HYPNOSIS AND MAT 24

HYPNOSIS AND DECEPTION
From Romans 6 and Matthew 24

I have long wondered just what the scenes of Matt 24 would look like. Like myself, most churchmen who read the familiar chapter exempt themself and their fellowship from the deception described there. But the Savior's words do not seem to exempt anybody. The operative word in chapter 24 is "many". Not few. And in chapter 25, it's "all", not some. Given the way He spoke these warnings, how does one exempt himself? Or more to the point, how do I exempt myself? Truth be told, I can't. If He is correct, it must be happening on a large scale and then I should be able to observe it. The question then is where? Where is it happeneing, all this deception? Given the scale, the answer should be most obvious. It came to me in an unexpected way recently.

I have long pondered what really happens when a person is hypnotized. Others must have the same question because those who practice hypnosis, those who want to do it to you have a quick answer: they say no one can be made to do something against his will. This is supposed to settle your fear and make you amenable to be hypnotized. And this assurance is the first thing they like to come out with. They want you to believe that if you allow yourself to be hypnotized, you will not do anything against your better judgment. This sounds fine but it is their first lie.

If you allow yourself to be hypnotized, you agree to it. Then of course, they are right, you are not doing it against your will. You agreed to it and so in that sense, they are correct. If you agree to let them hypmnotize you, you cannot complain later that you were made to do something against your will, even though you were. And this is what they mean when they say you cannot be made to do something against your will. For instance, a woman who thinks (as she is told) she is in bed with her husband (which is really the hyptonist), in her mind, she is not doing anything against her will.

One thing I have learned, when a politician says it isn’t about the money—it is. In this case, when they say it isn’t about making you do something stupid, something against your will—it is. When they say it isn’t about getting you to do something against your conscience--it is. That is exactly what it is.

What got me to looking at hypnotism again was an incident I saw recently on TV. A man was put to sleep momentarily, whatever that means (his head was hung low, cocked to one side trance like), and while in that state of “sleep,” he was given instructions. He was told he was a counselor and should begin to counsel some people, Dr. Phil like. And he did--when people from the audience asked him how to deal with their teenagers. Dr. Phil could not have done better. Another lady was told to oversee this scene, Oprah like, with appropriate questions and comments, which she did, while clapping her hands in reserved Oprah like appreciation and saying, that's my guy, that's Dr. Phil.

What did I just see, I asked myself. These two people looked ridiculous and everybody laughed hilariously. It was hilarous. Were they just pretending? Were they simply going along with the joke for the fun of the moment? Or did they really think they were Oprah and Dr. Phil? This is an important question.

One may mock, but they were not mocking. Mocking someone is different from doing a really good job of mimicking a well known personality. And to mimic someone’s mannerism and speech in a way that others recognize who it is you intend to portray, this is very difficult. People like Rich Little make a profession of it, but theirs is a lifetime dedicated to the endeavor which includes hours, days of practice, much like work. And they are limitted to the few whose manerisms they have chosen to portray. Even the professionals cannot copy everybody or anybody at will. But the two people I saw hypnotized on TV did it instantly, at the snap of their instructor’s fingers (the hypnotist) and without a moment of practice. They did it without the hours of study that would be necessary for the professional to do the same. What is going on here?

The reason they could instantly copy Dr. Phil and Oprah was that they believed what they were told. They believed they were Dr. Phil and Oprah. That's who they were, in their mind. What they did, they were instructed to do, while in a state of sleep. It was not really sleep although it looked like sleep. It was really a trance. In this trance state, they were listening carefully to their instructor. Then they remembered his instructions and obeyed them on queue. They missed nothing he had said. Simply put, they yielded themselves and became servants to this man, the hypnotist. They believed him and did what he said. It is no more complicated than that.

Romans 6:16. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

You didn’t know this? No one is exempt from this law. We are all servants—we are the servants to whom we yield ourselves. We are the servants to whom we obey. Someone says, Well, I don’t yield to anyone. Not according to this statement. Know ye not….? The reason our lives are like they are is because of whom we serve—whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness. Knew ye not? Most people don't know this. They think they serve no one except maybe themselves.

