mrs. spy continued, the boss-swap

we continue our action and drama:

with the story of a powerful rich mafia guy sending his collect-ors to get money from several restaurants. 

two large muscular white men [the color is not important and every race has criminals] glared with brown eyes at the scared victims. the worker placed the wad of bills into the hand of the one with light brown hair while the one with blonde hair watched. sadly their hard earned money went to the crooks.

they delivered the cash to Mr. Frig, the boss, who happens to have brown skin [the color is not important] and who was now meeting someone. they wait by the door and hear: "I need you to make sure my operations in the school are ignored," Mr frig said, "and you will get encouragement from me each week you succeed" the man smiled and promised to cooperate. frig continued "I think you should know that the last cop who worked for me was less successful and he died slowly." "you can rely on me" replied the man.

as he stood to exit the room, they saw that the man was short, around five feet 3 inches and quite fat. he had red hair and wore regular glasses rims. they came in.

they opened their brown leather cases and removed the "protection" payments. 

mr. frig announced "I am very pleased! those who are loyal will be rewarded. I now promote each of you. Gus will be an overseer of other collect-ors and you- Howard will be in charge of the exchange." "yes sir" responded the equally pleased yes-men.

frig continued, "howard take twenty g of these and deliver it to the address in this envelope and receive the shipment. you will bring it to my contact in the school code named ibin. i have sent an email that you will meet him, by the school at the start of the school day tomorrow, under the blue sign beside the school. howard accepted the packs of bills and went to his new office where he locked it in the safe.

meanwhile ibin was meeting with a tall thin man named George. george had blonde hair and grey eyes. ibin gave him the money from that day's sales, and told george to deliver it to the laundromat for money laundering.

george walked to his nice blue car, and obediently drove to the real laundromat. as he walked to the counter he said the code words "i need to wash a green belt" and the worker lifted a board so george could come behind the counter. the man looked chinese with dark hair and dark eyes. he locked the counter-top in place and led george to an office. the chinese fellow opened the door with a key and let george in. there george gave the money to kate and lenny who were wearing blond wigs. kate hugged george and said "you have always been a loyal worker and today we have a surprise for you." she smiled and licked his ear.

while george was distracted by this pleasant enjoyable sensation, lenny came near to george and from very close shot one bullet. george collapsed onto the plastic paint cover on the floor and kate hurried to change her clothes and shower in the office. sometimes working for a mafia guy has a sad ending. to be continued. [george was now dead and this position was now available for howard's promotion.]

trailer: a new student will begin selling illegal drugs in a second school... for mr. frig.

ancient robot

you all probably heard about the ancient robot?

the one in mythology called talos/talon. the people thought it worked with blood of the gods.

http://www.greekmythology.com/Myths/Creatures/Talos/talos.html

in an episode of ancient astronaut-  this was connected to a gear device also ancient- nothing like it was made after it for hundreds of years and the accuracy astounded the researchers.

can it be that humans could not build those things except for those two exceptions that were assisted by extra-terrestrials and if so why?

lets all speculate!

precision [2006 study]

http://www.livescience.com/1166-scientists-unravel-mystery-ancient-greek-machine.html

long before the boat sank [2014]

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/21173/20141129/worlds-oldest-computer-antikythera-mechanism-more-ancient-previously-thought.htm

we all want to feel that "good feeling"

when we feel a good feeling such as pleasure and enjoyment, there are certian body-chemicals called bio-chemicals [some are hormonse] which relate to these feelings.

from my reading: 

eat noodles. because-

avoiding carbs [as some people i know avoid and talk about no carbs]- is BAD for emotions because the carbohydrates relate to some joy-bio-chemicals.

so eat those noodles! etc. as long as not too much per meal. [what is too much? ask a dietitician for your personal needs] what is certain: avoiding cabohydrates such as starch in corn or rice or noodles is bad for emotions

music is not just pleasant-

but also important for moods set a goal to listen to music daily- if you "acheive" you have 2-in-one stimulation of joy-bio-chemicals. also exercise- such as a brisk walk, several days a week, set the goal and do it- another 2-in-one. if you also:

** keep a visual written-record that is a third stimulator.

summary: list the goals, especially music and exercise- then do them and write if you did for each week and month

people who meditate and yoga stretches with calmness "feel" different- this also relates to bio-chemicals which can be stimulated by the above.

 for more information-

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-athletes-way/201211/the-neurochemicals-happiness

http://www.joyfuldays.com/happy-hormones/

http://www.besthealthmag.ca/best-you/mental-health/how-to-boost-your-happy-hormones/

