Monday, 6 July 2009

Communications

I think it was Rousseau who said that 'when man[or wombman]is completely happy, they have absolutely no need of language'. That would indicate that all speech is an expression of need, just as all fear has at its root the fear of death.
Here are a few thoughts of my own on the importance of good communication:
"Speech is the sceptre of mankind - gossip is the devil's rickshaw"
"The genius of communication is to able to be totally honest and yet totally kind to the recipient"
"Every time I speak, my spirit is on parade"
Chrystians [sic] have this thing about their 'bible', and Islam has now remembered to be just as
pedantic about their Qran, so much are these people bigoted that they have for centuries persecuted (even to the death) any who dare to hold a differing viewpoint. That's what the Vatican calls a 'heretic' - it's from a Greek word for 'different'.
Now the writings which the Chrystians hold dear are drawn from those of many good-hearted souls who, over a period of almost 1600 years, wrote down for posterity the things they had both received and witnessed. The problem that Chrystians have is that the Vatican has gotten hold of the best of these documents, and, because they contain an inconvenient truth, have made very sure that an unexpurgated translation never gets out onto the street - that could cost them billions, not to say also a serious loss of street-cred.
So today we have a situation where, if I dare to hold a differing view from the local Imam, I am in danger of being befriended by some dingily-clad extremist who will sit next to me on the 'bus and send me and my neighbours off to 'paradise/hell', but, after all, that is not a lot different from the treatment meted out to the Ladino Jews in Spain in the 16th Century.
No wonder poor old Richard Dawkins felt the need to write his book about his disillusionment. He's quite wrong, but I understand why he did it.
About the writings themselves;
The so-called scriptures are divided into two sections. Chrystians call them the 'Old' and the 'New' testaments, and will run out phrases such as, 'The new is in the old contained; the old is in the new explained'. Subsequent persistent marketing has led to the view that the resurrection of their leader proved that the 'old' was now obsolete. This is a dangerous misconception. Romans 13:4 reminds us that, whilst the new gives us the opportunity to live on a higher plane, there has never been any justification for abolishing capital punishment Even gentle Jesus, meek and mild, has very definite views on what ought to happen to evil child molesters - cf Matt 18:6. He also confirmed that he never came to abolish the 'old' but to fulfil it Nor did he ever at any stage, tell his followers to stop attending synagogue, although he DID say there would come a time when they would not be too welcome there...
So that is where the Vatican saw it's marketing opportunity, and since then, they have altered just about all the true facts in favour of their revised version.
Let's just briefly take their 'Easter' as an example, using the year 2009 as an example:
Their word Easter is a Roman/Anglican corruption - of the original Hebrew ‘Chaq Hamatzot’ - Feast of Unleavened Bread, but to try to sort it we will relate this ‘holyday’ to their Gregorian Calendar.

Thurs 9th April 2009 = Passover –

On the original night when the Hebrew Slaves revolted against their Egyptian taskmasters, they were all packed up and ready to do a moonlight flit, when suddenly the Angel of Death paid a visit to the neighbourhood and took out all the eldest male children of the Egyptians, but ‘passed over’ the Hebrew families. This amazing event is commemorated by all self-respecting Hebrew families as ‘Pesach’ – a one-day feast.

For Chrystians [sic] this is the night their Messiah sat down with his Inner Cabinet for a last supper before being betrayed by his chancellor, arraigned by his fellow-Jews and butchered by the Roman equivalent of the ‘Waffen SS’.

Friday 10th April 2009 = ‘Chaq Hamatzot’ -The Feast of Unleavened Bread

Passover is immediately followed by this seven-day feast – Unleavened Bread (no cholesterol problems here, then) so, if we want to stick to the original Rule Book, we should all get an eight-day vacation at this time of year, not a three-day one. However, as we have abandoned the original script for the Roman/Anglican copy there is little chance of the British government going out on a limb on this one.

By daylight on this day the kangaroo court had concluded with the Roman governor deciding that one Jew more or less was of little concern compared to the risk of a mob uprising, so, send him off to Golgotha - Skull Hill. Incidentally, the poor chap only carried the horizontal beam (patibulum) not the complete Cross. Patibula were pre-made in bulk, each with a mortise socket to fit onto the upright stakes, which were left up on the hill. So, the

Messiah was dead by sundown and buried by nightfall.