The reason those two people could be turned into idiots, made into a laughing stock so easily was they yielded themselves, yielded themselves for whatever was about to happen. And so it was with anyone else who happened to be present on that day. In fact the hypnotist went on to do the same (different but similar foolishness) to the others present. They were likewise yielded to him, and having a grand old time.

What happened to these ordinary people? Was this a group of extraordinarily idiotic folk? No, these people were simply deceived. Nothing more complicated than that. They were no different from any other group of people. The two I observed were not Oprah nor Dr. Phil, but they thought they were. They were told they were, after they yielded themselves to the man who instructed them. And this was no big change for them, this is how they live their lives.

And they were sincere. These people were not pretending. If they had tried to pretend, for the fun of it, they would not have done so well. What they did takes practice, that is if you are pretending, long years of professional practice. Had they been pretending, they would not have been funny and no one would have laughed. Oprah and Phil are not funny. No one laughs at them unless they intend to tell a joke, say something funny. The reason people laughed at these two ordinary people was the fact that they were deceived about who they were. They thought they were somebody else--to the observers, this was very humorous.

This kind of thing often happens on a larger scale. Sometimes the entire audience is involved, hypnotized. It is just as possible to hypnotize a group as one individual of a group. And if you are hypnotized, it matters not how many others are hypnotized with you. If you yield yourself to be deceived, it matters not how many others are deceived with you. You are deceived. It can happen to you alone, or in a group.

When the Savior was once asked what to expect in the last days, it was this of which He spoke--deception. The first thing He said was, “Take heed that no man deceive you.” In other words, ”Be careful that no man hypnotize you,” make you his servant. Be careful, yield yourselves to no man. How does one put this counsel into practice? How does one avoid deception? You avoid deception just as you avoid hypnotizm. Let no man deceive you. Don't go and don't stay where man stands up to do his thing.

What the Savior predicted is a most common occurrence today. Well of course, we are in the last days of which He spoke. So it is most practical advice. Let’s suppose you are setting in a room with a bunch of people (similar to the room in which I saw the people hypnotized.) A man gets up to begin instructing. What should you do? Should you wait to see if the man announces himself as a deceiver--then flee? According to the Savior’s advice, what should you do? Stay and let it happen, try not to be deceived? Or flee? Fleeing, you would not yield yourself. Gone, you would not be available for the yielding. By fleeing, you are not available for deception. And that is just the instruction of Matthew 24.

According to the Savior in Matthew 24, this is what happens in the end of the world, when the “many come in my name” claiming to be Christ (Christian.) And so we see it a most common occurrence today. Don’t yield yourself to be hypnotized, deceived. He said, “Flee, go not forth to their chamber, don’t believe them.” Flee from what? Is He speaking of the supermarket, the post office, the flower shop, the home depot? Those who come in my name do not stand up to give instructions in those places. We can be thankful that those who "come in my name" are primarily found in one place, church. Church is where you let these men have access to you, instruct you, hypnotize you while you sleep, while you are not aware it is happening. Speaking of both the wise (Christians) and the foolish, He said "they all slept". Not just the foolish.

The trouble with deception is that the one deceived does not recognize it. He is unaware of his condition. Interesting that he can see clearly that others are deceived this way, but he cannot see his own deception. The two nice people who were hypnotized into idiots did not realize it (but they laughed heartily when others were told to do the same thing they did). The sleeping church people do not know they are sleeping or deceived. But notice the Savior did not say, “Don’t be deceived.”

He didn’t say, “Listen to them, but just be careful not to let them deceive you.” Why didn’t He say that? Because if you listen you will be deceived. He knew that. If you set and listen, like our two deceived people who sat and listened, you too will be deceived, hypnotized. That is the mistake. And that is how it happens. If you stay, it will happen. This is why when the speaker is done, the people all get up together and go around speaking Christianeese so fluently. They think they are all Christian.

