CHAPTER 1: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONSERVATIVE-REPUBLICAN CHRISTIAN

Jesus is a small-c communist

If you have not read the Introduction, please do so before reading on. The Introduction contains important clarifying information helpful in understanding this work.

As I stated in the Introduction, contrary to the general consensus, especially within the American mainstream, there are no conservative Christians. For clarity, I am referring to the current political, economic, organizational system of ideas and doctrines known as conservative Western ideology  primarily found in the United Kingdom and United States, with emphasis upon the United States, hence the identification of Republicans. As you will see, this conservatism stems from the very beginnings of what is called civilization, lauded by many and grossly misunderstood.

Clarifying "conservativism"

There are several relatively prominent connotations of the term "conservative" often associated with Christianity. One is the belief in the literal interpretation of The Bible. However, not everyone who calls him or herself a conservative Republican Christian rejects Biblical figurativeness. Also, many so-called liberals believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus.

Defining terms is essential to the understanding of real Christianity. The revelation is an unfolding. The meaning of terms will unfold within this work for the patient and persevering.

For the most part, the Conservative-Republican mentality shares much in common with all fundamentalism and traditionalism around the globe regardless of the name of the religion or political party.

Considering the economic and military weight of the Empire that is the combination of the United States and United Kingdom, with their shared Anglo-Saxon heritage, conservatism within this greater Empire is the most pressing danger, hence our focus. I tie the United Kingdom to the United States, in as much as the United States is the offspring of England and England is living, to no insignificant degree, a vicarious empire through that offspring.

A way to handle this subject of conservative Christianity is by giving the Biblical sense back to the meaning of the word "liberal" and then showing how that sense is the same sense as real Christianity.

Biblical liberalism

Understanding the Biblical sense of liberalism is dependant upon viewing the concept from within a number of timeframes and informed by different meanings of other terms depending upon context. The Biblical sense of liberalism from one perspective antedates (predates) the Christian faith when one dates Christianity from the context of the time Jesus walked the earth in the flesh as completely human as you are. However, the Biblical sense of liberalism and Christian faith are one and the same when one views both in continuity with the Biblical prophetic desire for messianic salvation. In that sense, the Christian faith began with prophetic pleas and prophetic knowledge: Reception from the Holy Spirit. The prophets were already believers in the coming Messiah.

If you find yourself already frustrated and arguing semantically, that's understandable given that the training from this world including in the churches has run counter to the revelation. It is unsettling to find out that the world says it is either or whereas the truth is that it is both or neither.

Real liberalism is inherent in the message of Jesus, so there is no hypocrisy in being simultaneously a true liberal and a true Christian. In fact, one cannot be one without being the other. It takes the spirit of faith of, and in, Jesus to be a true liberal. The law and the prophets pointed to a true liberal when they prophesized the advent of Christ incarnate (in the flesh). Also, that true sense of liberalism must be contrasted with the current notion of conservatism. In addition, in making it plain that there are no conservative Christians, I will also be making plain that there is no such thing as a liberal Christian, as the term "liberal" prevalently is used today. The prevalent use is a distorted, unreal meaning.

Figurative thinking and word usage

A place to begin restoring the Biblical meaning and concept of liberalism is with (Proverbs 11:25), which says, "The liberal soul shall be made fat: and he that watereth shall be watered also himself." Fat in this Proverb means bountiful. In the context of this Proverb, it is a good thing. The fat of the land is the land's bounty. Rich soil, with the right light and water, may yield abundance (fat). As a clarification, everywhere the word "fat" comes up in The Bible does not mean real bounty, because bounty has two distinct and diametrically opposed meanings depending upon the context. One meaning is bounty from God for direct righteousness. The other is bounty from the spoils of evil. The word "bounty" has been hijacked in this case by those who call booty (property seized in war) bounty. Booty is the reward of piracy or robbery. All war profit is plunder and booty. All war-profiteers are a kind of pirate. Those who call war profitable side with piracy. Also, the words "watereth" and "watered" in the proverb means "help" and "helped" respectively and in their simplest terms.

This is the type of figurative thinking and word usage you will need to put into practice to become literate in the language of the revelation of Jesus. Jesus was perfectly fluent in the revelation. Everyone else is either learning as an ever-becoming child of God or turned away orphaning him or herself from God.

In the Introduction, I raised the issue of people becoming discouraged and quitting the faith (to the extent they had it) once they find out the greater truth leading to the absolute. If this happens, they professed Christ without having been looking for the truth. I further introduced the concept that by being exposed to the truth and then renouncing faith, they would be worsening their separation from the elect (the chosen, the anointed). I went on to quote Jesus as follows:

And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Matthew 25:32-34).

The verse that follows, which is Matthew 25:35, harkens back to the Proverb 11:25 that I quoted above ("The liberal soul shall be made fat: and he that watereth shall be watered also himself."). Make the connection in your mind between these cited Bible verses. Matthew 25:35 quotes Jesus as continuing, "For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye have me drink."

Now, just as with the word "fat" above, the word "meat" here is not confined to the word meaning animal muscle tissue or organ tissue. There are those Christians who would insist that animal flesh is actually precluded from the Biblical understanding by logical, emotional extension. However, coming to understand how they have arrived at their position requires a broad and deep understanding of the scriptures and history as a whole. That will not come to anyone who does not make the effort to understand the emotional language of the revelation. I will say that meat is often used in The Bible synonymously with mundane food in general. Actually, there is a place where the mundane food {taken for granted by so many, especially those rich in mammon (money)}and the divine food are a continuum just as Jesus showed the continuum as he was enabled by God our Father to move back and forth from the incarnate to spirit. It is profound yet it is right there in front of us.

The term meat is still used today when referring to the edible flesh or tissue of fruits, vegetables, nuts and the like. Therefore, do not jump to conclusions based upon narrow, current word usages. Doing so can close the door to further understanding and enlightenment.

Jesus went on to explain that those who gave food and drink, etcetera, to those with the least (the needy) thereby also gave Jesus, the Son of God, food and drink. You feed and water any of, or all of, his flock; you, thereby, feed and water him (the good shepherd, the Lamb of God). This is the heart of understanding true liberalism. It is infinite oneness.

In the interest of disclosure, I am a vegetarian (vegan often: no animal products) when able to choose; however, I have eaten what has been placed before me knowing full well that all such food is a type of flesh shed for the life of my body, for which I am grateful, and knowing also that all such flesh (animal, plant, earth) is not the real bread, per se, from heaven and for my soul.

The real bread

The Hebrews with Moses living in the desert received manna that fell from the sky. It was not food for their souls except by implication. One must draw the connections between receiving the different kinds of breads: Grain bread and such, manna from the sky, and spiritual bread from heaven. Jesus taught as follows:

Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. (John 6:31).

Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. (John 6:49).

This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. (John 6:58).

The "this bread" is the spiritual bread: The words of absolute truth. You will please note that Jesus added to scripture. He enhanced the understanding going well beyond the level of miracle that was the manna falling from the sky.

Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no. (Exodus 16:4

Then Jesus said that what was written was wrong. Now how can that be? It is not that Jesus was saying that it was wrong. He explained that the traditional interpretation of the meanings was less than he was revealing. Heaven has more than one sense, connotation, or meaning. In The Bible, heaven can mean the sky and it can also mean the kingdom of God. The real bread did not fall from the sky as the manna did. The real bread comes from the heaven that is the kingdom of God that transcends the mundane sky. It is not dependant upon the sky we see when we look up outdoors. This does not mean the food (manna) did not fall from that sky or that it was not provided by God from heaven. Everything is provided by God. It means that one eating that manna was not necessarily filled with the Holy Spirit. In fact, many who ate that type of bread (meat) were still just as devoid of the Holy Spirit (truth) as they had been before eating the manna. That is Jesus's point. That's why so many of them died spiritually as well as physically. They did not live on eternally in the spirit. The manna did not impart justice. The bread that came from heaven that if we eat we live forever is the real bread or the true spiritual bread: The truth from Jesus.

I wish to avoid getting ahead of the subject matter, but it bears introducing at this point that even the word "real" as used above is to be understood within the highest sense of the revelation. You will be able more readily to identify contextually sensitive word meanings within the revelation as you continue. On the highest level, reality is the absolute truth of the spiritual, manifest, and incarnate nature of God. All else is false or unreal (unreality) in this absolute sense where Christianity holds that all things ultimately resolve to, or depend upon, God. Satan, the spirit of imagining oneself as God's arch nemesis (equal rival), is in denial, or unreality, that he or she cannot be, or has not already been, beaten or overcome.

In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. (John 16:33).

This all will become clearer as you read on and become fluent in this language that may yet be foreign to your mind. I will address contextual sensitivity several more times in this work, so do not despair if you feel lost. Just considering these matters can constitute progress. Eventually, you will become able to flow from word sense to word sense as the contexts change.

You will come to understand that the blind leading the blind are those who are not born of the spirit but are those who are dead of the spirit. They are not truly or really living (in that sense-context). Once you come to grasp this, door after door will continue opening to you.

Let me emphasize now that this is not a word-game. This is not a work of fiction. This is real and the most serious of matters. It is not for entertainment. It is for edification that is spiritual enlightenment. It is a matter of the eternal life and death of souls. What can be more important here and now? It is not to be read and put down. It is to be acted upon now, always, and forever.

Self-sufficiency

Now, contrary to Jesus's teaching that as you feed and water any of, or all of, his flock (the needy, his believers, and all others really); you, thereby, feed and water him (the good shepherd, the Lamb of God), conservatives emphasize so-called self-sufficiency. Pause on that and consider it. Digest it, for it is undeniable truth. It is an unavoidable contradiction, hypocrisy on the highest order, of so-called conservative Christians. Everything said in defense of such self-sufficiency is obfuscation and rationalization or worse. No Christian has any excuse concerning this. The true Christian will love hearing this reproof. All others will be anywhere from indifferent to hating it. The doctrine of self-sufficiency as opposed to the teachings of Jesus is proof that there is no such thing as a Christian conservative, but there is more. It never ends in fact. After all, the truth is infinite.

