The Offending Part

Feb 4, 2016

The Offending Part

lwk quotes this scripture followed by a question:

“And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.” -Matthew 5.29

Do you suppose this is something the man Jesus said, not necessarily guided by the Christ within, or perhaps even modified/added to/corrupted in the transmission of the scriptures themselves?

If you could distill down what the teaching was intended to convey, what would that be?

JJ

This basic thought is repeated several times in Matthew and Mark, which is not a surprise because many scholars think that Mark was written first and used as a source by the author of Matthew.

The above scripture mentions the “right eye”, but later Matthew repeats this thought in Matt 18:9 just mentioning the “eye” with no right or left attached. Mark does the same thing. There are similar references to cutting off the hand or the foot if they offend.

Even though there is some literal truth to these scriptures, as I noted before, it would seem quite possible that Jesus may have rephrased them if he had thought about how literally some future fanatics may take his words. Then too, it is quite possible that he never said it this way at all. Mark words his a little differently and Luke and John leave it out altogether.

The Aquarian Gospel gives a larger account of the Sermon on the Mount and never mentions this scripture at all.

Furthermore, Jesus said “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” Matt 5:17

Here is one of the laws:

You shall not make any cuts on your body for the dead or tattoo yourselves: I am the Lord. Leviticus 19:28 ESV

My guess is that this was a saying attributed to Jesus and got placed in there when the gospels were compiled. Jesus probably made some off hand remark about how it would be worth the sacrifice of a body part to enter the Kingdom of God, but didn’t plan on this type of wording to enter the holy writ.

As I said there is some literal truth in the scripture, because a life lived well with a missing body part is better in the end than a careless one where one is whole.

BUT…

99.9% of the people would see it as madness to pluck out an eye or cut off a hand just to avoid temptation. An I agree, that a person would have to be bordering on insanity to do such self mutilation, but there are some who have done it.

Saint Lucia of Syracuse, plucked out both her own eyes and sent them to an admirer to stave off his advances when she thought he may interfere with her vow of chastity. I’m not sure who was the more insane, Lucia, or the church for making her a saint.

Whether Jesus said this or not it surely was not meant to be taken literally, but merely stated to make the point that most any sacrifice or disability we might have to suffer for the kingdom of God would be worth the price. Those who go so far as to give the ultimate sacrifice of their lives for the truth are assured of great reward. On the other hand, suicide, in an attempt to negate life, is a grave error.

Even though all the words attributed to Jesus in the scriptures may not be completely accurate they are still the result of contemplative thought and have value. What meaning can we derive from these strange scriptures?

There are three body parts mentioned that may offend and cause the disciple to turn to the path of destruction. They are the eye, the hand and the foot.

The eye discerns light from darkness and when it ceases to follow that discernment the whole body goes into the hell of darkness and the person loses his way.

Through the eye the individual sees many things done by others that offend him. In this case he needs to pluck out the offense (not the eye) so he can see into the soul of his brother.

The hand is a symbol of labor and it offends when a person does harmful deeds that cause ill will in his brother’s heart. These offensive deeds (not the hand) need to be eliminated and replaced by acts of generosity and love.

Feet symbolize the power to move forward toward our goals and overcome obstacles on the way. Offences of the feet come when the person walks by those in need and does not help, or he bulldozes over a brother in the way causing harm. The disciple must remove this offensive behavior (not the feet) and seek to be a servant rather than to be served.

In reading and interpreting any words belonging to either a wise man or a tyrant one must use the eye of discernment. The literal words often do not tell the whole story.

***

Questions

Ruth asks: “These are the Jews that were here on Earth before other humans and Sanat?”

Not quite sure which group of Jews you are referring to here. If you are referring to sixth degree initiates the answer is no.

Ruth:

With the 7th Initiation, that Christ will be undergoing for the rest of humanity, what does that entail for him?

JJ

It is written: “He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied.” Isa 53:11 To complete his seventh initiation he must complete the work he has set for himself so his soul will be satisfied so he can move onward to greener pastures and leave the work for others to more forward. What all this entails no one knows in full detail.

For more on the seventh go to this audio

LINK

Start at 5 minutes 48 seconds.

The full presentation is HERE

Ruth

(Does Christ have to) resurrect the rest of humanity out of the darkness and above the cosmic physical plane? Or only himself and his elementals and Devas?

JJ

They will not be taken completely out of darkness but he will complete as much as is possible – to his satisfaction. All life will be stimulated.

Ruth:

So Jesus will be the Messiah over the Jewish leaders and ancient Jews who have incarnated into the Mormon Church? How are those people going to recognize him, when they are so stuck in wrong thought forms and corrupted beliefs?

