Webseries & Related Links: |Home Page| |God's System| |Introduction, assumptions| |Part I, Overview| |II, 'then'| |III, 'NOW'| |IVa: Church Alpha basis| |IVb, 'Body'| |IVc, Conflict| |IVd, Destiny| |V, Trib-Mill| |App: Satan's Strategy| |Trial Sum: Paradox of Merit| |Kingship: Due.Dilig.Disclosure| |Infinity-finity Dichotomy| |DDNA solves Dichotomy| |Spir.Pathology (viral dDNA results)|

Appendix, Tactical Examples: The Lord vs. Satan: SupCtHeaven;

aka, the Trial of Human History.. aka, Did God err?

Satan's Counter to God: 'Script' Strategies and Tactics

Appendix Quicklinks: [God's Paradox] [Satan&Co.Grand Strategy] [.. of Poverty] [.. of "DIOS", foreign-God] [S&C's Target] [..Tactics] [..Signature] [..7 Content Elements] [..Macro Tactics] [..Micro Tactics] [Ex:Matt4] [Ex:apocrypha] [Ex:Bible Trans.&Interp.] [Ex:Koran] [Ex:Mothman/ghost] [Ex:BOMormon] [Ex:Politics] [Ex:Prolife] [Lie Detect.Tips] [Lie Detect.Table]

Tactical Example: The Mothman Prophecies (and other magic/ghost tricks)

This Example covers both book and movie. The book is based on actual events which occurred in 1967 in Ohio, so is an important Tactical Example. The movie is a fictionalized later positing of the same event occurring a generation later. The movie is included to show how mesmerizing-to-the-public are the Satan&Co. tactics. Neither the movie nor the book are being criticized in any way. The objective is to see how Satan&Co. use everything to herd us in the direction they want to go -- to use us, to keep us from having a happy relationship with God. The people thus used are ALL of us, so there is never any justification for pointing the finger.

If you didn't read Mothman but did read Ghostly Encounters by Frances Kermeen, you'll find nearly identical interviewee and author reports in the latter; classic Satanic Signature in at least 8 of the stories in that book, with the #2 Signature "Greek" play being utterly obvious: a) the entire nature of the Greek contact with 'the gods' was through a "medium" -- a term which is a blatant, sarcastic, and deriding Satire Against The Mediator, Christ; b) most all god myths depict the exact same coy impishness as the 'ghosts' play with people. Additionally, the slapstick behavior of these entities runs rife: like Keel, Ms. Kermeen was 'visited' and annoyed in much the same way, first hooked by a childhood playmate wittily named "Mr. Sitarumia". That anagram is probably a Greek noun (umia ending) related to the Cross in some way (I've not decoded it yet, I'm not sure if the "Mr." should be translated as part of the anagram, and I've no time to analyse further). The book also recounts a dead giveaway term for demon influence, "mind transference" (aka telepathy): that's how the 'ghost' communicates. In Scripture, the term could be styled 'thought transference'; a number of Biblical keywords denote its function. (Keel's book uses a similar term, which you'll read about below with connection to Derenberger. Bear in mind that Keel and Kermeen probably don't know about each other, and surely don't realize they observe/experience the exact same 'entity' behaviors, even including the electric and phone games. More on this topic follows below.)

On top of that, a dead giveaway was in a passage where a 'ghost' was seen (by one interviewee) "trying to enter" a Christian's "body": demons can't enter Christians, but if you don't know your Bible Doctrine, you don't know you are seeing it in action, and thus the 'ghost' is really a demon telling you he's a demon by portraying that action to your mind -- for, demons well know they can't enter a believer's body. [A relative just mailed me Ghostly Encounters; why, I don't know -- he knows nothing of my website. I've no time to review the book as for Mothman, below, but what's said re Mothman easily applies to Ghostly Encounters, which recounts the same phenomena: except, the phenomena were called 'ghosts'. Students of Scripture on mediums etc. know better: demons use/influence/possess mediums, and that's what PYTHIA (@Delphi: that title is a fabulous pun, if you know Euripedes' Ion) WAS. That's why the Hebrew OT passage on Saul and the witch of Endor is so illuminating -- she never had contacted any real dead person, so a real Samuel returning up from Hades' Paradise frightened her. There are so many OT and NT passages on how ghosts/apparitions/manifestations are really demon games, you'd think that after 3400 years of having some Scripture in writing, mankind would at least have learned this much. Besides, for millennia demons have advertised themselves to entice people to play with them EXACTLY in the same way -- changing only what names they use to characterize their beingness. Are we humans too dumb to ever learn, or what? Does no one realize that "crossing over" means to cross over to Satan&Co.'s turf? A double-entendre of typical demon wit? Cross, get it?]

    Usually, the folks who get interested in UFOs and extraterrestrial life (i.e., Strieber's books and those supposed millions of 'walk-ins' from the Pleiades, a very popular constellation with the sex-hungry Greeks), also get interested in ghosts, which are allegedly humans who have 'passed on' -- or, to be au courante, "crossed over". Ghost aficionados love to claim that the ghosts are there to teach us, or us, them; UFO maniacs spread much the same gospel. I particularly liked the goofball in an episode of "The UFO Chronicles" who raptly claimed to be in constant telepathic communication with what he and his wife called "The Galactic Federation". Clearly this guy knew nothing of the mechanics of demon thought transmission; so he didn't get the joke when he was told that the people of this segment of Earth's time were to be the teachers for distant extra-terrestrial civilizations. Sure, that's what we are "now" (Bible keyword for our timeslot), as Church: in the Greek of 1Pet1:12, Peter writes that angels crane their necks to learn from growing believers, lol! Heaven, and therefore angels, are extraterrestrial, get it? As Parts III-V explain, in eternity Church will be a permanent Royal priesthood: so everyone will be learning through us. Do you get the joke, now? See, in olden times "the gods" was a popular notion. Today, 'extra-terrestrials' and 'ghosts' make good substitute names. So we can feel scientifically smart, you see. Yeppers, ol' Carl Jung was right: science is the new myth, replacing religion (bad2 replaces bad1), yet making us feel just as holy.

    Can we be dumber to not notice that both the 'aliens' and the 'spirits' behave in exactly the same way? Only difference is the claimed origin, for crying out loud. In Scripture usage, such punning is a type of concatenation: the art of taking part of a verse and coupling it with part of another verse to vastly elucidate the truth. Here, the 'concatenation' is, alien+'spirit', for both groups tease humans the same way, make Greek wordplays, act like the ancient Greek gods did, etc. So they can't be unfamiliar with Earth, and they can't be human; so OF COURSE they know what Gramma BlahBlah did/said in that hotel room in 1860 or whatever -- THEY WERE THERE.

    So what is the concatenation's revealed, elucidated truth? Duh. Alien+spirits=demons, just as the Bible has always taught. "Spirit", of course, means breath/soul/immateriality/life/Holy Spirit in both the Bible's Hebrew and its Greek. The term is used for demons many times, usu. with 'evil' put in front of the noun to clarify which immaterial class of beings is meant. 'Alien' is a Bible key word for someone opposed to God -- has a similar usage in Scripture to the Bible terms 'strange', 'far', 'enemy', and not-of-God. Does no one get this obvious advertisement? Amazing. I bet the demons tune into programs like John Edwards' "Crossing Over" just to get their daily haha. That poor and very nice guy, like so many others, can't see how he's being used. A Goodyear Blimp, this. [What's so tragic about programs like "Crossing Over": watch the way the demons communicate to the medium; he's never 100% sure of what the input means. So, there must always be a lot of volitional attraction and participation. They make the medium and the targets work at getting the meaning of the input. People are so negative to God, they are willing to work at such silliness? So don't see how they are being derided by all the fuzziness? Same stuff happened in the 1800's with the spiritist movement. Oh well, we learn from history that we learn nothing from history...]

Bearing in mind that, as explained at length in Part III, our "NOW" is an invisible epoch for Trial purposes, Satan&Co. best divert attention away from the Real God and the Real Spiritual Life by focusing on the VISIBLE. So you miss altogether, God's Invisible Plan For Your Life, in favor of the cheap, feely thrill.

    God's not about flashy, feely. God's miracles have always had some prime rational component, however powerful the miracles. Miracles are designed to authenticate a thing which cannot be otherwise authenticated: for example, everyone knew Messiah would come, but only the real Messiah could do the prophesied miracles. So, folks could know Jesus Christ was THE Messiah, not an imposter. Moreover, visible miracles during the OT period and that overlapping time with the final judgement period of Israel, 30AD-96AD (during which the NT Canon was written) were designed to teach something in a memorable way. Paul was struck blind -- miracles are often UNpleasant -- so you can BET he remembered the event for a long time, and learned much from its punning (he had to be struck blind, to see).

    Satan&Co. know all too well God's style: so, they mimic it. Also, they DERIDE God and His Plan by IMBALANCED stress on visible flash, so they thus OBFUSCATE His "sons" purpose by loud appeal to a SUBSTITUTE idea of God: one that makes man entertained. That man falls for this substitute in every form promulgated, from Ascetic-God to Zany God, is the sad testimony of history. One version of Zany God, of course, is the idea that some men are to be made privy to upcoming events. Prophecy: ahhhh, the magic word. Knowing the future. Yeah, baby, I'm special because I know the future! Me, not God. Yeahhhhhh: about the only thing more hypnotizing to man than the (legend of) Dracula himself, is the idea that man can foreknow the future. Kinda like strong catnip, for cats. Or, a nice-sounding flutey tune, for lemmings. Pied Piper and all drown, hooray!

    So as you read man's history and track all his stories about what prophetic disclosure he's had, you find two salient classes of output: 1) official/real Bible prophecy, which is always clear, laconically dull, and due to man refusing God; and 2) all other prophecy, which is always fuzzy, exciting (e.g., obtained via Pythian ecstatics).. and due to man refusing God. Well, that's the real reason, but it's kept invisible. Extracting the prophecy uses so much mystery and ceremony, the recipient feels favored, so the 'noise' of all that trouble MASKS the obvious derision: why isn't 'god' simple and direct? Why does the 'god' play cat-and-mouse games, which clearly demonstrate DERISION, certainly not love? Moreover, the one so 'favored' is never quite told he's getting an 'in' on the future due to his goodness; there's always some catch, some ambiguity, some 'out'. So, whether Aborigine or Aztec, Zoroastrian or Zulu; so, whether ancient or modern, Satan&Co.'s prophecy style is always intriguing -- with a big wallop at the end. Shows a little leg. Hides everything else until the last minute, when the bell tolls for thee.

So it's not too surprising that a book like The Mothman Prophecies would receive so much press, even a generation after the book's initial release. Not until (maybe early) 2004, did I know of this book. I saw the movie a month after I read the book, both done solely to honor a friend's sudden request. (The requestor still does not know about this particular website.) In short, absent the request, this "Example" would not be in this website. Yet it illustrates a major genre of D-I-O-S heavy slapstick style; so I ought to include it, so you have something easily accessibile to test.

Why would Satan&Co. sponsor this type of ooohhhyyyy supernaturality? Cuz the satanic play, as noted in the "Signature" section above, is always slapstick; cuz, it hooks people; cuz, then people are motivated to either ridicule such topics, or to become gushy about them. Thus the idea that supernaturality might actually sensibly exist, is blocked from the human mind.

    Satanic Tactical Key ==> By casting the 'supernatural' into a gee-whiz kaleidoscope; by then polarizing folks' views of the supernatural, the actual Truth about it goes undetected. Thus the entire question is REDEFINED in terms of silliness you deride, or silliness you believe. So "supernatural"="silly", get it?

    That's a trial lawyer's tactic from time immemorial, to redefine something, and thus help his side win. Done by the best of trial lawyers, Satan&Co. ("Satan" means "opposing lawyer" in Hebrew.) Thus the idea that non-silly supernaturality exists (i.e., a real God Who makes sense), is cut out from the public mind. So the only options for a human to fit in with his peers become the satanically-defined ones: either believe something silly, or scoff at it. Clever 2nd-Temptation-style salami tactic, eh?

What makes The Mothman Prophecies important: it furnishes a present-day blueprint for how Satan &Co. hook us. Which blueprint, anyone can test on any day in life. Those who mock the book show how they got hooked by Satan&Co.; those who believe in it show how they got hooked. Moreover, since the actual events in the book also constitute a real-life summary of how the demon boys play with our heads to get us obsessed with their games, so to drive us crazy, the experiential side of getting hooked is displayed by the book. In short, EVERYONE GETS HOOKED, HERDED INTO MANAGEABLE GROUPS. Of course, Bible has warned about this tactic, and illustrated it, from Genesis 2 onward.

Since the author of the book isn't sure (or won't admit) WHAT 'entities' tormented both him and his interviewees so much, he's not trying to score points for the Bible, ok? God doesn't need salesmen. Demons, though, do. You do with the data whatever you like. Preferably, you'll yawn and avoid all such ploys; just live in God's System, don't get goofy, scared, or hostile.

    Repeat Warning: BE BORED with this stuff. Think of 'supernatural' stuff as absinthe, poison. Which, it truly is. And, B-O-R-I-N-G! Oh, the more you know Him, the more UNimpressed you'll be with anything and everything else! Ok, end of warning message.

Obviously this will be a tricky and complex Example to cover. Let's start by defining WHAT DATA IS RELEVANT to this website's analysis:
  • THE BOOK. The content of the book differs substantially from the movie. As I understand it, the book's main theme is this: UFOs do not exist; instead, there is a supernatural group of 'entities' (author's term) who like to play malevolent games on mankind, as demonstrated in the Point Pleasant experience of 1967, which was a kind of mass hallucination, played both in small groups around the town's environs, and played individually. That experience really happened, according to the author. He interviewed the folks affected by it, and he himself was adversely affected by it. (His "Afterword" is quite depressing.) This experience was a real wakeup call for the author; as a result of it he came to disbelieve in UFOs and to believe in some malevolent creatures.

      LITMUS: is any 'data' reported demonstrably indicative of D-I-O-S; and especially, demonstrably SATANIC rather than merely human-hallucinatory? Obviously if all the details are patently of human 'size', then we can just throw out the book. However, if details demonstrate a larger (albeit slapstick-loving) intelligence behind them, we are looking at demon sponsorship.

  • THE MOVIE. The movie portrays the root contention and theme of the book rather seriously, sticking to the more-universal hallucinations, that of a so-called 'mothman' and the voices, predictions. However, it only amalgamates some of the characters and data in the book, placing a mixture of these in a new hypothetical scenario occurring in the same town, with the same bridge, but in 2002, not 1967. So its relevance will be deemed reinforcing, in that people who made the movie reinforced the book's tenets; and, interpreted them for the sake of portraying how such tenets could play out again.

  • THE REACTION TO BOOK AND/OR MOVIE. It is here that the D-I-O-S strategy plays, live.

      LITMUS: is any REACTION demonstrably indicative of D-I-O-S; and especially, demonstrably SATANIC rather than merely human-hallucinatory? Obviously if all the details are patently of human 'size', then we can just throw them out. However, if details demonstrate a larger (albeit slapstick-loving) intelligence behind them, we are looking at demon sponsorship.

So the question becomes, is this story a demonboy toy? If it is, what kind of story is UNDERNEATH the story line? Or, is this story just someone's imagination run amok, replicated in reaction by those who read/view it? Well, let's see. So, let's examine some details of book and movie, to check for any satanic sponsorship clues which are demonstrably BEYOND the cleverness of any individual associated WITH the book or the movie. Obviously, John Keel is telling what he believes is the truth in the book. Just as obviously, the movie's purpose is to make money, so it can be assumed that those who made the movie, didn't necessarily believe what Keel wrote. Nonetheless, as noted in the "Signature" section, demons just can't resist revealing themselves. So, if they really were involved in the events Keel recounts; if they really wanted Keel to see them (which seems obvious, in both book and the movie versions), then we should find telltale signature characteristics.

Let's look at #2 Signature Characteristic, the demonic penchant for giving themselves away via Greek-god concepts. The geographical area we call ancient Greece was composed of various city-states which had reached a mature, 'civilised' level of demonism within their culture. So, they were pretty irreverent yet also respectful, in their relationships with the 'gods'. Classical Greek drama often has statements in it which deliberately allude to specific Scripture (i.e., verses). This fact doesn't mean you should avoid Greek drama, for crying out loud (let's not be goofy). It DOES mean that the pattern there is repeated in other genres, i.e., the 'coincidence' that 'extraterrestrials' have names or make statements which are likewise allusive compared to original Scriptural terms/doctrines.

So, as Keel was even aware in his book, the 'contactee' is being DERIDED, noisily, when the 'extraterrestrial' uses a name which is a play on Greek gods. Unnoticed by Keel, maybe: back in ancient times, it was widely known that the Greek gods were really demons. And: Greek plays have 'actors', get it? So, in Point Pleasant (and elsewhere, against whomever) the demon is acting as an extraterrestrial: which of course he really IS, hahahahaha! [By the way, during Church Age you will not be able to see any angel in the Trial. Since God is not magic, any angel you think you see is all a thought-transference headgame played on you by Satan&Co. Or, maybe on you by yourself (far less vivid, far more controllable).] That's the same kind of witty derision they played in the Gospels. Making fun of whomever they possessed.

Words they use will be plays on ORIGINAL-LANGUAGE terms in Bible or Greek drama, too: because everyone knew that Greek 'gods' were really demons.

For example, the very name "moth", according to page 96 of Thomas Harris' Silence of the Lambs, "was 'anything that gradually, silently eats, consumes, or wastes any other thing.' It was a verb for destruction too..." The movie version of Mothman demonstrates its theme in the library scene and afterwards, where Alan Bates (the theme's spokesman) shows Richard Gere a picture of the very nocturnal moth Harris mentioned in his book (and displayed in the movie version of Silence of the Lambs). Which, of course, the movie has Bates hasten to say, "they [the creatures] cannot be explained.. rationally." Because, the idea of such supernaturality is not within the "consensus ..of what constitutes reality" to the so-called rational human mind. So, we disbelieve. Or, we get all engrossed, gushy about supernaturality, to escape our boredom!

Of course, in Biblical Hebrew, the famous qal doubled "muth muth" in Gen2:17 comes to mind: dying spiritually, you will die physically, the Lord warned Adam about 'that' Tree. Demons are destroyers, aren't they? Abaddon, Appollúon (Rev9:11, Greek spellings in verse)? Wingéd, of course, like any famous 'god' should be: no angel needs wings to fly. (Wings depict, among other things, virtuous thought, Bible Doctrine -- note Ezekiel's depiction of what the wings PROTECT; note how the cherubim faced on the ARK, and touching wingtips.) Note this: FOUR wings, like a moth, not six, like a seraph. Satan was cherubim, four-winged -- the seraph (six-winged) titles were battlefield awards, pre-Adam, but after Satan's fall; most angels have no wings.

    So demon destruction needn't be blood-and-guts. Oh no. Instead, Snaky, Ionic, venomous. Hiding in plain sight. Being the 'voice' a bizillion crazy people 'hear'. Especially, serial murderers or the bored seekers of the supernatural. Myth-lovers. Like, the Greek myths. Greek word, muthos. As in, storyteller. Liar. Bible verse the Lord said in Gospel, that Satan is the father of lies. Bible term engastrimuthos lit. 'ventriloquist' demon (á la Satan's use of the reptile in the Garden), is one who can control the vocal chords of the human he possesses. Being made of light, any demon can really work wonders on electronics, assuming he won't instead choose thought-transference, have the human(s) imagine/hallucinate some electronic effect, like hearing a voice on a phone or taperecorder. [Here's another example which surprised me, due to its accuracy. Although the movie "Prophecy 2" (or "3", I forget) is inaccurately premised on the idea that someone half-human is needed to save Heaven (though demon satirization on the Hypostatic Union is surely meant), the movie is accurate that there was a civil war among angels, and that humans are a post-positive conjunctive part of it (see Part II's first olive table). The other accuracy is the portrayal of how demon-thought-transference can make you 'see' things. In the movie, a demon appears as a scruffy handsome Israelite who looks for information on "Danyael", a half-human. The demon goes to a doughnut shop, asks the counterman if he's seen Danyael; the latter demands $50, before he'll reply. So the demon pulls a napkin from the dispenser, flashes it: camera shows the counterman 'seeing' the demon have a $50 bill in his hand. When the counterman puts what he thinks is a $50 bill in his pocket, camera shows he's putting a NAPKIN in his pocket. Great camera work and editing in that scene!]

So "mothmen" in English ends up meaning either "killer of men", or "deceiver of men", playing on both the Hebrew and Greek roots. Clever, eh? So no wonder people would see 'mothmen' and like creatures so much all over the world, as John Keel explains in his Mothman Prophecies. No wonder, then, that the book's anagrams like "Lanulos" are obvious -- sun and moon, Rev12 allusion -- but in LATIN, for Roman gods were patterned after the Greek ones, and of course the beast in Rev13, on which the harlot of Rev17 rides, is Rome. Clever: 'Alien' (Fake!) church will pogromize, just as predicted, since anyone who believes in Christ is likewise a 'son of Abraham', spiritually speaking. Wow. That particular anagram has a lot of meaning layers, for Rev12 is a historical trend between the Advents and also a particular phase of the official Tribulation, viz., last 3.5 years. One could write a whole book solely about the derisiveness of that anagram, and its succinct Matt4 strategy, especially since the term was pitched as the name for another PLANET, lol. Of course, the other dead giveaway is the portrayal of everyone ON "Lanulos" being naked. Demons just love playing with sex topics.

The significance of the anagram "Indrid Cold", who was the supposed representative FOR Lanulos to Derenberger, isn't immediately apparent. Definitely demonic, though, even before you decode the anagram: note well how "Indrid" tells Derenberger he's a good subject for AUTOSUGGESTION!

    In the movie, only the name is preserved, and no mention of "Lanulos" is made. Will Patton plays Derenberger (but named differently); Patton FIRST pronounces "Cold" like "Koolde". The "oo" sound, in most foreign languages, corresponds to a "u" letter in the language's alphabet. So too, in Latin, Hebrew, and Greek. In the book, "Indrid" gets all huffy when some reporter interviewing Derenberger misspelled "Cold" improperly, so Derenberger gets huffy, insisting that "C-O-L-D" is the proper spelling. No wonder. Anagram has sooo many layers. Remember, Latin's grammar and case usage basically developed from very ancient Greek. Possible Latin phrases into which the anagram translates are many. Here are a few of them. Bearing in mind that Latin, like every other language, elides (omits) letters (esp. vowels) in SPEECH, you phonetically derive any of the following [letters in brackets would be elided in speech]:
    1. [i]l[lud] dic rid[e]ndo, a command: devote-to-gods/authoritatively-speak it by means/manner of ridiculing;
    2. [i]l[lud] doc[e] rid[e]ndi, OR
    3. doc[e] rid[e]ndi [il]l[i],
        two versions of same command, essentially meaning: teach laughter-at/ridicule;
    4. lic[et] di r[i]d[e]ndo, the gods may/are permitted to ridicule. [Latin nom/voc plural of deus is EITHER "dii" or "di". Literally, this is dramatic: It is permitted, oh gods, to ridicule! There could be other translations.]

    Oh: it's real important to remember that in the Bible, nearly all the Old Testament people-names were really commentaries, phrases, descriptions. And nearly all of the names were some kind of expression ABOUT God. That's why you see so many -el endings (for the first two letters of God's 'last' name, Elohim). So, Israel means "Prince of God", Jacob means "Chiseler/cheater", etc. For 'Indrid' to take a first name anagram which actually SAYS something is very much in tune with Biblical practice.

    You can surely say the anagram has something to do with derision. Latin gerund (verbal noun) OR gerundive (verbal adjective) for laughing/joking/ridiculing/ smiling, "ridend-", is definitely in the anagram. Of course, almost anyone you interview who claims to have seen an angel will tell you they grin/smile, etc. Spartan shields' smiling "Gorgon" is a frequent "archetype" painted or carved all over the world's pantheonic art, so the idea of gods smiling in derision is pretty common. (Jung is wrong to have called it a mere universal archetype; folks SAW those images in their minds, else they couldn't have painted them. I've seen some in New Mexico's Indian ruins so close to the Spartan ones, it's like they copied each other.)

    The posited middle versions of the anagram require some explaining. Because in Latin the genitive case has so many uses, the meaning listed for #2 and #3, varies greatly. Latin term "Doceo" means "to teach"; in Greek, it's spelled doKeo (Greek has no "c"), and means to critically-judge, opine, adjudge, value someone as low, with a distinct connotation of DERISION. Paul uses the Greek term to good effect in 1Cor12, beginning around verse 19. Since both Latin and Greek have an objective genitive, "Indrid Cold" comes to be an anagram which satirizes the 'student'. English "docile" (Lat: docilis) means 'teachable', and of course the object of "Indrid" (Laughing's!) Teaching/Opining was poor Derenberger, who really believed he was flown to Lanulos! Angels were teachers in OT (demons like to think of themselves as teachers, too, esp since that's what the Holy Spirit does for Church).

      Contractions abound in Latin just as they do in most other languages, so omitted vowels are to be assumed. Of course, Hebrew is renown for spelling without vowels. My Latin grammars are a century apart and differ over the use of the gerund versus the gerundive. The result is a lot more meaning layers than can be conveyed within the scope of this site, since using one versus the other, one case versus the other, alters the meaning. If we treat the remaining "l" as representing the sound of "illud", which is a remote demonstrative pronoun, THAT ONE, we get the necessary laughing-at meaning (transitive use of ridere means to laugh AT, or ridicule). So, either: teach THAT ONE of/about ridicule, or teach-by-ridiculing-THAT-ONE. Of course, Yitzak, the child of the promise to Abraham, means "Laughter", "he who laughs". So, since sun and moon in Rev12 also depict Israel, "ridndi" could be a Latin equivalent translation for Yitzak; so is fitting for an 'alien' first name. Doc. of Laughter, to be precise. Laughter is the best teacher and medicine, after all!

    The first and last decodings are even more insightful, requiring less manipulation, and revealing more of the true authorship of this horrible prank. Latin verb "dico" has an etymology of authority, rule. So the usual translation "to say, speak" isn't really correct. It's an idea of an authority speaking, of a promise or pronouncement. Term was originally used much like the Hebrew idea of devoting-a-thing-to-God, which in simpler terms is often known as "devoting to destruction". Euripides' play "Ion" requires the audience to know that, in order to get much of the funny lines in the play. So too, with the Roman gods: Vestal Virgins, for example, were "devoted", required to remain virgins forever, living in the temple of their god (I forget which one, am typing extemporaneously). Victims (sacrifices) were "devoted to the flames". So, "dico" really means to consecrate, devote, etc. Hence, dico's imperative mood, "dic", is a command to devote-to-destruction, get id? Of course, the common title for Satan&Co. in Bible and elsewhere (e.g., Roman and Greek mythology, which is really a mutated story of Gen6) -- is, "the gods".

      Trouble with the first and last decodings is that "ridndo" is in either the ablative or the dative -- there are so many different sentences which might be meant by these cases, I can't list them all. However, each one would still convey a clear message that NO human could possibly be smart enough to invent. Get both modern and older Latin grammars (the newer ones are more truncated in their explanations), and look up the uses of both dative and ablative with EITHER the gerund or gerundive. Sample meanings of these cases are: SEPARATION (i.e., of the believer from the spiritual life, hah!), BENEFIT (sarcastic), purpose, intention, source/origin, cause, means/instrumentality/agency, manner, as used. The dative is rare: Cicero and Caesar's Gaul writings have only a few sparse entries. Bear in mind that the Ionic dative of purpose is in Eph2:10, which verse clearly "Indrid Cold" has in mind, since Derenberger was his 'workmanship'!

    The formation of the "Indrid Cold" anagram as depicted here follows a similar reversing pattern as for "Lanulos". The latter is formed by taking what is in the MIDDLE of solluna, the "l", moving it right over three letters, then REVERSING the entire sun-and-moon combination. So, too, with Indrid Cold, depending on which of even the four sample decodings listed above. In each variation, consonants and vowels are moved/switched, and in the final 'move', the entire phrase is reversed. For example, the first one (most likely candidate, it seems) was formed in four steps: 1) REVERSE the double consonants which are nearest each other; 2) REVERSE unalike vowels nearest each other; 3) REVERSE remaining "r" and "d" which didn't already get reversed in steps 1) and 2), leaving the "c" (for constans!), constant; then 4) REVERSE the entire phrase.

    Rather fitting, this salami tactic, this sleight-of-hand, since reversal is the entire game of Satan&Co. (Scripture translations frequently get reversed from Greek meanings via similar games.) Obviously, there's more cleverness than described here: maybe the foregoing isn't the right decoding. Clearly though, Derenberger wasn't smart in Latin, Greek, or Hebrew, nor would he satirize himself! What I don't understand, is why no one made a point of the name being an anagram, since "Lanulos" was so obvious; I'd have figured it out in high school had I then heard of it, along with a bizillion other kids who played with acrostics and Mad Magazine in the 1960's. If you know a thing's reality/meaning just HAS to be independent of the person telling you about it, then you know you're not dealing with hallucination or bombast. Satan&Co. gave the store away, here. And no one caught on?

Of course not! So, Satan's own name and rank, pre- and post- his 'fall' is played upon to the uttermost! Look up in Encyclopedia Britannica what "Apollo" meant in the Greek pantheon, then compare to Bible verses about Satan; then compare to "Bright Morning Star", the Lord's Title at Second Advent. (If you've time, remember how Zeus is always ridiculed in Greek myths -- that's Satan's casting of the Lord; which, of course, he himself also plays, on occasion!) It's incredible, the genius of wordplay in the mere "Phoebus Apollo", the full name for one of the 'aliens' who kept bugging Keel (read the book) -- which even Keel himself recognized. (more on Phoebus Apollo follows later, when Oracle of Delphi is covered in the "Koran" Tactical Example.)
  • For example, Isa14 makes a big deal out of his pre-fall purity. Well, "Apollo" references that purity.
  • Satan was the Guardian of the Throne, the #1 creature; the term "Apollo" references that, too.
  • Moreover, one of Satan's post-fall names is Destroyer: "Apollo" is a cognate of Greek verb "apolumi", meaning "to ruin, destroy". So, "I destroy". (Revelation's "Apollyon" is in Abussos, though, and refers to a different demon who then will be released.)
  • Moreover, Apollo is associated with light: sun, Morning Star --
  • Satan's pre-fall name (Haylel-ben-Shacher, Isa14:12; ewsphoros) is translated Morning Star (or Son-of-Dawn, another title, different words), lol!
  • And "Phoebus" means "Bright", which is blatant hutzpah that he will beat the Lord by the 2nd Advent, especially when you compare to the Hebrew equivalents (too many words)!
  • So the 'alien' who contacted Keel (per the book) called himself A.Pol, with an alleged 'associate' named Lian = Apollyon. Aka, "very high" (lian=very high) destroyer; also, allusion to very high mountain, Greek of the 3rd Temptation in Matt4. Making "Lia" female drops the "n", as is proper grammar (heh).
  • Also, using a female is ALSO a Rev17 allusion, idea of using a woman to make harlotry. Against the Rev12 woman. Etc.
One could go on and on showing how many ways these few words grinningly betray demonic origin.

