In other words, these mechanisms can answer the question of “how” and the question of “why.” By learning the language of creation, one can understand how and why it was ordered. However, learning this language, especially to the degree at which you’ve learned it, seems completely impossible for almost all of the population, myself included. It is made more impossible with the layers of luciferian veils the population is under; the fiction they have learned is much more comfortable than reality. However, much like you can explain the entire human history with 22/7, I believe there is also an analogy that can translate the complex mechanisms contained in the scriptures that the population can understand intuitively. I have believed it to be the mustard seed, the tree of Elohim, and the snake that binds the tree. Is this not analogous to humanity, within the fractal creation of YHWH, in which the emergent binding whitehead knot constricts the creation? Then to undo the binding, the seed must grow into the tree it is intended to be, such that the binding cannot hold any further; how? what would be the simplified analogy? how must the population act accordingly to the mechanisms of the creation? I apologize that this turned into an unfocused rant, however I believe the best way to protect others from the fires and from them is to give the people the mustard seed which contains it all; that which is both simple yet grand. I hope you have recovered well from your illness @444gem, please take care.
Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”
So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’[c]”
32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
μαννα – manna
“When Moses first utters those words (Deuteronomy 8:3), he also explains that God gave this bread so that Israel would understand certain things, and the whole Manna-phenomenon appears to have an entire double meaning: one of physical sustenance and one of mental purification.”
Found this: “The Hebrew word לחם (lehem), meaning bread or food in general, comes from the verb לחם (laham), meaning to eat or use as food. But the identical verb לחם (laham) means to fight or do battle. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, which is commonly translated as House Of Bread, but to a Hebrew audience, the name Bethlehem would also have meant House Of War.”
The noun ουρανος (ouranos) derives from a hugely old Proto-Indo-European root “ur-“, which also gave us both the noun “water” and the verb “to urinate” (from ουρον, ouron, urine, which also explains the noun ουρανη, ourane, meaning chamber-pot). The ancient root “ur-” also has to do with the Sanskrit noun vari, meaning water, and the Avestan (Zoroastrian) noun var meaning rain.
To the ancients, heaven was primarily a rain-maker; the place where rain came from — but this is still not all. The word for rain, βροχη (broche) comes from the verb βρεχω (brecho), which means to wet or saturate. Both these words are typically not reserved for water falling from the sky, but also cover other kinds of wetting: brewing, steeping or even the overflowing of rivers, the soaking up of water by a sponge and of course the imbibing of fluids by a thirsty drinker. And that means that even the familiar act of baptism is a form of raining (see our article on the verb βαπτιζω, baptizo).
Heaven is any origin of any agent that flushes, cleanses and allows growth. And note the obvious similarity between the Greek verb βρεχω (brecho), meaning to rain, and the Hebrew verb ברך (barak), meaning to bless.
Both the Hebrew word for land or earth (ארץ, ‘eres) and the Greek one (γη, ge) describe any situation in the here and now that’s capable of growth and correction by means of any kind of fluidic agent, whether in the physical or mental realms (ACTS 14:17, HEBREWS 9:23). Heaven (שמים, shamayim in Hebrew) denotes both the source of that agent, and the blueprint of what earth may finally become, after its many seasons of cleansing (HEBREWS 8:5, MATTHEW 5:48, 6:10, REVELATION 21:1-2).
This is obviously your reference to urine in speaking previously – if they wanted to translate “blood” and “body” literally, why did they not with this reference to any cleansing or refreshing fluid poured out, to include urine? Highly selective literalism.
The “house of bread,” translations is not entirely unjust, although the point made is good. Think to the parable of the kingdom of the cosmos, which Yeshua describes as a tree (the body of Elohim) and then describes flour with lots of yeast worked in such that it rises bigger and bigger. (Cosmic Expansion)
Hence Yeshua was born in The House of Bread, meaning from the very first moment of the universe he was to arise from unfolding of the cosmos. Hence you “eat his body.”
There is another aspect to this discussion above, which is that eating meat or anything with blood in it is expressly forbid by Kosher.
This is how devious these wicked serpents are; they take abominations and call them sacraments to trick their cattle into rebelling against YHWH.
The Body of Christ, A.E, is The Church. The Apostolic Church. The Gospels are not to be interpreted in an autodidact way, but in a responsable, mature and moral way. We talk about the Holy Tradition, about Christ Himself commanding his apostles to go and spread “the Word”. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
Matthew 28: 19, 20
It is not the church. That is not even what the translation above says. It is those that follow the true message of Yeshua, not a bunch of greaves images and golden temples.
What do you make of the surviving Nazarenes and Aryeh Yehudah that follow Yeshua, are his relatives, and teach the nations despite the mass persecution and genocide, including from your church?
My device does not like the word “graven,” and consistently autocorrects it wrong. The “body of Christ,” is not a church full of golden statues and graven images.
Re-research! Eastern Orthodoxy did not commit genocide.
for the most part, the Orthodox Church has largely been the victim of persecution, from Communists in Russia, to conquering Muslims during the Byzantine Empire, to other Christian sects as in the 4th crusade of the 13th century and the events in Alaska in the last century. The Eastern Orthodox Church has never supported killing anyone. Although there were instances of persecution of heretics, they were never condoned or by the EOC as an institution.
I am aware of the atrocities of Stalin and the USSaRus (literally Osiris). It including genocidal millions of Isis-Ra-Elis,along with yes, repressing your religious rites. These are terrible atrocities.
However you need to do your Re-Search. Let us look at the mass genocide of the Paulicians under the Byzantine empress Theodora and sanctioned and aided by Cattle Church authority:
In the year 843 Byzantine Empress Theodora and her agents, mass genocided over 100,000 paulicians in and around Turkey and Armenia. Children, Women, Men, all were mass murdered, and their property confiscated and split between the Proto-eastern Orthodox Church and the empress. Likewise all survivors were stripped of any and all rights in the empire.
This is an en masse genocide by religious persecution in no uncertain terms, in Byzantine territory, and under what became Eastern Orthodox Church control.
Consider the naming of the two Cold War “rivals.” If you consider the work of Stanford Economics Professor Anthony C Sutton, you will see they were cooperating at the largest of scales and only pretending to be rivals.
USA and USSR, together spells USSARUS, the name of the 4th horseman of the apocalypse as written in Egyptian and transliterated into Greek: Osiris the bringer of plague and death.
“Then he said to me, “Son of man, eat this scroll I am giving you and fill your stomach with it.” So I ate it, and it tasted as sweet as honey in my mouth.”
Clearly we’ve been commanded to eat paper scrolls dipped in honey, then wash it down with flesh crackers. I also don’t understand why they are not munching Ezekiel, as he is also Son of Man.
@Chud why don’t you munch Ezekiel too? What about Daniel, also a Son of Man? According to your church we must munch The Son of Man in its most literal translation.
This is the insanity of having no concept of the Aryeh Yehudah term “Akel,” which means to consume, and being more nuanced: to take nourishment from sustenance. There is no nourishment in crackers.
>”@Chud why don’t you munch Ezekiel too?”
>”This is the insanity of having no concept of the Aryeh Yehudah term “Akel,” which means to consume, and being more nuanced: to take nourishment from sustenance. There is no nourishment in crackers.”
I’ve asked you about 9-10 questions, all of them have gone unanswered. Most of them are very specific regarding scriptural commands. I don’t understand how you Justify hyper literalist translations reading in one specific passage, while you stamp underfoot the others. I’m genuinely interested in trying to understand it; if I already had the answer I wouldn’t ask.
However, yes I do know what “Akel,” means in Hebrew, do you? Another question, do you speak Hebrew or Ancient Greek?
When I say there is no nourishment in crackers I am referring to the fact that Yeshua said we would never hunger anymore if you ate of the body.
Do the waifers fill your stomach, or do you eat a big meal after mass? According to your literalist interpretation of the translations, we shouldn’t need to eat ever again after one super powerful flesh cracker.
A.E, you should be able to speak for yourself. Take a bit of distance from “zeitgeistic knowledge” and try read some theology instead. I warmly recommend you approach St Paisios, Nectarios. It won’t bite, I promise you that. I know you know you master words. I am way behind you and I do not have this kind of ambition. Your words lack the Spirit though… It is in the Apostolic Church. If your search for Truth is genuine and you garnish it with humility you will one day, soon I hope, will understand what I mean.
I am a sinner.
I do speak for myself. I tag Gem because he has repeatedly asked people to so he might respond, yet most consistently don’t, or do so halfway, as did soannoyed.
This forum shunts responses around. I tagged him on a post he was being addressed on, but wasn’t tagged in.
I disbelieved in Catholicism and most other organized religions long before I’d ever heard of Gem.
You’ve got to take it easy with him. He is not wicked, but he is so confounded by the wolves dressed as shepherds that he believes Constantine the mass serial killer was a holy “saint.” And then compared him to vlad the Impaler as a justification, a blood drinking, child raping Dragon that today is known as Dracula, and gave birth to the lineage of mass murders and drug lords the English “RA-YA-El” family.
Where on earth did you extract the “child raping Dragon” story? How many other cherry-picks from fictional books have you purposely planted here, I wonder?
Are you even aware there was this thing called hungarian propaganda?
He killed “all his close relatives” I remember you saying about Constantine. Somehow the mother (who was close enough I’d say) “mannaged” to escape. She died of old age. Please be more careful with what you state as 100% truth.
Also, killing for fun? These are obvious exagerations and I know you know that. It’s that proverbial “bits of truth mixed with bits of trash”.
Have you, appart from your exagerations, which are many, many, many! ever considered the contexts? Had there been an incestuous affair between Crispus and Fausta and a plot (as some historyans claim) after all, Constantine was away “quite some time” without the wife, and the son, would he have had another solution? He tried to implement christianity to pagans. If the idolatry and incestuous affair stand in regard to Crispus and his wife, then it looks more like he had to make an example out of “fair-play”. Do you know for sure what made him so upset to drive him to kill them? No one knows for sure, yet you know it was for fun.
The hypocract and intense double standard is palpable in your words. You’ve actually claimed based only on modern sources that Constantine didn’t kill anyone, then when confronted with overwhelming evidence from do note Piraeus sources, you claimed he has a pre-Christian history which he reformed.
Now that I’ve provided you with several contemporary, matter of fact sources which show that Constantine was a serial killer who murdered his son, nephew, wife, and many of his friends directly after the council of Nicaea, you defend his mass murderer. Sometimes admitting one is in error is less foolhardy than defending a serial killer by changing your stance constantly so as to avoid admitting this error. This is how July indoctrination works.
You speak utter fantasy to fit your narrative, and change your stance without doing any research, and yet nitpick the tiniest detail of my words… You’re right Constantine only killed his son, nephew and boiled his wife, but Mom escaped, so saying “all,” was slightly inaccurate. He only killed most of his family, this Saint Constantine. I will admit I was not 100% accurate with that statement. It does not change the fact your church was founded by a serial killer.
It is written in the commandments “Murder you SHALL NOT!” Why do you defend a mass serial killer?
Certainly his nephew and many friends he murdered in cold blood weren’t all having incestuous affairs with his wife? Does Yeshua not say “let he who has not sinned cast the first stone regarding an adulterous?”
Maybe this doesn’t apply to boiling your wife, or provides an exception to the commandments for emperors?
If you are to admonish me for perfect accuracy and call my words into question by the slightest of errors, then I would expect you hold yourself to the same standard.
“ nitpick the tiniest detail of my words…”
The devil is in the tiniest details.
My sources are not modern.
Fausta was the daughter of former Emperor Maximian and sister to Emperor Maxentius. However, they were both political rivals and Constantine had them killed in 310 and 312 respectively. He married Fausta in 307. in 325 he killed his sister’s husband and had his nephew hanged a year later. Yet, they were also political rivals and Constantine was engaged in a civil war with them.
In 326, after becoming the sole emperor of Rome, he kills his wife and first son. Why? After all, his favourite son, Crispus, was made Caesar in 317 AD and proved his abilities as a leader in military campaigns during the early 320’s. Also, Fausta was highly respected by Constantine throughout their marriage, and proof of this was that in 323 she was proclaimed Augusta, although she had previously held the title of Nobilissima Femina / “Most Noble Lady”.
According to church historian Philostorgius:
“But Constantine, having obtained rule over the whole Roman Empire by remarkable success in wars, ordered his son Crispus to be put to death, at the behest (so people think) of his wife Fausta. Later he locked his wife Fausta in overheated baths and killed her, because his mother Helena blamed him out of excessive grief for her grandson.”
This is according to Greek historian Zosimus:
“He killed Crispus, who had been deemed worthy of the rank of Caesar, as I have said before, when he incurred suspicion of having sexual relations with his stepmother Fausta, without taking any notice of the laws of nature. Constantine’s mother Helena was distressed at such a grievous event and refused to tolerate the murder of the young man. As if to soothe her Constantine tried to remedy the evil with a greater evil: having ordered baths to be heated above the normal level, he deposited Fausta in them and brought her out when she was dead.”
There’s been an idea presented that Fausta accused Crispus of rape or assault; and then later it is revealed that Fausta lied and Constantine had her steamed to death.
The “nuances”, the “modern sources” are old enough.
Mass serial killer? We have different definitions of “mass”, but you probably mean civil wars. So we talk about wars. There! Fixed it for you. Gave you the context for becoming “mass serial killer”.
>“let he who has not sinned cast the first stone regarding an adulterous?” You “forgot” this one I suppose. King David, whom you and we, the orthodox, also esteem raped Uriah’s wife and killed him. How does that sound as “a double standard”? King David also fought and killed people. Dare I say many. Wars as context for murders. I repeat: we do esteem David. David, the great repenter, prophet David. And the great repenter and the prophet David is looked at as holy. I have no problem with that. Is he a also “a pagan god”, a “god”?
Even your own biased church source, which are the only ones that intimate this supposed relationship as a form of granting clemency to Constantine, state that he had already “obtained rule over the whole Roman Empire.”
What about how nephew? Was he rocking it with Aunt Fausta? And All of his friends too? He did this AFTER he had consolidated all power. Other sources I have quoted this to you make it clear, even stating very clearly that it was the drunkenness of power itself that made Constantine, once more mild mannered, then into a psychopath.
I also fail to see where that pesky commandment that says “Murder you SHALL NOT,” comes into this? Are flesh crackers so literal, and yet the commandments of Moshe offer exceptions for unproven adultery. Constantine killed his son without trial, his nephew, his wife and his friends too.
Yeshua said, in defense of an adulteress “let the one who has not transgressed cast the first stone.” Do you suppose that there is an exception to this command for emperors that have fully consolidated their power (even according to your own source) to boil their wife without trial?
Your argument of civil war is again fanciful. Even the source you quote (which I provided you before), makes it clear he had consolidaTed all power. You say the devil is on the details, and yet you make up fanciful story after fanciful story to excuse a serial killer.
You measure me with one rod, over the tiniest of “all” vs most, yet you lie through your teeth over and over, to defend mass murder no less, constantly changing your story.
What evidence proves David raped Bathsheba? A quick search online gives me only opinionated results at this time (which is why I purchased hard copies of the scriptures) and I am tied up multitasking just now, but I’m not convinced he did except by perhaps modern standards (he was in power over her so she felt she couldn’t say no – despite that many women have managed to find ways to do so throughout history).
She was visible to a man walking on a roof – I find it hard to believe she was oblivious to this fact.
I don’t want to speculate and to smear either person, but I can easily see how this may have been rather opposite to his “raping” her. But if you have read it more clearly and have some proofs, I would be grateful to see them.
It doesn’t say he raped Bathsheba. It says he slept with her and they conceived a child.
It uses the common word for “laying” together as וַיִּשְׁכַּ֣ב “we-kisab.” When there is rape, such as in Genesis 34:2, it uses the term “violate,” which is וַיְעַנֶּֽהָ “We aneha.”
You are dealing with someone who speaks pure fantasy and lies to protect a patron saint mass serial killer, changes their story on a dime at each new evidence to fit their narrative, and never admits they have erred, yet demands 1000% accuracy of every single word I might type or he then makes grevious and unfounded accusations to try and discredit what I say. I am not afforded the grave to honestly err as a human.
This person claims he pays great attention to detail, yet he pays so much attention to detail that he requotes sources I’ve already given him, as if they were new, and then contradicts his own quoted source and invents a super reformed Christian “civil war,” fantasy tale for a man that boiled his wife.
Then he spits on the scriptures which he knows little of, and certainly has rarely if ever attempted to read on his own, and then makes a semi racist insinuation about jews after I ask him what he sees the place of the kin of Yeshua and the Aryeh Yehudah. Likewise, he repeteadlt refuses to answer one single poignant questions regarding scriptural commands.
I do not hold this against him, for Yeshua has said there will be grace for Amartia for those deceived by the serpents, but this is the curse for those than bear the Tau Cross, the mark of the antiXristos. Their eyes have been sewn shut and their hands tied.
It is not my place to write in the book of life, nor is it the place of any of us to render any judgement whatsoever. However what is said is the unfortunate (and depressing) reality; all we can do is have compassion for those who have their eyes sewn shut by the beast of the seven hills of Rome.
Don’t believe everything old Charlie says, nor what Robert -the twillight-Pattison claims.
The only thing they have in common (Charlie and Tepes) are the long noses.
I am a romanian, born and lived so far pretty close to “Dracula’s habbitat”. I also have a long nose ( but so have many indians and jews). And since I am a cracker eater and a Christ’s blood drinker, one never knows, I might actually be a very, very close relative of Vlad. In fact, most orthodox romanians are cannibals since they sacrifice Christ over and over again with every Eucharist, eat His Body and drink His blood.
Stop being silly. Think deeply about what I’ve shown you rather than being avoidant.
You still have yet to address your completely fictitious statements regarding Constantine the serial killer and that the cattle church was founded by this psychopath and then a few months later he mass murdered most of his family and a lot of his friends.
You also have not addressed the historical fact of the mass religious genocide of the Paulicians by the Eastern Orthodox Church in the 800s CE.
Nor have you addressed why you interpret the first half of the sentence hyper literally to justify flesh crackers, but not the other half of the sentence. Why do you get hungry after a cracker?
Nor have you addressed any of my questions regarding how you justify all of the clear and direct scriptural commandments the church stamps on with great fervour.
Nor have you addressed the genocide of and massive oppression of the Aryeh Yehudah, the very kin of Yeshua, and the destruction of all rival texts by the gentile church. All those early Isis Ra Eli and Aryeh Yehudah hating sermons and edicts aren’t fake.
Rather than quibbling, can you openly and honestly address these things?
No, you have to address and reconsider your “insertions”, your lack of accuracy, “the tinniest details” since you know all the answers and since your questions are only rhetorical. You have already too many times insulted people to the point all those that disagree with you are cattle, the cattle lick, the magic cracker eaters. So far, for someone who knows all in detail (lies the devil) you “failed” to mention the greek root of “Catholic”.( It doesn’t fit in your novel, right?)
On the other post I gave you a very long explanation regarding how to source etymologies thst don’t come from Gugal Anna, the bull of heaven. Not sure if you saw it or responded since you don’t tag me.
This notion of the “apostolic church,” being The Cattle Church/Eastern Orthodoxy has no historical basis. It is a lie. Following Saul of Tarshish (The Solar seeker of the six) and the children of Luciferian Vespasian who fabricated a history of fake martyrdomss does not make it “apostolic.”
You also seem to disregard any notion of the actual descendants of the clan of Yeshua, nor the make any room fro Aryeh Yehudah in any of this. I find it odd that in a discussion regarding the Aryeh Yehudah Messiach, you seem to throw away the Aryeh Yehudah.
No, the etymology I am offering you does not come from one word; that would be extremely foolish, and you are admonishing me rather than asking id I have more corroboration evidence. The search for Truth requires losing your biases and live for the institutions of men.
Trusting Gugal’s first answer, whom is named for The Babylonian Bull of Heaven, is equally foolish. The exoteric (public) explanation for the name for Google is that it means an insanely large power of 10.
However, if you do some research on History and Archeology, you’re going to find out that very name for Google comes from Gugal-Anna, including its color scheme. Gugal Anna, whom is literally The Bull of Heaven in Babylon, for whom Ishtar (The Queen of Heaven and blood sacrifice) descends to the underworld to find in Babylonian Luciferian Mythologt.
You asked a company started by CIA intelligence operatives kids, named after the Bull of Heaven of Babylon, to give you the etymology of your a Solar Cow Church pretending to be “Christian.” And you trust it?
To give you a corroboration of where we find the name Gugal elsewhere in Luciferian mythologies, look no further than to the deity KUKAL KAIN of ancient Meso American Mayas. It was, like Ishtar, the deity of blood sacrifice and the planet Venus. How did Kain the murderer end up amalgamated in name and practice with the blood sacrifice deity of Ishtar (Venus, who is Lucifer the morning star) and the name for bull Ishtar goes to the underworld to find? That’s how luciferian mythology morphs across time, it mixes and reformulates a little bit, but the names and mythologies and blood sacrifices stay the same. Let me know if Gugal also tells you with its first answer that the name KuKal Kain = to KalKulate = to the KLu-Klux-Klan.
I’m going to assume that if you are on this sight, you realise that the exoteric, publicly professed concepts of things, are Mass mind kintrol, that Lucifer rules the word, and they use the esoteric reasonings to manipulate people and as a convoluted and thin veils for darker esoteric practices, such as child rape (let me know if you find Church Documents openly admitting they’ve been raping children for 1000s of years.) Realising this fact of a veil of manipulation and lying, means you are able to analysis beyond the surface level.
Let’s take an easy one:
For instance, I don’t think any of these stars are going to admit their doing 666 symbols all the time. Gugal will tell you it’s the OK sign, or if you really dig maybe you’ll find out in some cultures it means “up your a$$.” Or maybe the Buddhist symbol of “peace and unity with Ganesha.” (FYI Ganesha is the serpent, said “HANAS” in Hebrew, like GANES-IS, which is actually Berashid.) I am certain you’re certainly not gonna get a nice article on Gugal explaining the 666 OK hand symbol as professing allegiance to Lucifer. But are you going to argue that? No, because there is a mountain of evidence.
Let’s start with how to source etymologies that are not force fed by the Exoteric professing using the Cattle Church. I’ll use sources only available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven.
No, the etymology I am offering you of Cattle Lick does not come from one word; that would be extremely foolish, and you are admonishing me rather than asking if I have more corroboration evidence. The search for Truth requires losing your biases for the corrupt institutions of men.
Likewise, trusting Gugal’s first answer, whom is named for The Babylonian Bull of Heaven GugalAnna, is equally foolish. The exoteric (public) explanation for the name for Google is that it means an insanely large power of 10.
However, if you do some research on History and Archeology, you’re going to find out that very name for the company G00gl3 comes from Gugal-Anna, including its color scheme, and symbolism. Gugal Anna is literally The Bull of Heaven in Babylon, for whom Ishtar (The Queen of Heaven, same title as Maryam, and blood sacrifice) descends to the underworld to find in Babylonian Luciferian Mythology.
You’ve asked a company started by CIA intelligence operatives children, named after the Bull of Heaven of Babylon, to give you the etymology of your a Solar Cow Church pretending to be “Christian.” And you trust it?
I sense you may believe I’m making a spurious connection from the word Gugal and this CIA-In-Q-Tel project for world domination.
To give you a corroboration of where we find the name Gugal elsewhere in Luciferian mythologies, let us consider the deity KUKAL KAIN of ancient Meso American Mayas.
It was, like Ishtar, the deity of human blood sacrifice and the planet Venus. It’s name is identical to the bull of heaven Ishtar goes to see in the underworld. Likewise it is a Serpent Sea Beast, a Dragon, just as Mar = Sea, with reference to aMARu the serpent of the AMARites (who became MARs the blood coloured planet of earth) and Yam = Ugaritic Poseidon. The sea beast. The congruence of namings, mythologies, and rituals surmount quickly, and are far too vast and profound to be by chance; they are the product of esoteric Luciferianism.
Now how did Kain the murderer end up amalgamated in name and practice with the blood sacrifice deity of Ishtar (Venus, who is Lucifer the morning star) and the name for bull Ishtar goes to the underworld to find?
Well, that is how luciferian mythology morphs across time, it mixes and reformulates a little bit, flips the gender or puts two together or splits one into two, but the names and mythologies and blood sacrifices and abominable practices stay the same; it’s all based on the SOLAR mysteries. Let me know if Gugal also tells you with its first answer what I have shown you here regarding the name KuKal Kain = to KalKulate = to the KLu-Klux-Klan.
I’m going to assume that if you are on this sight, you realise that the exoteric, publicly professed concepts of Luciferian organizations are a form ofMass mind Kontrol and manipulation, that Lucifer rules the world, that the very names you use to blaspheme YHWH such as Gad (Isiah 65:11, it’s Ba’al God) and Dios (It’s Zeus, you know this since you are Greek speaking), are used to replace the name of the ineffable creator.
You also likely realise that the esoteric reasonings for manipulating people with an nice sounding exoteric lie are very dark. They use their nice words and public personas as a convoluted and thin veil for darker esoteric practices go serve Lucifer, such as child r@p3!
Let me know if you find Church Documents openly admitting they’ve been r@ping children for 1000s of years. It’s an ESOTERIC PRACTICE OF WICKED WOLVES PLAYING SHEPHERD.
Realising this fact of a veil of manipulation and lying, means you are able to analysis beyond the surface level.
Let’s take an easy one that doesn’t touch your extraordinary bias toward an institution of men:
I don’t think any of these movie/music stars are going to admit their doing 666 symbols all the time.
Gugal will tell you it’s the OK sign, or if you really dig maybe you’ll find out in some cultures it means “up your a$$.” (Nice reference to the child @n@l r@p3) Or maybe you’ll discover the Buddhist symbol of “peace and unity with Ganesha.” (FYI Ganesha is the serpent, said “HANAS” in Hebrew, like GANES-IS, which is actually Berashid.) I am certain you won’t find a decent article on Gugal explaining the 666 OK hand symbol as professing allegiance to Lucifer. But are you going to argue that with me? No, because there is a mountain of evidence that they lie, and that they serve the Di-Hevel, the Di-Abolos, the Twin of Abel.
Let’s now start with how to source an etymology of Cattle Lick with respect to primary source documents, history, theology, practices, hierarchy, rituals, and self chosen namings;as well as keeping in mind the well documented and pervasive mass murder, child Molesting, and total disregard for a multitude of direct scriptural commands
We need to go beyond the force fed by the Exoteric professings of the Cattle Church, and examine how wolves dress themselves in sheeps clothing. Recall that even their own official doctrine claims not to know the origin of Catholic; strange. I’ll use sources only easily available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven, but which require a bit of critical thinking.
You also use “gugal” a lot and so does A.E but it is ok when you do that. You possess the “critical thinking” (“ I’ll use sources only easily available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven, but which require a bit of critical thinking.”)
“ I don’t think any of these movie/music stars are going to admit their doing 666 symbols all the time.”
True!
Abusers of people and particularly those of children have nothing to do with the Church. The Apostolic Church. They are abusers of both people and faith. Wolves.
About the rape claims and the murder of Uriah.
In 2 Samuel 11:2, 4, we’re told that Bathsheba is bathing, but we’re not told where. Bathing was mainly done by pouring jugs of water over your body since bathtubs were uncommon. Architectural discoveries found that most homes at that time had a courtyard, so this may be the most likely location.
Was Bathsheba fully naked as she bathed, possibly in her private courtyard? In those days, bathing wasn’t always done in the nude. Clothes or sarongs were sometimes worn to avoid being totally exposed. The Bible does not say if Bathsheba was nude or clothed.
Let’s also remember that David wasn’t supposed to be in his palace. Therefore, Bathsheba may not have realized he was peering from above.
Uriah and Bathsheba lived in the lower section of Jerusalem. King David’s palace was elevated above all the houses, so he had a private vantage point. Based on Scripture, David was on a roof, not Bathsheba.
Did Bathsheba Seduce David?
First, let’s consider what we know about Bathsheba.
Based on 2 Samuel 23:34, 39, she was part of a brave and godly family. Her husband, Uriah, and her father, Eliam, served on King David’s elite team of soldiers. Her grandfather, Ahitophel, was considered a trusted counselor of the king.
Interestingly, the bath mentioned in verse 2 was not an ordinary washing for cleanliness. It was ceremonial, performed by Jewish women every month after a “state of uncleanliness.” The count for seven days of impurity ended in the evening at sunset. The evening time of the seventh day was when a woman would carry out the ceremonial washing. Bathsheba was where she was supposed to be (Leviticus 15:19, 28) and when she was supposed to be there. From all indications, Bathsheba was obeying the law of Moses.
Did Bathsheba seduce David? Did she place herself within David’s sight in hopes of receiving the king’s attention? Scripture does not say. God alone knows the heart, as well as its motives. Even if she had, it was still David’s choice to look beyond a glance and act on that temptation.