In the following chapter, Matthew 25, the church is depicted by inspiration as sleeping. "While the bridgroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept." Churchmen read this and recognize themselves. They discern that the parrable of the virgins is about them, the church. But they do not recognize what the sleep is. They think it means they aren't working hard enough. And so they try to get each other awake, which means going about doing good works with more fervent vigor, passing out literture etc. But this is not the intent of the One who told this parrable. The sleep to which He referred is the trancelike state in which you set there, zombie like with the rest, listening to instructions, both wise and foolish. A man is in front, saying things for you to believe and repeat. This is the sleep of which the Savior spoke--a hypnotic trance--an altered reality. It has nothing to do with how much work you are not doing for the church. The sleep is about being programmed without your knowledge. Programmed in many ways, but most importantly, to return every week, and to be loyal to those who "come in my name" and to go about Christian like, as if doing good.

There are true believers of course, not everybody is a false Christ and the wise do certainly exist. But just because you are one of the "wise" virgins does not exempt you from the sleep of churchmen... for we are told that "they all slept", including the wise.

Now you know. Now you know how God looks at men at 'worship' in the last days. Next time you see one or more persons being hypnotized, next time you see them trancelike taking instruction, just know that Matt 24 and 25 is what God sees when He looks at the scene. This we were told would happen in the last days. News flash, we are here, this is the last days, this is typical church. Stay if you must, but now you can't claim ignorance of what is really happening there. This is exactly what He was talking about in chapter our two chapters.

THEY ALREADY KNEW IT

THEY ALREADY KNEW IT

When I told people that there was only one God, it surprised them. They wondered how I could think they didn’t already know it. They gave me to understand that with them, it was common knowledge.

When I mentioned the great fact that He had a Son, they were amazed that I thought it news worthy. They assured me they worshiped the Trinity.

When I proclaimed the first angel’s saying, “worship Him,” meaning the only true God, they said they were already worshiping Him. Since there was only one God, how could you go wrong?

When I cautioned them to place no other beside or before Him, as one equal to Him, they told me that there were actually two others that would qualify for that.

When I spoke of His Spirit who wanted to dwell in them, they explained to me the omnipresence which means everywhere at once. Being everywhere as it is, He was sure to be in them. No way to avoid it.

When I said that Jehovah does not serve with Baal, they assured me that He can and does use anything, anywhere, anytime.

When I reminded them to call upon the name of the Lord (Yahuah) and they would be saved, they corrected my error saying whatever you call Him matters not.

When I quoted the Son at His departure saying, “I will not leave you comfortless, I will come to you,” they said it wasn't Him, but rather someone else who was coming, a third person, and being God as well, it was He who would command their worship.

When I reported the truth that He dwells in temples, just not the ones built with hands, they indicated where they went to church and invited me to attend, not forsaking their assembly.

When I repeated the call to come out of Babylon, they said that it was just what they had done, not being members of the church down the block, nor the one on the other corner.

When I invited them into His rest, the one we enter today, the eternal Sabbath from which we will never part, they reminded me that we are commanded to wait till the end of the week for that.

When I told them of the Savior who had come to forgive their sins, and with that as His mission, He had not failed, they assured me of their faithfulness to the commandments, to all that the Lord hath said.

When I advised them of the fact that because of His work on earth, He doesn’t remember their sins any more, and their iniquities were all forgiven them now, they cautioned me to be sure to obtain forgiveness every day, for each new sin.

With regard to the Savior, the New Covenant, they told me it was really just the old one, the law, now only viewed from a new perspective.

Do you think this is a fulfillment of Jeremiah 31: 34? And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

GRACE AND TRUTH CAME BY YASHUA

GRACE AND TRUTH CAME BY YASHUA

John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, [but] grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him].

Did grace and truth come by the law? No, grace and truth have another source. Did grace and truth come by Moses? No. Not by Moses.

Grace and truth are revelations of God, His character. The law can not compare with grace and truth. Grace and truth do not come by the law, but from another source. See the difference.

People say that God is a mystery. It is the theologian that presents God as the mystery. His god is the mystery of which he speaks. But while men have not seen Him, He has been declared--by His Son. Still, men do not see Him. And it is to these that He is still a mystery. Those who insist on their mystery god, to them He will remain a mystery.

And to these with the mystery god, the new covenant will also remain a mystery. For these, the old covenant will be proclaimed the new covenant. The new covenant will be for them a mystery, a parable, not understood. And so it should be.