Moreover, no human can do such breathtaking realistic 3-D thought transference even to himself; let alone, to a whole group. So you (and most with you) really think you see lights in the sky, MIB, etc. So those who are uninterested or not so far gone don't 'see', because their lack of interest means 'permission' wasn't given; or, even if they do see, they remain uninterested, so again no 'permission' was given. Further: no human can mess up electricity so well as the book depicts. [Angels, being made of light, obviously could have a tremendous impact on any biology, electrical or radio waves or equipment; assuming such stuff in the book wasn't thought-transference. Trial Rules do circumscribe what they can do; further, there are probably internal (natural) limits. It's not worth much further speculation. The more you know God, the more you know Christ, the less interested you will be in demonology.] Demons make any 'prediction' true if it serves them, and if they can do it under Trial rules.

    God allows this "strong delusion" (Romans 1 term), too; as explained in Part IV (and elsewhere), if you're electing the magic, you're REJECTING God. Believer, or unbeliever. Since Satan is the ruler of this world, Satan&Co. are delegated punishment powers (see beginning of Job 1 and 2) when Divine Justice must allow it: here, because so many were sooo enamored of the supernatural, they got to play the games they did, keyed to each person's proclivities. So, some were more enamored of an ugly creature, than a spaceship. Others weren't much interested until they were personally 'contacted'. Notice how even the slimmest 'permission' was opportunistically used (so 'just say no', 100%). Mere humans could not have pulled all that stuff off.

Consider also,
  • a disingenuous author wouldn't spell out his own gullibility for examination.
  • The hallucinations, too, are higher-than-human, though made up of seemingly stock images.
  • That the 'Mothman' creature is so much a CARICATURE of an angel.
  • So clearly, one who saw a 'creature' didn't value Scripture -- or was being tempted AWAY from it. So too, for anyone who saw a spaceship, for Bible is clear that only on Earth is there non-angelic life; in the universe, there's no other rational (finite) life except angelic and human. So again, those intrigued by the lights (or 'mothman') didn't know enough, didn't want to know enough, Scripture; the magic was more appealing.
  • It's also rather telling that dark-skinned but NOT Negroid 'agents' were used (in mid-'60's, pro-integration was politically correct). First, demonism has long flourished in both India and the Far East, so this cleverness is yet another play on Greek gods (pantheons are a lot alike, if you adjust for culture). Next, it would be 'inclusive' artistry to bring in 'Orientals' to depict the Middle East: about 100 years ago, that's what the term "Oriental" meant (i.e., in books on the Arab language of the late 1800's). See? NO human is smart enough to cleverly link all this to Bible and history, ok?
  • Their looks, manner of dress and behavior was sheer slapstick! though they were supposed to be at least minor OFFICIALS in some capacity.
  • And no one who 'saw' those 'men in black' thought it odd that supposed government types would need salt, take pills, have wires up their legs, and almost always be 'oriental'? Of course they did! but because they all saw the same vision at the same time, they mistake it for genuine, instead of testing visual content for sense. The "salt" thingy is even more ingenious, since "salt" is a Biblical keyword for Bible Doctrine in the soul. Again, not one human in a million knows this use of the term "salt" in the Bible, though nearly EVERYONE on the planet knows the expression, "salt of the earth"!
  • So why didn't the Christians involved check with God? Oh, because God isn't important! Rather, majority-makes-right, age-of-parchment-makes-right, but who gives a flip about what the Bible actually SAYS! See how enamored they were of the supernatural?

The movie is pretty loyal to the book's essential thesis, and incorporates a lot of its claims, especially with respect to how Keel was badgered. So, the movie focuses on the idea of malevolent creatures who use foretelling to bait humans, but adapted the book's contents instead to a similar situation, rather than to the real one: another reporter, but the same bridge. The movie reinvents the theme, weaving in a lot of what Keel had disclosed, but also adding its own details. So, the movie adds a bit of house-hunting tragedy.

    Camera shot of a bat in the closet of the house 'Klein' and his 'wife' prospected. Bat-like thing scared 'Mary' so badly, she crashed the car. Scarring both, then killing her. 'Leaving a cursive gamma (Y, but in Greek that's lower case) in its trail, which every once in awhile the movie flashes. Which, of course, was the very shape of the glyoblastoma (sp?) showing in the CAT scan of 'Mary's' left front temporal lobe. And, presumably, in Will Patton, causing his ear to bleed. The gamma, of course, would be the first letter of that rare brain tumor's name. Of course, it's ALSO the first letter of "God" or "Greek" (in English). Or, Greek gods, see. Clever, eh?

Like the book, though, the movie camera makes it plain that vampiric thing, whatever it was, kept watch on Klein. And, on others, playing horrifying pranks on the townspeople. Even to the point of burning eyes via too much exposure to the light, just like a laser can do; while the guy was having sex no less (cute play on Gen6 that; how demons love sex topics; oh, remember that angels' bodies are composed of light, so pointing a finger would be like sending a laser beam). Movie version of the book's convo between Cold and Keel: "What do you look like?" Richard Gere's progressively-obsessed 'Klein' begs 'Indrid Cold' on the telephone. The latter replies, "It depends on who's looking." Moreover, when Gere asks, "Can you read my mind?" the character replies, "I don't need to, do I?" Both are classic demon replies, Pythian style, and maybe Hollywood boned up on the Oracle of Delphi for the film. The book has even more of them. (It's the ambiguity that's classic. Demons can't hear thoughts, directly; but due to Trial it's probably a 'discovery' (legal term) issue that all "evidence to be submitted" be disclosed so the opposing side has 'equal opportunity' in the Trial. So, I'm guessing there is probably some Divine access system -- thus God can't be accused of withholding evidence. Yet, aside from this movie line: what pastor in a million knows this doctrine about the Angelic Appeal Trial? In 1967, when all this really happened, mine was the only one who knew.)

Movie provides the distinct impression in one of its subplots that the year 2004 election is to be influenced by these creatures. Of course, for millennia Bible has explained demons are very involved with rulers. (See Flood passage and Job monikers "sons of God"; Ez28; the titles of the demonic table of organization in Greek, words like archons etc. as used in Col1:14-18, end Romans 8, Eph6, other places.)

Of course, it was quite a nice touch, both in the movie and the actual event, that the 'mothmen' and other demon-produced hallucinations leading up to the main tragedy, all take place during the ONE time of year people actually have a thought or two about God: between Thanksgiving, and Christmas. Satire of the highest order. Do you notice, no one in either book or movie actually seeks help FROM God? Only the whining "why me" accusation (see Gen3, how Adam and the woman accuse God) enters the mind. Do you realize now, why God lets this stuff happen? Why Satan&Co. are authorized to discipline us? LOL, we are so negative to God, absent some tragedy, we don't even think about Him, even during the celebration of His Birth! No wonder the demons openly mock us.

In one paranormal-phenomenon book Keel mentions that the 'contactee' says, "the truth is hidden". What neither Keel nor the poor guy apparently knew: a frequent NT Greek term for "truth" is aletheia, which literally means, the UNhidden! So some demon is really having fun with that contactee, saying, The UNhidden is hidden! Get it? Hiding in plain sight?

So Satan&Co.'s self-advertisements are not at all hidden: even Hollyweird unknowingly gets used, a generation later, to repeat the story. That Bible uses a whole slew of Greek drama words and concepts in both Gospels and every NT epistle is a fact which was widely taught even 50 years ago; so when the events of Keel's book took place (1967), someone should have clued in due to the 'alien' names and anagrams. Moreover, Greek drama is very well documented; the original languages are preserved; and Greek cultural concepts were avidly aped by Rome, and are very much a part of Western culture through now. Principle: there's no excuse not to know the wordplay, because Greek drama is referenced. So one big extra clue that this 'mothman' thingy was of satanic origin is how its obvious hints tweak the entire Christian clergy for being too stupid to catch onto them. So, again, note the clever result of the Satan&Co. strategy to pitch supernaturality as either deriding, or believing in, silliness. The whole thing was written off as some goofballs having funny brains. Just as people shallowly view Scripture, so also they shallowly analyse anything they don't understand. So the people affected, were left clueless and hurt, thinking themselves crazy, with no way to learn how to be extricated from the mess they got themselves into. Hopefully, some of them did finally realize they were under satanic derision; hopefully, some of them found Bible Doctrine under a good pastor. Else, they would have to end up dead, in an insane asylum, drunk, or drugged. Who can live through such an experience, and not be traumatized? Remember: any real supernatural experience is not fun. It's shocking.

    So imagine Satan saying to God in 1967 (or 2004), á la Job Chapter 1 and 2's scenes, See how those American believers we beguile don't care about You, even during the one time of year everyone knows that YOU are to be honored? That's even worse than them cursing You to Your Face! See how they don't check Your Word to interpret events? How is it, that we should go to the Lake of Fire, but those who prefer our 'voices' to Your Voice, the Holy Spirit -- how is it, they don't go to 'hell', too?

Of course there are many voices, and we humans love every siren song we hear, from the thrill of a vampire movie or séance, to Ouija boards, to play-acting Satanism cults. Multiculturalism. Science. Psychics. "X-Files". "Taken". Good ol' Genesis 6, updated; trying to hook people on dallying with them. Yeah, these outer space folks (yup, DEMONS!) want to mate with us and we'll become like gods if we 'eat', mate (same temptation in Gen3, also Gen6). So, once hooked, the person has given permission. So the idea of such (mental) intercourse is a blatant invitation to which the 'just curious' will consent.

The 'just curious' consent all the time. We prove that only our bodies are adult. And one thing a child likes, is magic. Oooh-Ahh. Those debunking the magic-lovers are likewise children. Ahhh, the magical put-down!!! Build your happiness on another's unhappiness for 15 minutes of fame! Oh how well the unhidden is hidden!

Finally, demon sponsorship clues via the REACTION to book/movie should be pretty easy to detect. You can look around the internet, searching on "mothman" and see the wide range of reactions. Most scoff; many use "mothman" to make money (i.e., the town of Point Pleasant now has an annual Mothman festival every September 13th).

Naturally, if you surf the internet or talk to people, you'll find many who say "this [book, movie] is stupid". If pressed for whys, the response is generally, "This guy made it up to sell the book [movie]". In short, derisive skepticism.

Alternatively, there are the folks who oh brother believe it! Whether they believe 'mothman' is some real creature like Bigfoot, or some divine sign, or.. you name it -- all these folks have one thing in common: the thrill of belief. Which often translates into, the thrall of stupidity. For example, on the internet you'll find a crop of 'Christians' who, like the movie's Gordon Smallwood (played by Will Patton), have so little faith in Bible, they have no discernment whatsoever. Hence, any word in life which is also in the Bible, must therefore prove the Bible right. So, says one of the sites on the internet (I'm not making this up): because 'mothman' has wings and the Bible talks about angels in Revelation having wings, a) it must be TRUE that 'mothman' exists, and b) "mothman" must be an angel. (LOL: again, I'm not making this up; website is mostly black, with some red sidebars. Why is it supernatural-topic websites so often have black backgrounds and illegible red text?) Never mind that both book and movie go to some lengths to show this 'angel' is not at all pro-human; never mind that Bible also says Satan&Co. are angels. So no, not all angels are on God's side. So these 'Christians' wouldn't know their Bible if it bit them...

    See how good Satan is at using silly Christians to make others alienated from the Real God, Who is not silly? See how stupid the excuse for rejecting the Real God is, based on silly believers? If the believer is silly, must God be silly, too?

See, people all react to the content of the Mothman story, not realizing how their reaction affects them. Not realizing how their reaction burlesques them. For they become obsessed whether pro- or con-.. and therefore become silly. Thinking themselves holy for crusading, of course...

While the apparent reaction to Keel's 1967 book was to accuse him of making it all up for a sensational sell; while as a result of the movie Pt. Pleasant has become a weirdo's shopping mall á la Roswell; while it's politic to badmouth the idea of supernaturality, there is some too-clever-for-humans truth, here. So you're looking at demon sponsorship.

Most tellingly, we are hooked by means of silliness: for the details in the Mothman story ARE slapstick, above all else. So by making it silly, the demons deride, which is the "D" in Satan's D-I-O-S strategy. By deriding, we are made both salesmen FOR derision, and the objects of derision. The joke is on us, and we too are laughing at someone else.

    THE JOKE: all these reacting folks, whether they scoff or scarf up the story; all these real people don't realize how they themselves are displaying the exact same characteristics as the reactors and 'contactees' in Keel's book.

    In the book, people either scoffed or scarfed, too: they crammed their cars on bluffs, replete with picnic fixins', to watch the UFOs coming in nightly at precisely 9pm. (What, and no one thought it odd UFOs would be so punctual, but the government, so secretive?) So, now people (mostly Christians, of course!) cram the internet with their various posturings, focusing on the information as if there really were UFOs or beasties or angels.. or, making fun of those who so believe. You can see much the same thing when you review what programming PAX TV chooses to show. If it's Christian, it must be weirdo...

Meanwhile: does no one recognize how the 'debate' regarding what is supernatural, is thus relegated only to does-this-silliness-exist? So, one's mind ends up buying a false definition of what 'supernatural' ought to mean? So how receptive will the scoffers be to the idea of a God Who actually makes sense? So how receptive will the scarfers be to the idea of a God Who actually makes sense?

Neither will be receptive. The scarfers want to be entertained, therefore define "God" as silly; and the scoffers don't want anything to do with 'god', since the scarfers believe in 'god'. So both camps throw out the baby with the bathwater, and Satan&Co. laugh heartily.. at them. Having thus polarized the debate, Satan&Co. cause the wide swath of humans 'in the middle' of these two camps to conclude it best to not think about supernaturality. Better to focus on mowing the lawn, and vaguely define "God" as Someone who likes potlucks in Peoria on Sunday. So, bingo! Everyone is even more reticent to look at/for God, than they were before! Clever strategy, huh. Does that sound like a strategy any human would be smart enough to use? But of course we humans are too dumb to live.

Nor does that strategy cease. Did you notice how most of network TV for 2005 is focused on supernatural programs for primetime which are largely silly in nature? You got your choice of demanding spirits who bug young marrieds (just like Kermeen's book, just like the Mothman book) on Tuesday or Friday ("Medium" and "Ghost Whisperer"). You got your choice of electronic aliens who wanna triple our DNA strands ("Threshold") and infect our minds, inhabiting our bodies; or dragons from prehistoric times who do the same, and are now coming up from the abyss of magma ("Surface"); you got the Fielding-type Lord of the Flies triple-population experiment, aka "Lost", which to the viewer is pitched as some alien intelligence, playing mindgames with them; or "Invasion", in which aliens fall down from the sky into the water, and try to inhabit humans. Do you see the same theme running through all these programs? Do you know each of them is so replete with Bible metaphors, you'd have to be a Biblical scholar to recount them all? So you just know the humans writing and producing these programs are clueless. "Sea" in Bible means large masses of people; obviously the invasion/inhabitation of humans depicts Genesis 6 and all the demon junk the Bible reluctantly portrays; the parallel to the Biblical explanation of demon impishness and hostility of these 'aliens' isn't even veiled. "Surface" of course is almost a bald-faced retelling of Revelation 9, though surely the writers of the show don't recognize that. And of course the dragon is always cute...

The list can go on and on. Again, clearly no human is smart enough. (Surely the networks aren't conspiring to tell Bible stories about demons during primetime, right? Sheesh.) Notice how DARK most of the new 2005 shows are. So not only is the supernatural silly, it's nasty. Best not to believe in it altogether. Or, to use it as a cheap thrill...

    ==>Aha: a little bit of silliness, artfully promoted into book and movie and television, artfully based on real events and especially Bible (however allusive, depending on viewer knowing the Bible keywords) -- goes a long way to block out what little positive volition man had, toward God.

And God? Oh, the Real, Sensible God was in a movie, once. Was it the Ten Commandments? Well, no. Even that movie was off by 100 years (dating the Exodus wrongly, see Exodate.htm). God is always portrayed as an idiot, a Sugar Daddy or Petty Judge. Watch any movie about God you want, see for yourself.

CAVEAT EMPTOR: If you only want a 'magical' relationship with God, that's all you'll get. If you want to judge "God" is silly (so you don't believe in Him), that's what you'll get. Matt 7:1-2! See also Col3:25, Hosea 6:7, Gal6:7.

Either want God for Himself, or don't. But avoid supernatural stuff. You can't outsmart Satan&Co. God IS Supernatural by nature, but living under His Power in His System is not something you will feel. God doesn't want love based on the feely. Based on Truth, yes; anything else, no. And if you grow up spiritually, you'll come to have the same attitude, recognizing anything else as tawdry fluff (yawn here).

Tactical Example: The Holy Koran

This section needs extensive re-writing and amplification. However, the gist of it remains correct. Much more evidence needs to be provided from the Koran itself. So this section will be rewritten, clarified and amplified, later.

In other sites, I've noted that the fastest and easiest way to determine which God(s) is the real God(s), is by reading the world's holy books. Obviously, since they all differ, some of these holy books are written by Satan&Co.: 'counterfeit serpents', to trap people away from God. How to tell a counterfeit? Well, a book will reflect the character of its author. Remember Satan's Grand Strategy: to defeat God on God's Own Turf, and God's Own Terms. Well, the Arabs are sons of Abram, so are part of God's Promise, thus God's Turf. So, it's no wonder that the Koran well displays his genius.

    Please don't misunderstand. It is not my objective to 'put down' anyone. Quite the opposite. We are all cannonfodder for Satan's plan, no matter what our belief, socioeconomic status, smarts, or any other human factor. That fact should be baldly evident just because there is a "Dome of the Rock" and a Wailing Wall. The whole world knows of these two structures; the whole world knows that Daniel 9 and Matt24 are Bible passages. Jews are supposed to be experts on the OT, and Christians, on NT (so goes the common idea). Ok then: why doesn't anyone notice that the Dome is an archetype of the "abomination of desolation", in both those Bible passages? Thus signifying, that Satan is burlesqueing the entire Judeo-Christian world, because he proves Bible right by getting the Moslems to make that "abomination of desolation"? And we don't catch on? Granted, the real Tribulational future "abomination" will be of a different thing. But it is an "abomination", right now. Part IVa covers this topic in much more detail.

    Satan also burlesques the Arabs in Koran, and it is soooo bitter and fine, how he does it. Makes you want to cry forever. And Look: once you know that the Dome of the Rock FULFILLS the interim-time of both prophecies, then you know without a doubt that God is the God Of The Bible. The structures aren't disputed by any historians or scholars; the Bible books AS books aren't disputed with respect to whether they are in print. Everyone knows and can see, at any second, that these Bible books are in print. Everyone knows and can see, at any second, online, the Wailing Wall (and probably, the Dome, too). So, then: Satan is burlesqueing the Arabs, By Proving Bible Right. He burlesques everyone..see?

Just as I have had to show where we Christians are stupid, in order to illustrate Satan's system of beguiling us all, so also I need to give you enough non-Biblical sources you can test yourself. The other non-biblical stuff like gnostic, Christian and Jewish apocrypha and pseudopigrapha are generally stolid or lurid, not too clever, and not even trying to well- imitate Scripture: as if the demon 'inspiring' each of them was bored. Other religions' holy books are prettier-but-fuzzy, aimed at emotion-only, enamored of pseudo-intellectual games of irony, with lots of ennui. Stressing ennui, in fact, as a virtue, the hallmark sales pitch to East Asia (including India), historically. [East Asian religions are primarily a satire on God's Attributes. If you want to know how vile was Satan's actual use of the word Elohim as an epithet in Genesis 2, read almost any East Asian holy book. The satanic venom any of them display is incredible to behold. So I guess it's no accident that Encyclopedia Britannica, in its article "Hinduism, History of", noted current Western culture's interest in Eastern religions is "unprecedented since the Roman Empire." That quote is in or near the last paragraph of the 1984 article.]

The Koran, by stark contrast, took a lot of work to do, as the following paragraphs will illustrate. So, the Q'uran symbolizes the very best of Satan's non-Bible script-games. (The games he plays with the Bible are far keener, and take up the balance of this website after the next subsection.) Satan's Anti-Semitism Major Tactic is just as much aimed against Arabs as against Jews. For, the Arabs are also sons of Abraham, and are likewise protected to a certain extent under God's Gen12 promise to Abram. Never forget that. Current history in this year 2003 will not make sense unless you understand that it's the Anti-Semitism Tactic which 'defines' our epoch, but with this twist: Satan's trying to use Anti-Semitism to wipe out Christians, too. We are all in this together, we are all the "People of the Book", as Satan himself says in the Koran, and anyone can become a person "of the Book" simply by believing in one of the three faiths. So the whole world is involved, here. So, let us be forewarned.

So, let us begin the review of the Q'uran. You'll probably need a copy of the Koran handy to check out all the references below. At times, you'll see me mimic the Koran's writing style (from Pickthall's translation, which Muslims consider very devout). Please understand: I LIKE Muslims. This section is to show how Satan hates them, using their own hatred of God to destroy them. For Arabs and the Muslim faith (which came from the Arabs) are indirectly covered by the Genesis 12 protection clause (sons-of-Abraham). Satan is out to destroy ALL sons of Abraham, preferably by getting them to exterminate each other. You can trace that strategy in the Bible, and you can see it play live any time you view world news.

Since a lot of technical material regarding specific Suras follows, I'll just summarize here how the D-I-O-S overall pattern with respect to the Koran works. The first and last, Derision and Substitution, will be stressed in the review, for if you see both the initial tactical approach (Derision) and its result (Substitution), you should be able to see the other two in many more ways than I have time to list. So:

  • Derision/Obviousness in the Koran is made about everyone, as will become plain as you read here;
  • Imbalance/ Misemphasis is accomplished by means of the mellifluouy of the actual text, which is extremely tender, emotional Arabic poetry -- kinda like a lover's, at times; also, by means of cultural loyalties and especially, anti-semitism in the adherents (this you know from learning Moslem culture and history, and the Koran buttresses tribal/family loyalty) -- thus the adherents FEEL GOOD;
  • Obfuscation/'noise' is accomplished by textual beauty also, but more by means of the Koranic provisions themselves (works, primarily), the idea being that self can do something Allah likes: praying, giving alms, etc. Note the stress on body-stuff; if you have stuff to do which garners approval, you don't have to think. So,
  • Substitution/Reversal becomes easy, as the following review of the Suras will show.

Oh: you should know some things isagogically (background at the time), before we start. First, Christianity had gone into an even more severe phase of apostacy than before. The book by (Sir John) "Glubb Pasha" was mentioned earlier; see also Gibbon, Cary, Mommsen, and other writers of that period in Christianity (500-600AD). Cary's version is shortest and in many ways the most perceptive.

    Let's look at this issue closely, for it shows one of Satan's many attempts to focus on the Land so he can get the Temple rebuilt there; and regather the Jews (for slaughter) to that rebuilt Temple. Basically, the Christian nations were pretty exhausted from fighting each other. What else is obviously true of that era? They weren't looking at ISRAEL. No cause to do so; no money, no strength left, and life for the Jews, while never easy, was relatively calm. So, Satan has to create a cause, revivify the Christianity he divided -- to conquer it wholly and keep Scripture from being disseminated -- but now, revivified for his ongoing goal of Gotterdammerung. NOTE WELL: If Christianity weren't so rotten at this point, there could have been no Islam, nor Crusades, nor Inquisition. Without Islam growing and spreading as it did, the Crusades would have had no impetus; without the eventual conquering of Islam-in-Europe in the ninth century (viz., Charles Martel), there could have been no Inquisition, which wiped out Spain's middle class, and slaughtered or converted a lot of Arabs and Jews; which was part of a whole Church trend for centuries, of wiping out 'heretics'. See? This was a prior time when Satan promoted in order to annihilate. What is happening in 2003 is but a RECURRING trend of the same kind; it's too exactly-parallel to be 'coincidental', sorry.

Second, Islam (meaning, "surrender to God") was a significant departure from the many-limited-gods worship which was common in meso-Arabia at the time Mohammed got his vision. Islam is much more about God blessing man than by man appeasing God; in fact, three big departures are these: 1) ONE God, One Person; and, 2) you obey this God for your own good -- no sacrifices; 3) God the God of Abram. Notice how, prior to this time, Arabs had made a stink about Abram, and were already long infamous in history for being raiders and thieves, partly from the rationalized justification that Ishmael and Abram's other sons (by Keturah) were unfairly disinherited; but they didn't WORSHIP Abram's God. So, this vision is tantamount to God visiting Hagar in the wilderness; tantamount to Joshua leading Israel into the Land, even down to the SAME RATIONALE (wiping out apostacy); tantamount to a FIRST ADVENT for the other progeny of Abraham -- those analogies are real important to remember, when we get to the At-Tariq sura. Pretty attractive, eh? Kinda sounds like Judaism and Christianity, eh? YOU BETCHA.

So, now consider: the Q'uran's origin cannot be human. Perhaps some of the world's 'holy' books have been of human origin, but in the case of the Koran, it's physically impossible. The Q'uran (Arabic transliteration: term means "Lecture", "Teaching" -- play on the word "Torah") has too many plays on the original languages of Biblical verses. Such a comprehensive genius would have required an expertise with Scripture beyond anyone alive at the time of Mohammed. Remember, the Bible was in the hands of very few people in 600AD; those who had it, couldn't easily read the horrible script: they had to chant it slowly to know the words. Looks kinda like this:

Imagine reading THAT line after line after line after line! Of course you have to

See? Too-slow reading means the brain can't get meaning. So, then: how could 7th-century Christians ever have the time to cross-reference the Bible so well, they could link verses in the original languages, which were NOT available to them, and with lightning speed, to boot? But that's what the Koran does! And then subsequently write poetic verse which plays on the double-entendres in widely disparate verses of the original Hebrew, Greek (etc)! Do you realize what an expert someone would have to be, to do this? Yet that's precisely what the Koran does. But no Bible scholar then (or now) could do that. Moreover, Mohammed received his 'inspiration' and dictated it, so there was no time alone for research.

    Jerome's translation of the Bible into Latin and his commentaries, were critically important, but very basic; no one improved on his commentaries. Worse, Rome banished his translation in favor of the Vulgate as it then existed -- preferring OLD Latin, so Jerome's translation didn't replace the old version of the Vulgate, for another 400 years. In short, Jerome would have been the guy with maybe enough expertise, but he was already dead for two centuries, by Mohammed's 'vision'. And no one had Jerome's translation, even. Further, other so-called Church Fathers wrote commentaries which were likewise at a kindergarten level (because they didn't publicly know more, or because they kept it simple for the masses, I'm not sure). So an intensely-sophisticated understanding of Scripture was not available, so Mohammed couldn't have gotten it, even if (as some argue but I do not) he was literate. Remember also: God was punishing Christendom for its apostacy, too. That is why an Islam could be allowed to rise. Again, read Sir John Glubb ("Pasha"), A Short History of the Arab Peoples. Lots of used copies are available from Amazon.

The original Q'uran is beautifully written, the sound of which can justly be said to provoke tears and ecstasy in the hearer; it is poetically phrased in nearly perfect meter. No wonder so many people believe in Islam. Of course, the dead giveaway that Satan wrote it is its manic obsession over Jews and Christians in nearly every Sura. Jews and Christians, of course, 'abandoned' the previously-given "Scripture" ( = "Torah" + "Gospel" + "Q'uran", in Pickthall's translation), so a Mohammed was needed.

Also, a jihad. [Islam is supposed to be a sort of update on the Bible, but seems to maybe leave as 'okay' the covenants to both Jews and Christians, if they believe that only Allah is God. So, Islam itself essentially boils down to believing in Allah, and doing the moral works and worship the way the Q'uran prescribes. If you violate the prescriptives, you go to hell unless you repent, even after you believe in Allah, unless He decides to forgive you anyway. There is no animal sacrifice, only a few rituals, some set prayers -- today, these are called the "Five Pillars of Islam"; special importance is placed, OT-style, on the meditation over the Q'uran's verses; ideally, you govern your country by it, too. Thus, Moslem moderates in the Sunni sect will tell you that "jihad" is only a spiritual, internal struggle, and is never intended as military war against the infidel. Most of the Koranic verses support this interpretation. However, the Hadith, which functions kinda like our OT and Acts, of course shows a great many wars. Thus the radical/militant subsects in Islam get their justifications.] For all the wonderful tenderness and charm which constitute each Sura verse (and the wordplay is utterly fabulous), the psychological defense mechanism known as "projection" runs rife throughout the Koran; kinda like Chapter XI in Mein Kampf, which described Hitler and Nazism, but was output as the nature of 'the Jew'. Satan, though, expresses his projected Anti-Semitism and Anti-Christian venom in the subtle style of Antony's eulogy over the dead Caesar (Shakespeare's Julius Caesar). So, by constant digs within a facade of kindness, the masses are riled up to go execute the murders. Clever. Antony (Satan via the Koranic sura-verses) can blink his eyes in mock surprise: "I came to bury Caesar, not to praise him". Yeah: Satan comes to bury us, not to praise God! See? Projection takes what's true of self, and imputes that to the 'enemy'. Thus, self is innocent. Well, the Bible's Jehovah Elohim isn't so obsessed.

Satan demonstrates (via the Koran) a distinct fondness for Isaiah's, Paul's, and the Hebrews author's writing styles: three writers which the Koran excludes from its definition of "Scripture". Lots of terms in the Koran are wordplays on the Book of Revelation, another book which is excluded from the "Scripture" definition. Thus, in typical OBVIOUS style, Satan affirms that the Bible is indeed the Word of God! But of course, chops off what books constitute "Bible": the chopping-off technique is Satan's signature. ["Torah" in Hebrew usage either means the whole of the Tanakh, or merely the first five books of Moses. It's not clear -- probably deliberately -- which of the two usages of "Torah" is meant by the Koran. Pickthall's annotations seems to say that the Koranic usage of the term stresses the Pentateuch.]

