Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 5:45:59 PM
From: Cyprian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Your post was quite long, so I will have to respond in sections. What you wrote below, which I quote, can essentially be summed up as gnosticism, which is a heresy that attempted to cloak itself in the garb of Christianity. Of course the Gnostics waged battle against the true Church from very early on. There are writings by the Holy Fathers refuting the Gnostics dating back to the 2nd century. The writings of St. Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, are a well known example from the 2nd century. Of course the antecedents of Gnosticism predate the Christian era, and in the time of the Apostles, Simon Magus (cf Acts ch. 8) and Nicolaus the deacon, who later apostasized. (also mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles), were figures during the Apostolic era which formed Gnostic sects. The sect of Nicholas is referred to in the Apocalypse as the "Nicolaitans". (cf. Rev 2.6) You wrote: Their belief holds that the word "lord" in the bible designates a being that rules over the Earth...the physical realm. Materialism is part of their religion. Earthly power is seen as the reward for acts that glorify the "lord" they worship. They view everything as a duality...all the way up to God. They believe there is an equal counter-balance to that which God represents. They believe that God rules over the spiritual realm and Lucifer rules over the physical. They reason that since we're in the physical world as humans, Lucifer is in charge. They believe that Lucifer is just as important in the physical world as God is in the spiritual. They believe that Lucifer is designated in the bible as the "Lord God" while God is called just "God"

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 6:21:38 PM
From: Cyprian	1 Recommendation Respond to of 20039

They view everything as a duality...all the way up to God. They believe there is an equal counter-balance to that which God represents. They believe that God rules over the spiritual realm and Lucifer rules over the physical. What you are basically describing is the dualistic view of Freemasonry, which arose out of the beliefs of Jewish Kabbalism and pseudo-Christian Gnosticism. Of course the antecedents of this go back thousands of years, to the ancient mystery religions of Babylon, Egypt, Persia, etc., including the Zoroastrians. The universal symbol of Satan which describes this blasphemous dualistic belief is the hexagram, a type of six-pointed star, which careful observers will note that fraud Alex Jones always carefully avoids making reference to. Mr. Jones will carry on about pentagrams and owls and phallic symbols, the all-seeing eye and such, but is always careful to avoid educating his listeners about the seal of Antichrist -- the six-pointed star -- formed by interlaced or intersecting, mutually-opposed, equilateral triangles. This interlocking symbol symbolizes the cosmic struggle between the "white" Jehovah (Adonai), and the "black" Jehovah (Lucifer). One can observe one triangle pointing upwards toward heaven, while the other points downward towards earth or hell. This picture of this masonic temple in downtown Denver, right across from City Hall, graphically depicts what I have described: flickr.com Take careful note of the satanic hexagram on the right side of the building, and note also that in-line with kabbalistic-masonic lore, the dark triangle is pointing upward and the white downward, symbolizing (in their view) that the black Jehovah (Lucifer) will ultimately be triumphant. Here is another representation from the Satanist Eliphas Levi's book, "Transcendental Magic" thebiggestsecretpict.online.fr This exact poster appears on the wall in a scene of the sick and satanic film adaption of Stephen King's book, "Children of the Corn". Stephen King is of course very heavily into satanism and the occult.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 6:54:30 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

>> Read the story of Abraham and Isaac. << I'm a Christian. I have read it a number of times. >> God (not Lord God) tells Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. << Well, if we are going to have any fruitful discussion on this topic we will have to make recourse to the original language in which these verses were written, and not just some English translations, which can be the source of much confusion. English translations of the Bible translate the word "Lord" differently depending on the case. LORD in all caps is oftentimes a translation of the so-called Tetragrammaton, which is a Greek term meaning "four lettered", referring to the four-lettered name of God. The names Jehovah (JHVH) or Yahweh (YHWH) sometimes are substituted for these four transliterated Hebrew letters. Manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament Scriptures, translated a couple centuries prior to the manifestation of Christ in the flesh, oftentimes render the Tetragrammaton as "Kyrios" or "Lord". This is likely where many English translations took their cue. The "Yahweh" for Lord in "Lord God" is not exclusive to any particular member of the Holy Trinity. Proof of this exists in many passages of Scripture, but since we are currently dealing in Genesis I will provide you with a verse from this book: "Then the Lord [i.e Yahweh or Jehovah] rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord [i.e Yahweh or Jehovah] out of heaven" (Genesis 19.24) As is quite clear, there are two distinct individuals or hypostases called "Lord" here in this verse. The Holy Fathers of the Church teach that this is a mystical reference in the Old Testament to the Father and the Son, with the Son of God raining brimstone and fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah from the Father in heaven. Yet in both cases of this verse for "Lord" we have the Tetragrammaton or four-letter name of God employed. So it is quite evident that Yahweh/Jehovah is a name that applies to both the Father and the Son. Of course the unbelieving Jews, as a result of their blindness, reject any notion of God having a Son, so as a consequence they must concoct alternative explanations to explain away the fact that there are countless references in the Old Testament to all three members of the Holy Trinity.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 7:51:47 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

