.  But in not understanding the biblical mandate of discernment vs judgement, the whole issue of sin became clouded.   Was Phil Robertson condemning?  Or was he expressing the need for discernment --  sharing important facts about the very purpose and objective of the life that all of mankind is presently living?  Thus, with respect to the necessity of proper discernment, the Apostle Paul also wrote in 1st Corinthians: "... I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person.  For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore 'put away from yourselves the evil person'."  If we are not to keep company with anyone "...who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner", then the ability to discern what the Gospels portray as sin, is of the utmost importance.  
 
When it is recognized that the statement in Corinthians quoted by Phil Robertson was as much a polemic against heterosexual infidelity as it was homosexuality, a wise man would want to know: Why does the scriptures impose such strict biblical-based morality upon mankind?   To the degree that adultery and sex outside of marriage are condemned -- to the degree that men were told by Jesus that they have already committed adultery if they look upon another woman with lust in their heart?   Further, to the woman caught in adultery, Jesus warned: "...go and sin no more'" (John 8:2-11 NKJ).    Why?   Perhaps the answer lies with what biblical experts confirmed in their excavation of the Dead Sea Scrolls -- i.e., that post-Nicene Christianity has virtually nothing in common with the actual first century teachings of Jesus (see The First Fatal Mistake) -- which was a religion of transformation where the lost prodigal son gained entrance to the Inner Kingdom (see The Third Fatal Mistake).   And in all instances where Jesus was asked how to enter the Kingdom, his answer was virtually the same -- i.e., in the Second Epistle of Clement: “Let us expect, therefore, hour by hour, the kingdom of God in love and righteousness, since we know not the day of the appearing of God. For the Lord Himself, being asked by one when His kingdom would come, replied, 'When two shall be one, that which is without as that which is within, and the male with the female, neither male nor female’”      

How could this be?  The question should be posed?   When Paul stated that the followers of Jesus were exempt from the (outward ritual) works of the Law of Moses, this is true.   But Paul also stated that the Law of Moses was an allegorical portrayal of the Royal Law that must be fulfilled within the life of the sincere believer.   And it was the proper application of theKey Of Knowledge that would open the inner "narrow strait gate" to the Kingdom (see The Key Of Knowledge And The Cosmology Of Mind).   Thus, Jesus commanded those who would be his followers: "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46 KJV).   And this is why Jesus warned those who would claim to believe in his teachings: “And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it” (Matt 10:38-39 NKJ).   That the sincere believers in the Gospel teachings were to be in the world and not of it -- and to travail in TheWay and transform their lives and become what is portrayed in the previous link as the Final Living Temple -- and to have no part in the sin of this world -- is very clearly stated in the words of Paul who warned: "For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who ...then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt.. For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries." (Heb 6:4-6;10:26-27 RSV - see TheLie.org).  If adultery is sin as Jesus stated, can those who willfully commit adultery "...after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment".   And Christians are warned by the Apostle Paul to have nothing to do with the "sexually immoral, ...put away from yourselves the evil person."  What Phil Robertson was correctly pointing out is the fact that we presently dwell in a culture that is based upon sexual immorality. 

In light of the above profound warning to complacent believers who call upon the Lord with their lips, while failing to live in accord with his Commandments, a sincere seeker would want to know:  How is that condition achieved where "...the male with the female, neither male nor female’”??? And, it must be noted, that unless this condition where the duality of male and female is overcome and wholeness is achieved, the Epistle of Clement which directly quotes the teachings of Jesus that were evidently removed from the Gospels (seeBibleCorruption.com), conveys to the believer that the Kingdom cannot come outwardly where carnal men look for it -- because it is within you (Luke 17:20-21). Thus, where Jesus taught that one must achieve the next stage of birth to enter the Kingdom, this overcoming of the duality of male and female has little to do with the civil ordained unions of man and woman in this world -- but rather, the subsequent stages of Marriage and secondary birth that modern man does not at all understand the higher reality of. But even more revealing is the similar teaching that has been preserved in the recently recovered Gospel of Thomas where the disciples as Jesus: "Shall we then, as children, enter the kingdom?"   Wherein Jesus teaches when the Kingdom will come (within you): "When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female..." Which provokes the question: how can "you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female..."?   The answer is found in what Jesus taught as Wholeness -- and the fact that man and woman are half of each other, and must not only be reunited as ONE -- but a Divine Marriage must be instituted and evolved where the two become "one flesh" (Matt 19:5; Mark 10:8) -- physically, mentally and spiritually.   And when rightly understood, these verses are not making reference to procreation -- but rather, the total integration of male/female on all levels of their being in Absolute Oneness -- allegorically reuniting Adam and Eve within the construct of the Consecrated Divine Marriage.    Which means that Marriage itself is a Religious Sacrament -- and the vast majority of marriages ordained by the authorities of this world, are little more than stated licensed sex and cohabitation. 