Though he chops off what he calls "Scripture" to man, Satan plays on ALL of it. So, he also keenly plays on terms in the Bible's Apocalypse/ Revelation, viz., Revelation's ultimate God-Man title, "First and Last": see "Iron", v.3. There, it seems like Satan's replying in court to God the Son (who is also our Defense Attorney -- see last part of Heb2 and 4). Moreover, in the Koran Satan uses "We" (sometimes Trinity in disguise!) far more often than the OT does; and, even talks about the "holy Spirit" sustaining "Jesus". "Spirit of Allah" or its equivalent is used maybe a dozen times. These latter two types of "Spirit" usages are deliberate parallels to OT terms (probably to gain credibility). The Koranic usage mocks the multilayered Hebrew and Greek "ruach" and "pneuma", respectively -- the real Bible employs these terms in wordplay, and even in Mohammed's day (and still today!) Christians were confused as to the terms. Mohammed couldn't know that, of course. But Satan would know, especially since he sponsored the confusion (and still does). So, to Mohammed and his audience, it wouldn't be clear what "spirit" meant. So, Satan can mock the Holy Spirit by using the terms as he does in the Koran, and no one is the wiser!

But of course Satan must mock the Holy Spirit, for the Holy Spirit sustained the Humanity of Christ (which a dozen sura verses even admit), thus procuring our salvation. But of course Satan must also mock the Father, since it was the Father Who imputed our sins to Christ, "the Lamb of God" -- and judged them. [Only with Three Separate and Independent INFINITE Gods does INTERpersonal freedom and justice exist without gerrymandering, sham or cost: think about it. See also Part V's "Paradox of Merit" table.] So, Satan can't afford to have humanity recognize that "God" is Trinity, lest the salvation message make sense in both the "Torah" (e.g., in Gen3&15:6, Levitical Sacrifices) and the "Gospel", which the Koran, in one of its rare uses of the Sacred Tetragrammaton, concurs is from THE LORD! [e.g., John 3 and end each Gospel. More about this "THE LORD" moniker will be said a bit later on.]

    Oh their Lord! Can't DARE admit to them that Father, Son, and Spirit are Each Unique, so there is no other like Each of them! Each is without partners, Unique! Oh their frustrated Iblis! Can't dare explain that "Father", "Son" and "Spirit" titles indicate their Sovereign Choices-Of-Office, Each Wholly God, Infinite, Sovereign-to-choose! Oh, no, their Iblis-lord, that threatens you! Oh their Lord! Can't dare expose the "portent" that just as there is more than one human, and each human is unique(!), so also Each Member of the Godhead is ONE-OF-A-KIND! Oh their Lord! Can't allow your believers to be saved for a far greater eternal future than underground (really, boiling) rivers! Oh their Lord! Can't allow these sons of Abraham to be saved as ABRAHAM was, 'By Believing in the Substitionary SURRENDER(="Islam") of Christ on the Cross (Gen15:6 and Rom4's explanation)! Oh! Can't tell them that his "ISLAM", his SURRENDER, buys our freedom, Satan?! Oh No, his Lord shouldn't have 'sons' via spiritual-birth-and-Divinely-infused-by-Scripture-development! Oh No, Refuse! Don't dare let them know, Iblis, you Great, Jealous Satan who wrote the Koran, so you can feed your egotistical drive to eliminate ALL sons of Abraham!

    In the "Cow" Sura (Al-Baqarah), we get this delicious autobiographical sketch of Satan's fall, when "Iblis" refuses to worship man. Of course, the real story is that God the Son wanted to ADD HUMANITY to Himself in order to provide a max-depth gift to Father.. which thus means the angels would be worshipping the GOD-MAN. Satan did find that offensive, as you can tell in Matt4. Even more offensive, to become the servants of man, once man was created: you can tell this by the way demons satirize man every chance they get. Bible is loaded with the satire. So is every non-Bible 'holy book', as you should begin to see, during any extensive reading of this webpage. (See also the "God is not Magic" link on the Home Page.)

So, unbeknownst to Mohammed and his faithful followers, Satan has the Suras frequently mock Trinity, relegating Each Infinite, Unique Member of the Trinity into 'partners'. Granted, most of the 'partners' sura verses mock idols, just like Isaiah does in Isa44, etc. But in the Koran, the 'partners' concept is stretched way beyond bounds:
  • to a denial of Righteousness getting juridical payment (though rich Righteousness doesn't need it, True Justice still requires judgement for wrongs against Absolute Righteousness, but no sinner can be untainted, so none is big enough to 'pay'); and,
  • to a denial of Trinity. (Both of which denials, of course, Satan made in other ways throughout Christendom, at the cost of many lives!)
For surely, Allah is not paid anything by man's good deeds! So, in the Koran (and other God-is-One-Person faiths), God can't be Absolute except as One Person, all Alone, Unpaid for sin. 'Sly put-down, that: God isn't good unless He is a masochist! See how Satan makes fun of the second facet of Righteousness? See how Satan is projecting his own nature onto God? It's Satan who is one-of-a-kind (his high opinion of himself). LOL!

    Come, now: 'as if the only good version of "God", is ALONENESS! Macho Macho Macho. Masochist Masochist Masochist. Utterly alone, the only one of His Kind. Does this make sense? Ok, let's put our brains ON for a second. Why would this SINGLE God make pairs of everything, uniting them, right down to plant species???? Koranic scholars are ecstatic about Allah's pairing concepts in the Koran, according to the annotations I have in my Pickthall translation. Ok, then: doesn't that fact tell you something about His Own Nature?

    Granted, any One of the Godhead could do everything. Granted, any one human can do a lot of stuff. But people aren't alone -- so should God be? I'm not projecting human thinking onto God, but rather posing the obvious question, Koranic style, looking at the "portents" of nature as Allah repeatedly bids me do in the sura verses -- well, don't these "portents" indicate His Nature? So, then: His Nature is SOCIAL. Not "Alone". So, then: with whom will He have rapport on His Own INFINITE Levels? It's kinda boring to preen in front of a mirror or live like the "Omega Man". ["Omega Man" is a old movie starring Charleton Heston. After nuclear holocaust, he was the only uncontaminated human left. For most of the movie, he talks to a bust of (I think) Napoleon.]

    More: God must be One Person, all Alone and Unpaid, and is so insecure He can't add Humanity to Himself? For, God Sovereignly 'pairing' Humanity to Himself (the Son) is somehow demeaning (see sura verses with "Majesty" and "Glory" in them), but an unending (final) universe of humans hopelessly inferior, thus hopelessly uncompanionable to Absolute Allah does not demean him? So instead a universe of slavish praisers makes him pleased? Tit-for-tat? Sugar Daddy, or Petty Judge, but never a real relationship? So the only relationship between Allah and humans can be a set of do's and don'ts -- so Allah is stuck with PETS? Whose future isn't above the earth, but UNDER it? [See Ps68:18ff, and Eph4:8ff. As prophesied in the Psalms (which the Koran recognizes also as Scripture, for it notes "We gave David the Psalms"), as part of His Ascension the Lord's Resurrected Humanity led, in Roman-style triumphal procession, all believers who (pre-Ascension) were in Paradise, thus leaving it empty; after that, anyone who believes in Christ goes up immediately to Heaven upon death (just as Christ's human spirit did). So: only unbelievers are left down there. So, at the time the Koran was written, the only people who were under the earth were the unsaved. 'In Torments. Think over the sly meaning, then, when those who are believers in the Koran are promised a future UNDER the earth!]

Do you see the awesome Satanic put-down of Father, Son, Spirit, Each Unique and Wholly-God? Why, of course none of them need or have 'partners'! They are together By Choice. In fact, Satan was trying to tempt the Son's Humanity to negate His continuing, voluntary surrender (to Father's and Spirit's Will) by accessing His Own Deity to benefit Himself (Matt4: more on this follows in its own section, below). Via the Koran, Satan loudly replaces what the Bible teaches about God and the Lord's Nature with two stupidities many Christians then believed: 1) the idea of a hydra-headed God, and 2) the related idea that somehow Christ would have to be two Persons, to be God-man.

    Look: Because Christendom can't read Scripture, so will agree that 1) and 2) are Biblical, Satan can block one's eyes to what Scripture really says, and yet claim those books are from God! No Muslim need bother to check if the actual Bible agrees with 1) and 2), for its own Christians agree it does; lo! 'Allah' has already told them the interpretation is false! See how clever Satan is? Using Christian stupidities to blind others? [Hydra-headed idea of "Three-yet-one" was decided by several religious councils as the orthodox interpretation. There is absolutely NO Scripture to support it. Even if we used but one verse on Trinity in Scripture, the Greek of 2Cor13:14 makes it clear that the Trinity are Three Infinite Equal Gods. Each One, Absolute. Amazing. Even today, a Christian (me, for example) is branded a heretic if he so much as questions the sense of this insane "Three-yet-one" idea. See, Infinity is not spatial. So, stupid Christians also, then (and now) couldn't conceive of God as being Three Separate Absolute Persons, so came up with the 'mystery' of Three-yet-One. You can see it still in the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia section titled "Unicity". Concerning 2), the nature of God-man (aka "Hypostatic Union") -- lol, the many goofy explanations Christians and priests came up with are funnier than a Robin Williams monologue! Lessee: Christ has Two Wills (still taught in Eastern Orthodox and Anglican faiths); or, He wasn't Divine until He was Seated (so Matt4 is a sham temptation!); He 'emptied' Himself of Deity at His Birth (RSV still uses that stupid idea -- more follows, below). Well, you get the idea. If these are the ideas represented as the Bible's, of course they are justly open to a charge of making 'partners' for God!]

    Satan deftly and correctly says that both ideas end up making Allah need partners, a blasphemy. Further, he makes it clear that these ideas are but interpretations of Scripture by Christians! See how he flaunts the truth in plain sight? At once castigating the Christians for their MISinterpretation of the Real Bible, and at the same time telling his nascent Muslim troupe why those ideas are wrong, yet in a way which slakes any curiosity to even look at what the REAL Bible -- which Koran admits is from The LORD -- actually says! Such brazen arrogance! See how he makes fun of Muslims? Here I am, telling you guys the Truth that the Bible Is From The Real God, and you guys are too uninterested to even examine what that book says, but yet you claim to love 'Allah'? Well, then: you deserve the seductive deception I, The real Iblis, play upon you, with that tender, frequent Koranic catchphrase, "if ye did but know".

    SATAN'S TACTICAL KEY ==> Satan accomplishes this derision-and- substitution of Trinity for Macho-Masochist through body-stress: deeming "Infinity" to be spatial in nature, so God can't be more than One Person without being (what RCC calls) "diminished". Bang this idea loudly enough, and no one can recognize how obviously false it is. So the Muslim can only think of One Person, for the same reason. So, if God had a 'partner', God must NEED something, hence is not Absolute. Of course, that argument would be true for humans, even angels -- but not for God. Note Satan's cleverness: it is never acknowledged that God might WANT to create partners, even though He doesn't need to, i.e., because it Sovereignly pleases Him to do so. Moreover, the fact that He did create far lesser beings, makes Him look like His ego can't tolerate 'partners'? For, even Allah is not totally alone, the Only Conscious Person in the Universe: rather, He created.

    Thus the believer in the Q'uran is unknowingly forced into a narrow, spatial definition of God which still demeans Him. For, the flipside of Koranic verses explaining God has no partners because that demeans His Majesty (or Glory), is to say that -- wow -- God can't have a partner, for then He has Need. So, He's not Absolute, so not God. Worse, that the only companions He can make, are so-hopelessly-inferior angels and humans. No mediatory way to get nearer His Level of Being, either; so everyone is a masochist, with this great gulf fixed? Yeah, so far down, 'heaven' is under the earth! See how sly Satan is? See how obsessed? That He must deride even a fake concept of a spatial Absoluteness, which he himself created!

Still, one can understand Satan would need to attack God. Yet, it's even more astonishing how Satan can't resist lurid preoccupation with mere humans, as well. In the Koran, Satan(&Co.) parades his obsessions with great believers he couldn't defeat. Noah, Job, the Patriarchs, Moses, Joshua, David&Solomon, Jonah, Ezra, Mary: he puts really silly statements in their mouths, alongside genuine references to OT narratives. For example, In the "Mary" sura, there is a flamboyant anecdotal narrative between Abraham and his father, quite similar to one in the online (alleged!) Book of Jasher. Even weirder are the sura verses about what King Solomon allegedly said or did -- and about the Queen of Saba (Sheba)! Really strange stuff -- not quite as gross as the gnostic texts, but definitely in the same 'ballpark'. 'Fantasy of how he wished these folks thought and acted; replicas (he wished!) of the possessed unbelievers in the Gospels. Satan's nothing, if not a name-dropper. Heh. See Bible's Book of Jude on Satan's motive, here.

So of course Satan's positively fixated on the Lord's Humanity, even admitting the Virgin Pregnancy was caused by the Holy Spirit in the "Mary" sura. Satan's fixation is so bad, he doesn't even CARE that the "Gospel", which he affirms is from God, contradicts the Koranic claim that Mary birthed Jesus all alone in some oasis! Could he despise Muslims' disinterest-in-Allah more than this? To blatantly contradict a book the Koran itself SAYS comes from God, saying that a holy woman was ALONE (anathema, to Muslims, a sin for the woman) -- to birth a child in an OASIS! Where she could be attacked by marauders or other men at any second????? Wait: it becomes even weirder...

Per that same sura, Jesus is "faultless": ok, and for what reason?

  • Per the Koran, the "Gospel" (which means "Good news") is..um, what?
    Compare: Bible shows that it was John the Baptist, NOT Jesus the Christ who was the herald OF Christ, because "Christ" means "Messiah"; and "Messiah", in the OT, is also "the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world"! (cf Job 9; John 1:29,36, remembering that lamb was a sacrifice for sin in Leviticus.)

  • Now compare to Koran's "The Ranks", verse 6: "And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One."

    LOL! This "Praised One" is supposed to be Mohammed????!!! The standard Koranic interpretation of that "Ranks" v.6 is that the so-called "Comforter" is Mohammed! But the Bible says it's the Holy Spirit. (John 14, Acts 1:5, 1:8; "Parakletos" in Greek is often translated "Comforter" in the English, but the term is a military term, and means Advisor/Mentor.)

Wow. Jesus is faultless, but The Greater Prophet Jesus was supposedly sent to herald is a sinner? (Cf. all the Koranic verses where 'Allah' talks about Mohammed's sins -- forgiven, of course.) How is it, that the sinner is greater than the Sinless One? Don't ever read the Bible, Muslim! It will upset your faith!

MORE: Satan likens Mohammed to the Holy Spirit! So now, Allah has a partner! Because "Comforter" and its cognate verb is a Bible keyword in the Gospels and LXX; and "Comforter" refers very plainly to the Holy Spirit, because Christ Himself said that's Who Parakletos was (John 14:16-17; term is used in LXX and NT in various forms, e.g., 1Jn2:1). But of course, since Mohammed nor his fellows would know the Greek meaning, how could they know they were being satirized by Satan in "The Ranks" v.6? How can any Muslim know he also is being satirized today, since lo! There's no reason to look at the other part of God's Word! Disobey Allah in the name of believing in Allah's Koran! Look only at the Koran, then! LOL!

What surprises me the most is how fixated Satan is about Church Age believers, who are the Bride of Christ. See, we Church are called "later time", in Koran's "Event" sura, because Satan, like Paul, is dispensational, so refers to our group by our timeslot, just like the Bible does. Satan's use of the term "later time" is a play on Greek word "eschatos" when used of time ("last days", in many English Bibles). That Satan means Church is even more obvious from his "new creation" link to the wide-eyed houris in "The Event" sura. "New creation", see, is how Paul designates Church Age believers, because we have specially-designed human spirits so to be able to grow up spiritually to become a spiritual (not sexual) 'houri' for the Lord's Humanity: Bride.

    The Sura title is critical: Al-Waqiyah is awfully similar, especially given the text of the Sura, to Bible's Hebrew qahel, to assemble/gather. Greek ekklesia, meaning CHURCH, in Bible. Significant too, for the Hebrew word usually translated "event" or "act" in Bible, is some form of dabar, to SPEAK. Greek is LOGOS. Get the pun? THE WORD! Matt4:3-4! Gen1! 1Thess4:17! Rev4:1! In each case, THE WORD commands it, and it happens! Then there's the parsing of the syllables: God (Al) and (wa) because (ki) God (Yah), literally. The two 'names' for God are important: first one stresses ESSENCE, last is the Tetragrammaton; Yeshua is taken from Yah; Yeshua, of course, is "Jesus", in Hebrew. Both 'names' for God are stated in their prefix/suffix forms, not the full form. Both waw and ki have many other meanings, so the sentence would change: note no verb, a classic Hebraic (and Greek) way of saying God is eternal, or that a thing is DECREED from eternity past. Next, compare the sentence to Eph1. Whoa. No human is even remotely this smart. [The etymology in the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament has a very interesting entry on "dabar" at the end of the root comparisons, saying that the term focuses on the activity (hence "Event") of speaking more than content or results. What distinguishes dabar is the equating of speaking and EXISTENCE of the thing spoken, i.e., God speaks and it just EXISTS. Same is true for the Greek logos (comes from legw). It's all the more awesome, when you do a little more digging and find out there are dozens of synonyms which don't have an "Event" connotation. How would Mohammed or anyone around him, know all that?]

    This is awesome Koranic wordplay by Satan, but you'd have to know the Greek of 2Cor5 and Eph4:11-16, to "get it". Especially, in context of Mohammed being previously cast as the replacement for the Holy Spirit, since it's the Holy Spirit Who Makes us this "new creation" and puts THE WORD in us to make the Event of the Rapture occur! Awesome! See for yourself,

    • in context of 2Cor Chaps2-5, 2Cor5:17's "kaine ktisis": term means "new-in-species creation"; see also Ephesians 5; look up all "Bride" passages, too.
    • And well Satan knows we're in an endurance race, and he's in a race for time, to PREVENT the Body being completed so that "the event" of Rapture, "the Event" of the 2nd Advent, work against God! Compare all "race" verses in the Koran with Bible's "race" verses, i.e., Hebrews 12:1-2 in the Greek -- no English translation gets it right. Then compare to Koran's "Event" v.10, and "Iron",v21.
    • Most of all, Satan's quite aware of the Pleroma rulership goal -- Koran's "Event", verse 10,14 compared to verses 35-40. If you know the Divine Dispensational design of history and the role of Pleroma described in Scripture, this is as blatant a summary of that structure as you'll ever find, outside the Bible itself.
    • In the same Sura, Satan even spends time the way Bible does linking the completion of Church, which is the Culmination of Trial History, to the Beginning of the Trial, Genesis, by suddenly resorting to "We" (for Elohim, a plural noun indicating TRINITY) and other Genesis monikers. John in 1Jn does some of the same, and of course the Lord does so in John 17. Paul does it in Romans 8:11ff, and in Ephesians (whole book, passim references). This is soooo cool to see.

      Just imagine: to this day, most of Christianity, pastors included, remains blissfully UNaware of the Pleroma Plan of God, though the Bible is overflowing with explanation in wordplay after wordplay, as Part III tried to illustrate. Yet the Koran talks about it, written circa 600AD! No, no human caused Mohammed to know this data. As the Koran keeps saying, "if ye did but know".

      The Sura is about Judgement Day, Koranic definition. Matt25:32-33 is referenced by the Sura's to-the-right and to-the-left language, since the Lord Jesus Christ is the Ruler and Judge (see the Matt passage in context). Koran doesn't show the rollout connotation, maybe (I would need to see the Arabic for that), but by such a bald reference to the Matthew passage (which IS a rollout, beginning with 2nd Advent, followed by Rev20's Great White Throne), surely Satan knew that. And is tweaking anyone to catch it. Which, who did?

Satan derides himself, too. The Iblis passages are hysterical. They each repeat the same story, but my favorite passage is in the Saad sura, vv72-86.
  • When Allah made Adam, Allah bid all the angels worship Adam. (Oh? This is the One who derides partners, but his angels are supposed to worship man? Oh yeah, this makes sense.)
  • Iblis (one of the Koran's names for Satan, which some gnostic texts also use with longer spelling) refused to worship.
  • So he was sentenced to hell (sound familiar?), but he asks Allah for a reprieve until Judgement Day, which Allah the Merciful speedily grants.

      Then the ingrate Iblis warns Allah that he will lead all men astray, clearly to get revenge on Allah. v.83-84 are significant: "He[Iblis] said: Then, by Thy might, I surely will beguile them every one, Save Thy single-minded slaves among them." So, then -- who are beguiled? Those who can accept that Allah would make the angels fall prostrate because Allah created man, yet Allah himself is demeaned if He TAKES ON HUMANITY? Look: if angels must worship what Allah makes, how much more should they worship Allah if Allah makes himself HUMAN? Divine AND Human? Wouldn't that be a bigger Glory, since Allah's making mere man is a bigger glory than his making angels? (Note: Sufis interpret the worship mandate to mean that because Allah used TWO types of Glory to make man, but only one for angels, angels must worship man as the higher product of Allah's 'hands'.) So, by saying it's demeaning to 'beget' Himself (cf As-Saffat, v.151-2, coupled with "Majesty" and "Glory" verses with "partners" in them), Allah in effect objects on the same grounds as Iblis! So, then: isn't Satan posing as Allah? And telling you so, right in the Koran? This is the classical Greek actor who plays TWO roles, speaking both parts! Here, "Allah", and "Iblis" -- refuse with EXACTLY the same 'objection'! Awesome genius! Added to which, he calls himself only a 'djin', not even an angel, lol! His own version of hypostasis! [I can't help but wonder, since Satan did foreknow the Lord's Plan to take on Humanity, if he explains via Koran that he fell in part because he was offended by that Plan (Iblis=he who refused, Muslims tell me: root means to refuse, frustrate, be refused, be frustrated -- very apt).]

    Here's a potpourri of other derision Satan pulls off in the Koran, with the Muslims none-the-wiser, because they don't check the OTHER holy book the Koran endorses:
    • Koran forbids animal and human sacrifice, but notes that Allah commanded Abraham sacrifice Ishmael, and of course Allah stopped that -- but a "tremendous victim" REPLACED the stopped human sacrifice. [As-Saffat, vv102-107. It is true though, that elsewhere 'Gabriel' explains to Mohammed that the Jewish covenant is for the Jews, but the one for Muslims somewhat different. I can't recall which suras say so, at the moment.]
    • Koran contradicts Bible saying Noah lost one of his sons before the Flood;
    • that Lot's wife was predestined to be destroyed, and this was announced in advance to Lot, before they left Sodom;
    • that Pharaoh's wizards allied with Moses?! The only glancing similarity to that weird statement is during the last plague or two, where the wizards could no longer make counterfeit signs, and warned Pharaoh (Ex8:19). But that was later, and never an alliance, lol!

      I could go on and on with blatant contradictions to the Bible which the Koran says is from God. Amazing stuff. You really have to read it yourself. Don't take my word for these things, because I'm desperately trying to understate what's there, out of compassion for my Muslim friends! Look: it's easy to get upset at something or someone when they are or do something wrong/irritating, whatever.. but when a whole people is so sold under despite many blatant contradictions in their own holy book, which contradictions even a child can prove.. irritation stops, and sympathy begins. For, if the Koran is holy, and calls as "Scripture" Torah and Gospels, yet contradicts them, then the Koran itself cannot be holy. See? Satan beguiles us all. In Plain Sight.

    See? Satan frequently and OBVIOUSLY, DERISIVELY causes the Koran to contradict itself, as well as the Torah and Gospels. In a slapstick manner! But oh boy, accept the Q'uran as Scripture too, don't question it, or you'll suffer a "painful doom"! No arguments, don't be a disbeliever! LOL. So how can one not wonder, when the Bible accounts are so rational, but the Koranic accounts are so weird? shouldn't one question? I mean, how else to tell if the Q'uran is speaking from God? Just take Mohammed's word for it, that he got a "clear proof"? Anyone can say that. Any demon can make a supernatural script. Wouldn't even Allah know that? Of course he would. Doesn't the Koran repeat over and over that it, itself, is a "clear proof"? Clear proof of what, though? Of God's Script..or of Satan's? Shouldn't one try to find out? See, just like Paul says, we are "without excuse", the Bible's equivalent phrase to the Koranic usage of "clear proof" (Rom1:20).

      So, then: how about testing the Word for internal consistency, coherence and accuracy, which the Real Bible says everyone must do? Cf. "ear tests truth", "judge for yourselves" (NIV), Isa44-45, Deut 30 for just a few samples of the Divine Injunction to test what a so-called prophet says, not just blindly believe him. Moreover, if you don't test the Word, how do you know you understand it properly? How do you know that you're not being taught a bad interpretation? Doesn't even the Koran repeatedly say that the worst sin is to lie against Allah (deft wordplay on the Bible's "adikia" injunction against lying to the Holy Spirit, e.g., in Acts 5, 1Jn1, etc)? Well?

    See? Such blatant derision of the Bible can't go unanswered by those who know the Bible. Of course, Satan really wants CHRISTIANS to react: Matt4! Just as he did to the Lord's Humanity, he's baiting us to strike back! But he doesn't want the Muslim to investigate; which, the Muslim won't be inclined to do, believing that we Jews and Christians tainted the original text, anyway. Thus Satan also peppers the Koran with many dire warnings of hell and doom if they disbelieve it, lest the Muslim notice the clear proof that, though the Koran claims the Bible is from Allah, its own version of the Bible it lauds, is derisive!

      See? He's doing it on purpose! Satan hates having lost Abraham so much, he persecutes all his children! 'Changing even the color of what in Scripture is a RED heifer to a 'yellow' one -- making yet another golden calf ("Cow" sura)! But threatens with doom anyone who bothers to check against the very "Torah" 'Allah' claims is also Scripture! The Bible's Jehovah Elohim is not so threatened by inquiry. Remember, Arabs are also sons of Abraham; some of God's Gen 12 promises apply to them; Christ also died for them. So Satan hates all Arabs, just as much as he hates Jews and Christians! So, he satirizes the Arabs, too! Thus the Koran must have content which contradicts "Torah" and "Gospel". Deliberately. Blatantly. So these three groups will be compelled to defend, and thus fight. Kill them all off!

    So, Satan&Co.'s betrayal of their authorship must also be blatant enough to encourage those who recognize the lie to zealously jump "over the edge" (of Sovereign Grace): and fight 'the infidel'. 'Just as Satan tried to make the Lord's Humanity do, in the 2nd Temptation of Matt4 (covered two sections below this one). So, religious wars must be promoted even among and within 'heathen religions', so to decoy recognition that only the "People of the Book" are the main targets. These latter must be 'helped' to turn against each other at all costs! Especially since any human being can become, in a nanosecond-of-faith, a person of the Book! So of course, in seemingly non-religious contexts, there is a promulgated divisiveness between those pro- and those con-. Each getting special 'help', of course!

    So, in the Koran, a book which is supposed to confirm prior Scripture but update it (a sly play, that, on the greek of Heb7:18, 9:15!), Satan&Co. must reference the content of that prior Scripture, in order to claim the Koran continues the same revelation. Thus, the Koran must also employ the same terminology as the 'prior Scripture'. This three-pronged tactical system (referencing, claiming continuity, using the same terminology) is done to garner legitimacy. Which means, the real target audience for this 'revelation' already accorded sufficient legitimacy to the 'prior' Scripture, thus rendering such a piggybacking of 'new revelation', necessary.

    So, supernaturality must accompany such claims, for mankind childishly reasons that all supernatural "signs" come only from a real God. Remember, in the OT and in the Gospels, it was necessary at times for God to do miracles as proof that the message wasn't bogus. So, of course, since Satan&Co. have a whole bunch of superhuman powers, they too would make 'counterfeit serpents', just as they did via Pharaoh's advisors. Trouble is, this is 600AD; no one should have believed any 'signs', for the Church Age began about 600 years prior: a "dead spot" in prophecy (term is my pastor's -- Paul's term is "mystery"). All signs ended when the Canon was completed, as the NT says over and over and over. (Criterion is expressed in 1Cor, end chap13 through first half or so of 14, Ephesians (whole book), Col 1:16-27, Heb1, Rev22:6-21, etc. Part III's "Invisibility" explains more.)

      So, Satan&Co. roll out to the jaded, the bored, the credulous, the ignorant, their tawdry lightshow. Show a little leg. All on purpose, in and for the promulgation of the Koran at the very time needed to light a fire under Christianity (all puns intended)! In fact, poor Mohammed himself was persecuted in part because people thought he'd plagiarized Scripture, rather than gotten a 'revelation'. So, as in the "Cave" sura (what a play on Socrates' talk with Glaucon & on Bible's use of skotizw, lol!) they demanded a test, in the form of supernatural revelation about three particular individuals. One can't help but feel empathy for the exuberant Mohammed, who of course doesn't get the information right away, because he didn't properly acknowledge Allah (kinda like how Moses was reprimanded for striking the Rock at 2nd Meribah). Of course, Satan knows the Bible Injunction that proposed new 'Scripture' be tested, all too well. He also knows that the "Cave" test was totally out of line: "You shall not put THE LORD to the test!" Jesus responded to the 2nd Temptation (same genre of temptation as those asking Mohammed to get special revelation).

    See, as noted earlier, the real Bible enjoins testing it: that "the ear test truth", and "judge for yourselves". 1Jn4 also stresses "test[ing] the spirits", because there is a "spirit of truth", and a "spirit of error". To do this, John repeats that one must be "born of God", and "know Him", and KNOW Scripture ("truth"), of course. Thus, some proposed addition to Scripture must be evaluated for its fealty to what is already proved to be from the real God. For, as even the Koran states, no lie about God is to be either made, or accepted. (This is how we got our Bible; evaluation of each verse in each book must be done.) Therefore, in a claimed addition to the real Bible, Satan&Co.'s exposé of their authorship will be expressed in the Bible's own terminology. Of course, if the evaluator hasn't bothered to understand the Bible's terminology, or has a truncated (chopped off!) idea of Bible's meaning -- such a reader won't get the 'hint'. So, will fall for the lie, á la Romans 1. See, Satan&Co. make fun of our disinterest in God more than anything else. And accuse us in the SupCtHeaven for that reason. Now you know why the various types of apocrypha got accepted by people.

    Ok. Here are...

    Telltale Terms of Satanic Authorship in text where they play the God-Role.

    When Satan(&Co.) casts self in the role of Allah, the text will insert 'asides' to -- pssst -- let you know it's really Satan.

