| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 15:06:17
|
Actually, I agree with much of what you are putting forth about Christianity so that's why you are finding any debate with me.
I wanted to also note, since you seem to be the only one bringing up the Eboinites..
They were the ones who put forth the claim that Paul was a convert to Judaism. Interesting claim considering his passionate letter against the Torah to the Gauls.. Then again...maybe the Eboinites were frosted because they did not get their tithe money :-(
Peace to you,
Steve |
 |
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jan 2005 : 09:51:11
|
Thanks. It is good to know that controversial as this interpretation is, that it actually makes sense with scripture.
Look at the New Covenant as two competing doctrines. The Gospels, which are historical accounts of Jesus' ministry and including the Book of Acts which tells about some events after Jesus fled Israel. Then the rest of the New Covenant is basically Paul's syncrotizing the survival of Jesus Christ into the pagan Roman/Greco mindset of Asia Minor.
The Gospels should group with James the Just and his side of the debate with Paul, who was really such a lousy Jew that he was hunted under oath to kill him. Paul climbed out a high window on a rope to escape execution. The contention was traditional Jewry.
This juncture is difficult to swallow for Christians but it was James who was preserving the teachings of Jesus. James and the Jerusalem crowd knew Jesus first hand to be a good law-abiding Jew. They also had witnessed him fulfill most if not all the scriptural prophecies of the King/Messiah in Israel and that under the Roman occupation Advent was a very popular doctrine - that Messiah ben Joseph would prepare the way for Messiah ben David to restore Israel to rule under Yehovah. The backlash that against obvious history very few Jews today can accept the obvious Messiah figure in human history is a very convincing indicator that Yehoshuah H'Natzrith, Jesus of Nazareth would never, never have uttered any nonsense about him being the God of Abraham. That kind of blasphemy and idolatry would have gotten him excluded from the Jewish religion - excommunication. With this in mind it may be clear to the New Covenant reader that one specific commercial incident with the Temple Tax franchise contracting the drachma (half shekel) is what got the Herodians hunting for Jesus' life. Even his attempts to fulfill the Worthless Shepherd prophecies of Zechariah, as offensive to Israel as that was (barking the fig tree), were not enough to incur the Roman crucifixion penalty. Recall Pilate curious why the Jews would not take care of the problem according to the Jewish traditional laws?
It was Paul's doctrine, Paul who only met Jesus one time on the road to Damascus that won the hearts of the Gentile world. Paul's doctrine bought into the same tendency for people to buy into the supernatural and bazaar. Ravage supposes that Paul recognized this "faith" tendency in people to be such a powerful weapon. I have prayed and seen miraculous though subtle answers and have even prophecied through prior knowledge psychometrics, predicting violence on top of the Temple Mount on September 28, 2000. So I am willing to believe through His messenger ways (single dimensional messages called angels) God may have told Paul that he would be testifying in Rome.
If Paul was such a coward about a whipping to pull his newly bought Roman citizenship, then why suffer two years in prison under Felix to be remanded into Rome? It is possible that because of the blood oath of "forty rabbis" to starve themselves until Paul was dead, that he was staying in jail out of cowardice. Paul may have figured Rome was his best chance of survival. But that was two years of prison life where Paul could have been set free at a simple request.
James the Just and the 'good Jews' back in Jerusalem, Israel were fairly appalled that Paul would teach that anybody could join the new Messiah sect of Judaism without the ritual cleansing of circumcision etc. The Nazarene Gospel Restored tends toward James and his gang deciding since Paul was teaching Judaism to so many Asia Minor pagans, that the doctrinal differences would be okay. Paul shaved his head and cleansed himself according to law in order to show repentance but seems to have subsequently committed an act to show the repentance was disingenious - a fraud. He was hunted as though he had openly desecrated the Temple itself. Maybe new witnesses were arriving into Jerusalem testifying what Paul was actually teaching in Asia Minor - Christianity?
Then we find that Paul made it alive to Rome upon the Remand he demanded of Felix. There under a mild house arrest (probably keeping Felix's letter explaining he could find no fault with Paul) for two more years he wrote letters to his churches in Asia minor and these letters survived to be the predominant doctrine of the New Covenant and Christianity. The Nazarene Gospel Restored critically and inductively examines when and how the Gospel accounts got separated from one another so that we see distinct editing that crept in from Paul's doctrine. The historical events that differ from Gospel to Gospel are inductively reasoned and evaluated for which minor event account, if any is likely the historical fact of Jesus' ministry.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 29 Jan 2005 10:34:02 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2005 : 09:35:10
|
quote:
David Merrill wrote in the "His Name is Not JESUS" topic:
I figured Downhomepraise might believe you had an inside track, to be able to correct Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, being that you are writing from Israel. That's all. Trivial as it might seem to you.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
The above quote implies that there are people in the geographical area of Old Palestine (now called Israel, by the media) who are able to speak and/or write in Hebrew (i.e. The Pure Language of Creation). Are the “inhabitants of Jerusalem” and the surrounding geographical area able to speak or write in a language that would help anyone to better understand the Scriptures?
It is our understanding that the vast majority of the people living there, who claim to be Israelites, are in fact Khazars. We are told that Khazars are a non-Semitic, non-Hebrew people, who have perverted the Way that Yahweh gave to Moses and our ancestors. It is our further understanding that the Khazars have perverted the Hebrew language and instead speak Yiddish.
In his book entitled “Our Nordic Race”; available from Virginia Publishing Company, P.O. Box 997, Lynchburg, Virginia [24505]; (434) 384-3261; the author Richard Kelly Hoskins; states ... quote:
quote by Richard Kelly Hoskins....
....the Kingdom of the Khazars was a thriving concern. Situated to the east of Hungary....Racially these people were of Mongolian descent who later absorbed a certain amount of Slavic blood...
.... Believing that a national religion would help cement the nation together the ruler, King Bulan, interviewed representatives of the three major religions of that day. Selecting the religion of the Pharisees as being best suited to the needs of the rulers, Hebrew rabbis and teachers were imported, and the country of the Khazars by decree adopted the religion of the Pharisees.
Being without a written language,the Hebrew alphabet was adapted to the Khazar tongue and the result was called Yiddish, a language very different from Hebrew.
