A Deconstruction Of The Death Of Christ: It’s Not What You Think


–=–

“But the natural (idiot/foolish) man receiveth not
the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:
neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.”

–1 Corinthians 2:14

–=–

 

As a consummate Bible researcher nowadays, I am always looking for spiritual, reasonable explanations for the most unreasonable, ridiculous sounding of stories. There is, of course, a fine line between deciphering the absurd to find spiritual instruction and playing the fool. The king’s scribes were quite clever in their transliterations, leaving traps and pitfalls throughout the Crown’s copyrighted, English (dog-Latin) version. Some may take offense at the idea that I am calling the story of Christ’s death and resurrection as a somewhat ridiculous story, and to you otherwise reasonable people, I will simply offer to tell you why I say this over a glass of blood-turned wine along with Jonah inside the “whale’s” (translation sea monster’s) mouth aside a nice burning bush.

The ancient, well known, often utilized, and certainly well established Truth is that the more ridiculous an allegory or other moral story is portrayed, the more easily it is remembered. If you’ve ever bought one of those memory courses from a television infomercial as I did when I was a very young lad, you’ll find the same exact lesson on how ridiculousness supercharges the memory, complete with instructions on how to imagine the utmost ridiculous connections to different images in your head in order to remember a list of 100, or even 1,000 words. The stranger the image or description and correlation of those words in order, the more memorable that list becomes. Indeed, in trying to memorize cold a list of irrelevant words, I could not, my mind able to recite merely a few, out of order, and without coherent purpose. But when I applied the rules of ridiculousness, that is, when I followed the instructions and correlated the words as a continuous, absolutely absurd set of details in a story of my own imagination,  I was amazingly able to remember lists of 100 or more words, in order, by simply connecting each word as instructed. For example, if the first word is elephant and the second word is umbrella, I was instructed to imagine the most silly looking of elephants, complete with concerned expression and a polka-dotted leotard, that is holding an umbrella. And if the third word was then turtle, then I would imagine the elephant in the ridiculous leotard holding the umbrella up against falling turtles, themselves having something odd about them. If the forth word was water, then I would imagine the turtles doing an awesome 360 flip and while diving into the ocean, or if it were sunglasses, then of course the turtles would be sporting some shades. And so it went, word after totally unrelated word, placed by my mind into the most ridiculous of loosely linked, situational absurdities. And sure enough, as I pictured these things in my mind, I was able to spout off that list of words with hardly any effort at all, because who could resist that silly elephant holding an umbrella so as not to get hit by the falling turtles that were diving into the ocean with sunglasses, etc. etc.

When I consider all the True life stories I’ve heard over the years, as I am sure the reader would agree, again I find that I remember the most outlandish, ridiculous, or even most violent ones most often. I find myself telling stories about these events, and usually I do so because of their ridiculousness, their humor, or their horror. Comedians make whole stand-up routines based on such ridiculous stories, turning them into jokes that may or may not be true… but they sure are memorable. And of course we remember certain jokes because they are funny, and they are funny because they are absurd or even impossible in Nature. Perhaps they are embarrassing, or they remind us of something close to home or a personal experience. Whatever the case, we are wired to remember the most bizarre shit. We remember the harshness of violence, experiencing post traumatic stress, as another example. If I were to ask anyone where they were on 9/11/2001, they could probably tell me in detail, simply because what they really remember is a link between the out-of-place absurdity of watching the World Trade Centers burning and falling on television, because such an absurdity was in the background on every television screen, everywhere, making whatever one was doing that day stand out. In fact, when prompted to speak about that horrific event, many of us specifically reference whatever mundane task we were preforming and whatever usual place we were lingering. But if I were to ask anyone where they were three days before their 27th birthday, they most likely would have no clue. Why? No association. No correlation. No event to remember. No story to tell. Whatever stands out about the event, the story, the happenstance, and specifically the ridiculousness of the situation, the more memorable it is. It’s like a filter in the mind, where the details of what is considered as normal or routine are lost in the shuffle, but where learnable or unique moments shine through, teaching and preparing us for the future. After all, there’s a psychological reason why shock-jocks are so unwittingly popular and why news outlets have “breaking news” and cover certain stories for weeks at a time, 24 hours a day.

Entertainments are the same way. The more scary, the more ridiculous, the more fantastical, the more memorable they are. For how can one explain what does not exist, say in science fiction or fantasy, without a deep impression of that non-existent thing to the point of being able to picture it in ones mind? Yet most of us (I hope) can still distinguish between reality and fantasy. In other words, after seeing a fictional movie, we do not believe in those false, computer-enhanced images as what is actually real or as history. That would be Idolatry. And, I’m sorry and happy to say, religions are no exception to this rule.

Why are all the stories of the gods of all the cultures so ridiculous? Why are the gods tyrannical, manipulative monsters with multiple heads or some other superpower or supernatural attribute? From Zeus to the Babylonian creation story, these tales are physically, scientifically, and logically impossible to believe. Yet we remember them, don’t we? Many insist they are to be taken as literally True, as the Word of God, ironically and in idolatry assigning supernatural qualities to the God of Nature, while completely loosing the moral teaching intended through that ridiculousness. And I agree, they are the Word of God (Truth)… but only if you are taking them as the metaphor and moral story they are meant to be understood as. They are mythical because myth is memorable. All civilizations, all countries and nations, all religions, are built upon their own ridiculous myths about those that founded or formed them. Without the mythology of the founding fathers, there would be no purpose behind the United States, and certainly no reason to support what it has morphed into in modern times — a simulacra (a copy having nothing to do with its original) desperately promoting that patriot mythology as its reason for its post-modern existence. If Zeus was a librarian that had no authority, that shuffled books around all day without any other adventure or purpose, what could we possibly learn as his moral story? What would be memorable about his godliness?

The problem is that, while we remember the story, we often don’t remember or were never taught the point behind the ridiculous, impossible-to-be-True story. We are never told the moral lesson of the allegory. And so we take it literally, which in our minds causes the story to become historical “fact” instead of learning from the story (pretended history). We mistake facts with Truths. For instance, it is a fact that Han Solo and Chewbacca are ship-mates. But did you know it’s a fact that they are also lifelong friends? These are facts, in fiction. But they are not Truths. They are not the Word of God. There are many facts used to tell the story of the Law, that is, of the Word of God. Yet the Word (moral Law) is often lost behind belief in the facts, which aren’t Truths, only tools to cause Truth to shine. And often those facts are ridiculous, causing memory association. But as the Bible quote above suggests, the fool may not discern spiritual Truths because the fool is too busy trying to prove or disprove the facts, trying to prove the history instead of learning from it. It is foolish to believe that the purpose of the stories (mythos) of any history is to establish fact. Only the elite do this, and only to prove their power positions over the common people. These historical facts are institutional lies that justify completely unjustifiable rulers, which would have no purpose or reason behind their otherwise totally illegitimate rule if it weren’t for the established, embellished, generally bullshit historical fact they force us to learn in their public schools and institutions. And the only reason we fall for these so-called histories is because we forget their purpose their reason, their intention. We take them as literal instead of make-believe. We allow the most ridiculous events, like 9-11, to be used as historical facts in their justification for completely immoral, illegitimate, tyrannical laws to be passed against us. And we consider those laws somehow as truths instead of the prima facie (on their face) facts they actually are. We consider what is totally avoidable as that which is unavoidable, simply because we are tricked by their supposed factual history of inventions instead of learning from them. We don’t emulate the founding fathers in their dissent from the king, we treat them as gods, as the reason why their great grandchildren continue to rule the illegitimate United States corporation, which didn’t even exist until after those founding fathers (gods) were dead. In other words, prima facie means that these legal terms and laws are all facts as long as nobody questions their legitimacy, which is the description of every government. Corrupt men that seek power all have this trait in common — they turn the moral lessons meant to be learned by the retelling of history into the evidence of why they should be rulers. They turn myth into fact, and force it to be labeled and considered by fools as Truth.

