- Keys Writings 2014, Part 1
- Noah, The Movie
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 2
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 3
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 4
- Global Warming
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 5
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 6
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 7
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 8
- The Beast of Revelation
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 9
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 10
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 11
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 12
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 13
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 14
- The Grand Tour
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 15
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 16
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 17
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 18
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 19
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 20
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 21
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 22
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 23
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 24
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 25
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 26
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 27
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 28
- Keys Writings 2014, Part 29
The Second Thoughtform
Question: What is the second illusion (in the news media) with the accompanying thoughtform?
When I tell you this I know it will register as correct because it seems really obvious when you think about it.
This second illusion explains why they are caught in the first illusion of thinking they are just reporting the pertinent news without bias. The illusion is that they see themselves as standing in that great center between the two extremes. They think they look at both sides and take that reasonable position which is neither left or right, but what the reasonable public wants and needs to know.
This illusion is particularly prevalent with what is called the “major media,” which all report pretty much the same news and usually leave out the same things.
The thoughtform that controls them goes something like this:
“I will avoid if at all possible any news that will give credibility to extremist views and will report nothing that would offend my friends from the center.”
The problem with this thoughtform, is what it calls extreme are often views held by half the country and many of his friends who he sees as being in the center are really far left.
This newsperson thus believes he is doing an admirable job of reasonable reporting from the center when he really takes a stand with the minority from the Left. He therefore carefully crafts his stories so they sound reasonable but gives extra time and attention to stories that support his personal point of view and minimizes, disparages or leaves out stories that do not support his thinking. You can tell where a media person (or network) stands by what he doesn’t cover, or covers with a negative slant.
Bernard Goldberg who worked for CBS for many years wrote a book called “Bias,” giving an insiders fairly objective view of bias in the media. He tells us that those who work with the news do not see themselves as biased to the left or right but sincerely believe they are coming from the center and being fair to both sides. If someone points out their bias it just goes over their heads. They just will not consider such a thing no matter what.
We are fortunate today to live in an age where there are many sources of news, including the internet. This doesn’t help the person who has little desire for the truth, but for those who do, the truth is out there and available with a little searching.
There are numerous other organizations controlled by thoughtforms based on illusion. The unions are another big one. Theirs runs something like this:
We have done great things to help the laborer and know what is best for him. He (or she) owes us.
This is the opposite of what the thought was when the unions used to do their job. In the beginning what the worker wanted was the important thing. Now it is what the union bosses decree.
Most members here see me as a pretty reasonable person who would not take any action to assume beastly control.
Is it possible that I could function as a beast to some?
Could Jesus himself be a beast to us if he were here?
How could this happen and how do we avoid such a thing?
As a group do you think we are successful in avoiding the mark of the Beast?
Aug 22, 2014
Seeing the Beast
Is it possible that I could function as a beast to some?
Could Jesus himself be a beast to us if he were here?
The group seems to assume the answer is yes.
How could this happen and how do we avoid such a thing?
Even if the teacher makes every effort to not exercise any unearned or unjust authority over others he can still be put on a pedestal and accepted without question. Jesus and the teachings he is supposed to have endorsed are a large part of network of the Beast.
In the seekers quest for truth perhaps his greatest temptation into illusion comes through an “I found it” moment. He finds a source, a guide, a teacher, a book that seems to take him where he has not gone before. He tests everything to the best of his ability and he can find no error. At this point his temptation is to relax and depend on this outer source as a substitute for the inner. He just accepts what the teacher says without running it by his own soul as well as his maximum power to reason.
No matter whether the teaching comes from an angel, devil, prophet or a talking dog the seeker must run it by his highest preceptors of truth and not accept it completely until it satisfies the soul ands makes sense.
Now some go the other extreme and question everything with a jaundice eye when much of what the teacher gives out is easily seen as true by those with soul contact. Some of these types of people are governed by a thoughtform that says something like this, “Everything that is outside of my current belief system, or isn’t approved by the authority I rely on, is wrong.”
The true seeker will not accept all things without running them by the mind and soul and neither will he reject all things outside the comfort zone. He will avoid getting lazy and automatically accept or reject, and, instead, run anything that is in any way questionable past his highest personal truth detectors.