Respectfully Submitted,
Marty
|
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 22 Feb 2005 09:49:01 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2005 : 09:45:13
|
That is a very powerful topic for debate and thank you for bringing it here.
This was my point, however. Oneisraelite has falsified the geographic location where he writes from on his bio here. For whatever reason. He also promotes, like you the earmarkings of what I call "Yahweh People" - primarily the mixture of the suffix theophoric "...yahu" with the theophoric prefix "Yeho...". Producing Yahuway instead of the commonly accepted Yehovah Anglicized Jehovah.
It is clear that Strong's, Young's and Richardson's concordances and lexicons are not Yiddish. I have The Joys of Yiddish by Leo Rosten here on my shelf. However there are many Hungarian Jews who speak Yiddish. This is why my language trainer for Hebrew by Menahem Mansoor is titled specifically Biblical Hebrew - Step by Step. It is not training Yiddish or modern Hebrew. It is teaching Hebrew as it was used in the Holy Bible.
Hebrew is peculiar in that it is the only language to have died and been fully revived. Because many of the people reviving it speak Yiddish it is difficult to perform this task unique to human history - reviving a dead language. But the objective is ideally to find the true Hebrew roots and keep them alive for posterity.
To fingerpoint that the Jews, being Ashkenazic/Khazarian, not even Semitic are busy constructing a giant Red Herring to mislead modern humanity is paranoid. At least if you are trying to tell me that the standards like Strong's Exhaustive Concordance all agree in a huge insideous and pernicious Jewish (ZOG Zionist Occupied Government) lie.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 20 Feb 2005 09:57:10 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2005 : 08:42:19
|
Dear Marty;
www.aish.com/jewishissues/jewishsociety/Finding_My_Place_on_the_Jewish_Bookshelf.asp
Oneisraelite;
So far as accusations. The 'accusation' began asking for explanation why you would use Strong's Exhaustive Concordance to explain Yehoshuah's name but deviate from that same standard with Yahuway instead of Yehovah (Jehovah). Then it occurred to me that you were bolstering your credentials by saying you are writing from Israel, whatever the sense.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=427&whichpage=1
I would like to be able to say I am writing from Israel when speaking of Hebrew matters. Just like I would like to say I am writing from Antarctica if purporting to know something about glacial ice. But I will stay to the truth the best of my ability. That really lends the best credibility in my opinion.
If you consider it a crime to lie, then it is really beyond me that you do it with every Post by saying you are from Israel. Bondservant; thank you for explaining. Maybe he will understand.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 22 Feb 2005 14:10:17 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2005 : 14:13:45
|
Oneisraelite;
It is confusing at best. You are trying to tell us that you write from Israel, in whatever sense.
Leave it the way you like it. Since it is clear you are not writing from Israel I will point out that you are a liar and you will simply stand convicted by your own testimony. Unless of course I agree with whatever point you are making.
You make it so easy to shoot you down if I disagree. For now we may all just presume you are saying it because it makes you sound all wise.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2005 : 15:02:43
|
quote:
It is confusing at best. You are trying to tell us that you write from Israel, in whatever sense.
I have spoken to oneisraelite, and he does indeed write from inside the Commonwealth of Israel (not the State of Israel). I am surprised you are making a big deal of it. I understood what he meant immediately when I first saw one of his posts.
The real reason for your disaproval stems from your rejection of the modern day Identity of Israel. |
Edited by - Linc on 22 Feb 2005 15:05:48 |
|
|
|
Bondservant
Forum Administrator
382 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2005 : 16:41:56
|
| Since Oneisraelite very plainly states at the bottom of EVERY post that he is OF the "Commonwealth of Israel", there is no mistake about what he is saying. However, his actual location is AT (not IN) a State of the United States of America (USA). This trivial argument is now considered closed. The next time it is brought up on ANY of the forums, the poster will be locked out. Enough is enough. Bicker among yourselves in Private Messages or emails, not here in the forums. There are far more important matters at hand that the ecclesia needs to be edified with. |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2005 : 09:18:01
|
Link;
That is a very important point. Thank you for bringing it up. Also, thank you for bringing out that people are clicking 'Active Topics' and reading about it, forming opinions.
It is wonderful that this thread was led back here (thank you, Marty [Cornerstone Foundation]) where it bears the context of your point, Linc:
quote:
The real reason for your disaproval stems from your rejection of the modern day Identity of Israel.
Albeit Downhomepraise was misled and so would be many new to the concepts of Identity in the pages here on ecclesia.org. The bickering has been edifying. Mostly in terms of Legal Identity. Which of course ties intimately to the "Identity of Israel". I think it is clear a proper sense of Identity is crucial to gain control over and avoidance of unwanted contracts (contracts are express relationships).
But primarily it rests upon our each presuming we are correct in our take on identity. And how we identify that "image of God" indentity within us.
Correctly catagorized an item that effects the ecclesia, Topic "advanced-resonance inductive plasma physics" http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=378&whichpage=1 summarizes my entire agenda here. Intervals, octaves and harmonics are amplified by truth. Correctness. This medium is pure in its "1"s and "0"s but complexities of sophistry can disrupt the patterns that develop resonance effects which manifest in mutual agreement - competent common law and supporting case law (stare decisis).
You say you do not understand why I would make a big deal of it. Actually I do not feel I am the one making a big deal of it. Oneisraelite should correct what is technically incorrect and proven misleading. Downhomepraise accepted it on face value and also that it bolstered (falsely) the credibility of the author to deviate from accepted standards - Yahuway instead of Yehovah. This is in the heart of things pertinent - the pushy identity of Judah (Yehudah) interjected into the Name of God.
Sure, it is not a big enough violation for Admin to correct the problem firmware by 'force'. But Oneisraelite can still make his points about "commonwealth" or "spiritual" Israel in the text. And there it would be quite appropriate debate.
So Linc, I understand your point about assuming I misunderstand the modern Identity of Israel. That is what this Topic is all about. I interjected, quite rudely the extreme views of Rosenthal and Ravage for that purpose. To hash that out.
What do you mean, I do not understand the "modern day Identity of Israel"?
Regards,
David Merrill.