Exodus 31:16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a perpetual covenant.

These will never enter into His rest, which thing He swore in His wrath they would not. And so it is to this day. Like the “everlasting covenant” of circumcision, which is no longer of the flesh, His rest will remain a mystery to them.

Geneses 17:13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

Now the old covenant is replaced with the New. What is the New?

Isaiah 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

The New Covenant mystery is Him. He is the New Covenant. He replaces the Old. See the difference between them.

LIVING OUTSIDE OF BABYLON

LIVING OUTSIDE OF BABYLON

Those who live outside of Babylon understand the mysteries of God. They are not confused as to what comprises Babylon. The Savior does not speak to them in parables, but plainly.

Coming out of Babylon contemplates more than leaving your local church. It requires a clear recognition of Babylon and its parameters. Babylon is more than a building. It is larger than church. It is a way of life--a way of thinking. It is quite possible for a person to leave his local church and never come out of Babylon at all. It has been done many times.

One part of coming out of Babylon is to realize that people who live and worship there are not going to understand. This is why it is called confusion. If you were not confused, you would not be in Babylon. And this is why people think they are not in that particular place or condition; they don’t see it. They don't see their own confusion. Like the Pharisees of old, they say “we see.” We are not confused. And with that said, because they said they were not confused, because they said they were not Babylon the Savior claimed that their “sin remained.” They refused to see their blindness. Even a blind man knows he is blind. But the most amusing thing about blind Babylonians is the fact that they do not know they are blind. It is when a Babylonian church (one chocked full of it) claims not to be Babylon that its sin remains. How interesting. There is no more Babylon that this claim.

It was because of rampant confusion that the Savior spoke to people in parables. He told them stories. For the most part, they liked His stories. And this was not just once in a while:

Matthew 13:33 Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened. All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

In speaking to the multitudes, He didn’t use any other method. He told them stories.

Today the tables are turned. In the day of the Savior, it was He who told the stories. It was the Pharisees who were listening. They were not receiving but they were listening. In their hearts, they turned the stories into fables. They often realized of whom He spoke--of them, but they didn’t receive it. The parables were not fables, but they could be turned into fables. How is this accomplished? By the retelling of them.

Now, today, is is a little different from back them. Today it is the Pharisees who are telling the same stories. See the difference? They are retelling them to their own satisfaction. If confusion reigned then, how much more so today. And this is all by design. It is the overwhelming deception that He promised to bring upon them (2 Thes 2:10,11).

Why did the Savior speak in this manner to the multitudes? Why was delusion His intent?

Matt 13:2 And great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore. And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow.

Matt 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
13:15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
13:16 But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
13:17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous [men] have desired to see [those things] which ye see, and have not seen [them]; and to hear [those things] which ye hear, and have not heard [them].

All right, let’s see if we can name some of the many of which He spoke here. Would it not be any one who had not witnessed the Savior's day (as had the disciples). This would not only be any man living before the cross, but would also include those who continue on in the Old Testament ways. Especially them. The truth for these is a parable at best—something they do not understand. Something they have not seen. But the disciples were not among the blind. They were not numbered with those who were not supposed to understand. To the disciples He said He would speak “plainly.” To them the understanding was given, though they did not always see it.

Peter once asked for clarification of a parable, which evoked an interesting question from the Savior:

Matthew 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
15:15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
15:16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

Unto the disciples it was given the understanding. They were supposed to “see.” And it was remarkable when they too didn’t understand and needed Him to explain what He was saying just as if they were as ignorant as any one of the multitude standing around them.

Luke 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

Again is revealed the intention of this parable teller—“that they might not understand.”

Matt 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:
13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

The ancients did not understand the things that Yashua would utter. They were heretofore kept a secret, even to the "many righteous men and prophets" who wanted to see them, but had “not seen them”. What could be more clear?

OF SUCH IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD

OF SUCH IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD

Luke 18:16 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.

As a churchman, I used to ponder this. What was it about children? I saw that they were innocent, to a degree. Only to a degree. I saw that they were trusting. But I could not see much else.