Discernment was of paramount importance to the original disciples of Jesus -- and this is especially seen in the statement to the person who Jesus healed: "...sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee" (John 5:14 KJV).   And what this means is that those who sin -- especially after coming to the knowledge of the Gospel message -- inherit a fate even worse than before they were healed from their sin. To the degree that Paul warned the congregation of believers: , “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (Gal 6:7 NIV).   The Question is: How does a man reap what he has sown?   
 
In the coverage of Phil Robertson Bill O'Reilly portrayed himself as a kind of authority who wrote a book on the life of Jesus.   Taking into account the absolute need for discernment, the proper question that should be posed would be parallel to that in John 9 where it was asked in a discerning manner: "Teacher, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born homosexual?"   And while not righly understood today, this question is well represented in what can be portrayed at the subheading, The Biblical Foundational Mindset.   Did the Jews in the first century believe in the pre-existent soul?  As stated in The Hastings-Scribner Dictionary Of The Bible (New York, 1903. Bk 4, p. 63) "To affirm that Jews in Christ's time did not believe in pre-existence is simply incorrect".   Which means that the discernment raised by Phil Robertson with respect to the plight of the homosexual is of paramount importance for all people today to understand.

When rightly understood, Phil Robertson wasn't judging and condemning anyone -- as suggested by Bill O'Reilly and many of his critics.   What Phil Robertson was in fact doing was warning others about the pitfalls of certain behavior which the scriptures portray as immoral and ungodly.   In the words of the Apostle Paul: “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (Gal 6:7 NIV) -- which can also be portrayed in the words: "Teacher, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born homosexual?"   And this biblically based reality is explored in the subheading The Conditions Of One's Birth.   And if we ask the question as to why this biblical teaching is not understood today?   The answer is, because the modern Church has shackled itself in the abyss of a Spiritual Diaspora of ignorance, because of its perpetuation of The Religion Of Roman Emperors.


When Bill O'Reilly first announced that he was writing a book, The Killing Of Jesus, I hoped that he would open the Pandora's Box of the Christian world and reveal the original Gospel teachings that were suppressed by the secular politics of the Roman Church.   The original disciples who walked and talked with the historical man Jesus daily, did not believe that he was God -- but very much a true holy man who fulfilled the Royal Law of God within himself, and became At-One with the Indwelling Logos.    Quoting from The Foundational Paradigm Of Mind And Being Jesus was a man who became the Anointed (Messiah/Christ) at his baptism in the Jordan (see The Ten Words), the Church corrupted the very words of God spoken to mankind -- because they were too carnal to comprehend the original teachings respecting the man Jesus who was in“...supernatural union of a man and God... In their eyes, Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary: but he was the best and wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was baptized in the Jordan, the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry” (Gibbon; The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.4, P.366).   Or that Jesus was the example and pattern for all of mankind because in the original teachings of the Gospel, Jesus was portrayed as being "...justified by fulfilling the Law. He was the Christ of God, since not one of the rest of mankind had observed the Law completely. Had any one else fulfilled the commandments of the Law, he would have been the Christ." Hence "when [believers] thus fulfill the law, they are able to become Christs, for they assert that our Lord Himself was a man in like sense with all humanity."  (Hippolytus, Refut. Omn. Haer. vii. 34).    That the majority of Gentile Christians were too carnal in their thinking, mindset and lifestyle to understand this essential original teaching of the Gospel, is because they could not conceive of the reality that the mind of man is segmented into levels of higher and lower fragmented consciousness that alienates man not only from the inner Kingdom, but the higher reality of his own soul -- and ultimately God. 