Saturday 11th April 2009 - first day in his tomb

Sunday 12th April 2009 – second day in his tomb

Monday 13th April 2009 – third day in his tomb

Very early on the fourth day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread Peter’s 12-year old son, John Mark, seems to have climbed out of his bedroom window and made his way under cover of the half-light to the burial garden where he was confronted by an empty tomb and an angelic being who informed him that his Flash-Gordon hero had moved aside the three-ton cornerstone and was out and about again.

So convincing was John Mark’s account that about ten years later a converted Saul of Tarsus insisted on taking the young man on a European Tour to convince the Diaspora (scattered Jews) that the Messiah is still alive.

My apologies if this account of events is at variance with the received ‘church’ version, but if Messiah said he was going to be dead for three days and three nights before vacating the Tomb, why do we insist on having the poor soul crucified on a Friday and resurrected on a Sunday…Surely someone who heals lepers, turns water into wine and walks on water wouldn’t have made a careless slip-up like that?

I want to apologise if my direct modern style is proving too abrasive for you, but as life is short, I do not wish to be offensive, nor, on the other hand do I wish to waste it by being inoffensive.

I will gladly die for the truth that there is a resurrected Jew on the throne of the universe, but his name certainly wasn’t Jesus Christ then and isn’t Jesus Christ now…

The Vatican are attempting to squeeze the eternal plan of redemption and salvation into a Roman Catholic straitjacket. I will refer to just a couple of your points:

1. cf. Mark 16:5 – a young man met and spoke with the two female witnesses. Not an angel in this portion of the story but a youth just prior to puberty. In v.7 he asks them to tell Messiah’s disciples and Peter about this stupendous event.

Now compare this with Acts 15: 36-40 and THINK about it. A female witness would in those days have carried little weight in the synagogues or before a synhedrin, but by the mouth of two male witnesses – Saul (Paul) and John Mark, Barnabas saw a way to convince the dispersed Jews.

2. I have spent 58 years studying the writings as far back as either my puny European mind or my distinguished family roots will take me, and I still believe that a day consists of 24 hours, whether or not I count from sunset as man was originally instructed, or from sunup as the Western world would have me reckon.

Ancient sources? Will someone please advise the waiting truth-detectives when the Vatican will release for public consumption a full and free translation of those troublesome ‘Dead Sea’ scrolls which they keep hidden away.

Roman Catholics will say– “it is obvious that the crucifixion took place on a Friday”. Obvious to whom? Was the Sunday to Saturday calendar already in common usage during the Roman occupation of Palestina? THINK about it. You believe it was Friday because you have always been taught it that way. I was taught that way too, but it is not the correct thought pattern.

The Vatican leaders know that “in the Roman Empire of the first century, there was no general consensus about the names of the days of the week” and that is why it is so deplorable to change the reported facts in favour of developing a world religious system to control the minds and the money of mankind. If we do that, we are no different from the servants of Islam, who, by dint of their bigotry and asinine teachings will shortly raise a plain black flag over the British Palace of Westminster unless we all stop sleepwalking.

Easter as a term is a corruption because it has been chosen to change the original reported facts, the calendar dates, etc.

Ask yourself when you last had a Jew knock on your house door and invite you to their meetings? They have nothing to prove.

Finally, look again at Stephen [Acts 7:38] on trial for his very life in a Jewish court, he points out to them that, even this side of Calvary and the Resurrection, Messiah still wants him to talk about “this is he that was in the assembly – ‘synagogue’ in the wilderness…”

I want to respect their point of view, but not the practices of a ‘church’ that relies more on tradition than historical truth.

This is why our UK society is in such a mess. We seem to have removed all forms of deterrent from our ‘laws’ and replaced them with wishy-washy psychological treatments.

If we are to accept with our adult minds that the god/man Y’shua came to the world through an unsullied maiden and really did rise again after death, then we are offered, through identification with him, the opportunity to live a life above the carnal level. Where the western world has erred is to suppose that this opportunity is at the expense of the Old Law. Which is why the writer of the Roman epistle says ;

‘…he beareth not the sword in vain..’ – Rom 13:4

The offer of redemption – NOT conversion – is universal. It does NOT exclude the Jew, nor should it have been taken as an excuse to torture and dismember anyone who dared to disagree with the assumed Vatican authority and doctrine – (cf. our Ladino believers in Spain in the 16th century).

The offence to the godhead is for mankind to treat the sacrifice of the Son of Man as of no value, and this has NOTHING to do with fonts, icons or any other papal paraphernalia. I am sorry if this is hard to read, but I have risked my life for this truth and I cannot live in a fellowship which insists on discarding true fact for traditional fiction.

Let's all have a good think about this and decide what we need to do next.

Leymoor Lad





No comments:

Post a Comment