If something doesn’t sound quite right the first thing to do is to make sure you understand everything correctly. I’d say that about half the time that my teachings seem questionable to someone is because they are not getting the full picture and a more complete explanation takes care of the problem. If the student sincerely disagrees then he should open up dialog with the teacher and see where it leads. If the teacher is an earned authority and has satisfied your soul 99% of the time, but this one teachings seems wrong, then it’s a good idea to put it on the shelf and see if the picture changes over time.
I have put things on the self before only to take it off the later having achieved a greater understanding.
As a group do you think we are successful in avoiding the mark of the Beast?
We have an advantage over other groups because we know what the Beast and the mark is.. We are not waiting for a great one-world dictator to show up and plant a computer chip in our right hand or forehead, but realize the Beast has been here all along and the world worships those who use unearned authority in the present time. Members here know they are free to question me or anyone else. We are not perfect, of course. Some may question too much or not enough, but all must learn to run every new teaching by their own souls.
Keith mentioned that fear is a device used by the Beast and this was a good observation indeed. You will find that when one enters a group that is controlled by an authoritarian thoughtform that most will be fearful in speaking up or going against hat thoughtform while participating in the group?
Why is this the case? Give examples of situations where people are afraid to speak up to authorities. What is the best way to overcome the fear and challenge the Beast?
Aug 24, 2014
The Fear Factor
Why is fear such a core ingredient in the Beasts power and what is the best way to over come or challenge it?
Larry talked about what a driving force fear is in the workplace. We never talked about the thoughtforms at play there.
The power of the Beast works differently in the workplace than it does in other groups and this is why.
In the workplace you know you are being controlled and you know you are cooperating with it and you know what will happen if you do not go along with your boss. At best your movement up the ladder will cease and at worst you’ll just get fired.
Basically the main thoughtform in the workplace is this: “Do what the boss says or you are out of here.”
Of all the controlling thoughtforms the workplace is the least insidious. Why?
Because you get paid to cooperate and the laborer is constantly working to transcend the thoughtform so he is not controlled by it.
After all, who will accept a nasty boss barking orders at him for a minute longer than he has to?
The controlling thoughtforms in other organizations are different in that participants gladly embrace them and they govern their thinking. After work, and the laborer goes home, he tries to distance himself from the controls at work. So, the thoughtform governing the employee could be classified as a partial one. You are only controlled for around 40 hours a week and most likely looking for an opportunity to break free. Other thoughtforms work in the background eight days a week.
The Beast therefore doesn’t use thoughtforms to control the thinking of people in private enterprise as much as other groups. On the other hand, government employees are under much more control of the Beast than are private ones. Here the independent thinking employee not only has a boss to contend with, but there will be overriding thoughtforms sent down from on high from Uncle Sam that must be subtly absorbed and followed if one wants to get ahead. Here are samples:
You have as much power as Uncle Sam says you have and the people need to respect this power.
You know what is best better than the people you serve.
We are all a family so don’t rock the boat if you know what’s good for you.
Religion has powerful thoughtforms that members buy into of their own free will and sustain them 24 hours a day. Perhaps the religion with the most powerful thoughtform among those with a substantial membership are the LDS. Yet if you tell the average member that they are governed by a group think that they are fearful to challenge they will most likely laugh and say something like this:
“As LDS we believe in free agency and we are free to think and say whatever we please. I accept the teachings of the church of my own free will. Nothing is controlling me.”
Here’s the key piece of knowledge. When you are a member of any group and buy into its thoughtform and follow the programming it will seem like there are no controls – that you can sincerely express yourself any way you want.
However, things completely change when you step away from the thoughtform and have an independent thought. This is where the fear steps in.
Question: So how does fear step in for control when one challenges the thoughtform? How does it suddenly appear you have gone from having free will to little or no free will?
Florence writes about the legends of the fall of the female side of creation..
You would probably enjoy the book Right Use of Will by Ceanne Derohan. She claims to have a revelation from God telling us how the female side was suppressed and it needs to be rediscovered and released. I think most of her books are from her fanciful imagination but do think she struck the right chord on female suppression and that it needs to be released and set free to express itself.
Male and female dominion goes in cycles and right now we are entering a cycle where the female energies are moving toward greater dominion. Right now, as evidence of this, there are more females than males in our colleges and those with the most education usually wind up in the dominate roles.