JJ

The disciple Jesus will be a Messiah to the Jewish race, not the Mormons. That does not mean he will be “over the Jewish leaders” but he will be a force for change. Keep in mind that it has been over 60 years since DK made this prediction and even the plans of the Great Ones change with new influences.

Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Reflections on Trump

Jan 31, 2016

Reflections on Trump

Donald Trump is one of the most interesting as well as controversial presidential candidates we have had or some time. The amazing thing he has a good chance of getting the Republican nomination and winning the presidency. If he runs against Bernie Sanders he should win despite his controversy because the majority do not want a socialist president. Hillary is having legal problems because of her illegal emails and may not be able to stay in the running.

Just like circumstances fell in place for Obama to become president, so far circumstances are falling in place for Trump.

Trump has a great Achilles heel though and that is the number of people against him. Presently 60% of the people see him as negative. Some analysts feel that if a couple Republican candidates drop out that most of their people would go to Cruz or Rubio and not Trump and when the herd gets thinned that Trump may be in trouble. Time will tell.

Here are the plusses and minuses I see with Trump.

PLUS

He is very intelligent. Like I said his handwriting shows he is the most intelligent candidate since JFK. However his intelligence flows in a different direction. None of us can excel at all things. Intelligent people pick a few things of interest and excel at them. Trump does have an interest in the material and abstract but his handwriting shows that he really places a lot of attention on the social aspect of being. Some may question this because of his politically incorrect statements, but consider how well known he has been for decades. Few people are household names because they are billionaires. He is a household name because of a high social consciousness and awareness. It makes it look like he is in the game for the ego, but his greatest motivation is to mix with interesting people. He likes stimulating them in either a positive or negative way.

If he becomes president he has he potential to use this social intelligence in a positive way on behalf of the country.

NEGATIVE

He is somewhat of a wild card. As I said, he does not reveal all his plans or thoughts. This is not only confirmed by his handwriting, but his own words. Several times he has been asked about position of several issues and he has responded that he will not reveal his thoughts because knowing too much about him would hinder him in dealing with enemies if he becomes president.

He has changed positions a number of times and may change them again.

PLUS

He is a determined fighter to get what he wants. This will be positive if he fights for the good of the country.

NEGATIVE

Some worry that he will fight for personal interests rather than the good of the country. Voters need to assess whether he has the best interests of the country in his mind.

PLUS

He has proven, more than the other candidates that he can run a successful business, come back from behind, make good deals and electrify and audience.

NEGATIVE

He has also had failures and has offended a lot of people.

PLUS

He has proven he can get things done.

NEGATIVE

There is a concern that if given the power of the presidency he would use too much authority and bypass Congress as Obama has tried to do.

PLUS

We know a lot more about him than we did Obama when he was elected.

NEGATIVE

Not all like what they know, or think they know.

The three issues I look for in a president is how he will handle national security, the economy and will he support the Principle of Freedom? If these are taken care of then our lives can go on to solve all the other issues which are minor by comparison. I am not attracted to a president who wants to borrow money to give me freestuff.

Whoever we elect will have many unknowns about him or her as the person enters the office.

Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Trump Supporters

Jan 30, 2016

Trump Supporters

I read the article about Trump referenced by lwk and I must say that he really plays loose with the facts and seems to have a great bias against Trump. He draws conclusions that are not based on any recognized reality. For instance, Mr. Schwimmer says:

“Here is a man who has never held public office and has achieved less in business than Paris Hilton.”

True, he has never held public office but to say he has achieved less in business than Paris Hilton is madness. Paris has never managed a multi billion dollar enterprise, never made deals comparable to Trump and never built or managed any huge real estate endeavors, never authored a best selling how-to-succeed book and never had people support her for president. True they both had television shows, but Trump’s required a lot of savvy and judgment whereas Paris just had to be her silly self.

In his book, The Art of the Deal Trump describes a typical day:

Most people are surprised by the way I work. I play it very loose. I don’t carry a briefcase. I try not to schedule too many meetings. I leave my door open. You can’t be imaginative or entrepreneurial if you’ve got too much structure. I prefer to come to work each day and just see what develops.

There is no typical week in my life. I wake up most mornings very early, around six, and spend the first hour or so of each day reading the morning newspapers. I usually arrive at my office by nine, and I get on the phone. There’s rarely a day with fewer than fifty calls, and often it runs to over a hundred. In between, I have at least a dozen meetings. The majority occur on the spur of the moment, and few of them last longer than fifteen minutes. I rarely stop for lunch. I leave my office by six-thirty, but I frequently make calls from home until midnight, and all weekend long.

It never stops, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. I try to learn from the past, but I plan for the future by focusing exclusively on the present. That’s where the fun is. And if it can’t be fun, what’s the point?