In 2nd Corinthians Paul confirms the reality that there exists deeper levels of consciousness within the mind of man, and relates the account of being taken up in spirit to the Heavenly Kingdom where he witnessed mysteries which are inconceivable to the faith-based congregation of believers.   Quoting the article Opening The Eyes Of The HeartIf it is true that there are higher realities of being that are totally inconceivable to the mind of the undeveloped faith-based believer (see  Mysteries Of The Gospel) -- and by virtue of their immaturity, the biblical authors were powerless to explain in detail many of the important Gospel teachings and concepts -- then the spiritually mature author's of the scriptures who do Know of these higher realities, remain virtually powerless to do anything more than to provide the people with a list of do's and don'ts, so that the immature Christians will be in a position where they are then better able to evolve to a mature understanding and comprehension of the teachings of Jesus and TheWay.  To totally ignore these do's and don'ts, without knowing the consequence of one's choices and actions, is paramount to walking out onto a freeway blindfolded. 

What this means is that Phil Robertson was promoting Gospel-discernment when he expressed the importance of maintaining biblical morality.   In fact, if Phil Robertson was of a more mature spiritual understanding, he would have explained about The Esoteric Reality Of Virginity And Sex -- and he would have enlightened the people about The Holographic Pattern Of Sex that is the basis of the biblical prohibitions and morality that the people in our modern culture find outdated.   And while it is true that as a faith-based Christian that Phil Robertson does not possess this higher understanding that has been suppressed by the Church of Rome, it is also true that Phil Robertson is wise and insightful enough not to violate the do's and don'ts set forth in the Gospels.   For greater understanding, click on the below links for a more in-depth exploration of the relationship of sexual morality and gaining entrance to the Kingdom within.

GodSpeed in TheWay,

Brother of Yeshua/Jesus

The Esoteric Feminine Mystique


Lilith.Nazirene.org
 



" />
Home // Headlines // O’Reilly vs Duck Dynasty
 

O’Reilly vs Duck Dynasty

While I can't say that Bill O'Reilly's recent coverage of the Duck Dynasty fiasco was negative, he raised a number of points that failed to put the issues in their proper perspective.   Generally, Phil Robertson was portrayed as a Fundamentalist who promoted outdated biblical morality.   Yet, if it is true that the Gospels were written by Godly Enlightened men, can their Wisdom be outdated?  Can Truth be outdated?  Twice Mr. O'Reilly mentioned the condemnation of homosexuality as stemming from the Old Testament -- and yet, it was the New Testament -- 1st Corinthians -- that Phil Robertson was in fact quoting in the statement: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers — they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. … Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”

O'Reilly then seemed to find fault with Phil Robertson's statements, and quoted Luke 6:37: "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven".  But in not understanding the biblical mandate of discernment vs judgement, the whole issue of sin became clouded.   Was Phil Robertson condemning?  Or was he expressing the need for discernment --  sharing important facts about the very purpose and objective of the life that all of mankind is presently living?  Thus, with respect to the necessity of proper discernment, the Apostle Paul also wrote in 1st Corinthians: "... I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person.  For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore 'put away from yourselves the evil person'."  If we are not to keep company with anyone "...who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner", then the ability to discern what the Gospels portray as sin, is of the utmost importance.  
 
When it is recognized that the statement in Corinthians quoted by Phil Robertson was as much a polemic against heterosexual infidelity as it was homosexuality, a wise man would want to know: Why does the scriptures impose such strict biblical-based morality upon mankind?   To the degree that adultery and sex outside of marriage are condemned -- to the degree that men were told by Jesus that they have already committed adultery if they look upon another woman with lust in their heart?   Further, to the woman caught in adultery, Jesus warned: "...go and sin no more'" (John 8:2-11 NKJ).    Why?   Perhaps the answer lies with what biblical experts confirmed in their excavation of the Dead Sea Scrolls -- i.e., that post-Nicene Christianity has virtually nothing in common with the actual first century teachings of Jesus (see The First Fatal Mistake) -- which was a religion of transformation where the lost prodigal son gained entrance to the Inner Kingdom (see The Third Fatal Mistake).   And in all instances where Jesus was asked how to enter the Kingdom, his answer was virtually the same -- i.e., in the Second Epistle of Clement: “Let us expect, therefore, hour by hour, the kingdom of God in love and righteousness, since we know not the day of the appearing of God. For the Lord Himself, being asked by one when His kingdom would come, replied, 'When two shall be one, that which is without as that which is within, and the male with the female, neither male nor female’”      