*note- sorry no time for my creative story- action and drama-

 maybe next session

how long were the jews in egypt? new info

how many years were the jews in egypt? 

according to the bible- a literary answer- some respond 400 years as the covenant with abraham or around 400 for those who believe 430. 

both septuagint and exodus 12.40 have the number 430.

knowledge of history means being aware that the books of the bible are known to be inaccurate- not divine and certainly wrong- numerous people have offered varied suggestions in trying to make a time-line and "shockingly" they all offer "different" possibilities- because assuming god knew- he did not tell anyone- and if he did tell, then that book was the one that religious leaders decided "not to be preserved."

the books chosen to be preserved- have been discovered as wrong.

admittedly a child who has not yet heard of history can be told "the bible is true and whoever says a detail is different is a bad naughty heretic"- hopefully they do not stay at the childish stage. assuming that line of logic according to one verse in exodus the other differing verse is a bad naughty heretic.

we do know history- and there are numerous examples, where even if we "start with the assumption" the bible is correct- we can see that is a false assumption.

SADLY, bible scholars will immorally lie and bend and corrupt- and try differing answers, one at a time, until they convince different ask-ers of opposing solutions-

HAPPILY, we can compare their attempts and see that no-one agrees with the other and also simply see from the bible itself that something is wrong. the content of the bible is false and not divine

last night I noticed in the back of a new edition of the bible- it had a timeline- attempting to align the "biblical-history" which is different from history- as distant as fact is from fiction, with the dates of millenia bc.--- and ever since i read my first religious timeline, i have learnt to "take it with a grain of salt" which means not believe that the composer was correct.

so here is the issues for bible scholars to call "apparent contradictions" and reach conflicting conclusions- based on the differing contents of the same bad book-

with inconsistencies and the problem with inconsistency is specifically: "assuming god knows therefore a book with conflicting data is not divine" and also only fools would not edit the book to show the true message.

this editions timeline claimed 430 years in egypt. after all exodus 12.40 says so.

yet exodus itself also gives the lifesapns of kohot and omram. assuming the book of exodus is "correct" kohot entered egypt and lived 133 years [probably less because he entered egypt in genesis 46.11] his son omram pa of moses lived 137 years- if we trust the bible- and with the 80 years of moses at the year of exodus exit we can total 133+137+80=350 and that is only if moses was born in the last year of omram. it is still less than 400.

rabbis teach that they were not in egypt 400 years the number they taught students in religious schools is just as baseless and they say it is "oral-tradition" which over-writes and overpowers the biook itself the contents of the holy book are not "binding" for rabbis. I know a student that for years believed the number which rabbis taught- until he met christians who said 400 and now a new edition published 430- a number certainly false becuase we know from exodus itself the lifespans of kohot and omram do not total 430. something "for those who have faith to grapple with" or open their eyes.

so which is false?
is verse 12.40 "not truly 430"? the publishers insisted 430 is fact.
perhaps the error is in chapter 6 they actually lived much longer and the book erred that kohot entered egypt age 18 married and had his first born omram age 200 and lived 337 years and then omram fathered moses age 150 plus 80= 430- problem solved- then the book is still false.

another suggestion is 215 years "by the septagint" as one bible college published- which is also a trick because septuagint never said 215 nor any number besides 430, the only difference in this topic: it has the extra words "egypt and canan" with the 430

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/02-exod-nets.pdf

 so there is no source for 215 and we can be certain that "exodus is a book of heresy" not divine
claiming short lives of kohot or perhaps that part is true and the 430 is false, because the truth of words added, for the total 430, and the time in egypt was not preserved.

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/02-exod-nets.pdf
other attempts try: 1230 bc and 1290 bc for the exodus, or even claim solomon 1000+480=1480 bc for the exodus- all which conflict what we know about egyptian and hittite history-
besides, the number in the book of kings is "not truly" four hundred eighty- the common and oft-quoted phrase "stop being 'overly' literal" in the mouth of the religious leaders trying to defend...

anyway the ones i ask believe 430- and the printed new edition- says so, and who cares about an ambiguity in septuagint- that would make the number of years in egypt "unknown"- except certainly less than three hundred fifty as explained by the years of kohot.
what if that was an exaggeration- considering no antibiotics and no sewage treatment and drinking from the river-water- 

i estimate kohot 23 years of diahrea after entering egypt age ten, until dying and omram perhaps 37 and moses 18 with an estimated exodus after "eighty years- '80' total in egypt" because kohot entered age ten. the number 80 got into exodus for the age of moses but "truly was" the number of the total in egypt.
if the israelites were ever in egypt at all. if exodus is not reliable than that leaves only the version in joshua 24 to claim it- and there too there is no number for the years in egypt. so my conclusion is less than 350 and the book exodus is certainly false-

to summarize even if we begin and start calculating with the assumption the bible is true and read exodus 6- septuagint p. 55 gives even less! one hundred thirty for kohot+136+80 less than 346 in egypt and total unknown.