Helping all the needy is far from the highest priority of the conservatives, as demonstrated by their failure to have ever done it, despite collectively having the wherewithal to do it. They do help to some degree under the proviso that it be in what the rich conservatives deem is in their best selfish interest. It is ironic that helping the poor is always best, but one must see the whole picture to know that. One can never see that whole picture by viewing through the dark glass of selfishness. To the Christian however, helping the needy is the highest priority. It is right up there with finding lost souls and bringing them to the faith of true liberalism. It is teaching what must be done. It is teaching the softhearted condition that will undertake that work. The conservative though is more about taking care of self and ...continues... Click next page number [2] below. [If you would like to see the full text on one page (helps with searching for text on the page), use the "No-Graphics Print Version".]

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
    • Thomas James

      Speaking about Robin Hood I believe that there has been a lot of censorship ever since the 1950's concerning him. The closest thing we have in America to a Robin Hood type figure is none other than Jesse James. Now don't get me wrong Jesse was indeed a cold blooded killer and a supporter of the Confederate way of life that included slavery. However the Union also supported a form of involuntary servitude known as the military draft.

      So putting aside some of the controversy of the Civil War I did a little research and found a newspaper article written by Jesse James saying that it hurt him deeply that some considered him a thief. Jesse protested that he should not be considered a thief but rather a robber who stole from the rich and gave to the poor. The Robin Hood mythology of Jesse James was also fueled by a newspaper reporter named John Edwards who wrote many articles glorifying Jesse James as America's Robin Hood the defender of the poor and oppressed victims of railroads who stole land from poor farmers and bankers who foreclosed on widows houses.

      The Robin Hood Jesse James mythology exists to this very day and I find it ironic that these Christian Conservative southerners vote for these carpet bagging Radical Republicans and Robin Hood in reverse canditates like Ronald Reagan who steal from the poor and give to the rich with their trickledown theory of economics and brag about giving the bankers the power to foreclose on everything that the poor has.

      I don't think that that Jesse James Robin Hood mythology is easily dismissed. Even if evidence suggests that the robberies were only for personal gain which they may very well be the idea of an outlaw ascending to the immortal status of a saint and a hero is far too powerfull an idea to not have been seriously considered by Jesse James.

      Jesus on the otherhand unlike Jesse James who killed bankers who refused to open up the safes rather used non lethal force when he used a whip to drive out the money changers from the temple and succeded in redistrubuting the stolen wealth by overturning the tables of the money changers.

      • Hi Thomas,

        I've read those accounts about Jesse James too. Jesse was at war. He's the "bad guy" in the North because the South lost. A Northerner doing the same in reverse would be viewed differently in the North.

        Someone you might also want to look at is John Brown. He is even more enigmatic than Jesse James. John was Hellfire against slavery. Yet, in the North, he's treated with a double-standard.

        My mother taught us the song "John Brown's body lies a-mold'ring in the grave; John Brown's body lies a-mold'ring in the grave; John Brown's body lies a-mold'ring in the grave; His soul goes marching on." We were decidedly Northerners and abolitionists but not pacifists at that time in the 1950's.

        Now John was going to "steal" weapons to free the slaves. He was ahead of his time since the Civil War came shortly after. Ironically, it was Robert E. Lee who commanded the federal Marines who captured John Brown at Harpers Ferry, Virginia.

        It is interesting to me that Robert E. Lee comes into this, as Robert E. Lee was also heavily involved in the Mexican-American War (1846–1848) and invasion and capture of Mexico City, which led to the United States militarily forcing Mexico, via the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, to cede Texas north of the Rio Grande and to also cede what are now: California, Nevada, and Utah, and Parts of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Wyoming.

        The reason this is interesting to me right now in particular is that yesterday, I happened to see two segments of an Alex Jones "documentary" that does support the United States' military conquest of all that territory. He supports the military "might makes right" theory here, when it suits him.

        Alex is extremely upset that Mexicans are in the United States en masse and are not all of the mind that the U.S. was fair or just in its treatment of the issues surrounding the so-called independent Republic of Texas. Alex builds this up into a huge threat being used by the global plutocracy to undermine and destroy the U.S. Constitution and to establish the North American Union and then Pan America, as in one nation-state that is the Western Hemisphere for all intents and purposes. From there, it's just a matter of uniting with the other huge, consolidated states such as the European Union and African Union, etc.

        The fact is that the Americans who went to Texas were invited by the Mexicans but not to then form their own country on Mexican lands and then secede. Alex is one of those "Remember the Alamo" people, apparently. He's falling to what was false propaganda at the time. He's falling either knowingly or unknowingly. I more than suspect Alex has heard the other versions of what really happened and has just stuck with the anti-Mexican version because it serves Alex's personal aspirations. I don't like that about Alex. He says he's a Christian but turns around and encourages guns and ammo in the event of violent revolution, which he is all for if the global elites are bent upon dismantling the U.S. Constitution.

        What Alex ought to be concerned with are the eternal Christian souls of his followers. He ought to be encouraging the coming global government to turn to real Christianity for all the reasons I've laid out on this website. The U.S. Constitution is not and never has been the best form of government, far, far from it. All of Jesus's commandments are far enhanced above the U.S. Constitution. Alex hates military imperialists (interventionists) but is still following them, as in James Knox Polk, the 11th President of the United States.