Judging by the amount of narcissism taking place nowadays, I’d say the point of the story of Narcissus has been lost, for example. Perhaps they’ll name a cell phone camera model or selfie app after that unfortunate character of mythology? Or perhaps the story of the modern Narcissist must be rewritten to reflect the idiotic “accidents” taking place so often, as people walk off of cliffs while filming themselves doing so, even as they fall to their death on the craggy rocks below. Perhaps the myth of the Lemmings may need to be rewritten for these post-modern times, where those cute, cuddly creatures walk off the cliff with cell phones in their paws?

We may watch and enjoy movies like Clash of the Titans or Lord of the Rings without coming away from the story with its actual purpose for being told — the moral lesson. Unfortunately, the story of Jesus Christ and his death and resurrection are no different. When taken literally, as a purely historical event, the point of christ’s death is completely lost. It serves no purpose. It becomes an excuse instead of a cause. The moral takeaway and lesson of the life and death of Christ today for most “Christians” is just about as dead as that of the Greek gods.

In this study, I’d like to show you the exact place in the Bible where the spiritual, moral reason behind this story of Christ is explained. But first we have to understand what was the Babylonian, Mosaic tradition of animal and human sacrifice before the Christ (New Law) became the metaphoric, spiritual replacement for the literal sacrificial lamb.

PASCHAL – adjective – [Latin pascha.] Pertaining to the passover, or to Easter. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English language, 1828)

PASSOVER – noun – [pass and over.] A feast of the Jews, instituted to commemorate the providential escape of the Hebrews, in Egypt, when God smiting the first-born of the Egyptians, passed over the houses of the Israelites, which were marked with the blood of the paschal lamb. 1. The sacrifice offered at the feast of the passover. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English language, 1828)

EASTER – noun – A festival of the christian church observed in commemoration of our Savior’s resurrection. It answers to the pascha or passover of the Hebrews, and most nations still give it this name, pascha, pask, paque. (–Webster’s Dictionary of the English language, 1828)

–=–

Think these are the same holidays? Have you been told that Easter and Passover are similar in their celebrative purpose? It’s a lie. Don’t believe it. The story of Easter is designed to replace the Babylonian (i.e. Jewish) story of Passover just as the New Testament is meant to replace the Old. In other words, the sacrifice of the “Son of God” is designed to replace the sacrifice of animals to the Babylonian gods. The New Testament is designed not to eliminate but to fulfill the Old.

–=–

“Ever since the New Testament, the paschal lamb has been interpreted as prefiguring Jesus. In subsequent centuries, Church Fathers and later clergy taught that Jesus was the lamb of God, the new Passover sacrificeThe Christian who is quoted or paraphrased in Sefer Nitztzahon Yashan makes the curious argument: the difficulty of offering any rational reason for the details of the paschal sacrifice in Exodus 12 provesthat the text requires an allegorical explanation, and it must be an allegory about Jesus. This seems to have led Jews to work harder to prove that, on the literal level, the rules were meaningful, not arbitrary… Modern biblical scholars also struggle with the meaning of the ritual and the significance of these details, typically using anthropological tools to understand it, and suggesting that most of these rituals did not originate with a historical first Passover… Such is the nature of allegorical explanations. Christians claimed that the allegory was about Jesus, but there was nothing to stop another allegorist from giving a totally different explanation, in this case, that it was about the Jewish people as a whole.”

–Prof. Rabbi Martin Lockshin, excerpted from ‘Searching for the Meaning of the Passover Sacrifice, The need for medieval exegetes to suggest a plausible alternative to the Christian exegesis of this ritual’

–=–

The problem? Here we have an allegory trying desperately to be proven as a history. Happens all the time. Again, the fool completely misses the spiritual lesson, because to the fool, the spiritual lesson is foolishness, and the spiritual coldness and irrelevance of history and scientific proofs are paramount.

Now, before you get all bent out of shape because of some pseudo-religious belief that the modern conceptualization of “science” as the new, replacement-for-Christ savior of men is the holy grail of the atheist (fool) and the logician, hold your horses just a moment and think about what I’m saying here. Because this question is a very reasonable one that can easily and even scientifically be answered: can science be applied to the Bible? In other words, can science discern the moral value and intent from an allegorical story or mythological history? Can science be used to prove or disprove an allegory, a metaphor, an aphorism, a moral equivalent, or a mythology? Of course it can’t. What a fool one must be to attempt to apply science to a book of moral stories and inherent Laws intended as that which is not even in the realm of scientific observation! Shall we use science to examine whether or not Little Miss Muffet truly sat on a Tuffet, searching desperately through historical ruins to prove said tuffet and the girl that sat on it actually existed? Shall we merely take at its word the story of Mary and her supposedly little lamb and that its fleece was apparently white as snow? Was Wilber really “Some Pig” as Charlotte the Black Widow claims him to be, or was he just another side of bacon waiting to happen? You must understand that this is not a pro- or anti- science argument, but rather just a case where science isn’t even part of the topic. It simply isn’t necessary or relevant to the purpose and intent of the Bible as a moral teaching tool to invoke scientific methods. Spirituality and moral behavior is not a scientific subject. And it’s utterly ridiculous to attempt to try and prove or disprove the Bible’s allegorical, metaphorical nature with the tools of science. Perhaps the fact that this idea is so ridiculous is why it has caught on with such fervor among non-thinking fools. Yet one must ask such a purveyor of scientific proofs for allegorical stories this question: which is more ridiculous and unscientific, the Bible stories themselves, or trying to prove or disprove those moral stories with science? LOL! Why would anyone attempt to bring science into a moral discussion? Unless, perhaps, one wishes to purposefully confuse the very intent and purpose of the Bible’s allegorical mythos and moral lessons with some “factual” or “scientifically provable” history (an oxymoron) that never actually happened so as to justify whatever it is they call themselves… kings, priests, popes, magistrates, judges, jews, Christians, or just good old false gods?

The moral of this story is that morals cannot be proven by science. They are not of the same realm. That is to say that spiritual thought and action are not and cannot be scientifically justified. Inversely, there is no spirituality in science, for True science seeks only to understand Nature Itself, not decipher its spiritual meaning. Attempting to apply science to the Bible is like applying spiritual morals to a spiritless machine. It just doesn’t work. Yet, it certainly works to confuse and confound most people from understanding the Bible. In that way, science may very well, in the end, triumph over the minds of men and destroy our collective spirit.

You see, If the bible can be made into an artificially “factual” history (fact) instead of an allegory (moral Truth) in the minds of Christians… oh, wait, that’s already happened. That’s the purpose of legal corporations that in their corporate charters call themselves by differing, anti-Biblical, empty, denominational religious names. And each one has a history of its own. The Methodists have their founding father, John Wesley. The Catholics have their replacement (anti) God and vicar of christ, the Pope. The 7th Day Adventists have their very recent history of Ellen White and John Nevins Andrews, their own founding fathers. The Baptists founding father in Amsterdam was John Smyth, with John Clark or Roger Williams in America. Mormons have their bizarre history and replacement Christ in Joseph Smith, while scientology was apparently invented by L. Ron Hubbard, a science fiction author, after he made a bet between fellow high profile sci-fi writers over a poker game that Hubbard could not start a new, successful religion of his own. All religions have their histories, that is, their “facts” that are used to justify their own false, corporate doctrines. Nevermind the repeated warnings of the Bible that we should call no man as “father” nor take any other doctrine (law) but that of the Bible.