I figured that like churchmen, not all children would go to heaven, just the good ones. And so I could not see how the children were such an example of the kingdom of God. Such is the churchman’s dilemma.

Churchman know that children have not had the time to develop their own righteousness. How could they be saved? If God will save them, He will have to consider them innocent—which to the churchman means they have not had much time to sin.

The churchman is partly correct—He does consider them innocent—but not for the reason that churchmen believe, that they lacked the opportunity to sin. Rather, they are innocent because He has made them innocent. When did He make them innocent? At birth? No, before. Before they were born--when He made all men innocent. It happened for children when it happened for all men.

If you tell this to children, they will believe. They will be glad. Non-children won’t believe it—they have their own righteousness. They have been working on it for an extended period of time.

When the Savior called the children unto Him, He didn’t divide them between the good and the bad. He didn’t instruct the disciples to hold some back or make others of them to go away. The children knew this about Him, they were coming. It was the disciples idea to hold them back. It was those in charge who didn’t know. They see this as their job. The disciples thus revealed their view of the kingdom of heaven.

He didn’t say to the children, Now look at the disciples children, see how they hold you back from me—this is like the kingdom of heaven. It was the disciples who needed the lesson.

USAGE OF THE TERM GOD

USAGE OF THE TERM GOD
BY INSPIRATION AND BIBLE TRANSLATORS

The modern usage of the term God is the source of some confusion. The reason for the confusion is the fact that the term is used in several ways by both inspiration and translators. It can mean the person who is God, and there is only one of Him. It can mean the position that this person occupies and there are many of them including the evil, or it can mean one in possession of the attributes of God. These many usages and misusages can be the source of confusion over this one term.

While the term God may encompass one or more of these meanings, neither the usage of the term nor the term itself will always indicate which usage is being employed. Broad as the meanings of the term may be, just the reference to “God” (without context) is often not enough.

One of the most important things to remember about the term God is that it is only a term. Being a term, this means it is not Him. It is only a term that is used or misused as the case may be, sometimes with reference to the supreme being, or to describe Him. But God is not His name though many know no other name for Him.

While God (or god) is a legitmate term and has its place, it has its limitations. With reference to the supreme, the term God falls short of comprising all that should be emcompassed in that one Being. Only His sacred name can do that--YHWH or Jehovah. In short, His name is not God. And "God" is no substitue for His name. No term, however it is intended to be used is sufficient for Him.

For instance, it is common today to hear it affirmed that “Jesus is God.” This is said with much finality, as if with that, the speaker has made his point and everyone is expected to agree. But do they? They do, they agree only if they are all just so confused. If they are all equally as confused as the speaker, they agree. And it is this mutual confusion and apparent agreement that precipitates the need for clarification, and thus this paper.

The term God in the Greek for instance can be applied to YHWH God, as in “the God” of John 1:1, and “the only true God” of John 17:3. In this usage, God can refer to one being only—the Father, the Most High, the Ancient of Days (all titles, not His name). There is only one of Him, not two, and not three. This means that only He is God in the ultimate sense, in infinity, and there is no other like unto Him. There are not two Most Highs, not two Ancient of Days. There are not two Jehovah's for instance, the one having the name of the other Ex 23:21. Only He is YHWH and there is no other. This truth is confusing to the common Christian who thinks He knows another equal to Him and one that He considers comparable to, or "beside Him."

The term God is also employed by inspiration and applied to many other entities: the Son, certain men, angels, Satan, etc. Even the Savior used Scripture that applied the term to men. None of these usages of the term is intended by inspiration to place another God beside Him as another equal (as if to replace Him).

So we see that though the term used for all these entities is God, it is not God in the sense that God is God. In other words, though other entities are also called by the same term--God, none of these others are the same as God, nor are they YHWH God. Yet the same term applies to all of them including the one God. And because God is spelled the same in all cases (G-o-d), in the minds of many, God is otherwise indistinguishable from “the God.” With that term alone, there is no way to identify the God to which you refer.

Some degree of relief can be had with the use of the small case g when compared to the capitol G. But this does not solve much.

