I'm posting my last comment as a post here too, because there is much in the applicable comment thread that will benefit people if they will consider.

Hello Man from the East,

Firstly, you came here saying, "...we Christians have been deceived into believing a false Christ named Jesus who was in fact Lucifer himself!" Now, you aren't a Christian. You aren't entitled to say "we Christians" since you aren't one of us. Secondly, you called Jesus "Lucifer." You assigned the name of Lucifer to Jesus. Of course, we've all already seen that you are not one for thinking in more than one context at a time. We know the context you mean when you say Jesus is Lucifer. You are using the name Lucifer as equal to the devil or Satan. You even called Jesus "Satan."

I don't have endless time to deal with you, and I'm not going to give you endless time. I will though point out your fundamental errors for your sake (to a point) and for the sakes of visitors.

Lucifer means "bringer of light." "Light" has a number of connotations. One of them is truth. Jesus came with the truth. There are though false-Christs and false-bringers of light. There are those who set themselves up as gods. Nebuchadnezzar II was one such person. He was called Lucifer, but he was false. That's the point. Nebuchadnezzar II was the false morning star. Jesus is the true morning star. Work it out.

As for name calling, I didn't say there is anything wrong with name calling. You did. You complained that Jesus was sinning when he told the Pharisees that they were vipers. They were acting like vipers. That's the point. There is nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. In fact, it's required to warm them away from their wrong path. Then we let it be. If the shoe fits....

Do you hold with the Pharisees against Jesus? Do you hold with their hypocrisy and conspiracy against him to murder him (have him murdered by the state that kept them)? I don't and never will.

When Jesus was teaching in parable form and he was saying how people had assumed to themselves power that they ought not have and that they were denying the Son of God his rightful inheritance, the Pharisees self-identified with the evil ones in the parable. The shoe fit. They hated seeing themselves in the parable, but more importantly, they feared that others would see them in it too and no longer follow them and support them. Jesus was right. Also, Jesus was given them fair warning and rebuking them rightly. They were wrong. He was and remains right. That's the way it is. If you don't like it, you can knock at the Pharisees gate in the afterlife (death and Hell) to see if they will take you in since you won't be joining Jesus in Paradise with his Father and mine.

As for my having maligned you, I have in no way harmed you. It is for you to repent. I have told you rightly. It is your choice as to whether or not you accept the truth and benefit or reject it. You have not put the slightest mark on me.

I have changed no topic nor have I sought to. The subject is not confined to your formula. You don't set the bounds here.

Listen, a super computer and some programmers could come up with your name and mine and all the names you've mentioned as equaling 666 via so many formulae that it would be imbecilic to let the computer keep running the program. It would prove nothing, just as you've proved nothing. The formula used in Revelations was the one used at the time. It wasn't a formula yet to be discovered or put into use. Using the formula in Aramaic, which was one of the linguae francae and the everyday language of Jesus and the common Jews, 666 means "Nero Caesar." I don't recommend the Wikipedia as the end-all-be-all, but it does have a fairly descent article on the "Number of the Beast." If you think your formula is worthy, go add it there.

You can play with such things endlessly. I'm not opposed to research. I studied gematria years ago. Regardless of whether or not it was 666 or 616 or if 666 meant Nero or "Gaius Caligula Caesar" (another despicable, demonic ruler), there is no doubt that Nero and the utterly disgusting Caligula were set up as gods by the state. The Caesars were deified by the Roman Empire. However, they were not divine. It is obvious that Roman Emperors often did great evils and severely persecuted those who would not conform to their whims.

Jesus was a threat in their minds — a threat to the evil, greedy, violent, depraved Empire and the Sanhedrin that was under Caesar's thumb, just as now.

You wrote of me that I "tried to twist the truth by interpreting the sayings of Jesus to conform to your false belief." Hogwash. Everything I said is clearly supported. It is you who don't know how to read him. You have admitted that you are confused by his parables. I'm not.

Think about this: Confusion is the work of the devil, and if Jesus is truly the light of this world and wants to save the world, then why the hell did he spake in Parables? Simple answer: So that people will be confused!

Wrong! He taught in parables so the common people would hear the word and see the light in those stories. They picked up on his language (the language of the revelation) while the self-styled intellectuals of the day scrambled around in their materialism and hypocrisy trying to keep the people down, just as they do now. The thousands and thousands who followed him were not confused. They got it. The self-styled geniuses are the ones who were confused, just as you are now.

What do you think the following means. Interpret for us:

Shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him, and say, Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his! how long? and to him that ladeth himself with thick clay!

As for Romans 11:26, Israel will turn to Jesus. That's what it means. He's referring specifically to a remnant. God will save Israel's remnant that come to believe in Jesus Christ.

You attempt to use Paul against Jesus. You're backwards.

You don't understand the oneness of spirit. God is spirit — one spirit. If anyone has the spirit of God (righteousness; real righteousness) dwelling within, then that one is of God and one with God. Are you one with your family? Is your family a single entity? The spiritual family of God is one.

You dwell on the mundane level. Open your heart to the downtrodden. Where is your concern? Where is your compassion? Where is your spirit of forgiveness?

Jesus rebuked and rejected Satan who tempted him. How can he be Satan? He cast out devils. Are you with the hypocritical Pharisees who said he cast out devils by being the devil? Jesus already defeated their argument. They were left speechless. Unlike you, at least they knew when they had lost the argument. They didn't keep speaking against him in public, because they didn't want to continue to be embarrassed by always being shown up by the greater light of Jesus.

Look, if you're going to hold to your position, go elsewhere. You have no part in us nor we in you. You are working to preserve some false authorization for some wickedness you are doing or want to do or want to excuse that you've done. You are avoiding apologizing for your errors.

I'm not asking for some public line-by-line confession from you. I'm saying that you need to search your soul about your own sins. You need to ask God.

God will tell you that Jesus was and is absolutely right. God will tell you that you've been wrong here in everything you've put forth.

God bless everyone in the Universe with the message of Jesus Christ.

Tom Usher

P.S. Your use of all caps and endless exclamation marks was altered. Nothing but all caps and exclamation marks is bad form. Use them sparingly.


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.