And that brings us back to the allegory of the passover…

Let us be clear that this so-called Jewish holiday, that of the celebration of the “pass-over” or paschal (lamb) sacrifice, was not the physical, literal killing or slaughtering of all the first born human sons and animals. That’s too ridiculous even for the Bible. But the consideration of it, that of the killing of children, was a powerful metaphorical conception that certainly did represent the taking away of the right of what is called primogeniture. This concept of law is not a physical attribute but a status, otherwise known in law as being the firstborn. And so we can quite fully understand the purpose of this allegory of the passover by simply understanding manmade law of the time, and therefore the purpose of putting to metaphoric death that spiritual status, that is, a right of succession.

PRIMOGENETUREnoun – 1. The state of being the firstborn child‘Maui and Tahaki are famous mythological heroes in Polynesia and they have more powerful manas than their elder brothers, though they are not the primogenitures.’ After the sin the primogenitures lost their privilege of serving in the Holy Temple and it was given to the Levites, who had abstained from the sin.’ 1.1 The right of succession belonging to the firstborn child, especially the feudal rule by which the whole real estate of an intestate passed to the eldest son(–Oxford Lexico.com Dictionary online)

PRIMOGENETURE – A historical term that refers to the rights and responsibilities of the first-born child among siblings in a family. When used in the legal sense, the term is used to discuss the right of the eldest son in the family to inherit his parents’ estate upon their death. The initial purpose of determining primogeniture was to keep an estate from being divided among siblings. When this was done, a parcel of land would continue to get smaller and smaller, which reduced the value of the overall property. To explore this concept, consider the following primogeniture definition.”

PRIMOGENETURE – (noun) – The state of being the firstborn child in the family. The system of inheritance or succession of the firstborn child, especially the eldest son

PRIMOGENETURE LAW – Primogeniture law historically determined that the first-born son among all of a couple’s children would inherit his parents’ entire estate upon their deaths. The purpose of this was so that the parcel of land would not end up being so subdivided that the value of each individual parcel would plummet. The term “primogeniture” was implied to refer to male children. If there were no male heirs, then primogeniture law determined that the property would be divided up among the daughters in equal shares. Primogeniture law actually hails from feudal England, and does not exist in the United States. (–Legal dictionary online, at https://legaldictionary.net)

–=–

Perhaps it slipped your mind that there happened to be no female children smitten by God (Jehovah) on that day of passover? Now, allegorically and legally, you know why. They simply were not male, and so not considered by law as “firstborn” and therefore had no right of primogeniture to put to figurative death. Disclaimer: No female children were harmed during the making of this allegory. This is what you might call as a big tell…

–=–

“And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD (Jehovah) smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.” (–Exodus 12:29, KJB).
–=–

Only the “firstborn” (primogeniture) were “smote” by Jehovah. In other words, the right of succession to God’s Kingdom was allegorically usurped. This, by law and custom, and therefore by default, necessarily did not include any female children, which were never considered as firstborn. Again, it was the status of inheritable blood that was made figuratively dead, not the actual life of the child. Yet the blood-right remained (was saved) with the children of the Israelites, who escaped the “destroyer” of the “firstborn,” this word destroyer being a translation of the word shachath, which specifically means “moral corruption, rot, ruin, spoliation, perversion, or to be marred or marked (by evil/immorality).”” Yes, the destroyer (of spirituality and Truth) put to death all the “firstborn” male children (heirs), but this was a figurative, spiritual death, not a literal, physical one.

It is also very important not to confuse the “Jews” with the Israelites. These terms are not the same. The Israelites were men that followed the Law of God, that is, the Christ (Logos) as Law. The Jews (יְהוּדִי – Yĕhuwdiy; or Ἰουδαῖος, Ioudaios), were specifically defined as:

“The apostle John, inasmuch as agreeably to the state of things in his day he looked upon the Jews as a body of men hostile to Christianity, with whom he had come to see that both he and all true Christians had nothing in common as respects religious matters, even in his record of the life of Jesus not only himself makes a distinction between the Jews and Jesus, but ascribes to Jesus and his apostles language in which they distinguish themselves from the Jews, as though the latter sprang from an alien race: John 11:8; John 13:33. And those who (not only at Jerusalem, but also in Galilee, cf. John 6:41, 52) opposed his divine Master and his Master’s causeespecially the rulers, priests, members of the Sanhedrin, Pharisees — he does not hesitate to style οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, since the hatred of these leaders exhibits the hatred of the whole nation toward Jesus: John 1:19; John 2:18, 20; John 5:10, 15ff,John 5:18; John 6:41,52; 7:1,11,13; 9:18,22; 10:24,31,33; 18:14.” (–Strong’s Concordance #G2453 entry, quoting THAYER’S GREEK LEXICON)

–=–

Hmm… sounds a lot like secular Israel and the worldwide, mostly atheistic jews (Ἰουδαῖοιof today, despite their masterful infiltration and blinding of Christian churches throughout the world.

Oh, but surely Christians and Jews can live together in harmony under the same Law, right? A Christian-Jewish Alliance? Forget the Bible, you’re racist if you don’t think so. That’s scientifically proven by the propaganda arm of the ADL!

As the Exodus story explains, it was the status of being firstborn (primogeniture), a legally recognized and spiritually induced (blood-right) status, that was in title only taken away from the Egyptians, including even Pharaoh’s own firstborn son (heir), whereas the firstborn of the Israelites (not jews) had their God-given rights preserved. God (Jehovah) figuratively passed over them in his taking away of the right of inheritance to God’s Kingdom, for they were not followers of the Law of Nature (God), that is, they did not respect the metaphoric lamb of God (Jesus Christ/Logos). But to understand this story the metaphor must be applied. Remember, this is not Clint’s opinion, this is defined straight out of the concordances and lexicons for the Bible. And this is just one of many hundreds of examples of the term death being used figuratively, meaning spiritual death, and signifying a loss of inheritance and access to God’s Law to defeat man’s.

All in all, the event is not even a religious one. In other words, it has nothing to do with religion, but is strictly an allegorical understanding of the law of inheritance and status as it applies to the Law of Nature (Christ).

The Egyptians and the Jews were, of course, idolators. They worshiped the false (untrue, unnatural), Babylonian gods. In other words, they did not worship and obey Truth (Nature) and Its Law. And so their horrific sacrifices were also made to idols (false gods).

Idol – Strong’s #G1497 – eidōlon

εἴδωλον, εἰδώλου, τό (εἶδος (cf. Winers Grammar, 96 (91); Etym. Magn. 296, 9)), in Greek writings from Homer down, an image, likeness, i. e. whatever represents the form of an object, either real or imaginary; used of the shades of the departed (in Homer), of apparitions, spectres, phantoms of the mind, etc.; in Biblical writings (an idol, i. e.):

1. the image of a heathen god: Acts 7:41; 1 Corinthians 12:2; Revelation 9:20 (Isaiah 30:22; 2 Chronicles 23:17, etc.; θεῶν ἤ δαιμον´ων εἴδωλα, Polybius 31, 3, 13);

2. a false god: Acts 15:20 (on which see ἀλίσγημα); Romans 2:22; 1 Corinthians 8:4, 7; 1 Corinthians 10:19; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Thessalonians 1:9 (often in the Sept.); φυλάσσειν ἑαυτόν ἀπό τῶν εἰδώλων, to guard oneself from all manner of fellowship with heathen worship, (1 John 5:21).