        Well, the false-hearted New World Order is inevitable. The thing Alex Jones likely doesn't realize enough though is that, that order is then displaced over time by the Christian Commons: the final Hegelian antithesis if you will. There is one last attempt against it (against that "millennium"), but the attempt fails. After that, humanity is free from evil forevermore. That's the prophecy, and it must and will be fulfilled. Yes, it's historicism. Real Christianity is historicist. That should be obvious to all; however, many "liberals" (false liberals) today are completely oblivious to it with all their Post Modernism, existentialism, and whatnot non-denominationalism even to the point of some of them saying one can be Christian and Muslim at the same time (ridiculous).

        Unlike the Christian Zionists (false Zionists), I don't encourage bringing in the evil to speed up the day when the Commons displaces it. Jesus never said to aid evil to hasten the day. In fact, Jesus knew and I know that the ones who attempt to change the times are the evil ones (the enemy demons sowing tares amongst the wheat). We as Christians are always to stand against evil and to do that via peaceful means because anti-peaceful means are evil. We are to be as consistent as possible.

        Alex Jones, in his propaganda against certain of the Mexicans, completely ignores the history of Polk's War and the Abraham Lincoln "Spot Resolutions." Alex ignores that Polk was about the business of expanding the slave states. Polk was also being decidedly imperialistic and expansionistic, two things Alex and his followers decry concerning the economic and military global elite right now in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and even Honduras in its way and soon, if they get their way, Venezuela by way of Colombia. Alex puts it passed Polk that Polk would not and did not create a pretext for war with Mexico. Lincoln didn't believe or trust Polk and demanded that Polk show him the spot where Mexican troops carried out an incursion into the United States and killed U.S. troops, as Alex and others still alleged the Mexicans did.

        Now, I don't say that just because Lincoln made the demand that that's enough to be certain Polk was lying about it; but to my understanding, Polk never did specify the place it happened. Also, one must consider the mind that would go all the way into Mexico City and then force that country to cede all that territory and the fact that Polk was a slaver who wanted things to remain that way: Blacks in total slavery — not exactly the kind of mind to just trust.

        Alex Jones "educates" plenty of his followers often with only one side of the picture or two sides but with carefully painting both sides, as he does concerning Mexican history in his two pieces above, in ways that the view of that other side is impossible to discern.

        When I speak about the global bankers, I ask them to stop, turn, repent, and atone. I don't mention that every time, but I don't want anyone not to view them as confused and misled human beings who might very well in some cases (and all cases if enough of us bring forth) actually see the light. Very rich people have seen the light (partially but significantly at the time) in history. It can and will happen again.

        Did you see my immediately previous comment reply to you, Thomas?

        By the way, it's notable that your comment here concerns Robin Hood I mention about half way through this very long chapter. Chapter 2 is also huge. Many other chapters are fairly short. I didn't follow any regimen about it, as I explained earlier in the work.

        Are you having any success with your family members seeing any light concerning all these matters? May peace descend into their lives.

        "Amen"

        By the way, I'm sure Jesus didn't use the whip on the bankers. He used it to prod (not abuse) the huge oxen and cattle. I suppose you realized that. I say it for the benefit of others. The money on the floor was partially as you say, symbolic of the message of redistribution. Always keep in mind, Thomas, (I remind myself too here) that Jesus had the Christian Commons in mind. He had the ultimate Commons of Heaven, where there is no money, in heart and mind. He had it in mind to bring Heaven in, in the here and now. He did say that he wins on Earth (New Earth but Earth nevertheless). Think semantically. We are talking about existence, being. The New Earth and New Heaven will be better than anything imagined.

        Jesus left in disgust. Then they came to haul him into the kangaroo court of the High Priest, Caiaphas, who knew the Old Testament about the sacrificial lamb but completely refused the enhanced message that God was completely sickened by it and didn't want such sacrifice but rather mercy.

        Some people might be tempted to ask me where it says that. Well, it requires reading the way Jesus read the scriptures to open them up to see it. Softened hearts will see it. That's my answer, and it does come from God.

        You won't hear Pat Robertson or any of his kind preaching this truth.

    • Thomas James

      Yes I totally agree with you that the Confederate States of America and their 99 year so called apprenticeship program which is actually slavery is a total abomination. However when the Bible speaks or rather the Old Testament speaks about emancipation we would find out that things like banks charging 30 percent interest rates and and having people entering into 30 year mortgages and banks having complete power to foreclose on everything a man owns also to be intolerable forms of slavery that people must be be emancipated from.

      The fact is that this system is unsustainable and good honest people who play by the rules are becomming homeless.

      You seem to understand that if you really wanted sucess in this world then maybe you should have become a pastor of some big mega church which teaches prosperity and that "as long as I have mine and God blesses me let the others worry about theirs". Then my family would ask you what they need to do to receive God's blessing and reward in this lifetime.

      People may be smart enough to realize that money is not needed in heaven however in this world money and capitalism rules. A Doctor simply cannot realize why on earth should he make the same amount of money as a janitor who did not even bother to go to school. As a matter of fact everyone can justify his need to be paid more than his competting fellow man.

