The Becoming God

Friday, July 29, 2016

God's God

Do not think it strange that God has a God. We imagine in ourselves, but we cannot find the one imagining. Yet we know that we are the one imagining. Our "God" is Eil's imagining, Allaha. These are the Aramaic terms. Allaha, the imagining, we can know; Eil, the imaginer, not so much. Allaha is Eil's imagining, and Allaha has become us. We are individuals in and of Allaha, so yes, Eil is imagining us and is us. Eil has become imagination, and imagination has become us. Everything is Eil, even though Eil cannot be known.

It is all one, but it certainly is not stagnant. Eil has become us, Allaha, so that we will become Eil. We are on the road, in the program, under process, incurring generation . . . unto Eilness. Just as we cannot know the imaginer in us, as Allaha we cannot know Eil imagining us. We can know Allaha, Eil's imagination -- which we are -- but the invisible Source, Eil the Shaddai, no. Even as God, Allaha, we cannot know that which is imagining. So if we cannot know the Ineffable, Invisible Eil, how are we going to become like Him?

By imagining. When we can do what he does like he does, we will be him, his perfect emanation. It certainly does not hurt to know the doctrines, the stories of the Bible, the acts of God among men, his attitudes and thoughts, but learning all of them perfectly is not the end intended. IMAGINING is the end intended. Imagining perfectly as he does. THAT is the fulfilling of scripture, our destiny -- the real DOING of it -- being the Becoming God becoming.

So the question is not what do we want to become, but what does HE want to become? Imagine!

Tuesday, July 26, 2016

Dr. John McDougall's The Starch Solution: The Cure For Many Diseases May Be Just Eating Right

Dr. John McDougall's views on nutrition and disease are worth learning about. From Crohn's disease to oily skin, constipation to arthritis, most of modern mankind's health problems come his DIET. McDougall says eat STARCH. No meat, no dairy, no oil.

Dr. McDougall has a very well developed web site with very much information on it. Videos, webinars, podcasts, newsletters -- he is trying to spread his knowledge like I am trying to spread mine, except he's got a long head start, and I am no doctor.

Please, search his site and learn how what you eat is making you weak and sick . . . and what to do about it. Here are a small sampling of the information he is putting on the internet:

McDougall web site: https://www.drmcdougall.com/  
Educational Materials: https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/education/cpb/
Color Picture Book: https://www.drmcdougall.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/Dr-McDougalls-Color-Picture-Book1.pdf
The Starch Solution: https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/shopping/books/starch-solution/
On Cancer: https://www.drmcdougall.com/health/education/videos/free-electures/diet-in-the-prevention-and-treatment-of-common-cancers/ 
On the Perils of Milk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJvrlwnEqbs
On Arthritis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldsMEHV8Ox

I should mention that they are talking about WHOLE FOOD carbohydrates, not cookies, cakes and candies. Sweetened cereal even without milk isn't going to help you. McDougall has dozens, maybe hundreds of recipes for real and satisfying meals. You still have to exercise self-control and stay out of the snack aisle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEkQCe7VxUE

Sunday, July 24, 2016

Hysteria and Honor for Healing (edited July 27, 2016)

DeBorah,

Hi. I'm still thinking about your question regarding healing: "What am I missing?" It could be religious emotion raised to a certain pitch of intensity.

C. H. Dodd, in The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development (http://www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=539, chapter 3, page 58), states:

"Quite naïvely, they were impressed by the abnormal psychical phenomena—faith-healing, second sight, 'speaking with tongues,' and the like—which broke out at Pentecost, and accompanied the extension of Christianity beyond the borders of Judaea. The reality of these phenomena there is not the slightest reason to doubt. Paul himself declares that his missionary work was accomplished 'in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of Holy Spirit' (Rom. 15. 19), and he regards 'works of power, gifts of healing, divers kinds of tongues' (1 Cor. 12. 28) as normal in the life of the Church. We have now sufficient records of similar phenomena at other times of religious 'revival,' not only within Christianity, to justify the view that they are usual accompaniments of religious emotion raised to a certain pitch of intensity" (emphasis mine).

"They are the usual accomplishments of religious emotion raised to a certain pitch of intensity." Hence the emotional "hysteria" at healing revivals. Our revivals, their revivals . . . there is something else He is interested in beyond doctrinal accuracy.

I have mentioned before my friend Janet who got caught up into heaven emotionally in her own devotions and was healed of tuberculosis. I have "been there, done that," too. Emotion, euphoria, ecstasy, the feeling of the ethereal, the palpable sense of God's presence, power, and glory -- "it's real, it's real, it's real" -- broaches over into Honor of God. That seems to be real important to Him. He likes it and He responds to it.

If at a revival or prayer group you do not get to the certain pitch of intensity incidentally, seek to establish it yourself like Janet and I did. For myself, as I was preparing for bed I realized and was overwhelmed by the fact that the Intelligence Which Is Power To Become was presently manifest AS me AND my world. Humbled, I simply said in my mind to It, "You can heal me." And It did. I honored Him, and my healing was the reply of Unconditional Love.

Wishing you more than well.

Dan Steele

Friday, July 22, 2016

The Story of Jesus the Manifestation

The oneness of God is a really hard thing to understand and even harder, much harder, to explain. The idea in the Bible is that Jesus Christ is the manifestation of God. He reveals Him. He didn't just teach about him; he didn't just explain him; by his life he REVEALED him: "Ta da! Here I am!"

We have stories of Jesus the Manifestation as a man on the outside of ourselves. He is inside, of course, and is not divided from our own being.

"Hey, wait a minute, Dan. If he is inside and not divided from our being, then he is us."

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding! Give that player a kewpie doll.

We are the manifestation of the Eternal. Like it or not, you and I are His manifestation. The Story of Jesus in the Bible is the story of this manifestation of the Eternal in us. That Jesus, the one in the Bible, came and taught how to pray. And that is what he is doing in us as the manifestation of God that WE are. Are you listening, Israel?

I am anxious for Victor Alexander's movie The Story of Jesus to be made, because he is the only man alive that I know of who holds this view, that the Jesus Christ who was written of two thousand years ago was the Milta, the MANIFESTATION of Eil, the Shaddai, in us. Jesus is the oneness of God.

Victor needs to raise about five thousand dollars (he says $4500US) to be able to promote his movie idea at the American Film Market in November, 2016, but he needs the money now. All I have to promulgate this need with is this little blog, but I am asking you, if you or someone you know can contribute to the making of one of the most important movies of all time -- the message of God to us -- please contact Vic at v-a.com/bible/ (e-mail: vic@v-a.com). Victor conducts fund raising campaigns through Indiegogo. I see on one of his blogs (http://www.aramaic-bible.net/blog/) that his Indiegogo campaign is at https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/alexander-releasing-at-the-american-film-market#/. I think it is better to just e-mail him.

I will be bold to ask for large contributions. A dozen people contributing five thousand dollars each wouldn't be too much. Nor would a few believers donating much larger amounts. Every little bit helps, too. Listen to God inside you and answer the Prophet's call. We are all He has to get this done.

On behalf of the Father, I thank you very much.
____________________________________________

As an added, extra bonus, here is a short e-mail letter exchange between Vic Alexander and myself. Remember, this chain of e-mails starts at the BOTTOM and works its way UP:

Thank you, Vic, for considering me worthy of membership in the AAC (readers, see http://www.v-a.com/bible/AAC/ for the Ancient Aramaic Church). Are we going that way, or is it coming this way? I think the latter. I haven't gone anywhere; I'm just learning as it comes. I fully understand the difficulty of trying to express the purely spiritual in the flesh world (my blog is proof). Which is perhaps the point of the Milta: don't write it, live it. Manifest it.

You could work this idea into the title of The Story of Jesus, perhaps as The Story of Jesus the Manifestation. That is your idea, isn't it? Jesus as the Manifestation is why your movie is uniquely different from every other of the Jesus movies: He is Eil -- the whole of the Godhead -- in the flesh. NOBODY has ever made this clear before in a popular movie.

My deal is that Eil revealed the nature of His prayer technique to Moses, and priests subsequently buried the idea to keep it in-house. Or maybe it just got lost in translation from the ancient Aramaic. Exodus 3:14's original Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh can be reconstructed from Genesis. Adam is God's intention to become a state or thing -- Ahiyeh. The rib becoming Eve is God's creative power to give birth to and actually become the state or thing he intends -- Ashur. Cain and Abel are the acquired form of that state or thing Eil has become and its inherent nature of transitory spirit -- it is Eil, but in the forgetfulness of amnesia it thinks it is the state or thing He has become and not Eil -- hiyeh! (Are you taking my AAC card back yet?)

This is the technique Eil revealed to Moses for Jethro, God's abundance. All things are possible for him who believes like Eil believes. The Bible is first of all a prayer manual. Prayer is what Jacob was learning at Laban's. Jacob mastered it and graduated into Israel at his return to the Jordan to face Esau, the flesh. This is a very different way of reading the scriptures, but I think it is the manner intended by the authors -- and subverted by priests some 3500 years ago. You are the man called to bring it back. God bless your movie.

Dan Steele

PS: Allaha is still a foreign term to me. I have the same trouble with Hebrew terms in Jewish literature. In my mind, my language is just as sacred. If I have to refine and expand my native terms, I will. What I mean by 'God' is what I have learned from years of refinement and expansion. It is unique to my mind; it is Eil, the Ineffable, Alahoota and the universe, all of God's spirit and consciousness. And me. We are in there, too, manifesting Eil right now. Kind of a big calling, isn't it?