–=–

Take the partaking (artificial sacrifice) of those little, corporately mass-produced, shitty-tasting little wafers and processed (unnatural), corporately manufactured grape (artificial) juice in church as a pretended “flesh” eating and “blood” drinking. What ever might the Bible say about that?

–=–

As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol (G1497is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one… Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol (G1497) unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.”

—1 Corinthians 8: 4,7, KJB

–=–

“And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

—1 Corinthians 10: 2-4

–=–

Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.”

—Hebrews 13: 9, KJB

–=–

Not only does the New Law of God (Christ) state not to worship or sacrifice idols, it also tells you that your meats should be spiritual, not worldly. And, of course, we find here one of many warnings not to follow strange doctrines, which basically is a reference to all modern, so-called “Christian” religions (worldly, secular corporations) and their useless, worldly ceremonies and rituals. The Bible is clear never to worship God in any of man’s false traditions, or in other words, never worship or pray to God through any artificial (manmade) invention.

Astoundingly, due to the stark ignorance of today’s populations in all nations, the planned reinvention and construction of the idol of the “Third Temple” reinvoking the Old, Babylonian law is under way. Here we find again blatant, and in my opinion purposeful, willful ignorance of the metaphoric, allegoric nature of the Biblical stories of the first two temples therein. This third temple can, according to the Bible, only stand and represent idolatry at its worst. Over and over we read that God’s Kingdom is not found in anything built by the hands of men. God’s Realm is Creation, not the resourced recreation of men. Therefore, any temple or other corporate church building is an idol, and every religion is necessarily a false, reinvented doctrine designed and incorporated (made legal under man’s false law) to misalign and replace God’s Law (doctrine) as told in Biblical allegory. The True Christian has no religion but that of unwaveringly following the example of Jesus Christ without artifice, s the personification of Logos (the Law of the Universe). And that just doesn’t include anything built by the hands (or minds) of men. For the Law of Nature, the Law of God, is self-Evident, self-Existent, as all of Nature and the Universe is, not an invention of man.

But in modern, Zionist-Jewish thought, from one Rabbi HaRav Avraham Yitzchak HaCohen Kook, the First Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi of Israel, revered and famed Torah sage, philosopher, writer, poet, iconic and beloved leader of religious Zionism and the return to Zion (1865-1935), is as expected completely foreign and opposed to Christ (God’s Law of Nature), using logical fallacy to promote pointless animal slaughter as idol sacrifice:

Will There be Sacrifices in the Third Temple?

Rav Kook’s views on the Temple service are sometimes misconstrued. A superficial reading of a passage in Olat Re’iyah (vol. I, p. 292) indicates that only grain offerings will be offered in the reinstated Temple service. To properly understand Rav Kook’s approach, it is necessary to read a related essay from Otzarot HaRe’iyah.]

What will the rebuilt Temple be like? Will we really offer animal sacrifices once again?

Protecting Animals

Some people object to the idea of sacrifices out of concern for the welfare of animals. However, this objection contains a measure of hypocrisy. Why should compassion for animals only be expressed with regard to humanity’s spiritual needs? If our opposition to animal slaughter is based not on weakness of character, but on recognition of the issue’s fundamental morality, then our first step should be to outlaw the killing of animals for food, clothing, and other material benefits.

In the world’s present state, the human race is weak, both physically and morally. The hour to protect animal life has not yet arrived. We still need to slaughter animals for our physical needs, and human morality requires that we maintain clear boundaries to distinguish between the relative value of human and animal life.

At this point in time, to advocate the protection of animals in our service of God is disingenuous. Is it moral to permit cruelty towards animals for our physical needs, yet forbid their use for our spiritual service, in sincere recognition and gratitude for God’s kindness? If our dedication and love for God can be expressed – at its highest level – with our willingness to surrender our own lives and die al kiddush Hashem, sanctifying God’s name, then certainly we should be willing to forgo the life of animals for this sublime goal…

Hints to the Future

Even in the current reality, we may feel uncomfortable about killing animals. This does not mean that the time for full animal rights has already arrived. Rather, these feelings come from a hidden anticipation of the future that is already ingrained in our souls, like many other spiritual aspirations.

Hints of these future changes may be found in the text of the Torah itself. Thus, it says that offerings are slaughtered on the northern side of the altar. Why this side? The north traditionally represents that which is incomplete and lacking, as it is written, “Out of the north, the evil shall break forth” (Jeremiah 1:14). In other words, the need to slaughter animals is a temporary concession to life in an incomplete world.

Furthermore, the Torah stipulates that sacrifices must be slaughtered “lirtzonchem” – “willingly”(Lev. 19:5). The Temple service must correspond to our needs and wants. As the Talmud in Erchin21a explains, one must be able to say, “I want to bring this offering.” When the slaughter of animals is no longer generally acceptable to society, this condition will not be fulfilled.

Finally, the Torah describes a person offering an animal sacrifice as “adam” (Lev. 1:2). This word indicates our current state of moral decline, a result of the unresolved sin of Adam, the first man. An individual offering a grain offering, on the other hand, is called “nefesh,” or “soul” (Lev. 2:1). The word nefesh implies a deeper, more essential level of humanity, independent of any temporary failings.

(Excerpt from: Arutz Sheva 7, IsraelNationalNews.com – quoting from Gold from the Land of Israel pp. 173-176. Adapted from Otzarot HaRe’iyah, vol. II, pp. 101-103; Olat Re’iyah vol. I, p. 292, sent to Arutz Sheva by Rabbi Chanan Morrison, RavKookTorah.org)

–=–

Read that again, would ya?

This blatant, temple-based return to the idolatry of the Babylonian, Mosaic Old Law should be a frightening nightmare to any moral man, yet we find the entirety of the so-called “Christian” religions brainwashed to be in praise and service to this Biblically defined, anti-Christ brood. This is the ultimate in antichrist rhetoric and action. This is literally the undoing of the allegory and purpose of the Christ story. This is the killing of Jesus Christ, in other words, the destruction of the New Testament Law (Law of Nature) and the reinstatement of the Old, secular Babylonian law. To be antichrist is to be against God’s Law, the New Testament, as exemplified by the allegory (example) of Christ. This is the very definition of the biblical word Jew, as we read above. It’s what all Christians should expect from Jews, again, as defined in the Bible. It’s their reason for existence, to defeat what they call openly as the false savior, Jesus Christ (New Law). This has nothing to do with race, or opinion, and everything to do with moral, spiritual consciousness toward Jehovah (Nature), that is, God’s Creation and Its Law.

And so we come, in the Bible, to where the reasoning behind this turning point from the law of men under Babylon and its false gods to the Law of Nature is explained, as the emergence of the New Law (Testament) based on the allegory of Jesus Christ. The purpose behind the Christ allegory, that is, the personification (story) of Jesus Christ as a man following the Law of Nature (Jehovah), was quite eloquently authored to replace the Babylonian hell of these idolators and their bloody, sacrificial rituals to false gods. This was made quite clear in the 9th chapter of Hebrews:

Heb 9:1 – Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

Heb 9:2 – For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.

Heb 9:3 – And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; (Author’s note: see here that a building made by the hands of men is called the Holiest of all instead of that which is God or a Creation of God’s Nature. In other words, these temples were sanctuaries against Jehovah/Nature, not in support of It.)

Heb 9:4 – Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

Heb 9:5 – And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercy seat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.

Heb 9:6 – Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.

Heb 9:7 – But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

Heb 9:8 – The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

Heb 9:9 – Which was a figure (idol) for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;

Heb 9:10 – Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Heb 9:11 – But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building (idol);

Heb 9:12 – Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Heb 9:13 – For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

Heb 9:14 – How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Heb 9:15 – And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Heb 9:16 – For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

Heb 9:17 – For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Heb 9:18 – Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

Heb 9:19 – For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

Heb 9:20 – Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

Heb 9:21 – Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.

Heb 9:22 – And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

Heb 9:23 – It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Heb 9:24 – For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures (idols) of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

Heb 9:25 – Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

Heb 9:26 – For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Heb 9:27 – And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Heb 9:28 – So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

–=–

The point? Worshiping God through idols was ceased, where Jesus Christ (personification and example of Logos) replaced those idols. We are called in the New Testament not to worship Jesus Christ as God or as an idol, but to become Christlike in our actions under Gods Law so as to worship Jehovah. Instead of sacrificing idols to God, we are to be the sacrifice ourselves, sacrificing (crucifying) all worldly things so as to live spiritually, in the Realm of God’s Nature and under Its Law. We are to become the sons of God by following the example. In this way, the sacrifice is Real, not made in idolatry, or in other words, we act on and under the Law of God (Nature) instead of just using idols as an excuse not to follow that Law. In essence, what this is saying is that a man cannot make his sins disappear in some mock, ceremonial atonement, by killing , mutilating, and bleeding dry some poor defenseless animal that is part of God’s Creation, for this pointless, purposeless murder of an innocent beast is certainly a sin in and of itself. It makes about as much sense as hunting elephants and giraffes for sport. You cannot cleanse your own blood of its sin by taking that of another, completely innocent beast. No, it is you that must stop acting like a beast, sacrificing from your spiritual Life that which is of the world of the flesh, the world of men (i.e. secularism, legalism). Instead of slaying innocent beasts as the Babylonian false gods demanded, man must follow the example of Christ (the Law of Nature personified) in order to rectify ones own sin — to be reborn from the realm of man’s law into the realm of God’s Law, in order to go back to Nature (God). In other words, this means that the legal person, the respect of fiction and the law that governs fiction, the lies, must die (metaphorically), so that the spiritual man may emerge without legal ties (false law) that prevent a man from acting under God’s Law. One cannot be saved from the trappings of false religion and worldly afflictions through useless killing in idolatry. It is our blood that must be spiritually purified. Thus, the Christ allegory is a guidepost allowing all men to return from the Babylonian woe, from Jewish (antichrist) influence, back to the very Nature we are born originally into. We that shed what the Bible refers to as sin can only do so by following the Law of Nature (Logos). For sin is just a general term meaning artifice, lies, fictions, idolatry, and self-deceit. SYN. That which is synthetic, not of Nature, not of God’s Realm or under Its’ Law.

So let’s put these pieces together here…

The Bible Law (i.e. common law of blood-right) says that in order for a testament to be valid, its testator (author) must be dead. No death, no inheritance. So one must ask oneself, how does an undying, “Living God” (Jehovah), defined as the entirety of Existence, the Universe and Nature Itself in Supreme Being (the verb Being, as Existence Itself), construct such a testament and still remain the eternal, never-ending, Living God? Here we may better understand the purpose behind the allegory of the Son (testator) of God, or He that was allegorically sent to die for our sins, in order that the New Testament (New Law of God) might be left to all men through death, a requirement of the law of the testator. This is figuratively the exact story played out in the maxims of law. In other words, this is an allegorical representation of what all men must suffer; namely, to be reborn from civil (legal) death in exchange for spiritual (True) Life under God, under the Law of Nature (Jehovah), personified in the story (allegory) of Christ. And yet it is so clearly written here that this True Life of substance without idolatry and empty sacrifice cannot be attained by merely participating in religious ceremonies and false sacrificial “communions” of eating meats (defined scripturally as any foodstuffs, literal or figurative) to false idols. This ceremonial custom of animal sacrifice, in fact, is surprisingly, completely against scripture, as we can read above. Just as you can’t squeeze blood from a turnip, as the saying goes, you certainly cannot squeeze the spiritual (figurative) blood of christ (atonement/forgiveness of sins) out of a communion wafer or other idol, and especially not from one of God’s own innocent Creatures. And no, grape juice is not a substitute for the works of, in, and under the blood of christ (Logos – God’s Law personified).

While the current false doctrines of corporate, religious gobbledygook and the ceremonial nonsense it promotes is enough to drive men away from such spiritually sound principles as the notion of the True meaning and intent behind the “blood of christ” and the reason for this story of the ultimate sacrifice by God — that a testament necessarily means the death of its testator — we may understand that the never-ending, never-changing God (Jehovah) cannot die lest we all figuratively die with It, waking up to our True, spiritual Nature. Therefore, the Son of God must be sacrificed, so that the Law (Will) of God may be testified and transferred to us. But in order to inherit this set of principles, we must become the sons of God ourselves. Jesus Christ is our example of how to do this, by following the Law of God. As Its sons, we become the spiritual, figurative primogeniture of God’s Kingdom (Nature). If you try and take this as literal, you will never understand It nor find yourself in It. You must reach deep down and find what is lost, that is, the ability to Love and cherish such moral stories and allegories for what they are intended to give you, learning from them as intended, and then acting accordingly. Poetry is, it turns out, for Real men. In other words, man may now Live Truly under this New Testament of Law, by the Will of Jehovah, by following in the sacrificial (metaphoric) blood of christ as a brotherhood of God’s sons. And what is so beautiful about this concept is that it literally requires nothing. No thing. No persons, places, or things (nouns/names). It is the negative Law, the Law of Truth, and Truth has no name (noun). It is the realm of God, of Nature, of that which is unblemished by the names and titles and defects and marks and fictional rights of man’s law and custom. He that is of God is the lesser part of God. Yet he who falls from such Grace is still of the Greater Good (God), the Higher Whole, but is tricked into allowing (consenting) that which is lesser in Law to overtake him. For the Greater always contains the lesser, just as the principal always contains the agent, the truster the trustee, the employer the employee, and so on. Hierarchically speaking, the power and Glory and Grace of that which is of Jehovah never loses its power or its Law, for the Law of Nature reigns supreme at all times, knowing that without it no Existence of any kind, Real or artificial, would Exist, as all self-Existence is literally Jehovah defined. All other forms of so-called “existence” are artificial, or that which is a re-creation of man. Thus, the foundational, scripture-based maxims of law spell out and follow exactly what one would expect.

But there is a problem. For the scriptures, after so much shared wisdom and warning with regards to the trickery of men and the simple instructions given from the perspective of being in Grace in recognizing everything that is false and of the father of lies (i.e. the re-creations of man influenced by devilish, adversarial intentions), also give us the free will to go against the Will of God, to break the Law and Covenant. The willing fool has no place in God’s Realm and has no access to God’s Law. He that should worship and express joy by the deceits and trickery of the lies of mans’ artifice, enjoining himself to that which is below him in persona (mask) and flattering title (idol), shall then be under the law of that which is lower than him, representing spiritual death, as the inability to govern ones own actions under God’s Law. So says the Bible — and thus the foundational maxims of law agree.

