Isaiah's Branch Analogy.

[John D. Brey]

Through the lens of Biology, I see 'Grafting' as synonymous with Gene Splicing and the 'Word of God' as synonymous with Nitrogenous Bases.

Throughout Isaiah's prophesies he uses plant metaphors as though they apply to human biology. Through selective breeding, the gardener tries to develop as near perfect a plant as possible. Once he gets what he wants, that plant becomes his "cultivar." Take the "Red Delicious" apple. The Red Delicious eaten today is an exact clone of the first of its kind developed through selective breeding in the 19th century.

Once a cultivar is developed, the plant is cloned from there on out. To allow it to mix sexually with other varieties would destroy the traits carefully cultivated. To clone a cultivar, a branch is removed from the cultivar, and made to grow through vegetative propagation techniques apart from sexual-mixing. A branch produced through vegetative propagation can be grafted onto a root from an inferior tree. If a branch from a Red Delicious is grafted onto the root of a highly inferior plant, the gardener will still get a Red Delicious from the grafted branch since the branch and not the root determines the fruit. The root adds nothing to the fruit; it merely feeds the branch grafted onto it. No matter how inferior the fruit from the root that the cultivar/branch is grafted onto, the cultivar branch/graft loses nothing of its desired traits. The root doesn't affect the fruit from the branch.

Isaiah realizes these things and implies that God is the unique gardener who started out from the get-go with his perfect cultivar: ha-adam (the first human) ----no selective breeding took place. And though you have to delve deep into the Hebrew to suss these things out, the second human was cloned from the first so that the first and second human were identical twins, perfect cultivars from the hand of God. Had the human race continued producing vegetatively from the perfect cultivar, mankind would be a clonal-colony of perfect human beings.

Unfortunately, the third human wasn't a clone of the first or the second. The ******* Cain was the first product of sexual breeding rather than clonal/vegetative reproduction. Whereas the second human is a perfect clone of the first, the third is nothing of the sort. After a branch was taken from the first human to clone the second, the serpent grafted his own branch onto God's perfect root. In complete contradistinction to the good gardener (who in the worst case grafts his cultivar onto and inferior root ---still producing his cultivated fruit), the serpent took a superior root, a perfect root, and grafted on his inferior cultivar; the branch created in his own image: the phallus. With the serpent's branch came a new form of gardening, sexual-mixing.

Isaiah's giant aha moment came when he realized that since the fruit of a branch grafted onto a different root still produces the fruit of the grafted branch, all of humanity are the product of the serpent's graft (literally and figuratively) such that we're all fruit from the serpent's ******* branch (the phallus). Cain being the first fruit of that branch. Isaiah's great excitement comes from knowing that even as the fruit from a branch grafted onto a different root is affected in no way from the root, neither is the root affected by the grafting on of a different branch.

If the grafted branch is cut down to the stump, the root can send out what's called a "basal-shoot," which doesn't share the DNA of the grafted branch, but the DNA of the original root.

Isaiah realizes that that's what brit milah, ritual circumcision, is all about; cutting down the branch (the phallus) grafted onto God's original root, ha-adam, God's original cultivar (root and branch), the pre-lapse human. Once the grafted branch is cut to the stump, the human body can send out a "shoot" נצר (nazar) from the root, and not from the foreign branch. Isaiah knows that when a Jewish male is born as a "nazar" נצר (the Hebrew word for a "basal-shoot" growing from the root of a tree after the foreign branch is coppiced to the ground), that person will be the first person in the human race to be born a true clone of the original two human beings as they existed prior to having the serpent's branch grafted onto one of them.

For this Jewish male to be born a nazar, or nazarene, a shoot נצר from the original root, a shoot נצר from God's original cultivar, he must sprout out of the human body after the grafted branch is cut off (brit milah); he must grow out of the human body as a clone, from the original root, through parthenogenesis, vegetative reproduction, virgin birth, and not from the sexual form of reproduction come from the serpent's branch being grafted onto God's perfect root. When and if this vegetatively-produced male is ever born, he will be the true circumcision in contradistinction to "ritual" circumcision; circumcision being symbolic-coppicing so that the original root created by God will send out the Shoot, the Branch, the Nazar-ene, who will save the whole human race from the serpent, and from their first birth, assuming they're up for being born again.



John

 

[Yokefellow]

Throughout Isaiah's prophesies he uses plant metaphors as though they apply to human biology. Through selective breeding, the gardener tries to develop as near perfect a plant as possible. Once he gets what he wants, that plant becomes his "cultivar."

Exactly.

I often tell people that 'Salvation' is the politically correct term for God Eugenics.