One2 Quotes me saying:
“Good is a distorted reflection of positive and evil is a distorted reflection and misuse of negative.”
So Good is a distorted reflection of male energy and evil is a distorted reflection and misuse of female energy?
Good is still a distortion in reflection of the male energy or the Father energy then?
The Father (sending) aspect always represents the positive polarity and the Mother (receiving) the female.
The wording of that quote should be changed for clarification to:
“What is called good is a distorted reflection of positive and evil is a distorted reflection and misuse of negative.”
What people see as good is often miles away from what the real good is. For instance, until recent history slavery was seen as a good thing. They saw it as being good for the slaves because they were too backward to govern themselves and needed someone to tell them what to do. They thought it was good for society because slave labor created a better standard of living for the slave owners. Everything was seen as win/win and even many slaves bought into the prevailing thoughtform.
Now looking back we see that this version of good is indeed a distorted version of the positive energy of being.
Now, in this age many people see another version of slavery as good. They think that it is for our best good to be taxed 50% or more to provide services for those who do nothing to earn the benefits. Centuries from now we will look back and see the current system just as much distorted good as we now do slavery in ancient Rome for the slaves in Rome were often allowed to keep two thirds of their earnings if they ran a business.
The actual principle of good and evil never changes. Good is that which moves us forward in our spiritual evolution and evil is that which takes us backward.
Aug 24, 2014
Challenging the Thoughtform
The Question: So how does fear step in for control when one challenges the thoughtform? How does it suddenly appear you have gone from having free will to little or no free will?
I am quite familiar with the thoughtform of the LDS (Mormon) church for I was active in it for 20 years, from ages 13-33. I am now 69 so it’s been a while since I graduated.
There were a number of things that attracted me to the church. Here are several:
(1) I was inspired by the Mormon scriptures. They seemed to bring me closer to the Spirit than the Bible.
(2) I was inspired by their early history and teachings.
(3) I liked their doctrine that we were eternal beings that did not begin at birth.
(4) I liked the doctrine of eternal progression, that we will evolve until we become like the Father of our spirits.
(5) It made sense to me that there just wasn’t a heaven and hell but a number of places we will go to after death, as the Mormons teach.
(7) I liked the idea of lay participation, that there was no paid monastery, except the upper levels. Members could participate in speaking, teaching and healing.
(8) I was captivated (and still am) of the idea of building Zion, a gathering of the pure in heart, which was to produce a near perfect society.
(9) The teaching that God can speak to prophets today just as in ancient times made total sense, as well as the idea that even lowly members can get revelation.
The LDS church was so unique that if a member has some type of rift with it then he has nowhere to go. With many protestant churches, if you do not like your minister you can just go to a different one and hear similar sermons. Not so with the LDS. Their basic sensible logical doctrines set them apart, and once you accept them you are stuck with that church or nothing. I checked out a number of different churches and didn’t find any with the least bit of appeal.
That said, I wasn’t the type of member who thought everything about the church was ideal. Here were some things that bothered me.
(1) Whereas I was attracted to the teachings I found many members didn’t even know what a lot of the teachings were. Most were drawn to the church for the social aspects and since every member gets a job or two many felt it gave them purpose.
Outside of a small handful I was not drawn there for the association with other members, as most of my best friends through life have not been religious church goers.
(2) I found that most of my time spent there to be boring as they taught the simple things over and over. I rarely learned anything.
(3) I really wondered how heaven was going to be such a great place when it was going to be filled with boring Mormons as I found non religious people more interesting and fun to be around.
(4) The members idolized the Prophet and General Authorities. They gave them much more credit for knowledge and spirituality than they deserved and this was a big turn off to me. Most appeared to be pretty ordinary men to me.
(5) Before I knew what a thoughtform was I picked up a group think among the members that greatly repelled me. Every member that was really into the church seemed to have invisible antennas that told them how to behave and what to think. They all knew instinctively what movies would be approved by the church, what books and which people and groups they could associate with, etc.
In private I ignored this thoughtform but when attending church or associating with other members I sensed that I needed to play along or my church standing could be in danger.
(6) One of the things I liked about the Mormon scriptures was that they told us to seek out the mysteries of God, but this seeking was not in the thoughtform. It was the opposite. Everyone knew not to seek for if God wanted them to know a mystery he would reveal it to the Prophet first.