------Original Message-----
From: Vic Alexander
To: imagicworldview
Sent: Fri, Jul 22, 2016 7:57 am
Subject: Re: Supporting new essays

Hi Dan,

You've come full circle. You're right, Milta was the key to the understanding. Our problem was that we let the language stop us from seeing. We read but we didn't see. We heard but we did not understand. Now we see and hear for the first time, and hey, it wasn't that hard. It's like when John was in heaven (he was taken up spiritually, as if it were an out-of-body experience), he saw everything and understood -- he understood, but now he had to go back to the world of the flesh and explain the purely spiritual. He was told, 'of this do not write', meaning don't try to explain the spiritual with words; explain it through living the spiritual without abandoning the physical life. So your ephemeral co-exists with the actual.

You explain it better once you wrap your head around the intricacy of the spiritual-physical duality that we live on earth.

With Maryah's blessings,
Vic

PS: Say a prayer and induct yourself into the AAC. Now you are a fully fledged member. You don't need anybody's permission to live the life that Eashoa Msheekha wants you to live -- only an understanding of it. The Milta lives in you independently of anybody else. Now you must explain it to others the way you understand it. That's all you're expected to do. There is no earthly hierarchy to stop

-----Original Message-----
From: imagicworldview
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:58 AM
To: vic@v-a.com
Subject: Re: Supporting new essays

Hello again, Vic.

Yes, I had to refresh my mind as to what I had said in previous e-mail. That would be July 1st. It is that the scriptures can be read another way. Much benefit to you, as that way is a Success Manual, a Guide to Prayer. Of course the Bible was created as prayer training, for if the Milta taught them how to pray then, then that is what Eil is doing now and always with us. The Shaddai provides Jethro. It isn't that the Bible isn't to be read as a history, that is fine, but the history is providentially arranged to teach us Success in Prayer.

I think that was behind Moses' discussion with the divine and the statement in Exodus 3: 14. Virtually, Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh means "I am . . . his/its becoming." And Ashur is the spark that starts or empowers it, which is to me the creative power of prayer or imagining: "Believe ye have received, and ye shall have."

I much appreciate your stance on Milta, that He is the Father. Inasmuch we are in the Milta, I peg us as inside and included in the Trinity. We have been made stupid ("ignoranced") in our present state, yes, but for a purpose: to learn how to pray like Eil! We need to work on it.

Dan

-----Original Message-----
From: Vic Alexander
To: imagicworldview
Sent: Thu, Jul 21, 2016 5:05 am
Subject: Re: Supporting new essays

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your help.

Yes, I'm doing better. Tomorrow I go in for another minor procedure. In about a month the eye doctor will have both eyes treated. But I can already see about 50% better. So I'm sort of back in business.

I'm desperately trying to raise $4,500 with this new Indiegogo campaign. I just have to go back and meet my buyers again this year at the American Film Market.

I meant to reply to your last e-mail. I know you're into a badly misunderstood area. I'll try to find your last e-mail and reply to your last blog on the subject. I've been planning to make a series of videos on the Ancient Aramaic script and why it's crucial to the interpretation of the Scriptures. These terms that you mentioned are all on my list. I'm going to explain them each. You may have seen the first one on 'Eil'.

With Maryah's blessings,
Vic

-----Original Message-----
From: imagicworldview
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 1:01 AM
To: vic@v-a.com
Subject: Supporting new essays

Hello, Vic.

You said you were having surgery on your cataracts, and I see on your site that you are back in business. Congratulations. I have been going round and round with a critic of my views which has been some fun. I was trying explain to her that the scriptures are non-dual even though we read them as dual. She wasn't having any of it, so I sent her some of your recent essays (http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2016/07/hey-bonnie.html). Thanks for the help. I hope you get donations and book orders through my suggestions.

I sometimes see ancient Aramaic script on your site. Being Christian and also married to a Chinese woman, I often see Hebrew and Chinese words and scriptures as calligraphy. Ever think of printing ancient Aramaic calligraphy? I am seriously interested in how Eil, Allaha, Eashoa Msheekha, Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh and other words were written in ancient Aramaic. No, I not getting a tattoo. Just thinking about artistic reminders. I'll retract this if I find someone has already posted all these. Yikes. I just did a quick search on Yahoo for ancient Aramaic calligraphy images. Not much help!

Dan Steele

Thursday, July 21, 2016

Hey, Bonnie

Look at what I just found for you! Newish posts by Victor Alexander. I checked out his web site to see if he had put up any new posts, as he does rather frequently (and some of the precious posts of the past have disappeared, so I try to stay up to date). At the bottom of v-a.com/bible/ I found half a dozen new essays. Gold, dude! Er, dudette.

The first five of the dozen articles listed are links to other pages. Number six is a link to his Story of Jesus movie campaign:  http://www.v-a.com/movies/.   If you have some wealthy friends, here is a movie project worthy of support (like you, Victor doesn't agree with anything I say). He could use any and all donations, large or small, to help get his movie sold at the film market in November. Buy a few books at least, everyone, and become educated in the genuine scriptures.

In these essays Alexander uses Jesus' real name, Eashoa. Read the footnote comment in the first chapter of Mark regarding this name: http://www.v-a.com/bible/mark_1_audio.html.  Gadzooks! This has changed, too, into an audio file.

I hope you are familiar with his site. Here's a few of his new essays:

http://www.v-a.com/communication/america-at-the-crossroads.html

America at the Crossroads

If the world came to an end today, what would be the lessons that we've learned? This coming Presidential election will define what type of world we've been living in, and what type of world we would like to live in -- as if we have a choice ... and we do. That's what elections are about. So what do we choose? To live in a world we lived in? To live in a world we'd like to define ourselves? Something new. Or perhaps we'd like to go back to the morality of our forefathers, the writers of the Constitution. In other words, to live according to their values of liberty and the pursuit of happiness ... with freedom, to live and choose the faith we decide to live by. Or will we choose to live according to the Bible?
This in a nutshell is what we as Americans must choose this coming election. To live according to the Constitution or the Bible. With the Constitution, we can change the laws governing us; with the Bible we can't ... not the spiritual laws dictated by God. And we can't change the Bible. That's why it's called the Bible. It's a contradiction in terms.
So let's say we decide to live according to the Constitution ... we can in fact change everything, not just the laws governing us, but the laws governing our existence. Since we will be free to change any laws, we will create a new world, a world that did not exist today, or that did ever exist, a brand new world, a world in which we would decide what is right and what is wrong. Such a world would be an abomination; but not if we decree what is moral or what is not. And here's the difference: with us the abominable will be the new norm and the holy will be unacceptable ... because we will have declared ourselves the arbiters of morality and justice. Such a world would be abominable indeed. It would be total abomination.
I choose not to live in such a world. I prefer to vote for the old world; at least I knew what was right and what was wrong ... and everybody agreed on something. Yes, give me a world I'm familiar with. I don't want to live in the world of science fiction; that's alright for children and their video games. When they grow up, they'll be able to distinguish between fantasy and reality. They will quickly become acquainted with reality when they grow up and have children.
With life there are circles, and repeating cycles: we are born and we die, and for us Christians there is even rebirth, to be born again with our Lord and Savior. That's why He came to the world, to teach us about such things and to give us hope, the hope of the Kingdom of heaven and the life everlasting.
There was one time a world without right and wrong. It was called paradise. Adam and Eve lived in it. But there was also Satan who lived there. He was not Satan to begin with. He was an angelic being, tall and attractive. His attraction was the gift of God, as He had given this quality to all His creation. But this angelic being was jealous of the man and the woman, who knew no right and wrong; they could eat of all the fruit in paradise, except the tree in the middle of paradise, and not die.
He thought they were too lucky, to be so endowed by their creator to live life without sin and know no wrong. Yet he knew of wrong, the imagined wrong that was done him: to know what was good but not to be able to willingly do what was right. So he rebelled and decided on his own that he would tempt Eve to eat of the fruit of the tree that she knew was wrong to eat of.
The soon to be Satan said to her, when she refused to eat of the fruit of that tree in the middle of paradise, "Did He tell you that you would die if you ate of the fruit of the tree?" And, Satan, noticed that she was truly afraid, so he continued, "You won't die; He just doesn't want you to know what's right and wrong."
That was the first lie that Satan had told, and it made him a liar forever -- because he would never repent of it. He had no excuse for doing it. And that's the problem with such sins; there's no excuse for the sin that sells your soul to the devil. Because there is no going back from that. Once in the clutches of Satan, nobody can escape unscathed.
And of course Eashoa Msheekha knew that He would someday have to come to the world of men and redeem Himself on their behalf in order to undo the lie that Satan had put over on them, that they would die if they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge -- the knowledge that He alone could impart to humanity in order that they could truly live free, not just to live free to do whatever they wanted but free to follow Him forever. This is what true freedom is all about and this is what everlasting life is all about, after all: to live freely and to do the will of Maryah freely, not because of the laws of men but because of the Laws of Maryah.
This was easy for Maran Eashoa Msheekha to do. But would it be easy for us human beings to do? Well, that's why He had to come to the world, to show us how. He would have to learn -- as a human being -- what was it like to deal with the temptations of Satan, to suffer as a human being, to shed tears of sadness and joy as a human being, and to die as a human being, and through that death and subsequent resurrection to show us that if He could resurrect Himself that He could also resurrect us.
And Satan had one more shot at tempting Eashoa, to see if He was indeed the Msheekha prophesied by the Scriptures, which Satan knew by heart -- he had once lived in paradise as an angel and knew what was holy -- so he asked Eashoa the three questions, to see if he could mislead Him.
And what were the three questions? "If you're hungry, why don't you turn these stones into bread?"
Eashoa did not wish to resort to His heavenly powers. If He'd wanted to do that He would've come as a ruler, even as an emperor; but that was not His intention. He had decided that He would come as an ordinary man, in order to feel struggle as an ordinary man, so He said, "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that issues from the mouth of Allaha." Every man and woman would have to face the same hardships and fight the same temptations of Satan.
Satan's next question was, "If you're the Son of Allaha jump from this parapet and the angels of Allaha would intercept you; you won't even injure your foot."
And Eashoa turned away from Satan without even a reply. Eashoa would like us also to turn away from Satan and the temptations of evil people.
Satan's third question was, "If you would only bow down to me, I'll give you all the riches of the world and their glory." Satan pointed to the glittering lights of civilization below.
Again Eashoa refused to heed Satan's warning, "It is written that you shall listen only to Allaha and to serve Him faithfully."
As Eashoa was quoting him the Scriptures -- to remind Satan that if he were going to quote Scriptures, then he should adhere to them himself -- He ignored him, He turned around and walked away from him. And Satan disappeared into the abyss that he came from.
We must also stay away from Satan's haunts, and remind evil people that we're not interested in their riches and glitter. What we want is what shines in heaven.
When Eashoa walked the earth, He took His Disciples on the path of righteousness. He taught them how to avoid the pitfalls of wealthy men, whose wealth was not earned honestly, men who were corrupt and prone to commit crime at every turn. He said, "Go to those people who love you for what you are, and shake the dust of your feet when you leave the houses of those who want to corrupt you with food and rewards."
We seek the rewards that Eashoa has in store for us. We might not be able to do as well as the original Disciples and Apostles, but we must try, we must run the course as best as we can, and leave the rest to Maryah, who will help us every step of the way.
___________________________________________