2 more info from the septuagint- in ruth it has ten generations like in cron. 

pars ezron

aran aminadab

nason salman

boos obed

esi dauid

the footnote is for alterante spelings- but only a heretic would include in the same book both versions- i refer to the one of luke with more generations- in the greek, more generations "of amdi etc" more than ruth. 

some deleted in kjv

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Luke-Chapter-3/

because luke erred and was not assisted divinely-

and editing was needed- yet they did not remove enough!

another error in verse 36- assuming genesis and chronicles are correct, most match- an almost perfect attempt for a human author- and certainly not divine-  because "sala of cainan of arpaxad"- even in kjv [link above] so which is false if genesis is true- because sala was of arpaxad.

similarly which detail in exodus was the false one? the years of kohot or the years in egypt 430 septuagint has a partial solution- either way exodus is heresy. what about matthew...

another problem "not enough generations and the wrong fathers" in matthew- assuming cronicles and kings are true- as christian doctrine requires- poor things. the ruined books are the ones which they believe they are obligated to: must defend-!!

could god not tell them to write the truth?

or at least edit out the errors? of course not! these are not divine books! they are preserved with the errors and conflicting details which do not match unless corrupted in differing ways.

to demonstrate one problem for the scholars to "defend from this merely apparent contradiction" which is in fact a glaringly apparent one-

granted: what is absent is hard to notice, but we are not kids we can open two books at once! compared to the longer list in first chronicles- I challenge you to find king aamzia on the list in matthew-

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-1/

who was amazia father? and who was his son?

one bible scholar defended "not truly 14" generations in each group- call him a heretic? 

or a defender- it would be a sin to say "the verse of fourteen generations" is false or not true- but what if someone adds the letters "ly"- then i can defend verse 17 and say:

the number fourteen "is not truly" 14, and matthew did not mean one was the son of the other... 

alternatively, god never told him this one was the father of this one- because it was not a divine book. or those who defend the greek of luke and the greek of matthew saying "all conflicting versions are both true" because the words in the book are "not truly"- is that also considered heresy? or is the book of matthew itself- for denying cronicles- a heresy? you decide.

law in stone with glory "abolished out"- part 2, 2 cor.3 +rom 3.3

the words of the law "are not annulled"- for study- not erased nor left out of a religious publishing- [assuming they are good books- for this discussion] while the "force" of the law is inoperative- matching paul's message in several places- the one most clear is second-corinthian-3

*2 cor. 3

in verses 7-11 in greek "the law in stone [litho] which is glory became deprived of force" in other words: void, nothing, made idle, inactive, annulled and deprived of force.

murder will be discussed below. first-

the context compares the glory of the differing services-

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-Corinthians-Chapter-3/

now we should analyze this verse- because it is the one that messianic jews use the hebrew word cancel- so they need to play games with the words "what was annulled"- so we must- in search of letting the book establish the doctrine- see which words they dance around.

verse 11 compares something "lasting and permanent" with the law of stone which is different- not permanent.

"even what was annulled and cancelled had glory- hence so much more what is permanent".

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2co/3/1/t_conc_1081011

this discussion will not speculate "the why"- why is the law of moses temporary- if jesus is deity, then the question never begins and is not valid- the same god who commanded the law, can define which generation is bound and for which generation not in force- there are even sources in the old testament and even rabbinic talmud about time-limits and expiring laws- to be quoted elsewhere- from even rabbinic doctrine- talmud bkorot and mkilta on exodus 12- and several books which i have read have quoted numerous similar rabbinic doctrines- which should remove conflict with paul's messages- these rabbinic comments were for interpreting the "original" commands- but not for this discussion- 

the fact is: the content of this new-testament-book.

annulled are the ceremonies in the law-of-moses, and even the moral ideas have expired and need new commands. the "do not murder" of the bible was very limited- VERY, VERY LIMITED, and allowed for "many kinds of killings" in the books exodus, numbers, and even leviticus and deuteronomy too- the killer could- in the biblical literary and religious context-

claim "i did good! i only killed the sinner, not the sin of murder. admittedly, I killed, and yet the command was not: do not kill guilty, so I did not murder" this is the lesson of pineas in numbers [not ferb's family] which matches a long list of immoral-yet-biblicaly-justified murders- which are not "considered murder" to name just one "if my son shames me he deserves death" in exodus 21- look later-please!