When I realized this was the mindset of members I decided to set up my own test in search of someone who could transcend the thoughtform. Whenever I found a member who seemed to be intelligent I would ask him or her about one of the mysteries of the church. One of the mysteries was the location of the lost Ten Tribes of Israel, so this was the simple question I asked as a test:
“So, have you ever wondered where the Ten Tribes are?
To my disappointment, time after time I received the same answer which was:
“I’m sure that when the time comes that we need to know, the Prophet will tell us.”
When I received this answer I knew that I was dealing with an individual controlled by the thoughtform and it would be dangerous to pursue mysteries any further.
For years I asked this question seeking a kindred spirit to share many of the mysteries I had discovered, but to no avail until my nephew, Curtis Harwell moved into town and attended the same church. Since the Bishop often asked new members to give a talk so we could get to know them he asked Curtis. I was pleasantly surprised at how interesting his presentation was and invited him to dinner.
After dinner, I asked him about the Ten Tribes. To my delight instead of giving the standard answer he said that he would really like to know where they were and that it had puzzled him for some time.
I opened the scriptures and gave him my ideas and he was not scared off. Instead, he kept asking, “What else do you know?”
Then I would share something else and he would ask again, “What else do you know?”
Encounter with the Beast
Curtis kept asking me for more knowledge. He was like a sponge, for he realized that he hadn’t learned anything really new in the church for years.
After I shared with him numerous mysteries I had discovered in the scriptures I then moved to metaphysical teachings. I shared with him some of my books that few Mormons had laid eyes on. After he did some reading he exclaimed to me, “Wow, I didn’t know that knowledge like this was in existence.”
After a couple months of sharing with him he told me that he was moving about 300 miles distant to Blackfoot, Idaho. He said he was looking forward to sharing some of the teachings I gave him with the members of his new ward.
I explained to him that even though he may not be breaking any official rules of the church in doing this that he needed to be careful or he could lose his membership. He laughed at that, thinking that such a thing would not happen.
Then he mentioned a small treatise I wrote called Eternal Progression and said that surely this would be all right to share with others as it was merely giving scriptural evidence of progression in the next world.
I then told him that even the sharing of this fairly innocent writing could get him into trouble. He didn’t think this was possible and asked why.
I told him that even though the LDS scriptures seem to say otherwise that a recent prophet in the church declared that there is no progression from one kingdom to another and that is the view of the authorities today. My treatise talked about the three kingdoms from Mormon doctrine and proves that there can be progression from one kingdom to another. I told him that the Powers-That-Be will not like this challenging point of view at all.
He had a hard time believing that the examination of a minor point of doctrine would be of much concern to the authorities. He could understand reincarnation being problematic, but not this. When he moved I kept my fingers crossed that he would not be too eager to share what I had taught him with fellow members but seek to feel them out the way I did with him.
All seemed to go fine for a while and within a few weeks he had several jobs in the church. Then he decided that my treatise had to be harmless and he made a number of copies (not listing the author) and passed them out. Among those he gave copies to were his Elders Quorum President and the Bishop. He innocently thought that they would find it interesting and want to know more.
A couple days later he received a summons from the Bishop to meet him privately in his office. The Bishop sat him down and explained to him that the paper he was passing out contained false doctrine that runs contrary to what the current prophet endorses. He had conferred with the Stake President and they concluded that it would be wise to have a trial for his membership before the High Council. He was herewith relieved of all his church duties and the trial would be held in three days.
That evening Curtis called me up being very emotionally wrought telling me of his situation. Then he explained that the only witnesses that were going to be allowed on his behalf had to be good members of the church and since I was a member still in good standing he asked me to come down there and testify on his behalf.
I told him that any testimony I could give would probably make no difference and the result would be that I would also be excommunicated and most likely wind up losing my wife and kids.
He then said, “You got me into this situation and now you have to get me out.”
I reminded him that I had warned him, but did feel somewhat responsible and agreed to go testify on his behalf.
Sure enough, they excommunicated him despite my testimony and then came after me and excommunicated me also.
Curtis was fired from his job by his Mormon boss who decided he couldn’t put up with an apostate working for him.
No one could fire me because I was self employed but my wife was a true believer and thought I was being led by Satan. We divorced shortly thereafter and she did everything in her power to keep me from seeing the kids.