The Revelation of the Milta

Our universe began with what scientists call an explosion. The explosion was seen as a bright light, out of which there emerged what we see as an immense world of stars and planets. It happened 13.7 billion years ago. This is our reality, which we perceive according to our human senses.

This knowledge came to us from years of study and observation of the universe. It is secular knowledge, because there was an earlier collection of stories regarding how the world was created six thousand years ago. Modern science arrived at its conception of the universe only recently, so learned men had to find some other way to explain how the world began, and all they had was their eyes -- there were no telescopes.

One of the earliest and most influential body of knowledge was the Bible, a series of Scriptures that were gathered by men to reveal the truth about that first light that shined on the universe billions of years ago.

The Bible begins with the creation of our world in simple terms. It depicts the birth of Adam and Eve as two human beings in Paradise -- a perfect world where the first man and the first woman live in harmony with all the other creatures. In this world no one grows old or dies. All knowledge is good. There is one ruler, who is portrayed as Allaha (God in English.) The word itself, in the language of the Scriptures, represents the Light that was the spark of the world. 'Al' means 'over' and 'la-ha' means the flame; in other words, 'Above the Light,' 'Above the Flame,'  'Above All,' or 'The Creator.'

The original Light was depicted as the ruler of Paradise. This is what the word 'Allaha' means. This word is different in almost all the languages of the world, because it is described according to the cultural perspective of the people that believe in the whole concept of 'creation.'

According to modern science and the Western perspective, the universe was created by the explosion of anti-matter: the concentration of matter in a space so dense that even all light is extinguished, the particles of matter exist in complete stillness, and the temperature is zero. This concentrated mass of matter (the end result of older star having collapsed) is so great that it must explode; it is simply too much pressure for it to exist in a complete state of inertia. The nature of this matter dictates that it will explode again and shoot out into the empty space and fill it with magnificent stars, planets and all forms of celestial bodies.

However, the story of creation in the Bible is told in simple terms. It was intended as an introduction to the fundamental knowledge about the Creator and the World that He created, a knowledge that can be understood by men of olden times. This knowledge has stood the test of time: many religions use the same method of describing the beginning of knowledge about humanity and the world.

What is unique about Christianity is that this knowledge is revealed only by the Milta (the Manifestation) of the Son of Allaha (the Son of God), and this revelation is intended to clarify to humanity certain truths that must be observed so as the Light may reveal the purpose of this knowledge. Therefore, in strict theological terms, the Truth can only be revealed by The Light, and Eashoa Msheekha is that Light; i.e., He is the Revelation of the Truth. Moreover, He is the Truth, the Resurrection and the Life, because He created everything and He taught humanity everything, and without Him.

This knowledge begins in the first chapter of Genesis, the first Book of the Scriptures.  This knowledge, in a perfect world, does not change; but once it is breached, there are consequences.

There is growth, and knowledge must define the changes that take place with growth and the proliferation of life. Ultimately there is death. This knowledge must explain the consequences of growth and maturation. Nothing that is born will live forever in this world. Life is cyclical: birth, growth, maturation, aging and death.

The Scriptures traced the whole process. Also, with knowledge there is right and wrong. So the Bibles of various peoples took up the task of explaining the doctrines of faith. For men to live in peace and freedom, the religious books of various nations had to follow the laws that emerged from them.

This continues to be the dilemma of who is right and who is wrong. But there is something missing. Where is the Resurrection? There has to be something more, for the process to repeat itself. There has to be Hope.

Eashoa Msheekha came to the world to reveal the laws that were given to Him by the Father, the Creator of the universe. He was opposed by those who felt that the laws of Allaha were given to them for safeguarding. This view persists to this day.

But according to the Messiah who appeared two thousand years ago, He was the only Milta of Maryah Allaha, His only representative on earth and in heaven. Human beings cannot be the representatives of the Creator, because their world is always changing and evolving -- including their morality, as things change and various peoples assume power. Knowledge of the world is always in flux. It must adapt itself to changes in nature. It must allow for the overwhelming political changes. Otherwise there will be chaos.

But with Maryah (the Lord) there is only one morality and one source of power, which is unchanging and eternal. His knowledge cannot be assumed by men; His knowledge is only given when He is in direct control of it.

Moreover, Maryah's position can only be expressed through His Triune nature: He is the Milta of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. So He is coming from the position of absolute power -- not that His power is oppressive. It is rather liberating and benevolent. He represents true freedom and genuine hope.

The first knowledge of the Scriptures that began with Adam and Eve, which was corrupted by the desire to know what was right and wrong, in variance to what the Creator had intended, this knowledge had to be revealed by the Milta of Maryah Allaha. This was the role that Eashoa Msheekha was to play. From the beginning it was an absolute necessity.

So everything is not just right and wrong; there is the third element, which is what Eashoa Msheekha offered humanity when He came to the world; there is the knowledge according to His purpose. He decides everything until everything is revealed. To the end He remains the only Milta of Maryah Allaha. All knees shall bend. He shall remain supreme, and all those who follow Him will not perish; they will live eternally with Him.