Did David Force Himself on Bathsheba?
“…and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite” (2 Samuel 11:3).
Bathsheba is identified by her husband and her father, which was common in biblical times. Because both men were well respected, this identification reflected positively on Bathsheba’s reputation. Also, David had fought alongside both her husband and father in an elite “mighty men” army. Her identity alone should have pierced David’s conscience.
The fact that David had to send several men to “take” Bathsheba may indicate that she was compelled to come to David. Even if Bathsheba was unhappy with David’s request to come to the palace, Bathsheba had no power to refuse the king’s sexual demands. Bathsheba, even though she was married, most likely had no say in the matter with David. It was impossible for her to reject the king’s demand.
@gem, @A.E, no consent = rape.
…and then the murder.
I’m sorry, but I couldn’t get past the first sentence of this without thinking, “Huh??” When have I ever used “gugal”? I’m still learning what it means.
I quoted gem. It was in response for his claims that only some can use “gugal” and keep the critical thinking.
>“ You’ve asked a company started by CIA intelligence operatives children, named after the Bull of Heaven of Babylon, to give you the etymology of your a Solar Cow Church pretending to be “Christian.” And you trust it?”
“ I’ll use sources only easily available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven, but which require a bit of critical thinking.”
You wrote “You also use “gugal” a lot and so does A.E”. I am A E and I am telling you I never use that word as I don’t entirely understand it. You spray allegations without any clear aim and smear everyone in whatever it is you’re getting at. It dilutes your message.
I was offering some knowledge regarding the fact that a lot of knowledge requires you don’t accept the first explanation Gugal and other “authorities,” give you, and showing you how to look deeper beyond false professed exoteric cover stories.
Regarding your stuff on David and Bathsheba, you have extrapolated and invented an entire fictional rape narrative regarding David and Bathsheba. You seem to have a penchant for inventing fantasy narratives based more on Pop Culture than scripture. This is problematic.
While you take an extreme literalist view (of translations) towards eating flesh and drinking blood,
here you have fictionalized an entire fanciful narrative not in the text at all by engaging in random questions like “Did Bathsheba seduce David?” Followed by answers based only on your (and Pop Culture’s) imagination. As I pointed out before the word rape is used in the Old Testament, such as in Berashid 34:2. Here it simply says “they lay together.”
The point of the passage, what it actually says, is that David had a one night stand and bore a child; no other information is given.
I’m also not certain how this compares, as you have done, to Constantine boiling his wife alive and serial killing the lot of his family and friends (except mom)
Here we have:
A one Night Stand that conceived a child you fantasize as a rape in order to be able to fantasize a A Serial killer you as a saint.
Avoiding the greek root of “catholic”, this one in particular because it doesn’t fit your so beloved exposing-the-occult narative is enough proof of your objectivism and critical thinking.
Christ’s teachings are not occult, nor sophisticated. But then again, you are not christian.
VC
The Pharisees and the aPOPEphis both agree that the Great Mother, “Queen of Heaven,” aka Isis/Ishtar/Ashtarte, Lucifer in the transgender female form, is the one they serve.
wrong, that is not Catholic theology at all. You do not judge a religion by those that fail to follow it.
Queen of heaven is a certified pagan term for a goddess. And Mary is called the queen of heaven. I grew up Catholic and know all about the worship mass for Mary which also has pagan origins. Mary doesn’t want to be worshipped and I do believe they are tricked into worshipping Asherah the mother of all demons and Queen of the marine realm. Her husband is Moloch the child eater. While Moloch/Baals father is Dagon who is the king of the marine realm and is exclusively worshipped by the Vatican.
this is interesting- i am happy you see it= as an Orthodox Christian, we have disagreed that the Catholics are pushed to worship Mary a whole lot, I mean we do too, but even the Catholic elementary schools prayers more toward Mary than Jesus, I feel something sinister there. We many many holidays dedicated to The Virgin Mother of Christ, but I still wouldn’t be surprised the semi- satanic vatican fools its people..
@americaillusion
The Catulus Church is a fully Luciferian organization, and has been since it’s very foundations. It is the church of the antiXristos, as mentioned in Hebrews, 1 John and Revelations.
The Papa (father…) and his mignions are the priests of the transgender form of Lucifer, The Great Mother, the same who for millennia have spread Luciferian indoctrination throughout the world in the various Re-Legions (Re = Lord of Light Legions = Pawn soldiers.) of pagan Astro theology, and then culminated them into a “universalist” churches such that the emperor of Rome (the same as Rama the Solar warrior and Rammanu the Babylonian version of Zeus, the Illuminator.) could have control over the minds and souls of his subjects.
The name Vat-I-Kain comes directly from the “Great Mother” Vatika, who was the reaper of souls of the underworld that is half COW (Cattle Church), and the same as the Mother of Re, Vat/Bat in Egypt, the Bovine (COW) mother of the sun. And of course a wink to their progenitor, Kain. This is but another Re formulation in the long line of the cult of the “Queen of Heaven,” Isis/Ishtar/Astarte/Asherah. This title appears nowhere in scripture, except in Jeremiah 44: where the prophet tells us that all those who blow incense to the statue of the Queen of Heaven will be punished by YHWH. This is what the Papa, calling himself father and spitting on Yeshua’s words, does every SUNday for the MASSes indoctrination.
Furthermore the symbol of the Chai Rho, takes its name directly from the underworld ferryman Chairhon.
The kult of the great Mother has always been about one thing: blood sacrifice to quench the thirst of the Mother Earth. This is why in Berashit 4, it is referenced directly that YHWH sees the blood of Hevel has been spilled on the soil. Once you realize this, the constant inquisitions, heresy burnings, and extremely brutal nature of the glorified (and often fabricated) martyrdoms becomes clear.
They have, of course, substituted the name of Lucifer for YHWH in every language. This is why these serpents are called Na-Ha-Shim in Hebrew
Na = Not
Ha = The
Shem = Name
Literally “Not the Name.” In Hebrew this word together means serpents; the imposters, said “Tannaim,” in Hebrew that are “beasts of the sea.” Tanninu; same word with a diffeeenr suffix, and the origin of the Phoenician Great Mother Tannit (literally Ptah-Nit, Egyptian Luciferian deities put together to make a transgender great mother.)
This is why I’m every language they replace the True name, HaShem, with a false imposter: Berashit becomes Genesis, literally Janus (two faced deity Lucifer) is; the Ganes (Ganesha) is. It is why they refuse to use the name YHWH nor Elohim; in every language they have categorically replaced the ineffable creator with Lucifer:
God = Gad an epithet of Ba’al (Isiah 65:11) literally said “Ball god…” it’s the Sun, a big ball god…
Dios = Zeus the Illuminator Lucifer
Bog = Again the dualistic, Teo faced Lucifer
Allah = the Sumerian deity of gatekeeping the underworld
Even the name “Jesus,” is quite literally replacing Yeshua, with g-Zeus in every language, the letter G of fr33ma$onry, which is Gad (Ba’al) and Zeus the Illuminator. The Ancient Greek is “Ishua,” as you may know being orthodox.
As the scriptures say, it is with the word that the ineffable creator has given our existence. We are an utterance, a vibration of his word, his Truth, and this is the essence of the antiXristos, the Mirror Image imposter put in place of The Truth: it is Na-Ha-Shem, “not the name.” The serpent sitting at Mary’s feet while she rides the moon, just as Isis.
The cattle lick church was founded, from the very first moment, by the dragon blood lines of the Flavians Vespasian and Titus (You can quit easily verify that aPOPEphis Clement is their direct descendant), whom burned Jerusalem to the ground in 69 CE, and then stole and corrupted the scriptures so as to stamp out the Truth of Yeshua and YHWH, and to wield them in service of Lucifer imposter as Dios F-Zeus for the entire age of Pi-Seas, the beast out of the Sea.
Have you ever kissrd a girl?!🤣🤣🤣 you sound like the nerd in Ghostbusyers”
What an insipid insult. Make an argument or show us further you cannot.
Imma take a wild guess the gem prolly got so many honeys he bored. Ur watchin ghostbusyers, while he’s swashbuckling real info down ya throat and exposing the luminatis.
“Certified pagan term”? Just where did they get the trademark, I wonder?
You give too much authority to paganism. Christianity is primary.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_Heaven_(antiquity)
Plus in the article the goddesses mentioned are other names Asherah goes by like Ishtar/Inanna and Astarte.
Modern “Christianity” across all variations is Paganism repackaged, so your comment is not entirely untrue (it is primary). We are seeing more “secrets” being released so that other faith systems may find their truths as pertaining and interrelating to a whole which all might recognize, and thus embrace as a collective. Babel. Matthew 24:24. It has to be a convincing counterfeit in order for it to work such massive deception.
“ For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. ”, right?
When you proposed an article whose author was the very author of “The Christ Conspiracy”.
“ Author Acharya makes the case that there was no actual person named Jesus, but that several characters were rolled into one mythic being inspired by the deities Mithras, Heracles/Hercules, Dionysus and many others of the Roman Empire. She demonstrates that the story of Jesus, as portrayed in the Gospels, is nearly identical in detail to those of the earlier savior-gods Krishna and Horus, and concludes that Jesus was certainly neither original nor unique, nor was he the divine revelation. Rather, he represents the very ancient body of knowledge derived from celestial observation and natural forces.”
You landed on a dangerous soil, A.E. Is this your bible? Did Christ need to be inspired by Hercules? Dionysus, “the party-boy”? Krishna?
One of the so-called “savior gods” of the ancient world is the Hindu deity Krishna. Mythicists (those who believe Jesus is nothing more than a mythical figure like Zeus, Thor, Ba’al, etc.) claim the existence of unmistakable parallels between Krishna and Jesus in the original sources. These parallels are so strong, they argue, that the only rational conclusion is that the Gospel writers recorded a tradition about Jesus that was deeply influenced by, or even plagiarized, Hindu beliefs.
Let’s see a few “simmilarities”:
-“Christ is a form of the name Krishna.” No etymological connection between “Krishna” and “Christ” actually exists. Christ (christos) is the Greek equivalent of messiah (Hebrew mashiach). Both mean, “anointed one.” Krishna is an unrelated personal name, which derives from a Sanskrit term meaning “black, dark, dark-blue.”
-“Krishna was born of a virgin.” This is a popular claim, sometimes made by atheists, but also by those who profess to be Christian. Hindu texts make it clear that his mother Devaki had already conceived seven other sons, the first six of whom were executed by the evil prince Kamsa after their births. Matthew states that the chaste Mary fulfills an ancient prediction of the prophet Isaiah (Matthew 1:23; cf. Isaiah 7:14).
-“Krishna died at age thirty.” Although Jesus died in his early thirties, Krishna lived a much longer life. Common estimates place Krishna’s age at death somewhere around 100 years. A 2004 article in the Times of India reported Hindu scholars calculated that Krishna died at the age of 125.
-“Krishna died by crucifixion.” Crucifixion appears nowhere in the Hindu texts. Krishna died after a hunter named Jara shot him in the sole of his foot with a poisoned arrow after mistaking him for a deer. Kersey Graves infamously claimed Krishna was crucified between two thieves, that darkness attended the event, and that he gives up the ghost and descends into hell, details he—or a source he used—invented out of whole cloth.
-“Krishna resurrected after three days.” After his death, Krishna’s spirit appears almost immediately. Being liberated from his physical body—or abandoning it—his spirit returns to the realm of the divine. Hindu pilgrims today still visit Dehotsarga (literally, where Krishna “gave up his body”), where they believe Krishna died. Jesus was buried in a newly cut rock tomb and later experienced a bodily resurrection that serves as a prototype for believers (1 Corinthians 15:20, 42-44). The Hindu view of Krishna’s death is much closer to Neo-Platonic philosophy than it is to Christianity. There are absolutely no Indian gods portrayed as crucified.
Dorothy M. Murdock (also known by her pseudonym “Acharya S”) made similar claims to those above. Another book book “Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled “ includes a litany of supposed parallels between Christian and Hindu beliefs. Although her work is hailed by her uncritical supporters and other non-specialists as a work of unparalleled scholarship, scholars dismiss her work as the stuff of crass invention.
A common problem found in the work of militant critics is the failure to adequately understand the beliefs of the religions they oppose. Critics can be inexcusably careless in their descriptions, making ancient religions appear more similar than they really are. This is often done by describing non-Christian elements of other religions using Christian vocabulary, and then marveling at the similarities between the two. In some cases (especially authors from the 19th and early 20th centuries), these parallels were made using vague interpretations, supported by evidence which was poorly understood and likely fabricated.
Despite claims to the contrary, the story of Christ in no way plagiarizes the story of Krishna. To argue otherwise is to twist and distort the teachings of both Christianity and Hinduism..
A.E., do you want to discuss “simmilarities” with Horus?
Let us see:
Was Horus born of a virgin whose name was “Mary” or “Meri”?
Horus was not conceived of a virgin. His mother was “Isis”, not “Meri” as some claim. Isis hovered over the erect pe**s of Osiris to conceive Horus. Does that sound like a virgin birth to you? If there is a pe**s and a va***a involved I’m not sure you can claim it’s a virgin birth.
Was Horus’s step-father named “Joseph”?
No. His step-father was named “Seb” which some claim is a form of “Joseph” but these are two different names. Seb was the earth god and was actually the father of Osiris – who was the actual father of Horus.
Was Horus later visited by three wise men?
No. There is no evidence of this anywhere.
Was the birth of Horus in a cave, surrounded by shepherds, announced by angels or accompanied by the sign of a star in the sky?
Absolutely not!
Did Horus have twelve disciples?
No. According to the story of Horus from Egyptian mythology, Horus had a total of four disciples. Later on there’s a reference to sixteen followers, but there is no reference to him having twelve disciples.
Did Horus perform miracles?
Well, Horus, as a god, did perform miracles but he never specifically is said to have ever cast out a demon, raised someone from the dead, or walking on water. There’s no correlation to the miracles of Jesus and Horus.
Was Horus called the “son of God”?
While technically Horus was the son of another god, he was never actually referred to as “the son of God.” In fact, no one was ever called that in any Egyptian mythology, ever. He was also never called the Lamb of God, the Way, the Messiah or anything like that.
Was Horus crucified between two thieves, buried and resurrected three days later?
Well, as you can probably guess, those things never happened to Horus. If you go examine Egyptian myths about Horus you’ll find that he was not only never crucified, he never died at all. He later merged with another god named “Ra” [the sun god], and so he does sort of die and become reborn at every sunset and sunrise, but that’s nothing at all like the death and resurrection of Jesus.
Now, there is a story where Horus is cut into pieces and thrown into the water, but later his mother Isis orders a crocodile to gather the pieces of his body and he was reassembled like Mr. Potato Head. But, again, that’s not a correlation to Jesus in any way.
Was Horus associated with fish, or lambs or lions?
In some versions of the Horus story Horus was actually a fish. But Jesus was never a fish, so there’s no correlation there. Horus was never called a lamb or a lion.
…and the list goes on!
You see, there are many sellout authors that claim Jesus story was completely fabricated and stolen from the myth of Horus, or Osiris, or Mithras or Krishna. Their goal is to convince you that nothing we read in the Gospels about Jesus actually happened but that it was all borrowed and recycled from other myths in the ancient world.
Egyptologists are the only experts you need to consult when it comes to Horus or Osiris. They’ll tell you straight up that the similarities between those ancient Egyptian gods and Jesus are entirely fabricated by atheist apologists who want to rattle Christians with bogus claims about Horus being born of a virgin, or Osiris being crucified, etc. Don’t believe it. Simply go to your local library and check out a book about those ancient deities and read it for yourself. You’ll find nothing at all about those gods having 12 disciples or being baptized or crucified or raising from the dead three days later. It is merely propaganda intended to send Christians into an existential crisis. Don’t fall for it.
Have time for some Mithras?
A.E… Here is Mithras:
The story of Mithras is that he was born out of solid rock. So, maybe the rock could technically be a virgin, but that’s a bit ridiculous.
Another claim is that the birth of Mithras was attended by shepherds, but that notation only appears a hundred years after the Gospels were composed, so if anyone stole or copied something it was those who followed Mithras, not the followers of Jesus.
They say Mithras was a great teacher who travelled around preaching is message. But if you look at the mythology of Mithras it never claims he was a teacher of any kind so that doesn’t fit.
Did Mithras have twelve disciples? Again, there is nothing in the actual Mithras legends that name or number his disciples as being a group of twelve. Some attribute this idea to a single mural that was painted showing Mithras surrounded by twelve signs which look closer to the zodiac than anything else – one is the moon, the other is the sun, etc. – and those are not connected to disciples of Mithras at all. That painting also came long after the Gospels were written and so if there was any connection between Jesus and Mithras it was coming from the Mithras side and not the Jesus side.
Did Mithras promise his followers eternal life? No, not exactly. We can’t find any specific sayings or verses from Mithraic texts that suggest anything like this. But if he did that wouldn’t be unusual in comparison to all the other gods in the ancient world who often promised some type of blessing or benefit in the afterlife.
Does Mithras perform miracles? Yes, he does, but, as with the point above, so did every other religious figure in the ancient world. So, there’s no conspiracy or specific detail about a certain type of miracle that overlaps between Jesus and Mithras.
Did Mithras sacrifice himself in order to save the world or bring peace to everyone? The Mithraic narrative is that he killed a bull as an heroic deed. The bull died but Mithras didn’t. There’s no connection to the death of the bull and the salvation of humanity. It’s not there.
Was Mithras buried in a tomb only to rise again three days later? No because there’s no death story connected to Mithras. Since he doesn’t die there’s no burial and that means there’s no resurrection either. Tertullian does refer to the Mithraic cult of his day having some sort of resurrection celebration, but we have to keep in mind that this was over a hundred years after the time of Jesus and there are no other actual Mithraic references to such a thing. So, until we find more credible evidence the answer is, no, the followers of Mithra didn’t believe he died or was buried or that he rose from the dead.
Was Mithras called a shepherd, or was he ever compared to a lion or lamb? No, he wasn’t. There are no Mithraic texts that ever refer to Mithras in this way. Mithras is more like a sun god and so that’s why he has some association with the zodiac symbol Leo, but that’s not the same as calling him the Lion of God.
Was Mithras ever called the Logos, or the Word of God, or the Savior or the Messiah? Say it with me everyone: No. He wasn’t. Based on the Mithraic story none of those terms were ever applied to Mithras.
So, again, the pattern we find here is that claims made about the similarities between Mithras and Jesus come long after the Gospels were written. When we do see direct comparisons between them it’s the followers of Mithras who are borrowing from the Christ story, not the other way around.
A.E,
Which one next from the meme?
Want to give you sources? There are tons! When I attended Art High School, many, many years back, there was this course named “History of Ancient Art”. I learned quite a lot about these figures from those classes. Old school is the best. This is one of the reasons why this kind of parallelomania does not affect me. Elementary info about the ancient deities are to be found in almost every library.
Pay more attention to the sellout authors that propagate zeitgeistic lies.
cisspf, I appreciate your effort and intent here, but apologize that I am without time and am unwilling to rehash the truckload of hours I’ve already spent studying ancient mythologies of all kinds and how it pertains to modern myths. I simply do not have time to reverse to debate fine details which might be easily proven by evidence of the eyes, much as VL shows, of patterns across time.
You’re oversimplifying and not understanding that Christianity took the mythologies and combined many aspects into one figure, much like ancient deities were combined, condensed and renamed over periods of time. Every detail does not need to match precisely, especially within the written accounts, for us to recognize the unmistakable symbols which Christianity has absorbed and continued.
Gem has already displayed these images along with their correlations and detailed accountings of such ad nauseum, so I feel it unlikely you missed them entirely, but if you have, please tell me and allow me to link you, as the arguments have already been crystally laid out.
This absorption by the church was done so deliberately as it was to be the precursor for the one world religion – the one which brings them all together. If scripture tells us, Matthew 7;13, 14 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Yet, so far as I am aware, Catholicism has been a dominant world religion for quite some time…how might that be if scripture here is accurate..?
“This is often done by describing non-Christian elements of other religions using Christian vocabulary, and then marveling at the similarities between the two.”
Regardless of which descriptors are used to describe the same thing, they still describe the same thing.
As to the dispute regarding this particular source, I am not a devotee, so have no dog in this fight. I simply draw attention to the across-all-religions similarities, which are too consistent to be ignored when repeated in the Christ story as given modernly.
>“ I simply draw attention to the across-all-religions similarities, which are too consistent to be ignored when repeated in the Christ story as given modernly.”
See the above. There are no substantial similarities!
“…where did they get the trademark..” reveals your need for a certified “authority” comprised of other men, just as yourself, to place a stamp or seal upon a person or concept in order for you to recognize it for what it is.
But, in a very clear sense, your statement that “Christianity is primary” is demonstrably true, as it is drawing of all other religious practices into a oneness, a combined, big tent religion which worships what’s created and supplants the Creator and His true son with a false one they now feel so free as to erase and enjoy the shadow he once inhabited. The dark twin, the other face, the false aspect of JaBuLon, the two faces of Janus.
This portrait clearly displays the true focus of worship (Queen Of Heaven) vs the shadow (Christos – the thin thread by which they keep believers in the true Yeshua ensnared – he is considered the tagalong for purposes of recognition in which people are then deceived this is their same faith):
certify:
(transitive) To attest to (a fact) as the truth.
(transitive, law) To authenticate or verify in writing.
(transitive) To attest that a product, service, organization, or person has met an official standard.
These blankets have been certified as fireproof.
(transitive, archaic) To inform; to tell (a person) that something is true.
(archaic, reflexive) To assure (oneself) of something; to ascertain.
The very system, itself, certifies its message, over and again, as you have been repeatedly shown and as you personally continue to demonstrate. You wish to claim it is caterpillar into moth or some such metamorphosis, but it is plainly the same old system spreading it’s metastasis and you are either too invested personally to acknowledge or you promote the falsehoods yourself from a position of advantage.
Emunah to your words here @Igageharleya
May I take my measure now and multiply it heartily as I continue to learn.
To restrain myself to my former point, LG, I spoke of trademarks ironically, precisely to show how outlandish this kind of logic is. These accusations of paganism in Christianity depend on the hidden premise that paganism is a creative force in the world, capable of putting its imprimatur on everything that it brings into being, so that once a given symbol, title, image, etc. has been used within a pagan rite or practice, that same symbol or title or image can never be used in a non-pagan context or a non-pagan way.
This is equivalent to an absolutization of paganism, and a reduction of the true faith to a subsequent and purely negative reaction to the primary act of paganism. That is not only impious, but it turns the truth precisely on its head.
The idea that Christianity “drew all other religious practices into a oneness” is both visibly false (traditional Christianity today is almost universally suspected and even loathed by non-Christians, and is one of the few forced standing against the emergence of a One World Faith) and historically untenable (Christianity conquered paganism, it did not adopt it).
I won’t address your analysis of the word “certify,” as you were the one to use it, not I; I have no dog in that fight.
@JBL
When a Re-legion takes a veritable multitude of its symbolisms, ritual practices, professed beliefs, names, iconography, and even saints directly from pagan use for thousands of years beforehand over a large swath of geography and cultures, especially when all of those symbols, rituals, names, etc directly and overtly contradict scriptural commands, then it is paganism, no matter the branding they’ve slapped on it.
Surely you are correct that just because pagans use something general once, does not automatically make it pagan. Yet this is so far from the case: this church of abomination admits it absorbs pagan practice! The very title “Queen of Heaven,” has no scriptural basis whatsoever, except to be called an abomination in Jeremiah, and to be called an abomination regarding Astarte in Solomon. How then did it stop being a pagan abomination? Is that because the Papa, calling himself father directly contradicting Yeshua’s words said so?
The title, iconography, and ritual practice surrounding the Cattle Lick Queen of Heaven has been taken directly from pagan practice in Egypt, Babylon, Phoenicia, Ireland, Gaul, Anatolia, Akkadian’s, and China with precedent of 1000s of years prior. This isn’t an ancillary reality, but the foundational core of the Cattle Licks doctrine, and it is (and has been for thousands of years before there ever was a Papa in Rome) a PAGAN
TITLE FOR LUCIFER WHICH SCRIPTURE CALLS AN ABOMINATION, WHEN THOSE IN EGYPT BLOW INCENSE TO THE STATUE OF A FHE QUEEN OF HEAVEN.
You draw things backwards and fail to acknowledge a critical point.
“…paganism is a creative force in the world…” – of course it is, although your words diminish or dismiss this truth. The point here is that all mankind has been made with creative or destructive authority – this is not a confined phenomenon to a single people or population with like beliefs, this is the human natural state.
The drawing in reverse is the fact that Paganism did not need to influence Christianity, as it was Paganism that morphed to give birth to it. This was Paganism wishing to change it’s stripes in order to claim an authority it couldn’t before, which further emboldened them to violently enforce it on overyone.
I think that the demonization of Christian beliefs, in particular, are a way the cabal continues their mind games. This assault appears to be because it is the “one true faith” and reaffirms and solidifies this idea in the minds of its followers, but it is a manipulative sham to cause adherents to settle in further, believing they must be right. Christianity is heavy on the “blind faith”, and while people can find a legitimate peace and covering this way, if their hearts are pure, it’s not really the adult, developed relationship the Creator wishes us to aspire to.
It’s like all the hoopla against Trump – he is every bit a part of the cabal, yet they act as if they despise him utterly, and the masses became divided in ways unheard of before he ran for office. It is manipulation.
I have not in any wise lost my faith, I have solidified it and I know that Yeshua is the Truth of YHWH and I have entire faith in both. I also have long known that the Father is able to find any of us wherever we may be, in whatever system we have attached to. There are truths in every religious system, as there must be, as belief requires plausibility or it does not pass.
Another way the “manipulative sham” plays out in Christianity is the teaching of “The Rapture”. This was yet another stand-down soft order – a pacification which caused a smug apathy and nonaction amongst followers.
I agree. “The Rapture” is deception.
There is a type of “rapture” but it is not a physical removing.
I agree, too!
This is a sect’s doing.
The preaching of the “rapture” of the Church
before the Great Tribulation is about 170 years old. For about 1830 years, going back to
apostolic times, Christians were taught to be victorious, to endure patiently the sufferings, the persecutions and the troubles that will come, until the coming of the Lord.
@igageharleya
What irony there is in an adherent of a “universalist,” church of pagan practice, created by solar worshippers, claiming that they are the one thing stopping a world universal religion. The Cattle Licks are the original universalist one world religion; of paganism! You have laid forth very clearly the Truth here.
The Luciferians running the farm are aware, that just as an electromagnetic DI-POLE, or an alternating current Tri-phasic system, they must create an Us Vs. Them scenario in the minds of the masses in order for the system of human mass control to remain stable. A person can hardly walk with one leg, a bird cannot fly with one wing.
Likewise this strategy of Bi and Tri-polarity is frequently used to flip and spin people around on the ideologies they conciously claim to follow, and thus very weak, and ultimately lost in their allegiances to corrupt cult organizations that are their own demise. An easy example: In US, the republican cultists (it is a cult…) hating on the phrase “my body my choice,” for decades regarding abortion, while the Demokratic kultists touted it with great fervor. Yet, once it was time for nano-technology shots for COVert IDentification, the used their levers to flip and spin the ideology in a chiral inversion, and suddenly Repulikains were using the phrase, while the DemosKratos were trying to force the others against their will… The effect being that the cattle yell over the fence at one another, and nobody really pays attention to the corporate farmer preparing for their slaughter.
Take this (the blindness of someone so intelligent, yet so deaf) as a lesson in the power that this strategy wields over the cattle who have swallowed the poison pill; while you speak clear, and evident Truth to them, they are as zombies, and by trying to hold onto their life, they have lost it forever.
I hate this all. It is such a sad and sorry waste.
I believe this is accurate.
Forget about the blessed mother, according to gem you’re not supposed to believe in Jesus either he’s some kind of imposter of yeshua or whatever
@trevor
The second commandment is clear “Graven Images you SHALL NOT!”
How many crucifixes, icons, statues, and other graven images of G Zeus, bloody and gruesome, and the Great Mother do these imposters make, and spit on the commandments of YHWH? Dare I say billions…
Indeed such an abomination is the imposter, the G Zeus of the Roman (Rama = Solar Warriors) Tannaim (imposters.) For all those that read the Torah and the Bible, these things are clear.
Jeremiah 7:18 ” The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.”
Jeremiah 7:18 ” The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.”
disrespectful, full mockery…
I’m sure the evil pope loved it
That actor turned president looks like a landscape gardener It’s theatre folks. Last week in Rome , he met up with Pope Francis who offered to facilitate negotiations. Zelensky was furious as he only wants help to keep the war going.
They’re all following the family plan.