      Asking my family how they are comming along is like asking the Jews and even the nation of Israel how they are comming along. Yet even the Jews are comming along. I sometimes wonder if during the last holocaust if the Jews were not subconsciously following the teachings of their King when they did not fight back.

      • Hi Thomas,

        "99 year so called apprenticeship program" is something I'm not familiar with. I could go hunting about it, but why not just ask you?

        You are completely right that we are to be emancipated from the greedy world bankers and all usurers. However, you worry me that you are leaning toward Liberation Theology possibly of the "physically fight them" variety. I don't say that you are quite ready to pick up a metal sword or a gun other than words of truth but that you might still be tempted right now to return evil for evil. It would do your soul good to denounce that in no uncertain terms.

        I know you have read more on this site than perhaps any other commentator here. I know you know how I view it that the whole shared inheritance of the family of humankind has been stolen by some of that family, which act and spirit divides that family into different spiritual houses: one God's and the other Satan's fractured house.

        The top bankers are gangsters. They know it about themselves and strive mightily to rationalize it all away in their minds, to actually justify it. The people are just too stupid is their thinking. Those bankers know Jesus is smarter than they are, but they can't bring themselves to live accordingly. They have to do everything they can to avoid confronting their demons head on. They do their best to co-opt and then twist Jesus into an abomination: a war maker and capitalist and a coercive and sexually depraved soul.

        Thomas, speaking truth is not vengeance. Vengeance is God's, but Satan exercises it. Don't confuse God and Satan as subtle as the differences might appear to you at times. God is not the wrath. Jesus never called down the wrath. He never assumed the mantel of the wrathful spirit. He did clean the temple. Where others see wrath in that, I see completely connected symbolism, meaning warnings against wrath: Satan. I see it by virtue of all the other things Jesus said and did. Viewing the cleaning of the temple as an isolated, mundane event is to completely miss the big-picture point. It is self cleaning and God cleaning. Jesus is the temple. So are we. The whole Real Heaven, New Heaven and Real Earth, New Earth as one is the temple. When he cleaned it, he didn't harm a soul. He drew no blood. He returned no evil to the evil. How the evil chose to react was marking themselves. It was their opportunity to rise or fall. Jesus didn't present a temptation to fall. It was clearly the time to rise together. Of course, Jesus knew they would not. His knowledge didn't cause it though. Their lack of faith caused it (despite those who get all confused over matters of faith and grace while they watch others starve to death and maybe collect some money from some doctors at the country club to help a few Blacks in Africa mostly for show). It was not Jesus's fault that many fell. It is not Jesus's fault that Pat Robertson falls over and over and over and asks others to support that fallen message and to thereby fall with him into the sin of greed and the falsehood of Calvinism that not only excuses capitalism with Calvin's mixed messages but actually lauds capitalism in spirit.

        I know you are becoming more and more passionate in your concern for the poor and for your own condition. Do not become desperate by the idea that you cannot supply your family with material excess. You as the head of your house can cutback and downsize just as much as you have to. I've seen four brothers ranging in age from 18 to 8 or so in a tiny bedroom sleeping on two bunk beds. There was no shame in it, per se.

        It is completely wrong that first George W. Bush and then Barack Obama and nearly all the Republicans and Democrats on the Hill gave all the newly created money to the very people who caused the crash with all their deregulation and derivatives and predatory lending, etc. There have been accusations by the likes of Sean Hannity against ACORN as if to say that it was all ACORN's fault for trying to get mortgages for the poor. Hannity is a great twister and loves to present things completely selectively, completely missing how the whole picture looks when one steps back from the minutia Hannity wants to focus on to the exclusion of everything else that screams that Hannity is a phony propagandist for the greedy, superrich-in-mammon hands that feed him.

        We as Christians are required to speak the truth about those demons, those serpents as Jesus called them. We are doing that, you and I. Let's just be sure to not muddle our zeal with the mind of the Zealots who took up the sword and died often in both flesh and soul.

        "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28)

        The superrich are going to get their comeuppance, Thomas. It's inevitable. Also, remember the Christians who went singing praises to God as they were led to the slaughter. They were not afraid of that death because they knew they would have real life for not falling to the sin of their murderers who devour people. This world is a test, Thomas. Pass it whether your fleshly family members do or not. They should be heeding truth and standing with you on it. It is not your fault if they do not. Do your best by them, but the dead bury the dead. You know that. Jesus tells you that. You are your spiritual family more than your fleshly family. It is great if they are one and the same, but you can't force fleshly family to see it that way. You don't need to force Jesus to see it that way. He clearly came here to teach it and did. God bless him.

        You seem to understand that if you really wanted sucess in this world then maybe you should have become a pastor of some big mega church which teaches prosperity and that "as long as I have mine and God blesses me let the others worry about theirs". Then my family would ask you what they need to do to receive God's blessing and reward in this lifetime.

        You see them. Jesus came to divide out the goats from his fold. Return love for hate but know the heathens for their chosen paths.

        Thomas, families lie, cheat, and steal (work the system) to send their offspring to medical schools and elsewhere. Many doctors know that.

