All you homosexual-fascist "liberals" out there, who was it who sang, "Baby, you're a rich, fag Jew," and did you and/or do you censor him for it?
Do you want every reference to him banned from the public domain?
His name is not in the Book of Life of Jesus Christ, is it?
Is your name there?
Are the names of the hypocrites written in the Book of Life?
How many books of life are there?
How many chapters are there in each?
How many mansions are there where souls reside, where they "live" and "die"?
What is being born again?
Is it reserved to the righteous only, or are people born again into more horrifying realms?
Which door is the real door of perception?
Who keeps that door?
Who shows people in and leads them?
Semantical understanding with wisdom are the keys.
If I were to say to a rich, homosexual Jew that he is a "rich, fag Jew," would you be offended, call for my banning everywhere in public, and tell me to leave you and him alone?
Now, there are those who pretend that John Lennon never sang the phrase into The Beatles song, "Baby, You're a Rich Man." Well, many people have no idea about John. They want to sugarcoat him. To know the real John Lennon, just listen to some of his uncensored work. He was an intentionally irreverent man. It also helps to be old enough to remember. What John wasn't was a "nice" boy. He was a libertarian, anarcho, capitalist, humanist, antichrist right along with Frank Zappa, Mick Jagger, and many, many others. They all knew full well who Aleister Crowley was. John even gave the devil's hand sign on the cover of Yellow Submarine, and I'm not talking about the BS hand sign. I'm also not talking about the unintentional position that is caught in a snapshot. I'm not talking about a Texas university's longhorn bull's hand sign. I'm talking about where and when the hand sign is used to say exactly what Aleister Crowley was forwarding that definitely sucked in huge portions of my generation. I was there. I saw it.
The youth of my day were attracted by peace. That was the bait. Some people wanted to keep it that way. Others used it as an inroad to then subvert people into "free love," as in sexual libertinism. Then came bi-sexuality, then homosexuality, and all manner of plastic, synthetic ideas from the contrivers. Unrealness came in to youth who were unprepared for the deceptions. Greed and violence soon followed, and the rest is still unfolding.
The initial purity though is still there in the hearts and souls of some.
As for John's vaunted song, "Imagine," I liked it at first when I thought he was only speaking about hyper-literalness where God is nothing more than as a cartoon character literally sitting in a material, golden throne on an actual cloud of the type you see everyday and that John was speaking about an equally limited notion of Hell below us.
Don't misunderstand me here. God can project whatever God wants, but God is not limited therefore to what was John's limited conceptualization. John was actually more than suggesting that there is no life superior to what was John's life here in the flesh.
Here's an example of a confused mixture where the page author doesn't differentiate the hand signs and the necessary intentions of those captured at the time. http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Wicca%20&%20Witchcraft/signs_of_satan.htm
Can people later claim to have meant one thing while really meaning the other? Of course they can. People lie to get ahead in their fleeting reality.
Have I assigned John Lennon to Hell here? No, I haven't.
Do I want to coerce him out of the secular world? I want every heart to have the real law written on it. Then the issue will be moot.
Also, if you don't believe me about John, ask Paul McCartney. Maybe he'll tell the truth. Paul and John didn't see eye-to-eye on God and Christ. Ask him.