And though you have to delve deep into the Hebrew to suss these things out, the second human was cloned from the first so that the first and second human were identical twins, perfect cultivars from the hand of God. Had the human race continued producing vegetatively from the perfect cultivar, mankind would be a clonal-colony of perfect human beings.

You are the first person I know that sees that event in a similar way as I do. I believe that the phrase 'till the ground' originally had a different meaning...

Genesis 2:5
"And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."

If we look at the context, we discover that 'tilling the ground' means to Genetically Engineer Life from the 'dust' (organic materials) of the Earth...

Genesis 2:7
"And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

In other words, God wanted Man to 'till the ground' or help God create Life. Perhaps it would have been something like...

• A Man was to be genetically engineered from 'Dust'.
• A Woman was to be cloned from 'Ribs'.

The whole thing was a test to see if the couple would be worthy and responsible of such a gift. The couple failed, thus God now has to teach Mankind 'the hard way' of what it means to have dominion and to treat Life with enough respect to be given that gift. Later, the Israelites were taught that the Tabernacles and Temples represented a Zygote. The 'sprinkling of Blood' represented a form of Genetic Engineering to repair the corruption in Earth's genetics. They did not quite understand I presume... even to this day.

Unfortunately, the third human wasn't a clone of the first or the second. The ******* Cain was the first product of sexual breeding rather than clonal/vegetative reproduction. Whereas the second human is a perfect clone of the first, the third is nothing of the sort.

Yep.

I am of the opinion that the Serpent (sarcastic name for Phallus) was turned into Male Seed in this verse...

Genesis 3:14
"And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life"

Thus, the so called 'snake crawling on its belly' is actually a euphemism for Sperm (Seed of the Serpent, i.e., Seed of the Phallus). It seeks to eat the 'Dust' which is also a euphemism for Seed...

Genesis 28:14
"And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed."

The Male Seed seeks to find the Seed of the Woman. When it enters the Ovum, its 'head is bruised'. It strikes at the Footstool of God in the Nucleolus (Ark of the Covenant), bruising the feet.

Conception = Enmity. Two shall be one...

Genesis 3:15
"And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

The Cross that Jesus was crucified on was a representation of the original two Chromatids that joined together in the Forbidden Fruit to produce the Zygote and the Enmity. Thus, the death of Jesus was to reverse that event...

Ephesians 2:15-16
"Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby"

When Jesus said we must 'drink his Blood and eat his flesh', he was referring to the Zygote growing on the Tree of Life...

John 6:53
"Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you."

We literally have to partake of it to become Born Again. It is conception into the Glorified Body. It is the opposite of the Forbidden Fruit.

After a branch was taken from the first human to clone the second, the serpent grafted his own branch onto God's perfect root. In complete contradistinction to the good gardener (who in the worst case grafts his cultivar onto and inferior root ---still producing his cultivated fruit), the serpent took a superior root, a perfect root, and grafted on his inferior cultivar; the branch created in his own image: the phallus. With the serpent's branch came a new form of gardening, sexual-mixing.

There you go. I wish others could see this.

Just my two cents...

The Forbidden Fruit was what we call a 'Zygote'. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil represent Ovary. The Earth is the Mother. Satan is the one who 'fertilized' the Forbidden Ovum. The Lamb/Melchizedek fertilized the Tree of Life.

The 'Earth Mother' can be thought of as Hagar vs. Sarah. Some sort of 'harlotry' happened; thus, Hagar/Mystery Babylon became the 'Mother' of the Human Race.

• Tree of Life = Ovary of Sarah
• Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil = Ovary of Hagar or Mystery Babylon

Abraham fertilized both 'Trees' which is part of the story of Mt Sinai vs. Mount Zion.

• Abram and Hagar were the Father of Ishmael (Mount Sinai/Earthly Phallus + Earthly Jerusalem/Womb)
• Abraham and Sarah were the Father of Isaac (Mount Zion/Heavenly Phallus + Heavenly Jerusalem/Womb)

Same Father, but two different names! Two Mountains. Two Cities. Maybe it is...

• Abram represents Seed of Satan?
• Abraham represents Seed of the Lamb/Melchizedek?

Anyhow, Adam and Ishshah were given a choice as to which parents they would like to incarnate from. They chose Satan and Hagar/Mystery Babylon. And here we are... lol.

Isaiah's giant aha moment came when he realized that since the fruit of a branch grafted onto a different root still produces the fruit of the grafted branch, all of humanity are the product of the serpent's graft (literally and figuratively) such that we're all fruit from the serpent's ******* branch (the phallus).

Wow. And everyone gets mad at me for stating that Jesus was being literal...

John 8:44
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."

Satan is the Biological Father of the Human Race. Our genetics are corrupted and must be corrected.

Cain being the first fruit of that branch. Isaiah's great excitement comes from knowing that even as the fruit from a branch grafted onto a different root is affected in no way from the root, neither is the root affected by the grafting on of a different branch.

If the grafted branch is cut down to the stump, the root can send out what's called a "basal-shoot," which doesn't share the DNA of the grafted branch, but the DNA of the original root.

Isaiah realizes that that's what brit milah, ritual circumcision, is all about; cutting down the branch (the phallus) grafted onto God's original root, ha-adam, God's original cultivar (root and branch), the pre-lapse human. Once the grafted branch is cut to the stump, the human body can send out a "shoot" נצר (nazar) from the root, and not from the foreign branch. Isaiah knows that when a Jewish male is born as a "nazar" נצר (the Hebrew word for a "basal-shoot" growing from the root of a tree after the foreign branch is coppiced to the ground), that person will be the first person in the human race to be born a true clone of the original two human beings as they existed prior to having the serpent's branch grafted onto one of them.

For this Jewish male to be born a nazar, or nazarene, a shoot נצר from the original root, a shoot נצר from God's original cultivar, he must sprout out of the human body after the grafted branch is cut off (brit milah); he must grow out of the human body as a clone, from the original root, through parthenogenesis, vegetative reproduction, virgin birth, and not from the sexual form of reproduction come from the serpent's branch being grafted onto God's perfect root. When and if this vegetatively-produced male is ever born, he will be the true circumcision in contradistinction to "ritual" circumcision; circumcision being symbolic-coppicing so that the original root created by God will send out the Shoot, the Branch, the Nazar-ene, who will save the whole human race from the serpent, and from their first birth, assuming they're up for being born again.



John

Just amazing. Hopefully people will wake up to what is being taught. Seems everyone is still on the Milk! You @John D. Brey are teaching the Meat (Euphemism/Plant Metaphor/Biology).

 

[Yokefellow]

New Jerusalem Has a Menstrual Cycle

New Jerusalem is referred to as a 'Bride' in the Book of Revelation...

Revelation 21:2
"And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

How exactly is this Golden City a Bride? There are many clues sprinkled throughout the Bible to help us answer this question. When said clues are put together, they reveal something incredible and profound.

We begin with this verse...

Galatians 4:26
"But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all."

The 'Mother' being referred to is Sarah, Abraham's Wife. Thus, New Jerusalem is not only a picture of Sarah, but she is also our new Mom in Heaven. How does that work? Is it literal? Will the Saved literally be re-birthed from Sarah's Womb? Let us look at our next verse...

Revelation 22:2
"In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations."

New Jerusalem features a Tree of Life that bears Fruit on a monthly period. This is a picture of a Woman's Menstrual Cycle. Thus, the Tree of Life is a picture of Ovary. When the Saved partake, they are literally conceived into a brand-new body. The opposite is the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Now you know what the Fruit was.

Of course, the Tree of Life Ovary must be 'fertilized' by the Male Seed in order for Conception to take place...

Revelation 22:1
"And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb."

The Masculine Throne represents the Phallus that casts its Seed as a River of Life to fertilize the Ovum Tree. The Lamb represents Abraham's Seed in the loins of the Father sitting on the Throne. They are a Trinity and yet they are One.

As we can see thus far, New Jerusalem is a representation of Sarah's Womb. She has twelve 'Gates' made of 'Pearl'...

Revelation 21:21
"And the twelve gates were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass."

The word 'Gates' is another euphemism in the Bible. Its ultimate meaning is the 'Entrance to the Womb'...

Job 3:10 (Brenton Septuagint Translation)
"Because it shut not up the gates of my mother's womb, for so it would have removed sorrow from my eyes."

The opposite of Sarah's 'Gates' is the 'Gates of Hell'...

Matthew 16:18
"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Again, said Gates refer to the entrance/exit of the Womb where the Male Seed enters to fertilize the Fruit on the Tree.

Each Pearl on the Gates of New Jerusalem represents the Female Egg Cell and as well as a Covenant. Once a Spirit passes through the Pearly Gates, they have consented to becoming Born Again... literally.

Now you know why New Jerusalem is a Bride for the Lamb. The Marriage Supper is all about Conception. The Bridegroom is the Male Seed. The Bride is the Female Seed. Consummation is the theme...

"In many traditions and statutes of civil or religious law, the consummation of a marriage, often called simply consummation, is the first (or first officially credited) act of sexual intercourse between two people, following their marriage to each other."

Consummation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

When the Male Seed 'exits his chamber' of the Phallus, the 'race is on' to fertilize the Egg...

Psalms 19:4-5
"Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race."