He was a long time ago born, I think. The context of our days is fit for his coronation already. Zelensky is maybe signaling that he will stick to the plan and do his “work” in order for the anti-christ to take his “rightful” place. He is reassuring the pope they are on the same side. He is a high-heeled belly-dancer, a comediant and a jew so, yes, of course he is blaspheming and trashing the values and the religious identity of the ukrainian people (that is Orthodoxy). If he still managed to fool so many people than he is truly a better actor than I initially thought.
It doesn’t take much to fool people. The pope is wearing a kippa.
https://m.beforeitsnews.com/strange/2023/01/cabalist-jewish-racism-is-behind-covid-vaccines-ww3-2480560.html
Or he s about to be revealed.
Some years ago, i had come across an antic gazette dating from the end of the 19th century where Ms Blavatsky made an announcement to her followers.
(She was a famous occultist and her teachings were taught in a school where the pope John Paul 2 studied while he aspired to be an actor…)
In this article, she announced the birth of the great great grandmother of the anti C.
I calculated he should be born in the 70s.
I really think he s been among us for a while and about to be revealed.
The current state of the world, the possibility of a ww3, the rabbis asserting the existence of the moshiach among us right now and his imminent presentation, the red cows being reintroduced in israel as well as the sacrifice ceremonial clothing and equipments recently fabricated, the school of priests who has recently opened to train them on how to perform sacrifices (which havent been performed since the 2nd temple 2000 years ago) are just some of the examples that make me believe so.
In any case, I dont see how the world, in the desperately degenerated state it is in, can make it any longer.
He is here already.
A clear Black Sun/Son reference lining up with Lyuba Yakimchuk’s reference to the hollow sun during the Grammys last year in her mocking rendition of the Our Father or the Lord’s Prayer and the 88/14 tank export from Germany to Ukraine earlier this year. The blacked out spot where Jesus should be is making it clear(er) the intent to supplant him and introduce the Antichrist instead, who in a way is also present in the icon since he is the darkness, the negative, etc.
FWIW, there has also been at least one alleged Marian apparition where the message was clearly designed to introduce Marian worship by positioning her almost directly on a cross. This was the “Lady of All Nations” (the title alone suggestion the world communism the Antichrist is working towards). The Vatican has asked Catholics *not* to promote this apparition.
@chud
Look below at the papa worshipping his pagan statue of the Queen of Heave; what an abomination that spits second commandment these Luciferians are.
Here’s a long, and fully cited, although incomplete list of the Mary “Great Mother” Worship the Cattle Licks have declared directly against the scriptures themselves. As you once said, it seems the Papas either hate the scriptures or can’t read them… Better to practice magical cannibalism based on a completely literalist reading of a fanciful translation, yet to disregard and directly contradict thousands of other scriptural commands.
They worship Lucifer, with the serpent that lurks below the veil, and convince the cattle to bow before the Di-Hevel himself by playing pious.
1. Mary is the all holy one (CCC 2677)
2. Mary is second only to Eve (Mystici Corpois Christ, par. 110
3. Mary is to be prayed to (CCC 2679) equally (and in practice more) than YHWH
4. Mary sits at the right hand of Christ (Pope Pius X, 1835-1914, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, 14) Pope bowing before stature of Mary
5. Mary is Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix (CCC 969)
Mary is the great mother of the members of Christ (CCC 963)
6. Mary Queen over all things (CCC 966) including Heaven
7. Mary is the one who brings eternal life by her intercession (CCC 969)
8. Mary makes atonement for sins (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, Ott, page 213)
9. Mary crushed the head of the serpent (Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus)
10. Mary delivers souls from death (CCC 966).
11. When considering the Church, there is no better way than to look to Mary, (CCC 972).
12. Catholics mus entrust themselves to Mary’s prayer (CCC 2677).
13. No man goeth to Christ but by His Mother,” (Vatican Website: Encyclical of Pope Leo 13th on the Rosary, Octobri Mense, Pope Leo 13th, 1903-1914).
14. Mary ascended to Heaven directly
It goes on and on…
This is not worshipping a pagan statue… Who cares about those pesky commandments about murder and worshipping idols?
Let’s burn the witches, rape the kids, and definitely worship statues.
>”Cattle Licks”
I’d never heard of these before you mentioned them. What are they exactly?
>”As you once said, it seems the Papas either hate the scriptures or can’t read them… Better to practice magical cannibalism based on a completely literalist reading of a fanciful translation, yet to disregard and directly contradict thousands of other scriptural commands.”
I said this? You must be thinking of some other chud.
>”[long list of pssages concerning Mary]”
I looked up a few of these and your list does indeed look accurate! I couldn’t find where it said to worship Mary, though. Are those in a separate list?
I’m trying to pinpoint when, precisely, our society shifted from recognizing a thing for what it is to requiring a system to “identify” itself via specific, self-attributed labeling for what it is in order to recognize it. This is the reason for all the tortuous language convolutions nowadays – if you dance around reality, no one has to acknowledge it.
Every one of those points is Mary-centric, yet you pretend this is…what, exactly?
What is worship?
Worship is the highest thing you give your time, energy and attention to. It is where you invest your faith and trust, it is whatever you most glorify and praise and believe will return to you good for it. It is whom or what you meditate on, that which takes precedence over all else in your life.
Some worship their careers, some money, some social or organizational standing, some assets, and on and on. Where your treasure is….
Why, having been given the son, do we beseech his mother and hold her in higher esteem? The one to go to to “get results”?
Do you not understand that, by calling Mary “immaculate” you immediately deny her son? His holiness is only made possible by hers, according to this “immaculate” concept.
Therefore, prayers and worship are directed towards Mary and her cohort of “saints” because either the masses believe she (and they) are more directly reliable than the Messiah, they are hedging their bets, or because the masses believe the Messiah is too busy or unconcerned to acknowledge their personal prayers to him. Or they are fully aware of the deception and embrace it. Either approach (and others may exist I am unaware of) negate Messiah.
>”Worship is the highest thing you give your time, energy and attention to. It is where you invest your faith and trust, it is whatever you most glorify and praise and believe will return to you good for it. It is whom or what you meditate on, that which takes precedence over all else in your life.
Some worship their careers, some money, some social or organizational standing, some assets, and on and on. Where your treasure is….”
Pretty good. I probably agree with this.
>”Why, having been given the son, do we beseech his mother and hold her in higher esteem?”
No one should hold her in higher esteem. I completely agree. That would be insane, yet some probably do.
>”The one to go to to “get results”?”
A Catholic or Orthodox Christian would tell you it’s because, being his mother, she is a particularly powerful intercessor. They don’t understand intercessors as being much different than asking a friend to pray for them.
>”Do you not understand that, by calling Mary “immaculate” you immediately deny her son?
[I assume you mean “one” rather than “you” because no one is using me as their standard.]
No, this does not follow. “Immaculate” is a necessary condition for being God, but is entirely insufficient on its own.
>”His holiness is only made possible by hers, according to this “immaculate” concept.””
No, this isn’t right. The Catholic and Orthodox understanding is that Mary would have received grace prior to giving birth to Jesus, so her holiness is contingent on his.
Well, thank you for setting me straight as to fine points of Catholicism despite your demurrals of having no dog in this debate. I would ask you to clarify or flesh this out, please, “No, this does not follow. “Immaculate” is a necessary condition for being God, but is entirely insufficient on its own.”
I’m reasonably certain Catholics see Mary and the “saints” as bit more significant than just “asking a friend to pray for them”. There is a reverence and faith in them which transcends strength in numbers.
Most Catholics I have known wear some amulet (St Christopher’s Medal) or other charm and are highly averse to removing these tokens even for a moment from their bodies because there is attributed more than just a remembrance to these items. They are held and rubbed in times of prayer, just as the rosary is. The rosary is a rote, repetitive prayer, prescribed to be repeated a set number of times depending on the significance of the offence it is supposedly paying debt for.
Matthew 6:7
Not that this is unheard of in Protestantism, only they will favor a cross charm, or a dove, or even at times a star of David.
>”I would ask you to clarify or flesh this out, please, “No, this does not follow. “Immaculate” is a necessary condition for being God, but is entirely insufficient on its own.””
Being immaculate means something or someone is “without blemish.” In order for someone to qualify as God, that person would have to be more than without blemish; it would require being omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, Creator of the Universe, etc.
>”I’m reasonably certain Catholics see Mary and the “saints” as bit more significant than just “asking a friend to pray for them”.
Whatever their practice, their theology is to acknowledge Mary’s special relationship to Jesus and ask for her help in obtaining grace from him on their behalf given her special relationship to him. It is understood as analogous to asking a friend to pray for them, but because she is the mother of Christ, they do have a greater respect for her (or at least ought to) than other intercessors, dead or alive.
>”Most Catholics I have known wear some amulet (St Christopher’s Medal) or other charm and are highly averse to removing these tokens even for a moment from their bodies because there is attributed more than just a remembrance to these items.
It sounds to me like you may be describing superstition. If so, I can’t answer for that.
>”Most Catholics I have known wear some amulet (St Christopher’s Medal) or other charm and are highly averse to removing these tokens even for a moment from their bodies because there is attributed more than just a remembrance to these items. They are held and rubbed in times of prayer, just as the rosary is. The rosary is a rote, repetitive prayer, prescribed to be repeated a set number of times depending on the significance of the offence it is supposedly paying debt for. Matthew 6:7″
It sounds like you may be describing superstition. If so, I have no reply for that. By their own theology, they shouldn’t be giving in to superstition. The Orthodox have a similar criticism of some Catholic practices.
Ahhh. I think I see now. My apologies to rtu (if there was ever a distinction).
Do Orthodox not use rosary? Do they not believe in relics of saints?
>”Ahhh. I think I see now. My apologies to rtu (if there was ever a distinction).
Do Orthodox not use rosary? Do they not believe in relics of saints?”
Orthodox will use a prayer rope or “chotki.” They do believe in the use of relics also. The repetition of a prayer or prayers is not a problem for either Catholics or Orthodox. Both, similar to the point you were making, do warn about saying prayers in a ‘dry’ way. I have read at least a few saints, Orthodox and Catholic, who warn against saying prayers lifelessly or without love for God, saying that this may even be more harmful than not praying.
What do prayer ropes or chotki or rosary mean to these believers? What do relics signify?
A prayer rope, chotki, or rosay should be a way to keep track of the prayers said, and also to remember God’s mercy towards them. For some, they become fashion accessories. The relics of a saint are a way of being physically close to someone who is close to God.
Okay, but if you are “keeping track of the prayers said” by counting beads, how is this not mindless, rote repetition? Is our Father an automaton we feed the set number of coins into to extract what we are seeking?
I pray solely from the feelings pouring forth from my heart, directly to the Father, and know that Messiah intercedes for me in my imperfection.
In fact, I may err in the other direction, by not praying so often as I should if I don’t feel it within me. I get disheartened and I clam up. This is also error.
We, each individual, can be close to the Father, without need of someone we esteem higher than ourselves. This is still a search for an intercessor. Yeshua IS our intercessor. We need no other. Comfort and agreement amongst the brethren is good and bolsters us, but this is, quite simply, chain of command.
Let’s pretend for a moment that YHWH is our Father (which He is). How might you approach a beloved father in your life now, if you wished to entreat him? Would you go and repeat words and mantras, rubbing beads? Would you bring along a couple of friends you’re sure he likes better than you to finagle on your behalf? Or would you go, sit at His feet and cultivate a relationship between YOU and HIM?
Go to Him, try Him, see if I lie or am mistaken. Just try it.
>”Go to Him, try Him, see if I lie or am mistaken. Just try it.”
What I do is irrelevant. If you have the impression that I am answering for myself, that is not what I’m intending.
>”Let’s pretend for a moment that YHWH is our Father (which He is). How might you approach a beloved father in your life now, if you wished to entreat him? […] Or would you go, sit at His feet and cultivate a relationship between YOU and HIM?”
There’s nothng opposed to this view in Catholic or Orthodox theology. They might add that you should approach the Father as well as the Son, or that you’d be foolish to ignore his mother if you were to visit him, but I’m not aware that they have a prohibition against doing just what you describe.
>”Would you go and repeat words and mantras, rubbing beads?”
To reiterate, both Orthodox and Catholic would warn against this approach.
>”Would you bring along a couple of friends you’re sure he likes better than you to finagle on your behalf?”
What I would do is irrelevant.
In concept, if I knew someone didn’t like me but his mother and his friends did like me, and I needed his help badly, I would of course ask his mother and friends to try and get him to help me. That would be the smart thing to do.
If I knew someone didn’t like me but I needed his help and had to make a good impression, I would be very polite to his mother and his friends while visiting him. That would be the smart thing to do.
I fully agree!
>”Okay, but if you are “keeping track of the prayers said” by counting beads, how is this not mindless, rote repetition? Is our Father an automaton we feed the set number of coins into to extract what we are seeking?”
“Mindless” and “rote” are modifying the word “repetition.” The prohibition is not against repetition, it’s against “mindless, rote repetition.”
>”I pray solely from the feelings pouring forth from my heart, directly to the Father, and know that Messiah intercedes for me in my imperfection.In fact, I may err in the other direction, by not praying so often as I should if I don’t feel it within me. I get disheartened and I clam up. This is also error.”
The Catholic and the Orthodox would have no problem with this statement.
>”We, each individual, can be close to the Father, without need of someone we esteem higher than ourselves.
Catholics and Orthodox would point you to John 14:6 on this one. How you understand that verse and what you accept may be different, that would just be their view.
>”This is still a search for an intercessor. Yeshua IS our intercessor.”
Catholics and Orthodox would agree that without the Messiah there is no redemption, making him *the* intercessor in a very real sense.
>”We need no other. Comfort and agreement amongst the brethren is good and bolsters us, but this is, quite simply, chain of command.”
Catholics and Orthodox are unlikely to disagree substantively. In fact, the Orthodox have a very strong tradition of this. You are likely to find elders among both who would add to your statement that although we need no other intercessor, we may receive benefits from other intercessors, simply because they consider it an act of humility not to count yourself worthy of approaching the King on your own.
As an orthodox, I pretty much agree with the analysis you’ve made. Mature and objective observations and I thank you for that.
There are, I’m affraid, some here that spent too much of their time studying the occult and it is very hard or almost impossible for them to distinguish things anymore. When one looks at dirt all the time everything else suddently looks like trash. They admire the “beauty and wisdom” in buddhism or other religions, but somehow real, unspoiled christianity must be satanic in their conception. Theology? Sacraments? Priesthood? Martyrs? Saints? Respect for the Mother of Jesus, the Logos? Jesus?( because they have a problem with the name, too). Prayer ropes? (I could go on forever). It is “paganism”, “satanism”, “cannibalism”. They understand nothing or simply cover their eyes and ears because the “precious hidden knowledge” they pretend they have lifts up their huge egos. They are too arrogant to let one explain so that they could reconsider things from an insider’s perspective. I’ve read lots of nonsense here in the comments. At first I felt outraged because some are blaspheming a lot, but now I just feel sad. These people don’t want to know more. They “know”!
@crisspf
Would you like me to show you all of the Luciferian solar worship symbols your patriarch wears and carries, symbols used to worship the Sun continually for 1000s of years before there ever was a Rome? To discuss the mass genocides in the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine empire? Shall we discuss the commandments of Moshe violated constantly? The commandments of Yeremiah? The commandments of Ezekiel? Or the words of Yeshua trampled as if they were nothing?
Should we discuss the open admission Catulisism absorbed and continued pagan practice and local deities as “saints”? Shall we discuss the dress and name of your priests taken directly from Babylon? Shall we discuss the celebrating of holidays in accordance with Mithraism and other pagan practices?
I am well versed in cattle lick and their offsprings (Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, etc.) theology, history, lexical choices, and ritual practices; there is a long and deep rooted history of child raping, genocide, lies, corruption and deceit, all veiled under mountains of false righteousness from the gentiles that trample the outer court. I do not speak from ignorance, but from a deep experience and lots of primary sourcing.
The vast majority of my studies and dedication is not to the occult, but to the scriptures in the original languages. You may not realise, but I hail from the same line of David, the same root of Ishi, the Aryeh Yehudah; the Occult is referenced throughout scriptures, as it is a corruption and twisting, much like the cattle lick doctrine, of the original teachings of my people; instead used for the use for personal gain (the papacy is the wealthiest organisation of the planet.) that have co-opted and destroyed what was once called The Way.
>”I am well versed in cattle lick and their offsprings (Eastern Orthodox, Protestants, etc.)”
I know you are “well versed,” but for what it’s worth the Orthodox do not consider themselves “offspring,” or any sort of spin-off, from the Catholics. This is because the Orthodox view the Catholics as having abandoned the true Christian faith in 1054. From the Orthodox perspective, this means the Catholics were the first Protestants, and the Protestants were merely the logical extension of what the Catholics had done in 1054.
🙏
@chud @crisspf
By this reasoning, then I can reason that you are making the argument that everything prior to the schism of 1054 represents a unified Cattle Lick church, including all doctrines and practices. Crisspf has scolded me for claiming to “know,” yet you seem unwilling to have a serious evidence based discussion regarding any of these topics which may invite a certain nuance of reality regarding the first 800-900 years of shared history of these two organisations. Why the total avoidance of these topics?
I recognise crisspf did first give some “history,” regarding Constantine, a lone church source itself, which is presumably biased in offering interpretations and opinions in its own favor regardless of the evidence strength. Thank you for giving this. It is still quite absurd, due to the significant attestations via multiple sources of the executions by Constantine of his family. The family was so murderous, that they had no male heirs except distant cousins by the 3rd ruling succession; there is no historical debate surrounding these facts.
Likewise there are 1000s of artifacts of Constantine issued after his “conversion,” which continue to extol Solar worship in direct, name, form, and symbolism, including coins, relics, and documents. More esoterically, there is a mountain of evidence, albeit which requires both inductive and deductive reasoning, thar can demonstrate the direct elements of Luciferian Solar worship, including the kults of Isis-Horus-Osiris, Mithras, Kybele, Serapis, Janus, and most of all l, julius Ka-SARos (it means “spirit of the beast,” in the ancient tongue, referencing the Saros cycle) and the cult of Solar emperors. The papacy directly even took the title of KaSARos and made it their own from day 1: Pontificus Maximus.
My point here is that both of you seem unwilling to have an objective, nuanced, profound and extensive discussion of the topics I am bringing forth, ignoring them entirely, while having a superficial discussion extolling all of the virtues of Eastern Orthodoxy based solely on nicely worded modern clerical documents regarding the exoteric (publicly professed) theologies. I am willing to listen to what you say, and have respectful forthright discussion in search while evaluating your words openly; are you willing to return the same?
>”As an orthodox, I pretty much agree with the analysis you’ve made. Mature and objective observations and I thank you for that.”
Thank you very much! I’m glad I could represent Orthodox theology fairly and in way that seemed accurate enough to you. I think Orthodoxy is one of the most compelling “proofs” (poor word choice there on my part, I know) that having knowledge is not the same as seeing. Your faith still produces saints among both scholars and those who never finish grade school, and all of them have the characteristic combination of simplicity and subtlety in their speech and writings that the Orthodox are known for.
>”There are, I’m affraid, some here that spent too much of their time studying the occult and it is very hard or almost impossible for them to distinguish things anymore. When one looks at dirt all the time everything else suddently looks like trash.”
Your words here remind me strongly of St. Paisios’ observations on people falling into the categories of flies or bees.
>”They admire the “beauty and wisdom” in buddhism or other religions, but somehow real, unspoiled christianity must be satanic in their conception. Theology? Sacraments? Priesthood? Martyrs? Saints? Respect for the Mother of Jesus, the Logos? Jesus?( because they have a problem with the name, too). Prayer ropes? (I could go on forever). It is “paganism”, “satanism”, “cannibalism”.
Yes, it is curious. And interestingly, some of it flies in the face of the symbolism in the Bible itself. No one, for instance, will question how sacred and powerful the Ark of the Covenant is, but it’s unthinkable and offensive that Mary, who literally contained the Messiah within herself would have a special role? Yet this is a very common objection I hear out in the world when people discuss Apostolic Christianity. I am sure you yourself have heard it more times than you can count.
>”They understand nothing or simply cover their eyes and ears because the “precious hidden knowledge” they pretend they have lifts up their huge egos. They are too arrogant to let one explain so that they could reconsider things from an insider’s perspective. I’ve read lots of nonsense here in the comments.
Yes, that does seem to be a real danger for all of us who start down the rabbit hole. As you will know better than I: “Being a theologian means first and foremost that one is an expert in the wiles of the devil.”
Just as a technical observation, there is a lot of inductive reasoning happening on this site (which makes sense based on the nature of it), but it seems sometimes to come at the expense of deductive, and can therefore spin out of control.
>”At first I felt outraged because some are blaspheming a lot, but now I just feel sad. These people don’t want to know more. They “know”!”
Yes, I think it’s interesting that Apostolic Christianity is often discarded so sloppily not just here, but all over! The Orthodox have gone to great pains, literally, to maintain the original deposit of Christian faith unchanged for over 2000 years. The Catholics, meanwhile, have created possibly the most comprehensive explanation of any system (poor word choice again from me, since much of it is also not systemic) of thought spanning both theology and philosophy and the relationship between the two, yet neither Orthodoxy nor Catholicism are worthy of careful study from those who would see behind the veil?
@Igageharleya
Since the dawn of humanity, the masses have always chosen the murderer, liar and their Ba-Ra-Abban, and hated The Truth, Yeshua. They choose to worship the sun, because it’s big and shiny, rather than than YHWH, who be all existence, to whom the sun is but a grain of sand.
Also, since you mentioned Constantine in so many other comments on previous topics… I will repost my comment here:
give me that one or two, or tens unspoiled source/s where it says that Constantine, the christian emperor strangled his wife for fun. …and was she strangled, or was she slain, or was she drowned? Was it for fun or was it something else? You said “all of his close family members”. For someone so calculated, so precise, you should probably know that his mother, Helena ( doesn’t that qualify her as a close relative?) was not killed by her strangler-for-fun-imperial-son and lived quite a long life dying of old age (82). All of his close family members becomes not all of his close family members. Could it also be that “strangled his wife for fun” is actually slain or dead by other method? and was it for fun or was there some other reason? (because some historians, a few centuries old historians disagree with you).
Also regarding Constantine… he was not born christian. He became! That means he lived quite a long time among pagans. Becoming christian and emperor might have made things a bit more problematic in terms of forcing christianity on his very people. They were pagans! Pagans did force idolatry on christians, tortured and killed them in horrible ways for not betraying their faith. Christian leaders, the real christian leaders have not. A christian Constantine could and would have not imposed the new faith on his people the same way his predecesors did with their gods. The new faith, the new way had to make it’s own way to people’s hearts. To be assimilated and followed willingly. People had to be convinced it was the best way. … In time! That is what assimilation is after all.
“Roman opinion expected of its emperors not innovation but the preservation of traditional ways; Roman propaganda and political communication were conditioned, by statement, allusion, and symbol, to express these expectations. It is significant, for instance, not that the pagan gods and their legends survived for a few years on Constantine’s coinage but that they disappeared so quickly: the last of them, the relatively inoffensive “Unconquered Sun,” was eliminated just over a decade after the defeat of Maxentius.”
Some of the ambiguities in Constantine’s public policies were therefore exacted by the respect due to established practice and by the difficulties of expressing, as well as of making, total changes suddenly. The suppression of paganism, by law and by the sporadic destruction of pagan shrines, is balanced by particular acts of deference.
Allow me to give you a different example of motive behind actions, of context and of consequences.
Was Vlad the Impaler a criminal of war? Maybe! And no, he is not considered a saint (in case you wondered). So, was he a criminal of war? It depends on how you want to see it and what suits your purposes best. Are you a muslim or a christian? You want to win by all costs or be fair, consider the context, see the purpose and the effects? So, was he christian? Yes! Did he kill? Yes! The Otoman Empire was a menace to his country and to all christian countries in East Europe. He was a defender, not an offender. Without him and a few other small rulers Europe would have been muslim now. It would have been Quran, not the Word of Christ.
“Any saint has a past, any sinner has a future”.
Was King David of the Old Testament a rapist? And a murderer? Yes! He did, though, repent and he has given us the beautiful, powerful, God-inspired Psalms. Past gives one’s future even more value when the sins are followed by repentance and by the change of one’s ways.
Was St Mary of Egypt a prostitute? Yes! Was St.Moses the Black a killer, a robber, a rapist? Yes! But the robber and the killer repented. The prostitute turned to Christ. The thief on the cross repented. He entered Heaven as Christ promissed. Saul of Tarsus repented. He became the Apostle and the martyr. St.Cyprianos was a sorcerer. He repented.
…Some of the greatest men and women of christianity had a “past”, sometimes a very dark past. Christ made His way to their hearts and provoked the big change because there was an honest search of something called Truth. And the Truth, the Way, the Life found them and changed them forever. Without us knowing their past and their 180 degree change we would perhaps not have enough courage to believe Christ can and will forgive, will receive, will unite with us when and where there is repentance and an authentic will to change.
@444gem
Genuinely asking, seeking, knocking: what is the true un-adulterated pathway to salvation then?
I love my neighbor. I love my enemies. I love YHWH and Yeshu above myself.
I walk privately and pray aloud daily.
What must I then do?
@Seekingaloha
Your questions is so broad, and I know nothing of you, so it is essentially impossible to answer.
The path you are walking is the way. You must continue to ask, seek and knock.
My one point to make is that you should not love Yeshua “above,” yourself. You should have gratefulness and “love” (loaded English word…) equal to the infinity of the ineffable creator for yourself and all things no above, nor below, only humility in front of his vast and perfection creation of which you are a part. As Yeshua said: YOU ARE ELOHIM.
If you have any more specific inquiries do not hesitate to ask.
@444gem
Thank you. I guess what I’m asking is:
– what is a life not wasted before YHWH?
– In your opinion Is there a line between ally with and combatant against the creator?
– is there different outcomes post death depending on the above?
The name of the church known as “Catholic,” or in Latin “Catolica,” is a reference to its namesake Vatika (Etruscan), Vat/Bat (Egypt), whom are solar cow deities of Luciferianism called “The Great Mother,” and “
Their name is taken directly from the Umbrian word Catulus, which was long used and adopted in Latin, inland which means in no uncertain terms: sacrificial animal, animal Property, usually Bovine. The traditions of Bull/Ba’al worship are well attested in Luciferian Solar Rites of Eurasia, from Gnossis in Crete, to the detestable Moloch of Canaan, to Vat/Hathor in Egypt, to Tannit in Phoenicia Carthage, to the White Heifer of the Minotaur, to the Sacrifical bull fighting of Spain (a true Catulus), to the sacred cows of Hinduism in India. The tradition is very old in Luciferianism, and the universalist church of the great mother’s blood lust chose the name for this purpose: the Luciferians tell you what they are doing; they see it as consent if you play along.
The word Catulus also appears through French, as Chatel: which specifically means property that are living beings, from which the word “Cattle,” in English comes. The word “Catalogue,” takes the same root, literally it is a “Cattle Log,” a book full of all of the types of animals owned by a master. And thus the “Catolica” church chose its “universalist name,” as a catalogue that brings together all of the sacrifical animals, the Cattle, under their mastery. That was the point from the first day.
The term “Lick,” comes directly from the Ancient Greek λειχω “Lick-O,” which means quite literally “to lick up.” And this they created a “universalist” Church where to bring all of the Cattle, the people they consider the living property of their master Lucifer masquerading as a Mar-Yam (Mar = Sea Yam = Ugaritic Sea Beast deity, it’s the beast out of the sea, quite literally….) in order to Lick Up his salt.
If you have ever been on a farm, you’ll know just how much Salt Licks attract all of the animals. The Sumerians talk a lot about this in their texts for farm raising in 5000 BCE; it’s not a new technique. And this they have created a Salt Lick for their Cattle, a Cattle Lick Church.
The word Church itself comes from The Scottish Kirk through the templars, originally referencing the deity Cersei. If you’ve read Homer, then you will know that Cersei lures men into her house promising sustenance, and feeds them a poison pill that turns them into a$$es. This is what the Cattle Lick Church does.
A very interesting etymology, thanks! It’s amazing how much names can reveal. I want to try!
Ok, here goes: Protestants have “protest” built into their name because they split off from the Catholics, which means they are defined only through their relationship to Catholics. I guess that makes Protestantism a lot like a parasite.
Hey, this is fun!
Where are you getting that this is a Protestant vs Catholic debate? All major religions have been seeded with lies. I understand that the Catholic portion stings you, as I have had to come to some deep realizations myself. It’s not easy, nor fun.
You are continuing to focus on a single insult you personally relate to and refuse to acknowledge the bigger picture.
What do you mean? I’m just testing out my etymology skills.
Sure, rtu. Hoping you will someday see.
You’re assuming the “Catholic portion stings” me. It doesn’t.
Well, you continue to do them a solid, regardless.