See: http://www.jewsnotzionists.org
P.S. Bondservant; It is difficult to remove the bickering from the face of these Posts when Oneisraelite continues to misrepresent where he is writing from on the face of every Post he writes. So I simply point out his misdirection may be used against him, to discredit him, especially if a new member is subject victim to the falsity. True or not about the 'modern Identity of Israel', there are appropriate and inappropriate methods of teaching about it.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 23 Feb 2005 09:56:08 |
|
|
|
Linc
Advanced Member
Canada
111 Posts |
Posted - 02 Mar 2005 : 17:29:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
Albeit Downhomepraise was misled and so would be many new to the concepts of Identity in the pages here on ecclesia.org.
If not for my Israel Identity background, I would never have stumbled across this site. Forgive me for assuming it was the same for the rest of you.
quote:
Oneisraelite should correct what is technically incorrect and proven misleading. Downhomepraise accepted it on face value and also that it bolstered (falsely) the credibility of the author to deviate from accepted standards - Yahuway instead of Yehovah. This is in the heart of things pertinent - the pushy identity of Judah (Yehudah) interjected into the Name of God.
Although I disagree with Oneisraelites pronunciation, I reject all kabbalistic thinking which imputes power and holiness to mere pronunciation. The power of words lies in the effect they have on their hearers. Although I know from my studies that The Name used to be pronounced Yahowah in the original Hebrew, I also know that to convey the same concept and understanding to todays English speakers, I am best off saying "Jehovah".
As a pure Adamic man, given the task of naming things, and indeed making a very good living TODAY by naming things every day, I know how names work. I understand their power and respect it. I will not accept any idolatrous thinking that hides the power of names from others.
Let us move on to more fruitful debates; arguing about pronunciation of words is even more silly than arguing about meanings of words, which Shaul warned against. But then, DM, it appears you reject the writings of Shaul as well.
How can we be in unity in the ecclesia when we disagree on basic facts?
quote:
Sure, it is not a big enough violation for Admin to correct the problem firmware by 'force'. But Oneisraelite can still make his points about "commonwealth" or "spiritual" Israel in the text. And there it would be quite appropriate debate.
Oneisraelite lives in the United States of Manasseh, which is indeed considered part of the Commonwealth of Ephraim. Ephraim was given the blessing of the firstborn, being the chief head and representative of Israel itself, making it fair to call it the Commonwealth of Israel.
quote:
So Linc, I understand your point about assuming I misunderstand the modern Identity of Israel. That is what this Topic is all about. I interjected, quite rudely the extreme views of Rosenthal and Ravage for that purpose. To hash that out.
What do you mean, I do not understand the "modern day Identity of Israel"?
I do not know Rosenthal and Ravage. I did not say you misunderstand, Dave. I said you reject the idea that the Celto-Germanic races are direct descendants of Abraham through his grandson Israel/Jacob. |
|
|
|
charles8854
Regular Member
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2005 : 10:02:22
|
Hi,
Im new here, but ive been on the net a while, i imagine some of you know me.
I appreciate the call to a higher-standard of debating; ie: maintaining respectful tones (peace), so long as it is possible with each of us.
But i would like to point out in John 8:39 to the end; that Jesus/Yeshuah really cut loose on the children of the original liar. Further; he clearly got so riled-up as to get physically-forceful, in order to route the money-changes from Yhvh's Temple.
Further, there were some quotes above from "David Merrill" & "True North", as follows:
"The followers of Jesus of Nazareth, mainly slaves and poor workmen, in their bereavement and disappointment, turned away from the world and formed themselves into a brotherhood of pacifist non-resisters ..."
And i am un-clear of the positions of "David Merrill" or "True North"; (there is a large amount of text there), but in the spirit of trying to bring the issues into sharper focus so that truth may more easily be discerned; there is a body of research which supports the proposition that the Followers of Jesus were Not “Pacifists”, but rather they were “Zealots”.
This is shown in the profound research of one “Robert Eisenman”; & I quote from part of a review of his book; taken from a web-page following this quote, which reads as follows:
“To anticipate the thrust of the book as a whole, let it be said that Eisenman first draws a portrait of the early community of James as a nationalistic, messianic, priestly, and xenophobic sect of ultra-legal pietism, something most of us would deem fanaticism. As Schweitzer said of the historical Jesus, this is an embarrassment and a disappointment to those who expect the original gospel to look refreshingly modernistic. Eisenman shows how "Jewish Christianity" was part and parcel of the sectarian milieu which included Essenes, Zealots, Nazoreans, Nazirites, Ebionites, Elchasites, Sabeans, Mandaeans, etc., and that these categories were no more than ideal types, by no means actually segregated one from the other like exotic beasts in adjacent, well-marked cages in the theological zoo. Over against this sort of "Lubavitcher Christianity," Eisenman depicts Pauline Christianity (plus its Hellenistic cousins Johannine, Markan, Lukan, etc., Christianities) as being root and branch a compromising, assimilating, Herodianizing apostasy from Judaism. Greek Christianity gives the Torah, and Jewish identity, the bum's rush, just like those allegorizing antinomians Philo argued against, just like Josephus. The Pauline Christ, a spiritual redeemer with an invisible kingdom, is of a piece with the christening of Vespasian as the messiah by Josephus.”
“Of course, these ideas are by no means new. Eisenman is simply filling out the picture in an exhaustive manner undreamt of by S. G. F. Brandon, Robert Eisler, and their congeners. The picture of Jesus in the Greek Gospels, eating with tax-collectors, lampooning the traditions of his people, welcoming sinners and ridiculing Torah piety are all expressions of Gentile anti-Judaism. Only Gentiles utterly without sympathy to Judaism could profess to see such a Jesus as a noble pioneer of a "higher righteousness." In the same way, the New Testament notion that Jerusalem fell because her people had rejected the messiah, when in fact they were fighting a messianic war against the Roman antichrist, must be judged a piece of cynical Hellenistic Jew-bashing. Christianity as it emerges in the Gentile mission is a product of cultural accomodationism, pro-Roman Quislingism, and intentional assimilation. It is a kind of paganized, syncretic, diluted Judaism not unlike the Sabazius cult.”