>> Read the story of Abraham and Isaac. God (not Lord God) tells Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac. Kill him. At the time, Isaac is the last of the bloodline. In the bible God is telling Abraham to end the bloodline. << Actually, it is you that I would encourage to read the story of Abraham and Isaac a bit closer. I would encourage you to read the New Testament as well, for the NT unveils the meaning of the Old Testament. Long before God tested Abraham with the command to sacrifice his son Isaac, even before Isaac was born, we read: And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. (Gen 17.19) Five chapters later... And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. (Gen 22.1-2) There is little need for me to explain the reasoning behind the trial of Abraham. Sacred Scripture explains it perfectly: By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure. (Hebrews 11.17-19) Abraham recalled full well that even prior to the birth of his son Isaac, God had made an everlasting covenant with him, that his seed should inherit the promises and blessings. Isaac carried the wood for his sacrifice on his back up the mountain. Christ carried the wood of the Cross on his back up to Golgotha/Calvary. A ram with its horns caught in the thicket was substituted in the place of Issac. A crown of thorns was placed upon Christ's head, and Christ was sacrificed in place of the Isaac, the Church. You do know that the members of the body of Christ are mystically likened to Isaac? "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise." (Galatians 4.28) St. Paul informs the Christians in Galatia that they are the children of promise, not the faithless Jews. Christians are likened to Isaac, and we were spared when Christ was caught in the thicket of a crown of thorns and fastened to the wood of the cross in our stead. As I said to you months ago, Christians are not ignorant of the countless Old Testament references to the Cross, long before Christ appeared on earth in the flesh. We are not so stupid as to believe that the Cross is just some pagan symbol that Christianity latched onto less than 2,000 years ago. Holy Writ teaches us that Christ is the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." (Rev 13.8) God's will before the world was ever formed was that his Son Jesus Christ would take on flesh from a Virgin, assuming our human nature, while fully remaining God, and would die on the Cross. So it is complete nonsense to suggest that Christ or Christians picked up the symbol of the Cross as a pagan symbol from the Egyptians or some other source. That is simply Jehovah's Witness propaganda.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 8:21:23 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

Abraham lies to Isaac and tells him they're going to sacrifice a sheep. When Isaac asks Abraham where the sheep is, Abraham tells him, "The Lord God will provide..." It would behoove you to make a more careful examination of sacred Scripture, rather than seeking to mock that which you do not understand. For starters, the Scripture does not say, "The Lord God will provide..." as you misquoted. It says God [i.e. Elohim], not "Lord God". You are the one who is trying to make some distinction between "God" and "Lord God" [Yahweh Elohim]. The Greek Septuagint reads "Theos". I don't see how you can say that Abraham lied?? Events came to pass just as he promised. God did provide a ram, which is a male sheep. Actually, most English translations read "lamb", and as St. John the Baptist said when he saw Christ coming to him when he was baptizing: "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." Abraham foresaw that God would provide Christ the Lamb of God as a sacrifice on behalf of his posterity. "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad." (John 8.56) "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed." (Galatians 3.8)

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 8:29:06 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

And an emissary sent by Lord God appears, stops Abraham and points out a sheep to use instead of Isaac. So Lord God saves the bloodline. Once again, you are not quoting Scripture correctly. The Scripture says an angel of Yahweh/Jehovah/YHWH/JHVH or whatever term you wish to use to express the Tetragrammaton. In English versions this is usually translated as "an angel of the Lord". The word "God" [i.e. Elohim] or in Greek "Theos" is nowhere to be found. The verse says "And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I." (Gen 22.11)

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 8:47:23 PM
From: Cyprian	1 Recommendation Respond to of 20039

Why would Lord God, if he's actually Lucifer, save the bloodline? These people believe Lucifer created the bloodline. Lucifer is their creator and savior. They read the bible completely differently from how organized Christianity teach the masses to read it. In this much we agree. Of course they read the Bible differently than Orthodox Christianity, because they are in bondage to Satan and are the avowed enemies of Christianity. Lucifer/Baal is the god of the Freemasons. The goal of Freemasonry is to rebuild Solomon's temple. Since Solomon's Temple must needs be rebuilt in Jerusalem, and nowhere else, Freemasonry is fully committed to achieving the aims and objectives of Zionism, which includes preparation for the entrance of the Antichrist into a rebuilt Jewish temple in Jerusalem. Hence the control of Freemasonry by Zionist Jews, who need to employ the aid of non-Jews in the furtherance of their diabolical schemes.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 9:16:48 PM
From: Cyprian	1 Recommendation Respond to of 20039