        However, many janitors work to put themselves through school. I did janitorial work and many other jobs and did save and pay my way through college. I did economize. My parents helped while I was in community college because it was affordable. Other people don't have parents but have minds capable of medical school. Circumstances created and controlled by certain others conspire to prevent the poor from rising. I know you know that. You've spoken rightly that bankers are out to destroy not only the poor but the middle class as well in many instances.

        Asking my family how they are comming along is like asking the Jews and even the nation of Israel how they are comming along. Yet even the Jews are comming along.

        Yes, they think they are right when they are wrong. They are afraid that others will see the errors and stop supporting the errors.

        I sometimes wonder if during the last holocaust if the Jews were not subconsciously following the teachings of their King when they did not fight back.

        They underestimated the wrath. They claim pure victim hood, but many were culpable. It is historical revisionism to buying into the Elie Wiesel selective vision.

        Thomas, downsize as much as necessary. Do not feel obligated to give what you cannot afford. Do not let others demean you as a failure for not being a rabid capitalist.

        If I had wanted to be rich in mammon for myself as opposed to translating mammon into The Christian Commons so all might share, I would not have been a prosperity preacher but rather a banker. I would have funded arms deals, addictive drugs, and sex. I would have laundered all the money. I would have conspired to take over the central banks of the world. I would have had anyone murdered who stood in my way. I would have been the Antichrist. I would have paid for my image to whitewash every evil in my heart.

        Pat Robertson says to his soul, "Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry." (Luke 12:19) However, God says, "unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided?" (Luke 12:20)

        Thomas, I say this to myself too: "In your patience possess ye your souls." (Luke 21:19)

        Are your children old enough to work? Is everyone pitching in? Is everyone economizing? Is everyone living within your family's means? Is everyone aware of all the tent cities popping up all over that are housing people who never thought it could happen to them? Is everyone aware that the ultra-rich on Wall Street would all be completely broke if they hadn't cheated all the people in the real economy via the bailouts of Wall Street and not Main Street?

        If they are putting you down, Thomas, it is because they are brainwashed by those who will eat them too.

        Is your family still sending money to Pat Robertson so he can live as a king while others starve at his feet, even while your family is hurting? Very strange, very strange to God

        Peace to you brother. I feel for you and wish I had the Commons where you could come give and share all the fruits of your labor for righteousness sake and nothing but.

        To Hell with capitalism, Thomas. To Hell with coercive socialism too. To Hell with the dictatorship of the dark-side majority too.

        Humanity either sees the light or goes. So far, it's been going to the toilet where it eats. Which animal does that, and what did Jesus have to say about them?

        Tom

    • Thomas James

      The situation is untennable. As I'm sure that you know I believe that this socialism for the rich bailout of bankers actually made things worse and not so much because of the taxpayer burden but because it actually emboldened the banks to do evil. Before the bailout the banks were ready to work out a deal because they did not want to kill the goose that layed the golden egg. Now the banks have their money so they can now foreclose on everthing the homeowner has with impunity. Of course now there might be a small government incentive for a bank to renegotiate a loan however this only works if you have a job. As a result we are seeing millions of foreclosures.

      As far as other credit goes as soon as the banks got their bailout they actually raised interest rates to outrageous levels. Again I am preaching to the choir.

      So now I am entertaining Robin Hood fantasies and is that not just making good use of my awesome high definition home theatre system? By the way it is amazing how crystal clear they were able to make that new high definition release of the 1939 movie Robin Hood.

      • You bought that "awesome high definition home theatre system" on credit, Thomas, right? I don't even think about such things anymore. Stuff like that hasn't crossed my mind in years and years now. The last time I saw a TV was at the beginning of 2005. I watch a few newsy videos on the Internet just to round out the website with some of them. People point me to music videos every once in a while, but I don't seek them out. I watched a few old TV shows on the Internet lately mostly to re-visit the propaganda. It's a completely different way of watching than when I saw the stuff when it was brand new.

        Well Thomas, you give the bankers more credit for honesty than do I. You believe that the bailout emboldened the banks to do evil. Oh, you're right that it gave them a real boost. It validated their plan. That's what I'm referring to. You've read this site enough to know that I'm positive they planned the whole thing well in advance. As for the tax burden, Thomas, you must be underestimating the transfer of wealth from the bottom up via the income taxes that will be used to pay the interest on the National Debt that has skyrocketed on account of the bailout of the whole Wall Street/global banking system.

        The only thing that will put it somewhat right in the mundane is a New Deal on steroids.

        Obama is totally the wrong person to do it. In fact, he's in because he can't do much of anything. He's just Hoover all over again. George W. Bush was Hoover's start and Barack Obama will be Hoover's end. It's some President that will come after Obama who might have the backing to radically remake the nation-state. People will have to be much more fed up with it all than they were during the Great Depression.

        The problems right now are all the distractions. The children are running around as if nothing's happened or is happening. Bernanke is citing phantom stats. His sleight of hand has only tossed the hot potato around. He hasn't cooled it off at all. If anything, it's gotten hotter.