June 6, 2016
________________________________________

http://www.v-a.com/bible/jesus_was_not_a_prophet.html

Jesus was not a prophet

If you can't deal with the word "Allaha," because it reminds you of 'Allah,' then you can't deal with the Milta either; now you're at an impasse.
But going back to the word 'Allaha' -- if you think it's another word for 'God', you're now dealing with a totally different problem.
The word Allaha came first. This is the first word describing the Creator -- the first linguistic designation for the word 'God' in its modern form -- the original concept of Allaha is not the same as the modern concept of 'God.'
The original concept of 'Allaha', which appeared about six thousand years ago, was a reflection on the wondrous existence of the world, with its stars and celestial bodies resplendent in the night sky, the appearance of the sun on the horizon in the mornings, its warmth and the affect it had on the plants, and the flowering of the earth as a result of it -- everything really that was observed in nature filled the hearts and minds of early man with the wonder of being a human being.
But going back again, the word 'God' is more of a theological concept for modern man. Religious people mostly speak of God. God created the heaven and the earth, God blessed man with certain gifts, God was not pleased at certain things men did, etc. God became a word designating a higher being, a higher power, a figure that existed above in a spiritual sense; and in order to speak to God, men would climb a mountain and approach God with trepidation. Moses climbed the mountain where God spoke to him. Even other religions think along those lines -- a mountain, a high place designated to provide reverence  and the possibility for communicating or receiving a certain knowledge that would bring them peace.
Sometimes God would punish sin; other times God would turn His face away in disapproval. All these concepts of God were recorded by various religions and passed on from generation to generation.
But when Eashoa Msheekha (Jesus the Messiah) appeared two thousand years ago, there was a change in the perception of these concepts. Eashoa Msheekha was different from other religious leaders. He did not appear as a prophet -- although He was considered to be a prophet by some of the people at the time. Eashoa had to explain to His Disciples that He was not a prophet.
He was the Msheekha. The word in Aramaic means 'The Anointed One.' But the word 'anointed' in those times could be a reference to the anointing by Allaha, but there was also the anointing by men. Anointing was an act of blessing someone, blessing them with a mission perhaps or giving them a certain position. It meant different things to different people.
When Eashoa Msheekha spoke about His own anointing, the anointing that was from Allahoota (Godhood -- a Godhood that He shared with the Father and the Holy Spirit.) A thousand years before, the Hebrew Patriarchs spoke of anointing also. It was a ceremonial ritual that designated someone for a certain task.
But the word 'Msheekha" was used by Eashoa only in reference to His own anointing. He was the Anointed One -- very different from the anointing that was performed by others; (today, the word is popular among evangelists; the anointing that is granted by some religious leaders, for example -- it is a word that is overused even; the word just doesn't mean the same thing anymore.
There is a difference, however, between the anointing by men and the anointing by Allaha. The anointing by Allaha when spoken of by Eashoa Msheekha was a special act that has relevance only to Maran Eashoa Msheekha. He was anointed as the Milta by Maryah Allaha. So He became the Milta Manifest from the moment He designated Himself on earth. That is the moment that He designated and the Holy Spirit testified to it. That is when the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit designated the new age of prophecy to begin. It was two thousand years ago, and it was the beginning of something new -- the old was no longer valid; it was fulfilled and it was transformed -- not into something different; but into something that was intended from the very beginning.
Today, Christians speak of God anointing His Son and sending Him to the world -- to sacrifice Himself on behalf of humanity, to wash their sins, to cast out their demons, to die on their behalf, etc. This line of reasoning leads away from what Maryah Allaha intended. The whole concept of God and the Son becomes completely misunderstood; the more it is defined and preached about along the lines of 'Jesus and the Father' being separate, the further it strays from the truth.
Finally it leads to the conclusion that Jesus was only a prophet. If Jesus was a prophet, that would mean that Jesus was a human being, as human beings go.
There are three major positions here, with respect to the concept of the Godhood.
The first one is that God is a singular figure, who sits in heaven  -- the God who is manifested in the decree of the prophets (most religions have their own prophets -- those who are accepted by a particular religious hierarchy.)
The second one is that God is an ephemeral being who created the universe out of nothing -- the world as we see it (that is according to human understanding, the understanding that only the highest order of creatures can have) -- this God is pretty much what the Western world thinks of as the Deity.
The third one is that God is an all powerful Creator, omniscient, and omnipresent, who sent His Son Jesus to the world to die as a sacrifice for humanity -- the familiar story of the Christian Bible.
All these three positions are at variance with the story of Eashoa Msheekha, that a Messiah would come and fulfill the Scriptures, and that a new order of things would follow. This concept of Allahoota (Godhood) is at odds with all three positions mentioned above. And it is Eashoa Msheekha who brought this concept with Him when He came two thousand years ago.
He said that I have come to fulfill, not to change anything. And He didn't. But He did not mean that the Scribes and Pharisees (or the religious establishment) were according to His will. He never accepted their interpretations of the Scriptures, or who were the true prophets and who were the false prophets. Eashoa Msheekha never recognized any worldly order to be the legitimate one; He was the only Truth.
Eashoa Msheekha said regarding the Scribes and Pharisees: hear what they say regarding the Scriptures, but don't do as they do -- because they read the same Scriptures He was raised on, but it was their interpretation of the Scriptures that was false. That was the leaven He spoke about, when He said, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees."
So Eashoa Msheekha introduced a new faith that was based on the original Laws given to Moses and recorded by the Prophets in the Ancient Aramaic language. This belief system was introduced with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It came from Jonah's Nineveh after the Ninevites followed the way of Maryah Allaha and accepted Jonah's reluctant preaching.
The Ninevites had invented the Ancient Aramaic language. It came from their cuneiform writing. The prophecies that were recorded in their language rang more true than the ones written by the Chaldean scribes of Babylon. That is why the Scriptures were recorded in the Ninevite version of the language. It was similar to the Babylonian language, but the Babylonian lacked the correct pronunciation of the names of people and places -- so concepts changed, just as they do with the Greek and Latin formulations. The Babylonian conception of Allaha was more compatible with the Greek and Roman concept of Godhood. This is how we ended up using the word 'God' instead of Allaha.
And this is the reason why the Roman Church forbade the use of the Ancient Aramaic language in which the Scriptures were recorded. All the Popes of the Roman Church knew the Ancient Aramaic language (because they had studied the Scriptures in this language -- some of them even corresponded in this language,) and it was only after Constantine adopted the Christian Faith and adopted the Greek and Latin Scriptures that the concepts of the Trinity (the original Allahoota or Godhood) and Eashoa Msheekha's Milta disappeared from the Scriptures -- the Scriptures that Eashoa Msheekha read from in the synagogues of Judea.
So, again, Eashoa Msheekha introduced Himself as the Milta of Maryah Allaha through many stages, for His followers to understand who He was and who He represented, namely the Allahoota in its three essences -- too difficult for some, but necessary to preserve when translating the Scriptures.
Going back to the Chaldeans of Babylon (and why did they allow the Roman Church to reject the Ancient Aramaic Scriptures, which they also read from,) it was for position in the hierarchy of the Roman Church, and subsequently in the Roman Catholic Church, where they are still the Chaldean Rite of the Catholic Church.
So, why not call Allaha by His true name? For the sake of position -- most people seek a position of power, financial status, or reverential address. But what do such people give up? They give up a clear understanding of who Eashoa Msheekha really is -- because the Ancient Aramaic language preserves the concepts of the Milta (Manifestation,) the Trinity (Tleetayoota,) Tla-Q'noomeh (Three Personas of the Holy Trinity) and Maranoota (Maryah Allaha as He was referred to by His closest followers -- He was called Maryah by His Disciples and Apostles, because He was One with the Father and the Holy Spirit.)
Moving on to more errors related to linguistic misconceptions.
Eashoa Msheekha was 'not the servant obedient unto death.' This is one of the depressing lines that longsuffering evangelists use in oppressive societies. Yes, it is true that Eashoa Msheekha gave His life in sacrifice, but it was His earthly life.
This line of reasoning leads the believer to a poor understanding of the Milta. Eashoa Msheekha did not come to suffer and die, but to die and resurrect. The prophets suffered and endured persecution, but Eashoa came to liberate and show the way to everlasting life.
Eashoa was not merely a prophet warning people against the 'Fear of God.' He was the Manifestation of the Father urging His followers to be 'wise as a serpent and pure as a dove.'
'To die in Jesus' has been misinterpreted; it does not mean to die the death. It meant to be dead to the temptations of Satan. Eashoa died so His followers could live. Yes, He died in sacrifice, but He did not want His Children to die as well. He wanted His Children to live in this world as well as to live eternally in heaven with Him.
Too much emphasis on His sacrifice as an 'obedient servant' misleads the believer into thinking that the life of the follower of the Messiah is one of continuous suffering and ultimately dying as a martyr.
Living in Jesus would have been a better way to explain the path that Eashoa proffered to His followers.
Eashoa Msheekha represents life, not death. He was the Milta of Maryah Allaha (the Manifestation of the Lord God.)
Eashoa Msheekha showed His followers how to pray to Allaha (to their God.) He was not Himself praying to God. He was merely showing those who would follow Him how to pray. This business of separating Eashoa from His Father has led to many errors in interpretation. He was not separate from His Father; He was the Milta (Manifestation) of the Father.
Eashoa was never separate from His Father. He was always with the Father. He died once on the Cross as a sacrifice. His followers were not supposed to all die on the cross.
'To pick up your cross and follow me' does not mean to suffer and die; it means to accept the fact that the non-adherent world is going to oppress His followers. It is to encourage His followers to deal with adversity -- which is a common phenomenon in the word; it is learning to deal with it that is the issue.
Eashoa wants His Children to live, and not to die -- put very simply. He asks His Children to endure in faith in the face of harsh treatment by the world, and to avoid being misled into slavery and sin, and to become victims of fear.
Everything about Eashoa Msheekha is positive; there is no negativity in Him.

July 3, 2016




Sunday, July 17, 2016

Jen and Vow: On My Daughter's Competition Entry to Work With Film Maker Justin Lin

My daughter, Janalyn, created the short film Final Vow as her entry in a competition to work with Hollywood film producer Justin Lin. Per the contest rules, she was limited to just four lines of given dialog. I am very proud that she had the wherewithal to use the four lines twice with some interesting twists. You can see her short film here:

http://www.yomyomf.com/contests/interpretations2/last-vow/

I would appreciate if you would 'like' it, and share it if you would -- popularity counts.

In the film, young lovers about to be married have doubts, betrayal, and run headlong into ruin. I was troubled by the film. Yes, it is Hollywood's version of entertainment, but I reflected on the darkness of this world wherein this sort of thing could actually happen: 1) that people could be like this and do these things in real life; and 2) that this could popularly be construed and accepted as "entertainment," which it is. "What is missing," I wondered, "that allows this?"

The answer was "Jen."

Yes, God answers some questions in Wade-Giles ('jen' is Wade-Giles romanization of the Mandarin Chinese "ren"). I learned of jen from A History of Chinese Philosophy by Fung Yu-lan (translated by Derk Bodde, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952; and a very good read, by the way). Jen is a Confucian concept. It is the love of God. A lot of people think that Confucius did not believe in God, but nothing could be further from the truth. He was an ardent religionist, but exceptionally pragmatic in its expression. If you have the love of God, you will make every effort to make better the world of men and women, for all that we can see of God is man.

So jen has been called human-heartedness, compassion, and perfect virtue. Men and women of jen work everything they can to good for their fellow man. They are benevolent, and they care to govern so they can do the most good for the most people. Or like Confucius, they strive to help others raise their character to minister well. Jen manifests in li, one's behavior.

What is missing in the characters my daughter's actors portrayed is jen, unconditional forgiveness, the artifact of unconditional love. Unconditional love, patience, understanding, grace and forgiveness: do you see these in Last Vow? No, but at least my daughter pegged their absence, and she did it very well. Had that been her assignment, she would have nailed it. But she is in a competition to create Hollywood entertainment, and she portrayed the world the way it really is. Jen is missing. That is what sells in Hollywood, and that is what bothers me.

Last Time on the Roundabout With Ms Appleby

This is Bonnie and my swansong in our relationship. She and I are going our separate ways (we don't agree on anything -- sure sounds like marriage). She is as sure of herself as I am of myself. We each think the other has a different, corrupted gospel, and that ours is the only correct, scriptural one. We reach out to the other who is wallowing in misinterpretation, misunderstanding, and following man-made doctrines. We each have "the only true way," which the other won't accept. (Yeah, that's marriage. I'll let her have the last word, below.)