and happily that "do not murder" which was very limited, has been deprived of force and a new morality COVERS it. with the word erase and "cover" in col. 2.14.

what is the word in cor. in greek: "argeo"? to annul and to cancel. and it refers to the law- paul is comparing the services and in brief explaining that "the law in stone with glory- was cancelled" the glory is just part of the message- admittedly moses' face stopped glowing at some time- [or perhaps that still glows? I never saw!] the law in stone is the issue here- the greek words: "moses glory face his annulled" and also the glorious message became annulled/cancelled- because in verse 7 the law in stones is mentioned and described as glory- and this glorious "service" is annulled because that is what paul is discussing: 

"the service written in stone [litho see previous post: ten of deca-logue annulled]" with+ "moses glory face his argeo" meaning briefly- "the law in stone, which is glory, became annulled". the translations have added several words more than the greek- i will not speculate why, instead we should focus on noting the facts.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2co/3/1/t_conc_1081007

the usage of the word argeo is not only- defined as annul and cancel, which suffices and means to make idle and inoperative- [an archaic word not to be used anymore is: "abrogate" also means annull cancel- repeal, www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/abrogate]

but also we can see the usage in romans 3.3

which i was surprised to discover ensures salvation for those who stop believing the faith.

the word "apostasy" is in this verse- apostasy=a+postis=faith and a+postasy is denial- unfaith, like a+morphous etc.the greek message is "not denial their faith of theo=God annul"  when studying this word-term argeo, i discovered it was used in this verse, which simply promises believers: that "denial not annul faith" which they once had.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/rom/3/3/t_conc_1049003

DENIAL NOT ANNUL FAITH, cool. many books have debated this issue- and brought numerous verses that god will punish an ex-believer who denies, verses which doctrine requires them to bend, in order to allow the "doctrine" of "guarantee/assure" the grace is secured=security- when in fact behind the veil of lengthy english- is a simple statement "faith is not annulled by denial" this was the books message in romans 3.3- me=no, source:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3361&t=KJV 

denial no annul faith. this means no need for a question mark in kjv! "me+argeo" means "not cancel" and not annul the faith in god [theo]. this is the usage of the word argeo- for cancel=annul=void=deactivate used here in cor. to tell a message that the glorious law of stone- is argeo=deprived of force. in other words- the same idea used for "no+annul+faith", is the word used here for "law+stone+glory+annul"- which became void and cancelled. "the law written in stone with glory is "argeo"= became deprived of force- like the usage in romans, there with the word no, the idea is:  became idle, inactive, inoperative, rest, became void nothing [nought archaic same idea] annul, abolish. so you call me "dictionary boy"- I am chatty and loquacious, [remember that action video con-air, 1997?] but when people play games- someone needs to be much more clear.

the idea is "abolish out" kata+argeo. hence the hebrew translators wrote here "btl" for the idea of the law with glory became abolished out.

the message of paul is that the glorious law in stone has become abolished out- so consistently he wrote in romans 8.2 "the law of grace has freed me" note the english word me- even paul the jew is freed from the law of moses- because even if we assume it is good and glorious [or part is good after moral editing and re-interpretation]- it has become "abolished out" and "deprived of force".

now that we have a clear message that the "law" of moses was not permanent, we no longer need to dance around col. 2.14 "cover/erase legal document of decree"- the idea is not only "forgave sins to erase the debt" which is part of the message there- but also "forgiving by erasing the legal document of decree" called the law of moses, so/therefore the violate-r "has not sinned against the deactivated law of moses"- if so, shall we, if so act immoral? jesus does not want that! paul explains and asks this and answers "no"- [in romans, see later, please]

the message is that those commands became "deprived of force" so it is not "considered sin" and that is the forgiveness. in other words: if theoretically an israelite, once commanded not to steal, falls to temptation and secretly takes some chalk home from school [and lost it, in this example]- under the law that is a sin- [+and atheists consider it immoral and bad- probably not prison if he confesses], the forgiveness of sin is "the erasing of the debt document" which refers both to "erase the sin" something spiritual which was created by the act and refferred to as a debt-document and can also refer to the "document of the decree" which is the "law of moses" and that word erase and wipe away is this same idea of deprive of force, written in the other epistle as above. so the immoral bad act- is different than a sin violating the command. it is only immorally bad.

so in theory: do not steal, but if you did, do not tell the missionary "I admit", and instead know that even according to his book- you have not lost all hope.