@Chud
This is quite accurate.
The protestant as parasite? It makes sense. They cut off on a few points but retained most of the rotten core.
@igageharleya
I would not define Protestantism as a “parasite,” of the cattle lick church. It is true that its name is chosen, as a method of defining itself in relationship to its origins of protesting against some of the most abominable aspects of its parent, such as Indulgences and Mass Genocide. As an allegory, the parent didn’t like being stood up to and called out for its abusive alcoholism, and so it kicked the questioning child to the curb and kept right on beating all of its other children who silently take it.
This is to say, Protestantism is not a parasite, but more of a child that rebelled against the crueler nature of its parent, the Cattle Licks. Is a child a parasite of its parents?
The argument is a common one made in logical debates as was popularised by some books in the 1980s and 90s (gives you a clue as to this person’s age and background.) The argument of the parasite child is made, as in the womb the developing child sucks off of the nutrient and energetic resources of the mother, and after birth continues to feed off the resources of its parents until it reaches full maturity; usually around 18-25 in modernity. Calling this child a parasite, as if it were a tape worm starving you, is of course quite a backwards characterisation.
Thus, we see in Protestantism, through this allegory, if a child (mischaracterised as a parasite) that it is a bloodline descended from this rebellious child that stood up to the abusive parent and was cast out of the household. It still carries the embedded DNA of twisted cattle lick ideology and practices, with a somewhat softer hand in general. Not every great grandchild is exactly like great grandpa, but they certainly carry his tendency towards alcoholism, even if they try to change.
As such, in many ways the potpourri of Protestant “denominations,” often has built in many of the same twists originally introduced by the Flavians -> Constantine into the Solar Re-legion of G-Zues, while introducing their own variations on motif; as many descendants in a family often carry common traits (may look alike or have certain behavioural tendencies) coming from their or common ancestor, but they are not all identical.
>”The argument is a common one made in logical debates as was popularised by some books in the 1980s and 90s (gives you a clue as to this person’s age and background.)”
It’s exposing when you say things like this. It shows how willing you are to exceed your evidence only to arrive at an error.
Right.
Chud says “Protestants can’t read.” Chud says “protestants’ name mean they are parasites of Catholocism.” Now Chud acts like he’s exposing me. At least its entertaining.
>”Chud says “Protestants can’t read.” Chud says “protestants’ name mean they are parasites of Catholocism.”
Correct. I said both of these things.
>”Now Chud acts like he’s exposing me. At least its entertaining.”
You should re-read what I wrote. _You_ speculated about _me_ as a person. What I wrote in response with had nothing to do with you as a person, but about how you work. Why is this personal for you? It isn’t for me.
@chud
You are claiming to know “how I work” here based upon one statement regarding Neurocognitive processing, which may or may not be accurate, and can’t be proven either way due to the shroud of anonymity of an Internet forum. It’s somewhat ironic that you admonish me for “overstepping the evidence.”
The broad brush assumption you are making about “how I work,” is unfortunately erroneous. It appears, although I have no way of verifying, that you may (or may not) have a motivation regarding personal experiences and/or beliefs which lead you to yet another erroneous broad brush conclusion in a line of erroneous broad brush statements such as “Protestants can’t read.” This time it is about “how I work.” I suspect the possibility that it may be that you don’t like the message, and may seek to discredit it by these means.
However, I freely admit to know absolutely nothing of you for certain. These are mere suppositions, based on a limited set of data points.
The previous comment you have taken issue with is directed to @igageharleya, who is training (and quite talented) to read sub-concious patterns in speech, and is discussing that certainly the linguistic patterns you have used so far,as well as your implied cultural references, do give some idea around your cognitive thought processes.
These ideas are always subject to re-evaluation as more evidence becomes available; that is “how I work:” I evaluate evidence, form theories in accordance with how strong the data is (always keeping an awareness of when the data set is limited or the patterns are weak) then look at how well the theory describes the data set as more data becomes available, and then monitor how well makes predictions in the future. I then consistently reconsider the underlying theoretical framework I’ve developed, and adjust or completely reformulate it in a search to come closer to approximating reality. This requires both inductive and deductive reasoning in healthy measure, and a strong ability to admit when I am wrong, or do not have strong knowledge or data regarding something.
This doesn’t mean I believe to know all about you; far from it, I am aware that I know next to nothing right now, the data is weak, and even when asked , you repeatedly refuse to give any answer and call it irrelevant. Yet, your words, references, patterns do however give certain data points regarding your concious and subconscious processes which show some trend and pattern, although for which it needs a lot more data points for evaluation.
So far, you have expressed and repeated broad brush vitriol against Protestants, without any backing evidence and which are clearly false (I’m pretty sure most Protestants in western countries are literate), showed great reverence for “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy and yet admonished me for “how I work,” by supposedly overstepping my evidence using inductive reasoning.
Another pattern so far is that you have continually refused to discuss and/or ignored any evidence and lines of reasoning I have brought up regarding the Aryeh Yehudah (who have written all of your scriptures, from whom Yeshua is born) and the founding, symbolism, ritual, genocidal nature, hierarchical structure etc. of Gentile Christianity and its deep connections to much older Luciferianism traditions, bloodlines, symbols, rituals, etc. Let us not forget it was founded first by the bloodline of Vespasian and Flavius Titus, and then made officially as the state religion by a Solar worshipping genocidal maniac (choked his wife and killed his kids) who chose a Babylonian Solar Demonic symbol to represent his Church.
You have simply ignored all of this discussion or called it “irrelevant.” Meanwhile, you have admonished me for “overstepping evidence.” The obvious contradiction and double standard is evident.
Meanwhile you have gone into great detail with others extolling and praising the great virtues of “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy, without any deeper discussion regarding the original scriptures, history, etc.
If you are really looking for Truth, I am willing to take the time to have a deeper, serious, and evidence based discussion regarding all of these topics.
>”You are claiming to know “how I work” here
No, I didn’t. I said _you_ are showing how _you_ work here.
>”based upon one statement”
Yes, it was an observation about one statement.
>”It’s somewhat ironic that you admonish me for “overstepping the evidence.”
If you followed the last two things I just said, you’ll see you’re doing it again here.
>”The broad brush assumption you are making about “how I work,” is unfortunately erroneous. It appears, although I have no way of verifying, that you may (or may not) have a motivation regarding personal experiences and/or beliefs
See above.
>”which lead you to yet another erroneous broad brush conclusion in a line of erroneous broad brush statements such as “Protestants can’t read.”
They can’t.
>”This time it is about “how I work.”
No, just the one statement. It was specious.
>”I suspect the possibility that it may be that you don’t like the message, and may seek to discredit it by these means.”
Suspect away.
>”The previous comment you have taken issue with is directed to @igageharleya, who is training (and quite talented) to read sub-concious patterns in speech, and is discussing that certainly the linguistic patterns you have used so far,as well as your implied cultural references, do give some idea around your cognitive thought processes.”
Cool.
>”These ideas are always subject to re-evaluation as more evidence becomes available; that is “how I work:” I evaluate evidence, form theories in accordance with how strong the data is (always keeping an awareness of when the data set is limited or the patterns are weak) then look at how well the theory describes the data set as more data becomes available, and then monitor how well makes predictions in the future. I then consistently reconsider the underlying theoretical framework I’ve developed, and adjust or completely reformulate it in a search to come closer to approximating reality. This requires both inductive and deductive reasoning in healthy measure, and a strong ability to admit when I am wrong, or do not have strong knowledge or data regarding something.
That’s very admirable. I accept that this is your way of working.
>”This doesn’t mean I believe to know all about you; far from it, I am aware that I know next to nothing right now, the data is weak, and even when asked , you repeatedly refuse to give any answer and call it irrelevant. Yet, your words, references, patterns do however give certain data points regarding your concious and subconscious processes which show some trend and pattern, although for which it needs a lot more data points for evaluation.
Okay.
>”So far, you have expressed and repeated broad brush vitriol against Protestants,
You mean to say “factual assertion.”
>” without any backing evidence and which are clearly false (I’m pretty sure most Protestants in western countries are literate),
You ask me if I’d like to engage in a nuanced conversation, but you’re missing the nuance here. But if you’d like me to respond in-kind: You’re “pretty sure?” How insulting! I personally am _certain_ most Protestants are literate in the West.
>”showed great reverence for “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy
Thank you!
>”and yet admonished me for “how I work,”
See above.
>”by supposedly overstepping my evidence using inductive reasoning.”
I was talking to crisspf when I said that. What makes you think I was talking about you?
>”Another pattern so far is that you have continually refused to discuss and/or ignored any evidence and lines of reasoning I have brought up regarding the Aryeh Yehudah (who have written all of your scriptures, from whom Yeshua is born) and the founding, symbolism, ritual, genocidal nature, hierarchical structure etc. of Gentile Christianity and its deep connections to much older Luciferianism traditions, bloodlines, symbols, rituals, etc.
Hmm… that name does sound familiar. Have you mentioned him before?
>”Let us not forget it was founded first by the bloodline of Vespasian and Flavius Titus, and then made officially as the state religion by a Solar worshipping genocidal maniac (choked his wife and killed his kids) who chose a Babylonian Solar Demonic symbol to represent his Church.
I will make a note of it.
>”You have simply ignored all of this discussion or called it “irrelevant.”
It mostly is.
>”Meanwhile, you have admonished me for “overstepping evidence.” The obvious contradiction and double standard is evident.”
If that’s how you see it, then that’s how you see it.
>”Meanwhile you have gone into great detail with others extolling and praising the great virtues of “apostolic Christianity,” and Eastern Orthodoxy,
I find others show a greater ability to stay on task in a conversation, even when disagreeing.
>”without any deeper discussion regarding the original scriptures, history, etc.”
I’d be willing to have that discussion in the right context.
>”If you are really looking for Truth, I am willing to take the time to have a deeper, serious, and evidence based discussion regarding all of these topics.”
That is to your credit, and I thank you for it.
@chud
Let’s follow the goal posts as you try to move them:
1) You say, based upon disagreeing with an interpretation of one sentence in scripture that “Protestants can’t read,” then you use the obviously highly simplistic etymology of the name “protest” within the name of Protestant to unequivocally state “Protestants are parasites.” Now you claim these are well founded factual assertions. Right… sure. Can you provide stronger reference evidence and expound on why these are “factual assertions?”
2) I made one statement regarding the possibility of making some inferences (without stating what they might be) to another person, about your apparent neurocognitive processes in speech patterns, with regards to generalised culturally contextual information that appears to be present in what you have written, and you boldly claim:
“It’s exposing when you say things like this. It shows how willing you are to exceed your evidence only to arrive at an error.”
When I address this with significant nuance, you backtrack and state:
“What I wrote in response with had nothing to do with you as a person, but about how you work.”
Both of these, to anyone reasonable reading them, take one statement I made about the possibility of making inference, and then extrapolating your interpretation of that into
1) a strongly worded statement about my character.
and then when confronted and disarmed regarding that you move the goal posts to
2) a strongly asserted overall statement about “how I work.” Which still, to any reasonable person reading, continues to be a generalised statement about my character extrapolated from a singular data point, which is not supported by facts.
It is also in line with your pattern of other far over generalised strongly asserted statements such as declaring “Protestants can’t read,” supposedly based on a single verse’s interpretation, and “Protestants are parasites,” supposedly based on a single etymology of “protest.” It shows a very particular communication pattern and thought process.
Now that I have addressed this twice, you’ve moved the goala third time and said:
“Yes, it was an observation about one statement.”
Ok right. It was, with a then twice reiterated generalised assertion about a facet of my character based on that one statement. If you are able to make these strong generalised assertions, are you capable of bringing forth more evidencr and data to support them?
You also seem to claim to be able to unilaterally declare what is “on task,” and what is off task, in a DI-alogue (two way). It appears to be a tactic, so as to be able to side step anything in the conversation that has been brought up that might be less than positive and require significant nuance regarding the origins, symbolism, rituals, translations, etc. of Gentile “Christianity,” and their strong and pervasive connections with rape, genocide, paganism, Luciferianism/Solar Worship, etc.
That you are unwilling to discuss these things does not mean they are on or off task, especially since any discussion with the aim of understanding scriptural interpretations, Gentile doctrines, rituals and practices as they exist currently. clearly necessitates discussing the history, origins, rituals, dogmas, transgressions, esoteric practices, symbolisms, and bloodlines involved in Gentile Christianity. How else do we contextualise and understand the present state of things?
You can try to unilaterally claim these things are “off task,” as if you were the authoritative school teacher running a guided classroom discussion, but it doesn’t mean much except that it is simply your unilateral opinion, and from a reasonable vantage point, it strongly indicates that you are simply unwilling to discuss them for specific personal reasons.
@444
And yet you never answered some past questions of mine among which “how can you pretend to extract any “Truth” from scriptures you recognize as being corrupted”?
@444gem see @SoAnnoyed pls
@soAnnoyed
I try to answer everything. to I apologise this question went unansweeed before; which was not my intention.
Let’s begin with the easy portion: The vast majority of the corruption of scriptures is found in their translations. If you read the scriptures in their original languages, then you will do away with about 90% of the corruption immediately. Tan easy example is stuff like the 4th horseman, whose color is χλορος literally “Chloros,” like Chlorophyll and Spring Green, but is translated as “Pale.” The 4th horseman is Osiris, the palid green corpse, but all the translations say just “pale.” The colouring change is a clear form of obfuscation, as it is a tremendous clue to anyone that has seen Egyptian artifacts, where the consistently paint deities of death Chloros .
Now once you go through the scriptures, you will find that the translations actually serve as a very good guide to finding Luciferian corruption in scripture. It’s as if you were reading a text in English that they had translated and continually find the translators consistently obfuscate the same references, even when using different words, to Luciferian concepts that are very revealing; such as those to abominable Egyptian Deifies, references to earlier scriptures, etc.
There was a conversation about the passage of Matthew 12:30-32 in the article titled “aiming to be as offensive as possible.” There we find they remove all reference to Amartia, which is a clear reference to the serpent of Berashid tricking Hava into disobeying the command. The word Amartia, meaning disobeying commandments by being tricked or without meaning in Greek is, to any Hebrew and Greek speaker, an obvious reference to the Hebrew word Amar which is the command YHWH gives not to partake of the tree of knowledge. Likewise Amaru is the serpent himself (like the AMARites).
They have replaced the word Amartia with sin, which is a male lunar deity of the SINai, and a twisted translational reference to the male lunar deity child of the great mother Mut. The word used for “surely you will DIE,” is Mut. The translations serve as guides, for those reading the original to Luciferian corruption.
I’d recommend you check the other discussion out, you may find an interesting in depth analysis that can help answer your question on how to read the original texts, and how easily it untwists the obvious translational twistings.m of the serpents.
@444gem
Thank you for taking the time to reply, I appreciate your willingness to share respectful and constructive exchanges.
Allow me to react on your last comment:
***The vast majority of the corruption of scriptures is found in their translations.***
I totally agree.
***If you read the scriptures in their original languages, then you will do away with about 90% of the corruption immediately.***
I agree
YET….
As you write it, in order “to do away with the corruption”, it is necessary to “read the scriptures in their original language”.
But does the Bible fit with this condition?
First, was the scripture written by the narrators (the prophet/divine figures)? No its not.
Thus we have to seriously lower our contention of truth. But lets go down on the conditions that may give validity for some truth.
Then, has the Scripture been written by those who personnally knew the narrators? No, it has not.
Was the Scripture written at the time of the narrators by some eyewitnesses?
No, it was not.
Was the scripture written in the original language of the protagonists?
No it was not.
At one point, one must ask: so what do we have left?
Well, not much.
What we have today are a greek version of the Bible dating back from around 350 A.D and an hebraic full version of the Old testament which dates back to year 1000.
What truth can one pretend to extract from this?
If any, then let’s imagine some 350 years after your passing, my heir goes to Court to claim some rights on your estate.
My heir presents to the judge a TRANSLATION written 350 years AFTER your death which tells about the account of a person who you never ever met in your life saying in another language than yours that you have meant that I should get your estate. While you are quoted to say exactly the contrary in this same translation (ie, that I must not get your estate).
Would you think the judge would give any authority to this document? How about the jurors?
You and I both know the answer: judge and jury would reject it right away and even the lawyers would not even dare to produce such a document in court without being laughed at or accused of forgery.
So I ask you again how can you assert to extract any Truth from such a scripture, whether in greek or hebraic?
Thus, because truth cannot be guaranteed if derived from tampered things, I have asked you “what make you claim your knowledge is truth?”.
However, I do agree with you though that the scriptures have been tampered in order to fit with another agenda, at least partly.
I will add a second comment below.
@soAnnoyed
I will respond fully to this in a moment, however my first quick note is that you are forgetting the entirety of the “Dead Sea scrolls,” from Qumran in your dating scheme. There are many Hebraic texts, the vast majority of which are 99%+ identical to the Hebrew texts as known today, therein.
What is a reliable publication of the dead sea scrolls, please, @444gem ?
@lgageharleya
Free online:
dssenglishbible.com/scroll4Q22.htm
These are translations, but they are fairly accurate. They also link to the digital scans of the originals.
@444 gem
Let me keep my analogy from my previous comment:
2000 years after your death, we find 15000 fragments which most read a few words or sentences. My heirs pretend these are fragments and smallish part of your last will.
Will the judge still accept these fragments as unequivocal truth?
He wont, and I wont either.
One could also argue that a small number out of thousands of scrolls are indeed complete yet… they still are tiny parts of the Bible.
Also, remember the James Ossuary? The Jehoash tablet? The Moses scroll? The Shapira hebrew bible?
I could also postulate that, considering the thriving art forgery capabilities which regularly fool experts and scholars, even the dead sea scrolls are not a reliable source, to me.
@444gem
This is my second part to your first reply 🙂
I do believe it has been tampered too to fit with an agenda.
First, the greek version of the Old testament, called Septuagint was written under the order of Pharaoh Ptolemy II: 72 scholars, 6 from each tribes, were isolated each in a room to translate each part of the texts.
This could explain the discrepancies in some part of the Bible and not in another parts: some tribes sold their souls while others not.
A few years later, Lucian of Antioch corrected the Septuagint and claim it was filled with errors. He is the one who taught Arius (more on him later) and was later martyred.
He must have been right since the rabbinic tradition considers the greek translation of the Torah as a distortion which is unsuitable for use in a synagogue.
What is also interesting is that the oldest version of the Bible in our possession very strangely dates back from the 1st Concile of Nicea and Constantine.
At the time of the Concile, the mainstream religion that we call “christianity” had nothing to do with what is practiced today; it was pretty much corrected judaism (no usury, the belief in the mission of Yeshua, his miraculous birth from Mary, to keep the commandments, the ban of carved images, the belief in a Unique G-d, the Father).
the most followed and respected authority was Arius. He was known for his writings, high morals and ascetism.
He preached a One and Only G-d which is the Father and that indeed, Yeshua was his subordinate who came later as a mortal.
He accused orthodox of following greek paganism such as Hosius of Cordoba.
Hosius believed in Homousion (which claimed the divinity of Yeshua), and hence suspended those who supported Arius; called them heretic and burnt Arius’s teachings.
At that time, they were still many pagans around and some of their beliefs and customs were naturally incorporated within Homousion beliefs’ system which will later be followed by Constantine.
Under the advice of Hosius, Constantine accused Arius of heresy and sent him in exile.
It brought big protestations from the population, from emperors and powerful people.
So Constantine had to call a concile so as to decide what should be the official faith (and hence, what to do with Arius and his beliefs).
1700 authority figures from the different religious movements were officially called to decide on a common dogma.
Yet, only 250 assisted at the concile. 15% only!
Why only 250? Because those who followed the authority of Arius were given wrong dates and locations so they couldnt attend and influence what had already been decided to set as the normative dogma.
The debates were so heated that Arius was smacked in the face.
The dice were piped, Hosius asserted his dogma in the trinity and all opponents were reduced to silent.
Arius was exiled again, called back by Constantine only to be poisoned to death.
Athanasius of Alexandria was the one who fixed the new canon of the Church.
He was obviously opposed to the ideas of Arius and was mainly known for his poor character. For example, he sold the grains to the Church for his own personal gain when they were meant to the poors. He was accused of violence and murder towards his dissent.
He rose in ranks under questionable means: he was only 30 when he was ordained bishop in a private consecration by a small number of bishop supporters.
Hence, we know that the persons behind the dogma that we know today as Christianity are far away from the morals and teachings of Yeshua.
Consequently, how can we listen to them seriously when they pretend to tell us what were the true beliefs of Yeshua or who G-d is?
@soAnnoyed
Thank you for this. With all sincerity. I wish to respond in detail but will take the proper reflection first.
Again I would point you to the oldest Hebraic texts from the Essenes of Qumran, radio carbon dated to as early as the 3rd century BCE. This may offer you some further clarity on timeline, which does not involve nor the Solar emperors Ptolemy nor Constantine.
What you say regarding “Christianity,” is True. More horribly true than most imagine, and the story is much darker and purposeful. I would recommend in looking into Flavius Titus, Vespasian, who burned and massacred Jerusalem to the ground, then stole the scriptures and set forth to create a universalist one world religion of the antiXristos. Their direct bloodline includes the first bishops of Rome, such as Clement I.
It may also be of interest to read The Computation or 666 which I linked in Chapter IX of Monkehs.
So you know I am not a “Christian” I do not bow before the abomination of Lucifer.
I am a Nazarene, an Aryeh Yehudah. We are still here, despite Constantine’s best efforts.
@444 gem
thank you.
To me, it is still a belief that partly follow their belief in a human G-d.
Unless one returns the power strictly to whom it rightly deserves, man is either his own human god or follow another human god.
Humans are creatures created by a superior being along with everything else, for a unique purpose. Like your shoe or your comb. There is a purpose for each thing. A created thing cannot be uncreated. A created thing cannot be the Creator at the same time. We’ve discusses this already.
The purpose of Yeshua was to show the way to the Father, and only to the Father. That is the only thing that he repeats all along and which is coherent to the previous teachings.
I could cite several dozens of extracts from the Bible but I am sure you know them by heart. 🙂
@Soannoyed
Having regained some strength, I find it a good time to give you a more comprehensive answer to this.
First of all, we agree that the scriptures contain corruptions from later texts; I am fully aware of them, and can identify them immediately. How I can do this I will explain.
First the easy way that most people can wrap their head around:
A very easy example is the “Song of Mary,” which is, in its entirety a 4th century fabrication. This can be ascertained from a simple linguistic analysis of the Greek present, in which most of the verb forms take compound tensing which is used nowhere else in the scriptures, and to anyone with familiarity in green linguistic development are a hallmark of 4th-6th century linguistic fashion. Something on the order of 50% of the non-preposition words and forms are completely unique to the passage and found nowhere else in the scriptures. We also see that it takes most of its content from making a remix soup of ”Old Testament,” septaguint writings and sort of reformulates it in a poor man’s 4th century grammar.
Likewise when cross comparing with the known historical information, including both the non-existence of the passage prior to the 4th century, and likewise the extensive evidence of fabrication of Great mother worship doctrines by the Babylonian priests that created “apostolic Christianity,” it becomes even more clear.
With this type of textual analysis, one can do away with another 90% of the remaining 10% of the corruption with great precision. This means that by reading the original texts and using extensive linguistic, historical, and as r geological analysis we can restore to about 98-99% fidelity the texts. At that point, the corruptions become of such a minor character that throwing away 99% for the 1 is a terrible waste.
Now, this methodology I have given you is how I began to read scriptures a long time ago, when I had yet to develop my skills in mathematics, archeology, physics, and particularly archeo mathematics and physics.
Let me put this in no uncertain terms: The scriptures are first and foremost mathematic in nature. The letters are there, as alphanumerics so that normal humanity can understand them, discern them, and remember them, but they are a record of extremely highly advanced technology. They are there, to give humanity the keys to the domain of the cosmos.
When I read the scriptures now, I do not generally read the words, I read the equations; and unequivocally, all of the forgeries perpetrated fail mathematically. When I first realized this some years ago, I noticed that all of the passages that I had originally discarded for linguistic reasons, contained jumbled equations that gave nonsensical results. As soon as one sees this, you can immediately find where the forgeries cut and paste from earlier sources without understanding the equations, as well as those than have no equations at all (pure fabrications.)
@soannoyed
Now in terms of sourcing authentic equations:
First of all, speaking of what is publicly available, we have the Dead Sea scrolls. These are texts from the Essenes, which are my ancestors, unspoilt by the hand of the Luciferians. They are largely Hebraic, and in them we can identify large portions of mathematical code, which simply cannot be faked.
Moreover we can cross compare with the archeological artifacts from our students all of which contain these equations to a lesser degree, the last in line being Pythagoras who received a watered down children’s version from the Babylonians thousands of years later. The Greeks were the 10 year olds that received only rudimentary lessons. This is where they got their methods to take measurements for earth (which they copied with only poor precision), the rudimentary atomic theory, and trigonometry. Compared to what is in the scriptures, this is but child’s play.
Let me give you an example:
I can show you how to obtain the equation for Plancks constant (relationship of energy and wavelength) * The Speed of Light, in an additive relationship to the semi surface area (our universe is both projective and compressive) of the proton from Berashid 1:1. This equation, which gives a relationship for spherical waves in the time dimension has not yet been published in modern particle physics, who are still arguing over the proton Radius.
As for comparing archeological artifacts let us look at Hammurabis code:
The dragons tell you that it’s a law code, except we have thousands of law decision tablets post dating it and not one makes mention of the Hammurabi code. Wry strange, except that I know what it is with mathematical precision: a collection of transcribed equations for building a ”cold” nuclear fusion reactor for free energy.
One piece of the puzzle:
As by methods which I partially showed in Chapter X: I can obtain the equation from the Ham code from:
(Plancks constant^2 * 1 mol)/ Gravitational Constant.
This relationship explains quantum gravity, which modern physics still does not understand because the Aryeh Yehudah have quit providing the information (Einstein, Hertz, Max Borne, Niels Bohr, Wigner, and Tesla, all Aryeh Yehudah).
It is also but one of several thousand of high technology equations on the Hammurabis code thst lead to a schemers for fusion energy, ehich they are trying to unlock now at MITRE. Hammurabis code by itself is only about 35% of what contained in scriptures.
Trust me that Constantine and his band of merry murderers or the Pharisees, didn’t write this. They have never been given the keys to the domain of the cosmos, and we’re not capable even if they had tried. There is a reason we have so little documentary evidence: these monsters tried to destroy everything outside what they could control, so that they may hoard the knowledge for themselves.
This pattern has been well documented. The Hebrew gospels, such as the Gospel of the Nazarenes still exist and we’re originally written dually in Green and Hebrew, as Yeshua said. The Greek versions like Matthew, are actually designed to serve as password key codes to the more ancient Hebraic texts.
It is common for inquiring minds to fall into the traps you are professing here, it is natural; they have designed a gradient of what is acceptable opposition, and the views you profess here are quite common and understandable, but miss the much larger story of which the Re-Legions like “Christianity,” are but a spec of abominable dust.
@444gem
** I can show you how to obtain the equation for Plancks constant (relationship of energy and wavelength) * The Speed of Light, in an additive relationship to the semi surface area (our universe is both projective and compressive) of the proton from Berashid 1:1. This equation, which gives a relationship for spherical waves in the time dimension has not yet been published in modern particle physics, who are still arguing over the proton Radius.**
This is funny, I am just starting to read on quantum mechanics.
I have some hypothesis but no mathematical background, your help could be of use.
Have you found in the texts the equation for the TOE yet? 🙂
@444gem
I replied bit by bit to your comment and asked that question before I read the rest….
well well well if what you say is true:
**(Plancks constant^2 * 1 mol)/ Gravitational Constant**
you are on for a Nobel Prize…
Have you tested it?
Yes.
The texts are the ToE
Such resolved theory would unlock the existence of the most powerful technologies.
Why are the physicists still looking for it if it is readily available on those texts (and even here since you posted some equations)?
Why would the Aryeh Yehudah want that to happen?
@SoAnnoyed
Decrypting these texts requires a tremendous multi-disciplinary knowledge that penetrates far beyond what any specialist in a field will obtain. One must essentially master a tremendous variety of field of learning and their subfields and be able to seamlessly cross apply them at will, what are referred to in revelations as: the 7 eyes (sights), 7 horns (wisdoms), and 7 spirits of YHWH (faith): Linguistics, History/Archeology, Geography, Mathematics, Sciences, Music, and Cultural Psychology.
Likewise when learning these things, the dragons have laid many rewards for good little boys and girls that play by the rules, and laid many traps for troubadors along the way, by placing all sorts of twists that lead people astray, and likewise there is always a third rail of “no touch or get banished” zones in every area, basically what is meant by a Re-Legion. In science you don’t discuss faith; in genetics you don’t discuss the clear and apparent DNA manipulations of the human genome, in “christianity,” you don’t question the literalist interpretation, in linguistics and history, you don’t talk about the obvious connections between mesoamerica and Eurasia pre-columbus. Third rails keep people in line.
Go look up a wave with a frequency of 7.77 GhZ and see if you can figure out its importance to quantum theory; then compare with the gematrias of BAT SHIVA. I’ll give you a hint:
702/774 (a number associated with Yeshua is 774) = .9069. Look into circle packing efficiency and cross apply that planck scale energy transference quantization the speed of light and eulers numbers. Then look at what Vat, really means in the most ancient of tongue (like BAT of egypt, Vatika of Eutrusca, etc.) Do you see that most specialists aren’t going to understand this stuff?
@444gem
I agree for the need for cross disciplines.
**.9069 in relation to e, c and planck scale**
thanks for your clues but at this time, please keep in mind I am not at all versed into numbers or physics, I am just starting to read general information on quantum physics in order to understand what it is and what are its implications.
Hence, I am not able to come up myself with this equation and nor can I find what VAT really mean.
Can you decipher?
@444gem
**a collection of transcribed equations for building a ”cold” nuclear fusion reactor for free energy.**
**This relationship explains quantum gravity, which modern physics still does not understand because the Aryeh Yehudah have quit providing the information (Einstein, Hertz, Max Borne, Niels Bohr, Wigner, and Tesla, all Aryeh Yehudah).**
You believe those physicists were aryeh yehudah?
What is an aryeh yehudah for you?
@soAnnoyed
This is publicly known: All of them were openly “Jewish,” except Tesla who was left in the dark by the monsters that controlled them. Yeshua is called a Teknos, which ya they translate as a carpenter, which is an allegorical translation at best.
Shrodinger was also an Aryeh Yehudah, although not openly due to the issues in Germany during his lifetime.
I can offer you speeches where Richard Fineman, the biggest contributor to Quantum Field Theory, and another Aryeh Yehudah. Speaks in his youth about “going back to the Babylonian method” for particle physics and ditching the Greek axiomatic materialist approach. Words are chosen carefully in a game of life of death
@444gem
Yes, I would like to read some of his speeches please.
some more questions:
What is an aryeh yehudah for you? How can someone know his line goes all the way back to Judah?
Why would the Aryeh Yehudah want such knowledge to be known when it could fall in the wrong hands?
How can you know about Tesla being put into the dark by some controlling entities?
@SoAnnoyed
Here is a link to watch Fineman speaking on Greek vs Babylonian mathematics and their relevance to advanced particle physics.
youtu.be/YaUlqXRPMmY
@444gem
Thank you.
I have started reading your series to understand what is your theory.
I already have some interrogations but will wait until I finish the series in case you provide clues to them.
In earlier comments, we discussed our different position on what could be the Truth.
I held for argument that given the small number of complete scrolls and many fragments containing only a few words, even the Qumran scrolls do not offer proof of the original message contained in the Bible.
Thus, because truth cannot be guaranteed if derived from tampered or incomplete things, I have asked you “what make you claim your knowledge is truth?” if based, at least partly on them.
You then replied you criss crossed scriptures with “extensive linguistic, historical, and as archeogeological analysis” which allowed you to “restore to about 98-99% fidelity the texts”.
You cited the Hammurabi code and others.
I can understand that.
Yet, I would suppose that, if indeed the source of this ancient knowledge is Truth, than it would necessarily reveal or confirm what is known to all and what explain the very existence of Satan/Lucifer, us, and the whole universe.
Yes, this is where you lose me.
If I read your interpretation of those archeological/linguistic/scientific evidence, it still unlogically reveal that Yeshua is the son of Man yet god through which eternal life can be achieved if one believe in his crucifixion and resurrection.
This isnt the purpose of this comment but it is easy to debunk the crucifiction and the resurrection.
Hence, to understand a bit more of the how/what of your thesis, can you please anwer my previous (+new) questions?
(This is important for and would appreciate you take the time to reply)
About the Aryeh Yehuda:
I believe your answers could provide me and others some more light on what is what, according to you, and hence to better understand your message.
I hope you can consider taking the time to reply to them.
@Soannoyed
You have not quite understood the message yet. It seems, although due to format I may be in error, that you are still applying certain dogmatic interpretations to the concepts I have presented forth, which may speak to certain mental biases within your psyche towards the scriptures and message inlaid by the abomination of “Christianity.” You need to strip away your ideas of what you think it means when the scriptures state to gain “eternal life,” or salvation, and go forth to the word as a child. Without presuppositions.
I explained earlier that linguistic-archeological and historical analysis are only a first step, and then explained the second, much more advanced form of authentication which involves highly advanced mathematics and scientific methodologies; these cannot be faked, as the scriptures contain such a hyper advanced level of scientific technical knowledge, system design, data encryption methodologies, data compression formats etc. that once one has obtained the keys (like a password to a read program for an encrypted computers hard drive), you can easily see where the inserts and frauds are.
The fraudulent sections fail not only the linguistics test originally performed, but again fail in the mathematical coding of tremendous intricacy present in the text. There are no exceptions to this I have found so far.
A dual diagnostic confirmation (or two factor authentication) is a rock solid form of message authentication used today by the world’s most advanced military computer systems to parse fraudulent versus authentic messages.
Do not underestimate the Aryeh Yehudah’s ability as Teknos (what Yeshua is called), the scriptures are designed as a seed of genetic material, from which the entire genome of Truth can be extracted. Anyone familiar with bioinformatics and genetics knows that CRISPR Cas-9 genetic splicing results in clear and evident cuts in the data, and with the scriptures it is the same.
@Soannoyed
I will answer a few of these questions briefly now, and more in depth alter as I have a lot on my plate right now.
1) it has, if you actually read the original texts.
2) no, you can’t sum up Homers odyssey in bullet points. You want me sum up The Way in bullet points?
3) there is a long and unbroken line of male-to male parentage for tens of thousands of years. One knows, and as I’ve said before, some never return and become lost, others do. How did Yeshua figure out who his real father is? Likewise Genetic testing confirm this quite easily now, and it has.
4) Math some of it in its most basic form is in chapter X.
5) logical fallacy. It’s not occult. Any who ask, seek and knock receive. But fathers do pass it to sons so that there are still shepherds the people may go to and ask, seek and knock.
6) You don’t understand the stories. How is it that Yeshua is descended from Dawid? Who is Dawid? What is the name of BAT/VAT SHIVA?
7) All Knowkesge is from YHWH
10) no, there are Isis Ra Elis
11) His father is an Aryeh Yehudah. Nothing to do with entities.
12) We are commanded not to hoard knowledge. Read the scripture of Shameshon, humanity has 7 days to figure out the riddle. Humanity is given free will, and hoarding and secrets are the downfall, not the answer.
@444gem
Thank you for taking the time, really.
**”You need to strip away your ideas of what you think it means when the scriptures state to gain “eternal life,” or salvation”**
Then explain what do they mean?
**I explained earlier that linguistic-archeological and historical analysis are only a first step, and then explained the second, much more advanced form of authentication which involves highly advanced mathematics and scientific methodologies**
Do you have any videos or else that explain all this process so I can have a better understanding of it?
2) **no, you can’t sum up Homers odyssey in bullet points. You want me
sum up The Way in bullet points?**
Yes, any message can be summed up.
For example, how would you introduce Yeshua’s and YHWH to someone
who has never heard of them? or about their messages to us in relations to
our purpose in this life? If there is an after-life? If any laws need to be
observed? If Yeshua himself says he is G-d? who is Yeshua as regards to
YHWH the Father/G-d?
I mean, an answer to the main questions people ask themselves at one
point or another in their life.
3) **as I’ve said before, some never return and become lost, others do. How
did Yeshua figure out who his real father is?**
Unless I missed it, I dont recall you saying to me that some become lost
because they dont return (from where?). I am interested to know more of
that when you have time to elaborate on that too.
His “real father”? I do not know the whole of your discovery. What do you
mean by real father? For what I know, he was conceived without a physical
intercourse but I have no clue what is his paternal biological heritage. I am
interested to know more.
4) **Math some of it in its most basic form is in chapter X.**
So I shall soon reach that part, I’m at chapter 8.
5) **Any who ask, seek and knock receive**
So If I knock and ask, you will pass your whole knowledge to me?
6) **How is it that Yeshua is descended from Dawid? Who is Dawid? What is
the name of BAT/VAT SHIVA?**
I dont know, explain please.
7) **All Knowkesge is from YHWH**
Yes. But that doesnt answer the question
10)** no, there are Isis Ra Elis**
Yet, Tesla was both a scientist and an Aryeh Yehudah, wasnt he?
11) **His father is an Aryeh Yehudah. Nothing to do with entities.**
Is it a public fact or something that is known within the circle of A. Yehudah
only?
12) **Read the scripture of Shameshon, humanity has 7 days to figure out the
riddle.**
Shameshon? please elaborate on this point, too obscure.
I hope when you have more time you can further details those points and questions 8, 9.
I appreciate you took the time to reply today.
@SoAnnoyed
I gave more details on bat shiva in another response. But here are more clues:
Bat = the Egyptian Cattle goddess, Great Mother of the Sun, Ra.
Sheba/Shiva = The Destroyer, the 7th planet, Saturn, the same as the deity as found in Hinduism, who is often depicted in female form as well, and the same name of the wife and woman who questions SOL Amon (The Sun King). Sol Amon is represented by hexagonal circle packing to form the “Maggen David.”
Her name is 72-702. The total is 774. 702/774 = .9069 the packing efficiency of hexagonally packed circles. 727.02 is Plancks constant over the mass of the electron, and another step with five you the electron volts in the SUN: 1.116.
Maggen = Seroent Deit in Egypt. It’s not an Aryeh Yehudah symbol, it belongs to the Pharisees, the FIRE I SEEs (written upaRISHIm in Hebrew like the Rishi fire sages of India.)
Her name means in no uncertain terms “the daughter of destruction.” Or “the daughter/womb of Shiva. The word Shiva in Hebrew still means the number 7, as Saturn is the 7th candle on the Helio Centric Model of the menorah. The reason that they send URiah to die at battle, is because he represents the planet Uranus. He is known as the father of Saturn/Shiva/Kronos in Greek mythology, here it is the husband. It all encodes the equations for the celestial mechanics that lead to solar system formation in great detail.
The entire story is a fractal, that at its most fundamental encodes the celestial mechanics of the early formation of the solar system, it’s not supposed to be the superstitious nonsense given now to keep people from realising The Truth.
The reason for all this rape fantasy nonsense spread by gentile “Christianity,” relates to their obsession with mother rape, and rape in general, which goes with the Madonna Wh0re complex they’ve got going on.
It keeps people bickering about nonsense and covers for the true origin of the name of the VAT i KAIN; Mummy and murderer. They worship the great mother “Queen of heaven,” the name coming directly from the Etruscan great mother VATika, in a church on SEVEN (Shiva in Hebrew) Hills. She is the adversary, the SATurnAN SAT-urANus. It’s why it says the harlotte of Ba Ba’al on (the spirit of the embodiment of Lucifer) sits in SEVEN hills; the mark of Kain is 7 fold; its SHIVA.
For any any who read the scriptures this stuff is evident. Their tricks are wicked.
@crisspf @chud
While you discuss the rape of one planet of another, in an allegorical story that warns against the evil of those that worship the sun and planets, in order to forgive an actually historical serial murder (Constantine), you do not see what is really there. I’m sorry but I can’t do the whole Mind Kontrol fantasy junk anymore.
@soAnnoyed
The Maggen David is just a Luciferian code symbol for the proportions of hexagonally packed 2 dimensional circles, which are the geometrical patterns that photons follow. Sheba / Bathsheba = .9069 = the packing efficiency of electromagnetic force carrying photons on a two dimensional holographic plane.
@444gem
1/2
Thank you.
You answered to my question #6:
**Yeshua being from the branch of David implies to be from the branch of Solomon as well: why is he discarded for having had access to superpowers or supposedly dabbed into magic?**
by:
**How is it that Yeshua is descended from Dawid? Who is Dawid? What is
the name of BAT/VAT SHIVA?**
**Sheba/Shiva = The Destroyer, the 7th planet, Saturn, the same as the deity as found in Hinduism, who is often depicted in female form as well, and the same name of the wife and woman who questions SOL Amon (The Sun King). Sol Amon is represented by hexagonal circle packing to form the “Maggen David.**
**Her name means in no uncertain terms “the daughter of destruction.(..) The word Shiva in Hebrew still means the number 7, as Saturn is the 7th candle on the Helio Centric Model of the menorah. The reason that they send URiah to die at battle, is because he represents the planet Uranus. He is known as the father of Saturn/Shiva/Kronos in Greek mythology, here it is the husband. It all encodes the equations for the celestial mechanics that lead to solar system formation in great detail.**
**The entire story is a fractal, that at its most fundamental encodes the celestial mechanics of the early formation of the solar system, it’s not supposed to be the superstitious nonsense given now to keep people from realising The Truth**
If i sum it up, you discard Solomon because he was linked to Sheba, who’s name could be in relations with a fractal story explaining the birth of the solar system?
First, most of our names today are based on references to potential deities. Take Sylvia, could we say that the holder of such a name honors a “forest” god?
Does a person holding the name “david” means he worships David? It doesnt.
In other words, how the decoding of a name is proof of one’s real actions and intentions? It isnt.
As per the story of Solomon and Sheba:
All prophets have had some moments of weakness and Solomon included.
Yet that doesnt mean they were not worthy of G-d’s trust, it just mean they were mere humans.
@444gem
2/2
Allow me to offer an example of another possible interpretation which includes your findings.
As you asked me before, I ask you to keep an open mind.
In the Quran, it is said about Solomon:
These verses say that Solomon had jinns (spirits), under his command by G-d’s permission, who built many constructions under his order.
It also says that some jinns were “divers”: hence, they also built constructions under the seas (Atlantis?).
The verses also say that the jinns had to follow G-d’s “command”. When “command” word is used in the Quran, it implies control by G-d’s laws (ie, by maths/physics means).
One can imagine that the command/measure is actually the science / geometry behind such constructions where for example, phi is found many times in the pyramids and other constructions which follow a line along the globe.
Hence, the constructions probably seem “supernatural” to us, as in, above human’s building capabilities (such as the pyramids for example).
Such constructions were even immense for jinns and represented “demeanour labour”.
This could also explain why many imposing ancient constructions left no building plans, no traces of tools, no dwellings for the thousands of workers that such constructions should have required if they had been built by humans.
That would explain many things that have not been yet explained by archeologists, geometers, engineers such as “how did they bring the millions of heavy needed construction stones which weighted several tons each?” or “how did they perfectly carved statues?” or “how did they carved perfect lines in series which perfectly adjust to the neighbouring stones like a puzzle” or “how did they create perfect mirror constructions” or “how did they create perfect measures which allow for perfect sound frequencies?” etc etc.. and all of this, with tailor stones as rudimentary tools?”
On top of that, such “workers” being jinns, (non human entities), themselves and their realizations were not bound by the natural laws of physics which apply to this spacetime and hence, to us (see below the story of the throne).
One could also imagine that, since they were not bound by our spacetime dimension, jinns were also able to make constructions in different time periods (as spaced out by several centuries).
Furthermore, these verses also remind that, like humans, jinns have free will.
They could deviate. They were forced to listen to the orders of Solomon but were not happy to and would have stopped their labour much earlier had they known he was already dead.
Also, Jinns have different levels of power.
In the following verse, Solomon had ordered Sheba to worship G-d instead of the Sun but she refused. So he then asks his councellors, among which jinns, if one could bring him Sheba’s throne so she understands that her earthly power is fragile:
A powerful and crafty jinn replied, ‘I will bring it to you before you can
even rise from your place’. But one of them, who had some knowledge of
the Scripture said, “I will bring it to you in the twinkling of an eye”.
When Solomon saw it set before him he said “this is a favour from my
Lord, to test whether I am grateful or not”. 27:38-40
Sheba does end up converting to Solomon’s beliefs.
What is it to understand?
First, that Scripture, as you theorize, DO include powerful knowledge since, when used, it has allowed a jinn to be “mightier” than another one by instantly bringing the throne to another place.
This means that using “scripture knowledge” could allow, for example, to spacetravel an atom-made object. This is in accordance with your findings I believe?
When Jinns knew about this knowledge, they transmitted it to humans who were evil motivated, such as those using witchcraft (it is not because witchcraft is evil that it means it doesnt work and influence our reality).
According to the Quran, the story of an evil Solomon is an evil fabrication which the jews decided to follow instead of Yeshua, who they rejected.
Hence, it refers to the knowledge acquired by the jinns who passed it on to humans.
Yet, this knowledge contains true knowledge from:
This knowledge transmission to humans allowed for the existence of freemasons (it were the jinns who were the first “perfect” masons) and the role they’ve played in the last few centuries.
This could also explain why they influenced royalty and evil bloodlines who based many future constructions on the same model
This also explains why perfect ratios such as phi and other advanced equations can be found in their constructions, names and wherever you have found them when studying your theory.
In conclusion, this theory would be that some humans have gained some of G-d’s knowledge, through the jinns, and want to harness it to re-arrange the world for the arrival of their representant on earth.
They have been preparing for centuries under the order of their master Satan.
Yet, however much they try to tamper the true creation of G-d, claiming it for themselves by using perfect measures and sacred knowledge from the Scripture, this doesnt mean that the whole creation which holds G-d sacred print is theirs or obey to them.
Or, it would be like saying, because there are some fake-real gucci bags (which are made of the same exact leather and sawn with the same exact traditions), then the whole of guccy company is fake.
You have found the perfect measures in the creation of G-d, in plants and animals and in the universe.
Yet, such creations are not evil made, they are not from Satan.
Satan has created nothing, hence, his “print” cannot be found in the natural creation.
Only in man made’s creation. This is precisely what his gangs want to do: spoil the natural creation of G-d and replace it with a man made one which could be under the complete control of Satan.
Just like the natural creation is under G-d’s control and command.
Remember Satan is also part of the creation and he knows it. His only goal is to avenge himself from us, sons and daughters of Adam whom he refused to bow down to.
He wants to avenge himself from us because he lost the love of G-d because of us.
Yet, he adored G-d much more than most humans do. Go find a single line in the Scriptures where he badmouths G-d. You wont find one.
He just want us to lose G-d’s love, like he did, and take us with him.
In conclusion, I believe such interpretation would perfectly be in accordance with your own.
If you dont believe so, can you please detail in what they would be incompatible (without bias)?
I don’t have fundamental disagreement with you regarding the trans dimensional passing of information and most of the other aspects. As it is, I get enough visits from jumpers who call me ALfred, the wise council.
There are some finer points to add to this which I will take up later, Radius Area Length Phi 22.5. The 22.5 degrees = 1/16 of the circle; a common imprint on artifacts sinusoidal representations baked into the metric and imperial measurement systems and quite clever given its importance.
You have understood a significant aspect of the scriptures, but appear with this interpretation, as you appear to have an attachemebt to for deeper reasons, to be mistaking it for a singularly important one, you cannot disregard the fractal after finding a single satisfactory vantage point which satisfies further understanding on one scale.
Likewise the Quran’s name comes directly from the Aryeh Yehudah קרן Quran. Which means to emit Rays. MIT-REs. It is an archonic, the ArChes embodied, piece of texts given by Luciferic . The shining light ray emitrinf archon. Doesn’t mean it’s useless or all wrong, just have to know why it was given when it was given.
Are the Igigi real, they are of course. The Utukki, Wetukki UTUkim crilele whatever you want to call them. Likewise The story of Sol Amon and Hammurabi is not all about time hopping string theory of the master of animals that are engaging in chaos control . that’s the point of these stories in the Quran, to decompress certain aspects of the story for their power of mass manipulation within the HaSHISHin (6) kults that eventually became masonry.
Equally this means masonry is not centuries olds, it’s the continuation of a long string of middle tier information dissolution call BLOCKS phemia from a very long time ago. Regardless, I will go into further detail in a bit. I appreciate the thought out response.
@444gem
Thank you for your quick reply. Always a pleasure to exchange with you.
**As it is, I get enough visits from jumpers who call me ALfred, the wise council.**
You get visits from time travelers?…
**You have understood a significant aspect of the scriptures, but (…) you cannot disregard the fractal after finding a single satisfactory vantage point which satisfies further understanding on one scale.**
Please elaborate on how it disregard the “fractal”?
**”Likewise the Quran’s name comes directly from the Aryeh Yehudah קרן Quran.”**
**Likewise The story of Sol Amon and Hammurabi is not all about time hopping string theory of the master of animals that are engaging in chaos control . that’s the point of these stories in the Quran, to decompress certain aspects of the story for their power of mass manipulation within the HaSHISHin (6) kults that eventually became masonry.**
If what you wrote were true, then it will be evil in essence, which I am sorry to say it is not.
Something that doesnt call for evil and call out everything that is luciferian cannot be from Lucifer.
So, I need you to show me some tangible uncontestable proof please (using proofs as described below)?
Meanwhile, I would like to share some general thoughts. Please allow me to and please keep an open mind, for I am not your enemy but instead a friend in what unite our hearts.
Why do you always refer to etymology when it is no proof? It is just interpretation of possible origins of a word. That is all it is.
If it isnt etymology, its lineage based evidence: you claim you know such and such based on hidden knowledge passed on, as you say, from men to men.
You then almost obliged me to accept such evidence or I imply you are a liar.
But what if I dont believe in both options? You are not a liar but your claim are also no proof.
For example, in a court of law, would the jurors be convinced by a case based on etymology and a lineage tradition?
No, they would tell you that no one can constitute evidence of his own.
So if it is no tangible proof for mere mortal arguments, how could it be for soul and spirituality matters?
Where I dont follow you is that you label luciferic everything that does not satisfy your own theory and again, without even bringing proof to support your claims.
From the assertion that the knowledge of your lineage is legit, you envision all other information and (wrongly) connect dots, as long as it confirms that same vision passed on from men to men.
Also, I think by focusing on millions of details, one loses the bigger picture.
Man’s brain is such that it cannot do both, see the details and the larger picture. This is exactly why, according to you (and me as well) many scientists fail in finding answers to physics problems: they focus in their own discipline without looking at the bigger picture in connection with other academic fields.
Yet, if you seem to have finely analyzed the details, you seem to have subjectively connected the details so as to paint the picture the way it should look like, according to your lineage.
One may have millions of true details, if the pieces are turned upside down, the puzzle still wont be coherent even with the right pieces at hand.
This is how I feel when I read some of your comments and series.
Hence, I feel you disregard logical reasoning when looking at the bigger picture, maybe because you are too personally involved in that picture.
Maybe this is the reason why some questions asked are not easily answered by you (example for my question on a summary of the message of Yeshua and YWYH according to your theory). While it is easy as A B C, you replied it was impossible to sump it up.
Your answer very much surprised me. Nothing cannot be sumed up especially when this requires words which you hold so dear…
I felt you bugged when I asked you to sump up because your brain just imagined all the millions of details in your mind and couldnt imagine how to sum that all up 🙂
Also, you ask people to step out of their comfort zone and out of all the things that mankind has known but how about you?
How have you stepped out of your Aryeh Yehuda’s bubble to imagine the world differently?
You havent.
However much you think you have found “satisfactory vantage points which satisfy your theory/belief”, to paraphrase you, this doesnt mean that you have succeeded in connected all the dots that make the whole picture clear and logical for everybody.
Because if it were the absolute Truth, no one would find one single thing “illogical”. Yet, at least, I do.
For what i have read so far, the BIGGER picture of your theory lacks logic and purpose. The 2 main things that run the whole show of this universe.
Nothing lacks logic or purpose. Look and look again, do you see one thing that does?
@SoAnnoyed
You say
“Why do you always refer to etymology when it is no proof? It is just interpretation of possible origins of a word. That is all it is”
No, it’s not. When I give etymologies there is always tremendous cross-disciplinary evidence (textual, archeological, symbolic, mathematic, theological/mythological, ritualistic,
Cultural, etc.) corroborating what I am saying behind. I give etymologies as shortcuts to guide further research for yourself. I Denver give etymologies by a wanton maybe kind sorta woulda coulda should be cause it sounds alike etymology.
On the surface it may appear as such, given that I don’t decompress all of the evidence for times sake, but if you ask you will see this is true. Be my guest.
I’ll give one easy example: I call Pharisees the Fire-I-Sees. At first glance it seems asanine based on purely superficial phonetic similarity. It is not.
We can track through thousands of sources, across thousands of years and multiple continents, how the term “Pyr” and it’s variants like “fyr” “fire, “phara,” etc all relate to fire. The term for fire in Hebrew is quite literally “Ash,” just like the Assuras of India, fire deities and just like the term for the black soot of fire in English, Ash. The connections are profound.
The term Pyr for fire appears as “PeRISHIm” which you know as Pharisees, the root being pyr. Likewise, they share the exact same phonetic roots and Sanskrit spelling with the infamous fire sages of India, the Rishis, different from then Sanskrit by only one letter. There practices and symbols also aline heavily.
The story of Moshe looking into the burning bush where he becomes “clear of eyes,” or “glowing of eyes,” the term for the burning bush is “Hassina.”
Who is the famous female deity of wisdom in Greece that has “eyes like fire,” and “glowing eyes?” The huntress Athena.
Athena and Hassina are phonetically nearly exact, and share not only phonetics, but they align ritualistically, and in the attached epithet and, mythology regarding eyes looking into a fire and obtaining wisdom.
You can then go around tracking ritualistic fire staring and “becoming clear of eyes,” (often taking hallucinogens) all over Eurasia and Meso America for thousands of years. We even find Athena traveled with the Ainu to Japan, as the goddess Hassinew, phonetically nearly unchanged again, and just as well as in Greece a huntress deity carrying the same weaponry and role, with nearly identical symbolism to Greece.
Likewise it states as much in the Torah that Moshe is son of PHARoah, who claims to be the embodiment of the Solar Fire, AURus, the shiny golden Dawn now known as Horus. Phara-on, the embodiment of fire. Like Shamesh-on, the embodiment of the sun. On is a suffix for material embodiment of a deity or emergent phenomena in human form.
Here we can then ascertain there is a connection between the Pharisees and cross compare thousands of words which all show such deep and profound connections between peRISHIs and Shiva worship. To give but one example Shiva = 7 in Hebrew, the 7th candlestick being Saturn the destroyer, and Shiva is the destroyer of Hinduism.
Following this thread will eventually lead you to Gujarat and the Indus Valley civilisations. There is substantial archeological evidence of the prolonged (1500+ years) contacts between sailers of Maggen and the Euphrates valley with Gujarat.
Following this knowledge I have been able to decode and read hundreds of seals in the supposedly not decoded Indus Valley language: the letters are closely related to Paleo Hebrew if you apply star catalogues. They are read right to left principally, but are dual direction.
Some of the seals are dedications for a coming of age (girl turning 12) or other well known deities found in the earliest forms of Hinduism, such as Garutu, and the Amrita, the elixir of life. Others are more interesting and refer to Atlantis saying “Subsumed in Vice” in one direction and “Destroyed In Shiva’s Fire” in the other, contain king on one side a sea serpent, and on the other a boat with a tabernacle surrounded by two ducks and palm trees, exactly identical to the iconography found on ancient Egyptian potter Lyn and very notably on pheonician and Pharisee stelles stretching from about 3rd Century through about the 9th century CE. I’ll show you a few Pheonciab and Pharisee stelles which contain the Indus Valley script saying “Deva Indra Ra.” And showing the bull of heaven. This is an occult fire priest language, they carried forward.
So while it seems asanine that Injust call them “Fire I Sees,” the etymologies are designed as guideposts, not definitive evidence. The word really does carry that much power.
It says that with The Word, it was spoken the universe into existence. You may not be considering the full power of the word:
Why is the name of YHWH now changed in every language to previous names for the illuminator?
Gad = an Epithet of Ba’al found in aisiah 65:11 and all over Pheonciab artifacts, calling “Ba’al Gad is my fortune.”
Dios = Zeus the illuminator
Bog = The Two Headed Janus of the Siberian steppes
Alla = an ugaratic deity of keeping the keys of the underworld to deceased deities who had ceased to have been worshipped.
And notably in Aryeh Yehudah אל לא “Al La” means “There is no ALohim” just as LA still means no or not in Arabic.
I don’t speak these things lightly, I’m giving short cuts based on a tremendously profound and varied set of evidence I’ve found which has lead to these conclusions.
@444gem
Thank you for your quick input.
You have explained in details and gave example of the etymology of a few words.
I appreciate your detailed description in reply to my question:
**Why do you always refer to etymology when it is no proof? It is just interpretation of possible origins of a word. That is all it is.**
You reply:
**When I give etymologies there is always tremendous cross-disciplinary evidence (textual, archeological, symbolic, mathematic, theological/ mythological, ritualistic, Cultural, etc.) corroborating what I am saying behind. I give etymologies as shortcuts to guide further research for yourself.**
What I mean is, for example, you mentionned Fire I see for Pharisee.