This is where Mount Zion comes in. Mountains in the Bible are representative of the Male Generative Principle. When the Womb of Sarah, i.e., New Jerusalem descends onto Mount Zion, it is a picture of Procreation...

Revelation 21:10
"And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God"

At the very 'tip' or 'head' of the Phallus of Mount Zion, the Seed of Abraham waits to enter the Womb...

Revelation 14:1
"And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads."

Note that the 144,000 represent the rest of the Male Seed that will also enter the Womb of New Jerusalem. They are the Genetic Codes that will fertilize the Tree of Life so that the Saved may be grafted into the Olive Tree...

Galatians 3:29
"And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."

In summary, New Jerusalem represents a 'Heavenly Birthing Womb' that the Saved will quite literally be re-birthed (Born Again) into the Glorified Body. Who has heard of such a thing?

Isaiah 66:8-10
"Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children. Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God. Rejoice ye with Jerusalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her: rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn for her"

Rejoice, for Mystery Babylon has been SAVED! She is Born Again!

 

[Yokefellow]

The Two Trees in the Garden of Eden...

A presentation I recently made...

 

[John D. Brey]

The Two Trees in the Garden of Eden...

View attachment 84258​

A presentation I recently made...

. . . I love the work you've put into this, and the patience too; the willingness to attempt to explain it so all can understand. Nevertheless, while we agree on a lot, and though I see some really good stuff in your work, I think there are some fundamental areas where we disagree. And it's the fundamentals that are most important.

We do a grave disservice if we point out the errors found in orthodoxy, the fact that it's usually contaminated to some degree with false doctrines, and then start from foundations that are themselves contaminated with falsehoods and errors. The strength of our foundation determines the size of the doctrinal structure we can erect on that structure. If we start with fundamental errors, then we join orthodoxy in confusing the issues and the Body of Christ.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

A presentation I recently made...

Generally speaking, you seem to sacralize the zygote and thus the mishkan implying that the life it represents is the "human" life God considers sacred. Based on this you imply human life begins at conception. Using this foundation, you justify strict opposition to abortion implying it represents murder of human life. I believe this is doctrinally incorrect in that it sacralizes the seed-of-the-serpent that produces the zygote when it pierces the seed-of-the-woman (if you will, and many have).

While the seed-of-the-serpent indeed produces the zygote, and thus the body that develops from the zygote, and while this body is indeed a tent, tabernacle, or mishkan, just as you point out, because it develops from the seed-of-the-serpent, this tent, tabernacle, or mishkan is merely a temporary home, or even a prison of sorts, for the true life that indwells שכן the tent or tabernacle. Destroying the tent or tabernacle doesn't destroy the life inside, the true, human, life inside.

The Hebrew word mishkan implies "dwell", "rest", or "to live in". In Greek, including the Septuagint, it is translated σκηνή (skēnē), itself a Semitic loanword meaning "tent."​

​

Wikipedia, Mishkan.​

St. Paul longed for the day he would be freed from this serpentine tent/tabernacle (living death) so that he could be clothed, enshrouded, in a heavenly temple. Jesus implied the flesh counts for nothing. It's words, mind, thought, that's the true life found indewlling the fleshly tent or tabernacle. And those words, thoughts, human life, are, in Jesus' words, related to spirit, wind, breath, which doesn't exist yet in the womb, doesn't exist in the zygote, or embryo, but which enters into the fetus only after the fetus exits the womb/tomb and inhales human life for the first time.

To teach that abortion is murder is a fundamental error that implies that the serpent and his seed, when combined with the seed-of-the-woman, create what God intended as a human life. It ain't so. It's only when the seed-of-the-woman becomes a zygote, embryo, fetus, child, apart from the seed-of-the-serpent, that the tent or tabernacle produced without the seed-of-the-serpent represents a true tent, tabernacle, or temple, fit for the kind of life made to dwell in it. It's only when and if we who are born the first time from the seed-of-the-serpent, are born a second time through faith in the seed-of-the-woman become flesh without the seed-of-the-serpent, that we actualize our humanity.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

To teach that abortion is murder is a fundamental error that implies that the serpent and his seed, when combined with the seed-of-the-woman, create what God intended as a human life. It ain't so. It's only when the seed-of-the-woman becomes a zygote, embryo, fetus, child, apart from the seed-of-the-serpent, that the tent or tabernacle produced without the seed-of-the-serpent represents a true tent, tabernacle, or temple, fit for the kind of life made to dwell in it. It's only when and if we born the first time from the seed-of-the-serpent, are born a second time through faith in the seed-of-the-woman become flesh without the seed-of-the-serpent, that we actualize our humanity.