    A first type of aside is "Lord of the Worlds". It first occurs in the "Poets" sura, from what I can tell (I don't yet have Koran on CD). Gnostic and Kabbala texts, however, are very fond of the "worlds" moniker, using it variantly with "Lord", "King", etc. The Bible NEVER uses this title. [In Bible's original languages, that is -- some English versions mistranslate as "worlds", a term for TIME: maybe, because the Gnostic and Kabbala texts use "worlds" and "Age" (or, "time") interchangeably to designate, as it were, multiple universes. I don't have Gnostic or Kabbala texts in the original languages, so I don't know what words are being used to translate as English "worlds".] Jerome's Vulgate used terra, -ae like modern Spanish uses tierra. Which, is like the Hebrew use of ha-eretz. Bible's Greek uses kosmos in the singular to designate world, never plural; ouranos is used for heavens (Bible's Hebrew is shamayim), and couldn't be translated "worlds". Since English and Spanish didn't exist in 600AD, "worlds" can't be based on KJV, etc. mistranslations.

    The Greek word kosmokrator was VERY well known in Greek literature; and, as being a term for Satan, especially IN Kabbalism (which transliterates the Greek term with Hebrew letters). [Here's the copy of Kabbalist citation from the Thayer lexicon entry for Kosmokrator in BibleWorks: cf. Buxtorf, Lex. talm. et rabb., p. 2006 (p. 996, Fischer edition).)* ] The term is only once used in the Bible Greek texts I have (in BibleWorks 5), Eph6:12, and its demonic meaning is there used by Paul. So it was very well known. See a detailed lexicon like Bauer, for citations of other books using the term. In short, this HAS to be a blatant advertisement of demon authorship; the Jews around Mohammed were 'into' Kabbala, and if they knew their Scripture, they'd have known OT never used that title, but kabbalism DID.. So they are being tweaked for their willful ignorance of Bible, and Mohammed wouldn't have known HOW to do that.

    This title seems to be a concatenation of what Satan originally wanted to become (cf Isa14+Ez28), plus one of the Greek titles Christ et alia use for Satan in the NT: Ruler of the World (Greek expression varies). So Matt4's Third Temptation is very much in view here. [Bible's term for Satan&Co. varies; the Lord usually preferring to use some participle of archw, to rule, as a noun; but "kosmou", meaning "of this world" is often appended. If you know anything about Greek genitives, this term is very punny. Descriptive genitive of course would come first to mind. But think: possessive genitive also comes to mind, but both ways -- not only does the world belong to its ruler, but its ruler belongs to the world. That is even more punny since kosmos is used, not ge. See, kosmos stresses ORDERED or ORGANIZED, with a distinct tone of mere APPEARANCE (we get English word cosmetic from this Greek word). But I digress..]

    • Satan's basically thumbing his nose at the Lord when he uses this title in the Koran. He's basically saying that since the Lord's Humanity turned down Satan's offer to rule all the kingdoms of the world, Satan will take over all the 'worlds' the Lord's Humanity has inherited at the Session -- just as he wrested control from the first Adam via Adam's wife, so will he wrest control from the Last Adam via the Church, His Bride. It's breathtaking arrogance.
    • Moreover, any Biblical references to "world" means THIS universe, not the one-to-come. Satan thus, through the Koran, says there will not be a new universe, for he will take over THIS one! See, in the Bible, "Lord of the Worlds" is NEVER used for God, for God is already LORD of everything -- far greater than "the worlds": God even owns space and time! So, on the one hand, via the "Lord of the Worlds" title Satan even acknowledges that he'll never be as powerful as God -- but also arrogantly replies that he'll win control of the universe by defeating God by God's own methods! Which even the Saad sura echoes (v.83-84), as we saw earlier!
    In short, this moniker is a defiant rejoinder to both the Humanity of Christ, as well as to His Deity, as Creator.

      This term really blows me away because it is soo obviously Satan; I'm sure no Muslim recognizes its Biblical roots! By the way, the term is stressed a lot in and after the "Poets" sura: vv.95-98 are so Delphic-curious about Satan being Allah I must get the Arabic to be sure. So also for vv164-182 of the As-Saffat (re angels); "The Troops" vv71-75, esp. v.75; vv50+56 of "The Winnowing Winds"; "Reality", vv40-47; "Rising of the Dead", v.17; "The Cloaked One", v.31.

    There are other blatant hints, as you'd expect. In what follows, any claim of how Muslims interpret the verse/passage comes directly from Pickthall's forewords or footnotes in the Koran, which you can see for yourself, or verify with an imam. Watch how the Koran or Koranic interpretation 'just happens' to reference Bible keywords, and what those BIBLE keywords reference! It's kinda hard to follow all this detail, so maybe get a cup of coffee, first!
    • At-Tariq sura: The Arabic supposedly means "The Morning Star". But that's ALSO the Biblical keyword for Satan's name pre-fall, and the Lord Jesus Christ's name in Rev when He comes at the 2nd Advent is "Bright Morning Star". Further, "Star" often means "angel" in the Bible, referencing how their bodies are composed of LIGHT.
    • Next, At-Tariq's theme corresponds to the Biblical 2nd Advent.
    • Next, At-Tariq v.3 corresponds to the Cross: Isa53:5 on the Lord's Humanity was pierced.

    • Per Koran interpreters, At-Tariq is the Allah's title for Mohammed; thus, by the SAME BIBLE KEYWORD, Mohammed is identified with Satan, AND being substituted for Christ. What makes this wordplay so astonishing is that the Greek preposition huper, means SUBSTITUTION: Bible uses the preposition to explain Christ's payment on the Cross, the very essence of how He became our Savior. Of course, "anti" is an ADVERSE substitution: instead-of, or against. Hence the term "anti-christ". So by picking "At-Tariq" as a name for Mohammed, Satan makes crystal clear that he's the author of the Koran. If the Goodyear Blimp carried a neon sign flashing this news, it couldn't be plainer.

    • Per the Bible, Christ is the "Door" (i.e., per Gospels). Note that, per Koranic interpreters, a variant meaning of "At-Tariq" is "one who knocks at the door"; so compare to Bible's "I stand at the door and knock" meaning in Revelation 3:20 and Luke 12:36. So again, Mohammed is being substituted for Christ in BOTH Roles, that of Savior (door of salvation), and Judge. Who was supposed to be Mohammed's herald, per the Koran? Yet the Gospels are from God, says the Koran! Can satanic mockery be plainer?

    • Yet another variant meaning of At-Tariq is "that which comes at night"; of course the Lord warns the disciples that as Groom He might show up at any time; like a thief (night being a good cover for surprise) -- it's a moniker for the Rapture, and is a common refrain in both Gospels and Revelation. Paul alludes to the suddenly-coming idea in 1Thess4-5, Phili3:11, Greek.
    • Satan in Koran plays on "the Way", too -- which was the name for Christianity in 1st Cent AD, the FIRST noun in the famous verse, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life".

    • Of course, then there's Al-A'ala sura, which title means "The Most High" -- which, of course, was Satan's thought when he fell, per Bible (Isa14, I think): "I will make myself like the Most High".

      So, these and like Koranic sura verses are even more blatant admissions than in "Poets". I'll add more examples after further review (I've got to find the Koran on CD, to do a better search). These many overlappings with the SAME Bible terminology can't be unintended, especially since the Bible keywords used by the Koran all add up to a message that Satan not only wrote the Koran, but also how he plans to win! Think: in At-Tariq alone, the Biblical Keywords all add up to the following: The MorningStar will substitute for the BrightMorningStar by the 2nd Advent by means of "knocking", suddenly (Rapture-as-Discipline, baby) -- it's a blatant claim Satan will win in the Trib before the Lord returns, and he intends to use Muslims to accomplish his goal! LOL, Mohammed couldn't possibly understand all the wordplay!

    A second type of aside (there are more than two types!) is simpler to spot and understand. It is exposed by a blatant-but-coy use of possessives, like "his" "their" "my", with "Lord", to -- pssst -- give a loud cue that "Allah" is not "THE" Lord. In a trial, lawyers use tricks like this to skewer hostile witnesses. Tricky speech. It's as old as time, baby. The Bible, of course, is not tricky, but since it also is a deposition of what people say, it also records such tricky speech. See, Hebrew (and Arabic, its sibling tongue) is a highly nuanced language, and people loved to play with the nuances. They still do. So, terminology here is very important.

      First point: OT uses "THE LORD", often. The Son was (and still is) THE LORD of Israel; so whenever He spoke through His Prophets, His Seal/Signature, usu. expressed as "Ani Adonai", I AM THE LORD -- would be in the message. [As in the Greek, the absence of Hebrew article indicates uniquely-high quality: so it's not "Ani HaAdonai". To best reflect the meaning in English, though, we'd need to use "THE" in capital letters. That's the convention I follow here. Further, there's no "I AM" separate verb, for a very important reason: the Sacred Name (Tetragrammaton) is a DOUBLING of the verb "to be", to signify ABSOLUTE EXISTENCE, no beginning or ending -- in short, INFINITY. Because the Name is considered Sacred, Jews usually say "Adonai" instead. Depending on where one puts the vowel points, the actual Name "YHWH" has been rendered "Yahweh" or "Yehowa", etc. (One can chuckle wondering if that DOUBLING also forecast THE LORD's taking on Humanity to Himself, heh.)] Christ Himself says He is the Signature when He says, "Before Abraham was, I AM" in the Gospels. (That's why the Pharisees wanted to stone Him.) So, this "THE LORD" moniker was recognized as a certificate of DIVINE authenticity: Not relative, but Absolute. Direct. Idea was, that if someone claimed it was from THE LORD, but it wasn't, God would strike him dead. Everyone took the moniker seriously. Liars would avoid using it! In fact, one big reason that Protestant Bibles differ so much from Catholic ones is the lack of Divine signature in the rejected books (express or implied, but there must be one in the text, rather than merely by tradition). Even today, some regard the Book of Esther as not belonging to Canon because it seems to lack Divine Signature.

      The Second point is occasioned by the First one, and shows how this second telltale aside constitutes "tricky speech": OT usage of possessives indicate whether the speaker believes in the same "Lord" as his audience. So, for example, "your Lord" in the OT regularly (but not always) means that the speaker doesn't believe, but recognizes that the person addressed, does. So if I say to you "your Lord is Allah", that doesn't mean he's MY Lord, nor does it mean Allah is THE LORD. Allah is, relative to YOU, "your" Lord. Or, so I am saying to you. (LOL I could just assert Allah is your Lord, whether Allah is, or not!) [The grammar term for this distinction is called "aspect" (viewer's view). The aspect of a preposition, of a noun, an adjective, a verb (etc.) gives you critical data about origin, nature, opinion, etc.]

        Yasser Arafat used this pil-pul distinction about 20 years ago (or less) to pretend he wasn't out to destroy Israel. When asked if he was anti-semitic, he replied, "How can I be anti-semitic? I am a Semite, myself!" See? He never answered the question, but instead replied by REDEFINING "anti-semitic". In short, Arafat's definition of the term was NOT the same as the questioner's, but he used the same term, PRETENDING he answered the question. Tricky speech! Coy, like the Oracle of Delphi, and Satan&Co. ("Satan" means "opposing attorney", heh. Wordsmiths!) So, such tricky speech can mean one definition of "Lord" in one sentence, but a DIFFERENT definition in mind when using "Lord" in another sentence. Same, for "Allah". See? That's the same kind of sly usage one can make of "Your Lord", or "his Lord" or "their Lord" vs. "THE LORD".

      For OT possessives, when used with "Lord", indicate RELATIVITY. In the Koran, Satan makes a much heavier use of possessives than the Bible does. The Bible, by contrast, more often uses "THE LORD"; less often, possessives. Satan therefore, by heavier use of possessives (compared to the Bible), begs the question of WHO 'Allah' really is! Satan therefore never quite asserts that the Koran is from "THE" LORD. See, Koran rarely uses "THE LORD", and then only with reference to REAL Believers in the Bible, viz. "The Prophets" sura, v.56: "your Lord is the Lord" -- (allegedly) said to Abraham; which, of course, is true! But you won't see such a statement said to Mohammed! Truly awesome.

      Similarly, in many "Allah" statements: the angelic speaker's statement about Allah reflects his own testimony, but "Allah" to him need not be the same as the one who is Mohammed's "Lord". You'll have to look at these yourself, because there are hundreds of such usages, and you have to look at them en masse to catch on to the importance of this play on Biblical terminology.

      The Lord Himself made blatant this subtle differentiation in verses to the Pharisees, e.g. "you are of your father, the devil." David uses the distinction in Ps110:1: "The Lord [Father] said to My Lord [Son], "Sit down until I make Your Enemies a Footstool for Your Feet." [This was a prophecy of Christ's Resurrection, Ascension and Session. Isaiah echoes it in Chaps 53-55, but so does each other prophet. "Footstool" is a very common prophecy in OT. You can see a goodly number of verses even in the English, by simply searching on that term.] Each prophet uses the distinction as well: the wording varies, depending upon what play-on-words is intended. So, syntactically, it's a subtle but keen distinction, as to WHOSE Lord is really THE Lord. See the difference? If "my" Lord is not "the" Lord, I won't use "the" Lord. If "my" Lord is ALSO "the" Lord, I will. So Satan is very careful not to pair possessives with that "THE LORD" moniker, except when talking about folks the BIBLE defines as believers. So, if 'Gabriel' is talking and 'Gabriel' makes a statement about his Lord, the REAL Gabriel really IS an Angel of the Lord, and "the Lord" can be used with him, too. Doesn't matter that 'Gabriel' isn't really speaking. It is the truth about the person being represented as him. (We'll come back to Gabriel in a few paragraphs.)

      DETECTION KEY==> All this witty deflection is obfuscated by mellifluous sound. For, Koranic content is marked by precise, studied, ambiguity, but wrapped in the most beautiful poetry. Just like the ancient "Oracles of Delphi". Thus, Koranic verses play the same deadly game as the Oracle of Delphi.

        Here's a famous example of an Oracle from Delphi. See, the Lydian King Croesus wanted to enlarge his kingdom by means of war. As was common in those days, kings consulted an Oracle to get their fortunes told. But since the Oracle of Delphi was just one of many, Croesus decided to test it first. So he brought a gift to it, as well as to the other Oracles (who were all headed by demons, by the way) to see which one was the most truthful. At the same time on a given day, all his messengers went to their respective Oracles to ask but one question: what was the King doing at that very second? Now, he'd pre-arranged with his messengers the time, because at that time, he'd be boiling turtle pieces in a pot on the beach (or something like that, I don't remember it all exactly). Well, when the appointed time came, only the Oracle of Delphi replied correctly. Thus, it got the REAL question (and correspondingly more money!): should the King go to war?

        The Delphic Oracular reply was: "If Croesus crosses the river Aly, he will destroy a great kingdom". In the Greek, it was expressed in absolutely perfect and beautiful meter.

        The King, who paid for the Oracle, interpreted the reply to mean he'd win if he crossed to attack Persia (under Cyrus). But of course, it was the Cyrus who, having been attacked, crossed the Halys in pursuit of the retreating Croesus -- and thus won his kingdom. So, indeed, Croesus destroyed a great kingdom, alright -- his OWN!

      All the Oracles were famous for this type of treachery, which is why Croesus did the turtle-pot thingy in the first place.

      This same Delphic quality runs throughout almost every verse in the Koran, esp. in verses containing the word "Allah" with a third-person description; or, without "Allah" but descriptions one could easily interpret to BE "Allah". Satan thus warns the Arabs that it's the Koran which will doom them; he loves playing with truth that way. Try reading the Koran with this subtlety in mind and see for yourself. By the way, the text of every 'holy' book similarly hedges about the identity of its Originator. The Bible does not.

    So much for sample blatant hints Satan&Co. use when playing the God-Role.

    Now, onto another class of blatant hints:

    Telltale Terms of Satanic Authorship in text where they play the Messenger-Role.

    In the Koran, sometimes Satan(&Co.) casts self as the angel Gabriel, who in real life is the seraph in charge of protection for Gentile nations (among other roles he has).

      But first, let's review some background about angels. "Angel" comes from the Greek "ayyelos" (pronounced AHN-ghel-ahss), but the term really means "messenger" or "herald", whether in Hebrew or Greek. "Seraph" designation is, post-Satan's fall, the highest-tier ranking among the angelic hierarchies. See, after Satan's fall, there was a rebellion, and 1/3rd of the angels allied with him. After enough time passed (equivalent for them to our 'lifetime' of chances to choose God), God the Father sentenced Satan&Co. to hell. But that sentence wasn't carried out immediately, because Satan appealed. (Even the Koran alludes to this fact in its "Iblis" passages.) So, as a result, a battlefield award above "cherub" came into existence: "seraph". Satan, until he rebelled, was chief of all the cherubim, and the cherubim were, as a group, the upper-crust of angelic society ('im' is Hebrew plural). Now there is a top tier above them, "seraphim". Michael and Gabriel thus got promoted, see, so Satan's out to put them down, too. Michael is the seraph in charge of protecting Israel.

    Here, then, is a very common way Satan&Co. reveal that God is not the author of a holy book: misappropriate what in the real Bible is GOD'S role, and assign it instead to an angel. The very SWAPPING itself is a derision of at least two layers: a) Satan&Co.'s fantasy of beating God, and b) God is a masochist (for going so 'low'). [Or, with books which don't claim to be compatible with or part of the Bible, Satan&Co. will provide revelation by means of a 'god' who has the actual characteristics of an angel -- heh -- their own! Of course, if you don't know Bible, you can't spot this blatant betrayal-of-the-recipient's 'faith'.] By claiming 'Gabriel' transmitted the Koran, Satan&Co. thus slander an angel they know. 'Same genre of slander as claiming Peter became pope, or Mary remained a virgin, as explained in Parts II and IV. So, 'Gabriel' is the revealer of Scripture to Mohammed.

    See, the real God really has NO partners. He Does All The Work, He Does All The Revealing: angels don't have that role. Even, and especially, the giving-out of His Word, which He values even above His Own Name (Ps138:2b)! It doesn't demean Him to directly contact man, just as it didn't demean Him to make man in the first place. It doesn't demean Him, therefore, to go the Ultimate distance: sovereignly, without condition or constraint, adding Humanity to Himself; so that HIS Humanity (and no one else's!) could, independent of His Own Deity, pay for ALL mankind's sins. Completely, Irrevocably, Forever. All By Himself. See? No partners. As it stands written in Isaiah, "I even I am He who removes thy transgressions..as far as the east is from the west" (a distance metaphor for below-the-horizon, never to be seen again). [Romans 5, Philippians 2:5-10, 1Tim2:5 explain the Inner Motive, and Heb2,4,5-7 explain His toward-man compassion Motive. English is clear enough, if you read ALL the passages over and over with your brain on. Try the French Louis Segond, Spanish Regina or English NIV or NASB. Portuguese Almeida might be good, too. I can't read Portuguese that well yet, to be sure.]

    Thus, in the real Bible, 100% of the revelation is given directly by God, whether OT or NT; only occasionally are portions of Canon (e.g., in Daniel, Rev) explained by an angel: for, angels are heralds, NOT revealers of Scripture. The Bible's angels don't explain or teach anything until after some human appointed by God received the information DIRECTLY from God. The Book of Revelation is especially helpful here: some angel occasionally explains meanings to John, but Only The Lord tells him to write. For, in the Bible, angels play an ancillary role, and God is the Direct Source. Post-Revelation's completion, because everything now comes ONLY through the Son (no partners! Hebrews 1!), only the Holy Spirit does any revealing, and He too SOVEREIGNLY chooses to ONLY reveal via the Word. Cf Heb1, John 4:24, Chap14, 17; Acts 1:5,8. The Father SOVEREIGNLY and without Partners(!) decreed all this be so: see Ephesians 1. That They Sovereignly Choose Individually to do or not do or partly do a thing never means that they need 'help'. Like, the help of an angel to talk to a Mohammed. So: to claim a 'Scripture' is revealed by an angel, to man, is a blatant advertisement of demonic origin. Period.

      The same blatant warning is made, of course, to anyone who is 'given' information by any angel. So whoever thinks he hears or gets a vision or gets anything at all from an angel, just had a demon encounter, instead. For, in the Church Age, God's angels don't talk to believers, but instead, they listen to what we are learning about Him, because we are their classroom, now. Cf. "long to look" verse. (Somewhere in Parts I-V I gave a list of angel verses.) You can also search on "angels" and "sons of God" verses. See, God the Son created them, hence the "sons" moniker. We, due to His Victory at the Cross, are Royal Sons. So, they are now our servants ("ministering spirits" means angels at end of Heb1). So, Sonship does not mean a physically-propagated Son the way the Koran mocks (Satan stressing body, as usual, even though at least the "Mary" sura admits that He was propagated by the Holy Spirit); nor are we who believe in Him physically-propagated, but rather, spiritually: see John 3, 2Cor5, Gal3, 1Jn. So there are no racial/social/sexual distinctions, at all. So, especially Now, no angel gives revelation to humans -- but only the Holy Spirit, who Himself is Sovereign, Holy, Wholly, Independent, GOD.

    Finally, the real Gabriel's speaking style is laconic: see how he speaks in Daniel and in the Annunciation. By contrast, the 'Gabriel' speaking in the Koran, is voluble. BIG difference. If you look at demonic behavior in the Bible, you'll find it very voluble, indeed. Slapstick-voluble, very expressive. Irrepressible, even.

    Satan&Co. provide many more instances of exposé than the few listed above. Space doesn't permit me to explain them all. I mean, a long explanation is needed to show how, for example, the Koran's Delphic style concatenates the Koranic desert concept of Paradisiacal "shade" with the Greek-literature "shade" which is not at all happy; Greek use of "shade" commonly means a dead person living a less-pleasant life under the earth, with a longing to return topside. Some ancient Hebrew texts use the same idea. So that in the Koran, both "shade" terms concatenate to: shade from the Son means you are so heated under the earth you become a shell of your former self. Again, classic Delphic style, a common Koranic refrain: "in Paradise there will be shade." That's right! One gnashes his teeth in DARKNESS.

    See? Satan loves twisting the truth, loves leaving hints that God really isn't 'in' it, loves making fun of his audience for cheating the books, for their lack of due diligence with respect to God's WORD (here, against anyone who believes in the Q'uran). Satan's nothing, if not self-righteous. Satan's love-hate relationship with God, as we saw at the top of this webpage, means he loves and hates the Word, too. So he hates you if you disrespect it: i.e., 'obeying' threats against testing Scripture, for if you really loved Allah, you'd read the OTHER holy book, too. So if he can make you disrespect BIBLE, he despises you. To beat you, he uses really nice-sounding words and lovely 'visions' to make you feel 'chosen', as noted in Part IV. He's out to seduce us and then throw us underneath to those 'gardens where rivers flow' -- yeah, 'gardens' of brimstone and 'rivers' of lava! Just like the child rapist will offer the innocent child, candy or a puppy...

    So, he mocks us all; here, anyone dumb enough to be anti-semitic will get permanently sucked into the Koranic prescription. Look: much of the Koran is nice. I've not yet checked the Arabic, but I don't see anything in Pickthall's translation which should justify anti-semitism or anti-Christianity. (Then again, nothing in the Bible justified Christian pogroms of Jews, either, nor 1st-century Jewish persecution of Christians.) But "Nice" is Satan's specialty, and he clearly uses it like Anthony's speech over poor ol' Caesar, to gain POWER. Just as we saw him do with mankind generally, throughout Part I-V. Look: we're weak. We all get sucked into the mellifluouy: Jews got sucked into it, Christians got sucked into it, so Muslims got sucked into it, too. Christ died for all of us, so we are all targets, as indeed is anyone human -- anytime, anywhere. We who are the "People of the Book" are special targets, because the "Book" is Really About God. Satan can't afford to have us recognize that, because then the other folks in the world can more easily notice that the real Bible is..um, real. So he has to make us war with each other. So he'll do anything to blind us. So, check all this out yourself, using the Koran. See if you don't spot Satan's satire and his D-I-O-S strategy, there. And find the REAL 'Allah'.

    But wait! Why doesn't God stop Satan's beguiling?

    Oh, because He never coerces volition.
    Oh, because He is as close to you as your next thought.
    Oh, because all you need do is ONCE believe in Him,
    your free-will consent for HIM ALONE to permanently save you.
    Oh, to a REAL Heaven,
    an irrevocable Heaven,
    an ETERNAL happiness ABOVE the Earth:
    as high as God Himself.

    For Oh THE LORD! God DESIRES it so, because
    Oh, since there ARE no partners, God wants to MAKE some!

    By pouring His THINKING INTO His Creation!
    Shall anything not be easy for THE LORD?
    Did not He, even He Alone, lift the too-heavy Stone?

    Oh, because He and He Alone saved you,
    once saved you use 1Jn1:9,
    naming but what sins you remember,
    and He "purifies you from all wrongdoing",
    until again you sin.
    But Oh! purified to fellowship anew,
    grow in His Son's Thinking,
    OH! To thus become,
    no longer an unliftable stone,
    upon the earth, even under the earth,
    but a Fitly Pure SPIRITUAL Companion,
    for your Unique Lord,
    The Lord Jesus Christ;
    Who IS Peace, Reconciliation, Prosperity
    (not merely on whom be peace).
    Oh, THE LORD! For that is His Name,
    the Most Beautiful of the Beautiful Names,
    and that is what He ALONE accomplished on the Cross.

    Oh, for that is why Hebrews 1 says He is above ALL.
    Ho PantoKrator.
    Indeed, there is no other God but Him.
    Oh, for God the 'Father' says so,
    and God the 'Spirit' says so,
    and both Witnesses agree.
    Ask the Father about this fact! You need NO intercessor!
    For the Father UNITED you to the Son,
    Who is also Himself, God!
    And He is not ashamed to call you, 'brother' (Heb2)!
    Oh, so if Two Gods of Equal INFINITE Nature
    so laud the EQUALLY-INFINITE Son...Ps138:2! 2Pet3:18!
    Oh, as speak the portents, the "evil generation seeks a sign" verses,
    A Greater One than Abraham is here!
    Oh, do not harden your heart, as those in the wilderness? (Heb2-4)

    O, Taste the Lord, for He is Good!
    And Delight thyself in Fatness.
    For oh, All Fat is the Lord's!
    And He Alone, Accomplished All.

    I realize this review is way too short for such an important book as the Q'uran, especially these days. Please understand: I'm really heartbroken that such beautifully-written words beguile so many nice people. So too, they wonder how I can be so beguiled by 'my' Book. And, I empathize as to why they are so convinced that God wrote the Q'uran. But any book which mocks God and those who believe in it, cannot be from God. Allah is mocked in the Koran, for the Koran says Allah doesn't get paid for sin. So Allah is cast as a masochist. True God would never be unfair to Himself. Doesn't matter that He doesn't need the payment, it's only JUST if He is paid. So the Koran is not from God. But Satan&Co. make it obvious that the Koran is their authorship. They love deriding. Koran is one of the finest pieces of demonic derision you'll ever read.

    Tactical Example: Philosophy, Politics, Science

    A really good tactical example for this category will be the current American political wrangling in Congress. The prolife movement and Federal Marriage Amendment satanic ploys are covered in other sites, particularly Paradox.htm, so will not be revisited here. Prolife is covered in the "Prolife" link atop this page (it's at the bottom of the webpage, so hit End and page up a few times, if you'd rather). Chief satanic things in our politics:

    • how no one points out the UNconstitutionality of the FMA, which would basically destroy the Bill of Rights (opens the door for all kinds of shredding);
    • how no one protested the false conviction of Martha Stewart (for almost lying? that's worse than Nazi Germany);
    • the unproven accusations against Arthur Andersen;
    • then the many other companies who went under solely by accusation.
    • And oh, did we really have millions of pederasts in the Catholic Church? Or millions of people who wanted to accuse?
    • Overall, prevalent mental attitude of hate-the-rich, hate-the-Jews (greed and jealousy) precedes war, every time. You can set your watch. The first attitude is blazingly rampant, in the US; anti-semitism is on the rise, but there are significant countertrends. US' decline began in earnest in the 1960's. Funny, that's when interest in getting Bible declined to an all-time-low.

    Sorry, but politically it's as satanic as can be, almost anywhere on the globe you wanna look: like the softening-up period before WWI. Prolife is burgeoning everywhere. Bad things ahead for the world, therefore. Brazil is a notable exception. That's a country on the rise: lots of interest in Bible Doctrine, there. Prolife is the bellwether of Satan's policy, just like the Bin Laden thingy is. Watch carefully, consult with God what to privately do. Never crusade on anything. Just stay in God's System.

      ==> Major war follows the type of conditions we have now. What might forestall it is the fact that so many are suddenly interested in the original languages of Scripture (very small percentage, but higher number than normal). That's why the prolife and Bin Laden thingy are needed: to siphon off interest into crusading, in the name of God. Younger Christians will get suckered into that shellgame. Same thing in different clothing happened this time last century. Note that "spiritualism", the name of early 20th century movement, has resurfaced with a bewildering variety of names, now: New Age, channelling, Scientology (which isn't new, but newly-popular), etc. That a channelling session could be held at the U.N. of all places, is indicative of the trend. Very much like this time last century.

      Else, the same mental attitudes prevailing as did this time last century, politically. Demagogues should arise within the next 10 years or so, if past is prologue. Then, follows war. This isn't an "end times, brother!" prediction, lol. Only God decides that, and He didn't leave any hints. Instead, "tachu!" Look sharp, stay in God's System, don't get wrapped up in this world, do your job as to the Lord. Kings-in-training are supposed to TRAIN, not get peasanty.

    The rest of section will be short list of 'bests' to review, because you can turn on the TV or pick up almost any book, use the 'satanic script' on it, and spot his work. A longer list of daily-life topics you can test for 'satanic script' follows in the "Other Examples: Satan's Genius Exposed" section. This is a very important exercise to do, for with repetition you will become adept at seeing his strategy and tactics. Thus, avoid his landmines better. Use 1Jn1:9 as often as possible, since the Holy Spirit is already THE Expert, and (per John 14, etc), He'll point out data relevant to you personally, as well as generically, which otherwise would escape your attention.

    Philosophies also well depict Satan's strategy and tactics. To make one feel good about all the effort involved in squeezing a thought through, important-sounding words are used. Feels so good to say those words! Makes one feel so smart! Satan's signature is likewise displayed in the picayune, long-and-windy quality of such ruminations. To drown you. 'Never a conclusion, always a hamster's wheel: Huff and Puff. Because such hyperventilations are unending, they are 'virtues': "unity", "equilibrium", "cycle of nature", "evolution" -- you name it. Anything epic-sounding, you see, to make you feel GOOD about the fact you never get the pea under the walnut shell chosen. Seriously: once you pick out the fluff, which amounts to every third word, what do you have left? Prepositions? After I parsed Camus' L'Etranger, the only word left was, ennui.