That quote was from a web-page at the reputable: “Drew University”, here:
http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/RPeisenman.html
They patronize Biblical “Higher Criticism”; & I find myself inclined to agree with both Eisenman & this “Higher Criticism” School. Another profound link to Eisenman’s controversial work is here: http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/eisenman.html
This may be a simpler summary:
http://wuphys.wustl.edu/~alford/james.html
The point is, that there is substantial extra-biblical/hard-historical evidence that the followers of Jesus/Yeshua were Not “Pacifists”.
And I hate to be a newbie/brown-noser; but “David Merrill” is right-on by echoing the issues raised in the book “Holy-Blood, Holy-Grail”. There is a related book by the same profound authors, entitles “The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception”. This books really rips up the romanized-catholic-church; although it whimps-out on the culpability of the rabbinical-pharisee/jews. I wrote a review of it on amazon, here:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0671797972/qid=1110551981/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-1204379-2382540
(That used price of $1.29 (plus shipping) is incredible, I paid $10.00 or so for my first used copy.)
And there is much more I could write, but I think this is about enuff for my first post in this newly-discovered & very file looking forum.
I would like to say that i take no delight in challenging the heart-felt beliefs of my fellow christians concerning their belief in the “infallibility” of the bible. I am 50 years old, & for most of my life, i believed the same. But there are too many chips on the table in the spiritual-battle, for us to mis-read the terrain of this spiritual war-zone. We have no room for self-induced delusions my fellow spiritual-warriors. Yhvh needs us to be seriously hard-nosed about precisely what is the fine heritage we can derive from our anglo-saxon/celtic christian-commonlaw heritage.
And we need to be hard-nosed about seeking “Truth”. Remember “the Truth will Set You Free”. Yhvh & his true followers have Nothing to Fear from “Truth”.
I do look forward to working with all of you in seeking the advancement of the kingdom of Yhvh on this earth.
Glory to Yhvh,
Charles Bruce, Stewart
Sandy Oregon
503-668-3932, anytime |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 11 Mar 2005 : 21:20:45
|
Greetings to you Charles Bruce, and all,
What caught my attention on your intent to communicate of all is:
"The point is, that there is substantial extra-biblical/hard-historical evidence that the followers of Jesus/Yeshua were Not “Pacifists”."
See... many think that The Annointed was, is, and continues to be a weakling, when in fact, no weakling would have, is and continues to be extremely brave at heart. His Words and actions do not seize to this day, and Father willing, for evermore.
It is my heartfelt belief that the problem also comes when many claim and adore the written works of others, yet pull-down and smear His Works.
As Walter reminds on another post, may ieaue welcome you to this forum for all,
I am,
Manuel
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 14 Mar 2005 : 12:36:00
|
Let me clarify where I am coming from.
In II Macabees Chapter 3 we find the components of a monetary contraction.
quote:
Now when the holy city was inhabited with all peace, and the laws were kept very well, because of the godliness of Onias the high priest, and his hatred of wickedness, it came to pass that even the kings themselves did honour the place, and magnify the temple with their best gifts; insomuch that Seleucus, king of Asia, of his own revenues bare all the costs belonging to the service of the sacrifices.
I will carefully explain the mechanics of this early "Franchise". The moneychangers were licensed by the Herodians in Jesus' day. They probably paid on a percentage or maybe a purchased license. We have evidence that the Herodians were however operating the sacrifices with foreign currencies by donation. However the moneychangers were selling the Temple Tax half-shekel or drachma at an inflated price to the pilgrims under the illusion that only the drachma or shekel was acceptable currency.
Think this through a bit. The Herodians, being that they accepted donations were probably hoarding the shekel and drachma coins. Contraction. That means the "proper" currency was intentionally being made scarce. A pilgrim would travel all that way for the holiday and then discover he must pay an inflated price to buy the "proper coin" to honor God's laws about Temple Tax. It gets me riled just writing about it.
Imagine what a righteous Jew of the time would think, seeing the injustice in that. Reading my historical scenario into the Gospels am since convinced it was that act above all things, overturning the moneychangers' tables, disrupting commerce that got Jesus hung on the Cross. The Bible indicates he acted alone against many. So therefore there were not a lot of zealots in the Temple yard that day. Jesus lost his temper and was not really acting on any doctrine other than simple justice of monetary tribute to God.
Then you say:
quote:
Further, there were some quotes above from "David Merrill" & "True North", as follows:
"The followers of Jesus of Nazareth, mainly slaves and poor workmen, in their bereavement and disappointment, turned away from the world and formed themselves into a brotherhood of pacifist non-resisters ..."
I think I recall that a quote from Ravage in his articles. His point is not the James version of Jesus' teachings but rather Paul's use of the Resurrection rumors in Roman/Greco pagan Asia Minor. Passive-resistance was a weapon beyond comprehension in the Roman military mindset. The rumors of James being somewhat militant and the post Macabee Jew (remember Masada?) may be, maybe are likely true. We find a faction ready to make Paul shave his head and show honor to the Law even on rumors that he was teaching grace had replaced the Law in Asia Minor. Then presumably that same faction cause Paul to lower himself out a window by rope, running for his life. Later we see a starvation pact to kill Paul for such Temple-defiling doctrine.
You also said:
quote:
The point is, that there is substantial extra-biblical/hard-historical evidence that the followers of Jesus/Yeshua were Not “Pacifists”.
And here I think we may be looking at two distinct factions. The Pauline heresy promulgated through Roman/Greco pagan syncrotism of virgin birth and resurrection. And the other, closer to home was James and the Apostles who knew Jesus. Unlike Paul who only had one encounter with the survived Jesus on the Road to Damascus. Paul indeed taught passivism. But using Paul to define Christianity might be mistaken and limited doctrine. Paul produced a lot of letters out of house arrest in Rome for two years. There are no accidents but that comes awfully close. Considering that the Apostles were free to speak and teach, so they had no motivation to write letters. Paul had them outgunned on the face of human history with all those epistles.
So I suppose in summation succinctly, I propose the "Jews" of the Holy Bible, the nasty ones attributed to killing the Messiah are really the Apostles who were vilified by Paul's Christianity in Asia Minor.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_epistle_dedicatory_1
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_epistle_dedicatory_2
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 14 Mar 2005 18:06:52 |
|
|
|
charles8854
Regular Member
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2005 : 01:45:56
|
Manuel;
I thank you for your warm welcome.