Understanding the generalities of these biblical truths, orthodox Judaism, with the Tanakh, doesn't consider abortion murder. Secondarily, and again based on the generalities stated above, the Talmud insinuates that only the "Jew" represents a living human being. Technically speaking, and the Talmud toys with this, only the killing of a Jew is murder in a biblical sense; a "Jew" being, in Talmud-talk, the same entity that exists after rebirth in Christian-talk. Through the power or ritual circumcision, the Jew is considered to be born "saved" (or not needing saved) the first time.

Since the goyim are born spiritually dead, without a living human spirit, technically speaking they can't be murdered prior to birth, i.e., abortion, nor, strictly speaking, after birth. The only time, theologically speaking, a genuine murder can occur, is where a human life exists. And in orthodox Judaism that existence is only in the Jew, while in Christian thought it's only in someone reborn.

Christian theology thus implies that the first murder was of Christ since, in Christian parlance, he's the only one born spiritually alive at birth by means of being conceived by God not the serpent. Various verses in the NT support the idea that Jesus is the victim of the first murder, by the original murderer, such that without his resurrection, we're all SOL. We need his resurrection to seed our new birth.



John

 

[Yokefellow]

Generally speaking, you seem to sacralize the zygote and thus the mishkan implying that the life it represents is the "human" life God considers sacred. Based on this you imply human life begins at conception. Using this foundation, you justify strict opposition to abortion implying it represents murder of human life.

I appreciate the feedback @John D. Brey . Your analysis caught me by surprise as I figured you would argue against the reincarnation aspects of what I believe. That is usually what people get mad at me about anyway... lol.

You present an interesting take. I had to take a moment think about where I believe Life begins. My bottom line of what I believe is that we have always been 'alive'. In other words, we have always existed in one form or another, both corporeal and non-corporeal.

I guess another way of putting it is that the Zygote is simply a continuation of the Life that a person had before they were conceived, thus there really is no beginning or end depending on how philosophical One wishes to look at it. Whatever happens to a baby before birth is God's business as to whether they go to Heaven or have to come back and be given another 'meatsuit'.

The main gist of all of the presentations I have made is to argue in favor of Reincarnation. They are designed to prove that God is Love and not Hate. My hope is that it will give others hope. The unborn baby will never 'burn for infinity' no matter what the Pastor says. Folks that have lost 'non-believing' loved ones can be content knowing that all will be reunited one day.

Being hated by Christians for promoting Biblical Reincarnation for the Unsaved is the most ironic thing I have ever experienced. Why would Christians be opposed to such Good News?

 

[John D. Brey]

I appreciate the feedback @John D. Brey . Your analysis caught me by surprise as I figured you would argue against the reincarnation aspects of what I believe. That is usually what people get mad at me about anyway... lol.

Reincarnation is occasionally taught in Jewish kabbalah. It doesn't, or hasn't, really entered my studies since I don't think too much about the unsaved and their plight. I tend to assume that's in God's hands. The offer of salvation is a free gift. Those who don't take it are in God's hands.

You present an interesting take. I had to take a moment think about where I believe Life begins. My bottom line of what I believe is that we have always been 'alive'. In other words, we have always existed in one form or another, both corporeal and non-corporeal.

The logical and or philosophical problem of hell, is the rather silly idea of God meting out everlasting punishment for sins committed during the relatively short span of a human lifetime. A person sins during their few decades on earth and then suffers for those sins forever and ever and ever.

But if, on the other hand, we've always existed, as you note above, if we're in some sense eternal beings who enter time and space to register (in time and space) a disposition that's actually eternal for us, then our rejection of Christ in time isn't based on the finite stimuli, reason, logic, empirical perceptions, related to a human body and a human life; our rejection of Christ in time, is merely a fleeting manifestation of our eternal nature.

The Bible can be interpreted to justify this stance through the doctrines of election and predestination. What God's omniscience knows to be the case, his election ratifies in time. And what his election ratifies in time, his predestination provides a mechanism to register in time: the unrepentant unbeliever is given a life, and the opportunity to register something of his eternal rejection of God, within the space of a brief life on this earth. His rejection of God in time and space, doesn't reflect his time/bound freewill, but his eternal freewill as it registers itself in time and circumstances related to his finite existence.

I guess another way of putting it is that the Zygote is simply a continuation of the Life that a person had before they were conceived, thus there really is no beginning or end depending on how philosophical One wishes to look at it. Whatever happens to a baby before birth is God's business as to whether they go to Heaven or have to come back and be given another 'meatsuit'.