did god ever tell the gentiles not to steal? moses was sent to israelites! "simon never said so you are out"- unless paul teaches to be moral- which in fact he does in many letters because that is how a disciple of jesus is supposed to act- with morality, the same as an atheist must be moral.

the stone with glory was made inoperative- 2 cor. 3

There is a raging debate among "messianic Jews" [that means those born in the Jewish race who not only believe Jesus is the "messiah"=hence the name "messianic- of Jewish prophecy, but also is deity=god]- if they must "observe" Sabbath because the ten commandments said "do not work"?

this is not a discussion about hearing a lecture weekly! 

the ten commandments certainly did not command go to gathering and pray nor hear a lecture that day [see for yourself, later please- in exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5- later]-

assume the faith requires weekly lecture and prayer- as part of the "relationship"- like one gives attention to a friend- relationship...

this debate is about the law.

one book claims "settled! we messianic Jews must keep the law of Sabbath"- see below, the other book says "law of Sabbath? no!"

each can be supported from the same "new-testament-book"- so which is truth?

**

if god believed "the law became inactive and inoperative", then this book which contains both opposing sources cannot be from god. therefore we will assume temporarily that it is a good book- in other words: for this discussion- which idea is the book teaching?

jesus defended the students who ate on sabath by quoting the event of david- he did not say "no sabath anymore" indicating in the gospels of mathew and other parallels- that the law of sabath is operative- yet somehow in the same new-testament-book paul says several times "I am free from the law" each time the same idea in different words- 

which causes/allows translators to "bend" the text- each one according to his "doctrine" which is in fact a pre-judice=from the start- applied to bend the ideas of the book- instead of letting the book ESTABLISH the doctrine- assuming it is a good book- as above.

[dead to the law and we died to sin and dead in sin" in this context col 2 etc. refers to that same idea]

*in my search for letting the book establish the doctrine [of those who claim to believe in the book] i found in the greek some surprises, that translators "bent". 

NOTE: i have no personal gain either way- because i became convinced from numerous examples that the book is not divine- and that people erred to include together books with opposing ideas- instead of edit it with the true message- 

so i can be academically free to assume- with no previous bias "what is this book- if it is a good book- what is the message of the book" [without the influence of "the book must mean whatever so interpret it only that way"].

***which of the surprises which were revealed to me from the greek- to start with?

1 jesus teaching about circumcision in john 7

not only did jesus teach the "important laws" without circumcision- showing the cut was certainly NOT IMPORTANT- yet he said the word "you"=ymin- this is very significant because "even if jesus would have said: "important to circumcise yourself"- i am aware of several excuses" and ways "out" but jesus did not teach that! in fact he did say ymin=you!

the book is teaching us a message about the law becoming inoperative.

jesus did not say the pronoun "moses required us to have circumcision" nor did he teach his disciples  moses required you to cut- instead he did say john 7.22 "jesus said moses gave you circumcision" and the pronoun is "you"=ymin see also: 

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G5213&t=KJV

regarding john 7.22

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/7/22/t_conc_1004022

wow! if he was trying to make friends- he would say "god gave us the law to cut" [to defend healing on sabath like circumcision on sabbath] instead he says "you" under the law- have a law to cut-which you do on sabbath. 

not only did jesus not teach to his disciples: "do circumcision" nor "the cut is very important"- jesus did teach that "you Pharisees" circumcise on sabbath. not including his students and not ever instructing his students to cut-

****hence the claim "circumcision was good enough for jesus" is a "trick" misleading- because jesus never cut a man nor a baby- he was not a "moihel!" [he did cut wood- according to hearsay a carpenter not a "circumcisor"] nor even taught his apostles to cut the circumcision-

in fact his teaching of circumcision used the pronoun YOU towards those pharisees who cut a man on sabbath- or male baby.

assuming the book is good, as Christians must- then the report of the teaching is that jesus separated from circumcision of the flesh.

the words of the law "are not annulled"- for study- while the "force" of the law is inoperative- matching paul's message in several places- the one most clear is second-corinthian-3

*2 cor. 3

in verses 8-11 in greek "the law in stone [litho] which is the glory of his face was deprived of force" in other words: void, nothing, made idle, inactive, annulled- 

specifically in the context of stone! the ten commandments- this was a shocker to me because i was not "trying to read in" i have no reason to make the book say keep the law or do not-

specifically the law "written in stone"- that is the decalogue- which include the sabath-

the decalogue often quoted by missionaries to convince people [you need jesus because] they are sinners- have been deactivated by the time of paul- according to the faith of those same christian evangilizors- that is a trick! 