I tell this story because it illustrates the workings of the Beast of unearned unjust authority. When you are in the thoughtform as was Curtis it seems like you are free to say or do what you want as long as you are supportive and obey the rules. Curtis found out this was not the case.
In my case I realized what I was up against and that even a slight challenge to the authority of the Beast would bring down the maximum attack allowed by law.
Fortunately, we have some protection from the law for one of those on the council that excommunicated me approached me afterwards and told me his only regret was that they could not put me to death for that was what I deserved.
When the seeker senses correctly the thoughtform and understands the attack that will be forthcoming then he can either be paralyzed by fear or he can face the dragon and deal with whatever comes.
I knew my days were numbered in the church as I couldn’t stand the suppression of thought much longer. Curtis forced my hand a little early as I would have liked to plan my exit on my own terms. But maybe the way it happened was for he best.
Have you ever gone up against the Beast of authority? If so, tell us your story.
Aug 26, 2014
More to the Story
For any who want to read a fuller account of our excommunications and the aftermath I prepared some links. The first part is a fictionalized account with the names altered. I was David Johns in the story and of course Curtis Hartel was Curtis Harwell.
The events and dialog of his excommunication trial is very accurate. Wayne and I were only allowed in to testify but for the rest I placed my ear on the door and was able to hear all the conversation.
There is no fiction in the aftermath links as they are written from experience to the best of my ability.
Aug 27, 2014
Greg related to us some great spiritual experiences and has chosen the path of light time and time again and we are honored to have him with us. I hope he doesn’t mind using him for teaching purposes.
He relates this:
“In early March 2010, I received the voice of God declaring over and over again, that on this day I was His son and that He had begotten me. I had received the declaration of the Lord that my calling and election was made sure.”
Let us suppose that this experience went to his head and he was tricked by illusion and ego to support the Beast. How could he use his spiritual experiences to give power to the Beast? Contrast this with the path he would take if he were free from supporting the Beast.
Aug 28, 2014
The Authority of the Beast
There are several categories of people in the spiritual arena who assist the Beast in this world.
(1) Those who have a true spiritual experience, high or low, and see themselves as unique or special because of it. They create a thoughtform that tells followers that this person has the key to such an experience and if you look to him or follow him you will have this salvation type of experience. The end result is the followers look to the outside leader rather than the God within – for the leader emphasizes his spiritual authority.
(2) Those who have a true spiritual experience, high or low, and see themselves as unique or special because of it. But the experience or source of revelation seems so removed from followers that they look to him as the only source rather than looking within. The leader only encourages this.
(3) Those who have a delusional experience or other worldly contacts they see as real and put emphasis on this in a way that directs others away from the God within.
(4) Those who fabricate spiritual experiences and contacts so followers will look to him for truth rather than within.
(5) Those who hold up an authoritative source, such as the Bible, a prophet, Jesus, reincarnation of a notable person, etc and claims special understanding or relationship.
(6) Those who attain an authoritative position in a spiritual organization and encourage the followers to look to them or the organization for knowledge and solutions.
In almost every case where a leader is empowering the Beast we see that he makes the claim that he is empowering individuals. One must wisely look between the lines to see that the way to empowerment is to not look outward to the leader and buy into his thoughtform but to the kingdom of God within. Any thinking running contrary to the authoritative thoughtform will be seen as an attack by a delusional soul.
Let us say that Greg decided to cooperate with the Beast and sought out his share of authority over the minds and hearts of men. What could he do?
He could start teaching the uniqueness of his experience that God had spoken to him and remind followers of this on a regular basis. Next he could come up with teachings and tell students that they either came from God who spoke to him or were approved by Him. Therefore, if you disagree with Greg you are disagreeing with God. You will therefore disagree at the peril of your own soul. This is where fear enters in.
What are several differences between those who empower the Beast and those who do not? What course would Greg take after his experience if he is free from the Beast and his mark? Why is it difficult for the average seeker to tell the difference between one who is free from the mark and one who is not?
Aug 29, 2014
Freedom From the Beast
First, let us deal with this question:
Why is it difficult for the average seeker to tell the difference between one who is free from the mark and one who is not?