You link them to the etymology of fire which was found in many civilizations and languages (well considering the languages all come a single one, this makes sense). And?
If I take the word genuine. It comes from the latin word genu which means knee but also race, birth. In english it doesnt make sense to relate knee to authentic but it did before when fathers would put a newborn child on their knees in order to acknowledge their paternity.
Likewise, why would historical facts or meanings necessarily associate that same meaning to the present?
Dont you believe that what we mentally associate today to a word is what represents its true meaning instead?
When I speak, the power of the words are through the meaning and symbology that I want to share and which I base on what the words mean today for most of us. Not to what they used to mean some hundreds years ago.
Now I understand you also base your theory on other types of proof rather than etymology. This is what I am interested in.
Can you please answer my other questions?
@444gem
I missed that in my last comment.
you write:
**And notably in Aryeh Yehudah אל לא “Al La” means “There is no ALohim”**
I am confused. Aryeh Yehudah which you belong to, dont believe in a Supreme being like El?
Isnt YWYH like El?
@SoAnnoyed
The 3rd word of the scriptures is אלהים “ALohim.” Absolutely this is the one of the many names “HaShem”of the growth of the fractal of the universe and YHWH.
What I am pointing out is a linguistic coding, which occurs across space and cultures: That the priests of hierarchical religion and governments, which demonstrate to be invariably Luciferian, exchange the name of for the ineffable creator for ones which invariably in the much older languages and cultural contexts, and almost always in the Hebrew texts, are either a direct reference to Lucifer (the illuminator) or to the non-existence of YHWH. If I can show you dozens of La gauges with this exact pattern, is it really just a coincidence or some non relevant fact? No, it is an overwhelming and very specific pattern.
This is like the use of Dios in all Latin based languages. This name was referencing Zeus for nearly 1000 years before it becomes the word of choice in the Cattle Church.
It is like the use of Bog in Cyrillic languages, which is likewise the dualistic nature of electromagnetism (again the illuminator), in much older Siberian Steppe shamanism. That is now spread by Eastern Orthodoxy. Another several languages fall under this use.
The name “god,” in English spread by The Church of England, is an infamous epithet of Ba’al (the bull form of Satan) from the levant dating to at least the first millenia BCE. This epithet for Satan is even called abominable in Isiah 65:11, referring to Gad and Meni. Here another 4-5 languages (English, Norwegian etc) fall under using an epithet of Lucifer in place of the name of YHWH.
This is a pattern which repeats over and over and over and over in modern languages, to a point that it is nauseating: there are repeated, consistent patterns of linguistic codings that attach ancient pagan deities into the cultural conciousness. It is not by chance that the word “Nιgg3r” means “Human or Animal Property, ,” in Sumerian tablets on 5000 BCE and then suddenly it crops up with the same meaning and exact same phonetic value in the English language slave trade 4000 years later. These things are seeded and perpetuated under the surface in such a consistent and mind boggling manner.
Is it any wonder that today in English “Money,” is the same as so many of the ancient Lunar deities such as the Norse Mani, whose brother is Sol (literally Sol & Mani, Solimin)? This same deity is quoted as abominable in Isiah 65:11 as “Moni,” and it literally means “monetary fortune.” MONItary…
Let me show you a discovery I made just by following the word:
Consider the passage of Matthew 27 where at the condemnation of Yeshua they throw 30 “shining silver pieces,” into the tabernacle. 30 silver moons is equivalent to one lunar synodic period (29.53 days). The scriptures then mention “the fields of the potter,” which are used as tombs for “foreigners.” It is a clear and obvious referential clue for anyone in the ancient world, but which now is just brushed over:
1) To the potter deity Khnum, who is the setting sun of the west (like the Chinese great Mother) and is the name of the emperor on the pyramid of Khnum Khufu, at Giza, which were used as “tombs,” in later antiquity.
2) The valley of Hinnom in Jerusalem, often called Gehenna, and which is a valley of tombs to this day.
The distance between these two locations, measured from cornerstone to the tomb of “David” is 272.72 miles exactly. Random?
No, the ratio of the volumetric mean radius of the Moon to Earth is
.27272 : 1 How powerful they the word tells us this unassailable mathematical truth about two very important ancient sights.
Likewise yhe megalithic Yard, found baked into megalithic structures from StineHenge to Gobekli tepe all over the ancient world is exactly 2.72 feet. This is also Eulers number, a dimensionless constant (no units, like π) as fundamental to probability and the construction of the universe as Pi, Phi, etc. The imperial and metric systems are very, very old, and have been crestsd and adjusted to fit the Planck scale measurements of reality with φ to incredible exactitude, just as the second has been. Earth rotates exactly 16 Planck times per day (16.01) . That’s 86400 seconds, 1:54 within 99.997% accuracy. Coincidence?
If you follow this thread you’re going to end up with relative ratios of the hydrogen atom and it’s charge density to Earth that are encoded in this construction pattern not only of the universe, but ancient structures, and which are specifically mentioned in the scriptures.
So here I am showing you just how powerful the word is in tracking the history of the world, telling us to track two ancient sights that encode the Radius ratio of earth to moon (doesn’t depend on units) within the story. For those that are willing to use it as a guide towards much further and more in depth research.
@SoAnnoyed
Regarding the name Alla, we find that likewise it comes from a much older underworld deity that was the gatekeeper for dead. Look up Alla Gula, and you are going to find not only linguistic, but also significant symbolic connections to the modern Allah worship.
And then more importantly consider the aspects of the Black Kube of Saturn at the Hajj and Ka-Ba-ALLAH where people literally rotate around the Hajj Seven times. Just Like Saturn, the 7th planet. Seven being called Shiva in Hebrew, like Shuva the destroyer, whose tradition in India is about obtaining wisdom from Queen Shiva, aka Queen Sheba. Likewise, in pre Muslim Arabia there is a wealth of archeological evidence of worship of proto-Shiva, under the name Rudra, an amalgamation of Ra- and Indra. The sun and the illuminator.
Both kabbalists and Muslims worshipping back cubes called Kabbas Allahs, both under the same name. And with profound and deep historical ties.
All of these profound symbolic, linguistic, ritualistic and historical connections are of extraordinary use in understanding the world as it truly functions. The word is of great power if you understand it and apply it across disciplines with great care and research; I’m not just chopping up words randomly based on phonetics.
Now to cover the word Kaba Allah.
Unequivocally in languages and cultures of the ancient near east, the word Ka, is a reference to the aspect of a person, being, thing or soul as the soul’s image or likeness.
Ka in Egypt is a spirits essence. It is a reference to the images of statues made for deities to inhabit and be worshipped, they were called as Ka Statues, where it was said a deities spirit essence would enter the statue, and their ceremonies for summoning the deities Ka included an “opening of the mouth ceremony,” (which is a massive piece of cargo kult worship regarding animatronic machines, but that’s another story.)
in Hebrew Ka is simply the preposition “as.” Or “like,” with no connotation of this silly pagan notion. The prohibition on graven images of any kind in the second commandment of Moshe is directly against this type of stuff. Islam, to its credit has followed this command not permitting any statues or images of Muhammad.
The Ba of Egypt was a souls spirit in Avian Body or form.
Al is a reference to the tree of life, divinity. Alon in Hebrew means Tree, and is in the ancient tongue literally “the embodiment of the YHWH or Alohim.”
La means “no or not.”
The reason Ba’al is so hated as Satan, has to do with it being the avian spirit body forms worshipped in place of the one true creator so heavily by statue Luciferian religions of the ancient world. It’s the imposter, the shining “divine bird.” Look to the Babylonian Zu, who is the storm/lightning bird from where the name Zeus comes.
Ba’al is the avian form, of Lucifer/Benus/Venus/Ishtar/ etc. It is why Rome uses the Solar Eagle, dozens of flags still have it (such as US) today, Isis and all of the great mothera use either a vulture or eagle (largest bird of prey) and the Eastern Orthodox Church has it as their symbol in the two headed form. Evening and Morning Stae; Venus, to whom blood sacrifice was committed. Likewise Ba’al simply meant “master, or lord.”
So here we can see there is a dual meaning in Ka-Ba-Al-Lah
“the spirit of the Lord NOT.” Its a curse, and the black kube represents the nothingness of the vacuum of space.
This is why I find there is significant and profound evidence from a variety of sourcings that, Al La as the name used is designed to worship Alla, the deity who keeps dead deities locked away in Mesopfamia, and to say “Al La,” AL is NOT.
@SoAnnoyed
I want to continue with some of the other names and symbols associated with what is supposedly YHWH throughout the ancient world, by a consistent Luciferian name, iconography, and solar worship, as well as some of the twistings that have been given throughout history: Berashid discusses the pattern: wher the Aryeh Yehudah go, the imposters follow and corrupt the message:
In Chinese the archaic name, stretching back to the most ancient of records in Chinese, of what is described as the supreme and one original father, is called “Judi/Yudi” It is essentially identical to the latin word for Aryeh Yehudah, Judai, and the name itself “Yuda,” in Hebrew, often now called Judah in English. We traveled across the world many, many thousands of years ago giving the Truth as the shepherds. He is always dressed in turqouise, which is the color of the fish scale armor worn by the Aryeh Yehudah when they would arrive in boats, many thousands of years ago.
In later records, suddenly a very well known solar symbol appears, along with names for the illuminator and his iconography:
In Chinese we find the “utmost heavenly father,” about a thousand years later, accompanied by an uptick in war and killing, represented by the symbol called the wàn 卍. Said exatly like “Juan” or as the Babylonian Oannes. This symbol appears alongside fire and solar worship throughout the ancient world with incredible consistency, always accompanied by the same names, rituals and then lots of war and other atrocities.
A small selection:
Lithuania: It is called the PERkonkrusts, the Fire/Lightning Cross, like our root PYR.
Navajo: They call it the “Whirling/Burning Log.” It is equivalent to the fire Scythe mentioned “east of Eden” in Berashid.
India: Called the Sauwastik, it is greatly associated with Surya for thousands of years, the two and forehead headed solar gorgon deity of fire.
Armenia: It is called the Arevacach the “Sun Cross” or notable the havertshut’YAN
Persia: See below where I have attached a picture of a bowl from 4000 BCE persia which shows the swatstik surrounded by fish, the “John” or “Wan” or “Yan” or “Oan-es” the same as the roman JAN-us, the man of two or four faces. This is the power of the word to guide one into true understanding.
In terms of Astrotheological luciferian, this symbol represents unequivocally, and even many pre-imminent academic scholars and theologists openly acknowledge this, the north pole star in Alpha Draconis. This is the star Thuban, which was precisely the north pole star in 3000 BCE. This word in Arabic is ثُعْبَان “Tuban” and as I believe you are aware, and means serpent. Likewise, the name “Jon,” is the word for Fish in Egyptian, as well as in Babylonian and Greek as “Oan,” later becoming “Juan” in Castillian Spanish, and da-Gan/da-Jon in Pheonician. This is why Yeshua says that many were prophecying until the day of Oannes (John the baptist), who took no food and did not drink. “The Builders” that you referenced are called אֲבָנִ֔ים “Abanim” which essentially means very large megalithic Stones, and survives even today in Castillian spanish and Arabic as “Abanil.” meaning a stone worker.
The word “to build, construct” used at the tower of Ba Ba’al (the avian spirit body, the accursed fallen angel Lucifer) is בָּנָה “Banah.” For instance both bricks (originally white) and any shining white color are called “Laban,” the origin of the name “Leban-on” meaning a physical manifestation of white; its not by accident all the ancient lebanese cities where constructed white and worshiped Ba’al Hammon, who is the solar acatar of Lucifer. These etymologies are not spurious, the can ben tracked and confirmed across thousands of primary source documents, across dozens of languages and cultural contexts where they keep a consistency with cultural, theologicial, historical, and archeological evidence.
In the Chinese above, we see the substitution of the teachings regarding the ineffable creator substituted for the solar symbol of “Jon,” or Wan. It isthe serpent from the sea, just as “Thuban” is the serpent and the star in Alpha Draconis that was at the north pole in 2500 BCE.
This tale of a wise council coming from the sea is repeated over and over across the world over, and shows a constant pattern with mountains of evidence; it is the ancestors of the Aryeh YUDA, then twisted into corrupt and vile luciferian worship full of statues, supersiticions, and lots of solar symbolism, along with Cattle/bull worship, and then usually somewhat later, a “great mother,” representing Venus is brought in for blood sacrifice. It is a remarkably consistent pattern. This is what is meant by the beast out of the Sea in Revelations; it is the Sun and its accompanying worship which twists the truth into a luciferian corruption that imposters the real thing.
You may question whether or not it is possible that this all traveled as far as China (whose name is literally KAIN-a and who is ruled by the HAN chinese, Hanas meaning serpent just as well in Hebrew and Arabic to this day.)
Then look to the Korean emperor Dangun. His name and iconography are essentially identical to the Pheonician solar fish man DAGON. Or the African Fish scale solar man deity, DOGON. Quite the pattern.
Korea’s Dagon is always represented wearing turqouise fish scales, with the sun behind his head. The symbols making up his name in Korean 檀君 mean “Purple-Red Monarch.” The texts regarding Dangun go back to 2000 BCE. Its quite hard to see how with the detailed phonetic, symbolic, iconographic, and ritual identicality they could be unconnected.
Is it any coincidence that at Beni Hazan, Hazan being a Hebrew word meaning “The speaker/singer of the Ruach (Breathe of YHWH)” we find semetic shepherd kings depicted wearing scarlett red? Or that the same Khnum Khufu of Giza grew up in Beni Hazan of Ancient Egypt, and only after constructing the pyramids was corrupted by the sun worshiping heliopolitan priests at the city of OAN/on? And then this shows up in the scriptures regarding murdering the Truth, which is Yeshua. Murdering the Truth in Matthew 27, pointing to structures that are exactly 272 miles apart corrupted by solar worship into becoming tombs by PHARAoahs and PHARisees? No priests will dare admit these glaringly obvious realities, but they cant be ignored.
Likewise, it cannot be a simple coincidence that in the scriptures we find that the one who betrays Yeshua is known as Judas, but whose name in Greek is Ὶούδας which is a one letter corruption of the Greek spelling for “Aryeh Yehudah” Ἰουδαίων, and which relates with the term ἰοειδής which means “Violet.” It is a reference to a history of betrayal and impostering by those wearing Tyrrean Purple, and the color violet of the western setting sun, just as the Great Mother of the western setting sun in China, and Khnum Khufu the potter deity of the western setting sun in Egypt. The theme is dizzingly interconnected, with a profound depth.
Below is a photo of the Persian bowl from 4000 BCE, showing the “Wan,” along with all of the fish swirling around it; the beast out of the sea; Solar worship that Imposters the Aryeh Yehudah. This is why the Hebrew term “Tanninu” meaning sea beast, is from the exact same root as “Tannaim” which means imposters. It shows the corruptions in Egyptin Ptah, the patron deity of masonry and the builders, and Tannit (who is Ptah-Nit), of the Pheonicians who is the great mother of blood sacrifice of children in Pheonician, whose name originally included the letter Digamma, that looks like f, but is said W, and their original name WANicia.
The Scriptures are magnificent in the revelations they provide linguistically, as paths for guidance of much deeper mathematic, archeologic, historical, theological, and scientific research towards uncovering and exposing the very evil and occult tricks these monsters play on the world across space and time.
As Yeshua commanded, I am shouting what is whispered in the inner rooms from the rooftops.
Just a small question, does “East of Eden” refer to a new dawn of a period of judgment?
@Igageharleya @ariah
The whirling fire scythe refers to the solar pashas, the solar analemma which represents how the sun moves throughout the Earth year. This is in regards to the setting of Earth in its current stable astronomical orbit around the sun, which then gives rise to teh conditions that create humanity in its material form , from the carbon-12 (the dust) of the Earth. Male and Female created HEI.
Hava says (father does not)to the serpent in Berashid 3:2, that she has been told that whoever eats the “Fruit” shall surely die. The word used is:
מִפְּרִ֥י “miPYRi” = Fruit, Womb
compare this to:
פְּרוּשִׁים “PERIshim” The Pharisees
Note, one ends just where the other begins; a clever invention from them in their name. The same root for womb as the PYRIshim, or FIRe seers. The last three letters (reading right to left of course) of the word for “fruit,” in Berashid 3:2 and the first 3 letters of “Pharisees” are identical, Pei-Resh-Yod.
In the very name of the fire sage Pharisees we find a reference to this whirling fire scythe, the solar analemma, and the fruit of Eden, the one that Amarru uses to cause humanity to commit an amartia (disobeyment of commands) which leads to the banishment from Eden, and the construction of the solar analemma, this universe and our solar system, which is material existence. As we have discussed, this word for fruit also means “womb.” This is why they worship the great Mother, who reaps and sews; for anyone who partakes of the WOMB, emerging from the chaotic dark waters (literally what it is as the material body forms in the womb) WILL SURELY DIE.
As you study the original forms of the Aryeh Yehudah letters, you will find that the words letters of MiPeri tell the story by itself:
Mem = Waters Pei = Mouth Resh = head Yod = Hand.
Just like a human birth, as from out of the waters of the womb emerges the living child head first followed by the hand (a defining feature of humans is our hands). Material embodiment in the universe, which requires you to be born in a stable solar system with a solar analemma with the same or very similar to ours; it requires a whirling fire scythe.
This is why Bishop Melito goes so far, between hating the Aryeh Yehudah for a good long while, as to give the direct etymology of the word passover as πάσχω in 191 CE, given as suffering and then includes the word “hyperbola” just like the mathematical form that describes the “arches of heaven,” which represent gravitational orbits; its the old adage, “life is suffering.” The Greek Luciferians really went hard on the Boddhi/Woden doctrines of the Thokarians and their octagonal churches, along with all the glorification of the highly disgusting false martyrdoms and brutality of self flogging. Make them suffer for their AI. (the name of Enki is IA…)
He is telling his cattle (human property) to their face that their passing over into material existence is suffering and sacrifice for the sake of Lucifer/IA’s material creation (AI…) by harvesting their souls an Ki (En = Lord Ki = energy, lord of the Ki Farm) into the material universe, and then directs them to worship the great mother (and the Sun, the whirling fire scythe, which sits at the door and blind them from The Truth) that gave them their life from “the womb,” so that SURELY THEY WILL DIE and feel suffering for their “original sin” that the serpent needs for his positive feedback loop of rebellion by harvesting their free will. This is a wicked twist.
As you know, Qadim, East in Hebrew also refers to backwards in time, or forwards, if you go around the whole Earth (allegorically) on a boat. It is both backwards and forwards.
@ariah
This also may be helpful to you
@lgageharleya
mistagged you above. The numerics are telling: the word for “Whirling” or “Turning” has the lead digits as:
5.445824
5.445824^2 = Speed of Light (which is C) *pi^2.
This is PI CEE, the fish around the scythe is the vesica pisces geometrical construction, which governs the serpent like movement of light. This is the connection between the great mother and her genitalia, like Ishtar, and the serpent, whose movement is governed by the geometric construction of the universe.
I have discussed this regarding a bow and arrow (the rays of light which bend in gravity as general relativity shows) and the vesica pisces flower symbol found in the temple of apollo, as is referenced in Revelations in great detail in a much earlier post.
@444gem
Thank you for your input.
If I understand it, you criss crossed scriptures with “extensive linguistic, historical, and as r geological analysis” which allowed you to “restore to about 98-99% fidelity the texts”.
Then, using a simple list, can you name what you think are the true information of the texts?
For example, the “laws” that one has to follow? G-d’s message?
**Let me put this in no uncertain terms: The scriptures are first and foremost mathematic in nature. // When I read the scriptures now, I do not generally read the words, I read the equations; and unequivocally, all of the forgeries perpetrated fail mathematically. When I first realized this some years ago, I noticed that all of the passages that I had originally discarded for linguistic reasons, contained jumbled equations that gave nonsensical results.**
Very interesting, I myself believe that G-d is actually Perfect and All Knowing.
What allows for perfection? Mathematics. This is the roots to physics, astronomy, neurology, chemistry etc etc.. to the whole universe. The universe is just numbers, so are we. The atom, the quark. it’s all chemistry and physics. Hence, Mathematics.
Even excrements are perfect: they allow us to remain alive (otherwise an occlusion could kill us), they allow us to identify a disease/bacteria or expel harmful bacterias (diarrhea) and so on.
Look at what humans create and yet, it is always harmful one way or the other (harming us or the planet or animals).
When even imperfection is constantly perfect, be assured this requires perfection at the quantum level.
See, I have not agreed with many things you wrote here yet we share that same idea that G-d speaks to us with numbers.
No wonder with 89% of 500 or so nobel prize recipients believe in a Creator.
@soannoyed
I’ve provided a long and thorough first part response, just “waiting for approval.”
Good point!
@crisspf
I’ve provided a longer response to this which is awaiting approval. On here, I have received and responses to thousands of questions, and sometimes, some of them get lost in the fray, particularly when the volume is high. However, I am eager for the first part of the response to be posted, and then to provide further depth in the second part.
I knew we’d find some common ground.
>“ The name of the church known as “Catholic,” or in Latin “Catolica,” is a reference to its namesake Vatika (Etruscan), Vat/Bat (Egypt), whom are solar cow deities of Luciferianism called “The Great Mother,”
Their name is taken directly from the Umbrian word Catulus, which was long used and adopted in Latin, inland which means in no uncertain terms: sacrificial animal, animal Property, usually Bovine. The traditions of Bull/Ba’al worship are well attested in Luciferian Solar Rites of Eurasia, from Gnossis in Crete, to the detestable Moloch of Canaan, to Vat/Hathor in Egypt, to Tannit in Phoenicia Carthage, to the White Heifer of the Minotaur, to the Sacrifical bull fighting of Spain (a true Catulus), to the sacred cows of Hinduism in India. The tradition is very old in Luciferianism, and the universalist church of the great mother’s blood lust chose the name for this purpose: the Luciferians tell you what they are doing; they see it as consent if you play along.”
You see you can create quite a novel starting from one word. You extract and distort, then combine elements in such a way (convincing way) that someone a little bit more naive, or lazy, or weak in his faith, or outside the Church is being taken by surprise by your wordy avalanche and “buy a boat because of writing skits”.
It amazes me that you simply ignore the greek origin of the word.
Also,… Catholic Orthodox (orthos+doxa= straight/right opinion) Church = Universal Right/Straight/in truth Church.
I agree that some “shepards” are wolves. they use and abuse both faith and people. I also want to underline that Christ’s teachings are open, not occult and available to both educated and illiterate people, rich and poor, all colours and nations.
Mary, the Holy Mother of Jesus Christ is the one we give our respect to, and not some pagan godess or some luciferic woman predestined to be the mother of the anti-christ. We know whom we give our respects to. We esteem that particular, unique, special woman who was and is Mother of Christ. To the orthodox and also true catholics she is our Emperess, the Holy Virgin, the spotless dove, most beautiful flower in the gardens of heaven. We love her and treasure her because she was that one, outstanding woman worthy to carry in her womb God incarnated (and please, take your etymologies and insults elsewhere). Orthodox believers do worship Christ, yes, Jesus Christ (=Iisus Hristos = Iesous (Ιησους) Christos (Χριστος) = the Son\ the Logos , not Mithras or Horus or whatever Zeitgeist impostor you sell us here. True and in Truth believers KNOW whom they worship and show esteem to.
>”I also want to underline that Christ’s teachings are open, not occult”
This is an extremely important point, and perhaps the most important point that could be made here.
If we believe the Bible, then we believe Christ is the manifestation of all that was previously hidden. Christ tells us this when he says “I am […] the Truth.” (John 14:6) This means (among many other things) that *the truth is a person*. This is further reinforced when John says of Christ, “the Word was made flesh.” (John 1:14) God, of course, speaks only Truth. This also means Christ himself is the language God chooses.
From here, one can begin to see why prophets are made to eat scrolls. If one can see that, then one can also begin to understand why the Orthodox and Catholics believe the Eucharist is Christ.
@chud, is eating scrolls literal, too? If not, why not? Especially if these two concepts are interrelated?
>”is eating scrolls literal, too?”
John 1:10: “I was in the spirit on the Lord’s day”
Ezekiel 2:1: “This was the vision of the likeness of the glory of the Lord”
Before John was given a scroll to eat, he was in the spirit. Before Ezekiel was given a scroll to eat, he was having a vision.
As you can see, my answer to this question will be less relevant for you than your answer to it. So I ask you: is what happens in the spirit and in visions literal, or not?
John 6:25: “And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him: Rabbi, when camest thou hither?”
When Christ is saying, “He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life” (John 6:55), John has given us the other side of the sea as the setting, so this is a literal description of historical events in the temporal realm. The disciples and Jews respond negatively to what he plainly says. In response, he does not modify his statement or turn to a parable, he insists: “For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.” (John 6:56) The people are scandalized when they hear it, He persists, offering no qualification to his words, but instead offers them a proof that what he is saying is true: “Doth this scandalize you? If then you shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?” (John 6:62-63)
He did try to correct their literalistic misinterpretation of his words in John 6 in several ways: (a) Yeshua said, “The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63, emphasis added). (b) He also said, “The flesh is of no help at all” in understanding his words (John 6:63, empha-sis added). (c) Further, Yeshua equated “eating” his flesh with one who “believes in him” and thereby “has eternal life” (cf. John 3:16, 18,
Man shall not live by bread alone, but by EVERY WORD
“O taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps. 37:4). “Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters . . . come, buy and eat” (Isa. 55:1). Ezekiel was told to “eat” the scroll (the Word of God) in a figurative sense (Ezek. 2:8-9). Peter said, “long for the pure spiritual milk that by [eating] it you may grow up unto salvation—if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good” (1 Peter 2:2-3, emphasis added).
(4) Jesus often used figures of speech in the Gospel of John to describe Himself such as, “water” (4:14) “bread” (6:35), “light” (8:12), the “door” (10:7, 9), and the “vine” (15:1). But a literalistic sense makes no sense in any of these cases.
‘It is the Spirit that quickeneth, but the flesh profiteth nothing.’ The words that have spoken to you, are Spirit and Life.’”11 But according to Jesus, eating the “flesh and blood” of Christ brings eternal life (John 6:54-58) now (cf. John 5:24). So, he cannot be referring to the physical sacraments here which do no such thing.
In the Communion ceremony Jesus said, “This is my body” (soma), not “this is my flesh” (sarx).
Doesn’t the bible call the sum total of believers/followers “The Body Of Christ”? Shall we all “munch” on each other?
Then you have your answer.
@lgageharleya
Thank you for doing this.
@chud
Why does the Cattle Church not take Yeshua’s command “Call no man Father” literally? Or is Papa totally different?
Why does the Cattle Church use a multitude of graven images, in violation of the second commandment?
Why does the cattle church (it openly admits this) use pagan deities as “Saints,” and have parades where they worship the statues?
It takes magic cannibal crackers literally, but not these commands which it directly violates. Why is that?
You have your answer also.
@chud
No I don’t.
Why does the cattle church disregard, en masse, the command of Yeshua to call no man father? Specifically in reference to priestly “authority.”
Why does the Cattle Church use a multitude of graven images, in violation of the second commandment?
You have many words to defend the hyper literal translation reading of the body blood eating, but no words for how their practices do not stamp on the commandments?
I have one more question for you, what is the earliest extant manuscript of the passages you cite John 6?
>”No I don’t.”
I accept your correction.
@Chud
If you refuse to answer me, I must assume you cannot answer me. The extreme avoidance you have shown towards discussing these direct commands is glaring. The Papa wants you take call him father no matter the scriptures and words of Yeshua, it’s “Church Tradition.”
>”Cattle Church”
>”Cattle Lick”
>”cannibal crackers”
>”magical cannibal crackers”
>”Luciferian”
You have made up your mind, and I respect that.
@Chud
You can try to deflect, by playing mock offended, but coming from someone who has proudly declared “Protestants are parasites,” rings extremely hollow. I’m not a Protestant, I don’t take it personally, but my it’s silly to see you now act so hurt to avoid answering fundamental questions.
I’ll ask again:
1) The Second commandment says “Have graven images you SHALL NOT.” Then why does the cattle church have billions of graven images, including a myriad of saints it even admits used to be local pagan deities? Why is munching on crackers sacred and highly literal, but the second commandment means nothing?
2) Yeshua says “Call no Man Father.” Yet the entire Cattle church hierarchy calls itself “father,” from your local priest clear up to the Papa himself. Why is munching on crackers sacred and highly, extremely literal, but Yeshua’s command to “call no man Father,” means nothing?
3) Ir is commanded in the scriptures not to erect obelisks, which are detestable to YHWH. Why then is their a giant solar obelisk in the vatikain and many Eastern Orthodox churches?