What I see as an error in this logic is the idea that our finite (human) life is the primary impetus for our decision for or against Christ. I believe this is not only epistemologically incorrect, but scientifically too. When I say it's scientifically incorrect, I'm thinking of Karl Popper's most brilliant revelation (which has hardly registered through the scientific community); it's too hard to swallow for people who think their thoughts and decisions arise inductively (that is from their empirical perceptions related to their human body and its means of engaging the external world).

What Karl Popper, who was an agnostic, came to see is the case, is that the human mind doesn't so much take empirical observations from the human body and use them to develop a human epistemology ---that would be an inductive process ---but rather, we take predisposed, deductive, insight, which is difficult or impossible to put a finger on, and with that deductive insight we use empirical observations and the knowledge gained from our biological means of perception, to construct a worldview that in truth uses empiricism, logic, and reason, in the same way a potter uses clay, or a builder uses concrete and drywall. Our worldview doesn't come from the external world. We use the external world, and the way our body registers it, to manufacture an epistemology and or worldview based our non-finite disposition.

Add this concept to your belief that we're all basically eternal beings, and it becomes clear how the unbeliever can easily use reason, logic, empiricism, to construct his rejection of God, even as the believer can use the same building materials (logic, empiricism, reason) to build a temple to the Living God. We don't believe in God from empiricism, reason, rationalism, or logic. Those are merely building materials to construct a comfortable epistemological home based on our eternal status in relationship to God.

Taken this way, reincarnation would merely register, again, and again, ad infinitum, the predisposition the eternal soul or spirit brings into their new human body.

St. Paul implies that those who believe in Christ are all "in Christ" prior to the creation, or falling down, of the world. In that sense, a Christian doesn't actually chose to believe in Christ in time, though it may seem that way to him; his belief in time merely registers a disposition that pre-existed his life.

The main gist of all of the presentations I have made is to argue in favor of Reincarnation. They are designed to prove that God is Love and not Hate. My hope is that it will give others hope. The unborn baby will never 'burn for infinity' no matter what the Pastor says. Folks that have lost 'non-believing' loved ones can be content knowing that all will be reunited one day.

Col. Thieme (my spiritual mentor) used to say a right thing done in a wrong way is wrong; as a wrong thing done in a right way is wrong. A right thing must be done in a right way.

Your point about the immeasurable love of God is right. The doctrinal way that love (and desire that all be saved from damnation) relates in time and space is based on the rejection of the false doctrine of 5 point Calvinism. In 5 point Calvinism, God elects and predestines believers and unbelivers. But this implies that the unbeliever is elected and predestined to go into everlasting punishment: a thought that's incompatible with the love of God.

What 4 point Calvinism (as opposed to 5 point Calvinism) teachs, correctly, is that though God indeed elects and predestines the believer, he does not elect and predestine the unbeliever, in which case God would be complicit in their eternal damnation.

In time, God found a way, through the original sin and its condemnation, to condemn all men to eternal damnation, the elect/believer, and the unbeliever. All are condemned equally under God's Justice in time and space. All are going to hell. All, every single human being, is subject to God's everlasting damnation because of the original sin transferred through the phallus during conception.

Those who are in Christ prior to the creation of the world, when they hear/understand that they're condemned by God to everlasting punishment from birth (Adam's original sin), are naturally aghast, terrified, frightened beyond understanding. They intuitively know the difference betweent the love of God and the judgment of God such that the idea that they have somehow fallen out of the love of God, and are subject to his eternal Judgement causes existential terror.

Into that existential terror comes the glorious Gospel of Christ. Though God really does find a way to condemn all equally, he designed a way to save only those he elects to salvific grace (he elects those who were in Christ before the creation of the world to "salvation" but does nothing for or against the unbeliever). By sending one unique person into time and space in a manner such that he alone is not condemned through phallic-conception, i.e., the virgin birth, and then taking the full condemnation related to the fall, all the sins and failures realted to Adam's original sin (phallic-sex/conception) and imputing every single one of them not to their rightful home, the persons born into sin, but to Jesus Christ, God has brilliantly found a way to "save" the elect from out of the slavemarket of sin, while leaving the unrepentant sinner in his sins by his own willing rejection of the Gospel of salvation.

In this incredibly brilliant manner, God found a way not only to register the eternal freewill of all soul/spirits in time (the believer from eternity will accept God's grace while unbelievers from eternity won't), but to make time and space a place where the fundamental decision of every creature actually takes place. If the believer doesn't believe in the Gospel in time and space he really would go to hell. His decision to accept Christ, though it's registered in time, truly is effication for eternity; it really does have eternal ramification. In the same way, if the eternal unbeliever believes in the Gospel in time, it really would indemnify him for all eternity (he would be saved) even if his eternal nature was opposed to God. In this way, time is not just a reflection of eternity; it's ground-zero for eternity. What each person thinks of Christ produces the zygote, so to say, for their eternal nature.