In the case of the Son as God, God must be capitalized. Capitalizing God when refereing to them both, one cannot distinguish between them. If the speaker does not find some other way to identify who he is talking about, it will be unclear, as so often it is. Men who know this little fact (such as trinitarians) often make use of it to their particular ends. They intend to leave the distinction between God and the Son blurred. It is with this blurring of their different positions that they provide for their “second person” and then likewise what they call “the third person of the Godhead.” Presto, the trinity comes to life. Then they call it a mystery, one to which they require that you adhere, on pain of their pronunciation of anathema.

In common usage today, this is the cause of confusion. It is a common error to think that God simply means God however the term is used. This is really forgetting all the possible meanings of the term and will inadvertently introduce the confusion so evident in Christendom that they refer to as a mystery.

The term God can not be used properly without the clarification of how the speaker is using it; is it God the person, is it one who has the position of God, or one who holds His attributes.

The most prominent usage of the term God by inspiration is not “one in possession of His attributes” (although it is most often misused this way by the modern speaker or writer.)

Inspiration rather, uses the term most prominently with reference to the teaching of one God, as in Deut. 6:4. This usage is repeated all though the Scriptures as in Isaiah, chapters 43 through 46 as well as in the New Testament. It is the greatest of all truths that God is God and there is no other. (This does not mean that no other can posses His attributes.) In other words, in the most prominent usage of the term God, God is the Person, that one Person and no other. In this usage, there is no other person like Him—no other God--not two of them, and certainly not three. And this God is no one’s Son. He is infinitely God in the ultimate sense. God in infinity, and no other. In this usage of the term, there can be no other God. All other “Gods,” legitimate as they may be, all other usages of the term are subordinate to this one.

To the question, are there any others? the answer must be no. Are there any other Gods, persons or beings like that, NO, there are no others. Insert any name you wish, there are no others. No, not one. None. Mark it down. The answer has to be no, even though there are others with that title. But by comparison, they are no gods.

This is confusing to the Christian because he has another that he calls God. Yes, God, that is the term. And he reads in his Bible that the Son is God in a few places. This makes him uncomfortable, but not to worry, the doctrine of the trinity was contrived to resolve his dilemma and with it, he is assured. But this is not the solution. With that “solution,” he has to break the first commandment. Here, like on no other subject, God Himself is needed. No one will understand God naturally. It cannot be done without help. And help from the wrong place (man, trinitarian theologian, church) is no help. It is the kind of “help” that will help you break the first commandment. On this subject, God must reveal Himself to man (as He did to Peter on this subject), to every man, or man will believe and say things that are not true—things he has been told by other men., things he learns in church. This fact does not mean that God has intended to present Himself as a mystery, no. On the contrary, He has not. The fact that many see Him as such does not make it so, not for others--others to whom He has revealed Himself. The reason He is the mystery to them that He is, is simply that He has not revealed Himself to them. Insisting on God as mystery will only prolong said mystery--for them. It is such insistance that will insure the mystery of God. What God has revealed of Himself is no mystery for those to whom He has revealed it. God the Father is the greatest of all communicators. And it is with regard to Himself that He is most clear.

While the Son is called God, and is God, He is not God in the way that “the only true God” is God. The Son is God because He has the attributes (nature) of God His Father. This is why He is God. He is not God in infinity, as is His Father. He is not the person who throughout Scripture is the one God. That one God, that one person can only be one person, His Father. So, while they are both called God, they are not both God in the same way. If they were both God in the very same way (in infinity) there would have to be two Gods. One is the person God, and the other has all the attributes of God, being His Son. All the the Son has was "given" Him, including equality with the Father.

The Son is God because He is the Son of God, which means He has been anointed, given the attributes of God, John 5:26, a very non-trinitarian text. Apart from His Father, He is not God. He has no existence apart from His Father, the source of all existence. This great truth is not true of the Father. He is God apart from any other being. He received His attributes from no other source. This makes Him the only true God, God in infinity, the Most High and the only Ancient of Days, YAHUAH. While His Son can share in all His attributes, glory and name, it is a bestowed glory and name. His glory and name belong to the one who gave it to Him, the great source of all, including the Son Himself.

