Inspiration is not cancelled out by inerrancy. A Case for Christianity as a universal Religion

[Richard Stanley]

I finished watching the Macdonald interview and it's interesting that he also discussed the function of the religious canons, including the Homeric, as "social identity formation".

Yes, Macdonald notes that the gospel Jesus is more compassionate than the "letter of the law" Jews, one can also see a motive in the authors of wanting to pacify this 'messianic' Jew, as the real Zealous ones in Palestine were not so docile.

Likewise the "words of Jesus" harmonize Roman and Ebionite rules...

Bridge building?

 

[Richard E]

What do you think of Tolstoy's comments about Jesus?
Tolstoy concludes with an exaltation of Jesus' doctrine as shining forth still boldy if anyone would but read it:
"The doctrine of Jesus is the light. The light shines forth, and the darkness cannot conceal it. Men cannot deny it, men cannot refuse to accept its guidance. They must depend on the doctrine of Jesus, which penetrates among all the errors with which the life of men is surrounded. Like the insensible ether filling universal space, enveloping all created things, so the doctrine of Jesus is inevitable for every man in whatever situation he may be found. Men cannot refuse to recognize the doctrine of Jesus; they may deny the metaphysical explanation of life which it gives (we may deny everything), but the doctrine of Jesus alone offers rules for the conduct of life without which humanity has never lived, and never will be able to live; without which no human being has lived or can live, if he would live as man should live, — a reasonable life. The power of the doctrine of Jesus is not in its explanation of the meaning of life, but in the rules that it gives for the conduct of life." Id., at 239.

Tolstoy concludes the chapter with this simple principle: "The faith that triumphs over the doctrines of the world is faith in the doctrine of Jesus." Id., at 244.”

What if the Church at the time of the Council of Nicaea looked to the teachings of Jesus in Matthew and the Hebrew Holy Scripture to note the commandments of God to determine which books were in accord with the word of God, and which were not? At that time the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was still accepted by many to have been the oldest account and most universally accepted account from the beginning of the Jesus movement. Would it have been needful for them to follow the instruction and commandment of God to know who spoke, or wrote, on His behalf? I found no record that Jerome made any such consideration. What about the Protestant Reformers? Should they have based the Protestant reformation on the teachings of Jesus and the Holy Scriptures of Jesus’ day? Church history proves that Rome destroyed many of the early Church and Jewish writings. It’s a fabulous blessing that significant scrolls were preserved in caves for future generations benefit. Dare we say it seems to be the providence of God to do so, that we might be able to reconsider and believe what God and Jesus (Y’shua) said is “the truth” that leads to life eternal and sets men free from false beliefs and unreasonable lives that Isaiah 42 calls prison houses? The “truth” is about living justly, loving mercy and walking humbly with God, and the Ten Commandments are the express Instruction of God that we must be careful to note the distinctions God gave to mankind – as given to those He said are “My people.” God never annulled His promise to the seed of Abraham and His distinctions remain in effect. It's also evident in the account that God spoke to all He brought to Mount Sinai – INCLUDING those of "a multitude of nations." This could be what was meant by the words of the prophet in Malichi 3:16 - 18, Dead Sea Scrolls Bible:
“Then those who feared the LORD spoke one to another, and the LORD listened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before him, for those who feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name. So that they shall be mine, says the LORD of hosts, even my own possession, in the day that I make; and I will spare them, as a man spares his own son that serves him. Then you will again distinguish between the righteous and the wicked, between the one who serves God and the one who serves him not.”
Who dares to know the distinctions God made to know the wicked from the righteous? The gospel of Jesus is to repent and do the will of God – not that we can now pretend to ignore the judgment between righteousness and wickedness – and certainly not that “all things are lawful” – which ripped the truth God gave out of consideration. The lack of conscience that agrees with God has torn all the Abrahamic faiths apart! There can be no better time than now to reconsider who we actually serve and if we believe God – or not. (Copied from one of my webpages)

 

[Richard Stanley]

What do you think of Tolstoy's comments about Jesus?

My thoughts about Jesus are pretty much the same as my thoughts about William Shakespeare, the cloth merchant and stage actor. Now ... maybe there is something to this IESOUS CHRISTOS entity, but this is speaking on a whole different level.

For IC, I recommend you read David Fideler's Jesus Christ, Sun of God for a starting point.

It’s a fabulous blessing that significant scrolls were preserved in caves for future generations benefit. Dare we say it seems to be the providence of God to do so, that we might be able to reconsider and believe what God and Jesus (Y’shua) said is “the truth” that leads to life eternal and sets men free from false beliefs and unreasonable lives that Isaiah 42 calls prison houses?