I also thank you for your supportive affirmation that Jesus/Yeshua was Not a “weakling”, but rather a courageous man who was “extremely brave at heart”.
And your summary there-on that the “written word” has been idolized to the exclusion of the “Works” of the messiah/christ; seem surgically accurate also.
I am very happy that we are of the same mind
on these critically important issues, good sir.
cbs ... |
|
|
|
charles8854
Regular Member
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2005 : 04:15:01
|
David;
Thank you for your extensive response to my post.
The links you included there-in, would not come up for me.
You said:
*****************
>In II Macabees Chapter 3 we find the components of a monetary contraction.
>Quote: Now when the holy city was inhabited with all peace, and the laws were kept very well, because of the godliness of Onias the high priest, and his hatred of wickedness, it came to pass that even the kings themselves did honour the place, and magnify the temple with their best gifts; insomuch that Seleucus, king of Asia, of his own revenues bare all the costs belonging to the service of the sacrifices.
> I will carefully explain the mechanics of this early "Franchise". The moneychangers were licensed by the Herodians in Jesus' day.
cbs: That sounds right, but I am not aware of any evidence in its support. I like Maccabees, very much. Eisenman discussed them a lot.
> They probably paid on a percentage or maybe a purchased license. We have evidence that the Herodians were however operating the sacrifices with foreign currencies by donation. However the moneychangers were selling the Temple Tax half-shekel or drachma at an inflated price to the pilgrims under the illusion that only the drachma or shekel was acceptable currency.
cbs: Agreed:
> Think this through a bit. The Herodians, being that they accepted donations were probably hoarding the shekel and drachma coins. Contraction. That means the "proper" currency was intentionally being made scarce. A pilgrim would travel all that way for the holiday and then discover he must pay an inflated price to buy the "proper coin" to honor God's laws about Temple Tax. It gets me riled just writing about it.
cbs: Agreed, on all points.
> Imagine what a righteous Jew of the time would think, seeing the injustice in that. Reading my historical scenario into the Gospels am since convinced it was that act above all things, overturning the moneychangers' tables, disrupting commerce that got Jesus hung on the Cross.
cbs: uuuuuummmmmmm; maybe. It certainly was a major part of the reason behind the crucifiction. I prefer to think in the common-law terms of “initiation of force” & “breach of the peace”; as opposed to the “Commercial” concerns. At the point where he turned over the tables of the money-changers, there was a merger of these concerns; ie: commerce was impacted by the justified use of common-law physical-force by the messiah/christ.
Surely his effort in turning over the tables of the moneychangers was laying the ground-work for a Regimen Change; for with-out their babylonian-whore “Commerce”, they could no longer finance their mercenary army to protect the holding of the kingly & temple offices by the corrupted Herodians & priesthood.
So, I suppose you are correct, in what seems to me to be a kind of indirect way.
> The Bible indicates he acted alone against many.
cbs: This is an important pont for me. I like to think the Twelve Apostles were his “Jury”, who “Justified” his acts, under applicable (but modernly obscure) “Torah-Law”, as he proceeded publicly with such force. I admit there is little (if any) documentation in support of this, but to me it makes very good sense. Especially in the light of the work of Eisenman & other reputable scholars who document that James & the others were “Zealots” for the un-written (lex-non-scripta) Principles of the “Torah-Law”. Here-under, Jesus/Yeshuah would have only been “Proceeding in a Lawful Manner” Against the DeFacto/Herodian Usurpers of the Kingly & Priestly Offices.
> So therefore there were not a lot of zealots in the Temple yard that day.
I do not believe that the lex-scripta biblical-text indicates one way or the other on that matter, good sir.
I find it hard to comprehend that he would take-on a whole crowd of babylonian-whore merchants, with-out availing himself of the support of the very followers whom he had so painfully worked to organize for supporting his work And the romanists who re-wrote the scriptures to reflect the romanist/babylonian agenda, would certainly have purged any such historical records, because it would have served as a model for future natural-born leaders to follow in rousing the common people to throw-of the shackles of the romanist-orchestrated slavery.
> Jesus lost his temper
cbs: I do not think the messiah/christ ever allowed his emotions to get out of his own control.
If you have read such apocrypha as the “Essene Gospel of Peace” ( i know its authenticity is controverted, but it rings true to me); you would see powerful argument for how the “Fasting process” ( which even the bible agrees he did) mellows the mind & spirit to the point that the emotions are never so powerful as to extend beyond the control of the follower of the path-way.
I think Jesus/Yeshua knew what he was going to do before he did it, while he was doing it, & after he had done it. Perhaps you feel similarly, but just chose your words poorly; Yes?
> and was not really acting on any doctrine other than simple justice
cbs: “Simple Justice” Is The Supreme “Doctrine”; good sir. (Well, at least according to the lex-non-scripta spiritual-side of the Torah/Law.)
>of monetary tribute to God.
cbs: Again; I believe that there were more powerful motivating concerns in the mind & heart of the messiah/christ when he over-turned the tables of the money-changers. I think the Blood of John the Baptist &/or the many other martyrs who proceeded him, was of greater concern than the monetary factors (even considering that the money was devoted to Yhvh).
<snip>
>We find a faction ready to make Paul shave his head and show honor to the Law even on rumors that he was teaching grace had replaced the Law in Asia Minor. Then presumably that same faction cause Paul to lower himself out a window by rope, running for his life. Later we see a starvation pact to kill Paul for such Temple-defiling doctrine.
cbs: Agreed. I think James was not inherently opposed to them; but was perhaps throttling them, until the “pathway of peace” had become exhausted; through Paul/Saul’s eventual “Flaking-Out” on the Penance he was suppose to accomplish (probably in repentance for his sins).
>You also said:
Quote: The point is, that there is substantial extra-biblical/hard-historical evidence that the followers of Jesus/Yeshua were Not “Pacifists”.
> And here I think we may be looking at two distinct factions.
cbs: Absolutely. It was all very polarized. There was no room for “fence sitters”.