        Thomas, the bankers haven't killed the goose that lays the golden egg. They've just set things up so they can rape the world and the common American people aren't in a position to stop them short of revolution. Of course, I don't advocate violent revolution. I advocate revelation in the hearts of so many that the whole world will be transformed in a way the bankers can't stop because no one will fight for them against righteousness.

        Those millions who are being foreclosed are going to be radicalized or die.

        Yes, they raised interest rates to outrageous levels. They raised fees of all kinds too. They are far from done.

        All the decent souls need to live below their means. They need to sock it away in the Commons. The people need to translate their labors into the Christian Commons.

        Right now people just aren't being smart. They think owning nothing outright is better than owning huge tracts of land together where they make consensus decisions based upon pure righteousness.

        Well, the people don't deserve what is happening to them or do they? Certainly many do not. At the same time though, hardly one is taking the right stand and advocating for the real peaceful, loving, unselfish, harmless solution.

        Thomas, I'm going to Heaven. There's nothing to recommend this place without hearts that want the Christian Commons enough to make it happen by coming together and separating in the right way and staying engaged in the right way at the same time. Jesus did it.

        Oh, I don't blame you for thinking Robin Hood. Can you steal back stolen goods? It's a semantical twist. Frankly, I don't buy it. If you take back what is yours, you aren't stealing. However, why did Jesus say let them have your cloak too if they take your coat? In doing so, he wasn't doing them any favors. He was though trusting in God.

        • So, what's the 99-year apprenticeship program?

    • Thomas James

      In colonial times apprenticeship programs were modeled after Old Testament slavery in which an apprentice became indentured to a slave master for a period of 6 years and on the seventh year became a freedman or journeyman. A journeyman means that you are free to travel to work for whoever you want to rather than having to stay with the slave master. In the Masonic order journeymen like George Washington are called Freemasons.

      However fundementalist Baptists who were unsatisfied with limited term slavery that they could impose on European immigrants as payment for their right of passage found a loophole in the Old Testament that said that a foreigner could be a slave forever so they sought the importation of African slaves who could be indentured for a period of 99 years. However this was an incorrect interpretation because in reality Africans were Christianized so in effect they became naturized citizens of America and even native born Americans so they should not have been treated differently than the Europeans.

      • Hey Thomas,

        That's interesting: a Baptist loophole for enslaving fellow human beings. The constant thinking in Old Testament terms while professing the New Testament is new to me as of only several years ago. I was raised in what most would have thought of at the time as ultra-liberal (the false sense) New-Testament only. That was the Episcopal Church. That church has only continued in that same direction since I left it at 11 in 1964. I couldn't handle the hypocrisy and couldn't see any other denominations that weren't also way too hypocritical in their own ways.

        I still don't understand where the "99 years" comes from specifically. Why 99 as opposed to 98 or 100 or even indefinite? Would a 99-year-old Black slave in the Deep South actually have been freed under that system, or was the 99 years just a label without having been a contractual or legal requirement somehow?

        Do you recall where you learned this?

        As you know, I'm very critical of using the Old Testament to justify anti-New Testament behavior even while I believe that studying the Old aids in better understanding the New for sure.

        By the way, were you raised "Baptist," per se?

        Are there any subcategories you'd like to state?

        Thanks, Thomas.

        Peace to you,

        Tom

    • Thomas James

      The Baptist church may not actually hold with an Earth centered universe. Although they hold with Biblical literal fundamentalism in which an Earth centered universe would be a fair amd logical conclusion based on Psalms "Thou has fixed the Earth so that it cannot be moved." The Baptist church simply ignores a lot of issues that are not the forefront of their agenda. Their main agenda right now is to disprove the theory of evolution in favor of creation science. No other issues are considered. As far as the pro-life issue only abortion makes it to their agenda. No other pro-life issues are considered. The issue of slavery is no longer discussed by the Baptist church but during the civil war it was the forefront of their agenda which caused the Baptist church to split into 2 factions. The earth centered universe is right now a dead issue and the last time that the Catholic fundamentalists dealt with it during the time of Copernicus.

      It is unclear to me the exact fundamentalist position on a flat Earth however the bible talks about a tower that is built on the earth that is so high that the entire Earth can be seen from its vantage point. This of course would be impossible with a round Earth because at most only half of the Earth can be seen at one time however if this tower were to be built in a fourth spatial dimension then it would be possible to see the entire Earth.

      • Thomas,

        Yes, well, there are the four corners of the Earth and other expressions that were taken "literally" in a sense where the conclusion was that the Earth was flat and that if one traveled to the ends of the Earth, one would find an edge over which one could fall.

        I agree with your statement that they simply ignore issues. I have yet to meet a Baptist who doesn't ignore at least some issue (important issue) that impacts upon ones entire interpretation to arrive at the real Christian message or not.

        As for the theory of evolution, it is also my sense that they hold with it in very high percentages. Although, I've learned not to make sweeping statements about "all" Baptists. By way of saying that, I don't want anyone to misconstrue that I'm suggesting that you, Thomas, are lumping all Baptist together as being single-minded about evolution.

