Friday, May 29, 2015

Two examples of compromising influences

I listened recently to an audio of a pastor Begley interview
about CERN. The speaker used the term "architecht" to
describe God, so is obviously a mason. Now, thinking on
this, I realized "architecht" has implications. An architecht
doesn't build the building, workers do that. An architecht
merely designs the building. This designation for God
would fit the idea of angels doing the actual work of
Creation, but The Bible nowhere hints at this. It is clear
that ALL things were MADE BY GOD.

The speaker also totally confuses the ideas of antimatter
and dark matter, which are not the same. The idea of
contained anti matter once breaching containment and
beginning reaction means all other contained such start
reacting also is not sourced, neither is any other crazy

Supposedly this "dark matter" is all chaos and when it
affects regular life it makes chaos and evil, and it is
what everything is made of and the signature of it and
of life is the same supposedly and we all have some of
it, and the New Age notion is then floated by the speaker
and Begley (a charismatic pastor) that how we think or
feel patches into either the evil that God supposedly
made everything out of, or the good which is God, and
then Begley gets into speaking things into existence
like God did and says that the difference between us
and the devil is that the devil can believe in God but
not confess Him while we CONFESS God. This is
obviously drawn from James 2:19

"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well:
the devils also believe and tremble."

ignored of course is the following verse and overall

"But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without
works is dead?"

The problem is not that the devils don't confess God
but that they don't OBEY God, or not willingly out
of obedience but backing off in fear of God's
superior power.

WHATEVER, on the contrary, the ones who believe
in one God are confessing just fine, THEY ARE NOT

Notice the subtle twist of Scripture here.

The interview then goes on to get into what adds up
to magic, and a concept of reality that would have
everything linked to and derived from "the dark" and
so forth, reminds me of a concept from Tani Jantsang's
brand of satanism decades ago on alt.satanism.
Also a basic primer on magic.

The second thing is a very different book, "What Witches
Don't Want You To Know," by Mary Lake. I read it on
kindle last night.

This is mostly a really good explanation of things that
happened to her especially as she got involved in
recognizing and fighting satanism in her community. 
But she had a weak point that remained unaddressed.
Pentecostalism. Mentioned praying under her breath and
then out loud what she figured the interpretation was,
so it was tongues.

Now, the deception of tongues is hindered by a heavy
focus on and loyalty to the Bible. Experience and the
Bible taught her to get rid of some nonsense notions
like a Christian can't have a demon. (flat out possession
is probably impossible for a Christian who is focused
on Jesus Christ in his or her life and obeying God and
turning to God about everything, but that doesn't mean
deception minor influence and other attacks can't
happen. especially when doors are opened. which issue
she deals with.)

Mostly the book is good. But in the process of closing
doors and getting more obedient to God, Who was
showing her a lot of things that she got independent
confirmation on, after she turned to Him in her extreme
depression (yes, the symptoms of depression and of
psychic attack strongly overlap), she got into two
errors. One was believing Alexander Hislop who is
one of the most absurd researchers who bases some of
his statements on nothing whatsoever and who equates
every mythological figure that is similar in any way,
ignoring differences. This resulted in not observing
Christmas and birthdays.

Dec. 25 was
calculated based on the courses the priests worked
and John the Baptist being 6 months older than
Jesus, and what course his father worked. Also
figuring in date selection was HAnnukkah not a
Mosaic Law celebration. This argues Jesus was born
Sept. 11, which of course puts His conception in mid
to late December. A matter ignored by the writer.

Now the next thing she gets into is reviving Mosaic
food laws. Having felt "conviction" out of the blue
when eating bacon sandwich and other times she
starts getting into the Leviticus food laws, and dismisses
the vision to Peter, and notes that Jesus came to fulfill
not end the Law.

Trouble with that one is that having fulfilled it the LAw
then ends, for Jesus said not a jot or tittle would pass
until it was all fulfilled. And since He fulfilled it, He
ended it, because it would pass once fulfilled.