    Politics, of course, are even fuzzier and funnier, bringing out how deeply Satan&Co. despise us. Of course, they all stress the body, do's, and are loud. The entire Palestinian argument is in this classic satanic style: what, does NO one see how NONE of the Arab countries ever volunteer to take in their brethren, except in token amounts, and that only for a short while, or when the Palestinians themselves make a stink about inter-Arab non-cooperation? What, does no one check how "the Land" came to be owned by Jews, even before WWI? The Sultan sold them the land. From Time Immemorial, a book by formerly-pro-Arab reporter Joan Peters, might be useful to read.

    Also, Feuerbach and Marx or Mao (especially on dialectics) -- these three manifest Satan's genius style; they also (unwittingly) emphasize how bitter Satan is over God's second Righteousness facet. Mein Kampf, anti-semitic websites, and any of the gnostic writings seek to seduce/'hook' first by emotion -- but in the name of reason. Suck out all the real reason, and leave just the sound of reason. You know, like: Dianetics. Wow. Big word: must be true, then, lol. Never mind that it's just another rehash of the ol' gnostic fantasy of us all being one big lightBorg, back before we got too curious and took on bodies. And so it goes.

    Or, for folks who like their gods splashy, Satan's kind enough to provide chanting and other sound-related rituals in a goodly number of philosophical or political contexts, especially lately: it's not called religion, anymore. In WWII, of course, you had the Wagnerian concepts Hitler so loved to hear. Ober-menschen: SuperMen with Super-reason. Magic.

    If you're willing to do some history-legwork, compare how Marx 'just happened' to write Das Kapital at the time that major MSS (Scripture, manuscripts) were discovered by Tischendorf and Tregelles, and being collated; at nearly the very time that the US Civil War had produced a massive increase in evangelism; at nearly the very time that around the world, England was having unprecedented success with its missionaries. This was hard on the time when Joseph Smith made his 'discovery', too. Darwin, too.

    Then there's the Scopes Trial. Scopes shouldn't have been prosecuted, so here we're looking at Christian APOSTACY, which obviously was idiotic then. The Christian idea of Genesis had been wacky for centuries (Bible doesn't say God created the earth in six days, but that He RESTORED it in six days, taking longer than He needed to, in order to give man a way to organize his time concepts.) So this is a tweak a century after Tischendorf and Tregelles' discoveries -- that the Christians didn't look in the original-language manuscripts to even learn what God really wrote in Genesis. (Had they bothered, there'd have been no TRIAL.)

      Satan got a good laugh on that one. Still, compare how Christianity was surging around the world when that trial came up. So Satan got to use the fake idea of Genesis to promote fake science and to cover up the now exposed, original-language texts. After all, he'd spent so much time mangling the translations, he didn't want his Genius in doing so, Exposed. So he exposes fake Christianity and fake science -- and even today, few know how fake both are.

      Sidebars: Darwin was a Christian, by the way, and didn't claim man came from apes. Why isn't that remembered? Why is it that what used to be taught as "adaptation" is now (incorrectly) called "evolution"? It's not the same at all (adaptation doesn't require transmutation of the species). Maybe Satan doesn't want the fallacy to be discovered, so hides "evolution" in "adaptation", now. Adaptation is correct, evolution, no: see Evolshort.htm.

      Frankly, I've got no quarrel with evolution being taught in school: it's helpful for learning research processes, and even more, for seeing what a stupid idea it is to credit, even if one is an atheist -- for evolution is just another reincarnation idea (pun intended). Still, the connection between how interest in God changes and things like this, keeps recurring. Predictable as the law of gravity.

    So also, if you want to research in history, note how Mao Tse-tung 'just happened' to come to power in China at a time when that nation, too, was undergoing a surge in evangelism; when archeologists were just beginning to uncover ancient texts around the Dead Sea, and in particular, grammar rules for Biblical Greek which heretofore were unknown (which is why there were so many new translations between 1950-1980)! Oh, and of course the rise of Mao and the (at that time) huge success of the US as a result of WWII couldn't be related, hmmm? Especially, when you remember that Communism has persecuted Christianity (even more than other religions), from the former's inception? Somewhere there must be extant a 1936 speech Stalyin made to the Politburo deliberately intended to wipe out Christianity. Why? Oh, it couldn't have something to do with the fact he initially trained to be a priest?

    On a larger historical scale, note the number of demagogues arising in key countries at about the same time during the first part of the 20th century. WWI basically ended the Hapsburgs and the Romanovs: odd. So the time was RIPE then for demagogues, and up they rose? And this is a coincidence? Especially just before WWII, you had Franco, Peron, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Lenin/Stalyin, Roosevelt, the Arab princes, Nasser, that guy in Japan (Tokugawa? No, different name). Most of these guys were newly-come into power; Mao still hadn't won overall, but the Long March had really changed his fortunes for the better; Chiang was definitely on the wane. These were all strongmen, placed curiously like you would set up pieces in the old game of Battleship (you know, with the big piece of cardboard between you and your opponent so each couldn't see the others' ship deployments).

    What matters Biblically is that between 1900-1950 there was a tremendous surge of interest in Bible, owing to those discoveries by Tregelles and Tischendorf, and by about 1900 serious study was really high; then comes WWI, in opposition (you know, to make people doubt God because bad stuff happens); so, as usual, it worked; so, by about 1930 (Depression, see Lev26), interest in Bible began to wane seriously, but some were actually even more deeply interested; so up comes yet another war, WWII; after that, interest dropped precipitously. In the 1970's, it arose again, but most went so apostate so fast, that the overall decline remained rapid. Even Loyola had to close its Latin Department, in the midwest (maybe elsewhere, too). What passes for seminary training now is a farce.

    Historically, you can trace how war follows a massive surge of interest in Bible. Discoveries of Bible MSS also follow a surge of interest. Then, the interest declines, and then eventually the texts are lost again. Doesn't look like that can happen, anymore. So the interest must be very high somewhere, now. Hence the homogenization-of-culture effort being promoted. Lukewarm interest in God because high interest in goodies. Then will follow war again. Watch how China goes. Next war involves China (which has a terrific surge of interest in Bible right now).

    Changes of Interest in Bible determine how history goes more than any other factor. Conclusively. This factor is the hardest to trace, currently, except perhaps in one's native country. Sales of Bible-related stuff could be tracked, I guess, but a surer indicator is the frequency of independent churches which aren't based on a cult leader, just quietly Teaching BIBLE. They will always be few, so you measure the importance kinda like GNP/GDP: a very small upward change is extremely significant, and the overall percentage will be small (i.e., 3% is a huge percentage). If I were among the ruling oligarchy of a nation, I'd be extremely interested in promoting individual BIBLE teachers who just study and teach. Not, to state-sponsor them (China is making that mistake), but to make laws allowing them as much freedom as possible (i.e., stringent separation of church-and-state, which the US is violating, as I type). Free independent Bible teaching is the best protection for a nation's people; it's the underpinning for a strong people, army, economy; for Bible interest justifies God materially BLESSING the nation. Lev26, explains.

    So those nations which will be at the forefront of history and the driving sources of it are those nations where there is a sustained and continuing rise in, or level of, interest in Bible qua Bible. Right now, the up-and-comers are Brazil, Korea, China. Maybe India (depends on whether the apostate version is dominant), Russia (not sure) and Africa (pockets of high interest there, but not widespread).

    US is on the wane, but we've been on the wane many times in our short history, and we have a tendency to wake up once spanked. However, 9/11 didn't wake us up the right way. Christian right is wrecking the US, as I type. Worst plague on a nation is a politically-active Christianity (which isn't Christian nor right, but Satan's Rev17 harlot). Greatest blessing to a polity of ANY type is a Christianity which is simply interested in learning Him. That's why Brazil, Korea, and China are likely the winners, by the end of the 21st century (or some other countries who I don't know about, but have interested-in-God populations within).

      I don't see the US surviving the end of the 21st century; rather, it looks like we'll go the way all "client nations" (my pastor's term) do, splitting into two or more smaller countries within the same continent; then, only one of the two keeps on thriving, and the other, languishes (think of Samaria and Judah, Rome, Holy Roman Empire, etc). We Americans already don't own ourselves, anymore (since late 1960's). Capital flight will again increase drastically if the Democrats are elected (whatever happened to the saner voices in the Democratic party, like Sam Nunn's?) -- but the Bush Administration is saddled with the Christian right FATAL disease, so which one is worse for the US? I dunno: Bush policy on Iraq is the most brilliant idea since George Washington's first successful campaign, imo; but we are too dumb about Arab culture, to appreciate it. But the curse of the Christian right is growing so fast, even that brilliance is at risk.

      It's the people who are sick -- no politician ever helps a nation, so no politician is to blame. It wasn't the Sanhedrin or Pilate, who executed Christ -- it was the common vote; until that happened, He might have escaped all the brutality and injustice. So: interest in Bible increasing in the US is our only hope. My pastor warned us in 1997 that he had stopped "recruiting for the pivot" (mature Christians of a sufficient number to save the nation), and started teaching us of the sustaining power of those few Pleroma-stage believers (OT version was Jeshurun, like Moses). He speculated that (based on ratio of Moses to the population of Exodus Israel) if only 25-50 people in the US population were Pleroma-stage, it would hold together. Else, not. (Part IVb covered that dynamic in the "Church makes History, Not Prophecies" table.)

    Tactical Example: Book of Mormon

    --> If you aren't familiar with the Book of Mormon, this subsection will likely make little sense to you: so maybe skip to the next subsection.

    The Book of Mormon is in that category of fake-bible books which are really aimed at seducing Jews or Christians. These abound. For the inter-Testamental period, you have fake bible books like Maccabes, etc. For the pre-Revelation period when the NT was being written and disseminated, you have fake books like gnostic Gospels, etc.

    Remember: demon-authored stuff always has certain SATIRICAL-plot/style characteristics:

    • SUPERHUMAN cleverness
    • +slapstick;
    • play-on-concepts/words in Greek drama and religion;
    • superhuman wordgames on/with REAL Bible verses/doctrines;

      plus, regarding i'm-a-Bible-book claims,

    • "concatenation" (Term means the common Biblical practice of taking clauses and adding them together, like math and esp. physics), and
    • wry uses of God's Names.
    We saw some of this clever wordplay in the Tactical Examples of the Koran and the Mothman Prophecies, above. Frankly, if you are really good at reading Greek and Aramaic, you'll see the cleverest satire ever written by Satan&Co. in the Gnostic and Kabbala texts. So packed with wordplay, it would take hundreds of pages to merely LIST all the burlesqued allusions!

    Again, where demon-authored books are targeted to believers, demon-authorship keys are more blatant misuses of Scripture -- to the point of YELLING their obvious apostacy. Of these pseudopigraphic targeted-to-Jews/Christian books, the best I've seen is the Book of Mormon; it's a mix of Christian gnosticism, Catholicism, and garishly-used Bible-verse snippets.

      Gnosticism is rooted in Eastern reincarnation concepts, viz., even in Greek mythology, a man can become god; Eastern version is progression to ever-higher lifeforms if one is 'good'. Modern-day version of this is "evolution", and "Scientology". Gnosticism, which predates Plato (it's central to classical Greek mythology and drama), always 'starts' with an initial pre-body harmonious state which in variant ways, 'fell' into entrapment by a body (i.e., pre-existence of souls, just like many ancient Eastern faiths). The objective in going through body stuff is to get a bigger soul and thus escape the entrapment; by the Lord's day the prescriptions for this process had become very refined.

      Catholicism in any stripe has as its central tenet that man must DO something besides believe in Christ, to be saved. Technically, like Mormonism, in catholic faiths one IS saved by faith in Christ, but to go to Heaven one must still get rid of the taint of original sin; Mormonism states this same problem differently, more along the lines of the apostate Protestant gotta-stay-in-the-faith-to-be-saved (which catholicism also generally teaches). Various observances and do's are to accomplish this taint-removing 'endurance'. [So of course all the "endure.. end" -type Bible verses are divorced from their real original language meanings and OT precedents; for, IF a sword of Damocles is not over your head, will you give money to that church? So, naturally, all these faiths must Malign The Effectiveness Of Christ's Work. Mormonism calls that work "infinite atonement" toward the end of 2Nephi -- beautifully true! -- then takes the pea away from you by saying "Nay" to faith-alone in the last chapter. NOTE WELL: phrase used is "I say..Nay." Not "God says"! Typical demon attorneyism!] So if one falls short of observances, etc., one doesn't go to heaven, exactly. Some among Catholics call it "purgatory"; Mormonism has a Dante-like hierarchy of other-places.

      So the Bible-verse snippets carefully pasted together with egregious falsehoods lends credence to this long-familiar pre-Christian concept of man-must-do-something. It's the way the snippets work with the falsehood which yells demon authorship, beguiles the doctrinally-ignorant. Amazing: they use the true parts to make the false parts stick out, and the CONTENT of the true parts explains why or what is false about the false parts! Usually, with deft keywords you'd have to know how the Real Scripture uses, to clue in! It's like a massive exam with trick questions! A fabulous example of this genius is in 2Nephi25:20, which is covered in the "2Nephi25:20" (flesh-colored) table below.

        It's as if the demons are constantly saying, oh, you stupid humans, if We Give You These Very Big Hints We, Not God! Are Doing/Writing This -- don't you even care enough about Elohim to catch on? No!!!! Of course, since we are brain-dead if unsaved or carnal (needing 1Jn1:9 but not using it), we can't see these hints for what they are. See why it's so important that one ONLY believe to be saved? We bleeping well can't do, anything else! [See the "God is Not Magic" link on Home Page: it has so many proofs of our fundamental inability to discern/reason, 99.9% of the human race in history is covered. Test it yourself.]

    When reading the BOM, the average Christian (of at least reasonable grasp of the difference between OT and NT) would immediately realize that oh, someone's merely lying here, because the NT and OT are all mixed up by a 'writer' who alleges to be contemporaneous with Jeremiah? Such dismissal would be a mistake; but of course, no one cares about any holy book's Content/Message, but rather what 'miracles' or other physicalities support its claim! BIG mistake: if you don't examine a holy book for the coherence and logic of its MESSAGE, you are a sucker for anything. No kinder way to put it: remember the story of the blind men and the elephant?

      So, look again at content: Concatenation of Bible verses takes a great deal of interpretative skill. (Paul was a master of it, as you'd expect from probably the greatest believer in all history.) For concatenation, when employed in a multilayered vertical and horizontal fashion, all-at-once, is too clever for the human mind. We can take the "love" clauses in Romans 5:8 and John3:16, and add them together. We can even string clauses together: but man's mind is linear; if he gets two connected 'floors' of meaning running together also, it's extremely rare, and probably unintended. 1Jn1:6-10 is a running 'building' of one floor per verse. The unusually-bald, simple, three-claused structure relates (like a database, even!) vertically as well as horizontally, so the first clause in v.6 ties to the first one 7, 8, 9, 10. Etc. See for yourself. (That passage is one of the simplest concatenated structures in the NT. Given its meaning, it would have to be!) Humans aren't even this smart: the closest ones I've ever seen are James Joyce (in first story of Ulysses), and some lines in Shakespeare's plays; well, maybe Aristophanes is up there, too. Even so, there is among these demonstrable geniuses a limited verticality of relating meaning, and they probably edited the text over and over to get even what beauty we see!

      By contrast, the Book of Mormon has many vertical and horizontal concatenations operating simultaneously, esp. in 2 Nephi. Virtually every major NT book is referenced, collated, vertically and horizontally related; problem is, the whole picture painted is a caricature satire against both Jews and Christ. So BOM really deserves more coverage than I'm giving it in this subsection, but I've yet no time to say more right now. Later I'll beef up this Tactical Example with a lot more detail.

    Again, please understand that the reason to disclose all this is to show how Satan&Co. attack people via holy-book claims, not to put down anyone beguiled by them. We are all beguiled by something: key is, to catch on and get out of the beguilement. Only use of 1Jn1:9 and focus on the REAL Bible will enable escape for the believer. Only believing in Christ ONCE, followed by the foregoing sentence, will enable the unbeliever to escape. This is a sickness we all have, not a basis for hurting each other. Our war is not with people, Paul reminds us in Eph 6!

    BOM demonstrates itself, then, as a demon work of superior quality and finessed satire, especially in its blatant usage of unknown-to-Zedekiah's generation NT concepts and keywords. BOM's text thus advertises itself as a hoax, doctrinally. You don't need to mess with irrelevant arguments like whether Joseph Smith really got some brass plates to translate in 1823 or so. You don't need to go chasing after allegedly damaging letters like the "White Salamander" hoax. Just look at the doctrine taught in the alleged holy book, and you have all the proof you'll ever need.

    It's silly and disingenuous to evaluate God based on what people believe or do. Go only by the doctrines in the alleged holy book, lest you stab your nose to spite your faith, heh. It's not reliable to use ANY physicality indicators, since demons have been alive for millions of years; can, á la Mothman Prophecies, cause mass hallucination even in 1967 Protestant Middle America; can, therefore, obviously weave any past event or item into later text, then cause the past event/item to be 'discovered'. Principle: only use Truth Principles (Doctrine) already validated doctrinally, to decipher truth yet unknown. Everything else, can be faked/manipulated: that's why it's always been #1 rule in Biblical Hermeneutics since Adam to compare Scripture with Scripture, a rule which Bible itself repeatedly enjoins in many ways. Deduction, not induction. [line-upon-line verse is one such injunction; ear tests truth (Elihu's first speech) is another; "taste the Lord" is another; Levitical injunction against believing false prophets yet another; Lord's signature titles are another: Ani, Adonai (really, Sacred Tetragrammaton), plus "thus says the Lord" and similar legal signature-affadavit statements. There are many more, but I've no more time to type.] You won't be able to use this principle if you're ooohing-and-ahhhing over the supernatural. God Is Interesting, All Else Is Boring, remember? Really: what does it add to your life if there really were creatures in outer space? Wouldn't you still need to change your tires?

      Quick-and-conclusive Doctrinal Proof God isn't "in" the Book of Mormon: if "Nephi" was really from Zedekiah's generation (586BC), he'd still be UNDER the Mosaic Law. Even Christ was under the Law when He came here. So to completely ignore the Law, breaks the Law entirely. So THE Lord would never give revelation to someone who BREAKS the covenant given Moses! Which "Nephi" admits doing, in 2nd Nephi25, and repeatedly (which violates Deut6's injunctions). He also admitted in 1Nephi to Lehi's(!) sacrifices and burnt offerings but is of the wrong tribe: only Aaron's sons are allowed to be priests. According to the Law, he should have been executed for that under the "strange fire" clauses. Other Israelites broke off from the Land of Israel ever since (shortly after) the initial settlement into the Land; but if they took a priest with them, they could still keep the Law. If you'll notice in the OT, the Levitical priests were spread out, not merely in Jerusalem. So for Nephi or Lehi to not do this, or God to not command it be done, is a flagrant admission that God is not the author of BOM. A Goodyear Blimp in the sky would not be clearer: Spits on Christ's Deity As God Of Israel! to break Law or HIS appointed priesthood.

    Specific gaffes abound; I'm not trying to be nitpicky here like pea-brained Bible debunkers, but rather to show satanic satirical devices: it's not the mistake per se, but the message CONVEYED in making it, which is important. There's the problem of them moving eastward (2Nephi17:1) -- which meant they would have gone the WRONG way to get to America, and would have had to spend years in that boat: is God that inefficient? Even the Flood only took one year, and dropped Noah&Co. down exactly where they needed to be.

      Further, you shouldn't find the many anachronisms mentioned in Nephi, since the OT was not yet fully revealed, in 586 BC (time of the Babylonian captivity, which is the stated cause of the Nephi family 'exodus'). Sure, the Mormon would say it's 'prophecy' -- yeah, conveniently discovered in 1823 or so -- in the same generation, Tischendorf and Tregelles would discover hidden true Bible manuscripts, two of the biggest caches of Biblical documents ever found in history (Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, respectively)! Do you think it's 'coincidence', the Mormon book -- or, competitive SATIRE? What, Nephi got more revelation than even Moses, though Nephi broke the Mosaic Law in its entirety? See what mistakes like this do, MALIGN God and His Word? Even to the point of reversing the Biblical name for that OT Word (BOM says Prophets and the Law, but Bible always says "Law and the Prophets", shorthand title for Canon, viz., in Luke 16:20ff). There are lots of other things about this I want to say, but right now i have no time. These too-brief comments regarding 1-2Nephi will have to do. Use them as hints, and study the Book of Mormon on your own; later I'll make what's said here clearer.

    Amazingly, the BOM's doctrines add up to yet another version of Catholicism, sans mariolatry, robey ritual, and beads: you really gotta be blind, deaf, and dumb to not notice that, esp in the "whore/harlot" passages, and last chapters of 2Nephi. The Mormon is allegedly the right version of faith, and everyone else is wrong. Yet in 2Nephi toward the end, that attitude is condemned, and the so-called "churches" are being condemned for it. But it's okay for Nephi&Co. to be the one, true faith?

    What's even MORE interesting, is this, in light of the Tischendorf&Tregelles discoveries: that same section of 2Nephi (and even before) begins the running claim, like in the Koran, that BIBLE was corrupted so what text exists, is adulterated. So don't look at it. Kinda strange, this claim, since 'Nephi' brought with him the Law and the Prophets. So, BOM, like Koran, becomes the ONLY Truth, the original having been 'lost' or 'adulterated'. Yeah, right. (This same old chestnut has been trotted out repeatedly, and is so overrated, it's not even funny.) So, lo! The most reliable MSS we have were discovered by Tischendorf (1844, Sinaiticus) and Tregelles (just before Civil War? Vaticanus), shortly after Joseph Smith's 'revelation'? You don't think Satan&Co. had to know in advance that such discoveries were going to be allowed by the Supreme Court of Heaven? Why else do you think the BOM makes a big stink out of 2Nephi 'prophecy' that it will later be discovered by another 'Joseph' and then sealed up again? Do you really think that is a 'coincidence'? [You can verify the MSS discovery dates yourself. I don't have the materials I need on Vaticanus to relay accurately -- they're on loan to someone else. Tregelles memorized an MSS Vatican had kept hidden, because they wouldn't let him take notes. So, Treg. later published his memorization: which after some years of struggle, forced the Vatican to publish photographs of that MSS about 1889.]

    Worse: just as in the Koran, 2 Nephi has the exact same DELPHIC style. The prophecies are masterpieces of studied ambiguity: so worded as to tell them not to believe him, because he's rejected the Law of Moses, refuses to give God's Word to them and instead is talking from "mine own prophecy" (Chap25); even, to claim personal credit for the prophecy of the Babylonian captivity, which Isaiah and Jeremiah were given to foretell! Is there more hutzpah than this? In 25:20, TWO words are deliberate lies, compared to the Scripture verses they ape: "nations" and "can" -- thus negating, in Boolean manner, the entire verse.

    2Nephi25:20 is a quintessential example of Satan&Co.'s use of Bible snippets in a Delphic, garish, insulting-to-God-and-man fashion. You'll probably need a BOM to see what follows, because it's not good to quote an extract out of context, no matter what or who the source material.

    2Nephi25:20: a Satan&Co.'s Test of Believer Love and Fealty to Word
    aka, can you think cunningly, like a Shyster Attorney,
    Or the Oracle of Delphi?

    1. In the verse, 'Nephi' sets up a truth equation between the two "as" bookends: so if the first "as" contents is true, then is the second is true. Therefore, if the first "as" is FALSE, so must be the second. Very clever Greek-style wordplay, worthy of Aristophanes. So "nations" renders the first "as" contents, UNTRUE. The serpent was for Israel only (Num21:9, in context).

    2. Moses raised the brass serpent in the wilderness at The LORD's orders, so JEWS, not "nations" (Gentiles, goyim) who looked upon it would be cured of the Egyptian Cobra bites' "fiery" venom (hence their colloquial name, 'fiery serpents').
    3. In John 3:14, Christ would liken His Own Cross to that event, since of course that's what everyone already knew the OT event represented -- it's not a 'new' prophecy, but rather an old one, known since that raising of the brass serpent, to presage Christ. Christ is claiming to fulfill it -- yet another of many Gospel claims He makes that He is the Messias. So again, Nephi's 'prophecy' is not new. But he's claiming it is (context is v.7), and that it's his (ibid).

    4. Notice how there's nothing in the Numbers 21 passage OR in John 3:14 about healing the "nations" after they had been bitten, because "nations" was always a term for Unbelieving Gentiles, in OT. For, in the OT, you became a Jew once you believed in Adonai, just like Abram, who after all had been an unbelieving Gentile (Gen15:6; compare to Romans 4). The OT event also depicted Ps32:5, the OT version of 1Jn1:9, which 'looks at' the Cross, to get forgiveness.
    5. So the first "as" in 2Nephi25:20 is UNtrue; thus the second "as" must be untrue, or 'Nephi' is lying: a more serious lie than normal, for he binds himself with that much-abused oath so popular in the OT, "as the Lord liveth". Saul liked that one a lot. So did David, when he'd sinned with Bathsheba. Search on the phrase in Bible, sometime. Lots of interesting stuff there! No wonder Christ enjoined people to stop oaths, instead: "NIV Matthew 5:37 Simply let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No'; anything beyond this comes from the evil one." Indeed.

    6. Let's see, then, about the second "as". Acts (4:12) verse being presciently misquoted there is (caps rendered from the Greek NA27; rest of English NIV is ok) "There is no other name under heaven given to men BY MEANS OF WHOM (dative of personal agency, passive verb in didomi) we MUST BE SAVED." (dei, impersonal verb of OBLIGATION.) Ooops!

        In Greek, the word "onoma", like the word "shem" in Hebrew, is often lamely translated "name" in English. It means so much more than that. In both ancient languages, the idea of a name was wholly bound up with the person: the name was supposed to reveal his character. That's why people named their kids after famous people, the idea being the kid would grow up to be that great. Yes, it was used as a good-luck charm or talisman. However, the terms also mean "person", "title" -- again, for similar reasons: always, the quality or nature of person is foremost in meaning. So when you see "name" in English Bibles, unless it's in the strictly-courteous context of "what is your name", assume all these meanings are meant. For, the double-entendres and triple-entendres, etc. of Scripture are phenomenal. And never Delphic, if about God. So, what do such facts mean in Acts 4:12? Well, think by placing each meaning where "name" was, in the English translation. So, then: "There is no other person under heaven given to men BY MEANS OF WHOM we MUST be saved" -- no other person. No other person. Are you a person? Then, are you Christ? No? Then nothing you do is given to help your salvation, get it? Because, He is The Truth: Truth needs no additions, no 'help'. You don't need to 'do' anything to Truth. It just is: total, complete, entire. Of itself. Defense rests.

    7. So the "CAN" change in 2Nephi25:20 is an important, lying one. States that Christ's Payment, though stated as "infinite" earlier in Chapter, still is not enough.
    8. Voilá, the whole verse is CORRECTLY UNTRUE! First "as" is untrue because it miscasts the OT passage it covers, and second "as" is untrue because the (presumably unborn) Acts 4:12 says "MUST"! Which, of course, every OT verse about the Redeemer, Savior, the Levitical sacrifices, etc. long prior validated: just as God commands, no prophecy is of private interpretation, and all prophets' statements must be tested against Scripture. Bible passes the test, Nephi flunks.
    9. However -- oh, this is so rich -- under Boolean-conditions, by LYING, the truth is stated! Thus you know this verse's 'contradiction' is deliberate, not a prophecy nor a puzzle of any kind. [Greek logic of 5th century BC -- or, if you believe Bible, Bible itself, invented what we today call "Boolean" logic.] Just as the brass serpent was raised in the wilderness, so Christ would be struck, Who would be THE NAME (HaShem, Deut6:4) by WHOM everyone MUST be saved.
    10. Of course, if you don't do your homework, "if ye did but know" (Koranic refrain in Pickthall's translation of Qu'ran), you will get duped. Which is inexcusable, since this Chapter first tells you Nephi rejected the Law of Moses, didn't teach it, wouldn't even teach Isaiah, but rather, "mine own prophecy", "because of the spirit which is in me". [Hmmm -- what KIND? Only Satan would know that in Hebrew and Greek, the term "spirit" is designated which kind by articles or syntax -- English can't do that. So, aha! can be a "familiar" spirit! Since being possessed or influenced does weaken a person physically, suddenly the "constrain" and murdering behavior of the so-called "Spirit" makes sense!] Which, in v.20, is negated, aha! So, by lying, tells the truth. Favorite Satanic ploy, great Greek wordplay.

    Wow. I guess it was a private joke, that verse: then again, they are also asserting God gave Moses the power to bring forth water by STRIKING the Rock. Instead of giving glory to God's Power: Herod was killed for not acknowledging God, in Acts, and many before him -- certainly back in the 500's BC -- were likewise toppled for it. Then again, Moses claimed it was his power at 2nd Meribah, striking it instead of SPEAKING to it as ordered: "shall WE bring you water out of this Rock!?!" (Numb20:10). Yeah, claim the power and strike Christ's Efficacy from "MUST" to "CAN"!?! Cute joke. Just as cute as the 1st Temptation, where Satan tempts Christ to use His Deity to speak Rock in order to Strike Christ. Just like, here in 2Nephi25:20. Trouble is, only we poor soppy humans get struck down. Poor Joseph Smith! Guy never had a day's peace!

    [Extra notes for the terminally-insane to understand the wordplay: the 1st Temptation in Matt4 was Satan's satire on 2nd Meribah (speak stones-to-bread to strike Rock of Israel, like Moses did, against orders, thus not being able to enter the Land) -- that 'floor' in a whole skyscraper of meanings ALSO gets a bow in 2Nephi25:20. That particular satire is VERY clever, for the FIRST time in the wilderness, Moses was supposed to strike the Rock (depicts Cross). Used rightly, too, in 2Nephi -- but in the passage CONTEXT, the SECOND striking is the topic! Nephi is STRIKING DOWN the Law (but 2Nephi5:10 says he obeyed, so maybe by Chap25 he dropped it); Law struck down in favor of his own prophecy, so STRIKING OUT on his own, "because of the spirit which is in me" which he ADMITS began when he LEFT Jerusalem (Chap25). So STRIKING DOWN Christ, who is the fulfillment of the Law, which Nephi even admits -- and then later, denies! Nephi is obviously drawing boundary lines to communicate what salvation means: I'm not accusing the verses of self-contradiction. Compare 2Nephi2:7,10, 9:17, 11:4 with 2Nephi2:5,13, 9:25-27 (deft summary of Paul's meaning in Romans and Galatians, etc., what the heck); BUT then, 2:26, 12:26 (but in the real Isa that's a Millenium passage, if I recall, so I'm not sure how Mormons read it), 25:23-27. Review 2nd Meribah and its import, plus Matt4 and Deut 8:3-4, then re-read 2Nephi. Too many meaning levels, to say more now.]