> The Pauline heresy promulgated through Roman/Greco pagan syncrotism of virgin birth and resurrection. And the other, closer to home was James and the Apostles who knew Jesus. Unlike Paul who only had one encounter with the survived Jesus on the Road to Damascus.
cbs: I question that. I think Saul/Paul “Fabricated” the Entire Event. In Both of the texts of Eisenman (James the Brother of Jesus) & Baigent/Leigh (Dead Sea-Scrolls Deception); much ink is devoted to exploring such propositions.
> Paul indeed taught passivism.
cbs: Except when the roman slave-traders were doing it.
Under Pauline Doctrine, the Romanists were Allowed the use of Force, but the Israelite-Slaves were Not Allowed the Use of Force. (Im sure you meant that; just a point of clarification, showing more of Paul/Sauls Hypocrisy.)
<snip>
>Considering that the Apostles were free to speak and teach, so they had no motivation to write letters. Paul had them outgunned on the face of human history with all those epistles.
cbs: I am inclined to believe that there were many written texts produces by the apostles. Paul was a prolific writer, & his romanist-sponsors may have even used ghost writers. I think it likely that the many texts produced by the apostles were burned by the romanist slave-traders with probably 98 to 99 % efficiency; and that is Why saul/paul dominates modern christian scholarship. Those romanist slave-traders had a powerfully efficient military-machine doing their bidding in stomping-out the last remnants of godly theocratic government on this earth. The “dead sea scrolls”, the “nag hammurabi” texts; & multiple other “apocrypha” have (at least partially) miraculously survived the romanist book-burners. Much can be learned from these texts, imho; especially as pre-digested & summarized by such brilliant scholars as Eisenman & Baigent/Leigh. Many even more insightful texts may still be in the archives of the vatican. I fantasize of some-how/some-day taking control of that vatican library.
> So I suppose in summation succinctly, I propose the "Jews" of the Holy Bible, the nasty ones attributed to killing the Messiah are really the Apostles who were vilified by Paul's Christianity in Asia Minor.
cbs: I don’t think I am reading your intended words correctly, David. You seem to be saying that “the Jews ... the nasty ones attributed to killing the Messiah(,) are really the Apostles”?
Oh, ok. Now that I diagram the sentence, I see that you were probably trying to emphasize the word “Attributed” & “by Paul’s Christianity”.
So, you seem to be saying that “Paul’s Christianity ... Attributed the ... killing of the Messiah” to the Messiah’s True “Apostles”; Correct?
cbs: Hmm. That is indeed a bold & novel proposition. And I have seen that saul/paul did vilify the true apostles on many occasion. But i have difficulty in imagining him being so bold as to actually attribute the killing of Jesus/Yeshuah to them. That would be extremely audacious, even for the subversive saul/paul. If you have any evidence in support of such a bold proposition, I would be interested in reviewing it, good sir.
Godspeed;
charles bruce, stewart
sandy oregon
503-668-3932
charles@christiancommonlaw-gov.org
http://christiancommonlaw-gov.org |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 18 Mar 2005 : 08:47:23
|
About the failed links: I have figured a way, if I get the file name in proper form, to make it easier to get it working and this means I can Post the link as soon as I think of it. But it takes a couple days before the link functions.
You said:
quote:
That sounds right, but I am not aware of any evidence in its support. I like Maccabees, very much. Eisenman discussed them a lot.
And it is within your right to decree the Book of Macabees does not meet Rules of Evidence in your court. That the canonizing "out" of Macabees was divinely inspired to preserve the infallibility of the written word. But keep in mind that it is found in all the mainstream Holy Bibles until just recently.
And said:
quote:
Perhaps you feel similarly, but just chose your words poorly; Yes?
I think the term "lost his temper" is interpreted differently between us. He may have not lost emotional control. A tempered man would have utilized administrative and judicial recourse available. That being the priest/Herodians frustrated that so Jesus began overturning tables. Also there seems plenty of precedent that other zealots in the crowd were watching to see what happened to Jesus before they were going to act. And thus supporting my theory that the commercial interference was a great factor in hanging Jesus. The Herodians saw they must make a stern example of him.
That's right. I had not factored in how Jesus must have felt about John being beheaded by the Herodians. Anyway that would support that he was furious.
And:
quote:
I think Saul/Paul “Fabricated” the Entire Event [encounter with Jesus Christ].
Maybe you are right. I do not choose to attribute that much imagination to Paul's strategy of War by Propaganda. I like to think there is usually some real events in the middle of such significant cusps in human history. The Nazarene Gospel Restored gives some substantial argument that Saul was a bounty hunter hired to marry into the Herodians on the Temple for payment. Bringing the survived Jesus to a complete public death was a priority. Maybe that priority was set by Paul's report of how the Messiah rumors were so very compatible with the Roman/Greco pagan beliefs (rebirth/virgin birth) in Celicia and the entirety of Asia Minor?
I am not clear what you point out about Romanists and force. Maybe my point about Paul designing a weapon - War by Propaganda?
Before I go into a new treatise I will try to clarify what I meant about the "nasty" Jews being the Apostles. Try reading the Book of Acts this way. The Jews who were adamantly trying to kill Paul were actually James' judicial team of Ebionites (leading many other religious Jews). When Paul returned to Jerusalem he was not only warned from doing so but little word had reached Jerusalem about the heretical teachings he was preaching in Asia Minor. There was only a Cypriot Jew named Mnason to contradict that he had steered clear of Cyprus (and bought his expensive Roman citizenship papers out of alms intended for the Ebionite missionaries' "widows"). Now imagine as testimony caught up with Paul. More people coming into Jerusalem who had seen Paul and heard about what he was teaching in Asia Minor. Now James was feeling duped into believing Paul because he had shaved his head and cleansed himself lawfully for a week.
So the Bible fails to vilify the Apostles and the reading through the Gospels gives the Christian reader the impression that the Jews after Paul in the Book of Acts were the same Jews that called for the Crucifixion. Maybe so but James and the other law-abiding Apostles were among only the Book of Acts' Jews, after Paul's death.
My treatise is on your mention of prolific writings destroyed by Romanist book-burners. I remember a short-lived fantasy show called Rage. I only saw the latter half of about the fourth episode. It did not catch my attention at the time but this episode did.