How could this be?  The question should be posed?   When Paul stated that the followers of Jesus were exempt from the (outward ritual) works of the Law of Moses, this is true.   But Paul also stated that the Law of Moses was an allegorical portrayal of the Royal Law that must be fulfilled within the life of the sincere believer.   And it was the proper application of theKey Of Knowledge that would open the inner "narrow strait gate" to the Kingdom (see The Key Of Knowledge And The Cosmology Of Mind).   Thus, Jesus commanded those who would be his followers: "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46 KJV).   And this is why Jesus warned those who would claim to believe in his teachings: “And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it” (Matt 10:38-39 NKJ).   That the sincere believers in the Gospel teachings were to be in the world and not of it -- and to travail in TheWay and transform their lives and become what is portrayed in the previous link as the Final Living Temple -- and to have no part in the sin of this world -- is very clearly stated in the words of Paul who warned: "For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who ...then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt.. For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries." (Heb 6:4-6;10:26-27 RSV - see TheLie.org).  If adultery is sin as Jesus stated, can those who willfully commit adultery "...after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment".   And Christians are warned by the Apostle Paul to have nothing to do with the "sexually immoral, ...put away from yourselves the evil person."  What Phil Robertson was correctly pointing out is the fact that we presently dwell in a culture that is based upon sexual immorality. 

In light of the above profound warning to complacent believers who call upon the Lord with their lips, while failing to live in accord with his Commandments, a sincere seeker would want to know:  How is that condition achieved where "...the male with the female, neither male nor female’”??? And, it must be noted, that unless this condition where the duality of male and female is overcome and wholeness is achieved, the Epistle of Clement which directly quotes the teachings of Jesus that were evidently removed from the Gospels (seeBibleCorruption.com), conveys to the believer that the Kingdom cannot come outwardly where carnal men look for it -- because it is within you (Luke 17:20-21). Thus, where Jesus taught that one must achieve the next stage of birth to enter the Kingdom, this overcoming of the duality of male and female has little to do with the civil ordained unions of man and woman in this world -- but rather, the subsequent stages of Marriage and secondary birth that modern man does not at all understand the higher reality of. But even more revealing is the similar teaching that has been preserved in the recently recovered Gospel of Thomas where the disciples as Jesus: "Shall we then, as children, enter the kingdom?"   Wherein Jesus teaches when the Kingdom will come (within you): "When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside and the outside like the inside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female..." Which provokes the question: how can "you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female..."?   The answer is found in what Jesus taught as Wholeness -- and the fact that man and woman are half of each other, and must not only be reunited as ONE -- but a Divine Marriage must be instituted and evolved where the two become "one flesh" (Matt 19:5; Mark 10:8) -- physically, mentally and spiritually.   And when rightly understood, these verses are not making reference to procreation -- but rather, the total integration of male/female on all levels of their being in Absolute Oneness -- allegorically reuniting Adam and Eve within the construct of the Consecrated Divine Marriage.    Which means that Marriage itself is a Religious Sacrament -- and the vast majority of marriages ordained by the authorities of this world, are little more than stated licensed sex and cohabitation. 


Discernment was of paramount importance to the original disciples of Jesus -- and this is especially seen in the statement to the person who Jesus healed: "...sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee" (John 5:14 KJV).   And what this means is that those who sin -- especially after coming to the knowledge of the Gospel message -- inherit a fate even worse than before they were healed from their sin. To the degree that Paul warned the congregation of believers: , “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (Gal 6:7 NIV).   The Question is: How does a man reap what he has sown?   
 
In the coverage of Phil Robertson Bill O'Reilly portrayed himself as a kind of authority who wrote a book on the life of Jesus.   Taking into account the absolute need for discernment, the proper question that should be posed would be parallel to that in John 9 where it was asked in a discerning manner: "Teacher, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born homosexual?"   And while not righly understood today, this question is well represented in what can be portrayed at the subheading, The Biblical Foundational Mindset.   Did the Jews in the first century believe in the pre-existent soul?  As stated in The Hastings-Scribner Dictionary Of The Bible (New York, 1903. Bk 4, p. 63) "To affirm that Jews in Christ's time did not believe in pre-existence is simply incorrect".   Which means that the discernment raised by Phil Robertson with respect to the plight of the homosexual is of paramount importance for all people today to understand.