    UPSHOT: It's clear Nephi is claiming a new covenant with just his people, and claiming God gave it. The back-and-forth style of comparison writing is somewhat similar to the way the author of Hebrews explains the new covenant in CHRIST. However, the basis in Nephi FOR that new covenant is anti-God; God's covenant had to be fulfilled before a new group could get anything, and Hebrews (well, also most of NT) explains that Christ Alone Got All Covenants Because Only He Could Fulfill The Perfection Condition; so no one else got them (see Heb1). So either Nephi is a demon talking, or Christ is subject to a Law which God freed Nephi from -- that latter cannot be true, so Book of Mormon cannot be from God.

    [A change in priesthood means a change in covenant, as Hebrews painstakingly explains (Chaps5-10). Nephi&Co. could not be keeping the Mosaic Law without a son of Aaron, even a whole line, in the 'new' land. So either the M.L. is abrogated and replaced illegally, and God is a liar -- or Nephi is lying. God never lies, so it must be 'Nephi', and 'Nephi' must be a demon -- as illustrated in the flesh table, what human is so crafty and smart? Certainly not young Joseph Smith!]

    Moreover, 2Nephi, like Koran, constantly uses concatenation of important and easy-to-check New Testament verses and doctrines -- yet denies their existence. (Here, by pretending the book is written during Babylonian captivity.) Moreover, the WAY these NT verses and doctrines are concatenated demeans them. This is especially true with the Revelation allusions (e.g., white robe, girdle) -- both John AND Christ are treated like cattle: praised one second, put down the next. Like toys to please a master. Really rude. Just as rude as saying the Holy Spirit 'constrains', and as a result one is weakened? That's a popular refrain, too. Satan really has it in for the Holy Spirit: tell me, would Holy God MAKE you MURDER Laban, 'Nephi'? Would the Holy Spirit act like the engastrimuthos demon, imitating voices, LYING, DECEIVING? Do you think nothing of immediately DRESSING in the murdered man's clothes, and then claim the Spirit wanted that? Didn't Ananias die for the same, in Acts 5, wanting to make himself look like Barnabas? And why, if this prophecy is so valid, is it only 'Nephi' who keeps saying (esp. in the last chapter) that he thinks it valuable? What about the Lord's opinion of it? Ohhh, not mentioned! Another dead giveaway that God didn't provide the vision, in the first place -- no Divine Signature!

      While I knew Satan&Co. was miffed the Lord didn't accept the 3rd Temptation in Matt4 (due to its Greek reversal of protasis), I didn't realize how much! until re-reviewing 2Nephi. The whole tree vision, too -- treating river and the 'building' as filthy, evil (wow, how Satan hates Paul's Ephesians!) -- when Bible's 'water' is always the metaphor for the Word (well, "sea" is metaphor for people -- salt+water, get it? and "waters" means many doctrines -- false, man's); and the 'building' is used in NT for Body of Christ, Eternal Temple built on the Cornerstone (big Dispensational keywords, frequently mistranslated in English NTs): see Eph2, and Rev21, & like passages.

    Of course, the bald treatment of the US as the 'promised land' -- despite universal BIBLE silence on even our existence -- is a HUGE red flag. Bible is and has always been, dispensational: see VERindex.htm for keywords the Bible uses. (You'll find these same keywords in Book of Mormon and Koran -- well, the English versions of them.) The United States is not part of the Age of Israel, so of course no prophecies about our existence are IN the Bible, for the Church Age Has No Prophecy, except its termini. Gist of answer: It's a NUMBERS criterion which depends on volition, which Father has established for the Church Age, so NO prophecy can apply to this period in history. So the alleged prophecy in Nephi about America being the new covenantal promised land for Jews, which eventually will be regathered to Israel -- is bogus. Pure and simple. The Delphic wording of that prophecy in Nephi also testifies to its being a lie. Pure and simple. Satan always tries to put the Church in Israel's timeslot, in order to pogromize Jews; he knows people will buy the idea if they've some nice, juicy prophecy to fantasize about while they burn their toast. Don't fall for it. LordvSatan4.htm explains that tactical strategy.

      More: Israel didn't use brass plates to permanently engrave things, and especially, not Torah. It was on scrolls. Jeremiah used scrolls. What, Jeremiah had scrolls, but Nephi, plates? (Brass plates of course were an invention for printing books sometime after Gutenberg. Bible is sometimes accused of using anachronisms, so I don't want to use the fact about brass plates but one way: they would have been better than scrolls: so why didn't Christ have them?) Ezra, who returned to the Land after the Babylonian captivity, still had scrolls. In the Lord's day.. still, scrolls. That's why everyone memorized. Moreover, Torah was never 'hidden' by God. People rejected the Law and the Prophets so totally, even when the Scripture was still in the Temple, people forgot where it was and 'found' it: viz., 2Ki22:8 (in context), and Jer15:16 -- so why would God hide the plates? Again, this isn't to debunk due to the mere existence of anachronisms, but rather to prove that the message 'in' them maligns God. Hence, can't be God's Word.

    So only the doctrinally-stupid are deceived by its claims: doctrinal, historical, logical gaffes and contradictions abound. Paul stressed the Church was UNKNOWN in OT times; the Holy Spirit wasn't given until the Ascension, so no one in the OT could be IN the Spirit: cf Jn7:39, Acts1, etc. "Bible" is repeatedly used at the end of 2Nephi -- but that word as used, only exists in English: it's not a Hebrew or Greek or even a Bible word, and was never used to designate Scripture until some centuries after Christ (see DeHamel book for the exact date)! So the term "Bible" was unknown even to NT writers, etc. [Greek word Biblios and Hebrew megillah or sepher don't have the connotation of 'book' or even collection of books as we know the term, and in any event would not become the English word, "Bible." Other terms were used: "Writings", "it is written", "Scripture", "Law and Prophets", "Law", and then the specialized names for the sections in it. Order was radically different from 'our' system. There would be no way for 'Nephi' to translate any non-English really-used term of his alleged time into, "Bible."]

      It's easy to BE doctrinally-stupid. In the beginning, the sound of the words is mistaken for truth. If the speaker sounds holy, if the words sound like the sound of the Bible we grew up with; if a book uses lots of Bible-sounding verses and even, real ones -- how easy it is, to be duped into thinking, oh, Bible has been lost and found so many times since Moses, this must be yet another book! But look beneath the mellifluouy to what is said. Ask: is this verse somehow insulting God's Nature, or Christ? Or, one of the Bible greats? I could tell the answer to that italic question was "yes" with respect to BOM, at age 19; though I had no knowledge of Scripture beyond sounds; well, and a freshman year of reading the book like..a book. Understanding nearly nothing. It wasn't some miracle insight about the BOM, either: but obvious logic. God doesn't give you insight in some magical way. And I am not smart; only articulate, and questionning. God will answer anyone who asks. No or high (alleged) human intelligence is completely irrelevant. Of course, if your question requires years of learning other things to 'see' the answer, you might not feel like you got one. But you are. Keep On Asking Him. That's a YES vote to KNOW Him.

      So: ask the question, yourself. Ask: is this item (i.e., verse) somehow insulting God's Nature, or Christ? Or, puts down one of His Bible believers? Save yourself the awesome grief of realizing you were psychically drugged by sound or feel or form! I wouldn't wish that realization even on Hitler or Stalyin, it's so awful.

    It's gaffes like these and the not-too-veiled LIE that the text came from folks contemporaneous with Jeremiah/Zedekiah, which yell demon authorship and derisive laughter. Wordplay on the REAL Bible is too brilliant, esp. verse concatenation in 2Nephi. BOM has the usual D-I-O-S keys of demon authorship, replete with deliberate contradiction and deft anti-(instead of) semitism. The anti-semitism, as we saw with the Koran, is a hallmark demonic signature; the goal of anti-semitism is either to wipe out Israel, or to deny/change the DEFINITION of "Israel" -- which thus makes the real Jews suddenly 'not'. Let alone, that there are and were never any "lost tribes" (term in one of the last three chapters of 2 Nephi). The "lost tribes" concept is an 18th century, European Anti-Semitism (basis for claiming Jews are not Jews): probably not much earlier (it's rooted in some egregious claims about what happened to Samaria after 721 BC). Certainly, not in circa 535+ BC, when 2Nephi was supposed to be penned! Jews have never considered any tribes to be lost, so if Nephi is supposedly OF the tribe of Joseph, then he'd never use such a term. Again, such blatant anti-semitism screams that Satan&Co., not God, authored the BOM.

    Unlike the Koran, BOM was apparently 'delivered' to a demon-influenced believer (not unbeliever), given usage of the Lord's Name, & in connection with him. As in the Koran, Satan&Co. yell their authorship in part by the way they use God's Names. See, God has strict rules and penalties if His Name is misused, i.e., claiming He says something He doesn't say. So demons are very careful how they use His Name and in what context; they avoid 'signature' titles (so it's not really Him) when claiming He says fake doctrine; but use 'signature' titles when rephrasing/quoting what He really has said -- in Scripture! As a result, they SLANT/REVERSE the true, by mixture with false in other verses. Incredibly clever. A classic example is in 2Nephi 29: vv1-3 are false, 4 true doctrine (anachronistically said, but it's a truth), 5-8 false. Note how 'names' for Him change in the false verses or are nicely allusive to the only true-doctrine verse among the 8; notice also the fabulous double-entendre: "fools" in v.4 would be Nephi&Co.!

    Awesome wordplay: blatant denial of Rev22:6-21; so anyone who believes in the Book of Mormon gets cursed per the Rev passage -- which, in double-entendre, is exactly what 2Nephi29:14's last sentence predicts! Clever: just like Oracle of Delphi. Humans just aren't this smart. Some apocrypha and pseudopigrapha also 'employed' believers, but BOM has a lot more 'class'. I really wish I had more time to write about it.

    So: don't blame the Mormons, don't blame anyone: just learn from these errors. Just as if you were at West Point, studying military history. For, it's a life-or-death issue, what God says. We ought to treat it more seriously than we do. You know, when the Bible forecasts "shame" at the Evaluation Seat (Bema, usu. mistranslated Judgement), clearly "shame" is how WE voluntarily will feel -- not something God imposes. So clearly, the sooner we catch on and get out of our beguilements, the better! Which we do in part, by learning like they do at West Point -- by seeing how our brethren succeed, or fail in their own understandings. Because, there but for the Grace of God are we. And maybe 'tomorrow' we are the fallen, and their lameness is made whole! So if they/we fall, we/they can carry the baton for them/us, as well as ourselves/them. One Body, so we all are hurting, if any are hurting. And only the Balm of Bible Doctrine, heals. That's the Royal Family of God thing-to-do! No one else can have, and grow up in, this unique spiritual life, "with REFERENCE to all generations of this Age over the Ages!" [Eph3:21, corrected translation of Greek lexeme there and accusative-of-reference with the preposition eis. Exclamation, because there are no verbs, meaning Paul is shouting. If you look at the context, you'll know why!]

    Tactical Example: Gnostic, Kabbalistic, and Christian apocrypha/pseudopigrapha

    The term "gnosticism" is limited in your encyclopedias to a movement of the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD. But its tenets go all the way back to earliest times. Kabbala, likewise, is limited by your encyclopedias to the Middle Ages. But you can ask almost any Cabalist, and he'll correctly tell you the ideas were there since Judaism was born. Even, older than that. For gnosticism is essentially an Eastern religious idea of communing, with lots of magic thrown in. Depending on how much asceticism you want, you can rarify the atmosphere to contemplation. Idea of separation between mind and body, to eventually return to the Light.

    If you read Satan's other counterfeit, Bible-related, holy books and god-myths, you'll see much more of Satan&Co.'s desire for vengeance against God than the Bible will (out of kindness) reveal. The Greek dramas, in particular, show a great deal of their activity in mistreating the human race, and it's surprising how many Bible verses are alluded to (unknown to those Greeks who wrote the plays, surely): classic Satanic slapstick style, with all the "Signature" characteristics which were outlined in the "Satan's Script Tactics" section. Just like the way demons treated unbelievers in the Gospels and in Gen6.

      A real good example of the genre shows baldly in Euripides' play, "Ion". The Oracle of Delphi, run by a demon who likes to call himself "Loki" or "Phoebus Apollo" was notorious for his treacherous utterances. So the "Ion" has that fact as a running subplot (title itself is wordplay revealing a 'venomous' plot). Read it, then compare to the Gospel depictions of possessed unbelievers. Even in the play itself, there are some interesting statements which (unknown to the authors and audience) have to be plays on Bible verses: the Chorus says that those born of both gods and human women will never have bliss (no kidding, they were all unbelievers, and were destroyed in the Flood maybe 2000+ years prior to the drama); Ion's birth and divine deliverance plays on Moses' birth and discovery by a daughter of Pharaoh, or, plays on the upcoming Incarnation itself (which was predicted about 200 years or more before this play was written). It would be easy to toss all this off to 'cultural similarity' if Bible verses weren't so played-upon. So, either the Greek playwrights had some knowledge of Scripture and used it (not likely, since the LXX didn't exist yet), or -- given the way demons do play with humans -- some demon "Muse" was having a little fun!

      It's also important to spend time on Greek dramas, since so much of Scripture uses Greek drama vocabulary, whether in LXX or NT; so the interpretation of many passages is materially different and clear if you know the Greek drama item being referenced by the Bible's usage. Also, maybe vice-versa. For, the development of Greece itself may be related to Israel's existence, given the many cultural commonalities to the Law, though I'd have to do a lot more research before I could be specific. See, there is evidence that some among the Tribes of Benjamin and Dan, after they entered The Land, split off (before Solomon's time), and sailed up north to Troy and Greece; maybe even founding Troy, Ionia (a 'branch' of which would be Sparta). Any such linkages would surely attract Satan&Co. to playing their games with any 'kin', however remote, and the obvious Scriptural allusions in the plays themselves would no longer be so surprising. Or else, maybe some political intermarriages occurred, for in Solomon's day there was a kinship with (what we call) Sparta and some other Greek city-states. (The split off's the only possible kernel of truth the we-are-the-real-Israelites jerks can hang a hat on -- ignoring, of course, that most of Israel did not split off, thank you very much. Naturally, any population of people has some within it who leave and wander, over time. But the whole "missing tribes" thingy is bupkis. Invented by Satan, of course.)

    So also, the other god-stories and holy books. Amazingly, these alternate 'god' stories have the same plot, when viewed in a general, 'big-picture' fashion. Currently, these stories are passed off as being 'Biblical' in the media, whether in History Channel documentaries, or in brilliant, spoofing, self-absorbed movies/series like "Dogma", and HBO's recent "Angels in America" (which someone just asked me to view, 12/03). That latter's 'Chapter 4' begins with an angelic 'visitation' to an AIDS patient, during which all of the seven satanic Signature characteristics are nicely summarized by the angel (played by Emma Thompson). If you just see that 'Chapter' of the six-hour series, you'll know Satan's fantasy and sales pitch in a nutshell, the authors and actors being clueless. Oh, how fun to accuse God! So fun, in fact, no one even bothers to get the story right, separating what IS in the REAL Bible from what's 1st-century tabloid libel, but oh! since it's hostile, it's OBJECTIVE! Yeah, right.

    What's the essential plot of all these other writings and even the media versions? Starter-god is really the bad guy, and he either abandons his creation or acts in a criminally-capricious way toward them: hence the unending theme of shaking the fist at God is 'justified'. So, starter-god(s) gets killed/imprisoned by his kiddies, sometimes with the help of the 'mother' starter-god. Then, one or more of the kiddies took over the earth/universe, sometimes hiding the original crime of rebelling against his/their 'parents' from lower creation. Truly amazing: Satan&Co.'s fantasy. Not all the holy books start at the beginning of this fantasy. Some start only at the point when the kiddie(s) had already taken over as 'god(s)'. You kinda have to read them all to tell which holy books start later, as it were, in Satan's fantasy. In fact, all these stories, wherever in the world, transmit the same 'bottom-line': the 'god(s)' will always ooze caprice; basically does whatever he likes with lower creation, who are always -- ahem -- 'encouraged' to placate him(them). Truly bitter satire of the highest wit. Truly and OBVIOUSLY makes fun of any humans who believe in it. Devastating stuff.

      Frankly, if you apply the "first law of math" to the logic, meaning, a set cannot contain itself, the granddaddy of all religious ideas of gnostic flavor (which includes all Eastern religions) has to be Kabbala. Kabbalism is rooted in a mystical interpretation of Scripture, which antedates the writing of Scripture by Moses, in that the essential doctrines were long known: ever since Gen3. If you look at the Vedas, which were supposedly penned at the same time that Moses finished the Pentateuch, you can't help but notice the similarity, even in the structure of the namings. Almost as if some demon was busy 'helping' some humans pen the Rig Vedas while Moses was writing, to set up a counter-mosaic law.

      So too, with gnosticism, which is too much like Kabbala to be unrelated. So if you really enjoy spotting very dense wordplay & satire on the Bible's original languages, start with the gnostic writings: they are by far the funniest, cleverest, most deft demonic documents extant. (Frankly, everything esoteric of any epoch in history is either summed up in gnosticism, or is eclecticized BY gnosticism. Gnosticism is still very much alive and flourishing today, in a dizzying array of forms, so it's extremely relevant, albeit annoying, to study.)

      Then cycle through the rest of the 'holy book' competition. It's particularly interesting to see how Satan&Co. vary their Slapstick Signature. For example, one of the better counterfeit Gospels is the so-called "Gospel of Nicodemus". However -- of course -- the miracles recounted which are not in THE Gospels, are so out-of-kilter with the tenor of Christ's miracles which are in the Gospels, you know something's wrong. Then, when you think over the alleged miracle for more than two seconds, you notice hey, God would be slapstic silly if He did a miracle like this! Which, of course, He's not: there IS no miracle like it anywhere in Bible.

        This 'gospel' has a lot of nice slapstick burlesques. Paradosis. Christ's Descent into Hell. Standards that bow when Pilate interrogates Jesus, but JESUS is not asked about it, lol. Mamlich being the Ascension, in Galilee instead of the Mount of Olives, Jerusalem. 1st Prize, though: the Jesus who wouldn't jump from the Temple will, however lift up an entire jail by the corners(!), then douse Joseph of Arimethea with oil, then kiss him... um, where is there anything like that in Scripture? And where in Bible does anyone except an angel, personally rescue a trapped believer? Nowhere does Christ personally rescue anyone, in all Scripture. Even mere kings use emissaries for that function. Wow, ya gotta hand it to Satan&Co.: they sure know how to make our lack-of-study obvious. I mean, can you see Christ slopping oil all over someone and then kissing him, just after pulling an 'Atlas' -- raising a whole building by its corners? Come on! This is Benny Hill quality! Satire on Mary Magdalene and the ointment! Or Greasy Terminator!

        It would be hilarious, if not so tragic, to realize that many of these obviously bogus stories were actually believed upon by the so-called Church Fathers. Many more were rejected, too, but hey: why would Jerome (or Eusebius, I forget) buy the idea that "James the Just" went without bathing and food, living IN the Temple? Bathing was one of the most sacred rituals of the Jews. Is that why Jerome used the name "Hieronymus" to attest to such a libelous story about the Lord's half-brother? I mean, that story is as slapstick silly as the "Christ's Descent into Hell" subdivision in the 'gospel of Nicodemus'! A whole lot of believers during the second and third century must have been a sick bunch of folks, to find popular those smiling-pots-of-venom, the Infancy Gospels. It's enough to make you mourn man's insane negative volition, forever. How is it that a person who will be perfectly logical about his day, suddenly finds it reasonable, some gnostic or other holy book story? The difference between the way the Real Bible is written and all its competitors, is like the difference between a good math textbook, and a child learning to write numbers. Incredible.

      If you have trouble spotting wordplay, then instead just read summaries of the principal gnostic sects and focus on how the plotlines satirize Scripture. Like, how the "Infancy of James" burlesques OT Hanna's self-absorbed pregnancy (she was the mother of Samuel), assigning it to Anna, Mary's purported mother: nice touch, to make Mary immaculately conceived (thus Anna's dippy husband, playing a self-absorbed version of Abram, never really gets a daughter of his own loins, but hey). Perhaps the easiest yet funniest of these satanic burlesques to review, is the "Acts of Paul and Thecla". Before you read it, read 1Cor6 and 7,12, Ephesians, so you can tell what Satan&Co. Burlesque. Because, the real Paul is not at all ascetic, and in fact (in context) counsels against a married couple withholding from each other; shows how learning Christ is like sex: a uniting. (It's really hard to miss this sexual parallelism in Paul's Greek, because he uses Greek religious words to analogously make his points: in the English, these words are euphemized.) Oh: there's a first-rate satire of the Beatitudes in "Acts of Paul and Thecla", which will be even more enjoyable to read if you first read the real one (you know, the "Blessed are the.." verses in Gospel). Too good to miss!

      Again, the reason to engage in this exercise is to see for yourself the satanic style of derision. Because, this same style is played upon man every day in every way, whether you are in a conversation, watching television, hearing what politicians do, or going to the supermarket. For, until you know what a "Corvette" looks like, you can't spot one everywhere you go. Finally, go through the Greek and Roman pantheons, myths, plays; again note how the plotlines SATIRIZE real Bible stories. You should notice that the clever satire is way beyond what a mere human could dream up. Non-Greco-Roman god myths differ only in name and cleverness.

    Satirize Epignosis via Gnostic Stigma

    "Epignosis" is a Greek noun Paul uses in wordplay: its cognate verb is "epiginoskw". When you carefully read the OT uses of those words and how Paul then plays on those uses, you see that both words only denote rapport with God due to Knowing Him; which comes from knowing His Thinking, which is written out for us as Scripture, e.g., 1Cor2:16, Heb4:12, all of 1Cor13; which was a longstanding promise in the OT, e.g., in Jer31:31-34. [Sample OT verses are Proverbs 2:5, Hos5:6, 6:6, Isa5:13. Since English typically screws up by translating different "knowledge" verbs all with "knowledge", you cannot distinguish what Bible is saying. This travesty is common with many other keywords in Bible. So you screw up your interpretation of the verse(s) in question.] So the "epignosis" is coined by combining the preposition "epi" (upon, on top of), which has a root connotation of true-foundation-for-true-construction, with KNOWLEDGE (gnosis, verb=ginoskw). It's a tweak word Paul likes to use, poking at gnosticism (a philosophical religion which really dates back to maybe Cain).

      See, in gnosticism, man makes himself like god by knowing enough (remember the Tree in the Garden). In Gnosticism proper (as distinct from its progenitors), the type prevailing during and after the Cross had two foci: a) either self-abstinence or hedonism (both designed to foster "katharsis", or purging purification of body-urges), and b) mystical 'knowledge'. In Gnosticism emphasis was placed on sending your mind outward, so to speak: you sat still, concentrating, willing to make contact, and the knowledge 'transported' you; with practice, you would be able to transport yourself 'noetically'. Or, you engaged in certain Vedic-like chantings or complex rituals which opened a 'connection' to the (transcendental) unseen, which then 'channeled' (to use a modern term) the knowledge through to you. In all events, the objective of Gnosticism was to free you from your body so your soul could float back up to that primordial Father of Light, baby. Which, if you became adept enough by death, would happen. (Some versions of Gnosticism maintained you'd have to come back and do it all over again, until you got it right: metempsychosis, Hindu relatives. It's likely that gnosticism was the parent of Hinduism, though many consider the latter the parent. Monotheism preceded polytheism in religious ideas, historically, as the concept of Personal Triune God depersonalized to mere 'elohim' Absolute Principle: same temptation as Satan used to the woman in the Garden. As you review Hinduism's history, you'll find it is a conceptual "bridge" illustrating the changeover from monotheistic concepts to the later polytheistic ones, and hence is more likely a child of the earliest forms of gnosticism, which were monotheistic. Nearly all polytheisms have some Ultimate Parent from which the hierarchy of 'gods' sprang. In the very earliest versions, the Ultimate Parent is little more than an impersonal collection of life forces, which is what "elohim" in Satan's taunt of Gen2, means, as we saw in Part II.)

    So Paul uses "epignosis" as wordplay: Knowledge is really knowing God HIMSELF, vs. mere "gnosis", which but puffs up self with hot air (useless knowledge): can't build on the latter (air=false foundation). So Satan satirized the real spiritual life by the gnostic thingy. So Satan now satirizes Paul by secret-knowledge transmission claims. For, it was Paul who re-invented the term "mystery" (cult doctrines known only to the cult) to tweak false intimacy with the Divine (well, uniting-with-God, let's not be coy) versus the Genuine Article.

    So an interesting example of how Satan&Co. satirize "epignosis", if you strip out the Hollywoody sensationalism, is in the History Channel's 'documentary' on Stigmata, or in the movie "Stigmata". Please understand: I'm not saying the people who made these are bad, or 'involved'. Not at all: the 'stigmata' topic merely illustrates satanic strategy and tactics. Everyone in this world gets used by Satan&Co. It's a major doctrine in the Bible. Here, the 'usage' is, as always, to promote something false.. using slivers of truth to do so.

    For, A thinking person would never conclude that alleged 'marks of Christ' suddenly showing up in a body would actually be from God, but rather from demonism. God is no sadist. But oh! What has been the repeated lie? Oh, St. Francis of Assisi and x number of other people are holy because they get these marks!! See how God is maligned, for crying out loud?

    The movie's also an unintentional showcase promoting that scurrilous libel, the so-called "Gospel of St. Thomas". You might want to read it, and then watch the movie, before you read the rest of this table: its comments won't make much sense, else. [Nerd note: I'm not condemning the movie. Like anything and everything else in life, it will be used by Satan&Co. to sell something: humans are quite clearly oblivious to being so used. So, you play intelligence officer, reading between the lines, to determine the sales pitch.]

    If you know the doctrine of demon possession, you'll find the movie demonstrates a very cunning satire which of course those associated with the movie didn't recognize: ah, a holy man destructively possesses an atheist? Yeah, the real God would authorize such a thing? Yeah, the Real God is so insecure, He 'needs' to use blood-and-guts, not to mention dangerous visions of being on a Cross, to promote some hidden, genuine, truth? Gimme a break! Of course, the word "truth" in Greek is "aletheia", and literally means, "the unhidden". So any 'hidden' truth is an oxymoron. Heh: self-canceling, so truth becomes LIE, get it?

    Of course, this holy man possesses an atheist in order to preserve the Gospel of St. Thomas, which the RCC suppresses! Never mind that only demons possess anyone. Never mind that any real stigmata only occur as a result of demon possession, since 'stigmata' deride the Cross. [In Matt4, Satan's below-radar taunt claims the Cross is needless suffering; that Christ refuses good deeds/miracles because God is sadistic. So all satanic 'miracles' display a derisive quality, if you look closely at their characteristics. Note how the Lord speaks of even REAL miracles in a negative way: "an evil generation seeks a sign", etc. 1Cor13 is even more dramatic, in its Attic Greek: Paul as the hypothetical greatest person in history, yet is nothing (outhen in Attic Drama Greek="NOTHING!") without Love.] Never mind that All Scripture is the Thinking of Christ (the transmission of which is proved to the reader via Content Quality, being written by the human NT authors) -- it matters more to allege Christ wrote a 'gospel' in Aramaic! LOL.

      See the libel? First: awwww, if you're holy you should be mauled in the same way as Christ. Second: awwww, touching something a holy person touched makes the touchee get mauled, too. Third: awww, it's MORE holy if Christ Himself said it, so the rest of the Bible is unimportant(!); so God the Holy Spirit, Who Gives All Scripture, Even To The Humanity Of Christ, is impotent by comparison. Christ IS the Word, and the NT writers testify to Him. So He Himself didn't and shouldn't write anything. In a trial OTHER witnesses speak, not the accused (here, God and Christ are accused by Satan&Co. of being maso-sadistic).

    Never mind that the Gospel of St. Thomas, where not libelous, is a stupidly-mystical and very confused rehash of verses anyone can find in the Synoptics. (This and the Apochryphon of James are among the very dumbest of the substitute-gospels I've ever read. They don't even try to make sense: just so much drunken speech. You can just tell the demon writers are making fun of the fact that the believer can't even read with his brain on. Kinda like the Emperor's New Clothes or avant-garde art: Then Jesus said, White is button and dogs eat ribbons, so shall you inherit the Kingdom, let him hear. Unbelievable drivel. The James thingy is a drunken satire on the Bible's use of Pleroma.) Remember, Satan always uses TRUTH to empower his lies: in "Stigmata", it's TRUE that no building or institution or religion is true Church. (See Eph2, Peter's "living stones" passage (Greek is very punny); Rev13-17, all of Hebrews.) So, the beginning of the Gospel of St. Thomas, which is interpreted to have that same theme, is used as the raison d'etre for the movie. In the process, the audience becomes enamored of the Catholic coverup, thus the Gospel of St. Thomas gets promoted as more genuine than the BIBLE.

      See? Satan's not stupid: first, he aligns truth with falsehood, to make them 'one' to the audience; second, he destroys a selected PART of the false, so to defame (if possible) all of the Truth. Most of Catholic Church doctrine is false, which a thorough comparison with Bible will show. So, by taking something the RCC rightly refused to condone, the libelous Gospel of St. Thomas, then showing up the RCC as 'bad', that libel looks holy; since the Bible's 66 books were rightly claimed as Divine by the RCC, the Bible itself become suspect due to RCC recognition. Very clever: if bad praises good, then good becomes bad; if good praises bad, then good becomes bad; if bad1 blames bad2, then good ALSO becomes bad: whichever side you favor, is bad! Documentaries today on Scripture are equally clever, using a very similar ploy; of course the humans doing them, don't know what they sell.

    Every non-Biblical 'holy' book has these same characteristics: falsehood piggybacking on truth, with some of the falsehood exposed as 'evil', to make the rest (deepest) of the falsehood look holy. If you apply the Signature characteristics to test for satanic authorship, you should be able to prove how baldly derisive are the would-be 'competitors' against Bible, anytime or anywhere.

    Testing fake Bible books can be instructive. EnochTest.htm is one such test, if you're interested in the Book of Enoch. You always look for malignings of God or Bible Hero, for blatant proofs that a book is not from God. They won't be hard to find. All fake Bible books make good comedy. That's their intent!

    If you're interested in the Grail Myth version of gnosticism, click on the "Grail" link in DDNA.htm, and have a gay ol' time.

    Formerly, I had listed another example in this section: from the HBO series, "Carnivale". It was yet another rehashed gnostic story. I cut it out, since the series is over. If you want that text, which analyzes some of the imagery (again, the humans making the series were clueless), just email me. However, the fake Bible books offer more goldmine-evidence, since in them, you can usually prove direct demon authorship. Not all fake Bible books are witty enough to qualify as demonic: the best two demonic books I can find are Koran and Book of Mormon: so they are classed at pagetop, as separate Tactical Examples.