the ten commandments were given to israelites in that same chapter 20 and deuteronomy 5- the listener can say "i am not israelite! so i was never commanded=sin of: not to lie not to steal etc." even if I did those immoral things it was not a sin.

and the convince-r is using a text which has long ago been deactivated- since the letter of paul and perhaps earlier- as we see from the teaching of jesus-
god himself came to live among us and teach: "my words are now without force" they were for the time of the law of death. for example: not "we must cut" but instead did teach "moses gave you" ymin- circumcision, not my disciples.

i was surprised that this is in the book- but it is there, see for yourself

two more surprises romans 3.3 guaruntees future "security" for deniers! yet those who claim security quote other and not this verse- and one more from col. in next post.

the non-mercy of creation

despite the jewish tradition that specificly the "creation was with judgement" the opposite of mercy as well as the use of the word elohim which means the "judge" both in jewish-oral-tradition and which is the name used in creation+ as well as  the use of this same word in exodus- this does not interfere with LIARS who try to ensnare followers with lies to claim "from the beginning god is merciful by creating"- who would not want a mercuful god? sadly it is a trick which conflicts- both jewish tradition and the usage of the word elohim in the bible.

this is followed by the angry mass murder of MILLIONS in the flood- A PERFECT MATCH TO THE description of the angry god in deuteronomy 4 and 11 and other examples.

the book exodus decreed death on saying "bad" words this is not justice and therefore the plagues of egypt attributrd to the same god of the book exodus- were not "justice" but an angry god.

similarly the "will not live" in exodus whoever goes near the mountain whether god will unjustly kill the person or human guards will murder.

the plagues killing thousands in the book numbers and the corruption of justice to kill the one who said- SPOKE bad words in leviticus and more- the mass punishment of many for the sin of akan in joshua 7 all describe an angry god and god is described as jealous many times.

that is the description of god.
if the bible is as the religious claim "word of god or inspired by god" or at least "correct"!

so no surprise god did not  SAVE the so called "chosen-nation" of jews in poland in the 1940's because he is an angry god... maybe he was angry that they gave honor to rabbis and wanted them to stop- he is jealous- or maybe he was just angry- without justice!

more problems in the gospels

the most important issue in christianity as defined in corinthians 15 is jesus death- yet specifically this incident is reported by two conflicting versions. somehow among the "so-called-holy" books with the wisdomn of god and no contradictions- they made the bad decision to include conflicting versions and insist that the followers musty believe that both conflicting versions are true- something rational people like myself refuse to submit to.

the "apparrent" contradiction is that according to john, the romans killed jesus before the sacrifice of the passover and he was the passover- whereas according to other gospels he was killed after the day of the passover sacrifice- rational people can only be fooled if only one version or the other are read but will recognize the problem of believing both are true-

since paul says jesus was our passover- that is a better match to john and therefore matthew mark and luke which got the wrong date - relative to john- assuming john is a good book as christians believe- we may not include the unreliable bookds of matthew mark and luke- which have the wrong date reegarding the most central issue- as mentiuoned when was jesus the sacrifice

other problems in matthew is the 14 generations whcih are not "truly" 14 so saying 14 is not holy and the list conflicts both the lists in luke and chronicles so more reason to decide not to include the unreliable book of matthew in the group- because the generations conflict b oth chronicles and luke and similarly luke conflict chronicles and matthew which all are different from kings 2 - 14.21

"And all the people of Judah took Azariah, which was sixteen years old, and made him king instead of his father Amaziah."

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/2-Kings-Chapter-14/

who was his father?

according to the new testament "Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;" no amazia and wrong dad so unreliable book we know hass errors and we can be certain that those who decided to include erred and did not have any "help" from the holy spirit and cannot trust them about which books should be in.

this is not central- only the death of jesus is central but even this shows the error of the people deciding and the unreliability of the book. god would know but this is not from god.

although this is a big enough problem the issue of the date of jesus death is much more severe- when doid the romans kill him was he the passover or the day after the day of passover? rational people like me cannot believe both versions which do not match - only faith can say both stories are true- untroubled that the date does not match- god would know! so these versions are CERTAINL not from god- and the decision to include both versions whcih do not match- is  a bad decision. 