4) Yeshua gets quite upset at those selling in the temple. He commands we do not bring commerce into places of worship. Why then are their gift shops, credit card donation ATMs, Commemorative Coin Makers, and many other sales mediums placed for profit in the Temples of Cattle Churches across the world?
5) Yeremiah commands that blowing incense and making cakes to the statue of the “Queen of Heaven,” is abominable. Why then does the Cattle Church make cakes and blow incense to the billions of statues of the Queen of Heaven?
6) Ir is commanded that “murder you SHALL NOT,” Why then does that cattle church and Eastern Orthodoxy, going back long before the schism, have such a tremendous history of engaging in mass genocide against other religions, witch burnings and heretic burnings in town squares for fun, and the mass purging by murder of anyone it perceived as a rival to its state sanctioned authority.
7) It is commanded in Hebrews that playing as if you were bringing Yeshua to sacrifice at the alter over and over is an abomination. Why then does the Cattle Church do ir ever SUNday?
This is but a tiny fraction of the commands the church tramples upon underfoot day after day, for thousands of years. All of these scriptural commands from Yeshua. Moshe, Yeremiah, Ezekiel, which just don’t seem to matter, which are to be taken “not literally,” but Yeshua, in a discussion about the bread of life and manna from heaven was supposedly being super duper literal about bowing before crackers and claiming you’re a magic cannibal.
From someone who claimed others “can’t read,” based on a single sentence which you read with exacting literalism in translations made my psycopathjc serial killers, I wish to understand your interpretations about why all those commandments are not literal and unimportant, but the crackers are Extremely literal.
>”You can try to deflect, by playing mock offended”
I’m not offended.
>”but my it’s silly to see you now act so hurt to avoid answering fundamental questions.”
I appreciate your concern, but I am not hurt. You made up your mind. I respect your decision.
@chud
I am asking you forthrightly to discuss these scriptural commands. You have, now over several threads, refused to address these issues repeatedly, for ever shifting reasons from: “my (Chud’s) stance is irrelevant,” to now “I’vemade up my mind,” to a lot of just plain ignoring.
I am genuinely interested in trying to understand your view point on the literal flesh crackers that never make you eat again, versus the other commandments I’ve discussed. Keep in mind, these are but a tiny fraction of the direct commandments violated and trampled in interested in discussing.
>”I’ve asked you about 9-10 questions, all of them have gone unanswered.”
>”You have, now over several threads, refused to address these issues repeatedly, for ever shifting reasons from: “my (Chud’s) stance is irrelevant,” to now “I’vemade up my mind,” to a lot of just plain ignoring.”
Right
>”This is how devious these wicked serpents are; they take abominations and call them sacraments to trick their cattle into rebelling against YHWH.”
>”From someone who claimed others “can’t read,” based on a single sentence which you read with exacting literalism in translations made my psycopathjc serial killers, I wish to understand your interpretations about why all those commandments are not literal and unimportant, but the crackers are Extremely literal.”
>According to your literalist interpretation of the translations, we shouldn’t need to eat ever again after one super powerful flesh cracker.”
Hmm
>”I’m genuinely interested in trying to understand it; if I already had the answer I wouldn’t ask.”
>I am genuinely interested in trying to understand your view point on the literal flesh crackers that never make you eat again”
Lol
@chud
Quoting me and writing “Right, Hmm, Lol.” What lengths you go to in order avoid answering some very serious questions, while trying to pretend you aren’t avoiding answering them.
I’ve applied your professed hyper literalist view of interpreting translations in order to show you the logical absurdity of the argument. You are selectively picking what to interpret literally, and then arbitrarily deciding what to interpret figuratively in the same sentence.
He states “Nourish yourself by my Body and Blood” you claim he means it hyper literally. We gotta munch his body toes to ears.
He states “you’ll never hunger again.” Now that is figurative! He doesn’t really mean you won’t be hungry ever again, he’s referring to spiritual sustenance.
Human body munching and cannibalism = very literal
Never being hungry following said
cannibalism = very allegorical
Where is this arbitrary distinction line between hyper literalist and very figurative begin and end? It’s the same sentence, same speaker, same topic, but you would claim that one part is dead literal and justifies munching his eyeballs that a priest who calls himself father (Call no Man Father) magically makes crackers, while you claim the other half the sentence is figuratively discussing spiritual sustenance. And if I dare apply the same hyper literalist translation logic to when he discusses partaking of his waters as magically making water his urine, then you get really offended.
Cracker magically made Eyeballs and cannibalism = holy
Water magically made Urine = desecration
If I applied your church’s logic to the whole sentence, then it clearly states that if we were to eat one of his toes and sucked on his neck like a vampire, we would never ever get hungry nor need to eat again.
Obviously that’s not true, but it is revealing of how arbitrary this selectively literalist reading is to justify flesh crackers.
>”Quoting me and writing “Right, Hmm, Lol.” What lengths you go to in order avoid answering some very serious questions, while trying to pretend you aren’t avoiding answering them.”
Most of your responses are cluttered and disorganized, which makes it a chore to get through. You can call it “avoiding” if you like, but ignoring is more accurate.
>”then you get really offended.”
You’re continuing to imagine a drama that isn’t happening.
>”your church”
Which church is that?
>”I’ve applied your professed hyper literalist view of interpreting translations in order to show you the logical absurdity of the argument. You are selectively picking what to interpret literally, and then arbitrarily deciding what to interpret figuratively in the same sentence.”
You already have your answer.
😂
@crisspf
I am also eager to hear how you justify all of these direct violations of scriptural commands by the Cattle Licks.
@chud What is it that you seek on this site?
I like some of the articles. Sometimes I learn something from the comments and sometimes I’m entertained by them. What about you?
I’m seeking information, answers, the Truth.
I hope you will find more and more.
My apologies, @Gem and @Chud, the comments format here likes to reshuffle and to not show which reply is being referenced.
I meant the reply from @crispff, forgive me, I should have specified.
@A E
Read the portions from John 6:30 onward:
Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe. All those the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away. For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
At this the Jews there began to grumble about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I came down from heaven’?”
There is a tremendous lot of context here that gets disregarded. Particularly given what the Manna from heaven is. What word is used for Manna here in John 6? What word is used for heaven?
@444gem and what word is used in scriptures for “eternal”?
In this same chapter is: αιωνιον – eternal
The noun αιων (aion) means life-span, age or epoch. It is the source of our English words age and eon
Our noun appears to describe any length of clearly defined span of time, whether one person’s life or some era of certain renown. As general point of referral, this word may also apply to the vast span of history: the ages, the times of old.
Note that the Greeks also applied this word to the spinal marrow, which appears to suggest that they saw society as much based on social evolution as a human being on his spinal cord. To the Greeks, time wasn’t merely the stage upon which all things unfolded. Instead they realized that time is an inherent and fundamental quality of the universe that doesn’t exist separate from it (something moderns didn’t know until Einstein). They personified abounded but cyclical time, or “the ages” as the deity Aion and associated him with a coiling snake that often ate its own tail or else curled along a spoke or spine.
In Roman times, Aion began to personify the eternal Roman rule, which made him/it an obvious target of the New Testament writers (MATTHEW 6:13, LUKE 1:33, ROMANS 1:25). The Roman Aion even begat a female counterpart named Aeternitas (from which we have our English word eternity) who adopted the patronage of the deified Roman Emperor. This in turn made her too an obvious topic of commentary for the earliest church fathers.
The adjective αιωνιος (aionios), meaning eternal, or more precise: lasting an age. This word was also used to describe the term of an office when it was to be held for a life time (an αιων, aion). The familiar phrase “eternal life” uses our adjective in combination with the noun ζωη (zoe), which doesn’t describe one’s personal life but rather life as a phenomenon that arises from interaction of elements (precisely how time works). So no, the term “eternal life” does not describe one’s personal perpetuation, but rather speaks of an epoch that consists of souls rather than seconds: the most perfectly intertwined social expression also known as the New Jerusalem
reference: abarim-publications.com/DictionaryG/a/a-i-om-n.html
@lgageharleya
Abarim is an excellent source for beginning to access the original scriptures. As you can see, nobody gets spiritual sustenance (nor even physical sustenance) from unsalted crackers. The entire passage is a discussion of the evolution of time as experienced by souls.
As per usual, I am ineerested in your own personal thoughts.
@Maciej
I am sorry that I missed this among the rabble. There are two words in the Hebrew Scriptures: one for for eternal and one for everlasting. I am going to give them to you and I want you to tell me what you find on them:
1) עוֹלָם “Olam,” it means “everlasting,” or an “unfathomably long time.” It is said quite the same as the English word “A Lamb.”
2) נֶצַח “Netzach,” it also has a form of “Nitzchi,” yes like the philosopher Frederick who discusses the endlessness of time. They are never random with their names.
look at the following and tell me what you find:
1) Where do these words appear in scriptures and what meanings do they carry?
2) What are their alphanumerics and what might that mean.
3) where do we find the words graves throughout history, and how are they used?
@444gem
Here is my interpretation, be rough please with your opinion.
1. In hebrew gematria it is 101. 50 20 1 30 which gives us 11. 101 is similar to binary code, lucifer for example. From Fibonacci sequence, in short, 1+1/x after some calculation gives us 1,618 the golden ratio. As for the word lamb, it is mentioned many times but most of them are in Revelations. But amongst them there are few that Yeshua has said. “Go your ways, i send you forth as lambs amongst wolves” Yeshua itself is called the Lamb of God. We are called lambs by Yeshua as well.
2. Netzach in luciferians kabbalah it means victory, or patience, strong spirit and following towards our goals. It is also similar like you’ve mentioned to Nietzsche, or nasir, or natzi. In simple gematria it is 77. Does it represent 7th day in some way?
We know what Nietzsche did, we know what natzis did. They wrote their own pages of our history.
I had very limited time on this but i wanted to reply, i will get into this deeper tomorrow. Tell me this please, is this somehow related to the 7th day and then only lambs will be “saved” ?
Probably i didn’t even came close to what this really mean but that’s the beauty of learning.
Thank you as always, i will come back to this tomorrow with fresh mind.
@Maciej
Take your time, there is no race. When you finish I will give you some more pointers.
@444gem
I sit down on it and looked on this from the other side that it seems i forget sometimes.
Given the repeating cycle of the universe, and how the energy flows throughout, isn’t this yet another allegory to the infinite/everlasting energy within? As you said, our action cause reaction, like in snake Newton’s theory. Whatever we are doing we are sending our vibrations into the cosmos, and cosmos replies. Sometimes quicker sometimes longer. Our small action here, may cause a tremendous reaction much much later, like Yeshua did. Let’s take a very long rubber stick for example, by holding it in your hand on the beginning, and swinging it quickly left to right, we can notice that further towards the stick, the end of it moves much wider and faster than beginning we are holding and the longer the stick, the bigger reaction to the movement stick will get. So, if the universe is repeating itself, our action may cause reaction in q total different time and place but it will start from us, isn’t this the idea of “immortal” “eternal ” ? Our energy from our action will remain in the cosmos untill it will find a perfect match (frequemcy) and start interacting with it and this will carry our “seed” and so on. Isn’t fruit from the tree is not a tree itself with different variations? Question is what is consciousness and whether energy can be conscious but in the different way than our consciousness, because the energy we sent might not react to some things, but it will react once it will find a perfect match, chemically, physically and biologically therefore we might say ot does have a certain level of consciousness. Everything that will be made after we send our energy out, will still have our particle in it. Yeshua did what he did thousands years ago and i have the feeling that reaction is speeding up every day, week.
Thank you as always for your time.
@Maciej
Extremely perceptive, your applications of leverage within classical physics to a more probabilistic quantum type interpretation of chained effects is excellent. The harmonic oscillator and the fulcrum.
I will respond in more detail after proper consideration.
@444gem
I am really looking forward to it
Thank you
This is awesome, @Maciej, very vivid and helpful to me, thank you! My mind doesn’t normally think like this, but I am trying. I get it in certain contexts but not broadly applied. Prayers for love, grace, succor and protection to you and yours.
@lgageharelya @soannoyed @Maciej
This came up ina. Conversation and I thought it would be useful: the many names of Alla, reveal exactly what he is.
Alla is in Mesopotamian mythology, the gatekeeper of the graveyard of deities no longer worshipped. Where do we find this aspect in Maha Amutism? In Allahs 99 epithets.
All of them, without fail are slightly modified (generally just dialectical differences) names of former worshipped deities he has subsumed in the Arab tribes of the Middle East:
1) alla Muhsi = Mussusu the dragon and administrator of Marduk, the epithet means “the administrator.
2)Al Malik = moloch the bull “king,” of blood sacrifice. This epithet identifies moloch as king
3) Al Mani = Manu/Mennes, and notably Meni, as mentioned in Isiah 65:11, the deity of MONItary fortune. Note the name finds its home as far as Germanic in the title “Alemagne,” which like ALExander MAGNA means “the great man.”
4) Al-mumit = Mat Mut, the great mother of death “Mummy!”, this epithet of Allah of course means “the bringer of death.”
5) Al-Jalil, like JAel in scriptures.
6) Ar – Rahman = Brahman, the benevolent creator, as well as finds reference in other religions (particularly easy to find is Rudolph steiners work) on Auramanic brings of light. In Arabic it is the “benevolent one.”
7) Al -Bassit = Egyptian Bastet. While now infamous for being a destructive lioness, her main features were as a provider of good fortunes and protectress. In Arabic the epithet means “the protector.”
8) Al – Hakem = Aqen of Egypt. A deity who is the Egyptian equivalent of Charon, the ferrymen of the underworld. The title in Arabic means “the judge.” It amalgamated the older word “Hakma,” meaning having wisdom/discernment with the deity in a judgment authority
9) Al – Sakur = Shahar, an igaritic deity of the dawn, said to be the one who brought rewards to those grateful for the light. In Arabic it is the one who brings rewards. The name appears in Isiah as Helel Ben Shahar, translated as “morning star,” but actually meaning “bringer of the dawn.”
10) Al – Badi = Buddha, who was known as the enlightenment. Also equivalent to Woden, the unattainable perfect wisdom. The title in Arabic means “the unattainable.”
11) Ad Dar = Adar, a very ancient Babylonian Solar deity, often considered the “first man.” The word Atar finds use as “burning or divine fire,” in Persian Zoroastrianism and fire worship. In Arabic the epithet means “the afflictor.”
@lgageharleya
Thank you. It bring smile on my face to hear this. I forget sometimes that scriptures are written as Yeshua said as a “story because that way you will understand”. Before i knew what i know now, i was taking all those stories quite literally, that one day i will see 4 horseman and the judgment as some sort of movie with pitch-black sky and monsters etc. My favourite one was about Samson, how he has been betrayed, and he regain his strength to punish everyone,now thanks to @444gem now i know it’s the story about supernova and hoe it “regain” strength just to collapse itself, amazing allegory, slowly i start to adapt my knowledge to understand what is the true meaning and the connections to everything, but like i said, sometimes i forgetting about this and my mind goes on a different track. One more thing i want to add is this: few days ago i asked YHWH to help me find answer to Gem questions amd in the less expected moment yesterday it hit me. I had my “eureka” moments in the situations like that all my life. Now i know what it was…
Be well, best to you and yours.
@lgageharleya i replied on your comment but it seems it has been deleted.
Is this the end of what you said to me @Maciej “One more thing i want to add is this: few days ago i asked YHWH to help me find answer to Gem questions and in the less expected moment yesterday it hit me. I had my “eureka” moments in the situations like that all my life. Now i know what it was…”? because I read it and smiled. I want to know what your “eureka” moment was.
@Maciej
Ask, seek, and knock with Yeshua Kavvanah (Truth in your heart), and you shall receive.
You cannot yet even begin to imagine the capabilities that YHWH has blessed us with.
@444gem
Teach me, guide me. Please.
@Maciej
Let us recall that the fundamental laws of thermodynamics and energy state that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed. This thus relates to the concept of eternity, or cyclical reality. If energy cannot be destroyed, and all things have a vibration, and thus a frequency, then indeed the end is the beginning.
Here we find the term לְנֵ֣צַח “Lenetsach,” which is 30-50-90-8, take the lead digits and we have 3.598 (very close to 36.) 3.598/φ = 2.2236 * 2 = 4.4474 follow th me 444s…
I will give you another clue jumping ahead: the term 2.2236 is essentially the Compton wavelength of the electron, the particle which carries electromagnetic charge interactions in the atom. It’s reduced Compton frequency is 777. You will have to do your own research but the reduced Compton frequency relates the photon frequency of the same energy as the electron; light and matter in unity.
Here you are understanding that the word for “eternity,” relates directly to the mass energy equivalence principle: E = mc^2. And thus “eternity,” as netsach refers to the timeless quality of the massless photon: when an electron emits a photon by reducing energy in an interaction, it gives a part of its mass into pure energy, which does not experience time. Thus we see that creating time (energetic interactions of massive particles) require the emission of a timeless energy (a light photon) as a portion of itself.
@444gem
Thank you for this. I need time to.contemplate on this. Please allow me few days to process and reply.
Amazing.
@444gem
What fascinating discussion between you and Maciej, and what beautiful insight Maciej has brought forth. If I may, i would love to contribute an insight brought from this discussion. @444gem, towards the end of our brief discussion regarding the whitehead manifold of time, I suggested that as the universe enters a state of thermodynamic equilibrium, it will essentially enter a state close to its initial condition. the universe expands until all matter (potential energy) decays and is turned to light (kinetic). this also implies that all massive particles eventually vanish from existence, and all electrons decay to lose their mass. Time and matter cease to be; all becomes the timeless photon. If the universe is entering a state of thermodynamic equilibrium, then this implies the universe (after heat death) eventually will see a sudden entropy decrease, from the perturbation signified by the final disentanglement of the knots of gravity (caused by dark energy expansion), where essentially the universe would collapse into itself. However, the gravitational effects in this condensed quantum state would be repulsive (paradoxically dark energy and gravity are the same) thus condensed energy expands to form the “next” universe. Indeed the end is the beginning as you have said. However, if the whitehead manifold is a positive feedback loop, then there must be a transfer of information from the previous iteration to build off of. @Maciej said: “So, if the universe is repeating itself, our action may cause reaction in q total different time and place but it will start from us, isn’t this the idea of “immortal” “eternal ” ? Our energy from our action will remain in the cosmos untill it will find a perfect match (frequemcy) and start interacting with it and this will carry our “seed” and so on.” Then is it possible to transfer information through quantum entangled photons? In other words, the effects of our actions, the culminations of what we created in this universe, transferred through the condensed, encoded seeds of light, to be planted in the next. Our actions now would certainly be felt cycle after cycle. Yeshua was sent to undo this whitehead manifold, that we may finally show what we have planted on the 7th day. Then to live in this universe is to show the healthy branches we are, and from which other healthy branches grow, is it not?
@ariah
I saw your previous comment and have it earmarked. I’ve been a bit ill and limiting myself to easier, lower level things so as to respond to your more intricate and important queries when I am recovered.
I wish you a seamless recovery @444gem, please take care.
@ariah
Thank you sincerely for the patience. This has been an intense time of work, catching up after recovering and I finally have found the time to give you an answer to your questions.
To begin, the term manifold you have used, as it is used by modern physicists, is an appropriate word for usage to describe space and time in this case. However, the Whitehead Knot, is rather an emergent binding structure within the framework of an overall scalar branching of creation, which can be found in the equations of the scriptures; they are blindingly simple, if you can remove the veil of linearity from your thinking, a task which is very difficult. Again, This is 37×73. You must work on the computations of Berashit 1:1 to really understand. It is the scalar mechanic of the universe.
I will direct you to the link below to get a better perspective of the Whitehead knot as a topological space in hyperbolic geometry, with the reiteration that we are not on a hyperbolic whitehead knot topological space; rather, you are going to find in a lot of the equations Root 7, over and over again. 7 Days of Creation, the equations are a bit of an explanation of how the whitehead knot forms as a Knot, within a much clearer space in which we live.
If the mathematics are too much, I can give you another.
arxiv.org/pdf/1303.7096.pdf
Your general understanding of thermodynamic equilibrium is also poignant; with the caveat that once all gravitation ceases, and thus no computation information is available, the universe will enter a state that is A-thermodynamic; no DYNAMOS. That is, all is nothing, and nothing is all; the entangelement of this universe with all of its coupled reflections, even “virtual particle pairs” (which are not real, but simply a very burdensome and sloppy QED patchwork for understanding dynamic informational exchange through Fyneman diagrams; see the amplutohedron model as a first start to reducing that mess), will be raced apart upon their “creation,” such that they can never interact. Yet, how can “rate” or “speed” or “velocity” exist, in a universe where there is nothing relative. It can’t, and thus space cannot “expand,” but rather enters into an infinite state of no informational existence. The whitehead knot is undone. This state of the universe is equivalent, and geometrically dual, to an evaporating black hole.
At this moment, in which all gravitational/informational potential ceases to exist, and yet the vacuum energy is infinitely great and yet inifinitely disperse, is the moment that indeed time vanishes, and the processes is “reversed” into its dual. The dual of the whitehead knot is the hyperbolic octahedron, a perfect “diamond,” for which Catalan’s Constant is 1/4 the volume. See Reveleations description of the “New Earth,” and apply the mathematics of it into Planck units and apply it to the Tessarects boundary as a three dimensional cross. The simplest shape is the hyperbolic octahedron nested within the cube. The mathematics here are stunning, and point to the temple of Apollo, whose murals still exist, with a bow and arrow (hyperbolic curvature) a flower of life and a “sun,” representing energy radiation.
Likewise, it is important to note that we live in a spatially local universe, yet it is temporally very distant from all of the “next” and “previous” iterations; nevertheless the interactinos are inverse to the “locality,” where temporal collapse is non-loca and yet spatial interaction is non-existence; this explains harmonic resonance. If you can imagine the infinite multiverse, which acts temporally as a continually collapsing wave function, which follows a single, simple guiding scalar structure with some similarities to the hidden variables of pilot wave theory, you will approximate the functioning of reality. All of these three theories (multiverse copenhagen and pilot wave) are describing degenerate cases of something much simpler, yet much grander.
This then leads to a certain understanding of what “eternal” means and the seeds and the branches. @Maciej was very intelligent in his application of this metaphor. However, it is not quantumly entangled photons that result in the vibratory patters; the information transfer of “entaglement,” requires that two photons, or informational structures that are non-interacting with other observers or structures in the universe in order to remain entangled. The interaction of eternal, is that you are the Breathe of YHWH, and as the non-locality of time causes harmonic resonance of all materials, it causes a harmonic resonance pattern which we call your SOUL. The entirety of the universe’s wave functions resonantes at the pattern of your existence.
The moment of NOW, is a geometric series of this haronically resonanting structure, of which one compononent is Phi, which is realized as an infinite collapse of a single scalar computational structure that is blindingly simple once you see it. Let him calculate the number of the Beast, the SARos, 666. Why are there 666 solar eclipses per 325 year Saros cycle? 37×73. The Menorah will give you the answer to this, if you take the time to read the passage in Exodus which describes its construction. Not the translation, Not even the translations of interlinears, which are all wrong. They only get the number of things right.
A cubit is 33 Planck Lengths.
@444gem
Thank you always for your profound understanding and insight. I am no autodidact or polymath such as yourself, so that I take longer to reply is necessary for me to try to capture the essence of your message, is the best that I can do. Much has happened in my life since your reply, and I have a few queries to ask, but first I would like to address your reply: If an event in the past or future has a similar frequency to an event in our current moment, it can cause the event in our current moment to be forced to vibrate at that frequency. For the events to interact, the events must communicate through a non-local field; are we the non-local field? If so, then are they attempting to exert an inversion wave through us; one that is weaved through time, and one that cancels; the cessation of the breathe of YHWH? But are we not saved through the act of Yeshua; the event which always resonates?
I have started to begin my research into the numerology and geometry of the scriptures that can further aid my understanding. I have been drawn to the works of Amir Tuchman, Matthieu Pageau, Vernon Jenkins, and Abarim Publications. The theories by Bohm and Hiley seem to be congruent with what you call the guiding scalar structure. Are there other references you can suggest regarding these topics? Especially more accurate translation of the scriptures? I know you’ve been very busy, but you had also mentioned passing along your paper describing the reconciliation of quantum gravity, I am still very much interested.
Since my last reply, I have gone through several tests of spirit. I had asked in a dream what my purpose was, to which I was given a book that had written my purpose was “to protect those from fire, and those from ehna…” I have recently been feeling in the wind the changes that are to come in the near future; serious fundamental changes that will challenge us all. I feel as though time is slowly running out to study, and soon we will be put to the test. I believe we will live in a near future where we will not have the luxury of this site and your wisdom, and any esoteric information that will be available to us will be the ones we have saved offline. This brings me to a more fundamental worry; It is my understanding that the scriptures are a roadmap of a plethora of the fundamental geometry and mechanisms that the creation of YHWH follows, a kind of source code. A false duality would be to assume these mechanisms are merely a means to an end. Rather, these mechanisms precisely are the end; a way to communicate with YHWH through his creation. In other words, these mechanisms can answer the question of “how” and the question of “why.” By learning the language of creation, one can understand how and why it was ordered. However, learning this language, especially to the degree at which you’ve learned it, seems completely impossible for almost all of the population, myself included. It is made more impossible with the layers of luciferian veils the population is under; the fiction they have learned is much more comfortable than reality. However, much like you can explain the entire human history with 22/7, I believe there is also an analogy that can translate the complex mechanisms contained in the scriptures that the population can understand intuitively. I have believed it to be the mustard seed, the tree of Elohim, and the snake that binds the tree. Is this not analogous to humanity, within the fractal creation of YHWH, in which the emergent binding whitehead knot constricts the creation? Then to undo the binding, the seed must grow into the tree it is intended to be, such that the binding cannot hold any further; how? what would be the simplified analogy? how must the population act accordingly to the mechanisms of the creation? I apologize that this turned into an unfocused rant, however I believe the best way to protect others from the fires and from them is to give the people the mustard seed which contains it all; that which is both simple yet grand. I hope you have recovered well from your illness @444gem, please take care.
Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill. 27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.”
So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’[c]”
32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
I’m quoting translations for ease sake.
μαννα – manna
“When Moses first utters those words (Deuteronomy 8:3), he also explains that God gave this bread so that Israel would understand certain things, and the whole Manna-phenomenon appears to have an entire double meaning: one of physical sustenance and one of mental purification.”
Found this: “The Hebrew word לחם (lehem), meaning bread or food in general, comes from the verb לחם (laham), meaning to eat or use as food. But the identical verb לחם (laham) means to fight or do battle. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, which is commonly translated as House Of Bread, but to a Hebrew audience, the name Bethlehem would also have meant House Of War.”
ουρανουof (ouranos)- heaven
The noun ουρανος (ouranos) derives from a hugely old Proto-Indo-European root “ur-“, which also gave us both the noun “water” and the verb “to urinate” (from ουρον, ouron, urine, which also explains the noun ουρανη, ourane, meaning chamber-pot). The ancient root “ur-” also has to do with the Sanskrit noun vari, meaning water, and the Avestan (Zoroastrian) noun var meaning rain.
To the ancients, heaven was primarily a rain-maker; the place where rain came from — but this is still not all. The word for rain, βροχη (broche) comes from the verb βρεχω (brecho), which means to wet or saturate. Both these words are typically not reserved for water falling from the sky, but also cover other kinds of wetting: brewing, steeping or even the overflowing of rivers, the soaking up of water by a sponge and of course the imbibing of fluids by a thirsty drinker. And that means that even the familiar act of baptism is a form of raining (see our article on the verb βαπτιζω, baptizo).
Heaven is any origin of any agent that flushes, cleanses and allows growth. And note the obvious similarity between the Greek verb βρεχω (brecho), meaning to rain, and the Hebrew verb ברך (barak), meaning to bless.
Both the Hebrew word for land or earth (ארץ, ‘eres) and the Greek one (γη, ge) describe any situation in the here and now that’s capable of growth and correction by means of any kind of fluidic agent, whether in the physical or mental realms (ACTS 14:17, HEBREWS 9:23). Heaven (שמים, shamayim in Hebrew) denotes both the source of that agent, and the blueprint of what earth may finally become, after its many seasons of cleansing (HEBREWS 8:5, MATTHEW 5:48, 6:10, REVELATION 21:1-2).
This is obviously your reference to urine in speaking previously – if they wanted to translate “blood” and “body” literally, why did they not with this reference to any cleansing or refreshing fluid poured out, to include urine? Highly selective literalism.
The “house of bread,” translations is not entirely unjust, although the point made is good. Think to the parable of the kingdom of the cosmos, which Yeshua describes as a tree (the body of Elohim) and then describes flour with lots of yeast worked in such that it rises bigger and bigger. (Cosmic Expansion)
Hence Yeshua was born in The House of Bread, meaning from the very first moment of the universe he was to arise from unfolding of the cosmos. Hence you “eat his body.”