    Tactical Example: Bible Translation and Interpretation

    Here are some of my hundreds of videos on Bible mistranslation, teaching, reading, Lie Detection. You can just Google on 'brainout' and 'Bible Mistranslation' to find a full list in both Youtube and vimeo. See also my "b-out False Doctrine" Youtube playlist.

    Videos on the satanic misreading of Genesis are best viewed in vimeo: click here.

    Alternatively, for the Youtube (smaller) set you can view off-Youtube, click here.

    Until Episode 8, you'll see how egregiously we Christians misread Genesis. Beginning in Episode 8, you'll see the astonishing meaning of those Genesis 5 begats, and will know why Satan likes it just fine if we snooze over them rather than wake up to our huge impact on earth, just by learniing and living on Bible. :)

    Every one of my websites contains many specific examples of satanic involvement in Bible translation and teaching. By contrast, the overall GAME they play and how they fool us, is covered here.

    Satan well knows we aren't curious about God, but rather only about His Goodies. Satan depended on our goodies-orientation, when he tempted Adam. Satan tempted Adam, by going after the WOMAN. See, essentially, Isha's fall meant that Adam would lose her, if he didn't take that fruit from her hand. It was an situational ultimatum: God, or goodies. Adam took the goodies, and he did it in the name of good. Hence was born the replacement of God with people in the First Commandment, such that 'fitting-in' with people is more important than fitting in with God. So much so, the average Christian will tell you that you serve God by serving people. And, in so saying, never even notices that Adam's fall rationalization is being replayed, right before your eyes.

    So Satan's task is but to repeat what succeeded in the Garden. That, he's done very well. Matt4 is updated version of the Garden Temptation, for Christ and for Church. Watch: Adam had to choose between God and the woman, and it was no contest. Church had to choose between the Word of God and people, and it was no contest. [Note to self: Maybe that's another reason why my pastor keeps repeating that 1John keeps drawing parallels back to the Garden, with marital intimacy and rulership pointers? Think over.] Church was offered the Third Temptation beginning about 100AD, and was warned about it in Rev13-17; it took the forbidden fruit, political power. Aha.

    So, the to-people slanting of Scripture translation and interpretation, was inevitable: Judaism had long done that, so of course the early Christians followed suit. Even more so, after the Church's 'fall' into politicization. "Works" are but figleaf loincovers; after all, that's why Adam made the loincovers in the first place, to ATONE. [Hebrew word for atonement is really, "to cover", "kopher" or "kepher" or most commonly, "kippur": from which we get Yom Kippur, Day of Atonement. So this is a fabulously educational pun in the Bible, to tell us about Adam's figleaves thingy.] So, we genetically inherit that drive, "flesh", "old man", the sin nature, and baby we can't make enough figleaves to fool ourselves that we PAID something. So of course, from the "Church Fathers" through the Puritans (though surely many among them worked very hard and believed much), one finds that figleaves signature. Which, when applied to Scripture translation and interpretation, amounts to a very childish, if not insane, doctrinal apprehension of the real spiritual life. So, to this day, that babyish Constantinian-Reformation view has dominated Christian interpretation of Scripture: as a consequence, God101 is but barely perceived and taught. Despite having Canon In Writing for about 2000 years!

    So, given the spectacular-but-quite-understandable failure of Church to historically pass Matt4 testing, it's pretty easy to understand how the grand champions of Satan's DIOS sleight-of-hand strategy and micro tactics, are Bible translations. So, Bible translations will most commonly and deftly display satanic sleight-of-truth. If you have Christopher deHamel's The Book, you'll find the scenario below should track to the order of his just-the-facts history of how the Bible came to be in its present form; I'm typing from memory, though (my copy of The Book is currently lent out). I highly recommend www.bautz.de, which is in German, for any further research (it was the only place where I could find a wealth of relevant data on Samuel Tregelles and the extraordinary Biblical advances of the mid 1800's). Click here for a great synopsis of the mid-1800's discoveries, half in German, half English (if you studied Latin even briefly, the German won't be too hard to grasp).

    After reviewing the above sources and other raw-data items, it became obvious that Satan&Co. have been fervently engaged in a kidnap-the-Bible scheme. Scripture itself talks about this a lot, viz., in the Greek of 1Tim2:26-3:7; the parable about the birds snatching up seed (believers in the Word) also includes the idea of SEPARATING Word from the believer. Perhaps more about the DERISIVENESS of Satan&Co.'s tactical strategy of kidnapping the Word should be said, before covering the historical sweep of the kidnapping, itself.

      If you'll remember from the "Gotterdammerung" table in the "Script Signature" section, an over- or underexposure to Truth psychologically destabilizes man. So, if you remember from Part II's content about why ritual was used to teach; if you'll remember from Part III's "Third Reason for Invisibility" how humanity can't take contact with God, you should find it logical to conclude that God would write Truth with a whole lot of protect-volition technique. That, He did: in fact, that's one reason why human authors were used, rather than a Bible descending from Sinai like the Decalogue did. The very writing of the Word itself has a whole lot of protect-volition mechanisms built into the very writing styles, themselves. This, because The Bible is assumed to be written to a positive audience. So, Scripture doesn't spend time justifying itself, often assumes the reader understands; and often doesn't explain fundamental things except via sophisticated wordplay and deft uses of grammar and syntax. This means, the person who wants to understand what God says, must do some digging. Which, if he's already positive, is natural for him to want to do.

      However, like with anything else in life, what's good about a thing is also and exactly what's bad about it. With positive volition, there's a danger in becoming too absorbed, overwhelmed, shocked (by pleasure, here) at knowing the truth, etc. Overexposure, not underexposure, is a genuine hazard. So, the need to dig offsets these potential hazards. For us, we have to dig in an ancient foreign language to even be sure of the basics. For those whose native tongue at the time was the same as the writer's, the 'digging' was still an effort, because the wordplay in Scripture is so dense and so multilayered, you could walk from Jerusalem to Ephesus still playing with but one verse. [Talmud is essentially a lot of playing with Scripture's meaning.] Note that function: volition is deciding at each second to play FURTHER. Consent is a type of buffer, because consent is a type of acceptance. It's easier to be hit with something if you are already inclined to accept the blow. Just as, Christ accepted the blows of our sins on the Cross, so also in the lesser 'series of blows' that repeated learning of Bible truth constitutes, Acceptance Tempers The Shock.

      Also, in all events, a huge amount of time gets spent in learning, which spending is also an series of repeated CONSENTS; which time, when the fullness of the answer finally 'hits' you, braces you for the shock. See, it's one thing to hear and even believe a repeated statement. It's quite another thing when the lightbulb goes on and you are confronted with the item really really really being TRUE. Whether you very much like the Truth, or very much don't. At that moment, the Truth is ROOTING in you, and it sprouts out rapidly from that moment forward. For better, or for worse.

      In sum, there are many protection mechanisms employed in the writing, not just this one about digging -- but, you get the idea: the protection mechanisms buffer volition from being unduly influenced by the gigantic Power of God's Truth. For, even though it IS the Truth, to coerce volition even a little bit, is anathema to Divine Sovereignty. I guess you could say, God is the Ultimate Practitioner of the so-called 'Golden Rule'.

      Satan satirizes this Golden Rule, as follows: oh, well gotta PROTECT the human race from this too-high truth! Oh, well since PLAYING is what the believer is supposed to do with Scripture, let's play! Slice it, dice it, process it, dilute it, reverse it, mash it -- process the truth to a 'safer' level of consumption! Better still, COVER UP this truth, secrete away this all-too-powerful weapon, Christ's Thinking (OT, Deity, NT, Humanity). Then the human race can 'safely' get my DIOS. So -- and you can set your watch by it in history -- everything Satan does is a version of kidnapping Scripture. He's positively rabid about it; one of the big surprises of research for this webpage, was the discovery of the satanic signature. It shows up everywhere, like graffiti: as if he couldn't stand for anything remotely resembling God to be 'unmarked'. So, from the outright sequestration attempts, which the flesh table below will highlight, to 'processed' translation and interpretation, which the text below the table will examine in some detail, Satan&Co. make their yellow (snow) journalism bylines. To keep us all safely in cosmos diabolicus, of course.

    So here goes a KIDNAP THE BIBLE! depiction to illustrate what Satan&Co. have undertaken: which, of course you can independently check out and prove (or try to refute), historically. [Again, typed from memory of DeHamel's book, chronologically. So I may have misstated some of the items in the timeline. I'll fix any gaffes, later.] Ahem: the writing tone in the table is deliberately caustic (Satan&Co. love to portray themselves as goofballs, to the human race), so buckle up...

    Satan's Kidnapping Scheme.. OOOPS!

    Pretend you're Satan's chief lieutenant. The absolutely last thing you wanna do is incur the anger of your boss. So you, who really have to run the day-to-day (he has to sit around and think all the time), YOU have to do all the birdogging. So YOU get the blame when things go wrong. Here's your situation, post-Cross: you must prevent believer growth to Pleroma, CONFISCATE SCRIPTURE, and kill as many Jews as possible (preferably by herding them). While the NT canon was being created between 30AD and 96AD, you worked real hard at creating many fake 'inspired' texts, so people would be confused which ones GOD inspired, and which ones YOU did; you fought hard to get everyone all goofy over the temporary spiritual gifts which God used to substitute-teach the stuff being gradually codified into a written NT. When the Canon was, despite ALL your best efforts, nonetheless completed circa 96AD, you fought long and hard to get it destroyed; failing that, you sought to make Christianity 'go political', just as Revelation 17 predicted, by developing and hallowing, the so-called 'Church Fathers': so you could at least control WHO got the Scripture. And what a triumph that was: by Commodus, the harlot was named Christian and was nicely religified with bishops, hermits, and all manner of legalism. Pharisees again, hah!

    Ahh, breathing space. Now you've promoted Apostate Christianity; and thus, offset those few who grew to Pleroma; so you can gerrymander to your own anti-God goals, the Pleroma Blessings God awarded to all humanity, from those FEW. After all, it was bad enough every OT hero ended up giving the entire planet an extra 490 years to live from Noah forward; gotta HIDE the Bible which shows that, lest folks realize the Session's Legacy to Church, exponentially increased the 490's blessing to.. infinity! So you sought and achieved a greatly increased number of apostate believers, so God can't justly pronounce the number of Pleroma 'balances' to complete Church, and thus call up the Rapture. Whew, you did buy more distance from the Rapture date: that first century's Pleroma increase was a b*tch! Then again, the 2nd through 4th centuries' apostacy was quite gratifying: even the Church fathers were sucked in. That's why they were promoted to posterity as "Fathers", of course. Heh. And how amazing, that when people for centuries afterwards read their writings, they don't notice how goofy those people were, how anti-Bible their interpretations, their crusades!

    So, the attempt to create APOSTATE VIEWING OF SCRIPTURE, via politicizing Christianity, finally worked: by Commodus' ascension, Christianity had largely FORGOTTEN how to read the Greek texts well, and had striated along competing denominational lines, replete with ecclesiastical bureaucracy. Even so, you've not been able to get Scripture totally destroyed. But you managed to centralize it into an institution which needed power over people; so you could hide the Bible and instead teach whatever suited your purpose. Better still, you made it so difficult to get any glimpse of Scripture, those positive to it MUST become priests or nuns -- thus you gather them into easy-to-'manage' locations. (Like a Hitler did with the Jews.) Heh. Then, split the Church so that the Greek texts are hoarded by the East, and thus hard-to-get for the West, which has more positive volition among the masses! And, with time, even the hoarder can't read the ol' Greek anymore! Divide and conquer, baby!

    But Drat! That danged Jerome, he brought Scripture together and translated it into Modern Latin! How did he do that, since he was one of the wackiest ascetics ever, even helping to promote that silly story one of my demons 'coached' yet another Eusebius on, about the death of James! What if some believers finally understood the BIBLE, and grew UP spiritually? What to do? Oh, just discredit him -- he's 'new', and the "Bible" is old -- parade the OLD like a holy relic, a magic thing, ohhhmmmmm, that people touch, but never actually learn. Bye, Jeromey baby: it will be 400 years before your translation ever sees the light of day.

    Ok, let's kill the Christians now: try to get Byzantium and Rome to destroy each other by 586AD, Boss has a yen for that number. Drat! Over 10 years late! Ok, next goal date is 99+586 years; go prepare some schlemiel as a prophet to the Arabs, make him like John the Baptist, but tell them he's their substitute for Jesus and Isaac -- superior to, of course. You found one? Are you SURE? Whasshisname? Moh-what? Well, did he bite? Does he obey, is he stable? Ok, just keep feeding him, make sure it sounds like Bible. Yes, support them: but make it look difficult, so they will build into a faithful cadre. Moslems? That's what they call themselves? HAH! Yeah, build their temple over the Rock once you invade Jerusalem, clock's ticking! I wanted to get this done by 586AD, but.. heh, now we just tack on Abram's age at circumcision, how rich...Oh, and have the Moslems a) confiscate Scripture, and b) validate continued POLITICAL orientation to RELIGION!

    Drat! That Charles Martel! Ok, beat the drum on unity, again, use Charlesmagne to reassert control over who can GET that translation! Ahhhh, we need RELICS! Make Bibles BIGGER, gaudier, Stones too precious and hard to lift, so no one dare read them, ha! But Drat! Charlesmagne wants to make the script a bit more readable! What to do? Ahhhh. Shift to miniscule, so to 'obey' Jerome's complaint about uncials, too; but in the name of beauty and deference to the past, make the script only mildly better, so verses still must be chanted slowly; so the hearer won't understand what the heck he hears, but will 'feel holy'! Drat! Those danged Anglo-Saxons and Danes, even some Germans -- they translated some portions! Drat! Codex Amiatinus! Hide it, get them! Ahhhh. Have only the Pope say who can translate the Bible, and make sure no one outside a few bored priests has a full copy.

    DRAT! People want smaller Bibles? Ok, load them up with commentary, and keep the script unreadable! Drat! People read them anyway? Drat! They just want the Bible itself, to see it for themselves????? No more 'commentary' to childishly-narrow how they 'see' the words? Bring on the Crusades, tap their fervor for God, so people will forget to read, and instead glory in conquest! DRAT! That Parisian method of chapter and verse, to make Scripture easier to study! Ok, make better picture books of the bible to palliate curiosity and slant it to politics; keep stressing the Psalter and jazz it up more! Drat! Those Franciscan friars! Well, at least the Dominicans can stamp out the heresy, but those stupid Franciscans, they're substantiating everything, teaching the people the chapter and verses, adding them together! DRAT!

    That dratted, horrible, Gutenberg! Now anyone can print a Bible! Double-Drat! The Reformation comes along and now Scripture is widely translated into the vernacular. DRAT! Wait, let's make war between the Catholics and the Protestants. Make them all kill each other off. DRAT! They aren't bloodthirsty enough! DRAT! Bibles smaller, easy to carry, even in the palm of the hand! Ok, make even smaller bibles a fad, make the type so small you need a magnifying glass you can easily lose! But what to do about those dang translations? Ahhhh: sleight the translation, so folks won't be really SURE what the meaning is, ha. Oh, and make everyone who does a translation either suffer a lot, or feel so unsure of his translation he keeps re-writing revisions, so people begin to doubt his accuracy. Make lots of translations which differ, make chaos so people will long for the old, stable, "Church"! Yeah, a stable of dumb beasts! Ahhhh.

    DRAT! Original-language manuscripts keep on turning up, be they found in crocodiles, or even sometimes as 'logs' for the fireplace -- almost in the fire, but Count Tischendorf happened to discover the parchments-used-to-light-fires were Scripture, and later found a monk who had secreted a whole manuscript in his cell! DRATDRATDRAT! Ho, what's this???? Who fell asleep at the switch among my minions? Two flubs within a few decades??? That danged Tregelles, he memorized Scripture while peeking at Codex Vaticanus, thus forcing the Vatican to finally publish it! TRIPLE-DRAT!!! Now There Are Three Original-Language Big Manuscripts Everyone Can Check! Masoretic Text errors are now exposed! Roll out Joseph Smith's group, make 'em grow! Alternative, obviously-lying 'Bible', HAHAHAHAHAHAH! Start a civil war to deflect attention from Bible, and instead onto just the SOUND of Bible! NOW NOW NOW!

    DRATTTTTTT@@$$!!%%!!! Paul's teaching about the 'local church' breaks out, People Learn Scripture Properly???? Well, only a little bit, but can't have that, must PROMOTE denominations and state churches! Drat again! Still people are actually studying the original languages??? It's those cursed independent-churches; that danged Tischendorf, Tregelles work is distributed! Ok, calm down, now: gotta make and enforce translation rules which chop out the clarity! Use the same stupid old-is-more-venerable 'reasoning'! So everyone will be afraid to stick his neck out and differ from some 'old' pillar-of-the-Church whose interpretation was juvenile! Else, how can one gain control over the masses, how can one promote works and me-be-god brain-urge? Else, how else can one create that 'holy' sense-of-self which comes from thinking one 'contributed to' (or can lose) salvation? Oh, gotta make more political and war distractions! Hmmm. See that guy Karl Marx? Hmmm. Help that Lenin over there; people in Russia are sufficiently jealous, now, to do some real damage, later on. Let's get Germany all riled up, too, after entangling everyone in 'alliances'. Wonderful: war is such a nice distraction, yet people can feel holy. Bleed themselves to death. Aha, Versailles: that Hitler sure looks useful...

    Yeah, that's right, continue to promote this Communism thing, keep folks' attention occupied and more rooted in MY realm. That way -- drat -- when in 1950's that truly old and better cache of Greek grammar rules is discovered, [Christopher de Hamel didn't mention this in his book], the previous, FAULTY grammar rules for translation will also be old, so still venerable, preferred. Heh. DRAT DRAT DRAT the Dispensationalists actually LEARN from the newly-discovered, more accurate, cache of Greek Grammar Rules, so Better Prove From The Original Languages, God's Timing! Screw them up, divide them into dippy interpretations, sick the Calvinists ON them, now! Roll out the tongues crowd, to blunt any accurate Bible teaching! DRAT DRAT DRAT! Discredit those few pastor-teachers who are CORRECTLY teaching from the original languages; make them look like anti-communist hotheads! NOW NOW NOW!

    Whew, that was close. Now we got the independents back under our roof. The prolife -- what a crock! -- thingy is nicely blocking everyone, which the Most High kindly allowed, since they stopped reading their original language texts by the 1950's -- courtesy of us, of course! Yes! So now those straggler teachers who still teach from those texts -- boy, we can concentrate our efforts now...

    See, most of the time, translations can't be right, anyway, because the original languages of Scripture are way too rich in nuance. So care in translation is really important. In what follows, you'll see a lot of seemingly-unkind remarks against translators and teachers. Again, remember that the point is to see how Satan blinds, not to point the finger. Ergo, I've got to give you examples you can verify for yourself, and also show why they are so stupid: so it must be Satan & Co.'s blinding action exploiting our own ignorance, our own negative volitions.

    Satan exploits the innate translation/teaching problem of Scripture's original-language texts:

    1. By noisily misemphasizing shallowly-obvious (but inappropriate) meanings of a word as 'proper' despite context -- common sense is thus drowned out. Example: "one" in Deut 6:4 and like passages. Another example: Phili2:7 is classic: "empty" makes no sense as a translation for "kenoo".

    2. By noisy restriction-translation rules. Example: there's an insane rule (anathema to any secular field of linguistics) that one Hebrew/Greek word may only be translated by one English word/verb form, even if context clearly indicates otherwise, however much it CHOPS OUT meaning from the Bible's original. This particular sleight-of-truth is why people can (they think) 'justify' so many dissonant interpretations of the same verse(s). Satan's genius here accomplishes a fuzziness and ambiguity, even contradiction, of truly epic proportions. Lack of interest by clergy and laity alike justify God allowing Satan this action, since careful study of the Word would clear up the so-called 'problem'. (In short, interest in the Word is historically nil.)

    3. By noisily confronting the harried translator with some not-politically-correct problem, i.e., in passages related in some way to sex. The translator feels compelled to slant the translation to make it politically correct. Satan gets to influence translators because the volitional issue is, will the translator value God's Word more than man's politics? Giving into the latter allows Satan&Co. to gerrymander the translation result. Examples: "from the womb" passages, "host" (which hides the intense military nature of the Heb/Greek words), "cleave" in KJV of Gen2:24, and hiding the fact that Adam and the woman KNEW they were naked (next verse). Even if the translator ISN'T tempted, bear in mind that Bible translations always must clear some kind of "committee". So the truth gets shaved, just like good proposed legislation, in the voting.

    Ergo Scripture's own Truth, its 'obviousness', remains right before-your-eyes, yet you can't see it. Classic example here is of the definition "one". It's scary, how successfully Satan's satire works. With any piece of literature, with any language, scholars in it laud the author's use of words: underlying patterns-of-comparison; variety of qualitative/quantitative allusions; parallelisms, puns, paronomasias, other word-play, satire, sarcasm, wit, alliteration, simile, metaphors; syncopation (tone), musicality, etc. Due to such uses of the language structure, classics by authors like Homer are much praised; so also Shakespeare. So also James Joyce' Ulysses. Dostoyevsky. Molière. Rabelais. Swift. Gilbert&Sullivan. Orwell. Even, "Mad Magazine". Academic people spend their entire lives combing these writings; they spend whole books expatiating all the rich literary meaning levels. Of course, the same is done for film classics, like Hitchcock's "Psycho", "Citizen Kane", "Gone with the Wind". In sum, people know very well to analyze any literary medium as being deliberately multilevel, punny. People know very well that quantitative words like "one" are equally used to denote qualitative concepts, like -- duh! -- 'unity'. Takes More Than One Person, to be 'united'. Duh.

      So, what happens when the same scholars look at the bible, which even unbelievers acknowledge is one of the great literary works of all time? Everyone goes BLIND. Never mind that everyone knows "Testament" means the Bible should be analyzed the way a lawyer would read a legal document (legal documents are always self-defining). Never mind that poetry and narratives are used, so any scholar should know to apply linguistic literary analysis to the text. Oh no. Despite all that erudition: suddenly, "one" ONLY has a quantitative meaning? 'Despite clear and frequent usage of "one" as qualitative, in every known language ever spoken/written? 'Including, all over the place in the very Bible people claim to "see"? Look! "And the two shall become one flesh" -- hello? Any brains out there working? "That they may be one, even as We are One" -- hello? Anyone awake?????? Hebrew "echad", and Greek "heis" both are used to mean "united", "unique", "first", as well as "one" -- when used qualitatively. Even back when Scripture was written, and still true today. Hello???? Is anyone thinking?????

      Of course not -- it's the Bible, stupid. Yeah, so we truly get stupid when we read it. 'Oh no, we can't treat the Bible as literature. Oh no, it's only HOLY to interpret Scripture as dry, shallow! Oh no, we can't admit God might actually be 'fun' to know! Must have a meaning-sucked-out-translation! Oh no, God should be boring, to be Majestic! Oh no, Bible should glaze eyes over, lest anyone richly understand it! Clothe its sexual wit with euphemism! Admit NO qualitative, metaphorical, humorous uses of concrete words, like "one"! In God's Holy Word? Perish the thought! Nay, banish idiomatic translation! Spurn punning structures, like Paul's use of the sex-act verb, Greek [pros]kollaw, command to 'have sex with' Christ, in (of all places) 1Cor6:16-17! Oh No!! Change it to "join" or "unite" or "cleave"! Cover the eye!' Yet it's 'okay' to remember the qualitative uses of "one" in Homer???? Or in other Hebrew writings???? Even in Hebrew today, "the United Nations" uses the Hebrew "one" (echad) for "United"! Just think of the centuries of stupid councils, persecutions, wars -- over the definition "one" in the Bible! Unbelievable. No -- believable, alright. Satan wins them over. (God doesn't need defending, so Satan reverses that fact, of course.)

      Oh, and let us not forget that -- um, hello? Aren't there 'collective nouns' in every language, especially in ancient languages? 'Man', for example, can be used collectively to denote all mankind, so takes a SINGULAR verb -- but also can be used to denote 'one' person, and in that situation also takes a singular verb. Then there's the term "men", which takes a PLURAL verb. Hello???? "God" isn't a collective noun? When THREE Persons are depicted clearly in OT and NT???? So "God is" can't be collective? So "gods are" can't be used like the term 'men', to denote a subgroup, even a self-styled group? Hello??? Are scholars thinking? Of course not. So, little wonder they can't 'see' Three Persons in the OT. They can't see, period: those degrees on the wall don't confer upon them the spiritual competence they need to overcome Satan's blinding propaganda -- only the Holy Spirit can confer it. This is not to condemn academic learning, but rather to show how Satan can reverse its value. To anyone. To experts. To you and to me. We are all vulnerable. Academic training doesn't protect one from error, unfortunately. 'Wish it did.

    Thus Satan manages the "salami-tactic" of getting most translated words to be a much-more-'off' than they would otherwise be. Therefore the resultant translation is confusing, dry, unintelligible, misleading: yet when one is confronted with, say, the fact that in a verse, the word "from" ought to be instead translated "out-from", the reader is inclined to think, "What's the big deal?" -- the difference seems too trifling. Yeah, like a germ. So the translation is oh-so-invisibly infected.

      Let's now apply the four characteristics of Satan's ploy to Bible translation problems, to see their effect. Take the "one" sleight-of-truth. Obviousness (derision) accomplishes misemphasis (imbalance) very easily -- "one" is a number. So, now, add noise: "A NUMBER!!!!!" The noise drowns out common sense: never mind that other uses of the word "one" are clearly displayed in any language, as well as in Scripture. So one can't think. Thus, reversal (substitution) is accomplished: "God" can only be "one" in NUMBER!!!!! So, Trinity, which is pretty obvious in OT and NT, is reversed (decoyed, discarded, demoted, derided). Only HS' power is enough to overcome this strong satanic influence on the brain, particularly since man's concepts are spatial. So he tends to (incorrectly) view "infinity" as SOLELY spatial, despite the realization that "infinity" cannot BE infinity and be spatial. So, one-in-number is as far as he can naturally think. (Hopefully one can have more empathy for those deluded by 'oneness', given the realization that Satan's ability to occlude even common sense, is vast.)

      Here's another example: Philippians 2:7's 'emptied' (RSV), in English, stresses the RESULT -- a void, a subtraction. Never mind that the Greek "kenoo", which 'emptied' alleges to translate, instead means to "take off/lay aside", stressing the action of ADDITION-and-SUBSTITUTION (temporarily disusing something in favor of something else). But oh! Got to use one English word, however senseless it renders the translation! But oh! 'kenoo' connotes taking off clothing (which, of course, means one still has the clothes, didn't lose them, duh)! Not politically correct! Can't say He became NAKED!!! oh, no! Never mind that Heb10:5 and Isa7 thus tie in here and stress the Grace of HIS (ahem, naked) BIRTH! Oh, sex! Oh, nakedness! Gotta cover it up -- use 'emptied'!

        See how 'emptied' REVERSES the Greek meaning? Watch: verse 7 obviously stresses the body (taking on Humanity) -- so, use 'emptied' to so noisily over-emphasize Humanity that an imbalance occurs in the reader's mind: 'emptied' gets seen as a SUBTRACTION of Deity. Voilá! The Lord 'emptied' Himself of Deity at the 1st Advent! The reverse of the truth that He ADDED Humanity, which verse 6 (in context) makes plain! Never mind that it makes no sense to claim a person can subtract himself!?! As an added bonus, verse 6 also gets cancelled/ contradicted, see (which says He is equal to God the Father, even in English). Another added bonus: awww, God killed himself to become man (a perverse way of saying man is more important than Holy God).

      Let's do one more example: "huper" in Greek always means "as a substitute for". "Peri", another Greek word, is similar. In any first-year koine Greek course you'll be taught this. Yet, in verses like 2Cor5:21, 1Pet3:18 (which uses both huper and peri), you'll find the cursed-English-one-word rule applied: translations merely say "for". Seems like no-big-deal, right? Wrong.

        "For" in English has many different uses. A common use of "for" is in pricing: 2-for-1, one for 50% off, etc. So, to say "for" connotes discount, which is at best an incomplete substitution. Worse, when we think of paying, we think that the thing bought is supposed to furnish equivalent or better value in return for the price paid. So, it's a concept of tit-for-tat, not of Grace. So, when we think of Christ as paying for us, the 'pricing' usage of the English 'for' is naturally in our minds. So, to say Christ died "for" sin, or "for" us, doesn't eliminate our need to 'pay' something, too. By contrast, the Greek prepositions have NO such connotation: a substitute is wholly a substitute (just as it was in the Levitical Sacrifices, but then who tests translations for Scriptural sense, heh). No bargain-basement salvation. No partial salvation. Whole, or nothing. No one else can 'pay'. So, Satan needs to require "huper" and "peri" ONLY be translated as "for", so to make salvation look like a discount-price! See how important this trifle (germ!) is?

        Need I say more? The oversimplified English "for" REVERSES the meaning of the Greek prepositions. For your homework assignment, work out, from the examples above, and the data here, how Satan deftly accomplishes that neat trick. :)

      Yet another example: "sozo", translated by the one-word-English rule as "to save", really has several meanings in the Greek, just as it does in the English. One can be saved for Heaven, save money, save time, be delivered from trouble, be spared/saved a hassle, etc. So, depending on context, "to deliver" might be the better way to translate. Or, "save", still, but..the to-Heaven version isn't in view. Maybe you're being "saved" in some more earthly way, heh, as a RESULT of being saved-for-Heaven, so "saved" is a play-on-words to hearken back to the Savior. After all, being saved for Heaven should result in various "saves" down here! (Bible is really keen on such wordplay, especially with "sozo".)

        Here, the satanically-inspired, political correctness rule (e.g., getting the Calvinists and Catholics to agree on the 1611 KJV translation) shows its vainglorious head: if "to save" is the ONLY allowed English rendering, then Catholics (and others) can claim you can lose your salvation, but those knowing it's Faith-alone-in-Christ-alone can still say that, too. So, everyone's happy. Never mind that the Bible's translation got corrupted. Man is more important than a book, by God! Better still, the layman remains dependent on the 'experts' -- despite the fact that the original Scripture was circulated by the apostles to laymen, so it's not God's Will that only the 'experts' have the Bible.

        Neat trick, huh? You work out how Satan plays the four characteristics on "sozo": obviousness/derision, misemphasis/imbalance, noise/obfuscation, reversal/substitution. Yep, it's another homework assignment, and a richly rewarding one -- go through every verse with the words "save", "spare" or "deliver" (and cognates, like "salvation", "deliverance") in it. Play with what-if-i-reinterpret-save-in-that-verse. See what you get. You can deduce the four satanic characteristics pretty easily, once you do this.