In walking back through the deception one can start with the obsession that the "royal" families have with maintaining their bloodlines and the widespread corruption in organized religions. The public excuse used by "royalty" for their desire to maintain the "purity" of their bloodlines is that they received the "divine right" to rule St. Paul instructs St. Timothy to neither give heed to fables nor endless genealogies. (cf. 1 Tim 1.4) It's the Jews that are clearly obsessed with endless genealogies and bloodlines. All this stems from the most vile book ever known to man, the Babylonian Talmud. The proof of this Talmudic obsession is plainly evident for all to see. The racist state of Israel is the one nation that reserves special privileges of immigration for those who can prove their "Jewish" blood from the maternal line.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 9:29:08 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

First, there's more than sufficient evidence to show that these "royal" families are heavily into the occult...ie Luciferianism and satanic worship. Yet these families insist that their bloodlines represent the most direct descendency from notable biblical figures such as Abraham, King Solomon, Moses, Yes, all male children of the Royal House of England are ritually circumcised in what the Jews call "Bris Milah" or the covenant of circumcision. Charles, Prince of Wales, was circumcised by the Jewish Mohel of London. He is a crypto-Jew, like many powerful world figures. Enoch, etc.(Enoch is the first son of Cain...A branch of "magic" is named after Enoch...Enochian magic). Allow me to clarify. There is an Enoch who was son of Cain, and a totally different Enoch (the seventh from Adam) from the righteous line of Seth, who walked with God and was translated.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 9:42:16 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

So, for these families, whose "divinity" are they actually empowered by? These same families are the ones who, throughout history have "authorized" the most widely known versions of the Bible that are then accepted and spread through the organized religions. These families are obviously playing a double game and they have hidden what they believe to be the truth of the Bible in the constant retranslations Who needs to worry about translations? Only "King James Only" Protestant fundamentalists who think there was no such a thing as the Bible until King James commissioned a translation to be made. The authentic Church of Christ has existed from the very beginning, before English even came into existence, and provides us all the passages of Scripture in the ancient languages of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Syriac, etc. Christ promised that His words would never pass away. (cf. Mat 24.35) Holy Church has always maintained possession of the authentic teachings and traditions of Christianity, untainted for almost 2,000 years. The Papists perverted Holy Tradition and the Protestants in an irrational response to this cast away belief in Holy Tradition altogether. The authentic Church of Christ has faithfully preserved and passed down the teachings of Christ and the traditions of the Apostles from the very beginning, and will continue to do so until the end of the age.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 9:50:21 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

In chapter one of Genesis, the main character is referred to as "God" "Character", as in singular? Then how would you explain this? And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Gen 1.26) Already in chapter one of Genesis God speaks of "us" and "our". Furthermore, we haven't even delved into the matter of the word "Elohim" which is translated God, and how that is a PLURAL ending in Hebrew. for example: cherub (singular) = cherubim (plural) seraph (singular) = seraphim (plural) As you can see, the -im ending in Hebrew makes the word plural.

To: Doug R who wrote (19126)	9/11/2008 10:08:04 PM
From: Cyprian	Respond to of 20039

The Lord God tells Adam that "in the day" that you eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you will "surely" die. It is interesting to note, that in the Greek Septuagint, that this verse starts off in the second person singular (i.e. thou) -- but shifts in mid-sentence to second person plural -- (i.e. ye). And the Lord God gave a charge to Adam, saying, Of every tree which is in the garden thou mayest freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil—of it ye shall not eat, but in whatsoever day ye eat of it, ye shall surely die. (Gen 2.16-17) Herein is contained a mystery. Notice that the formation of Eve from Adam's rib is not mentioned until four or five verses later. This is no metaphor. It's a lie. What a foolish thing to call God a liar. Adam did become subject to death in the day he ate of the forbidden fruit. Furthermore, Scripture tells us to "be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Pet 3.8) also cf. Psa 90.4 If a day with the Lord is a thousand years, as Scripture informs us, Adam did not exceed that day of a thousand years, because he lived to be 930 years. So Adam did die within one day in the sight of the Lord. You will achieve nothing by attempting to mock the divine Scriptures. Humility will work wonders for your understanding.