I suggest, though, that our only real difference is time, for I used to be her. I.e., I used to be as ardent a dualist as she is. Time and broader investigation brought me to this "other," I believe Moses' original, non-dual perspective and understanding. I still say go listen to Bede Griffiths, ‘a confirmed sacramental Catholic,’ on youtube.com (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zYEFgrc6Lc&list=PLMLdVAb4cprn_TVNYxeP2ZxTv53MxWWqy), who said he learned more in the last two years of his life than all the other years combined. We all have to go through further learning and get past day-one of being a Christian. After we have proved ourselves right about what we believe, we have to prove ourselves wrong in what we misunderstand. For if what we believed correctly on the first day was the end, there would be no further need to search for God with our whole hearts, and we are not there yet.

Bede Griffiths, by the way, uses a metaphor for advaita: "Not one, but not two." That is not correct, of course. The point of without division is one, absolutely. One. That is what fries fundamentalists' minds, for things are named, and name strongly suggests separation, and there is none. You've got a Father and a Son, a Sender and a Sent, a Him and an I, and while we picture them all separately, they are one.

It turns out (in my view) that Moses did not write a revelation of God, the great I AM, who is sitting in a chair on a planet called heaven ruling over his kingdom by some kind of remote control because he is wholly separate from it, he wrote a prayer success manual. Whatever else you make of the ancient Aramaic of the ORIGINAL Exodus 3: 14, Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh, it means "I . . . am his becoming" (see Victor Alexander: http://www.v-a.com/bible/supporters/exodus_1-4.html). This is most critical to successful prayer, but because it is so critical it was edited to keep it in heaven by priests who preferred that they knew it and we didn't.

I do not know if Bonnie ever noticed that this is a web site about prayer technique. It is not a debate thread or defense of any particular set of Christian or Jewish doctrines (though I entertain queries about almost anything). She never did tell me if she read my posts on the flip. So I'm going to have to tell you anyway, Bonnie. This is your half:

In 1975 I was invited to pray for the gift of tongues, and as I hadn't been baptized in the Holy Spirit, I didn't get it. I realized that I was utterly rejected by God, and seeking to find acceptance, I entered a trance. In a way, my whole life flashed before my eyes, but not as a sequential history. I followed a path in what seemed to be a riverbed where a concrete wall rose up along the side as I pressed ahead, much like modern washes. The trail came to a gap in the wall that was blocked by a huge cube. I couldn't jump high enough to scramble over it, and doubling back to the lower part of the wall was pointless because the path to acceptance went deeper under the block, which was what was wrong with me.

Now, I see that the block is what is wrong with me, the thing that makes me unacceptable to God, but there is no name on it. Hell of a time for twenty questions. I couldn't name it, so I gave it, whatever it was, to God. So he showed me. The shape of a man was scoped out of the mud before me and sat in front of me. The mud was transformed into bone and tissue to become a real man. He lived -- heart beating and all that, and I watched from behind him as he surveyed the earth before him: "I am a man; this is the earth. The sun will set, and it will get cold. I had better use the time to find shelter in those hills. Maybe a cave, or I can make a barrier to keep animals out."

I went from watching the man from behind and imagining his thoughts to being in the man and they were my thoughts. I hit a quandary: find a cave first, or gather firewood first, or gather food first, or plant food for the morrow? I watched myself go scurrying off with a whole shopping list of things to do, and not much time to do them. And then it hit me: I hadn't thanked God for making me, for giving me life. I hadn't asked him what I should do, or what I was supposed to do. I just took the life he had given me and ran off doing whatever I thought I needed to do.

That summed up my whole life: using the life he had given me in his grace and never giving him gratitude or even acknowledgement. I was a thief, a rebel; I exercised SELF-lordship. No wonder God wouldn't touch me with a ten-foot pole: I had "given" myself to him as his peer -- if I didn't like what he did with me, I was going to take myself back. I was distant from him, unsubmitted, separate. I could have crawled into a hole. (I don't know what the ministers who had laid hands on me were doing all the time I was in this trance. It was too late for lunch.)

I saw that "my" life was his life, and I had stolen it. I belonged to him. He owned me. I had to undo my lordship. I determined to end any and all self-control over myself and not move a muscle until he said which muscle to move. I figured I might fall flat on my face and lie there like a jellyfish out of water, but "oh well," and I cast self-control out of myself. The only reason I didn't fall was he caught me. I found true humility and submission. I simultaneously bowed my head in prayer and watched God's glory spread above my head like the rosy glow of a sunset (but it wasn't a sunset; it was Glory!), and confessed "You are Glorious God; I am mud -- a mudman. Whatever you tell me to do, that I will do," and I waited.

After a short while of listening (I seriously was not going to move a muscle) I heard the faintest voice refer to my profession of his being glorious God and my being a mudman: "Remember this, and it is all right." I was accepted. And the love and adoration and gratitude to him welled up in my bowels to my throat and my mouth started quivering on its own and the minister next to me said, "Don't try to control it," (ha!) and I went off in some oriental tongue.

Now Bonnie is probably beside herself, "You confessed that He is God and that you are a mudman, but now you have thrown that away and profess yourself to be God! You idiot, he said to remember it, and then it was all right."

No Bonnie, I haven't lost my salvation. As with so many things in the Bible, what he means by what he says is not what we think he means by what we read. When this episode of my baptism in the Holy Spirit came to my recollection about five years ago, I realized that I had completely misunderstood what he had said (what he "said" was the whole vision). Yes, that I am a mudman, BUT THAT IS NOT ALL THAT I AM!!! "I" became the mudman: "I" am the life that God gave to the mudman that animates him, AND I am the mudman, too. I am both. "You are Glorious God (and me), and I am (you and this) mud." Acknowledging that I am mud does not nullify that I watched the mudman become and then entered him by imagining being him from behind. I am looking through his eyes. God was saying, "Don't forget this; it will come in handy." Living AS a mudman AND as God, for the two are one.

The only God we will ever see is each other.

We are alive because God put his Spirit in us. We are the Spirit. Yeah, we are the mud, too. It takes quite a bit of mental wrestling to come to the understanding that we were the ones who put ourselves into us. We imagined ourselves as ourselves, and in doing so with faith we became ourselves. What we were and are as spirit became completely forgotten, which is the "death" of Christ -- becoming crucified upon these bodies of mud -- trees -- in complete forgetfulness of being Christ. The once to die is done. We enter unnumbered "lives" in this death until we wake up and become like God in a way we were not when we died -- FREE in his nature instead of being bound.
_________________________________________

Dear Mr Steele,

You state: “Pagans are just confused people like us looking at the same thing from another way.”

You may speak for yourself and others perhaps, but not for me, as I am not confused.


Whether you’re “a forty years tongue-speaking Pentecostal” or ‘a confirmed sacramental Catholic’ or a ‘highly educated theologian’ or a ‘popular, acclaimed author’ is totally irrelevant to the issue at hand – that being – your attempt of promoting a different gospel.

Your claim of having the true gospel falls short of the mark, as it is based in ‘human wisdom’ – (led by the spirit of this world) - by first attempting to denigrate scripture and then by appealing to the most basic human weakness – pride (ego, power, self). Sound familiar???

I shall leave you to it.

You have heard the true gospel message and you have chosen another path.

My sincere hope and prayer for you is that by His mercy and grace, that He will reveal to you, by the power of the Holy Spirit, HIS truth, HIS love, and HIS glory - so that you will truly be set free from the confusion you speak of and finally experience the peace that you are so desperately seeking.

Philippians 2:5 – 11

5/Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6/who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,7/ but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men 8/And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.9/Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10/that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven and of those on earth, and of those under the earth. 11/and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Philippians 4: 6 – 7

6/Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; 7/ and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

(*Note - can't use the Google thing - but it's me - B. Appleby - not 'anonymous').

Tuesday, July 12, 2016

Ms Appleby's Comments on My Reply to Her Comments on "Neville Goddard and the Development of the Gospel from Mistake to Correct"

(I add the salutation and close)

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:35 AM

Mr. Steele,

You state: "That part of your mind which is ruled by God is Israel, and this applies to every child born of woman. Moses, a master of the ancient myths, discovered Israel in his mind, and killed an "Egyptian," a thought of ignorance. God-thoughts bless us -- jethro -- and contemplating this Moses discovered Elohim/Ashur; that our imagination is the process of God's manifestation -- YHWH. The "Old Testament" is a discourse on this fact: "God said, 'Ye are God'" (Psalm 82: 6). Not gods, but God."

Response: Something for you to look at in your spare time:

https://lehislibrary.wordpress.com/2009/04/26/maklelan-psalm-82-elohim-as-judges-no/

(Thank you. I'm retired. You almost make my case for me: 

"Another indication that a correct reading precludes human judges from this chapter are the many Greek translations. The LXX translation I provided above (Ps 81 in LXX) uses the plural of theos to translate elohim, which can only mean “gods.” The Septuagint only uses the word theos to translate elohim, no matter where it appears, although it adds the word for “judges” to the construct pair “judges of God” in Exodus 21.
What these different perspective clearly show is that “judges” was not posited as a valid translation prior to the Rabbinic Period.
Next we’ll take a look a more up-to-date and respected Hebrew lexicon, the Hebrew Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Koehler and Baumgartner. It should be no surprise that the entry on elohim explains the translation can only be “gods,” or “God.” “Judges” is mentioned as a rare Midrashic translation that is not accurate. Older dictionaries and lexicons are generally based on the early twentieth century Christian apologetic readings of Ps 82 that I discussed above.
The context of this chapter and its rhetorical purpose also preclude the “judges” reading. God is mentioned as a judge, and judging is important to the chapter, but the very obvious wordplay between shafat and shoftim is explicitly avoided. That’s rather bizarre for Hebrew poetry, which is principally built upon wordplay and parallelism. It also doesn’t work when you consider “you are judges” as the antecedent to the clause “but you will die like mortals.” First off, human judges are already mortal. Secondly, nothing about being a judge would render their mortality noteworthy. The conjunction (”but“) clearly indicates the clause stands contrary to the normal course of events" (end quote from above).