Some of the scrolls point to the literal and figurative Egyptian origins of your Jews and the canonic Jesus.

The “truth” is about living justly, loving mercy and walking humbly with God, and the Ten Commandments are the express Instruction of God that we must be careful to note the distinctions God gave to mankind – as given to those He said are “My people.” God never annulled His promise to the seed of Abraham and His distinctions remain in effect. It's also evident in the account that God spoke to all He brought to Mount Sinai – INCLUDING those of "a multitude of nations." This could be what was meant by the words of the prophet in Malichi 3:16 - 18, Dead Sea Scrolls Bible:
“Then those who feared the LORD spoke one to another, and the LORD listened, and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before him, for those who feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name. So that they shall be mine, says the LORD of hosts, even my own possession, in the day that I make; and I will spare them, as a man spares his own son that serves him. Then you will again distinguish between the righteous and the wicked, between the one who serves God and the one who serves him not.”

The "Truth" is about that and more.

I'm afraid (fear) that my beliefs are akin to the Deists, that the creator force, whatever that is, pressed the Start Button and is just letting the chips fall where they may. It's on our own to figure things out, and thus your 10 Decrees are just some man's overly simplistic attempt to provide some basic rules for social stability, based upon prior experiences and biases.

One should be motivated to take the best course of action for that is reward enough, not because of Fear of the whip or worse. If there is an afterlife in your Heaven, which I doubt, then there should be no access to it via Fear. The conflation of Love and Fear is psychosis inducing and the reason that we are in such dire straight in regards to religion.

What is a "LORD of hosts"? Was Abraham a Lord of hosts, with a royal retainer of 318? One worthy of being entertained by Pharaoh?

 

[Richard Stanley]

I just realized last night that I have neglected to bring up the most important matter, namely the relationship of Judah to both Ephraim and Esau.

Ephraim, of course, is Joseph, and you know that Judah is in eternal fealty to Ephraim, because of that other naughty business. This while Esau will recover the blessing of Abraham from Jacob (aka Judah). All the while, Joseph had colluded with Pharaoh to corner the free markets and place all the free Egyptians into bondage, having bought their grains, the livestock, and their land from under them. Then Joseph moved all the new slaves around to different nomes (fiefdoms) as if they were cattle.

This practice was then emulated in Romanized Europe and heartily continued under the Roman Church, which we know as feudalism.

Question. Would your Jesus have endorsed this as consistent with the 10 Decrees and such? Or is this one of the things we can throw out the window?

 

[Richard E]

What would Jesus do - would he have endorsed feudalism or communism or socialism or capitalism? First off, in order to reach my conclusions I put the Teachings of Jesus into action to see if they worked - if they were true - or not. After several things happened, which I won't deny, I had to conclude what he and YHWH said was true. So I'm not going to discount things that were a billion to one odds happening, and due to the timing, can only conclude those things were based on observing the Teachings of God.

Mormons, among others, love to pretend to know "What Would Jesus Do?" The accord between the teachings of Jesus to the words of God - His Instructions on right and wrong - needs to be understood - not just "believed in" with "blind faith." Understanding is far different than pretending.

Kingdoms come and go - political systems likewise come and go - as does all else. Ancient Israel before a king should be studied more carefully.

In short, no, Jesus would not have endorsed feudalism, communism, or any government on the face of the earth today.

Why? See the Ten Decrees. Understand. Did you follow my backwards review of them on my webpage? If so - what comments do you think are off base or unreasonable?

the gospel and the law
onediscipletoanother.org/

 

[Richard E]

http://www.onediscipletoanother.org/id3.html

 

[Richard E]

I just realized last night that I have neglected to bring up the most important matter, namely the relationship of Judah to both Ephraim and Esau.

Ephraim, of course, is Joseph, and you know that Judah is in eternal fealty to Ephraim, because of that other naughty business. This while Esau will recover the blessing of Abraham from Jacob (aka Judah). All the while, Joseph had colluded with Pharaoh to corner the free markets and place all the free Egyptians into bondage, having bought their grains, the livestock, and their land from under them. Then Joseph moved all the new slaves around to different nomes (fiefdoms) as if they were cattle.

This practice was then emulated in Romanized Europe and heartily continued under the Roman Church, which we know as feudalism.

Question. Would your Jesus have endorsed this as consistent with the 10 Decrees and such? Or is this one of the things we can throw out the window?

Good question. No, I don't think he would endorse Communism either. Oddly, look at who dreamed up Communism and Zionism and the FED and World Bank.

Did God command complete debt forgiveness every 50 years - or not? This is where Jonathan Cahn is deceiving the Christian masses today - God commanded debt forgiveness - not financial destruction. He is warning of what the Jews plan to do and then place the blame on God for what the Jewish Bankers plan to do in defying God and their fellow man.

Those were His commandments to them, yet they used His decree to defy it by enslaving nations to debt they fomented (compound interest) as they also played nation against nation for their gain. God is not mocked, and those who believe He is with Israel as they bring evils upon the earth through violation of His Decrees will have a huge surprise awaiting them - perhaps almost as surprising as Evangelicals and Romanists will face.

Current events are very sobering regarding both in regard to their real standing - if the words of God or Jesus are true.

What do you think?

 

[Richard Stanley]

Current events are very sobering regarding both in regard to their real standing - if the words of God or Jesus are true.

What do you think?

Both the world and you are proceeding at a pace that enfeebled I am having trouble keeping up with, and these days Shakespeare is not helping either. The link is relevant to what we're discussing, and should make one ponder about the 153 fishies in the net and such. As discussed in the video, Shakespeare and ancient poetry was written with encrypted knowledge, to be understood by those who had obtained sufficient merit (even if they had certain advantages over others or not). Such, and including the Bible, is read on two different levels, depending upon the perspectives of the readers.

But, as to today's events, I have already written a considerable amount upon the 'staging' of these affairs. And, this is consistent with my prior statements to you.

I will try to read your pages as time and energy permits.

 

[Richard Stanley]

OK, I have done some further reading and both see some merit and flaws in your approach.

First, I think there is possibly some great value in this approach to Matthew, from the context of thinking about a Nazarene (Egypto-Persian prince living in his 'Aramaic' speaking kingdom, his father in Urfa>Edessa) master providing his disciples various wisdom sayings. Later, after his Roman cousins (from the Abrahamic tree) make off with his Abrahamic inheritance, the Romans, in collusion with the Maccabean Josephus, use the original Matthew as a template to add their esoteric system onto, while they also provide the parallel bolstering canonic gospels and the Pauline corpus. This allows for the 4 gospels to be worked on simultaneously, interwoven as described by Atwill with the works of Josephus. So, they have literally grafted themselves (Romans 11) onto the Root of Jesse and textually as well.

So great job there.

However, what you have provided demonstrates that your Son of Man, is representing himself not as a mere man, as you suggest, but as a kind of pope or leader of a secret, esoteric cult. One that, indeed, is intimately familiar with the concept of precession of the equinoxes, via the references to this age and the next.

Thus the religio-social construction that you suggest does seem more akin to what is known of the later Cathars and their predecessors, likely linking back to the gnostic Naasenes.

As I have alluded to prior, we are now becoming aware that this process was recapitulated with the Tudor tableau in England. However, it would appear to me that for some reason they jumped the chiliastic gun, as did the Roman Church with the Sistine Chapel meant to replicate the Jerusalem Temple.

As you know, the first Third Temple was razed to the ground during the Second Coming (by Christos Titus) 'exactly' during the time of the canonic generation of the disciples. At the next chili cook-off the Normans had their Doomsday conquest, placing their lords over the cities of England like the Levites were placed over the 48 cities of Israel. And now everyone is all excited about 2030, which will be but one generation removed from 1,000 years since that prior chili cook-off. But, they need time for the second Third Temple to be built.

Do not put figs into the chili.

 

[Seeker]

Hmmm, the Temple was destroyed in AD 70, one generation AFTER the prophecy was allegedly made about AD 30, we have the Norman Conquest in the middle, 1066-1070, and 2030 would be one generation BEFORE the next "fulfillment" of prophecy, is there some sort of symmetry here?

 

[Richard Stanley]

If they are following 'a script', it would seem so. Did anything interesting happen in 1030 CE?

 

[Seeker]

Close, William the Conqueror was born about 1028, thus was about 40 during the invasion and subjugation of England.

 

[Richard E]

OK, I have done some further reading and both see some merit and flaws in your approach.

First, I think there is possibly some great value in this approach to Matthew, from the context of thinking about a Nazarene (Egypto-Persian prince living in his 'Aramaic' speaking kingdom, his father in Urfa>Edessa) master providing his disciples various wisdom sayings. Later, after his Roman cousins (from the Abrahamic tree) make off with his Abrahamic inheritance, the Romans, in collusion with the Maccabean Josephus, use the original Matthew as a template to add their esoteric system onto, while they also provide the parallel bolstering canonic gospels and the Pauline corpus. This allows for the 4 gospels to be worked on simultaneously, interwoven as described by Atwill with the works of Josephus. So, they have literally grafted themselves (Romans 11) onto the Root of Jesse and textually as well.

So great job there.

However, what you have provided demonstrates that your Son of Man, is representing himself not as a mere man, as you suggest, but as a kind of pope or leader of a secret, esoteric cult. One that, indeed, is intimately familiar with the concept of precession of the equinoxes, via the references to this age and the next.

Thus the religio-social construction that you suggest does seem more akin to what is known of the later Cathars and their predecessors, likely linking back to the gnostic Naasenes.

As I have alluded to prior, we are now becoming aware that this process was recapitulated with the Tudor tableau in England. However, it would appear to me that for some reason they jumped the chiliastic gun, as did the Roman Church with the Sistine Chapel meant to replicate the Jerusalem Temple.

As you know, the first Third Temple was razed to the ground during the Second Coming (by Christos Titus) 'exactly' during the time of the canonic generation of the disciples. At the next chili cook-off the Normans had their Doomsday conquest, placing their lords over the cities of England like the Levites were placed over the 48 cities of Israel. And now everyone is all excited about 2030, which will be but one generation removed from 1,000 years since that prior chili cook-off. But, they need time for the second Third Temple to be built.

Do not put figs into the chili.

I wouldn't make it that complicated. Have you read Seiss on the Zodiac? Take Libra, my sign incidentally, has the cross, and speaks to the scales of justice and the matter of weighing as judgment. Christians teach Paul - we have all fallen short of the glory of God and are nothing but scum and worms - which defies what God said - repeatedly. God given Instructions are built into our nature, but we've been lied to by those of the Serpent/Satan - who accuses falsely against us. Look at the scales. What is holding the scales down? The claw of the scorpion. So it is - if we believe lies it will have weight to pull us down from what God gave to elevate us with justice, righteous living, and being merciful in our ways as He declared He is in His ways. Understanding the Ten Decrees and the words of God from Adam, Cain, Noah, Abraham, Moses and the Prophets - all have the same harmony of intent and purpose - and it must first be discerned in the plain text meanings - if there are subtext mysteries or symbolism these cannot deny, set aside, minimize or defy the plain text meaning.

I see the issue of the "Protocols" as great evils against God and mankind in defying what He asked and commanded of them - so that they can install a just king through their defying every one of the decrees God made = cannot have a good end and will be just as God declared in the Torah and the end of Isaiah 42...except they repent and do justice and restitution as decreed by YHWH.

Why would God make a mystery out of what He declared to be plainly known by His word? (Ex 30)

Jews complain about the scolding Jesus gave them in Matthew. Have they considered the scolding God gave them through Isaiah was no worse?
Telling is that they killed Isaiah and Jesus?!

 

[Richard E]

If they are following 'a script', it would seem so. Did anything interesting happen in 1030 CE?

One of the most interesting classes given at a Church was from the Seventh Day Adventists and it showed not a few timelines and history. Perhaps the main sources of the material were "The Great Controversy" and "From Sabbath to Sunday". (Ellen White - can't help but wonder where she got so much info, and Samuel Bacchiciocci [spelling?]}

The class was on Revelation, and they had many interesting time lines given in relation to Rome and Popes. I believe the presenter put the class together - Jim Reinking.

 

[Seeker]

Their most "famous" timeline, at least to outsiders, is the "Great Disappointment" of 1844, which I believe was salvaged by changing it from an eschatological event to an eschatological process.

 

[Richard E]

Their most "famous" timeline, at least to outsiders, is the "Great Disappointment" of 1844, which I believe was salvaged by changing it from an eschatological event to an eschatological process.

Largely, yes.

I have to point out that there are more than one source for the gospels, and Matthew's evidence is the Hebrew is original - and significantly altered as noted on my webpage. The point being that the number of fish stories is not in the Hebrew Matthew, but written by, or altered by, those who had purpose to pass on "hidden knowledge". Jewish Kabbalistic theory is a degeneration of truth - not a hidden truth. Who hides the truth of God? Who tells men they are worthless in the eyes of God unless they imagine they are covered by the blood of Jesus? God said no such things.

Christians are so deceived from the truth of God - and Jews an Muslims have nothing to brag about either.

Just went through the Protocols again the other day - amazing that anyone believes they were made up by the enemies of Judaism to cause prejudice. I need to go through their published Tanach and put up some quotes from their rabbi's of record of the wickedness they propose to non-Jews as unequals and dupes.

 

[Jerry Russell]

Just went through the Protocols again the other day - amazing that anyone believes they were made up by the enemies of Judaism to cause prejudice.

A very peculiar statement. The reason anyone believes they were "made up" is because it's a proven fact. The structure as well as extensive portions of text of the Protocols were plagiarized from Maurice Joly's Dialogue in Hell.

I need to go through their published Tanach and put up some quotes from their rabbi's of record of the wickedness they propose to non-Jews as unequals and dupes.

This exercise would demonstrate that some orthodox Jewish rabbis have expressed ill will towards non-Jews. So what?? What does that prove about the Protocols of Zion, or anything else?

 

[Seeker]

I would certainly agree that personally (I happen to be a non-Jew), I am unequal and a dupe in the eyes of the Elite, but I also believe that the Elite are composed of Gentiles as well as Jews, since the Elite do not discriminate covertly among themselves over religion (unless they consider the pursuit of money and power as a "religion"), they leave that to the unequal, duped, overtly Gentiles and Jews, who require their "rod of iron" to remedy their "wickedness" (disobedience of their law) with, as per Tupper Saussy in his "Rulers of Evil".
Luke 16:8 KJV: "And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light." Could "light" in this context mean of little value or importance, and not an "illuminated" light, as the children of the world have knowledge of?

 

[Richard Stanley]

I see the issue of the "Protocols" as great evils against God and mankind in defying what He asked and commanded of them - so that they can install a just king through their defying every one of the decrees God made = cannot have a good end and will be just as God declared in the Torah and the end of Isaiah 42...except they repent and do justice and restitution as decreed by YHWH.

Why would God make a mystery out of what He declared to be plainly known by His word? (Ex 30)

Jews complain about the scolding Jesus gave them in Matthew. Have they considered the scolding God gave them through Isaiah was no worse?
Telling is that they killed Isaiah and Jesus?!

It's going to take me some time to get caught up, but I'll reply here.

As Jerry replied, how can you prove the authorship of the Protocols, regardless of whether or not the intentions detailed within are coming true or not? It's besides the point to us in any case, because we have detailed that the entire construct of Jews versus goys (specifically) is an artifice, part of the false dialectic started with the schism over Aton versus Amun. And the false dialectic has been cynically employed from then till today.

I'm not sure what you're getting at by referring to Exodus 30, but it's rather interesting to me that YHWH's tabernacle and mishkan is an exact replica of a typical pharaoh's military campaign tent, and the detailed description of the ark is a typical pharaoh's ark. Exodus is the next book after Genesis where, Joseph colluded with pharaoh to corner the free markets and enslave the free Egyptians. At least, if you believe the narrative provided in the Good Book.

Now, you are complaining about actions being undertaken to fulfill the Protocols? What, prey [sic] is the difference? Perhaps you should consider that certain 'Hebrew' elites (Joseph) colluding with the Gentile (meaning an Elite) pharaoh is being recapitulated with the Protocols? They're just following the same playbook, so why are you complaining?

John XXIII stated to the elite Jews after WWII that he was their 'Joseph'. The Rothschilds got their start doing the bidding of the Prussian nobility, somewhat like Marx, and then they became the bankers for the Vatican. Yet we have to listen constantly to the partisans that the tail is now wagging the dog, whether it is the Jews or the Jesuits. So your solution is to parse the Bible into what makes you comfortable, instead of seeing the grand deception for what it really is.

But the Elect don't give a damn who you blame as long as they can fulfill the script and the (200) Biblical assertions of global hegemony.

Your humble carpenter from Nazareth is no more than that grain merchant from Stratford who is claimed to have written the works of Shake-speare.

 

[Richard E]

A very peculiar statement. The reason anyone believes they were "made up" is because it's a proven fact. The structure as well as extensive portions of text of the Protocols were plagiarized from Maurice Joly's Dialogue in Hell.



This exercise would demonstrate that some orthodox Jewish rabbis have expressed ill will towards non-Jews. So what?? What does that prove about the Protocols of Zion, or anything else?

We certainly have different viewpoints. We may deny anything - but I have to take the Instructions of God about testimony to arrive at my viewpoint. Since we evaluate differently, we arrive at different conclusions. Just curious - have you ever worked for a large government agency?

What does it prove?! It's Law in some places to deny the government decreed history of facts and events - truth or evidence contrary to the promoted norm is forbidden knowledge. For example - what was the Civil War of 1860 about? Who killed Kennedy? Was 9-11 an inside job? Or even that Jews cry "Anti-Semite", when they are anti everyone but themselves and their useful dupes. Second is that Zionist Jews consider non-Zionist Jew their enemies - and this predates the 19th and 20th., and is more pronounced today than ever. They used the "Protocols" on their own family that didn't want to go along with their plans to lie, steal, kill and destroy.

Guess it just boils down to who you believe and who you disbelieve, and is there really a way to know truth from lies.

I had to agree with God's Instruction because it freed me from the lies I'd been fed.