When rightly understood, Phil Robertson wasn't judging and condemning anyone -- as suggested by Bill O'Reilly and many of his critics.   What Phil Robertson was in fact doing was warning others about the pitfalls of certain behavior which the scriptures portray as immoral and ungodly.   In the words of the Apostle Paul: “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (Gal 6:7 NIV) -- which can also be portrayed in the words: "Teacher, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born homosexual?"   And this biblically based reality is explored in the subheading The Conditions Of One's Birth.   And if we ask the question as to why this biblical teaching is not understood today?   The answer is, because the modern Church has shackled itself in the abyss of a Spiritual Diaspora of ignorance, because of its perpetuation of The Religion Of Roman Emperors.


When Bill O'Reilly first announced that he was writing a book, The Killing Of Jesus, I hoped that he would open the Pandora's Box of the Christian world and reveal the original Gospel teachings that were suppressed by the secular politics of the Roman Church.   The original disciples who walked and talked with the historical man Jesus daily, did not believe that he was God -- but very much a true holy man who fulfilled the Royal Law of God within himself, and became At-One with the Indwelling Logos.    Quoting from The Foundational Paradigm Of Mind And Being Jesus was a man who became the Anointed (Messiah/Christ) at his baptism in the Jordan (see The Ten Words), the Church corrupted the very words of God spoken to mankind -- because they were too carnal to comprehend the original teachings respecting the man Jesus who was in“...supernatural union of a man and God... In their eyes, Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary: but he was the best and wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was baptized in the Jordan, the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry” (Gibbon; The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.4, P.366).   Or that Jesus was the example and pattern for all of mankind because in the original teachings of the Gospel, Jesus was portrayed as being "...justified by fulfilling the Law. He was the Christ of God, since not one of the rest of mankind had observed the Law completely. Had any one else fulfilled the commandments of the Law, he would have been the Christ." Hence "when [believers] thus fulfill the law, they are able to become Christs, for they assert that our Lord Himself was a man in like sense with all humanity."  (Hippolytus, Refut. Omn. Haer. vii. 34).    That the majority of Gentile Christians were too carnal in their thinking, mindset and lifestyle to understand this essential original teaching of the Gospel, is because they could not conceive of the reality that the mind of man is segmented into levels of higher and lower fragmented consciousness that alienates man not only from the inner Kingdom, but the higher reality of his own soul -- and ultimately God. 

In 2nd Corinthians Paul confirms the reality that there exists deeper levels of consciousness within the mind of man, and relates the account of being taken up in spirit to the Heavenly Kingdom where he witnessed mysteries which are inconceivable to the faith-based congregation of believers.   Quoting the article Opening The Eyes Of The HeartIf it is true that there are higher realities of being that are totally inconceivable to the mind of the undeveloped faith-based believer (see  Mysteries Of The Gospel) -- and by virtue of their immaturity, the biblical authors were powerless to explain in detail many of the important Gospel teachings and concepts -- then the spiritually mature author's of the scriptures who do Know of these higher realities, remain virtually powerless to do anything more than to provide the people with a list of do's and don'ts, so that the immature Christians will be in a position where they are then better able to evolve to a mature understanding and comprehension of the teachings of Jesus and TheWay.  To totally ignore these do's and don'ts, without knowing the consequence of one's choices and actions, is paramount to walking out onto a freeway blindfolded. 

What this means is that Phil Robertson was promoting Gospel-discernment when he expressed the importance of maintaining biblical morality.   In fact, if Phil Robertson was of a more mature spiritual understanding, he would have explained about The Esoteric Reality Of Virginity And Sex -- and he would have enlightened the people about The Holographic Pattern Of Sex that is the basis of the biblical prohibitions and morality that the people in our modern culture find outdated.   And while it is true that as a faith-based Christian that Phil Robertson does not possess this higher understanding that has been suppressed by the Church of Rome, it is also true that Phil Robertson is wise and insightful enough not to violate the do's and don'ts set forth in the Gospels.   For greater understanding, click on the below links for a more in-depth exploration of the relationship of sexual morality and gaining entrance to the Kingdom within.

GodSpeed in TheWay,

Brother of Yeshua/Jesus

The Esoteric Feminine Mystique


 




 

Share your thoughts with us.

*