Many of the Highest maxims of law are simply constructs stripped from the Bible. This should be of no surprise when one understands that the Bible (as the unwritten, moral Law) is the foundation of the common law, and that, therefore, the unwritten was copied unto the written (Roman) law for the purposes of opposition. In other words, the unwritten, moral law must be recognized in order for the written, immoral law to have purpose, otherwise there is no reason for man’s law. Without recognition of Christ (God’s Law/Logos) there is no need or use for anything anti-christ. There is no left without right, no up without down, no light without darkness, no evil without good. To understand this, one must understand that God’s Law is neutral, whereas the Law of Rome is strict and sanctioned (punishable). By neutrality I mean that God’s Law is the Law of Nature, as is an inevitable Act of God, meaning the Act had nothing to do with man’s designs, inventions, or interference. It just Is. It Exists with or without man’s presence. A lightening strike causing a fire is an Act of God. It is a neutral event in Nature, and only a fool would believe it to be targeted at anything or sent for the purposes of some man’s judgement. What arrogance, conceit, and outright idiocy must it take for any man to believe that the power of the Universe (God) can or should be directed at any other man, or upon oneself. Yes, I will certainly concede that the idiot that ignorantly walks into a lightening storm without the fear of the Universe (God’s Nature and Law) increases his chances of being judged for his stupidity, if you will. But the purpose of that discharge of energy we call as lightening has for its purpose nothing to do with any man or any other object it connects with. If man didn’t exist, lightening would still strike wherever Nature’s Design warranted it. And so it is with the notion of God’s Judgment. When the Law of God, the Law of Nature, and the Laws of Nature are broken, then it is only reasonable to conclude that some consequence (judgement) will follow, rebalancing the metaphorical scales of Nature’s permanent Design. Poison the drinking well, and the user of that well will be judged (poisoned) for his own sin. Eat unnaturally according to FDA recommendations and be judged with obesity, diabetes, cancer, or other illness. This is a neutral, or rather a causality effect, not a religious one. We reap what we sow, and most of the time we deserve the fate we create for ourselves.

The deceits promulgated by the church and state are seemingly insurmountable at times, just as the perceived need of money, the root fo all evil, is certainly the great destroyer of our time. To be deceived is a choice, and the Bible allows all men to be deceived if they choose to be. Free will… And, of course, the legal law of men depends upon deceit. Without deceit, there would be no nations, no governments, and no false gods heading those governments. The maxims of man’s law repeatedly tell us that he who seeks to be deceived cannot then complain about being deceived when he acts voluntarily in that deceit. Deceit is made legal by governments of the legal (artificial) realm, by contract, and specifically by voluntary participation in that deceitful practice. Contracts are the strings that control the puppet, which is why the Bible forbids them. For a contract is always between legal persons and therefore under the law of fictional (legal) persons, not God’s Law. Ignorance of God’s Law is no more an excuse than ignorance of man’s legal law according to its maxims and to the Bible. The difference is plain though, for the Bible warns against such deceits and gives you the Law of God (the allegory of Christ personified) in order to escape them. Thus, God’s Word (Law) is said to be the Armor of God, or in other words, the Shield and Sword of Truth (God). The Truth (God) will set you free, but only if you follow the Law of God (Truth/Nature) exemplified by the allegory of Christ. The legal system wholly depends on self-deceit, on illusion, on trickery, on dissimulation, and on the fact that those that are deceived remain in such a state of decay.

Job 12:16  – With him is strength and wisdom: the deceived and the deceiver are his (the destroyers’).

2Ti 3:13 – But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

Deu 11:16 – Take heed to yourselves, that your heart be not deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them;

Job 15:31 – Let not him that is deceived trust in vanity: for vanity shall be his recompence.

Luk 21:8 – And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.

1Co 6:9-10 – Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

1Co 6:11-12 – And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

1Co 15:33 –  Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.

Gal 6:7 –  Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Rev 18:23 – And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants (corporations) were the great men (artificial persons) of the earth; for by thy sorceries (pharmacopeia) were all nations deceived.

–=–

There is only one Law of Existence, of Nature, of Reality. The word Law is hardly adequate to describe It, for what word can possibly define what is self-Evident? This self-Existent (non-man-made) Order or Design is called as God’s Law, for God Is Reality, Is Truth, Is Nature, and Is All self-Existence — all that is not man-made. This Order of Nature, called as the Law of Nature (God), stands in self-evidence without exception, and is not alterable by men or by the artificial laws invented by men. All other so-called law is man-made, is consensual, voluntary, temporary, meaning that it must be contracted like any disease. And like a disease, man’s law will die without a host, without a volunteer, without victims; but only if you stop respecting it as Real, as part of God’s Nature. It always requires the breaking with the Law of God (Nature). There are no exceptions. There is no other law (doctrine) that does not specifically require one to break the Law of God, for no law of man is a self-evident part of God, that is, of Existence (Truth). No law of man is also a Law of Nature. There is no purpose for any law invented by man except to break the Law of God. There is no permit or license that is not intended to break with the Law of God. There is no legal person, place, or thing (name/noun) that is not intended to exist outside of the Realm and thus Law of God’s Nature. There is no positive invention by man that is not intended to control, harness, deceive, or destroy that which is a negative (already Existing) Creation of God. Man can only create artifice (art), and another word for art is technology. Only when mans creation is in harmony with and designed to protect and serve Nature can it be of the Will and Testament (Law/Word) of God. All of this is self-evident Truth, for the only Truth is God and that which is Created under and in harmony with Its Law. God does not invent, only man does.

The fool may consider such rhetoric to be a form of circular logic (dialectic). And yet no logic of man need be applied to the self-Existence of Godly things (of Nature). The circular notion of false logic is apparent by the flaws of its argument in referential to man-made (artificial) support for its accuracy. No-one can argue that Nature, in any way, is illogical, nor especially unreasonable. Its Design is beyond man’s capability of comprehension by use of the vulgar languages (including mathamatics), as all spiritual things are. What appears to the sophist as a circular logic is the very power of the negative aspect of Nature, which cannot be defeated by any positive (invention of man), unless one consents to that legal (anti-God) “fact” or “invention/design.” But a fact is not a Truth, and no facts need Exist in Nature, for Existence itself is self-evident Truth. Truth (God) needs no positively considered or pretended facts to Exist, and neither therefore does man. And that’s the point! That’s the power of God (Truth) — of being an anonymous part of God and thus part of and under the authority of the only whole and Highest Truth. In a spiritual and yes even circular way, one is protected from all lies when one remains in this circle of Truth, never allowing fiction and lies to break that spiritual circle. As they say, the Truth will set you free. For this circle is Real. It is Reality; the cycle of Nature. It is the realm of those who Live in and by the Grace of God and never accept what man has to offer in contract and thus become bound under the law of contracts (persons). For remember, a contract is only needed for those who seek to break with the Will and Testament (Law) of God, of self-government, of Love, Charity, Trust, Truth, and self-discipline. There are no contracts in Nature, in Love, in Charity, nor especially in Forgiveness. Understand this, and you may then literally and spiritually “under-stand” God’s Law. But if you comprehend it without applying it, you are indeed the very definition of a hypocrite (idolator).

–=–

“A contract founded on a base and unlawful consideration, or against good morals, is null.”

–Contractus ex turpi causa, vel contra bonos mores nullus est.  Hob. 167; Dig. 2, 14, 27, 4.

–=–

“The law never suffers anything contrary to truth. But sometimes it allows a conclusive presumption in opposition to truth.”

–Contra veritatem lex numquam aliquid permittit. ” 2 Co. Inst. 252. 24 See 3 Bouv. Inst. n. 3061.

–=–

“The agreement of the parties overcomes or prevails against the law.” 

–Conventio vincit legem. 2 Story, Ag. § See Dig. 16, 3, 1, 6.

–=–

The foundational maxims of law do not suffer anything that is not of the realm of Truth. But when a man can be tricked and deceived into entering into the legal contracts of the devil (attorneys), then this maxim invoking the power of Truth is bypassed. The law will suffer anything you can be deceived into accepting and volunteering for. For under contract, the Armor of Truth (God) is stripped from every man.

