Not Part of the Text
- Sup1 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup2 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup3 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup4 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup5 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup6 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup7 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Sup8 No Such Thing Conservative-Republican Christian
- Chapter 18, US/Israel
- Chapter 23, Cold War, War on Terrorism: Same War
- Chapter 30, US Supports Torture
- Chapter 36, Nazis and False Zionists: Racists
- Chapter 43, Serving Mammon: Conspiracy
- * Chapter 51, Den of Thieves: Money Changers
- * Chapter 54, False Flag 9-11 and More
- Chapter 60, Black Sun, No Light
- Chapter 74, Hugo Chavez
- Chapter 81, Pantheism, Polytheism, and Monotheism
- Chapter 83, Boundless Corruption, Non-existent Repentance
- Chapter 95, Hyping Terrorism
- Chapter 99, False-Christian Interests and Reaction
- * Chapter 100, The Shadow's Bidding: Assassinations and Coup d'Ã©tats
- Chapter 132, Everything is Known Forever
Tuesday, September 12, 2006:
The title of this chapter "Black Sun, No Light" is more fine-tuning or further clarification concerning what is the real light.
If you've read the earlier parts of this on-going work, you may recall the issue of Gnosticism and Lucifer's real identity. You may also recall Isaiah complaining about people twisting the meanings of words around to suit their selfish purposes. You may recall that we explained that there are two main streams of consciousness flowing through the language, one that is real and the other that is designed to pejorate that original train of thought or stream of consciousness. Also, we discussed how Jesus is the real morning star and not Lucifer, in the same sense that Jesus is the real bread and not the manna from the sky or the bread we make from the most literal grains, etc. We discussed the occult and Nazism, the bloodline fanaticism. Nazism is where we introduced the term "black sun." We discussed the caste system. All these things point to the pattern of clues as to the true nature of Jesus. We've mentioned secret societies versus Jesus showing God out in the open, doing God.
This world of falsehood is a battle ground. It is a place of constant struggle. It is exactly divided on the fault line that separates the unselfish, real, right fault plane versus the selfish, false, wrong fault plane.
Some will call this Manichaeism to obfuscate; however, Manes came after Jesus, and the dualistic light versus dark is quite obvious in real Christianity. Also, Jesus made clear that the flesh can be weaker than the willing spirit.
The less selfish the individual and the collective the more Godly, the healthier.
The reason we say both individually and the collectively is because we mean within (individually) and what comes from within that goes out affecting others (having an influence upon the collective) and all things in a cascading or ripple effect.
Now, "black sun" is code for all things antichrist, anti-light. It is an inversion of the light by way of claiming that there is real knowledge in the dark, real knowledge that is hidden, occulted, that is that humans are not only gods but don't need the ultimate, ineffable essence of God, that that God holds us down unjustly.
The question for the human being today is whether or not he or she will stand for Jesus by the plain and clear implication of all his words and deeds taken in toto, or whether one will say what he presented was false. This is the fault line.
All the secret societies of note hide at their core opposition to, or deviation from, the message of Jesus. It all comes down to who is to rule and why. The selfish claim superiority and the throne. Jesus is unselfish and teaches the raising of all to the throne under God who has been wrongly rejected.
It comes down to real life versus death. God the Father, whom those of the blackness, outer darkness, seek to overthrow (an impossibility), warned of the consequences of ego and hedonism (excessive and incorrect feeding; selfish lust). The opposite spirit tempted, lured, saying such feeding, partaking, will not lead to suffering consequences, that such feeding is not a false-hearted thing or death. That second notion has been a cover for the injustice that has been the caste system or class structure ever since.
Jesus is the epitome of right emotion, beingness, for our biological species. Epitome means prime example, a summation. The implications of Jesus stands against castes and upper classes. It stands against the dark schools that teach syncretism down, the wide path.
That syncretistic path is a method by which consolidation of the worldly power, the temporal power, is the on-going usurpation of the spirit of the original warning that had it been heeded would have prevented selfishness and all its suffering consequences.
That syncretistic path seeks to fracture and destroy anything and everything that stands in the one who is attempting to usurp God.
The ecumenical movement today is syncretism down. The call for toleration (not to be confused with pacifism, per se), is also a tool used to lessen the inhibitions against spiritual and physical fornication.
It is important here to explain that all the religions of the world suffer a range of twisting. This is why the unaware within them can be unselfish souls being played in the amorphous conspiracy to consolidate power into the hands of antichrist.
This is why the Roman Catholic popes have never called for the commons for the grassroots. They have all known that that call is clearly and plainly implied in the words and deeds of Jesus, but they have self-authorized themselves to twist the message, the word, the truth, the way, to selfish, violent, greedy, depraved means and ends.