One of the main reasons why the average person cannot tell who supports the Beast is that he looks at the surface of things. Those in the spiritual world who support the Beast are often very good at appearing righteous. They will generally preach about avoiding sin, keeping commandments, honoring God, etc. In fact they will often walk the walk and be very fastidious themselves in obeying the letter of the law.
The Jewish leaders who opposed Jesus gave the “appearance” of righteousness to the people and were more careful about obeying the letter of the law than he was. Their big criticism of Jesus was that he did not follow the letter of the law in obeying the Sabbath. The also accused him of being “a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.” (Matt 11:19)
On top of this they accused him of being in league with the devil:
“But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.” Matt 12:24
By all appearances the Jewish leaders were the righteous ones and Jesus was the free spirited fun loving guy who didn’t care what people thought.
They criticized the disciples of Jesus for not washing their hands before a meal. The Jews of that time were very diligent in ceremonial washing of hands in case they had touched something unclean previously. To them Jesus said:
It is “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” Matt 15:11
If Jesus were with us today he would not come across as the squeaky clean “saints” who expelled Greg from their midst. He would be easy going and a friend to all classes just as Greg is.
Here are some qualities of the person who escapes the mark of the Beast, contrasted with those who worship the authority of the Beast.
(1) They look for the spirit of the law and the principle behind things to determine their behavior rather than the letter of the law, scriptures or any written word.
(2) He doesn’t mind anything in his belief system being honestly examined in the light of day. He who has the mark will often take offense if his thoughtform is questioned or examined.
Did you notice that when I told Greg we were going to examine him to see whether or not he supported the Beast that he took no offense at all? That is one of the signs that he is free from the mark. On the other hand, those who excommunicated him would take great offense if we examined their thinking. Those bearing the mark of the Beast are easily offended when their belief system or their standards of righteousness are challenged.
(3) He judges his fellowmen by how they treat others rather than how pious they are or how closely they are allied to his belief system.
(4) He always follows the Inner Voice over the outer. This is the main sign of the person free from the mark. He who has the mark will look to some outside authority for his decision making for he will fear going against the outer voice. What makes this difficult for the person with the mark is he often thinks he is own man when he is actually controlled by the Beast.
So what course would Greg have taken if he was free from the Beast? Keith said it right in that “Greg has done exactly what he should have done.”
Greg has had a great spiritual experience, but he has stayed humble and doesn’t show any signs of feeling superior because of it. Neither does he insist that we all have the same experience or be damned. He just puts out there what happened to him and we can take it or leave it.
Most of the Keys members who have shared their spiritual experiences have been very humble about them and for this I am thankful.
We talked about the Beast using fear as a means of control. What is the greatest fear he uses against spiritual seekers and how is it overcome?
Aug 29, 2014
Principles and the Law
Shalom JJ, in overcoming and being free from the Beast and the Dragon, does commandment keeping, turning from sin, and resisting the Dragon come into play at all? How do you interpret Yeshua’s words in these Scriptures:
Mt 23:1 – 23:3
1 Then spake Yeshua to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat:
3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
You must remember that sin is translated from the Greek HAMARTIA, which means to error or miss the mark. There are many ways to error besides that of not literally following the decrees of a belief system.
Jesus was not strict in his interpretation of the Sabbath but looked at the principle. His words give evidence of this:
“The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. Mark 2:27
In other words, the law of the Sabbath wasn’t made to inconvenience or test us, but was made as something we can enjoy and benefit from. The scribes and the Pharisees had it backwards, seeing it as something that man must follow to the point of weariness and drudgery.
Then we recall the woman accused of adultery who should have been stoned to death for the act – that is according to the law. Instead if saying, “yeah, go ahead, Jesus maneuvered the situation so she was not executed. He then said to the woman, “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.”
Jesus was looking at the principle and overall good. In seeing this he did not condemn her as would the strict followers of the law but saw that she should be given a second change.
So, why did he encourage following the law of Moss then?
For two reasons:
(1) If he had spoken against the law in any measure he would have been crucified before he finished his mission.
(2) People are judged according to their own belief systems. The Book of Mormon expresses this point well and the principle presented here is true, even if one does not accept the source.
7 Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?…
9 And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.
10 Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written.
11 For I command all men, both in the east and in the west, and in the north, and in the south, and in the islands of the sea, that they shall write the words which I speak unto them; for out of the books which shall be written I will judge the world, every man according to their works, according to that which is written.