So I will decide- accept and include john's version so that jesus was the sacrifice matching paul- and the edate was the passover of the jews- and do not include the versions of unreliable matyhew mark and luke- which erred both about the geneology and more severe about the focal issue of jesus being a sacrifice-

however john itself has a great problem! called christology

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/John-14-26_14-29/

how can jesus and the father be the same one and yet14.28 "my father is greater than I" i once saw a trinity christian try to explain his faith with math symbols-
 he wrote jesus name and the fathers name and then he added two symbols- the equal sign and the greater than symbol!
there is a symbol greater than or equal but not BOTH equal and greater!

rational people like myself cannot accept that both are true- the same one "cannot" be greater than himself!only those with blind faith and religious salaries will insist two things that do not match are both true. also "my god" and eph 1.17

also john insists numerous times that jesus was eternal - as if divine- chapter one, before abraham and others- yet he has a god in chapter 20!

john 20.17
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/search.php?q=my+god&bsec=N&order=

if jesus is the same god as the father- then not "my god" if they are separeate, then that is still different than john 10 so john is also unreliable- god would know but this book is from errant men-

LUCKILY- paul did not write theos when he said jesus is master- not theos! so we are free to deny the doctrine of triune or trinity or whatever you call it-
jesus was only the messia and not divine and even the book of john which has errors that seem to describe jesus as eternal only mean that the "idea of messia" existed eternal-
not jesus himself- jesus said he was "less" than god not the same so the rest of john is unreliable and not from god- jesus admitted "father is greater he is my god and only god" if those verses are good as christians must believe than do not corrupt them! the other verses that do not match show the book is bad and unreliable- so the book john, is out like the other gospels and only one verse

i go to my god can remain with the letters of paul. maybe acts is good? i can only hope!
also john 14.16 "allos" means  another helper- the holy spirit is separate  but if the triune is one than the book of john is heresyor the doctrine of triune trinity is heresy- you get to choose.

Mrs. Spy 2 [inclusive and edited]

continued

2

Dawn's story

Dawn met me when we were both children at the pre-school. she felt pity for that "unusual" boy. we were separated when she continued her studies at a school only for girls and later found work as a secretary. At night after her day job she would return to her parents home and read books.

at the age of 20 her father revealed a partial truth- that he worked for the french intelligence agency and encouraged her to train for the FBI. Dawn was born to a father from Britian and a mother from Israel. dawn did not know that her dad worked as a british secret agent, but her mom, who worked for the mossad noticed and now had a second source of information.

after her first exciting mission [which I will write in a later chapter] she received a file about Dolf who was now the head of a powerful group of terrorists who increased fear in order to get money. Dawn Bon now did the less exciting part of her job- reading files to prepare for missions- but this file had a surprisingly interesting story. the file was to prepare for a dangerous mission: the FBI was monitoring activity of enemy inteligence trying to steal decoding equipment. the US army used radio signals and because those who find the same frequency can hear whatever is sent they must encode the message sent so that  the listener will not understand, unless they have decoding equipment set at the proper setting. a cell of terrorists whose main desire was to use fear to get money was trying to get some of the army's decoding equipment. they had captured and killed an agent and only knew where he had been killed so they called dawn to take the case

Dawn read that Dolf had been a successful student with almost perfect scores in first grade until the tragedy. one fateful night during summer vacation he heard someone smash the glass of his parents room and the loud rat-tata-tat of machine guns and he pulled his cover over his head and trembled with fear

when the loud bangs finally silenced he heard footsteps walking around the house  to take things. dolf had cried himself to sleep and in the morning awoke to a very quiet house. confident he only had a scary dream he had hurried to the toilet like he did every morning to drain the liquid waste from his body and then washed his hands and face, especially cleaning his eyes

then he went to the kitchen and was surprised that noone was there! he poured himself the corn crunchy-cereal and then added the cold milk. he ate while waiting for his parents to join him

after eating he decided that before wearing school clothes he would check his parents room. there he found blood. he stood frozen in horror traumatized for a long time, until the phone rang and dolf had hurried to answer it "i am mrs. osky I must speak with mrs. berry" he had heard. dolf replied "mrs berry was shot dead, may i take a message? Mrs. osky continued "yes tell her that her son is absent... wait JUST one second! WHAT did you say?

to be continued

Mrs Spy3

continued from previous

now we meet the FBI team

part 3

the FBI monitored activity of enemy inteligence trying to steal decoding equipment. the US army used radio signals and because those who find the same frequency can hear whatever is sent they must encode the message sent so the listener will not understand unlessthey have decoding equipment and set it at the proper setting.

a cell of terrorists whose main desire was to use fear to get money was trying to get some of the army's decoding equipment. 

to be continued

Mrs Spy part 2

this continues from previous post

part 2

Meet dawn. she was born to a father from Britian and a mother from Israel. dawn did not know that her dad worked as a british secret agent but her mom who worked for the mossad noticed and now had a second source of information. out of time to be continued

A well defended problem in the gospels

one issue well defended- is the challenge to the new testament that in luke-

"thirty years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"

compare the text- the word "son" only appears once because luke refers to a DAUGHTER!