I respond:

'Elohim' is the Hebrew form of the Assyrian/Ninevite 'Ashur'. It means "Over the Flames" and is in fact a singular compound word with a plural ending. The ancient PICTOGRAPH depicts the Son of God rising in the solar disc -- the Father -- with rays or flames of Glory radiating outward like the wings and tail of a bird landing. See https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?p=images+of+ashur&ei=UTF-8&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-004 and can search others. The thing is, Bonnie, THE WHOLE THING IS GOD, AND WE ARE THE "FLAMES." Without the forced pluralization of the word which is everywhere understood as singular, what God (Elohim) is saying in Psalms 82: 6 is that we ourselves are Elohim -- God -- HIM! Because He long ago became us. Remember, we are not the body, we are the Spirit breathed into these bodies. We share their nature for the while, but then we leave.

I am trying to get you to consider non-dualism, Advaita. That is the Sanskrit word for 'without division'. All is God -- Elohim -- without division.

Ms. Appleby continues:)

Your comment: "There is no New Testament. The Gospels are primers, explanations of THE Testament: Ye are God, YHWH, for YHWH is Christ, and Christ is you."

Response: Call the Gospels whatever you wish, however you will never find in the Old Testament or the Gospels: Ye are God, YHWH, for YHWH is Christ, and Christ IS YOU.

(Actually, that 'ye are God, YHWH, for YHWH is Christ, and Christ is you' is the point everywhere. You cannot understand any of ANY Bible without it. You are all the characters in Genesis, for they are all a psychological biography of YOU, from The Beginning Who created God to Joseph dead in Egypt. Presently in your consciousness you are Joseph [Jesus] dead in Egypt, and you need to fulfill your destiny of becoming The Beginning Who created God. [It takes a perfect time, three days, in this hell of forgetting to fulfill.] In your Bible the characters' names are not translated, nor are you told what they mean, for if you knew you would see that what I am telling you is the truth. He reveals Himself to those who search. TRANSLATE THE NAMES AS WELL AS YOU CAN -- THEY ARE ACTUALLY NATURES -- AND CONSIDER YOURSELF TO BE THOSE NATURES AS YOU READ THEM. E.g., your loving God is Abraham -- the Father is Merciful; your knowing Him is Isaac -- Laughter, for the joy of it; your flesh nature is Esau -- the hairy body; and your inner man is Jacob -- His "ignoranced" consciousness. Laban is enlightening experiences of imagining and manifestation, and your "sons" are psychological features which search for God. In the New Testament they are "hunters" for God, which subsequently are made hunters for men. When in the right circumstance you will reach for God and grab him by his creative forces and not let go until he blesses you, and will become Israel -- God ruling Man. This is all "Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh" in Exodus 3: 14.)

You Comment: "You know from your study of Hebrews that Paul said Abraham and Sarah (and thus all of the Testament) are allegories. These are states. Being a "friend" of God means getting to know that we are one with Eil, the Shaddai. Discovering the reality of this fact gives way to Issac -- Laughter!!! From the joy of it! "I, this stupid little human imagination, am YHWH, the imagining of Eil, the Source and Provider of all!!!"

That, Ms. Appleby, is the good news. Not that Jesus Christ has come, but that you are him going where he has gone. You cannot fail! He has been the same forever: the Becoming One, and you can -- must learn to -- do as he does: imagine to cause blessing. That is why I so often promote Neville Goddard in my blog -- that is what he was all about. We do not disbelieve that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, we just believe that the flesh he comes in . . . is ours!"

My response: See what confusion even just a BIT of ‘stupid little human imagination’ got Neville and you into......imagining that the Good News is not that Jesus Christ has come, but that you are God!

(I do not actually have a problem with the Ineffable imagining that he is a man on the earth and so becoming one -- that is what we did, but if he came, it would be to tell me what I am telling you; that there is no division: EVERYTHING is God. Part of the confusion is thinking that prophecy is fortelling the future. It is speaking what God is. Yes, that has future consequences, because not everything is like God but will be. Some of the change involves turmoil.)

You state: "Foremost you want to become familiar with v-a.com and v-a.com/bible/. Victor is the most convincing person I can direct you to inform you that you do not actually have the Bible. What you have is a fraud, a corrupted and much edited perversion of the scriptures. THAT is why you have the wrong gospel. You think that reality is dualistic, when in all actuality it is non-dual. You believe, because there it is right in Exodus 3: 14, that God's name is I AM THAT I AM -- that the Eternal is wholly other."

Hhhhhhmmmm....interesting....I wonder if the Bible C.H.Dodd had was a fraud, corrupted, etc.??????? You recommended him to me with the statement below:

"C.H. Dodd is recognized as one of the great New Testament scholars of the twentieth century. Dr. Dodd was for many years Professor of New Testament at Cambridge University. This book of three lectures was published by Harper and Row, 1964."

(That was in the web site I cut and pasted from. I thought you'd like to know he was highly regarded.)

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:42 AM

Continuation (last one)B.Appleby

You stated: "In my article I cited the learned Dr. C.H. Dodd's The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development. Did you read it? Get it. I am not kidding -- get it new or used or pdf (http://religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=539). It will absolutely be worth it. And whatever you do, READ IT!!! Especially chapter three. Here is just a little bit of it:

"C.H. Dodd is recognized as one of the great New Testament scholars of the twentieth century. Dr. Dodd was for many years Professor of New Testament at Cambridge University. This book of three lectures was published by Harper and Row, 1964."

From The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments, pages 62-64:"

(and a lot of his comments...then you state:)

So yes, you are correct, Paul never changed his view of WHO Jesus Christ is, but he changed his view of WHAT Jesus Christ is: "He" has become us, and we are included in Him!"

Response: If you are born again, confess with your mouth and believe in Him and all that He said and in what the Apostles taught and preached, which was that He was born of a virgin, suffered and died on the cross for our sins, rose from the dead and is now seated at the right hand of the Father and that He will return...and that HE is Lord....you will be a part of HIS Body, His church....however.....HE never and none of HIS Apostles ever taught or preached that “He” has become us, as you state.

(Yes, C. H. Dodd's Bible was as corrupt as everyone else's, but a lot of us KNOW the problems with the Bible and deal with them. Dr. Dodd knew Greek and Hebrew and I suspect Latin very well. I am sure he had access to any number of ancient texts, including the Aramaic (though he might not have weighed it as heavily as I do), as well as manuscripts you and I have never even heard of. No offense, but I would rather listen to him than you.

Regarding your response, I'm a forty-years tongue-speaking Pentecostal who believes all those things, but not like you imagine them. He died on the cross for our sins two thousand years ago? Haven't you read that he was crucified from the overthrow -- "foundation" -- of the earth? That was when he became us. He has always been what he is now: yesterday, today, and forever the power and wisdom of God Most High crucified for us; "crucified" in being us in the forgetfulness of who and what He is/we are, so that we can taste this dimension of death. It is given unto us once to die; no limit on the lives in this death until we accomplish our mission. But he is also risen back to the Father. THAT IS US, OUR PROMISE. The Father and Son are not two separate guys no matter how big you conceptualize them. They are one God of whom we distinguish his self "Father" from his emanation, the "sent" Son. But he makes no such distinction. He would say, "I am the one who goes"; and he has come as us.)


You state: We do not ignore contexts, we learn them so that we might grow. "Hear, O Israel, YHWH your God, YHWH is one!" (Deuteronomy 6: 4) means one thing if in your mind God is separate and divided from you, and something entirely different when you realize that the "one" that God is INCLUDES YOU!"

Response:GOD is GOD....He is not you, or me....There is one GOD...(3 in the Godhead - the Father/Son and Holy Spirit ) and He wants you to believe in HIM and to worship HIM and to have fellowship with HIM by believing the gospel message as presented in scriptures (both Old Testament and the Gospels) about JESUS CHRIST and His blood sacrifice on the cross.

(But why separate ourselves from Him? We can appreciate all these and worship ecstatically while being found IN HIM! Do ya'all have any concept of what oneness is? What part of 'in' do you not understand? You believe the Trinity are one. Extend the circle: you are IN Christ.)

Final and last one - it wouldn't let me post the whole thing all together.

You stated: "I found Thomas L. Thompson's The Mythic Past informative, as is Col. J. Garnier's The Worship of the Dead or the Origin and Nature of Pagan Idolatry and Its Bearing Upon the Early History of Egypt and Babylonia. They liked long titles back then.

You won't like that these books are written by arch-Pagans, but don't be afraid to read The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess. They are very informative. Spoiler Alert: the "lost goddess" is our being included in God's oneness.

Then, to get your head straightened out, read Rabbi David A. Cooper's God is a Verb: Kabbalah and the Practice of Mystical Judaism and Rabbi Jeff Roth's Jewish Meditation Practices for Everyday Life. Remember the adage, "Roses are red, Violets are bluish, If it wasn't for Paul, We'd all be Jewish." Or something like that."
..............

My response: I quote your own earlier words to you: “It took me close to forty years to understand that the "Devil" is the active and dynamic ignorance within our own spiritual selves.”

My response: That’s because you fed yourself a diet from ‘arch-Pagans’ in order to enhance your own spiritual self...and look where that’s got you!

(An enhanced spiritual self? I plan to annotate the above references and others in a later post. I take all with a grain of salt. I do not draw their conclusions, but use their input to judge and draw my own. Thompson and Garnier are probably over your head, anyway, and I don't think you could track the point through Freke and Gandy. Cooper, maybe. If you read it four or five times. Way up there on your reading list regardless of me should be C. F. Rehnborg's Jesus and the New Age of Faith. That and the book by Dodd every student of the Bible should read. BTW, it isn't New Age Faith; it is the New Age OF FAITH. There is no Devil, but there are many "ignoranced" people. Our collective ignorance is "the Devil." Have you read my posts about the flip? Pagans are just confused people like us looking at the same thing from another way. You should know that from Garnier.)

HAVE YOU READ MY POSTS ON THE FLIP? I'D HEAR A LOT OF "OH" FROM YOU IF YOU HAVE. 

Monday, July 11, 2016

There Never Was Nothing: The Answer to "You Can't Get Something From Nothing"

It perplexed me for a long time: you cannot get something from nothing, so where did God come from?

Answer: there never was nothing. The Absolute Eternal, Eil*, has always been; therefore, there never was an empty state. There may have been states of no created thing, but never a state of no Creator! There was always Eil, even if there was nothing else. Eil has become every thing in that nothing else.

It is still the same. The situation has not changed. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Every photon speeding from the sun and every other star is the Creator's intelligence imagining it is that photon and exercising its power to be that photon. It is so with every particle within the furnaces of every star. They are Eil's thought of being manifest. The state of no existing thing may have existed at some time in the past, but the power and wisdom of Eil has always been every thing that does exist.

Eil is the universe He imagines to be. Every atomic particle is Eil because it is Eil believing He is that particle. All the divine attributes -- the Source Itself -- are concentrated in Eil. Therefore every thing is eternal, THE Eternal, even though it is transitory.

When "God" created everything out of nothing, that "nothing" was not emptiness, it was Him, Eil. The thing was -- is -- His power and wisdom. THAT is the Jesus Christ our Savior: Eil becoming whatever we need to perform His will that we become Him, a complete and perfect emanation of Him.


*Read about Eil, the most holy ancient Aramaic name for God, at v-a.com/bible/ in numerous articles therein.

Wednesday, July 06, 2016

Reply to Ms Appleby's Comment Re Paul's Change of Gospel Message in "Neville Goddard and the Development of the Gospel from Mistake to Correct"

On July 12, 2013, I posted "Neville Goddard and the Development of the Gospel from Mistake to Correct," a poorly written (but not wrong) message about how the Gospel has been changed (I think I still owe the article a rewrite.) That article has attracted some of my highest traffic and the greatest vitriol in responses from Christian fundamentalists (see http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2013/07/neville-goddard-and-development-of.html?showComment=1467841816924#c1337588376689351049).

In the article I stated that Paul changed his view regarding the gospel after the nonsense he wrote to the Thessalonians and gained the maturity he displays in Ephesians. I also pointed out that the "Devil" we contend against is our own ignorance -- the ignorance that resulted from the amnesia we accepted to transition from being God's consciousness to a human's consciousness.

Regarding that article I received the well meaning comment below, and I would like to respond to it here where you might see it, as opposed to having it hid away in an ancient comment section. (I add the salutation and closing; and yes, this might still be edited):
_____________________________________________

Mr. Steele,

Paul never CHANGED his original belief or message about Who Jesus Christ was (is)...he was writing to two different groups of believers, with different backgrounds and needs at those specific times....Thess. had been converted from mainly idolatry and he encouraged them in their suffering, instructed them in the way of holiness and corrected their misconceptions about Christ's return by making sure that they lived their lives directed by the Spirit of God and believing what he had taught them....to the Ephesians he was instilling that as BELIEVERS in Jesus Christ that they...both Jew and Gentile...were one in Christ and to walk worthy of this new life in Him....and he NEVER told any of them that they were "God" themselves....in fact he warned them: Ephesians 5: 1: Be ye therefore FOLLOWERS of God, as dear children;....and goes on to say:..........15/See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,
16 Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
17 Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is.
18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart TO THE LORD;
20 Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
21 Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

AND

You state there is no 'devil' - yet Paul himself refers to him and warns of him in

Ephesians 6:
10 Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might.
11 Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
13 Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
15 And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
16 Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:
18 Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints;
19 And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel,
20 For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.

There are so many instances where you simply ignore the context of the whole of what is written and have come up with a 'different gospel' completely.

Bonnie Appleby
_________________________________________________

Ms. Appleby,

Thank you for reading my article, "Neville Goddard and the Development of the Gospel from Mistake to Correct." It might interest you to know that I answered another critic of that article some time ago (http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2016/02/criticism-of-neville-goddard-and_25.html). I hope you will read other of my articles and consider their overall worth.

Yes, I have come up with another, different gospel completely. The original. And it was not by ignoring the context of what was written, but by being more thoroughly immersed in context. I see by your standard, pat evangelical quips that you are a Bible student. I am writing that you and others might see that EVERYTHING YOU "KNOW" IS WRONG. That was what I realized when I first believed on Jesus, when I first got a glimpse of that world. But I knew that I had been deceived before, and that I would be deceived again. It took me close to forty years to understand that the "Devil" is the active and dynamic ignorance within our own spiritual selves. All that Paul said in Ephesians 6 applies. It is our own ignorance which deceiveth us that we must resist and eventually overcome. Come on, let's go!

Because all my teachers and I are subject to deception by "the Devil," I have always actively disproved what I am taught and subsequently believe. I keep what I cannot disprove. I know that I -- all of us are wrong, and that our mentally conceived "God" is too small. He is beyond our knowing. I know that things are real in that they "are," but they are not necessarily what they purport to be, nor what I believe them to be.

I imagine you have an anchor for your faith: a vision of Jesus, a healing, an observed miracle, or the hearing of his audible voice. You know that was real and your faith is anchored in that reality, so do not be afraid to look at HOW it is real. Look into the context in which the Bible came to be; let the picture you have of it be challenged.

Certainly Paul had all the attributes of human thought. He did not start already knowing all things. I am not making this stuff up. In my article I cited the learned Dr. C.H. Dodd's The Apostolic Preaching and Its Development. Did you read it? Get it. I am not kidding -- get it new or used or pdf (http://religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=539). It will absolutely be worth it. And whatever you do, READ IT!!! Especially chapter three. Here is just a little bit of it:

"C.H. Dodd is recognized as one of the great New Testament scholars of the twentieth century. Dr. Dodd was for many years Professor of New Testament at Cambridge University. This book of three lectures was published by Harper and Row, 1964."

From The Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments, pages 62-64:

"For Paul, with his strongly eschatological background of thought, the belief that the Church was the "people of the saints of the Most High," now revealed in the last days, carried with it the corollary that all that prophecy and apocalypse had asserted of the supernatural Messianic community was fulfilled in the Church. But the eschatological scheme of the apocalypses had been profoundly disturbed by the fact that the Messiah had come and the Kingdom of God had been revealed, while yet this world continued to exist, and the people of God were still in the body. The Messiah indeed had Himself passed into the eternal order, but His followers still lived 'in the flesh' (though not 'after the flesh'). How, then, could it be true that the prophecies were fulfilled which spoke of the congregation of the righteous being transfigured into the glory of an immortal life?

"Paul found the answer to this question through a restatement in more thoroughgoing terms of the unity existing between the Messiah and the Messianic community. Christ, said the keryigma, was Son of God 'according to the Spirit of holiness.' The same Spirit dwelt in His Church. Thus the 'communion of the Holy Spirit' was also 'the communion of the Son of God' (1 Cor. 1: 9). It was not enough to say that Christ, being exalted to the right hand of God, had 'poured forth' the Spirit. The presence of the Spirit in the Church is the presence of the Lord: 'the Lord is the Spirit' (2 Cor. 3: 17). Thus the 'one body' which the one Spirit created is the Body of Christ. To be 'in the Spirit' is to be 'in Christ,' that is to say, a member of the Body of Christ. The personality of Christ receives, so to speak, an extension in the life of His Body on earth. Those 'saving facts,' the death and resurrection of Christ, are not merely particular facts of past history, however decisive in their effect; they are re-enacted in the experience of the Church. If Christ died to this world, so have the members of His body; if He has risen into newness of life, so have they (Rom. 6: 4); if He being risen from the dead, dieth no more, neither do they (Rom.6: 8-9); if God has glorified Him, He has also glorified them.(Rom. 8: 29-30). They are righteous, holy, glorious, immortal, according to the prophecies, with the righteousness, holiness, glory, and immortality which are His in full reality, and are theirs in the communion of His Body—'in Christ.'

"This is the basis of Paul’s so-called 'Christ-mysticism.' It is noteworthy that as his interest in the speedy advent of Christ declines, as it demonstrably does after the time when he wrote I Corinthians the 'futurist eschatology' of his earlier phase is replaced by this 'Christ-mysticism.' The hope of glory yet to come remains as a background of thought, but the foreground is more and more occupied by the contemplation of all the riches of divine grace enjoyed here and now by those who are in Christ Jesus. 'Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ!' (Eph. 1: 3).

"This was the true solution of the problem presented to the Church by the disappointment of its naïve expectation that the Lord would immediately appear; not the restless and impatient straining after signs of His coming which turned faith into fantasy and enthusiasm into fanaticism; but a fuller realization of all the depths and heights of the supernatural life here and now. The prayer of the Church as taught by Paul was no longer, 'Let grace come and let this world pass away. Our Lord, come!' (Didaché, 10: 6) but 'to be strengthened by His Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye being rooted and grounded in love, may be strong to apprehend with all saints what is the breadth and length and depth and height, and to know the love of Christ that passeth knowledge, that ye may be filled unto all the fullness of God' (Eph. 3: 16-19)."