What does it mean to be the one God, the person. It means He is “greater” than the other who has all His attributes. Part of being the greater God is the fact that He is the Father of the one who has His glory. This relationship has its origin from the beginning, not just for a few short years while the Son walked this earth. It started with the event spoken of so often by inspiration—when He was begotten of Him—long before Mary (or Adam) came into existence. Before the creation of the world, or the heavenly Angels.

Understanding the different usages of the term God, we see that while God is always God, “God” is not always God. God (YHWH) is always God, but Yashua is not that very same person (YHWH God).

What typically happens today is that during a discussion of God the person, someone will interject a question or statement about “God the Son” as if He were God as well. This mixes the two usages of the term God of course, and thus, confusion is never dispelled.

The use of the phrase, “Jesus is God,” is misleading, and reveals personal confusion. There is much written with this usage as if to clarify the confusion it causes. When using the term God as in the first and primary usage by inspiration, Jesus is not God. When using the term as the attributes of God as does John 1:1, He is God. In this usage of the term, Jesus is God. But the two different usages do not reveal their inherent differences because they both employ the same term. Not realizing that John 1:1,2 uses the term both ways, in one case with reference to God the Father “the God” and then to God (the word), people confuse themselves even though both God and “God” are found together in some places.

Using the term God in both ways as it does, John 1:1,2 is just one example of a good place to unconfuse yourself. The apostle John is clear, the one is with the other. The Word (God) is with the other, with God, with “the God.” This means the Word is not “the God.” This great truth is exactly what the typical modern trinitarian theologian intends to hide from his student.

THE UNJUST STEWARD IS COMMENDED

THE UNJUST STEWARD IS COMMENDED
From Luke 16.

Here again we find the Savior telling a parable to two groups of people. The same two that were always present when He told these stories—the disciples and the Pharisees.

The Pharisees represented “those who would not understand.” And so the stories were primarily for them, not for the disciples. To the disciples He said He would speak "plainly", meaning not in parables. And as we read through what He said here, this is important to remember. Not understanding this point, the reader would have no clue as to why He would commend this unjust steward in his unjustness. But ironically, the modern stewards realize that He is speaking to them; they like to be commended for what they do. Still, they are confused as to the reason for the commendation.

I am going to do something here that the Savior did not do, but rather left undone. In the telling of this parable, He identified the unjust steward in the end, but left something unexplained about him. In other words, He did not explain every detail. If you look carefully, He explains why the commendation of unjust stewards in their unjustness and failure, but it is not easily discerned. Especially not by them. In fact, they will not discern it without some help. They often set about to preach on this parable, not realizing it is more a condemnation than a commendation. This is due to the fact that stewards do not realize who the stewards are, or that the parable is about them. Amazing phenomenon. They seem to like this story. Do you think He foresaw their reaction? Do you think He did this on purpose? Here it is.

Luke 16:1 And he said also unto his disciples (“and the Pharisees also” were present, v. 14), There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

Who is this steward? Stewards are those with authority. They do not want to appear as if they are wasting anything. They are those in charge. Those you have to deal with whenever you make a move. You know who they are. They expect to be called for their approval. People call them to answer whatever question they might have. Well, the Lord calls them too. Here is an example of what He says to them when He calls.

16:2 And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.

The Lord removes them from stewardship. But before they are removed completely, they have some time to prepare a plan. They would call it a message--a message for the Lord. Well of course, that's their job description. They are most clever in solving any predicament into which they find themselves, even when it is with the Lord. The steward, one day realizing his predicament begins to ponder his problem thusly:

16:3 Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed.

They realize that they have no practical training to do anything otherwise useful (like diging). Their training did give them the ability--to beg, which they naturally did as if for the Lord. But now it will not be for the Lord and so they are ashamed. Having lost their job, now it would be seen that their skill was on behalf of themselves, not the Lord. When they made it seem as though it was for the Lord, they were not ashamed to beg. They did it proudly. Now that their "work" is exposed, not being for Him, they are ashamed. But in their wise ness, they are resolved to have a plan. Here it is:

16:4 I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.