12 For behold, I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; AND I SHALL ALSO SPEAK UNTO ALL NATIONS OF THE EARTH AND THEY SHALL WRITE IT. II Nephi 29:7; 9-12
Where are these scriptures from the other nations?
The answer is quite simple. Every people of every nation have available sacred writings containing truths geared for the “salvation” of the people to whom they were given. These writings can range from the sacred teachings of the Hopi Indians to the Koran of Islam, to the Bavagad Gita, to the ancient Vedas to the writings of Confucius, to the sayings of Buddha to name a few.
Notice what God says about these words of his to all nations: “I will judge the world, every man according to their works, according to that which is written.”
Thus, those people who do not have the Christian scriptures but have other words of God, will be judged by those words that are accepted by their own people.
All the scriptures of all the religions teach the principle behind baptism – a new spiritual birth. But not all of them teach about the physical act of baptism.
Notice that the above scripture tells us that each group will be judged by their own scriptures. Therefore, if one joins a particular religion and the precept of that religion decrees that physical baptism is necessary then he is required to comply to be a full participant in the group of which he is a member.
So, when Jesus spoke to the Jews he encouraged them to follow those laws toward which their conscience was trained. If he had been talking to Buddhists he would have encouraged them in the same way to follow the precepts of their own religion.
These religious precepts are training wheels to guide people until they obtain power to escape the Beast and be guided by the inner God.
If sinning and not keeping the commandments doesn’t mean anything in overcoming the Beast and Dragon, why don’t we all eat, drink, and be merry while joining in with them?
Jesus said that on the principle of love hands “all the law and the prophets.” Matt 22:40
In other words, the one who follows the pure love of Christ from within will automatically fulfill the purpose of the law even though he may be seen as a lawbreaker by those with a black and white view. This is what happened to Jesus.
He who follows the law of love from within will not lead a carnal life, but will certainly not be beyond having a good time in harmlessness.
How do you explain this verse:
Rev 12:11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
Here is what is written in my book, The Unveiling:
“And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.” Rev 12:11
The group has cast the aspiration of the ego from the center of decision in the head to its rightful place in the lower self, where it can no longer cause division in the body of the group. Even so, fiery desire is strong and still seeks to override the selflessness of the spirit and assume control.
Three things give disciples domination over the dragon:
(1) The blood of the lamb. Blood is a symbol of life and the lamb is a symbol of submission to the Christ consciousness, or the soul, before the lion of Christ is manifest. The group, which in the past submitted themselves to the outward authority of the dragon and his angels, now must subject themselves to the inner Christ. Their very life must now be guided by principles revealed through the soul.
(2) The word of their testimony. Their testimony is manifest as the two witnesses, or the Words and the Works, which they have accepted through the soul. They teach eternal words and perform selfless works of service to their fellow men and women. Their teachings and service takes their attention away from low desire and aids them in subduing the dragon.
(3) “They loved not their lives unto death.” The true disciple is willing to give his life as a sacrifice if necessary, but, more often than not, the physical sacrifice will not be required. Even so, he still gives his life. The life he yields is the life that is held dear by the dragon of desire and lower aspiration. He gives up the life and control of the lower self in favor of the control of the “lamb” or the Christ within. In many ways this is more difficult than sacrificing the physical life. For one thing, the temptation to revert to the lower is always there, tugging at the disciple and the group. He must stay in focus and cease to love the lower nature and embrace the higher.
After the complete sacrifice of the lower life is made the disciple is pleased to find that the higher can fulfill the lower nature better than the lower can fulfill itself. He becomes holy, or whole, because his whole self is happy with the Christ self in charge.
Why on the fourth book do you have an all seeing eye (or is that a UFO) above the pyramid which represents a hierarchy rather than at the top on the capstone. What is the significance of this symbology?
The cover isn’t meant to convey any deep symbolism but to be attractive and give a hint as to what lies within. The eye, of course, represents the all-seeing eye of God, which is not confined to the pyramid – which is a symbol of the New Jerusalem. The rays of light, of course, are symbols of rays of light and true knowledge.
By the way, the cover was done by Duane Carpenter who I think did an excellent job.
Copyright 2014 by J J Dewey
JJ’s Amazon page HERE
Join JJ’s Study class HERE