(and "the Law" isn't just the rules it is the whole Torah incl.
prophecies in it about the Messiah, such as that He
would come when a non Judaean would be on the
throne of Judah, Genesis 49:10)

Hebrews 7:12 "For the priesthood being changed, there
is made of necessity a change also of the law." and goes
on to point out that Jesus Christ, a priest forever after
the order (meaning "manner") of Melchizedec, is not
of the tribe of Aaron so cannot be a priest under the Mosaic

Finally, the Apostolic Council in Acts chapter 15
specified that nothing would be kept from the Mosaic
Law that was originally required to keep one on track
with God through externals, only don't fornicate,
don't murder, don't eat things sacrificed to idols and
don't eat things strangled (no exsanguination at all).
This don't eat blood or at least pour some out during
death of the animal goes back to Noah, not Moses.

That and Paul's reiterations against Mosaic ritual law,
incl. Sabbath keeping, should have settled it.

I think that because she keeps the tongues talking, and
frequents the charismatic scene, she has something else
piggybacking. she is too loyal to God and too inclined
to the Bible for it to take over, but it can give deception
and this is what has happened.

Of interest is that she notes that the people she was
fighting in Missouri were such as a KKK person who
was friends with a homosexual, and "the whole scenario
resembled a boiling brew of different pagan sects with a
particular emphasis on Druidism." Two critical towns
were Dixon Mo and Fort Leonard Wood Mo.

Some years ago I was told of just such a group networked
across the country which had exactly such a peculiar mix,
and those two towns were confirmed when I asked about
it. "Traditional Druidism" is what its called now I think.

So her family dumped Christmas and Easter and birthdays
and went for the Mosaic holy days with Christian focus.
The purpose being to break free of any links through
shared time of celebrations, this did her some good. So did
the food thing apparently, BUT BEING TOO SLACK

Given her own background of ritual abuse and attempts to
train her for something, it is possible she had eaten human
flesh, and this was the real origin of the "conviction" when
eating bacon. Subconscious recognition. God may have allowed
these semi heretic developments because they did distance her
from a compromised situation.

But if she had not been Pentecostal, I think she would not
have been blinded to the plain word of God, that the food laws
are not to be followed. A closer examination of herself would
have shown that ONLY pork got this "conviction" sense not
the other prohibited foods like shellfish, which were only
dumped after research in Leviticus. And this might have led to
digging up more memories and information that might have
been of use to her.

Thursday, May 21, 2015

how to argue with a new ager, common core promoter and/or sustainable growth advocate

here is an argument to try to weaken a new ager's stance and anyone's determination in all this.

the educational system in play [common core but this applies to other stuff as well] came (under a similar name) from that guy Muller who channeled it
from some entity.
The whole New Age thing is about changing your consciousness and sooner or later we get to hear
about spiritual beings without bodies.

now, the question to ask them is, is this really a good idea? (we know it isn't but they don't.)

fitting us to deal with life on the terms of admittedly nonhuman beings, who are radically different
from us, means forcing us into a mold we were not designed (or evolved) to be in. If this were our
next step in evolution, it would happen on its own, not be forced like this. It doesn't seem to really be
useful for physical survival and dealing with objective reality, something that is an issue in
human survival, so what good is it?
If this is to prepare us for life after death, we can learn all that when we die.
Suiting us for living non physically with a different than normal physical brain state, is
ipso facto not suiting us for living
in the world we have to live in.

So everything about this is dysfunctional from the word go.

And if nature (or rather God) did not design these different types of beings to be together on the
non humans' terms if at all, then it is highly dubious to cultivate
such beings or the states of mind
that allegedly typify them.

(someone will scream "these are demons!" YES I KNOW THAT, BUT I AM TALKING ABOUT HOW TO UNDERMINE

these beings are then an invasive species. And consider, if PETA can argue that humans should
eventually have no contact with animals at all, then why should we have contact with nonhumans or they have contact with us?
it is inappropriate.