        Yes, they are in general very inconsistent when it comes to pro-life. So many of them seem so comfortable with wrongful executions of those who were on death row but were innocent. DNA testing shows this to have been the case. Now, DNA is being used to throw off DNA evidence. It was only a matter of time before criminals would start lacing crime scenes with the DNA of others to throw investigators off the scent. Baptists in general are certainly pro military and follow orders that result in the deaths of innocents. That's not consistently pro-life either. There are many other examples we could cite.

        I believe the Roman Catholics were still dealing with the issue of the Earth-centered universe even after Galileo, Thomas, rather stopping while Copernicus was still alive.

        Technologically of course, it would be possible to refract light or even bend it such that the whole surface of the earth could be viewed at once. Given today's satellite imagery and the proper viewing screen, it can also be done.
        Of course, God doesn't need the trappings.

        Tom

        • By the way, did you finish Chapter 1? If you did, I wouldn't be surprised if you're the first.

    • Thomas James

      Yes I was also baptized in an Episcopal church. My parents left this church in the late 1960's complaining of hipocracy. One sermon that disturbed them was listening to "Is God Dead".

      I suppose there was an agnostic minister who probably majored in Philosophy in college who couldn't find a job at a university. But if what he said was true then why bother going to church?

      Later on I did attend some Baptist services and was involved in a church that could be considered fundamentalist. I'm not saying that the Baptists told me to go out and buy slaves however I was expected to believe that the Bible was infallible. This ideology presented a lot of problems when I attempted to do my daughters solar system project based on the fundamentalist Earth centered universe. After much thought I imagined a cosmology that might be acceptable to my church and to science which was having the planets orbit around the Sun as the Sun orbits around the Earth. This was a vast improvement over Ptolomeys cosmology as it was at least navigationaly correct however it resulted in a lot of interesting spirographicaly orbits of immense artistic importance. Later on I discovered that it was not me but rather Tycho Braun who first proposed this hybrid cosmology combining Ptolomey and Copernicus but it was never adopted because Tycho was a tyrant to his student Kepler. Later on I found a computer program on the internet that could plot a spirographic Earth centered universe complete with retrograde orbits.

      My parents never directly praised any institution of slavery however my Father praised a slave like institution called the Navy. Because just like a slave you could not quit the Navy before your tour of duty was up the government would be justified in spending a lot of money on your training even a million dollars if you were a fighter pilot. And the government would not fire you before your tour of duty was up because you were their property so they had to feed clothe and house you. In the civillian world although you were a freeman that could quit at any time becase of that you would receive very little training, you could be fired for any reason and you would be responsible for making a living off of the wages that you receive.

      I am sure that when Jesus came on the scene he must of thought that the Torah Judaism system of slavery stank to high heaven. However Jesus could not abolish the Torah law lest he make the problem worse but decided instead to fullfill the Torah law. So what this means is that if some slave master complains that he is now bankrupt because he spent a million dollars on training his slave to become a pilot and instead some abolitionist frees him and now that former slave is making $200,000 as an airline pilot. I think Jesus would rather than abolish the law would fulfill the requirements of the law by buying the slave and setting him free.

      • Hi Thomas,

        Good for you that you could imagine an Earth-centered universe while the Earth could still be seen as orbiting the Sun from another viewpoint. I've written about that myself on this site. You appear to be at least relatively good at abstract reasoning, which is required to grasp Jesus's message. Perhaps you are really good at abstract reasoning and have only been held back because that level of abstract reasoning is frown upon for obvious reasons. Even though Tyco is credited, as you say, it's no proof that he was first. Regardless, it was original with you, just as it was original with me too.

        You know, I learn things from you, which I appreciate. I didn't realize that within our adulthood, the Baptist Church actually still held with the Earth-Centered Universe or Solar System on the pre-Galilean, let alone Copernican, level. I'm mean literally in the most literal sense as commonly used: strange. Have they given up that Earth-Centered Solar System, or do they hold with the flat earth too since both were the "literal" biblical view of many once upon a time?

        The way some people define "infallible" is likewise shortsighted.

        As for Jesus, I rather say that his fulfillment enhanced the law beyond Torah. Therefore, no real follower of Jesus may simply do the literal things of Torah since they include stoning and other illegal things in the divine, which stoning Jesus did and still does forbid his followers. Thank you, Brother Jesus!

        As for buying the slave, I see Jesus telling the slave owner to free the slave and to not worry about the million dollars but rather worry about his soul and everyone else's. Jesus bought all slaves with Jesus's flesh and blood he gave on the cross for truth and real love.

        Peace,

        Tom

    • Thomas James

      According to mathematical systems of topology all objects have corners, edges, and faces. Round objects are no exception to the rules of topology as circles can be considered as bloated triangles whith 3 corners or bloated squares with 4 corners. Vollyballs are actually bloated cubes and do indeed have 8 corners, 6 faces and 12 edges. According to topology even what we think of as flat objects such as squares are not really flat at all but when the diagonals are connected they are in actuality flattened pyramids.

      Therefore the four corners of the Earth are no doubt represented by North South East and West .

      • Yes, but if you line up neutrinos or even quarks, do you have the sharpest known edge possible right now or is it still rounded or both? Ah, semantics meets subatomic particles and even particle-wave dualities. When does matter, sub-matter, and their energy forms and forces disappear and everything left is spirit?