There was an epistle in a leather case and Romans were after it to destroy it. People were getting killed over it and it fell in the hands of a Christian girl who befriended the pagans. A few pagans decided to help her get the epistle to a repository (she was apparently led divinely) and the pagans consulted a wiseman in the form of an eight year old boy. Careful writing revealed the boy was wise beyond his years and declared the epistle very powerful and all expense must be made to get it to the repository.
There was entry of Longinus, the Roman who stabbed Jesus on the Cross. He was the tough warrior-hero. It seemed he must help with the mission in order to die a human death - him being about 380 years old by now. Very entertaining.
The epistle turned out to be the Book of James. The repository was divinely protected and when the Romans converged on it they were destroyed and the little old librarian was quite pleased with the new addition.
I tuned in the next week and nothing. I heard no more about that series Rage. I was very disappointed. Sometimes I wonder how I could get hold of the few episodes in existence.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 18 Mar 2005 09:43:54 |
|
|
|
charles8854
Regular Member
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 19 Mar 2005 : 06:12:41
|
<snip>
>You said:
Quote: That sounds right, but I am not aware of any evidence in its support. I like Maccabees, very much. Eisenman discussed them a lot.
> And it is within your right to decree the Book of Macabees does not meet Rules of Evidence in your court.
cbs#: Maccabees does meet the rules of evidence in my court.
I allow satan him-self into my court, at least so long as he maintains a non-disruptive posture.
It is for the conscience-bound Jury of my court, to decide the Merits of the Evidence presented from any such as these.
> That the canonizing "out" of Macabees was divinely inspired to preserve the infallibility of the written word.
cbs#: I believe I detect “Sarcasm” in your choice of the words: “divinely inspired to preserve the infallibility of the written word”. I find sarcasm a very inefficient mode of communication, good sir; especially in these sterile written-text-based discussion forums.
But to your sarcastically communicated point; yes, Maccabees was “canonized out” by the romanist slave-traders for the express purpose of eliminating all dissenting texts from the general theme of “Pacifism” as communicated through the approved texts.
>But keep in mind that it is found in all the mainstream Holy Bibles until just recently.
cbs#: I knew the catholic bible included some of it; but I was unaware of any protestant bibles including it.
>And said:
Quote: Perhaps you feel similarly, but just chose your words poorly; Yes?
> I think the term "lost his temper" is interpreted differently between us.
cbs#: Apparently so.
>He may have not lost emotional control. A tempered man would have utilized administrative and judicial recourse available.
cbs#: Imho, & at that point, Yeshuah had “Exhausted” the “Judicial Resources Available” (“administrative” was not practiced by Israelites, imho); & the “Pathway of Peace” had become completely Exhausted with them; & there-under it was then “Lawful” (under applicable Torah/Law), to “Administer Force” in efforts to “Keep the Peace” against those conspiratorial plunderers of the wealth of the common Israelite people & the treasury of the temple of Yhvh.
> That being the priest/Herodians frustrated that so Jesus began overturning tables.
cbs#: Jesus/Yeshuah Never Violated Higher Torah/Law; imho. Even under modern american constitutional common-law, it is lawful to take up arms to arrest corrupted public-servants & bankers. This is the entire Purpose behind “Why” Jesus/Yeshuah Assembled “Twelve Followers”, so that His Kingship over the Nation of Israel might be “Lawfully” Established.
> Also there seems plenty of precedent that other zealots in the crowd were watching to see what happened to Jesus before they were going to act.
cbs#: The Maccabees account, as well as various orthodox biblical-texts; all bear witness to support the proposition that the old testament “Zealots” were Not mere opportunistic bystanders. We are discussing a Militaristically-Organized community of able-bodied & religiously-Zealous men here. They were the Followers of the Promised Messiah of Israel, sir. I find it incomprehensible to imagine that their presence at his routing of the money-changers from the temple was anything less than in an “Active” Role.
> And thus supporting my theory that the commercial interference was a great factor in hanging Jesus. The Herodians saw they must make a stern example of him.
cbs#: I would not object to your proposition that: “the commercial interference was a great factor in hanging Jesus”. That can merge well with my larger concern for the lawless shedding of the blood of the common people of our Israelite nation.
> That's right. I had not factored in how Jesus must have felt about John being beheaded by the Herodians.
cbs#: Thank you.
>Anyway that would support that he was furious.
cbs#: “Fury” can be throttled & calculated; ie: brought to bear in an entirely “Lawful” manner.
I hate to nit-pick, but it is of ut-most importance in my mind that “Law” be up-held in every action which our mentor Jesus/Yeshuah accomplished. I have liberal friends who claim to be “Anarchists”. I stretch our friendship to its limits when they refuse to acknowledge the supremacy of godly/natural “Law”. I then just go ballistic; & rightfully so, imho; just as did my mentor, Jesus/Yeshuah, in the very case which we are discussing, (as well as others).
>And:
Quote: I think Saul/Paul “Fabricated” the Entire Event [encounter with Jesus Christ].
> Maybe you are right.
cbs#: Thank you.
> I do not choose to attribute that much imagination to Paul's strategy of War by Propaganda.
cbs#: Saul/paul had much help. The entire Herodian dynasty, as well as the romanist empire’s continued strangle-hold on the nation of Israel, depended on his work. And they all knew it, & undoubtably assisted him in the development of his subversive plans, as well as their implementation.
> I like to think there is usually some real events in the middle of such significant cusps in human history.
cbs#: If that was the only factor, yes. But the clear interests of the larger romanist/herodian slave-trading babylonian-whore community; seems to me to weigh-in powerfully in the opposite direction.
> The Nazarene Gospel Restored gives some substantial argument that Saul was a bounty hunter hired to marry into the Herodians on the Temple for payment.
cbs#: Very interesting. I have not seen that text. I looked it up on amazon, used copies are going for from 94 to 100 bable-bucks. That is beyond my means. Saul/paul being a “bounty-hunter, seems quite in harmony with his general karma.
> Bringing the survived Jesus to a complete public death was a priority.
cbs#: Agreed.
> Maybe that priority was set by Paul's report of how the Messiah rumors were so very compatible with the Roman/Greco pagan beliefs (rebirth/virgin birth) in Celicia and the entirety of Asia Minor?
cbs#: Maybe. I have not explored that aspect of the conspiracy far. It seems of minor concern to the larger issues, in my mind.