John

 

[Yokefellow]

I wish I could write as eloquently as you. @John D. Brey .

I noticed that Calvinism is often hated in a lot of Christian forums. There is something about the concept of 'Predestination' that conflicts with the 'infinite torments' and 'annihilation' dogma, so they argue endlessly.

For me, Reincarnation and Predestination are practically synonymous with each other. On Judgment Day, the Unsaved are 'predestined' to 'reap what they sowed'. They are judged 'according to their works'...

Revelation 20:13
"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works."

If we use basic logic here, we would conclude that there is no need to 'tally up' the sins of an individual and judge them by their works if everyone ends up receiving the same punishment in the Lake of Fire. If that is the case, then folks may as well sin to their hearts content since everyone will burn equally. Where is the incentive to repent? There is none. How is that fair and just? It is not.

The incentive to repent becomes clear when we see that the more an Unsaved Individual sins, the worse their next Life or Lives will be. Thus, the meaning of Life becomes a vicious cycle of attempting to 'pay off the debt' a person has accumulated in the previous Life while accumulating more in their current Life. It is similar in some ways to the concept of Karma. It is an impossible task without Grace and Mercy.

The point of Christ is to get us out of the 'reincarnation trap' through Grace and Mercy. The Saved devote their Lives to serving God. Instead of paying off the 'reap what you sow' debt, the sins of the past are erased. The person now lives to 'produce Fruit'. It is like Community Service. The Saved become a 'Living Sacrifice'.

Romans 12:1
"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service."

Jesus preaches to the Spirits in prison. In other words, Jesus preaches to those about to be reincarnated...

1 Peter 3:19
"By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison"

That is when the 'gifts' are given...

Ephesians 4:11
"And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers"

The gifts are given before conception takes place...

Jeremiah 1:5
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Thus, Predestination is not only Biblical, but fair and just. Those that do not make it to the New Heavens and New Earth will get another chance. This is why I call it 'God Eugenics'. The whole 'predestination' thing has to do with Soul Genetics (Branches/DNA). Some folks are more 'carnal' and animalistic. They are more likely to have their Soul (Genome) 'taken out of the Gene Pool' of the Body of Christ.

Thus, the Lake of Fire is to 'purify' the Word (i.e., purify the Genetics of the Soul) so that the Spirit overcomes the Flesh. The Lake of Fire destroys 'bad Genes'.

The Spirit returns to God who gave it. Spirit (Energy) is never destroyed but transferred.

 

[Yokefellow]

Blood in the Bible is representative of Soul and Spirit combined...

Soul = Genome/DNA Information
Spirit = Energy/Mind/Character

Thus, the 'Life' (Spirit + Soul combined) is in the Blood...

Leviticus 17:11
"For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."

The Blood of Abel was symbolically sprinkled on the Ark of the Covenant...

Hebrews 12:24
"And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel."

The Blood 'spoke'. Why does Blood speak? Because DNA is the Word of God. The Blood of Abel had a voice!

Genesis 4:10
"And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground."

Thus, when the Blood is sprinkled in the Nucleus (Most Holy Pace) of the Ovum, it contains an actual person in their entirety because of their Genome.

The Life (Soul + Spirit) is in the Blood. An entire Human Body is therefore contained in a single fertilized Egg Cell via the Genome.

John 6:63
"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

Upon death, the Soul (Genome) and Spirit are what is left. The Lake of Fire can destroy the Genome, leaving the Spirit to be placed into a new Body...

Matthew 10:28
"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

God Eugenics.

 

[Ebionite]

The point of Christ is to get us out of the 'reincarnation trap' through Grace and Mercy. The Saved devote their Lives to serving God. Instead of paying off the 'reap what you sow' debt, the sins of the past are erased. The person now lives to 'produce Fruit'. It is like Community Service. The Saved become a 'Living Sacrifice'.

In the context of the Christian soteriology, a living sacrifice is a contradiction in terms.
And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
Hebrews 9:22

According to the prophets, it was about the knowledge of the righteous servant.

He shall see of the travail of his soul, [and] shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
Isaiah 53:11

For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of Elohim more than burnt offerings.
Hosea 6:6

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy Elah, I will also forget thy children.
Hosea 4:6

 

[Yokefellow]

In the context of the Christian soteriology, a living sacrifice is a contradiction in terms.

Romans 6:6
"Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

 

[Ebionite]

Romans 6:6
"Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

also this:

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Romans 6:3

And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
Isaiah 28:18

 

[John D. Brey]

I wish I could write as eloquently as you. @John D. Brey .