To avoid what is avoidable (man’s inventions and false, legal law) one must consciously avoid it. But once we accept or contract into what is avoidable, namely fraud, what is avoidable becomes unavoidable. This is where most of us stand. We are accepting and participating contractually in fraud (hypocrisy). The contract is valid because we don’t call it what it is. And if we do, if we understand the fraud, none of us are acting morally against it. Words are idols if those words are not acted upon, and so calling something as fraud while still acting in it is idolatry. Thus, we are still volunteering in that which is avoidable, for to nullify an immoral or otherwise unlawful contract under both realms of the law one must act with moral rectitude in opposition and avoidance against it. We are not doing so. The contract is lawful as long as the parties agree to it. And our agreement comes not in the form of words, but in the form of our actions in support of those legal (artificial) words. Contracts are excuses not to act under God’s Law. We act in the fraud, that is, in legal persona, therefore we accept the fraud. We pretended to become the fiction (person/title) and continue to pretend to be it. In other words, we are not following Christ (God’s Law), and are instead accepting the false, legal law (doctrine) of men. The legal system cannot be made null until men stop acting legally within it (against God’s Nature and Law). And most importantly, we cannot worship God nor follow Christ (Law) while acting in a legal persona (mask) that is required as property (status inside) of government to follow the legal, man-made, anti-God, antichrist, false law of men.

This was and is the reason behind the New Law, the New Testament, the allegorical blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Logos). We are part of the story. We were, through and because of the sacrifice of Logos, given cosmic free will. We were given the ability to attempt to break with the Law of Nature in a legal matrix of total self-deceit, though in Reality this is impossible. We were allowed to play the fool. But once we recognize ourselves as the fool, as I have recognized myself to be, it’s this point in our lives that we must either die to the secular world in order to find spiritual Life under God and Its Law, or we will continue, as so many of us are, to live by the deceits of the flesh in self-deceit and in hypocrisy.

If you’ve read this up to this point, then you know right now whether you are a hypocrite like me, or you are a son of God. If you are pretending to be the idol of a “Christian” then you know that such a placed upon yourself as a flattering title is either well-deserved by your actions or is carried in deceit as a false show in idolatry. And finally, you know now that the Bible cannot be dismissed as religious nonsense, and that should you choose to lift yourself out of this voluntary self-deceit that it’s you and only you that has the power to become Christ-like, to make the allegory of Christ become your own True story. You have the Armor. Now you must decide to bear it or throw it off for the sins (untruths) of the secular world.

And if you’re honest with yourself right now, you know the Truth is that you already know the answer, you already know your decision, because you already know the path, and from this point on you are either on that path or you are not. For most of you, including myself, this is what it feels like to Truly be a hypocrite.

Welcome to hell…

.

–Clint richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, August 21st, 2019

 

Advertisements

The Word-Smith Fallacy


Quick rant here…

When one hears an excuse enough times, especially one that is blatantly outrageous in its underlying con-text, it sometimes causes one to boil over with the urge to lash out and utterly destroy the character of the one using the excuse.

In this case, having just heard such a term used for the 100th time at least, I’d like instead to practice my repose and dissect the problem calmly and rationally.

It is often the case that people in their discourse and cognitive dissonance use the term “wordsmith” in a dualistic fashion to defend whatever disposition they find themselves in. This term is used as a single phrase that implies a two-fold meaning, one being the defensive notion that “I am not a wordsmith,” while at the same time offensively inferring that “only a wordsmith would say such things.” In other words, the use of this term singlehandedly stops the conversation and thus the furtherance of knowledge sharing, and at the same time belittles the speaker or writer by creating an ad hominem attack on the character of he who studies and attempts to use words correctly. Amazingly, this seems to be a very popular response when the Reality of things, specifically the artful and alternative legal and metaphorical meaning of words of art, is presented and verified by multiple sources.

And so I am creating an new logical fallacy here, by the name of “The Wordsmith fallacy,” though logic and reason are nowhere to be found in its use.

So let me be perfectly clear while at the same time venting a bit of repressed and pent up aggression when I say this:

IF YOU AREN’T A WORDSMITH THEN YOU ARE FUCKING ILLITERATE!!!

There. I said it. Feels surprisingly liberating, really.

—=—

“Am I therefore become your enemy,
because I tell you the TRUTH?”

—Galatians 4:16, KJB

—=—

The synonyms of this term wordsmith are not many, those being “writer” and “author.”

–WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.

In its most simplistic definition, we find the following:

1. fluent and prolific writer, especially one who writes professionally.
2. An expert on words.
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition, 2011, by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.

1: a person who works with wordsespecially:  a skillful writer

 –Merriam-Webster, Incorporated, online, 2015 

Controlled by words…

The legislature is the author of law. The court administers that law and writes opinions. The president writes executive orders and presidential directives. The attorneys at bar write everything else, from procedure to rules of evidence to the over 100 Uniform Codes.

Oh, but they are just wordsmiths.

Sure asshole, and their skillful writings, being experts on the terms of art of the legal language just happened to enslave you and your illiterate family and their illiterate forefathers before them for generations.

Yeah, but they’re just wordsmiths!

Right dickweed, that’s the point. Because you are not. Because every contract you sign, every law you are bound in surety to follow, every flattering title you pretend, and every aspect of your life is controlled by their words. Yep, they smithed your person (status), they smithed your license, your social security card, and hell, they are even the smiths of the banking laws, which let’s face it, that number’s game is a whole other language most of us are also quite illiterate at.

Sure, but they are still just wordsmiths.

How fucking long can we play this game? How many times can you play this fallacy? How long can you “stick with stupid?”

Not ironically, there is already a word to describe this fallacious tool of idiocracy that has long been in existence, and of course each word leads to a connect-the-dots story to be told:

WORD-CATCHER – noun – One who CAVILS at words.

CAVIL – verb intransitive – 1. To raise captious and frivolous objections; to find fault without good reason; followed by at. It is better to reason than to cavil2. To advance futile objections, or to frame sophisms, for the sake of victory in an argument verb transitive – To receive or treat with objections. Wilt thou enjoy the good. Then cavil the conditions. – noun – False or frivolous objections; also, A FALLACIOUS KIND OF REASON, bearing some resemblance to truth, ADVANCED FOR THE SAKE OF VICTORY.

CAVILER – noun – One who CAVILS; one who is apt to raise captious objections; a captious disputant.

CAPTIOUS – adjective – 1. Disposed to find fault, or raise objections; APT TO CAVIL, as in popular language, it is said, apt to catch at; as a captious man2. Fitted to catch or ensnare; insidious; as a captious question. 3. Proceeding from a CAVILING DISPOSITION; as a captious objection or criticism.

SOPHISM  noun – [Latin sophisma.] A specious but fallacious argument; asubtilty in reasoning; an argument that is not supported by sound reasoning, or in which the inference is not justly deduced from the premises. When a false argument puts on the appearance of a true one, then it is properly called a sophism or fallacy.

–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language

So, is it fair to say that using the term wordsmith to escape discourse and ensnare the conversation is but a captious, sophist method of fallacious rhetoric? Or am I being too damned word-smithery for you?

At this point I have figured out the whole game, how everything was stolen from us through attainder and escheat, and how the feudal system is alive and well through contract, for the words of the contract make the law.

Oh, but those are just words, right?

There I go again. Damn wordsmith.

Well, I leave you with this final thought. In overcoming my own arrogance in using the English language in the pointless rhetoric we are bombarded with everyday, I was presented with a piece of information that I could not have imagined to be true, and one I followed to its suprising end. It spawned a whole discourse on the legal language, in the form of my upcomming works, an encyclopedic journey through legalese. And nothing I have ever done has been more enlightening, revealing just how illiterate I was in using the language I learned in public schools; the one given to us to keep us dumb to the designs of those wordsmiths we complain so much about but never learn their art.