> I am not clear what you point out about Romanists and force. Maybe my point about Paul designing a weapon - War by Propaganda?
cbs#: Well, I was not focused directly on your subject-header. From my studies of “Common-Law” the Use of “Force” is Only Allowed in those few & very rare circumstances when the “Pathway of Peace” has become Exhausted. And because Common-Law is Derived from Israelite/Christian/Torah-Law, I find it reasonable to infer that these very same principles were being practiced during the times of our Messiah.
I have studied much on all of this, & I would enjoy communicating my knowledge to you, because you obviously have similar treasures of knowledge. I have now sent you 2 emails asking for phone discussion; but I have received no response. I respectfully suggest that a phone discussion between we two would save us both a whole lot of key-strokes.
> Before I go into a new treatise I will try to clarify what I meant about the "nasty" Jews being the Apostles. Try reading the Book of Acts this way. The Jews who were adamantly trying to kill Paul were actually James' judicial team of Ebionites (leading many other religious Jews).
cbs#: I am thin on the term “Ebonites”, although I am inclined to believe it a valid term. Other-wise your words sound correct.
> When Paul returned to Jerusalem he was not only warned from doing so
cbs#: I have not seen any evidence of a warning for saul/paul to not go to Jerusalem, sir.
> but little word had reached Jerusalem about the heretical teachings he was preaching in Asia Minor. There was only a Cypriot Jew named Mnason to contradict that he had steered clear of Cyprus (and bought his expensive Roman citizenship papers out of alms intended for the Ebionite missionaries' "widows").
cbs#: Interesting.
> Now imagine as testimony caught up with Paul. More people coming into Jerusalem who had seen Paul and heard about what he was teaching in Asia Minor. Now James was feeling duped into believing Paul because he had shaved his head and cleansed himself lawfully for a week.
cbs#: Well, I suppose such is possible. But through reading Eisenman’s “James, the Brother of Jesus”; it seems very probably that James was in the control of a very efficient intelligence-gathering network, that he was fully aware of saul/paul’s negative impact on their true christian/israelite work; & that saul/paul had very little chance of “duping” James.
Also, there is another explanation for the head-shaving, fasting, cleansing activities of saul/paul. This is that James had set a “Penance for Sins” Requirement on saul/paul, & saul/paul had accepted. But as the spiritual cleansing process of fasting in the temple took its natural course, saul/paul made choices to embrace evil/demonic spirit-forces. I think it was Baigent/Leigh’s work which partially explored this idea, but it could have been Eisenman.
> So the Bible fails to vilify the Apostles and the reading through the Gospels gives the Christian reader the impression that the Jews after Paul in the Book of Acts were the same Jews that called for the Crucifixion.
cbs#: Yea. Ok. I see what you are saying (after re-reading it 3 times). Agreed.
> Maybe so but James and the other law-abiding Apostles were among only the Book of Acts' Jews, after Paul's death.
cbs#: mmm; there was a powerful pharisee/herodian faction, up until the ad-66 revenge for the beheading of James, & the beginning of the “Jewish Revolution”; where-in the herodian king was slain (by the Torah-Zealous Followers of both James & Jesus/Yeshuah).
But your general-point is well-taken; that James & the torah-law obedient Jews were very prominent at that stage of events.
> My treatise is on your mention of prolific writings destroyed by Romanist book-burners. I remember a short-lived fantasy show called Rage. I only saw the latter half of about the fourth episode. It did not catch my attention at the time but this episode did.
> There was an epistle in a leather case and Romans were after it to destroy it. People were getting killed over it and it fell in the hands of a Christian girl who befriended the pagans. A few pagans decided to help her get the epistle to a repository (she was apparently led divinely) and the pagans consulted a wiseman in the form of an eight year old boy. Careful writing revealed the boy was wise beyond his years and declared the epistle very powerful and all expense must be made to get it to the repository.
> There was entry of Longinus, the Roman who stabbed Jesus on the Cross. He was the tough warrior-hero. It seemed he must help with the mission in order to die a human death - him being about 380 years old by now. Very entertaining.
> The epistle turned out to be the Book of James. The repository was divinely protected and when the Romans converged on it they were destroyed and the little old librarian was quite pleased with the new addition.
> I tuned in the next week and nothing. I heard no more about that series Rage. I was very disappointed. Sometimes I wonder how I could get hold of the few episodes in existence.
cbs#: Interesting. I did some quick web-searching on it. I found nothing also.
How about that phone discussion?
Godspeed;
charles bruce, stewart
503-668-3932
> Regards,
> David Merrill. |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 20 Mar 2005 : 20:54:42
|
Greetings charles,
Thank you for your like-minded response.
You know... remember the written words where Yashua tells Peter:
Get behind me satan..."?
FYI... I, to this day have not received a written response to The Written Bill of Particulars I demanded years ago. Making them, fraudulent by Nihil Dicit. |
|
|
|
charles8854
Regular Member
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2005 : 01:59:52
|
> Greetings charles,
Greetings Manuel,
> Thank you for your like-minded response.
cbs#: Ditto; my friend.
> You know... remember the written words where Yashua tells Peter:
Get behind me satan..."?
Yes; i know.
There does come a time to tell fellow travelers to either
get with the real program or consider parting company.
I presume that is what you are referencing.
> FYI... I, to this day have not received a written response to
The Written Bill of Particulars I demanded years ago.
Making them, fraudulent by Nihil Dicit.
Demands for "Bill of Particulars" seems to me to be more powewrful than the non-statutoiry abatements.
Tho they surely can work together; with the abatments following default on the demand for the bop.
Your case seems familiar.
Have we discussed that case in times past?
Glory to Yhvh;
cbs ...
charles@christiancommonlaw-gov.org |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2005 : 11:52:25
|
Taking a closer look at your domain name Charles Bruce. I just realized what an oxymoron Christian Common Law is since all people are not Christian. So you are talking about a law common to Christians, Yes?
I believe that you should read the Ravage articles at least so you know what the argument is about Christianity being fashioned by Paul into the weapon against Rome. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 21 Mar 2005 12:47:09 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Original War by Propaganda