"τριάκοντα ὢν υἱός ὡς ἐνομίζετο Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ Ἠλὶ" the word tou means "of" 

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/guzik_david/StudyGuide_Luk/Luk_3.cfm?a=976023

explains that luke says "mary was the daughter of eli" this matches with precision luke used the word for son "only once" precision. 

in contrast mathew wants jesus to inherit the kingdom from joseph- the husband of his mother.

so it would seem proper to edit these genealogies to make them clearer!

mathew 1.1 jesus inherited the kingdom of israel from the kings of david. 2 jesus was a/n heir to abraham and david etc. +and use the word son- joseph son of jacob etc.--

in contrast to luke to edit jesus was the grandson of eli son of etc. because it is not josef's father but mary's father hence the word tou- of and the word son not repeated- only once "thought to be nominaly the son of josef" because son of mary- "mary of eli" her pa was eli but josefs pa was jacob.

Mrs. Spy

Mrs. Spy

Intro. this fictional tale reports: the spy rescued me from a dangerous situation involving 1 poison gas 2 US army codes and code equipment and 3 a team of FBI special agents. most importantly romance and emotions, and it will be posted [i plan] in short burst based on the time limit I have set for each publishing session.

NOTE I selected the name of the spy based on my personal feeling and do not refer to any real person - although the name i wanted and chose first- i followed up by a search for and find on facebook and must specify "not the one with the same name" on facebook profiles. some of the details about "me" are false and conceal what realy happened in my life- displayed as a mix of truth and falsehood which is fiction and it allows me to write certain words that  I may only publish as fiction

1

My name is Nikita. When I was born in the United States my parents named me a name with the letter N so now I chose the name nikita which means "unconquerable." NIKITA. I would  prefer the name radimir which combines rad "joy or happy" with mir which means peace, but they chose the name. my parents chose which school to send me to. they sent me to a jewish religious school where the teachers taught us students the unnatural [in a bad way] stories of the jewish religious  book called "humash". later i would comprehend the evil wicked messages of that bad book- called the bible.

my earliest memories are with the other nursery age children "pledging allegiance" to the US- with words that no nursery age kids ever use, ever- nor understood. I wanted to know what I was saying but the nursery teacher did not know the meaning of those unusual words- either. most kids simply do not even ask. now I know that it means I will be loyal and not ruin the USA.

the teachers taught us bible stories- miracles and "unnatural"- in a bad way- legends. such as the story of the water in egypt turning to blood. it is "cool" to imagine, but then has a bad consequence that one will not notice the word "water" at the end of that story. ALL water changed to "blood" and finally the egyptians could not drink "water" this is a flaw and we should not bother to defend a bad book- with wicked messages that murder is "even more forgivable" than eating from the tree of knowledge. briefly: some of the most severe evil cruel messages of this bad book which should not be defended: the corruption of justice to kill sinners who did not kill a human. consider- even to kill one who killed a human- might not be justice. consider "A man shoots and killed another man, can the police kill the killer? we comprehend that this is not justice and the police will be judged for the crime"- although the punishment parallels that crime hence certainly not to kill a guilty sinner who did not kill a human.

so the books: 1 exodus- deserve death for several sinners who did not kill, as well as 2 leviticus which has the death penalty not just in theory- which is also bad whether god kills unjustly or man kills the sinner who did not kill a human,  but in fact the story actually killed the one who SAID the sinful words besides 3 the other story they killed the gatherer of wood on sabath and in addition to 4 the cruel killing of cananites in dueteronomy 7 and other examples of corruption of justice which influence the passive "be killed" phrase as intent "deserve death" by humans- when justice teaches the guilty do not deserve death- helps us comprehend that these are bad books written by humans with cruel evil ideas of corrupting justice- noone will edit them and the book which contains such ideas is a bad book not to be defended- I will not even discuss the details of the cruel pain of circumcision... we return to pre-school

there was a girl in my group, her name was "dawn" and i liked that name- because not only did it have a beautiful meaning it also  influenced the name "eve" as the time evening! we were separated when I completed nursery school- then my parents chose a severley orthodox jewish school. both of my parents and also several rabbis pained me physicly with beatings, in addition to immeasurable emotion harm. the jewish books encourage parents and teachers to hit children and students. but parents know to deny it so they will not be punished. anyway i never saw dawn again- for decades- because she went to a school only for girls and i went to a school with all boys in which the rabbis both taught and beat the students including myself. later she would be trained as Mrs. Spy Dawn Bon [not the facebook profile which i found after choosing the name]  and I would be a civilian

to be continued...