The church of Rome is syncretism of the religion of the Roman Empire, which itself was syncretistic for the sake of compromising-consolidation. The Greek, Egyptian, Persian, Indian, and even Chinese blended to varying degrees. The Northern Europeans too were influenced via migration coming out of the ancient centers. Judaism itself comes out of the earlier centers. It is all a splintering off with the attempt ever since to consolidate. This is the old heaven, of self over the whole, trying to regroup with Satan still in it, not with Satan repentant, but rather with the subtle approach of tolerating the incompatible, tolerating the wide path. It isn't the first heaven. Its just the one that been around for a long time since the rebellion against righteousness and the real God who created light.
This is why the Jesuits arose. They were the Roman Catholic extremists against the Protestant Reformation. They were the counter-revolutionaries who most definitely had members who served as double-agents and instigated and fomented within the ranks of the opposition. They were the dreaded inquisitors. If the pope said white was black, then for the Jesuit, white was black. That's selling one's soul if anything is.
This than can easily be confused with conflation since conflation is twisted by them to their unwholesome means and end.
So, one can accept Roman Catholicism's twisting and obfuscation or one can ask where's the fruit. The pope is not authorized by God to countermand the new commandment of Jesus. We are not saying that the popes have done that verbatim, but they have whittled away at it. They have introduced ideas that are inconsistent with it, so-called just wars is one example. More importantly, they have failed to exercise the new commandment.
Christianity is what Jesus said and did. Jesus is the epitome. No pope has been. Certainly John Paul II was not. Certainly the black pope, the dark-side pope, the head of the Jesuits, has never been.
Look, Jesus did not dishonor his mother or father, but he did not worship his mother, Mary. Neither was she, contrary to Roman Catholic pronouncements, born of a virgin mother. The syncretism of the church of Rome, the co-optation by the Roman Empire of the church, caused that church to lose focus and become the harlot of the beast (Empire) and even the beast itself.
For some time now, the move has been on to reconsolidate around the papacy. They are having difficulty due to the Holy Spirit outing their sexual depravity and their traditional collaboration with Nazis and Communists, but there are many who are very willing to overlook these things for the sake of syncretistic, compromising consolidation—to collaborate with the unrepentant, less than lukewarm church of Rome.
What they all know, some more vaguely than others, is that the syncretistic-down house cannot stand. God's way won't allow it.
They don't care. They'll take what they can get while the taking lasts. It's very short sighted even though the program has been on-going in one form of another for ages.
The occult is really divided into the real and false. There is that which is hidden because hearts are too hard and selfish to see it and then there is that which is hidden because others selfishly exploit others. It is that second form that is against the real truth. That form is behind all the ecumenicalism and calls for toleration. That form is behind Roman Catholicism. Just look at their opulence.
Remember also that James Madison said that government is "to protect the minority of the opulent from the majority."
The pope is right in sync with that and always has been. Oh, popes have made some noises in the opposite direction, but none has put the full weight of his church behind those sounds.
The world is run in the spirit of selfishness that will be overthrown by the spirit of unselfishness. The selfish systems of government that protect the minority of the opulent will be overthrown and not by any violence or harm done by the unselfish.
As for the prophecy of Daniel and John's Revelation, understand that there are many interpretations. Some say that the Caesars were the heads of the beast. The image fits that. Others say the heads were spread out covering the empires of Babylon through Caesar and that the horns were the tribes of Europe with three being politically crushed and the papacy rising up as the one horn. That image too fits. There are various interpretations of the times too that can be made to fit. The weeks can cover times before Jesus. The weeks can cover times after the pope is made supreme.
The power of the papacy was taken away in 1798 (the fatal wound) but was begun to be restored by Mussolini in 1929. The 1798 date is 1260 years after the pope was declared as the world ruler of the Christian church. Also, the Roman church declared that the pope is God's law on earth, able to even overturn the precepts of Jesus, change the calendar (from Passover to Easter, from Saturday to Sunday as the "sabbath"; from evening to evening to midnight to midnight for the day) and the laws. They declared that the pope is the temporal ruler of the whole world and that anyone who went against that could be tortured and put to death.
The pope is creating syncretism.
The pope wore out the saints with persecutions.
They further said God was bound by the decision of the Roman priests.
The mortal wound was healed starting in 1929.
There is also the female worship of the virgin Mary as the Queen of heaven and really all the goddesses of the various pantheons down through the ages. The original Protestants refer to it as the Cult of Mary.