I noticed that Calvinism is often hated in a lot of Christian forums. There is something about the concept of 'Predestination' that conflicts with the 'infinite torments' and 'annihilation' dogma, so they argue endlessly.

For me, Reincarnation and Predestination are practically synonymous with each other. On Judgment Day, the Unsaved are 'predestined' to 'reap what they sowed'. They are judged 'according to their works'...

Revelation 20:13
"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works."

If we use basic logic here, we would conclude that there is no need to 'tally up' the sins of an individual and judge them by their works if everyone ends up receiving the same punishment in the Lake of Fire. If that is the case, then folks may as well sin to their hearts content since everyone will burn equally. Where is the incentive to repent? There is none. How is that fair and just? It is not.

The incentive to repent becomes clear when we see that the more an Unsaved Individual sins, the worse their next Life or Lives will be. Thus, the meaning of Life becomes a vicious cycle of attempting to 'pay off the debt' a person has accumulated in the previous Life while accumulating more in their current Life. It is similar in some ways to the concept of Karma. It is an impossible task without Grace and Mercy.

The point of Christ is to get us out of the 'reincarnation trap' through Grace and Mercy. The Saved devote their Lives to serving God. Instead of paying off the 'reap what you sow' debt, the sins of the past are erased. The person now lives to 'produce Fruit'. It is like Community Service. The Saved become a 'Living Sacrifice'.

Romans 12:1
"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service."

Jesus preaches to the Spirits in prison. In other words, Jesus preaches to those about to be reincarnated...

1 Peter 3:19
"By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison"

That is when the 'gifts' are given...

Ephesians 4:11
"And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers"

The gifts are given before conception takes place...

Jeremiah 1:5
"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Thus, Predestination is not only Biblical, but fair and just. Those that do not make it to the New Heavens and New Earth will get another chance. This is why I call it 'God Eugenics'. The whole 'predestination' thing has to do with Soul Genetics (Branches/DNA). Some folks are more 'carnal' and animalistic. They are more likely to have their Soul (Genome) 'taken out of the Gene Pool' of the Body of Christ.

Thus, the Lake of Fire is to 'purify' the Word (i.e., purify the Genetics of the Soul) so that the Spirit overcomes the Flesh. The Lake of Fire destroys 'bad Genes'.

The Spirit returns to God who gave it. Spirit (Energy) is never destroyed but transferred.

I'm not sure we agree on the dynamics of salvation? In the theological position I espouse, every single sin, every crime, ever committed, is put to Jesus for judgment, so that at the judgment seat of God, not one single sin will ever be brought up, not a single one (since they've all been paid for by the blood of Christ). There's no double-jeopardy in God's justice. Sin is not an issue whatsoever in the sense that the cross dealt with the sin issue.

There's no paying for sins through reincarnation since no one pays for their sins ever, they've all be paid for in full. At best, a person might be given multiple lives to accept Christ's free gift of salvation. But I think there are good arguments for why that's highly unlikely.

In my humble opinion, reincarnation is a good solution to a problem that probably doesn't really exist.



John

 

[John D. Brey]

I wish I could write as eloquently as you. @John D. Brey .

In my opinion, the scripts to your video presentations are fantastic; well-written, clear, concise, and to the point. I do think using your own voice might lend a more personal element to the presentations. The electronic voice sounds professional, but to paraphrase Rousseau, what the presentation gains in professionalism, it might lose in the raw power of the human voice.



John

 

[Yokefellow]

At best, a person might be given multiple lives to accept Christ's free gift of salvation.

That is precisely what I believe is taught in the Bible. Everyone is saved in the end. It is similar to Universalism.

But I think there are good arguments for why that's highly unlikely.

Interesting. How does the Atheist for example get to Heaven?

 

[Yokefellow]

I do think using your own voice might lend a more personal element to the presentations.

This is something I plan on doing one day.

 

[John D. Brey]

Interesting. How does the Atheist for example get to Heaven?

Within the context of what I believe to be true, the answer is that I don't know and don't feel I need to know, though I would like to know. And I don't think it's impossible to know. And maybe you have it correct?

For what it's worth, we come from a finite perspective based on our space/time existence. For us, the idea of eternal punishment is unthinkable. But our perspective isn't the end all or be all of truth. The Bible, taken literally rather than figuratively, seems comfortable with the idea of everlasting suffering. So while I'm very uncomfortable with that, I believe the Bible comes from a perspective infinitely broader than my personal peccadilloes. Though I can't conscious everlasting suffering, neither can I fully appreciate how Christ's death appeases God for all sin and sinners. I don't have to fully understand to believe. And most importantly, I don't want my belief to have to assuage my personal perspective; I want my belief to change my personal perspective.



John