And so to be clear, here is what you think you know.

DOG-LATINThe Latin of ILLITERATE PERSONS; Latin WORDS put together on the ENGLISH GRAMMATICAL SYSTEM.

–Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition

You see, my fallaciously caviler detractors, a slave-master never teaches his slaves his mysteries, never revealing the artful law and its structure of words that entangles him in intangible chains. He keeps his slaves illiterate, spiritually and deductively, just as the priest-class has kept the multitude ignorant of its words for many centuries, so that the people may listen to the wordsmiths (priests) rather than read the Source and True meaning of their words.

The lawmakers will never teach the general population that which they seek to control them with, keeping their private language as their secretive terms of art, revealing them only under oath in private associations; conspiratorial combinations of men acting as agents (attorneys), as officers of the court (crown). And guess what, the translators of the Bible too will never re-smith it into anything but dog-Latin, so that despite the fact that there are more Bibles than people on this planet and that they are given away free and can be found available in every hotel room, these wordsmiths of the king ensured that you would never be able to read it’s words in their true intent. For they only teach us dog-Latin. They keep us all public-minded, through public-education, by the vulgar public language, while they privately control the “higher” one to ensure constant confusion. The Bible is written in the king’s language, legalese; as a mostly parabolic metaphor. And the legal fiction is opposed to dog-Latin.

—=—

“All intelligent thoughts have already been thought; what is necessary is only to try to think them again.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

And so, my illiterate compatriots, when you finally figure out that every word you say in dog-Latin carries the opposite meaning of the legal wordsmith in a black robe you are speaking to, perhaps then you will comprehend why you always loose in court. Why you can’t figure out how to exit their system based on their artful words. Why you can’t quite grasp how you are tricked into volunteering to be subject to them. And why you always turn away from perfectly good conversations simply because you can’t speak the language that sounds exactly like your own, public, dumbed down version.

So learn the language or continue to eat shit.

SHYSTERnoun -“unscrupulous lawyer,” 1843, U.S. slang, probably altered from German Scheisser “incompetent worthless person,” from Scheisse “SHIT” (n.), from Old High German skizzan “to defecate” (see shit (verb)).

–Etymonline.com

It’s up to you…

—=—

The roots of language are
irrational and of a magical nature
.” 

—Jorge Luis Borges, Prologue to “El otro, el mismo.”

—=—

“Names are an important key to what a society values. Anthropologists recognize naming as one of the chief methods FOR IMPOSING ORDER ON PERCEPTION.”

—David S. Slawson

—=—

“There exists, for everyone, a sentence – a series of WORDS – that has the power to destroy you. Another sentence exists, another series of WORDS, that could heal you. If you’re lucky you will get the second, but you can be certain of getting the first.”

―Philip K. Dick, quoted from: ‘VALIS’

—=—

“…and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him by CRAFT, and put him to death.”

—Mark 14:1, KJB

—=—

“In politics, nothing happens by accident.
If it happens, you can bet
it was planned that way.”

—President Franklin D. Roosevelt

—=—

“In doubtful cases, the presumption always is in behalf of the CROWN.”

—Latin Maxim, AMBIGUIS CASIBUS SEMPER PRAESUMITUR PRO REGE. Lofft, Append. 248. (Blacks 4th)

—=—

“The latter part of a wise man’s life is taken up in curing the FOLLIES, PREJUDICES, and FALSE OPINIONS he had CONTRACTED in the former.”

—Jonathan Swift, ‘Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral & Diverting’
—=—

Cure yourself, or stand in painful prejudice and ignorance. But keep your fallacy and false opinions away from me! For your dis-ease is not medical, but contractual. And the only solution is end of contract. No really, the word solution in legalese means only one thingend of contract.

Oh, but that’s just word-smithing again…

.

–Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, January 23, 2016

 

 

STRAWMAN: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person


Apologies for my absence lately in the blogosphere, and for those comments I have not read and managed yet. I am also catching up on emails and wish to thank everyone who has made donations to keep me alive, researching, writing, and hosting the daily radio show (Mon-Fri, 7pm Eastern, on republicbroadcasting.org).

That being said, I’d like to introduce my new website and that which has been taking most of my attention these days:

http://www.strawmanstory.info/

I’ve been writing this work in book-form for several years off and on, building it bit by bit, until this year when I made it my full-time project. As I have been researching and writing I am continuously learning while pouring over legal dictionaries, U.S. Code, international law, etymology sources, scripture, concordances, and other sources of ancient and hidden knowledge, from Plato to Bastiat. This fact has not and certainly will not change.

There is a point in which a researcher must bravely and with uncertain confidence finalize his writings into a utilizable form, though when this point is supposed to happen is beyond my own comprehension. For I wish not to be bound by my own misunderstandings and set-in-word errors in logic and rhetoric due to so much faulty grammar out there, as so many (most) authors certainly have. Perhaps this notion of perfection is as much an impossibility as the idea of attaining all knowledge is. Only time will tell…

Of this work I can only say one thing… that it has never been attempted before. It is being compiled so as to teach a new language, the legal language, to those who seek to comprehend that which enslaves them. The magic of words is the invisible web that entraps and enjoins us to a legal matrix of fictional things. But we are not shown or taught this authoritative, “higher” language in which true knowledge has been hidden. Instead, we are taught the common words of illiteracy. This is called public education. And it keeps us public, stealing all privacy.

One cannot simply pick up a Bible, for instance, and read it in the common tongue. It’s meaning will remain a mystery even while its Law remains highest. The common words are often quite opposite in meaning from their legal counterparts, though they appear to be the same. But the symptom of this disease causes the victims of this “vulgar” form of common communication to remain subject not only to man, but specifically to man’s creation of language terms of art. For the word common also means “goyim.”

The illusion is steadily shattered with every word uncovered, with every maxim revealed, with every Bible verse clarified, and with every lie demystified.

For the reader and as disclaimer, there will be no turning back. No more turning away from reality. No more living in ignorance. No more convenient lies. No more shirking of responsibility by blaming a fictional persona. And therefore no more legal excuses.

What is legal is not what is right.

This work will be offered in (non-commercial) book form in exchange for gifts in private donation and barter. I will be offering it in advance soon as well so that I can raise the funds to have it created (printed) in that “book” format. But it will always be offered for free as well, for no one should be without the knowledge of their own enslavement. A (.pdf) will be available to anyone unable or unwilling to offer trade or gift. The only difference between these two formats will be that the physical book-form will be indexed. At over 1,000 pages, this will be a reference book as much as anything.

Yes, 1,000+ pages… If there is one thing I have learned for certain in my many years of laboring for knowledge, it is that nothing worth learning or doing is easy. The path is narrow, and only a few will walk it. This work is designed to help light that path.

The website is temporary for now, and will be updated in the next few months as I begin to organize my tome of notes and research into a final collection. Again, thanks to those who have supported me with love and kindness, and the ability to continue this work.

If you’d like to hear what’s been happening in “The Corporation Nation” radio show, you can check out any of my 375+ shows from the last 20 months for free here:

https://corporationnationradioarchives.wordpress.com/

(Note: Search tool at bottom of page, looks like a magnifying glass)

I hope to have the “book” finished in the next few months, and I’ll set up a unique email for that purpose. I will rely on merely word of mouth and radio promotion, so please help to spread the word and share freely. Just remember I can only continue this effort with your support.

Be well…

.

Clint Richardson (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Wednesday, June 3rd, 2015