I would guess that is much different than a typical day for Paris Hilton.

Schwimmer continues:

“who, except for the real estate knowledge, connections, and fortune, all of which he inherited from his father.”

Trump helped his father’s real estate business become successful and when he branched out on his own he borrowed $1 million from him. His father was never worth more than about $250 million and had five children to divide up the inheritance at his death. Trumps assets today are valued at $10 billion so obviously he did not inherit this from his father. His father, I’m sure was helpful, but not the cause of his success.

Schwimmer

“has failed at pretty much everything except real estate and, of course, self-promotion;

That’s like saying Bill Gates has failed at everything except his business ventures. Until running for president, real estate and his TV show were his main focus so calling him a failure in all but this is strange indeed. He co-produced and starred in the very successful Apprentice for over a decade.

Schwimmer

who touts himself as a champion of the little guy

I’ve never seen him do this. He talks about greater prosperity for all Americans.

Schwimmer

“switched political party affiliations at least five times since the late ’80s, according to voting records.”

He’s been a registered Republican since 1988. Reagan also switched parties.

Schwimmer

Who says he will “bomb the **** out of” ISIS” but is afraid of a five-foot-six blonde bombshell.

We do not know that. Many think this was merely a strategy to put the focus on Cruz and take him out as a competitor.

Next Schwimmer tells us we should not support Trump because he referenced Second Corinthians 3:17 as Two Corinthians 3:17. He was technically correct, but that is not the way fundamentalist believers reference scripture. So trump is not a big Bible scholar and doesn’t use the lingo. Who cares!

Then Schwimmer reminds us that Trump tells us he will make deals with all kinds of entities, including Democrats. He seems to think this is a terrible thing.

What is terrible is making bad deals. If a deal is good and benefits the deal maker’s side then why complain? The Republicans are terrible at making deals that benefit them. Instead they go along with the Democrats and doing this is called a deal. If they make no movement to fulfill promises to those who elected them then the deal is bad. For instance, budget deals that needlessly increased our debt are bad deals for all.

Trump has proven himself to be a good deal maker. Schwimmer seems to think he will use this talent as president, not to help America, but only himself. I see no evidence of this. One of the main deals he says he would like to have a part in is making a better deal with Iran so they do not obtain power to lob nuclear missiles our direction. Sure, that is in Trump’s best interest, but also the best interest of you, me, the whole country and world.

Schwimmer then goes on implying that Trump supporters are bordering on madness and delusion, following him without reason as if he were the second coming of Jesus.

There are a number of candidates I like and would be much happier to have as president than Obama, but I support none of them blindly.

I do not think I would get everything I want in Trump but one thing I like about him is that he understands the value of a dollar and knows how to get things done. Right now our biggest problem is our perilous economical situation and increasing debt. I believe he has the intelligence to set the economy on a stable footing and eliminate some of the wasted spending.

He is the only one running for president who has run a major business.

Back in the 1990s Trump was about two billion dollars in debt. That would have finished a lesser man. Of this time he said: “I refused to give in to the negative circumstances and I never lost faith in myself. I didn’t believe I was finished even when the newspapers were saying so. I refused to give up. Defeat is not in my vocabulary.”

Instead of giving up he focused and turned an apocalyptic situation into great success. He is noted in The Guinness Book of Records as having the biggest financial turnaround in history.

That’s not proof that he can do that for America, but it gives us more than the blind faith that Schwimmer accuses supporters as having.

Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Ice Ages

Jan 23, 2016

Ice Ages

Richard:

(Concerning Ice Ages) “As usual JJ does not have correct scientific facts.”

JJ

I am pretty careful about my scientific facts, thank you. It is rare that someone makes a legitimate correction of what I write.

There are numerous cycles that are called ice ages. The greater ice age, the Pliocene-Quaternary glaciation, started about 2.58 million years ago. Within that cycle have been lesser ice ages said to range from 40,000 to 100,000 years. Within that cycle are lesser ones still ranging from 10,000 to 12,000 years and within that cycle are 1,500 year cycles. This last 1,500 year cycle was called “The Little Ice Age” that ended with the recent warming which began around 1850.

A good case for the 11,500 year cycles was made by Robert Felix in his book Not by Fire But by Ice. He makes a good case for the fact that the 11,500 year cycles have occurred regularly for millions of years.

A case for the 1500 year cycles was made by S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery in their book Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years – a very well written book I might add.

Dates of previous cycles are regularly disputed and revised so there is no way of knowing who is making the most correct estimates.

In support of the rest of your post you might want to check out this article Global Warmists Angry Half The Earth Isn’t Covered In Ice.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/21/global-warmists-angry-half-the-earth-isnt-covered-in-ice/

Copyright 2016 by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE