Inerrant Lie #46

Another 'lie' from "God's ineffable, inerrant word":

As mentioned in 'Lie 18', the writer of Hebrews claims the Jewish nation helped 'make' Jesus. Therefore Hebrews 2:9-- while it reflects the esteem the Hebrews had of their own idolatrous handiwork-- though an egregious error and lie, is not surprising, per se. They are, per the Doctrine, an upside- down people, if only by the easy virtue of the odd number of convolutions inflicted upon the Doctrine by their rulers.

Speaking of the shameful mess of prideful bliss made of the Doctrine by the Hebrews, the "son of man," Ezekiel wrote: "I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him [Ezekiel 21:27]." The last overturning rendered by their handiwork, as I read, is Calvary. For, "last of all he sent unto them his son, saying, they will reverence my son [by hook or by crook; by flame or by fire; or by and for vanity, Solomon's "all [Ecclesiastes 1:2]" -Matthew 21:37]." Now, it's God's turn to twist them round, as I read.

It seems-- as the plethora of monikers (expletives included) presumably attributable to him indicate-- that there are any number of ways to apprehend Jesus. I agree with John the Divine that he is the Word of God made flesh, if only because that's what he said of himself (if "good seed [Matthew 13:37b]" ain't weeds). To come to Christ by another 'way' seems second- best, at best, to me. Who else in the lineup of usual (or even unusual) suspects are we supposed to believe?

If we take Jesus at his Word of God, he cannot be Christ, at any rate, for according to the Word of God, "the things concerning [him] have an end [Luke 22:37]"; while Christ has no end we don't wholly partake in, inasmuch as we are Christ. But if anyone in the canon told the whole truth, at least in part, even with ulterior motives-- it is he. Perhaps Jesus tells the most comprehensive of the lies we encounter in scripture, and because of the fulness of his lies, they appear as more comprehensive truth than all the other lies.

Hebrews 2:9 says, "But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man [Hebrews 2:9]." This verse is rich. It is, essentially, blindingly brilliant darkness, but the most immediately conducive lie to our present subject is: "Jesus... was made a little lower than the angels."

Peter said of Jesus, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God [Matthew 16:16b]." To which Jesus responded, 'This is the word of my 'God' [Matthew 16:17],' to paraphrase. If Jesus is our Christ, we had an end, and the whole ball of wax was a Jewish conspiracy to kill everything, just so their exceeding wickedness could finally rest in peace, with them in it, as they've ever been. What has this to do with God or us? None of this would matter, for we are nought but Death, already, were it so.

So, while it may be true that Jesus was 'made lower', it is also true that his Father in heaven was, like his beloved, 'made lower.' Thus, the resurrection is evidence that dead things enter the matrix via the womb. I guess The Lie of these lies is that Jesus' Father in heaven is the God of any but the dead. Where's the lie? in the letter, or the spirit of this 'doctrine'? Is it not in both? How could the dead ever get 'made'? They're stolen from their rest 'in peace'.

Notice the subtlety of Jesus' Father which is in heaven: According to him, Jesus is the Son of the living God, making the living God his mother. God is not "the sorceress, the seed of the adulterer and the whore [Isaiah 57:3]." The aforementioned whore is, however, "the God of the dead [Matthew 22:11d]; not the God of the living:" ; "ye therefore do greatly err [Mark 12:27]."

As to Jesus being 'made lower': when he was pleading his 'Father's' case before Pilate, Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then [as in now] would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now [as in then] is my kingdom not from hence [John 18:36]."

Inerrant Lie #45

Another 'lie' from "God's ineffable, inerrant word":

My mother always said a partial truth is a lie altogether. By this barometer, the respective bureaucracies of every government under the sun are manned entirely by liars. Not only do bureaucrats never tell the whole truth: they rarely tell even a portion of the same. Same goes for news agencies; corporate boards; insurance adjusters; medical billers; truck drivers; school teachers; preachers; anyone who enters into 'non- disclosure agreements': just about anyone who makes a living is required to lie about something to obtain and to keep their job.

In his gospel, John the Divine writes a lie of a sort to make a bureaucrat (such as 'righteous' J. Edgar Hoover, for instance) envious. The reason this lie would be especially impressive to a government employee (not to mention 'the father of lies') is that it is at once true and false. This lie is written so: "After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized [John 3:22];" the 'lie', here, being, "Jesus... baptized."

The next verse of John 3 indicates John Baptist's 'baptism' as the definitive model of the term "baptized," as used by John the Divine in verse 22. We know this to be so inasmuch as Jesus did indeed baptize: though John himself admits: "Jesus baptized not [John 4:2a]."

In fact, the latter [b] half of John 4:2 divulges it was Jesus' disciples-- not Jesus-- who 'baptized' (still do, for that matter) after John's 'baptism'. By this, we understand that, when John writes (in 3:22) that "Jesus... baptized," he's projecting the taint of the disciples' deeds onto Jesus: making him responsible for their works and Johnny B's. As children, we called this "pinning the tail on the donkey." Bureaucrats call it "passing the buck."

One refrain repeated in nearly every sermon preached by the late Pete Ruckman, is: "A text without a context is a pretext." Accordingly, both John 3:22 and John 4:2 are pretext, insofar as the only way to resolve one with the other (not to mention with the truth) is to take them both out of their given context-- John Baptist's 'baptism'-- which is the pretext.

Contrary to 3:22, Jesus did not baptize after John Baptist's 'baptism'; but contrary to 4:2, Jesus did baptize. In fact, "the Word of God [John 1, et. al.]" tangibly demonstrated the difference between his baptism and Johnny B's at the wedding in Cana. "This beginning of miracles [John 2:11a]" is likewise recorded by John the Divine.

To understand the figurative value of the water- turned- into- wine in Cana, one may consult with Paul's words about baptism to the Ephesians: "That [the Word of God] might sanctify and cleanse [the church] with the washing of water by the word [Ephesians 5:26]." Baptism is the operation by which the inner man is sanctified and cleansed, definitively: a thing Johnny B's 'baptism' can't pretend to do. True baptism is poured in, with Spirit [John 6:63]; not poured over, or immersed in.

While his disciples were/are rub- a- dubbing with Johnny B, Jesus was/is sanctifying and cleansing those who would/will receive his words with the hearing of the same. Thus the lie is really twofold: 1) that "Jesus baptized not [John 4:2a]."; and, 2) that John Baptist did [John 3:23, et. al.].

Inerrant Lie #44

Another lie from "God's ineffable, inerrant word":

It's all God's fault. Not only did God create the heavens and the earth, but all things else besides. Everything perfect and otherwise is God's fault. Even wickedness in the heart of a man is God's faulty doing. This belief is expressed and implied many times in scripture. It is also a lie of lies.

According to the Hebrews, their own murders of the prophets-- the chosen of God-- and of the Christ of God: is God's fault. After all, "Was not Abraham [their] father justified by works, when he had offered up [God's chosen] his son upon the altar [James 2:21]?" thus setting the precedent which the Jews followed to Calvary and beyond? This, too, is God's fault. It was, according to them, none other than God who commanded Abraham to murder his son Isaac [Genesis 22:2], as a sacrament to the God who chose Isaac [Genesis 17:19].

Clearly, the confusion of Babel clung to Ur of the Chaldees-- inclusive of Terah and his house-- when they fled Babel, in corporate fashion, to enter into the land of the Canaanites. Yet, even Abe's confusion is God's fault, according to Moses, who says of Abe that he "departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him [Genesis 12:4a & b];" which is another lie.

The eightieth Psalm contains a repeating refrain which aptly demonstrates this fallacy of the Hebrews: "Turn us again, O God, and cause thy face to shine, and we shall be saved [Psalms 80:3, et. al.]." This is confusion. The word "again" indicates their belief that it was God who 'turned' them out of the way to begin with. The imperative to "Turn us" places the responsibility for their repentance on the God whom they've offended. "Cause thy face to shine" means: 'take our abuse with a smile;' or, 'change your piss- poor attitude [Genesis 4:7].'

The root of this bitterness is found in the words and works of Moses. Moses, to this day, is praised vociferously from pulpits the world over for his endless chiding of God for God's 'evil intentions [Exodus 32:12f & g]' concerning Moses' people [Exodus 32:7], the Jews. Preachers call this "standing in the gap," or "making up the hedge," etcetera, when what it in fact is, is rebellion.

In chiding God in defense of the rebels, Moses sanctifies the rebels at the expense of God's expulsion from their 'camp [Exodus 33:3b - d]'. For this, the preachers and false prophets praise Moses. Prophets are sent from God to the people: to stand in the gap in God's 'defense'; to plead his cause before them. Yet this people sends the prophets back to God to plead their cause before him: as representatives of their own 'legal' defense; turning the world upside down.

Even the prophecy of Esaias is infected with this spiritual malady, to some extent, as demonstrated by his words in Isaiah 63:17: "O LORD, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy fear? Return for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine inheritance." Again, it is God who has turned out of the way, according to this passage of Esaias'. This is the belief given expression in the word "Return," above.

Beyond simply being a lie, this belief that 'it's all God's fault' is nothing short of false witness against God, as the scriptures express it. According to the scriptures cited above (et. al.): it is God-- not the Jews-- who is found to be 'out of the way'. This turn of phrase, 'out of the way' is perhaps the simplest definition of the term "deviant" extant. It certainly defines the term, at any rate. To say God is found deviating from the way is to call God a devil. Any 'God' who is deviant is a devil. Deviation defines devilishness. While it may be true that the 'God' of the Jews is a deviant devil [John 8:43 & 44], God who is love [1 John 4:8b] is not deviant. It takes a devil to say otherwise.

"30 Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin: 31 That walk to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at my mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt [Isaiah 30:1 & 2]!"