I hope I caught all the typos in that.

It was a greater perspective which caused Paul to make a "restatement" . . . of the unity existing between the Messiah and the Messianic community. Paul was a Pharisee, he came from a culture that saw God as separate and divided from us. When he became a Christian, he knew everything he knew was wrong, but he was still looking from that cultural background. What the Messiah MEANS grows on you as you mature and your perspective expands. Your mind makes constant "restatements," else why bother going to Bible study?

So yes, you are correct, Paul never changed his view of WHO Jesus Christ is, but he changed his view of WHAT Jesus Christ is: "He" has become us, and we are included in Him!

We do not ignore contexts, we learn them so that we might grow. "Hear, O Israel, YHWH your God, YHWH is one!" (Deuteronomy 6: 4) means one thing if in your mind God is separate and divided from you, and something entirely different when you realize that the "one" that God is INCLUDES YOU!

That part of your mind which is ruled by God is Israel, and this applies to every child born of woman. Moses, a master of the ancient myths, discovered Israel in his mind, and killed an "Egyptian," a thought of ignorance. God-thoughts bless us -- jethro -- and contemplating this Moses discovered Elohim/Ashur; that our imagination is the process of God's manifestation -- YHWH. The "Old Testament" is a discourse on this fact: "God said, 'Ye are God'" (Psalm 82: 6). Not gods, but God.

There is no New Testament. The Gospels are primers, explanations of THE Testament: Ye are God, YHWH, for YHWH is Christ, and Christ is you. You know from your study of Hebrews that Paul said that Abraham and Sarah (and thus all of the Testament) are allegories. These are states. Being a "friend" of God means getting to know that we are one with Eil, the Shaddai. Discovering the reality of this fact gives way to Issac -- Laughter!!! From the joy of it! "I, this stupid little human imagination, am YHWH, the imagining of Eil, the Source and Provider of all!!!"

That, Ms. Appleby, is the good news. Not that Jesus Christ has come, but that you are him! He has been the same forever: the Becoming One, and you can -- must learn to -- do as he does: imagine to cause blessing. That is why I so often promote Neville Goddard in my blog -- that is what he was all about. We do not disbelieve that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, we just believe that the flesh he comes in . . . is ours!



Foremost you want to become familiar with v-a.com and v-a.com/bible/. Victor is the most convincing person I can direct you to inform you that you do not actually have the Bible. What you have is a fraud, a corrupted and much edited perversion of the scriptures. THAT is why you have the wrong gospel. You think that reality is dualistic, when in all actuality it is non-dual. You believe, because there it is right in Exodus 3: 14, the God's name is I AM THAT I AM -- that the Eternal is wholly other. Except it isn't there. God said that his NATURE is "Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh," which I have made about twenty attempts to translate. Basically, it means that Eil, the Ineffable Most High God, is becoming manifest through our imagining, contingent mainly upon our faith.

You need also to be aware of Appendixes 30-34 in Bullinger's The Companion Bible. They document a bit of the Old Testament's editing. You can find them online.

I found Thomas L. Thompson's The Mythic Past informative, as is Col. J. Garnier's The Worship of the Dead or the Origin and Nature of Pagan Idolatry and Its Bearing Upon the Early History of Egypt and Babylonia. They liked long titles back then.

You won't like that these books are written by arch-Pagans, but don't be afraid to read The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess. They are very informative. Spoiler Alert: the "lost goddess" is our being in God's oneness.

Then, to get your head straightened out, read Rabbi David A. Cooper's God is a Verb: Kabbalah and the Practice of Mystical Judaism and Rabbi Jeff Roth's Jewish Meditation Practices for Everyday Life. Remember the adage, "Roses are red, Violets are bluish, If it wasn't for Paul, We'd all be Jewish." Or something like that.

Monday, July 04, 2016

Exodus 3: 14 Yields Still Another Alternative: Ahiyeh Ashur Hiyeh = Salvation, Commitment, Baptism With the Holy Spirit

I was not expecting this. I've got Moses desiring more of Jethro, God's abundance/blessings, and hearing from God that the way to receive them is Ahiyeh Ashur Hiyeh: Intention, Imagination, and Belief/Faith. Cool. The Bible was intended by Moses to be a Success Manual, a How-to on prayer.

Not far afield of this, I happened to read in Charles and Francis Hunter's book The Two Sides of a Coin on page 10, "Salvation plus commitment plus baptism equals victory in Jesus!" I immediately recognized that salvation is what Jethro and YHWH are to us. God is our Salvation. He would have Moses say, "Salvation has sent me to you." Salvation is his intent to come, his commitment fills his imagination, and the baptism with the Holy Spirit is his coming.

A success manual? Yes. How to pray for blessings? Yes. The way to eternal life? Yes. Is this in Exodus 3: 14's Ahiyeh Ashur Hiyeh? I am not going to say that it isn't! Sure as shootin', you are not going to get anywhere spiritually until you accept God's salvation in Jesus Christ who is YHWH, repent of your sins and commit your way unto him, and receive from him who is in you the baptism in the Holy Spirit. All this is done in you by him who is as you. And this is FOR you. But you have to take the lead to ACCEPT his salvation, REPENT of your sins, COMMIT yourself to him, and RECEIVE the Holy Spirit. In doing this successfully you will enter an ecstasy of receiving his forgiveness and the infilling of the Holy Spirit welling up through the bowels. Don't try to control it -- control is what you've just given up.

Wouldn't it be funny if the Bible actually started with -- was started because of -- Moses' baptism in the Holy Spirit, and that that was what "I AM THAT I AM" was about this whole time?

Saturday, July 02, 2016

The Story of Jesus: Why Victor Alexander's Movie is Essential

Studying the Bible has made me an entirely different person. Everyone I know who has studied the Bible has become an entirely different person. And blessed, too. Because the one thing you discover when you study the Bible is that your Bible is wrong, and you, in fact, "don't know nuthin'."

I cannot tell you how much I learned when I was trying to correct my Bible. The Massorah, the margin notes that surround the text in the Hebrew scrolls, indeed hedge the scriptures by documenting their many editing changes and errors; but when the translators translated the Hebrew text into English, they did so without referencing the Massorah, thus translating into the English version the thousands of errors, editings and changes the Massorah was protecting against! And as the translators were not native Hebrew speakers, they didn't thoroughly understand the language and mistranslated many words, ideas, and concepts, often guessing and choosing for meanings those which fit their preconceived doctrines.

The Bible we have is NOTHING like the real one. Which is why I love my Companion Bible. The companion column and appendixes provide an entirely different version of the Bible from the King James Version in the main column, in which (the companion column) I first got a glimpse of the true meaning of the Bible.

In ever looking to correct my understanding of the Bible, I discovered the Aramaic version. A friend advised me of the exegeses parallel BIBLE by Herb Jahn, which I procured along with his Aramaic New Testament. I then discovered Victor Alexander's translations from the ancient Aramaic.  Now, if you look at what was happening, I was getting ever closer to what the original Bible was, and to what the original authors MEANT. My world view was changing. I could mention Neville Goddard and the great influence he has been in my understand what the Bible is really about, but I won't.

Change comes from people discovering that the Bible they have is wrong. I know all about the inspiration of the scriptures and how God has protected it from error, but the standard Bible available to people isn't it! "Oh. This one isn't it? If my Bible isn't the right one, then what I am believing on?" Thus the search begins: the search for more reliable texts, wrestling with words' meanings and authors' intents. A person studying the Bible is good because he or she doesn't have time to get into shenanigans. That's not true, but it is true that discovering their Bible is in error may motivate people to begin studying what the Bible actually says and what it MEANS by what it says.

THAT is why I enthusiastically endorse Victor Alexander's The Story of Jesus movie project. If he can accurately present the ancient Aramaic Eashoa Msheekha of the scriptures, it will be a major accomplishment! Imagine thousands of movie goers wondering, "Where'd that come from? Why doesn't my Bible say that? What am I believing? Is mine what the Bible actually says, or what someone wanted it to say?"

I know Alexander does not agree with my "esoteric" Christian interpretation. It doesn't matter. He is a Christian warrior who has vowed to present the ancient Aramaic Jesus, Eashoa Msheekha, to the world. This other worldview will induce a revisit to the scriptures by countless thousands. "Oh, my Bible has been corrupted, edited, changed. I've been the victim of fraud! Let me read the real scriptures and see where that takes me." The idea of the real Jesus Christ changed a small group of men and women two thousand years ago, and it turned the world upside down. Here is the chance to change the worldviews tens of THOUSANDS. Hold onto your seat.

Alexander needs help. He's got to sell his movies and pre-sell this movie at the American Film Market the first week of this coming November. That means more than setting up a booth and handing out fliers. Up front, he says he needs $5,500US. That will help put him in position to find funding for the $50 million he needs for film's budget. Yeah, it costs that much to make a movie that will change the world for years to come, which is what this movie will do if Alexander gets the help he needs. I do not know how rubles or rupees translate in PayPal, but if any American wants to help God accomplish what He is doing in this day, here is one of His heavy-hitters who could use your hand:

Victor Alexander's main web site: v-a.com/bible/
Link to Story of Jesus fund raising campaign: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-story-of-jesus-afm-campaign#/  (I could not open it on Firefox, but it did open on Chrome -- my computer is getting too old, still xp!).

If you can't afford a thousand, can you give ten? If you can afford a thousand, can you give ten? This movie will move mountains God wants moved!