There is a danger to them and they recognize it--that no one would let them into their house. This, the modern stewards have all realized. Above all else, they want to be received, appreciated by the people. They like to be considered popular. And if they are removed, they are afraid they will lose the popularity that they had so long sought to establish. But not to worry, they devise a plan intended to maintain for themselves the coveted approbation that they had heretofore always enjoyed. And a plan so clever that they will be commended for it by the Lord. Here it is:

16:5 So he called every one of his lord's debtors [unto him], and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?

Their message is the same to "every one". They know that there is no one that does not owe his Lord a debt so large that he cannot repay it. Be sure that the stewards are quite aware of this. But now the steward hits on a plan: get the people to repay some of it, as much as possible, because they owe so much. (They know that such a plan will provide for their retirement.)

16:6 And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.

Stewards know that the people would never agree to repay the whole debt. The debt is too large and that would be asking too much of them. But some of it, yes, they could be persuaded to pay part of it, about half in most cases and before they have time to think about it, they are encouraged to pay a portion quickly. The clever steward/salesman knows human nature can be made to feel obliged to repay something, especially on the spur of the moment before he has time to reconsider.

16:7 Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.

Each individual is persuaded to repay what he can, depending on what the steward thinks he should. Depending on what he deems acceptable. The more the better of course, by way of a show of gratitude. He tells the people the Lord will appreciate whatever they can do. And He does. Look what He tells this steward.

16:8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.

The steward is still unjust, he has wasted his Master's goods, he has failed the Lord, he has made the people think they can repay some of their immense debt to the Lord and so he is removed from his stewardship, but for all this he is complemented. Why would the Lord commend him?

The stewards and their people are "the children of this world" in this parable. This is "their generation". It is in their generation that they expect to be commended for repaying as best they can. In their wise ness, they have kept the commandments to the best of their ability. How wise they are. After His commendation, the Lord advises them to go a little further in that same direction.

16:9 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

This is exactly what the stewards have done and now the Savior recomends it to all of them. Though they will fail, the unjust stewards, He encourages them in their way. Keeping the commandments, which is only fair, they should also make friends of the mammon of unrighteousness. Then they will still be received by the people and thus, their futures will be secure.

16:10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

The stewards are good examples for the disciples (and for us). Even though they lost their jobs with the Lord, even though they failed in that area which was to be their chosen career, they were faithful in their generation--that is in their own interests. This is commendable. It is worth a parable.

16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true [riches]?
16:12 And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's, who shall give you that which is your own?

Here the Savior uses the stewards as good examples of faithfulness (though it be in their generation, in unrighteousness).

That which is "your own"? What is that? Is it not what belongs to the Lord of this parable, "who shall give you that which is your own"? Is it not our salvation? These are the things we owe Him. This is our debt to Him. Then how should we presume to pay some of it back? Those who don't know this will respond to the message of the stewards. Those who listen and then proceed to keep the commandments as if in gratitude will receive from the Lord the stewards commendation. He will commend them "in their generation," but there is a caution:

16:13 No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

The stewards are wise in the one area, in their generation--mammon, and totally ignorant in the other. They are not commended in both areas.

16:14 And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

They derided Him. And guess what, these same good folk will deride me, as they read this. They didn't expect to fail. They believed you could serve both, both mammon and God. They believed they could be popular (justified) with both man and God.

16:15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

Here He reveals the identity of the stewards—“Ye are they”. Who are they—the Pharisees--men of the law--the stewards. Those who teach men that they must still keep the law. He calls their message an abomination. The modern Pharisees (stewards) are more ignorant (wise in their own eyes) than their earlier counterparts. The modern ones live on this side of John, and still proceed with law keeping as if the Savior had never come.

Now, in summary, the Savior reveals what this parable was about:

16:16 The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
16:17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

This story reveals what the modern stewards (preachers) are all about. Those who think to press into the kingdom with a show of appreciation, repaying what they can (law keeping) will "fail," just as did the unjust steward. But they were right about one thing, they can expect to be commended for it.

Since this parable was told, nothing has changed. The modern administrators of any religion all have the same message: do good (keep the commandments as best you can). Its the least you can do in appreciation for the greater debt you owe. While it sounds good to their people, at the same time it also secures for them their future in their generation. But no more, that is all.