Then a new power would rise up and be the power backing up the authority of the recovered power. The new power comes up out of the earth, not the sea (nations). This is the US. The church of Rome really got a boost from Ronald Reagan, the astrology enthusiast. Reagan officially recognized the Vatican in 1984 as a sovereign state. It was an anti-Soviet move.
In 1986, pope John Paul II met with representatives of twelve faiths including Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Zoroastrians, Sikhs, Muslims, Bahaists, Shintoists, etc. for a "World Day of Prayer." He kissed the Qur'an. He received the mark of Shiva on his forehead. Shiva is the destroyer of worlds, the devouring spirit, the dark side, the Satanic spirit in Hinduism.
Now that's syncretism down.
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 current pope, Benedict, though has openly criticized Mohammed's preaching violence, although he quickly backpedalled. Benedict quoted the fourteenth century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus about Mohammed's evil "such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Benedict though doesn't defend Jesus against Mohammed's distortions. We won't go into those here. We covered them earlier in the main body of this work.
Benedict XVI has been careful to avoid syncretistic accusations. He knows the criticisms against his predecessor. He isn't John Paul II's clone.
Speaking about the 1986 meeting John Paul II had with all the various religions, Benedict said the following:
...the inter-religious prayer meeting did not lend itself to syncretistic interpretations based on relativist concepts....
...even when we find ourselves together to pray for peace, it is important that prayer take place according to those distinct paradigms particular to the various religions. This was the decision in 1986, and such a decision cannot but still be valid today. The convergence of opposites must not give the impression of a capitulation to the relativism that denies the very meaning of truth and the possibility of attaining it.
Now, "World Day of Prayer" doesn't sound bad. Also, they attempted to take care to address the problem of syncretism. However, all the other aspects about the church's history of syncretistically absorbing misdirecting, confusing, aspects of paganism for the sake of co-opting religions cannot be denied.
A professed Christian accepting the mark of Shiva on his forehead and kissing the Qur'an cannot be ignored either. Compromising faith in Jesus to get along, not asking for converts, is not right in the eyes of Jesus.
Oh, no one is saying brow beat people of other religions. People do though have to be offered the gospel message.
In 1989, the Anglican archbishop, Robert Runcie, offered the pope "primacy of honour" over the Anglican church. The pope though held the position that he already had jurisdiction over the church of England and all churches everywhere really, so he didn't accept the language.
St. Paul's Cathedral, London was changed to look like St. Peter's. It has pentagrams and the builder's square and compass of Freemasonry.
This shows the powerful temptation of syncretism or ecumenicalism. It is the draw of New Age religion.
"HIS" is also found in the Cathedral and all over Catholicism and Anglicanism. Some fundamentalists point to "IHS" as found in Catholicism as symbolizing occultism. It means Hoc Signo Vinces, which is Latin for "In this sign thou shalt win." It is also the abbreviation of Jesus's name in Greek, which is the way it is used in Catholicism. It means "Isis, Horus, Seb" in other traditions but not in Roman Catholicism or Anglicanism. That's where the confusion comes in.
Concerning Benedict XVI, he was born April 16, 1927. He is seventy nine as of this edit (Sunday, September 17, 2006). He could live a long life, but even still, the Romans chose an elderly pope on purpose. They don't want to be stuck too long with one point-of-view.
Benedict is a so-called intellectual and politician. He's a science-and-reason person in the Renaissance and Enlightenment senses as seen through the lens of traditional Roman mysteries. He's a Hellenists. He headed up the Sacred Congregation of the Universal Inquisition before becoming pope. His every word and deed is calculated to forward his vision to forward the Roman church. God alone though knows every reaction to every word before it happens. Benedict can be caught unawares.
Of course, God is reason—divine reason. God's science too is the real science—spiritual science—God's will.
The Islamic community jumped on the pope in a verbal furor. Muslims in various places resorted to violence, proving the point of Benedicts concerns. All sorts of Islamic groups issued threats of violence against the Roman Catholic facilities. Non-Roman Catholic churches were attacked. The Muslims did this, because the pope said Mohammed was violent. They are violent, because they are insulted that the pope said Mohammed was violent. It's a group throwing a violent temper tantrum denying that their teacher taught them violence.
The Vatican has issued statements that attempt to paper over what the pope said. That attempt is a mistake. Christians are not to worry about hurting feelings and offending religious sensibilities to the extent that the root issues are avoided and no conversions take place. No one comes to Jesus without suffering the shame inherent in the realization of one's selfish past and present, of course including a violent past. Mohammed was (continued...click the next page number below)...continues... Click next page number 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".]
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)