There is another aspect to this discussion above, which is that eating meat or anything with blood in it is expressly forbid by Kosher.
This is how devious these wicked serpents are; they take abominations and call them sacraments to trick their cattle into rebelling against YHWH.
The Body of Christ, A.E, is The Church. The Apostolic Church. The Gospels are not to be interpreted in an autodidact way, but in a responsable, mature and moral way. We talk about the Holy Tradition, about Christ Himself commanding his apostles to go and spread “the Word”. “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
Matthew 28: 19, 20
@crisspf
It is not the church. That is not even what the translation above says. It is those that follow the true message of Yeshua, not a bunch of greaves images and golden temples.
What do you make of the surviving Nazarenes and Aryeh Yehudah that follow Yeshua, are his relatives, and teach the nations despite the mass persecution and genocide, including from your church?
@crisspf
My device does not like the word “graven,” and consistently autocorrects it wrong. The “body of Christ,” is not a church full of golden statues and graven images.
Re-research! Eastern Orthodoxy did not commit genocide.
for the most part, the Orthodox Church has largely been the victim of persecution, from Communists in Russia, to conquering Muslims during the Byzantine Empire, to other Christian sects as in the 4th crusade of the 13th century and the events in Alaska in the last century. The Eastern Orthodox Church has never supported killing anyone. Although there were instances of persecution of heretics, they were never condoned or by the EOC as an institution.
@crisspf
I am aware of the atrocities of Stalin and the USSaRus (literally Osiris). It including genocidal millions of Isis-Ra-Elis,along with yes, repressing your religious rites. These are terrible atrocities.
However you need to do your Re-Search. Let us look at the mass genocide of the Paulicians under the Byzantine empress Theodora and sanctioned and aided by Cattle Church authority:
In the year 843 Byzantine Empress Theodora and her agents, mass genocided over 100,000 paulicians in and around Turkey and Armenia. Children, Women, Men, all were mass murdered, and their property confiscated and split between the Proto-eastern Orthodox Church and the empress. Likewise all survivors were stripped of any and all rights in the empire.
This is an en masse genocide by religious persecution in no uncertain terms, in Byzantine territory, and under what became Eastern Orthodox Church control.
@crisspf
Consider the naming of the two Cold War “rivals.” If you consider the work of Stanford Economics Professor Anthony C Sutton, you will see they were cooperating at the largest of scales and only pretending to be rivals.
USA and USSR, together spells USSARUS, the name of the 4th horseman of the apocalypse as written in Egyptian and transliterated into Greek: Osiris the bringer of plague and death.
@lgageharleya
From Ezekiel 3:3
“Then he said to me, “Son of man, eat this scroll I am giving you and fill your stomach with it.” So I ate it, and it tasted as sweet as honey in my mouth.”
Clearly we’ve been commanded to eat paper scrolls dipped in honey, then wash it down with flesh crackers. I also don’t understand why they are not munching Ezekiel, as he is also Son of Man.
@Chud why don’t you munch Ezekiel too? What about Daniel, also a Son of Man? According to your church we must munch The Son of Man in its most literal translation.
This is the insanity of having no concept of the Aryeh Yehudah term “Akel,” which means to consume, and being more nuanced: to take nourishment from sustenance. There is no nourishment in crackers.
>”@Chud why don’t you munch Ezekiel too?”
>”This is the insanity of having no concept of the Aryeh Yehudah term “Akel,” which means to consume, and being more nuanced: to take nourishment from sustenance. There is no nourishment in crackers.”
See? You already have your answer.
@chud
I’ve asked you about 9-10 questions, all of them have gone unanswered. Most of them are very specific regarding scriptural commands. I don’t understand how you Justify hyper literalist translations reading in one specific passage, while you stamp underfoot the others. I’m genuinely interested in trying to understand it; if I already had the answer I wouldn’t ask.
However, yes I do know what “Akel,” means in Hebrew, do you? Another question, do you speak Hebrew or Ancient Greek?
Also let’s be clear.
When I say there is no nourishment in crackers I am referring to the fact that Yeshua said we would never hunger anymore if you ate of the body.
Do the waifers fill your stomach, or do you eat a big meal after mass? According to your literalist interpretation of the translations, we shouldn’t need to eat ever again after one super powerful flesh cracker.
@crisspf
I’ve provided a long and thorough response, just “waiting for approval.”
@444gem Another, just tagging you so you can respond if you wish to.
A.E, you should be able to speak for yourself. Take a bit of distance from “zeitgeistic knowledge” and try read some theology instead. I warmly recommend you approach St Paisios, Nectarios. It won’t bite, I promise you that. I know you know you master words. I am way behind you and I do not have this kind of ambition. Your words lack the Spirit though… It is in the Apostolic Church. If your search for Truth is genuine and you garnish it with humility you will one day, soon I hope, will understand what I mean.
I am a sinner.
I do speak for myself. I tag Gem because he has repeatedly asked people to so he might respond, yet most consistently don’t, or do so halfway, as did soannoyed.
This forum shunts responses around. I tagged him on a post he was being addressed on, but wasn’t tagged in.
I disbelieved in Catholicism and most other organized religions long before I’d ever heard of Gem.
@A E
You’ve got to take it easy with him. He is not wicked, but he is so confounded by the wolves dressed as shepherds that he believes Constantine the mass serial killer was a holy “saint.” And then compared him to vlad the Impaler as a justification, a blood drinking, child raping Dragon that today is known as Dracula, and gave birth to the lineage of mass murders and drug lords the English “RA-YA-El” family.
Where on earth did you extract the “child raping Dragon” story? How many other cherry-picks from fictional books have you purposely planted here, I wonder?
Are you even aware there was this thing called hungarian propaganda?
He killed “all his close relatives” I remember you saying about Constantine. Somehow the mother (who was close enough I’d say) “mannaged” to escape. She died of old age. Please be more careful with what you state as 100% truth.
Also, killing for fun? These are obvious exagerations and I know you know that. It’s that proverbial “bits of truth mixed with bits of trash”.
Have you, appart from your exagerations, which are many, many, many! ever considered the contexts? Had there been an incestuous affair between Crispus and Fausta and a plot (as some historyans claim) after all, Constantine was away “quite some time” without the wife, and the son, would he have had another solution? He tried to implement christianity to pagans. If the idolatry and incestuous affair stand in regard to Crispus and his wife, then it looks more like he had to make an example out of “fair-play”. Do you know for sure what made him so upset to drive him to kill them? No one knows for sure, yet you know it was for fun.
Again…The reasonable doubt! The context!
@crisspf
The hypocract and intense double standard is palpable in your words. You’ve actually claimed based only on modern sources that Constantine didn’t kill anyone, then when confronted with overwhelming evidence from do note Piraeus sources, you claimed he has a pre-Christian history which he reformed.
Now that I’ve provided you with several contemporary, matter of fact sources which show that Constantine was a serial killer who murdered his son, nephew, wife, and many of his friends directly after the council of Nicaea, you defend his mass murderer. Sometimes admitting one is in error is less foolhardy than defending a serial killer by changing your stance constantly so as to avoid admitting this error. This is how July indoctrination works.
You speak utter fantasy to fit your narrative, and change your stance without doing any research, and yet nitpick the tiniest detail of my words… You’re right Constantine only killed his son, nephew and boiled his wife, but Mom escaped, so saying “all,” was slightly inaccurate. He only killed most of his family, this Saint Constantine. I will admit I was not 100% accurate with that statement. It does not change the fact your church was founded by a serial killer.
It is written in the commandments “Murder you SHALL NOT!” Why do you defend a mass serial killer?
Certainly his nephew and many friends he murdered in cold blood weren’t all having incestuous affairs with his wife? Does Yeshua not say “let he who has not sinned cast the first stone regarding an adulterous?”
Maybe this doesn’t apply to boiling your wife, or provides an exception to the commandments for emperors?
If you are to admonish me for perfect accuracy and call my words into question by the slightest of errors, then I would expect you hold yourself to the same standard.
“ nitpick the tiniest detail of my words…”
The devil is in the tiniest details.
My sources are not modern.
Fausta was the daughter of former Emperor Maximian and sister to Emperor Maxentius. However, they were both political rivals and Constantine had them killed in 310 and 312 respectively. He married Fausta in 307. in 325 he killed his sister’s husband and had his nephew hanged a year later. Yet, they were also political rivals and Constantine was engaged in a civil war with them.
In 326, after becoming the sole emperor of Rome, he kills his wife and first son. Why? After all, his favourite son, Crispus, was made Caesar in 317 AD and proved his abilities as a leader in military campaigns during the early 320’s. Also, Fausta was highly respected by Constantine throughout their marriage, and proof of this was that in 323 she was proclaimed Augusta, although she had previously held the title of Nobilissima Femina / “Most Noble Lady”.
According to church historian Philostorgius:
“But Constantine, having obtained rule over the whole Roman Empire by remarkable success in wars, ordered his son Crispus to be put to death, at the behest (so people think) of his wife Fausta. Later he locked his wife Fausta in overheated baths and killed her, because his mother Helena blamed him out of excessive grief for her grandson.”
This is according to Greek historian Zosimus:
“He killed Crispus, who had been deemed worthy of the rank of Caesar, as I have said before, when he incurred suspicion of having sexual relations with his stepmother Fausta, without taking any notice of the laws of nature. Constantine’s mother Helena was distressed at such a grievous event and refused to tolerate the murder of the young man. As if to soothe her Constantine tried to remedy the evil with a greater evil: having ordered baths to be heated above the normal level, he deposited Fausta in them and brought her out when she was dead.”
There’s been an idea presented that Fausta accused Crispus of rape or assault; and then later it is revealed that Fausta lied and Constantine had her steamed to death.
The “nuances”, the “modern sources” are old enough.
Mass serial killer? We have different definitions of “mass”, but you probably mean civil wars. So we talk about wars. There! Fixed it for you. Gave you the context for becoming “mass serial killer”.
>“let he who has not sinned cast the first stone regarding an adulterous?” You “forgot” this one I suppose. King David, whom you and we, the orthodox, also esteem raped Uriah’s wife and killed him. How does that sound as “a double standard”? King David also fought and killed people. Dare I say many. Wars as context for murders. I repeat: we do esteem David. David, the great repenter, prophet David. And the great repenter and the prophet David is looked at as holy. I have no problem with that. Is he a also “a pagan god”, a “god”?
@crisspf
What civil war? I quoted this source earlier.
Even your own biased church source, which are the only ones that intimate this supposed relationship as a form of granting clemency to Constantine, state that he had already “obtained rule over the whole Roman Empire.”
What about how nephew? Was he rocking it with Aunt Fausta? And All of his friends too? He did this AFTER he had consolidated all power. Other sources I have quoted this to you make it clear, even stating very clearly that it was the drunkenness of power itself that made Constantine, once more mild mannered, then into a psychopath.
I also fail to see where that pesky commandment that says “Murder you SHALL NOT,” comes into this? Are flesh crackers so literal, and yet the commandments of Moshe offer exceptions for unproven adultery. Constantine killed his son without trial, his nephew, his wife and his friends too.
Yeshua said, in defense of an adulteress “let the one who has not transgressed cast the first stone.” Do you suppose that there is an exception to this command for emperors that have fully consolidated their power (even according to your own source) to boil their wife without trial?
Your argument of civil war is again fanciful. Even the source you quote (which I provided you before), makes it clear he had consolidaTed all power. You say the devil is on the details, and yet you make up fanciful story after fanciful story to excuse a serial killer.
You measure me with one rod, over the tiniest of “all” vs most, yet you lie through your teeth over and over, to defend mass murder no less, constantly changing your story.
What evidence proves David raped Bathsheba? A quick search online gives me only opinionated results at this time (which is why I purchased hard copies of the scriptures) and I am tied up multitasking just now, but I’m not convinced he did except by perhaps modern standards (he was in power over her so she felt she couldn’t say no – despite that many women have managed to find ways to do so throughout history).
She was visible to a man walking on a roof – I find it hard to believe she was oblivious to this fact.
I don’t want to speculate and to smear either person, but I can easily see how this may have been rather opposite to his “raping” her. But if you have read it more clearly and have some proofs, I would be grateful to see them.
@lgageharleya
It doesn’t say he raped Bathsheba. It says he slept with her and they conceived a child.
It uses the common word for “laying” together as וַיִּשְׁכַּ֣ב “we-kisab.” When there is rape, such as in Genesis 34:2, it uses the term “violate,” which is וַיְעַנֶּֽהָ “We aneha.”
You are dealing with someone who speaks pure fantasy and lies to protect a patron saint mass serial killer, changes their story on a dime at each new evidence to fit their narrative, and never admits they have erred, yet demands 1000% accuracy of every single word I might type or he then makes grevious and unfounded accusations to try and discredit what I say. I am not afforded the grave to honestly err as a human.
This person claims he pays great attention to detail, yet he pays so much attention to detail that he requotes sources I’ve already given him, as if they were new, and then contradicts his own quoted source and invents a super reformed Christian “civil war,” fantasy tale for a man that boiled his wife.
Then he spits on the scriptures which he knows little of, and certainly has rarely if ever attempted to read on his own, and then makes a semi racist insinuation about jews after I ask him what he sees the place of the kin of Yeshua and the Aryeh Yehudah. Likewise, he repeteadlt refuses to answer one single poignant questions regarding scriptural commands.
I do not hold this against him, for Yeshua has said there will be grace for Amartia for those deceived by the serpents, but this is the curse for those than bear the Tau Cross, the mark of the antiXristos. Their eyes have been sewn shut and their hands tied.
It is not my place to write in the book of life, nor is it the place of any of us to render any judgement whatsoever. However what is said is the unfortunate (and depressing) reality; all we can do is have compassion for those who have their eyes sewn shut by the beast of the seven hills of Rome.
Don’t believe everything old Charlie says, nor what Robert -the twillight-Pattison claims.
The only thing they have in common (Charlie and Tepes) are the long noses.
I am a romanian, born and lived so far pretty close to “Dracula’s habbitat”. I also have a long nose ( but so have many indians and jews). And since I am a cracker eater and a Christ’s blood drinker, one never knows, I might actually be a very, very close relative of Vlad. In fact, most orthodox romanians are cannibals since they sacrifice Christ over and over again with every Eucharist, eat His Body and drink His blood.
@crisspf
Stop being silly. Think deeply about what I’ve shown you rather than being avoidant.
You still have yet to address your completely fictitious statements regarding Constantine the serial killer and that the cattle church was founded by this psychopath and then a few months later he mass murdered most of his family and a lot of his friends.
You also have not addressed the historical fact of the mass religious genocide of the Paulicians by the Eastern Orthodox Church in the 800s CE.
Nor have you addressed why you interpret the first half of the sentence hyper literally to justify flesh crackers, but not the other half of the sentence. Why do you get hungry after a cracker?
Nor have you addressed any of my questions regarding how you justify all of the clear and direct scriptural commandments the church stamps on with great fervour.
Nor have you addressed the genocide of and massive oppression of the Aryeh Yehudah, the very kin of Yeshua, and the destruction of all rival texts by the gentile church. All those early Isis Ra Eli and Aryeh Yehudah hating sermons and edicts aren’t fake.
Rather than quibbling, can you openly and honestly address these things?
No, you have to address and reconsider your “insertions”, your lack of accuracy, “the tinniest details” since you know all the answers and since your questions are only rhetorical. You have already too many times insulted people to the point all those that disagree with you are cattle, the cattle lick, the magic cracker eaters. So far, for someone who knows all in detail (lies the devil) you “failed” to mention the greek root of “Catholic”.( It doesn’t fit in your novel, right?)
@cisspf
My questions aren’t rhetorical. You just refuse to answer them over and over.
@crisspf
On the other post I gave you a very long explanation regarding how to source etymologies thst don’t come from Gugal Anna, the bull of heaven. Not sure if you saw it or responded since you don’t tag me.
Ok! Fair enough!
@crisspf
This notion of the “apostolic church,” being The Cattle Church/Eastern Orthodoxy has no historical basis. It is a lie. Following Saul of Tarshish (The Solar seeker of the six) and the children of Luciferian Vespasian who fabricated a history of fake martyrdomss does not make it “apostolic.”
You also seem to disregard any notion of the actual descendants of the clan of Yeshua, nor the make any room fro Aryeh Yehudah in any of this. I find it odd that in a discussion regarding the Aryeh Yehudah Messiach, you seem to throw away the Aryeh Yehudah.
@crisspf
No, the etymology I am offering you does not come from one word; that would be extremely foolish, and you are admonishing me rather than asking id I have more corroboration evidence. The search for Truth requires losing your biases and live for the institutions of men.
Trusting Gugal’s first answer, whom is named for The Babylonian Bull of Heaven, is equally foolish. The exoteric (public) explanation for the name for Google is that it means an insanely large power of 10.
However, if you do some research on History and Archeology, you’re going to find out that very name for Google comes from Gugal-Anna, including its color scheme. Gugal Anna, whom is literally The Bull of Heaven in Babylon, for whom Ishtar (The Queen of Heaven and blood sacrifice) descends to the underworld to find in Babylonian Luciferian Mythologt.
You asked a company started by CIA intelligence operatives kids, named after the Bull of Heaven of Babylon, to give you the etymology of your a Solar Cow Church pretending to be “Christian.” And you trust it?
To give you a corroboration of where we find the name Gugal elsewhere in Luciferian mythologies, look no further than to the deity KUKAL KAIN of ancient Meso American Mayas. It was, like Ishtar, the deity of blood sacrifice and the planet Venus. How did Kain the murderer end up amalgamated in name and practice with the blood sacrifice deity of Ishtar (Venus, who is Lucifer the morning star) and the name for bull Ishtar goes to the underworld to find? That’s how luciferian mythology morphs across time, it mixes and reformulates a little bit, but the names and mythologies and blood sacrifices stay the same. Let me know if Gugal also tells you with its first answer that the name KuKal Kain = to KalKulate = to the KLu-Klux-Klan.
I’m going to assume that if you are on this sight, you realise that the exoteric, publicly professed concepts of things, are Mass mind kintrol, that Lucifer rules the word, and they use the esoteric reasonings to manipulate people and as a convoluted and thin veils for darker esoteric practices, such as child rape (let me know if you find Church Documents openly admitting they’ve been raping children for 1000s of years.) Realising this fact of a veil of manipulation and lying, means you are able to analysis beyond the surface level.
Let’s take an easy one:
For instance, I don’t think any of these stars are going to admit their doing 666 symbols all the time. Gugal will tell you it’s the OK sign, or if you really dig maybe you’ll find out in some cultures it means “up your a$$.” Or maybe the Buddhist symbol of “peace and unity with Ganesha.” (FYI Ganesha is the serpent, said “HANAS” in Hebrew, like GANES-IS, which is actually Berashid.) I am certain you’re certainly not gonna get a nice article on Gugal explaining the 666 OK hand symbol as professing allegiance to Lucifer. But are you going to argue that? No, because there is a mountain of evidence.
Let’s start with how to source etymologies that are not force fed by the Exoteric professing using the Cattle Church. I’ll use sources only available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven.
@crisspf @chud
No, the etymology I am offering you of Cattle Lick does not come from one word; that would be extremely foolish, and you are admonishing me rather than asking if I have more corroboration evidence. The search for Truth requires losing your biases for the corrupt institutions of men.
Likewise, trusting Gugal’s first answer, whom is named for The Babylonian Bull of Heaven GugalAnna, is equally foolish. The exoteric (public) explanation for the name for Google is that it means an insanely large power of 10.
However, if you do some research on History and Archeology, you’re going to find out that very name for the company G00gl3 comes from Gugal-Anna, including its color scheme, and symbolism. Gugal Anna is literally The Bull of Heaven in Babylon, for whom Ishtar (The Queen of Heaven, same title as Maryam, and blood sacrifice) descends to the underworld to find in Babylonian Luciferian Mythology.
You’ve asked a company started by CIA intelligence operatives children, named after the Bull of Heaven of Babylon, to give you the etymology of your a Solar Cow Church pretending to be “Christian.” And you trust it?
I sense you may believe I’m making a spurious connection from the word Gugal and this CIA-In-Q-Tel project for world domination.
To give you a corroboration of where we find the name Gugal elsewhere in Luciferian mythologies, let us consider the deity KUKAL KAIN of ancient Meso American Mayas.
It was, like Ishtar, the deity of human blood sacrifice and the planet Venus. It’s name is identical to the bull of heaven Ishtar goes to see in the underworld. Likewise it is a Serpent Sea Beast, a Dragon, just as Mar = Sea, with reference to aMARu the serpent of the AMARites (who became MARs the blood coloured planet of earth) and Yam = Ugaritic Poseidon. The sea beast. The congruence of namings, mythologies, and rituals surmount quickly, and are far too vast and profound to be by chance; they are the product of esoteric Luciferianism.
Now how did Kain the murderer end up amalgamated in name and practice with the blood sacrifice deity of Ishtar (Venus, who is Lucifer the morning star) and the name for bull Ishtar goes to the underworld to find?
Well, that is how luciferian mythology morphs across time, it mixes and reformulates a little bit, flips the gender or puts two together or splits one into two, but the names and mythologies and blood sacrifices and abominable practices stay the same; it’s all based on the SOLAR mysteries. Let me know if Gugal also tells you with its first answer what I have shown you here regarding the name KuKal Kain = to KalKulate = to the KLu-Klux-Klan.
I’m going to assume that if you are on this sight, you realise that the exoteric, publicly professed concepts of Luciferian organizations are a form ofMass mind Kontrol and manipulation, that Lucifer rules the world, that the very names you use to blaspheme YHWH such as Gad (Isiah 65:11, it’s Ba’al God) and Dios (It’s Zeus, you know this since you are Greek speaking), are used to replace the name of the ineffable creator.
You also likely realise that the esoteric reasonings for manipulating people with an nice sounding exoteric lie are very dark. They use their nice words and public personas as a convoluted and thin veil for darker esoteric practices go serve Lucifer, such as child r@p3!
Let me know if you find Church Documents openly admitting they’ve been r@ping children for 1000s of years. It’s an ESOTERIC PRACTICE OF WICKED WOLVES PLAYING SHEPHERD.
Realising this fact of a veil of manipulation and lying, means you are able to analysis beyond the surface level.
Let’s take an easy one that doesn’t touch your extraordinary bias toward an institution of men:
I don’t think any of these movie/music stars are going to admit their doing 666 symbols all the time.
Gugal will tell you it’s the OK sign, or if you really dig maybe you’ll find out in some cultures it means “up your a$$.” (Nice reference to the child @n@l r@p3) Or maybe you’ll discover the Buddhist symbol of “peace and unity with Ganesha.” (FYI Ganesha is the serpent, said “HANAS” in Hebrew, like GANES-IS, which is actually Berashid.) I am certain you won’t find a decent article on Gugal explaining the 666 OK hand symbol as professing allegiance to Lucifer. But are you going to argue that with me? No, because there is a mountain of evidence that they lie, and that they serve the Di-Hevel, the Di-Abolos, the Twin of Abel.
Let’s now start with how to source an etymology of Cattle Lick with respect to primary source documents, history, theology, practices, hierarchy, rituals, and self chosen namings;as well as keeping in mind the well documented and pervasive mass murder, child Molesting, and total disregard for a multitude of direct scriptural commands
We need to go beyond the force fed by the Exoteric professings of the Cattle Church, and examine how wolves dress themselves in sheeps clothing. Recall that even their own official doctrine claims not to know the origin of Catholic; strange. I’ll use sources only easily available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven, but which require a bit of critical thinking.
You also use “gugal” a lot and so does A.E but it is ok when you do that. You possess the “critical thinking” (“ I’ll use sources only easily available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven, but which require a bit of critical thinking.”)
“ I don’t think any of these movie/music stars are going to admit their doing 666 symbols all the time.”
True!
Abusers of people and particularly those of children have nothing to do with the Church. The Apostolic Church. They are abusers of both people and faith. Wolves.
About the rape claims and the murder of Uriah.
In 2 Samuel 11:2, 4, we’re told that Bathsheba is bathing, but we’re not told where. Bathing was mainly done by pouring jugs of water over your body since bathtubs were uncommon. Architectural discoveries found that most homes at that time had a courtyard, so this may be the most likely location.
Was Bathsheba fully naked as she bathed, possibly in her private courtyard? In those days, bathing wasn’t always done in the nude. Clothes or sarongs were sometimes worn to avoid being totally exposed. The Bible does not say if Bathsheba was nude or clothed.
Let’s also remember that David wasn’t supposed to be in his palace. Therefore, Bathsheba may not have realized he was peering from above.
Uriah and Bathsheba lived in the lower section of Jerusalem. King David’s palace was elevated above all the houses, so he had a private vantage point. Based on Scripture, David was on a roof, not Bathsheba.
Did Bathsheba Seduce David?
First, let’s consider what we know about Bathsheba.
Based on 2 Samuel 23:34, 39, she was part of a brave and godly family. Her husband, Uriah, and her father, Eliam, served on King David’s elite team of soldiers. Her grandfather, Ahitophel, was considered a trusted counselor of the king.
Interestingly, the bath mentioned in verse 2 was not an ordinary washing for cleanliness. It was ceremonial, performed by Jewish women every month after a “state of uncleanliness.” The count for seven days of impurity ended in the evening at sunset. The evening time of the seventh day was when a woman would carry out the ceremonial washing. Bathsheba was where she was supposed to be (Leviticus 15:19, 28) and when she was supposed to be there. From all indications, Bathsheba was obeying the law of Moses.
Did Bathsheba seduce David? Did she place herself within David’s sight in hopes of receiving the king’s attention? Scripture does not say. God alone knows the heart, as well as its motives. Even if she had, it was still David’s choice to look beyond a glance and act on that temptation.
Did David Force Himself on Bathsheba?
“…and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite” (2 Samuel 11:3).
Bathsheba is identified by her husband and her father, which was common in biblical times. Because both men were well respected, this identification reflected positively on Bathsheba’s reputation. Also, David had fought alongside both her husband and father in an elite “mighty men” army. Her identity alone should have pierced David’s conscience.
The fact that David had to send several men to “take” Bathsheba may indicate that she was compelled to come to David. Even if Bathsheba was unhappy with David’s request to come to the palace, Bathsheba had no power to refuse the king’s sexual demands. Bathsheba, even though she was married, most likely had no say in the matter with David. It was impossible for her to reject the king’s demand.
@gem, @A.E, no consent = rape.
…and then the murder.
But hey, this is not critical thinking, right?
I’m sorry, but I couldn’t get past the first sentence of this without thinking, “Huh??” When have I ever used “gugal”? I’m still learning what it means.
I quoted gem. It was in response for his claims that only some can use “gugal” and keep the critical thinking.
>“ You’ve asked a company started by CIA intelligence operatives children, named after the Bull of Heaven of Babylon, to give you the etymology of your a Solar Cow Church pretending to be “Christian.” And you trust it?”
“ I’ll use sources only easily available on the Gugal Bull of Heaven, but which require a bit of critical thinking.”
The double standards!
= go*gle
You wrote “You also use “gugal” a lot and so does A.E”. I am A E and I am telling you I never use that word as I don’t entirely understand it. You spray allegations without any clear aim and smear everyone in whatever it is you’re getting at. It dilutes your message.
According to gem, the “critical thinker” you also use “gugal”. Ask gem. I didn’t use the term before either.
@crissppf
I was offering some knowledge regarding the fact that a lot of knowledge requires you don’t accept the first explanation Gugal and other “authorities,” give you, and showing you how to look deeper beyond false professed exoteric cover stories.
Regarding your stuff on David and Bathsheba, you have extrapolated and invented an entire fictional rape narrative regarding David and Bathsheba. You seem to have a penchant for inventing fantasy narratives based more on Pop Culture than scripture. This is problematic.
While you take an extreme literalist view (of translations) towards eating flesh and drinking blood,
here you have fictionalized an entire fanciful narrative not in the text at all by engaging in random questions like “Did Bathsheba seduce David?” Followed by answers based only on your (and Pop Culture’s) imagination. As I pointed out before the word rape is used in the Old Testament, such as in Berashid 34:2. Here it simply says “they lay together.”
The point of the passage, what it actually says, is that David had a one night stand and bore a child; no other information is given.
I’m also not certain how this compares, as you have done, to Constantine boiling his wife alive and serial killing the lot of his family and friends (except mom)
Here we have:
A one Night Stand that conceived a child you fantasize as a rape in order to be able to fantasize a A Serial killer you as a saint.
Avoiding the greek root of “catholic”, this one in particular because it doesn’t fit your so beloved exposing-the-occult narative is enough proof of your objectivism and critical thinking.
Christ’s teachings are not occult, nor sophisticated. But then again, you are not christian.