      These four sample trifling-translation-tediums are extremely important: these particular trifling germs have murdered millions of people. Many a war has been fought, many a life has been lost, over loyalty-to-sect-defined Bible meanings! This is Satan's genius. Never mind that Scripture says that murder is a sin. Never mind that, no matter what the translation of 1Jn, we are commanded to "love" one another. Ah, that's a trifling thing -- reverse the meaning of "love" by noisily overemphasizing one's sect-defined Bible meaning: you thus drown out the very Bible itself! Aha! And in the name of defending God you can "love" the heretic by killing him. Ahhh.

      Second analogy: if you shop at a grocery store where every item you buy -- for the same price -- seems only a 'little bit' lower in quality or quantity, you'll still buy it. Yet the total difference in your true cost will be very large, for all those eentsy-teentsy shortages for the same price add up to a lot less or a lot lower-value purchase. It's been a common trick in the candy-bar business for years. So, if one's holy book verses are each a little shaved-off in meaning, they add up to a very different 'bible' than the real thing. So the total difference in the bill (cost to mankind!) will be very large. So of course one wants to dispute! And oh, how many miles of blood have thus flowed...

    Furthermore, Satan&Co. have a good time getting believers to narrowly and timidly look at Truth, which is another reason why so many lives have been tragically lost in so many 'holy' wars. It's so easy to accept black/white ideas, after all. Helps the ego feel better about one's many weaknesses. See, it's easy to shave the truth when the mind wants a black/white, childish view of life. Simplicity is man's urge, to counter the 'work' punishment. We all want things 'easy'. So, Satan makes it easy on us -- he shaves Bible words, concepts, ideals, ideas into black/whites: stereotypes, soundbytes. Which, since we are childlike in our desire for oversimplicity, we need to "defend". My family, right or wrong. My team, right or wrong. My people, right or wrong. My country, right or wrong. My faith, right or wrong. Black/white distorted-truths get 'married' to loyalties, to morality -- producing a deadly progeny, prejudice: the self-absorbed crown of the me-be-god, depraved brain reflex.

      Man's mindset, internal thought language, is entirely about goodies, so his God-ideas are also entirely about goodies. His sin-depraved material brain is out, so can't think at all, any other way. "Good" is reified into goodies. I give you goodies, you give me goodies. This is why and how people come up with goofy 'tenets' about God. How did this goodies-mindset come to dominate every thought and corpuscle? Well, it's what Adam's figleaves 'solution' means. He was trying to atone for his sin, and for the woman's, by creating what he felt was a 'good' thing, covering up his and her genitals. Being naked was no shame before the Fall: Gen2:24. But it sure was considered shame, after the Fall: see Gen3. Why? Because sex FELT good. So, his sin-depraved brain sent up the 'conclusion' that if he gave up something that symbolized feeling good, the obviousness of his (and Isha's) genitals, then God would be appeased: God would get a 'goodie' of sacrifice (works). See? That's classic if-i-do-for-you then you-will-do-for-me. Goodies exchange. Called, of course, "good". Extra "o" for "opposition" put in God's name, as Part II had explained.

    So it's not hard to understand, and very easy to empathize, why, among believers, Satan can mock us so. Almost any 'popular' denomination has core tenets which are pure satanic derision, obvious to anyone with a smidgen of common sense. If you happen to catch Tracy Ullman's HBO sketches, look for the one where she plays a 'fundie'. In that sketch, her character explains that her pastor taught that since Jesus was 33 when He died, and Karen Carpenter (a singer) was 33 when she died, the latter's death signified the Second Coming. Well, that kind of silly 'reasoning' isn't too different from many denominational tenets' justifications, historically: as was illustrated in the Part IV subsection containing the text, "The Life of Mary", an RCC-published book.

    So: Just as they trained you at the CIA to 'read-between-the-lines' in Soviet newspapers, so also a human can easily read the true meanings in these satanic, commonly-held, goofy religious tenets, to wit:

    • God gets paid by human suffering. Meaning? God is a sadistic son-of-Belial, because a) He made His Son pay for sins, and b) nonetheless still sends those paid-for to Hell -- Satan's core propaganda to humans. Satan plays this lie in a tune you'll commonly hear: that the Son only paid for the 'elect'. Meaning? God can't even assure payment to His Own Righteousness, and is a sadistic son-of-Belial, enjoying suffering [Satan's], instead. Pity those who fall for these lies.

    • God didn't preserve the faculty of free will in fallen man. Meaning? God is WEAK and Tyrannical, sentencing to flames those who had no ability to choose Him anyway. Again, obviously a Satanic venom. Not so obvious, sadly, to those who are duped by it. The Koran plays this refrain over and over: God leads astray whom He will. The Bible, by contrast, only uses phrases like that after making it clear the one 'lead astray' did it to himself, but blames God for it. [A sophisticated Moslem will likewise understand God didn't force the person to be negative, and can recite verses to that effect from the "Bee" sura. But the arbitrary quality of the wording is ALSO one of Satan's accusations against God, which we saw in "Core Trial Issues" of Part I.]

    • One must work for his salvation, or can lose it. Meaning? God is WEAK! and Stupid, to judge His Son.
    • God is a 'mystery', so one can't learn Him. Meaning? God is WEAK and Stupid to WRITE SCRIPTURE.
    • God is a 'mystery', so one must 'experience' Him via some ritual or magic-word prayer. Meaning? God is WEAK and EMOTIONAL, too!
    • Most of all: God demands works. Meaning? God is the biggest Sadistic Idiot in the Universe, for:
      1. Imputing our sins to, and then Judging His Own Son (2Cor5:21, 1Pet3:18,1Pet2:24, Romans5), because we can do "works";
      2. Having a standard of "works", which is entirely AGAINST BOTH facets of Righteousness (Rom4:1-10, 5:12, "filthy rags" verse, "no one is righteous -- no, not one");
      3. Accepting "works", since "works" can only address the BODY -- so, aren't even good-enough on a human level, since they can do NOTHING for the SOUL (Romans 4:1-5, Gal3, Heb5:11-6:6, Heb9:14);
      4. Accepting works by people TO people, but crediting them as if God needed and got benefit from them, so Righteousness is sentimental or flimsy (Zech7, Isa44:9-20);
      5. Accrediting people with Divine Righteousness (Gen15:6, Rom5:1, 2Cor5:14,15,17,19,and esp. v.21), but ignoring LEARNING Righteousness (1Cor2, Rom8:4, Rom12:2-3, Eph3:15-19) in favor of body-works (Heb9:14), as if the material could EVER create something immaterial. 'As if a body, which has no thought on its own, and is thus dead, even while moving, could create life! (Philippians 3:11, Jas1:1-8,16-25) So, God is a mad mortician? Playing Dr. Frankenstein? Or, worse, beguiling the human race into thinking it can play Dr. Frankenstein?

      Naturally, every one of these claims is allegedly backed up by some Scripture verse. Which, of course, is generally a translation of Scripture, not the real thing. Which, of course, is taken out of context (like, "faith without works is dead" is bandied about as if James 1:1-2:18a did not exist). Which, of course, also ignores common sense whenever convenient, like the Monty Python sketch about the dead parrot: i.e., a seed can produce "fruit"; or, head-vs.heart-belief; or, God would be fair to condemn men who have no free will. Of course, a clever attorney can make the senseless sound sensible, to slant testimony. SSSSS: It's awesome. Polly wanna cracker? Polly? Nailed-to-the-perch-Polly? Purchased from a petstore that way?

      Of course, Satan's blatantly deriding mankind TO mankind at the very same time, that man would believe in such nonsense. He's so bold, he even makes clear this nonsense to unbelievers, who constantly tell 'devout' Christians why such 'doctrines' don't make any sense. What do the Christians then do? Oh, they feel holy! Martyred, falsely accused! So they cling even more strongly to these idiotic falsehoods!

      Satan gets an even bigger 'bang for the buck' accusing such believers before the Supreme Court of Heaven: there, our "accuser" denounces us all for any infraction, and ESPECIALLY for believing these lies. Constantly. See, since the Son paid for all sins, denouncing us for sin gets the rejoinder, "But My Son paid for that sin" -- so Satan needs a more-effective accusation. 'Like our rebellion, via belief-in-a-lie. It's vital that he do so, as well as just-plain-fun: he gets us executed, called-home-to-Heaven in shame, that way (1Jn5:16). So, the "salt of the earth" can be wiped off the planet. That's his dream goal. (He gets it, too: at the Rapture, as Part IV explained.)

    See how common Satan's lies are? Why the heck do we buy them? Are we sitting on our brains? Why do we buy them, then? Because Satan's lies always appeal to the "King Ahaz" in all of us -- to our vain quest for self-righteousness, as a REPLACEMENT for God's (cf Isa7). As believers, we nod in agreement that we need a Savior (like the "Lord, Lord" people). Yet, in the very next breath, we embrace these interpretations of the Bible we laud: which prove instead we still want to replace God. We reject the truth that God Deserves Perfection, and should be juridically compensated, whether or not He 'needs' it, by assuming 'suffering' does something for Him. We reject the truth that we are weak, helpless, and thus hypocritical, shallow, evil -- when we value our "works". Or, papered over with that figleaf of 'niceness', we call ourselves 'good'. So, we reject the truth that we need to Learn God's Script -- for that requires thinking, 'doing' nothing. So, we go in for these obvious-to-a-child lies. And then pride ourselves on believing what doesn't make sense, as if believing what doesn't make sense were virtuous. Despite Scripture and a universe of evidence to the contrary. Are we "sheep", or what? (Isa 53:1-7.)

    Now, hear this: Satan&Co. don't want God to 'make sense'. For, if God makes sense, then Satan&Co. are wrong. They can't take that kind of confrontation with reality. So, they have to sell the idea that "God is Inscrutable, therefore He should not 'make sense'" as a VIRTUE. Check out any ideas you have of God which don't make sense to you; check out any ideas which you 'buy' but others say don't make sense to them. Rethink them all, as often as you can. For the sake of your own mental health. For, the punishment for persistently believing a falsehood is Deut28:28: "and I will strike them with madness..." [Modern Yiddish "meshugge" comes from the Hebrew "shigaon", translated "madness" in that verse.]

    Tips on Fighting Satan's Tactics

    So: how to cut through Satan&Co.'s flak? Really, by constantly growing up using 1Jn's Script: Part I. Parts III-IV explain the how's in more detail.

    Over the years, we each come up with techniques we find effective, as a result of learning 'God's Script'. Here are some of my favorites.

    How I quickly read-between-his-lies: first, use 1Jn1:9! Then, remember: what God says is 'little', Satan makes 'big', what's big is made little; what's true is hidden, what's false is 'revealed'; what's quiet is made loud, what's loud is made quiet; what's good is made bad, what's bad is made good. What's life is made death, what's death is made life. In a word: OPPOSITENESS. God's Truth can be discerned by REVERSING the meaning/quality loudly 'advertised', in the world. Or, 'urged' by your own body.

    This reversing-TOWARD-God (away from Satan) is 'THE FLIP'. It actually comes in two flavors: "G-2 flip", the way to decipher what's true beneath the noise, as depicted in the previous paragraph. The second flavor is even more powerful, a plain "flip" in volitional orientation to a thing, based on the very objection itself. You know: the very thing which once upset you, now thrills you. Like, at one time we all found the Gospel offensive, but somewhere along the line we flipped our volitional orientation to positive, and believed in Christ. That flip occurred because whatever we had found objectionable, that very thing somehow got re-associated in our minds with good. So, we believed.

      I learned these two Flip Flavors from learning how the Christ used Ps22 on the Cross -- the "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabacthani" verse in the NT is a reference to Ps22. He 'flipped' that Psalm, which is extremely tragic! into triumph. It's His Own reverse/emphasize/'noise'/ obvious strategic reasoning path. He used it to block out temptation, by focusing on the very thing which tempted Him: the repugnance of paying for ALL sins. He thus turned the very repugnance into happiness (Heb12:2), because he used it to remind Himself that the javelin-piercing, crushing pain (Isa53:5-6) was What He Eagerly Trained A Lifetime To Get. Think it over. It's fantastic. It's as subtle as saying, "Oy, what a cost!" with a grateful smile on your face, versus a grimace. [Parts II-IV reference this fact time and time again, for it is the key to the successful spiritual life.]

      The Flip is really useful, in defeating temptation. Am I tempted to be angry? Ok, then 'flip' the thing that's making me angry. Say what makes me tempted to be angry, is some stupidity I see: via the HS' enabling Divine Power, thus seeing through My Lord's Eyes, as it were, I can 'flip' the association of stupidity into love: Dear God, they are as blind, too. As Paul says in Romans 7 (end): "Who will deliver me from this body-of-death? Thank God [the Father], [I will be delivered] through Jesus Christ Our Lord!" The 'flip' has the function of REPLACING the 'anger' association (once held) with LOVE. HA HA, temptation! Now that 'temptation' is my friend, my ally -- WITH God, not away from Him.

      For me, this flipping represents the entire process of living on Doctrine, the entire meaning of the second facet of Righteousness. The "4 Decisions" (a doctrine my pastor teaches, covered at length in Fixes.htm and Fixes2.htm) is the underlying rationale: doctrine atones, propitiates, reconciles, and redeems every 'low' in life. Just as He did, for us 'low': Romans 5:8.

      In practice, what gets to me personally are the mundane lows of life, not so much because they are painful or frustrating or whatever, but because they are low compared to the High Doctrine which I am privileged to know. It's a hallmark characteristic, the constant in-the-face deadness of life, versus the Beautimous Lord one comes to constantly see. Everyone, however high in the spiritual life, flubs this 'differential', as was explained in the "Reasons" of Part III. It's part of the growing process, to learn how to mediate the low via the high of knowing Him.

      Doctrine applied to the lows BAPTISES them, and constitutes a Greater High than would be realizable absent the low. For, this is what happened to Christ on the Cross, as Part IV's "Combat" table explained. To get from 'not-wanting' to 'wanting' isn't some la-la experience. The annoyance remains, and even gets worse, for in spiritual adulthood, you don't need the 'thorn' of it taken away, anymore. The Doctrinal Meaning one learns to see and love via those Diamond Deposits just 'grows up around it', and eventually appropriates the thing's nature to mean the OPPOSITE of what the thing means on its own. Even while the thing worsens. Just like, at the Cross.

      For, the entire question of the "small" is the very issue God Himself faced in the Decree: to create, and thus marry endless crosses forever -- or not? Marry! said the Father, in the Decree. Marry! said the Son in 1Tim2:5. Marry! said the Spirit. Father thus kitted us out with the greatest dowry: Eph1. Spirit restored the demon-trashed earth in Gen1:2, and restores us at salvation to a higher life than Adam ever had (1Cor2,5, Rom5). Son, of course, united us in Him (e.g., 2Cor5:21 and all of Rom6-8). So, then: this little stuff is a Picture of God's Own Love for us. Unending crosses, because His Love wants "the all things". Not just nice things, not just big things. But, even us. So, even a paper clip.

    Frankly, the "flip" represents the very moment of the ultimate nexus, Joining Of Best And Worst, the Cross: the ultimate function of 2Cor12:9, God's Purpose getting completed! via WEAKNESS. Every time you must do something small, you are looking at the Whole Cross, in paradigmal form; you are experiencing a 'taste' of it. Which, God Sees and Wants to Thoroughly Taste/ Drink/ Eat ("sweet savor") all the time, everywhere, front-and-center. That's why the Son wanted to take on Humanity. [See Heb2, for "thoroughly taste", the meaning of Greek word "guomai" in that passage; the tasting is a huge concept in Scripture which if you get it, will favorably change how you view everything with respect to God and your life. For, it's not about sins, but about Tasting Everything. In which, we get to share as much as we want, because we exist.]

      That's why we even exist. Uppermost-Truth reason why: God 'Hates' Barriers, And He Loves Going Through Them. Especially, the most impossible ones. Like, the Cross (see how Paul talks about it last half of Rom5). For, God used the weakness of sin (which is the worst of man's many weaknesses) to flip all existence into doing the highest Divine Jobs. This, of course, only happens because Christ's THINKING on the Cross 'baptised' (associated) the sins, setting up an Alternate Thinking, so an exchange could occur. That's what 2Cor5:21 is all about.

      We get the same opportunity for the Holy Spirit to carry us beyond all barriers. This topic was discussed at length in the three pale-yellow-brick tables of the "God's Paradox", "Script Target" sections of this page (links above). Think the idea over; it's a really big help to see Isa53:10-12 in combined-text translation (BHS and LXX), which no published Bible even has: see Isa53.htm, especially the bottom of page.

      For, once you recognize how nothing small IS small, you will understand why brushing your teeth While Thinking Doctrine accomplishes more 'production' than all the money in all the history of this planet, combined.

      As the "Satan's rebellion" bullet in Fixes link explains, Satan recognized sometime before his own prehistoric fall, that everything was about 'Cross'. This, he hated. So this, he satirizes via his religious propaganda, beginning with that Tree in the Garden, as we saw in Part II. This pre-fall recognition is what flipped him into rebellion.

      My pastor has always taught that Satan had advance knowledge of the Son's Plan to take on humanity and go to the Cross. So for the angels, who probably variantly had some understanding of this plan, this was their eschatology, analogous to the OT folks getting the "promise"; and of course, us getting our own 'brands' of eschatology. So, then: what does one think of God's Plan? Happy? Good? Bad? Just as we face that issue, and like it or lump it, so also, did they.

      For, the Cross is everywhere and always our future. Unendingly. God wanted it, and didn't even want to be God without it: Phili2:5-10. So of course, all who are less than God would have the opportunity to want it, learn it, get it, also. Which opportunity, each of us has, to accept or reject, every moment we are alive. Forever. To some extent, we can't avoid it, because Heb10:5 means we ALL got bodies, so we all could learn. We choose, variantly, to learn it. But to a certain extent, we get it, whether we want it or not -- because we have bodies.

      This isn't an easy doctrine to take. Maybe an illustration from modern (really Bezite) Calvinism will help. Calvinism means to stress the importance of Sovereignty and Grace. However, in trying to figure out the relationship of God's Attributes within Himself, and the consequent relationship to man especially post-fall and in hell, Calvinism always gets bollixed over the question of God incurring COST. So, Calvinism comes up with some really goofy ideas to reconcile the COST facts, like mistaking man's genetic sin nature for a loss of free will, claiming that Christ's payment on the Cross was only for the elect, imagining that somehow God gets some kind of satisfaction from those unpaid hellions roasting in the eternal flames. All this convoluted reconciliation is for a noble purpose: Calvinism's premise is that COST TO GOD should not happen, because that would be unfair; or, worse than unfair, COST would be an imposition on Sovereignty, which is anathema.

      That premise is correct. However, and this is what Satan&Co., nor Calvinists nor most of us humans apprehend -- LOVE, which Sovereignty also 'is' (God is undivided in Essence), only maximizes expression with COST. If the result of cost is a cycling profit, fabulous. But, Love would never want the COST taken away. Because, the "profit", knowing Father, (and Father says this of Son, Spirit of both of them, etc) -- the "profit" of Being With Father In Thinking, is first. First in reality sequence, first in importance, sine qua non, alpha and omega, Shema Israel, unique, United.

      So, Sovereignty Demands/ Loves/ Wants/ Decrees there be an unending Cost/Cross series UNITED also, in order to BALANCE and maximally express that high First Enjoyment, or Love is frustrated. Ergo, Heb 10:5, Always. Thus Heb10:10-17, forever. That's why the Book of Hebrews spends SO much time explaining why works is not the spiritual life: rather, a Body, in which cycles a 'body' of Shared Thinking, HIS. Oneness. Communion. Victory of Cross. Unending. Ergo, Heb 10:5, Always. Thus Heb10:10-17, forever.

      The upshot is, going to 'hell' WITH God is better than all the 'heaven' you can even dream of, without Him. It's Him, who is 'Heaven': His Character, Being is more 'heaven', than the 'heaven' which is the Eternal State. Doesn't even matter if Satan were to win the Conflict. He's Heaven, so anything with Him is Heaven. TOGETHERNESS. One. John 17. So, then: Anything apart from Him, however otherwise good, is the worst of hells.

    Another useful test against blindness: The Overlooked Obvious, The Uppermost Truth. You know: the car keys/glasses/pen are right in front of you. Hiding in plain sight. Right where you last left them, of course. (Groan.) Satan always uses lesser truths, for he himself is trapped up in his obsession with them; so the 'overlooked obvious' is always some higher truth we don't see -- because, We're Not Looking High Enough. So, the real answer to 'whatever' is always right in front of us. Hiding en plein (sigh).

      The uppermost truth of the Cross is, God's Expression of Love For Each Other, as the above five 'flip' paragraphs illustrated. Son took on Humanity to maximally express His Love FOR FATHER; Spirit sustained Son's Humanity FOR FATHER; Father judged sins ON Son's Humanity FOR Son, etc. We humans get so bollixed when we think about the Cross, because we get fixated on our worthlessness or His Grace, we forget to recognize what the Cross means To God, Among God. Which is, the uppermost truth, surely: since, God is uppermost.

    Oddly enough, this trick I learned from my pastor's teaching about Paul's fall (his trip to Jerusalem to make that vow). Paul got so emotional over not being allowed to explain the great spiritual information God gave him to the Jews, he started to misapply God's explicit will for Paul's life. God wanted Paul to stop running around, and post himself in Rome, to be a focus of teaching there. But that order just drove Paul nuts. Paul wanted one last try at converting his beloved fellow-Jews. This was wrong, because it wasn't Paul's job to be a peasant, but a teacher; moreover, the Jews opposed Paul's God-given insights, because it meant the Law was being superceded (illustrated by the James clique's behavior in Acts 21, via Luke's genitive absolutes).

      So, Paul, stubborn, rationalized God's Will (and who doesn't): he used the 'excuse' of the money collection for Jerusalem believers to 'justify' going there. So, by the end of Romans you can see him begin to rationalize God's will into the OPPOSITE of what it was (beg. around 15:20). So, he got warnings in advance (e.g., by Agabus, etc). But he went anyway. As a result, God 'managed' to send Paul back to Rome, anyway, to stay put -- under praetorian guard. To write the Canon. Heh.

      What happened to Paul? Paul's emotional attachment to his fellow-Jews 'caused' him to overlook the obvious Will of God. Satan had switched 'obvious Will' with 'obvious emotion'..and snared (possibly) the greatest believer of all time. So, what will Satan&Co. do to us? Like the demon said to the seven sons of Sceva, in Acts 19:15: "Jesus I know, and Paul I know -- but who-the-bleep are YOU????" In short, we are more prone to such mistakes. Even without any 'help' from Satan&Co.

    So, I use 1Jn1:9 and then ask myself -- where are my strong emotions? What's obvious that they are clouding? What's the simplest and most rational interpretation of a thing? You know -- common sense. To deflect emotion, I analyze pros and cons of whatever emotional desire I have, so to bring up counter emotions to whatever is my 'bent'. This balances them against each other, so now I can think more clearly. Promotes objectivity. Then, the real answer usually becomes clear(er). Then, too, I can see more of how Satan&Co. (or, my own depravity) might 'hook' me, and find that blessed 'way out' (1Cor10:13). It really helps, this exercise.

    A quicker version of the 'overlooked obvious' is something I call "Where's the litmus?" Its purpose: to find what is truly the Righteous decision, especially when not all facts are sufficiently known. It's kinda like Urim and Thummin. Here's a crude example of a litmus: if you feel the urge to go to the bathroom, that 'urge' is the litmus to prove a "yes" to the question, "Should I go to the bathroom?" In short, what's the necessity, "pro-" a question? What's the necessity "con-" a question? It's surprising how this litmus test will ferret out emotional clouding. The trick is, to be honest, and TRULY find pros and cons. True pros and cons lead always to other alternative questions, which likewise must be run through the same litmus-finding.

      DOCTRINAL ANSWER KEY==>If you don't find a doctrinal litmus, the answer to the question, is "no". Either it's the wrong time, or the wrong slant, or something else is wrong. Put the question aside and reconsider later.

      You can use this litmus test on anything from whether you should marry, move -- to little things, like "Should I watch TV?" It helps one remember an obvious corollary of the First Commandment: if God is to be loved with all one's heart and soul and mind, then it follows that one constantly looks at, consults, the One Loved. That God's Thinking Standard should be consulted for every question, not just the so-called 'big things' in life: Deut4:2,4 (which uses "cleave", a KJV euphemism for the sex act),6-7,9,29,40; 5:32, 6:3-9.

    A much bigger version of "Where's the Litmus" follows in the table below. It's super-handy for detecting lies or mistakes of any kind; and thus, for better learning Truth.

    Lie Detection Matrix

    Falsehoods anywhere of any kind, or false/ incorrect translations/ interpretations of Bible/ verses are all pretty easy to spot: for, Satan's D-I-O-S Grand Strategy runs rampant through each one. Both the MEGA (attack strategy, Part IV) and the "Dungheap" (Part II) tables are woven into D-I-O-S; their combined MASS is used to mortgage the truth about the bulleted items in the olive table below (within this one). [Satan always plays off the Power of Truth to leverage fulfillment of his own goals.]

    So, those bullets can be used to parse and test out any idea, doctrine, translation, or interpretation which is claimed true. Bear in mind that when we believe falsehood we genuinely don't see what's wrong, so the bullets might need to be 'fired' several times. Keep trying: sometimes it helps to put the claimed truth on a sheet of paper where you can see it, plain. "Bullet Usage Tips" you'll find helpful follow the olive table.

    A falsehood will always:

    (Derision/Obviousness) MALIGN, BE MEAN, DEMEAN
    • one or more Attributes of God,
      especially Righteousness, Truth, Love.
    • One or more Roles of God
      (especially the 7 Ministries of the Holy Spirit).
    • the Hypostatic Union (Christ's God-Man Nature).
    • the Cross, especially its completeness.
    • The Session, in every detail.
    • The Royally-Invisible Spiritual Life, all facets.
    • Rapport with God.

    (Imbalance/Misemphasis) MARTYR, MANIPULATE
    • LOGIC (it's spiritual to be illogical).
    • KNOWING (it's spiritual to be ignorant).
    • THINKING (it's spiritual to FEEL or DO).
    • QUESTIONNING (it's spiritual to not ASK).
    • LEARNING (it's spiritual to be unlearned).
    • INDEPENDENCE (it's spiritual to HERD).
    • CAPACITY (it's spiritual to be needy, low, weak).
    • WEALTH (it's spiritual to be poor).
    • ENTHUSIASM (it's spiritual to be disinterested).
    • INDUSTRY (it's spiritual to be lazy).

    (Obfuscation/Noise) MASK, 'MANAGE'
    • 'How Many' God is, what Essence (nature) God is.
    • Nature and role of man, of sin.
    • Nature, mechanics, and Role of the Gospel.
    • Nature, mechanics, and Role of the Cross.
    • Nature, mechanics, and role of our Royal Inheritance in Christ.
    • Nature, mechanics, and role of RAPPORT with God.
    • Nature, mechanics, and role of learning in spiritual life with God.
    • Distinctions among covenants and covenantal groups.
    • Applicable provisions in a given covenantal period.
    (Substitution/Reversal) MURDER, MASSACRE
    • Interest in God Himself.
    • Scripture itself, word-by-word.
    • 1Jn1:9 (spiritual life is comatose without it.)
    • Study of Scripture.
    • Eschatology (kill orientation to the future).
    • Grace.
    • Faith.
    • LOVE in spiritual life, marriage, family, nation.
    • Pleroma (This frequent NT Greek term, plus teleiow (and all cognates), references the completed spiritual life which blesses posterity, defeats Satan's claims in the Trial.)


    1. If a given bullet (or the results of using it) bothers you a lot (pro or con), give it extra analysis, so to filter out emotion.

    2. A false idea/ doctrine/ interpretation/ translation will be most quickly exposed by running it through The FIRST BULLET, God's Attributes.
    3. While any false idea really uses all the listed verbs (and synonymals) against all the bullet-objects above (and synonymals), you don't have to go through them all, nor in order. Just spot check, using bullets you best understand.

    4. Because Satan's barrages are so multifaceted (phalanxed) and thick (his counterfeit 'temple veil'), you may find that a bullet-object under one verb is being acted upon by another. So, analyse via the verb(s) you see acting on that bullet.

    5. Each parenthetical sentence in the upper-right quadrant's "(Imbalance") listing shows the basic structure of any lie. Since lies are thesauretical plays off Multifaceted-Truth, the predicate description varies more richly than shown.

      For example, the claim that self-righteous anger is spiritual comes from the universal mistranslation of Eph4:26's "Be Angry and do not sin". Greek means "STOP being angry, in fact STOP sinning" -- the Greek use of imperative with me = "stop doing something you are doing", and is called "the imperative of prohibition". Also, the way the verse uses kai, stresses the fact that anger is sin. (This verse is an LXX quote of Psalm 4:5 (4:4, in modern Bible). Paul invokes it, to show that the Ephesians WERE sinning.) So the mistranslation is a lie, belonging under the parent claim that it is spiritual to FEEL.

        This mistranslation is yet another classic example of Satan's D-I-O-S using MEGA and Dungheap, applied to a Bible verse. (By the way, the four quadrants in the olive table above parallel his heraldic Escutcheon: see Part IV's "click here" link at the end of its MEGA table.)

        So, now go to the upper left quadrant (Derision) and notice how the Eph4:26 mistranslation maligns, exhibits meanness, and demeans all the bullet-objects there. (Hints: how could God/Christ have desired the Cross if anger was good? How could the Spiritual life be desirable if anger is good?)

        Next, go to the lower left quadrant (Obfuscation): see how the 'noise' of the mistranslation masks the bullet-objects in that quadrant.(Hints: how does anger=good square with love=good, in God's Essence? If anger=good, then what's left to be called 'sin'? Isn't all sin based on some kind of anger?)

        Next, go to the lower-right quadrant, and notice how the mistranslation reverses, thus SUBSTITUTES the OPPOSITE meaning versus the Greek. Thus, how it 'murders' the bullet-objects there. (Hints: how interesting is a God who calls it good to be angry? How godly is a bible which says that anger is good?)

      So, the parenthetical sentences in the upper-right quadrant, like the bullet about God's Attributes, quickly expose what's false (i.e., even if you didn't know Greek, you'd know something was wrong with the translation of Eph4:26). Substitute "good" for "spiritual" if that makes the claim easier to parse.

        For example, the atheist (or agnostic) who thinks himself 'objective' for demanding proof-of-God from science is saying that a material thing should be higher than, and conclusive of, an IMmaterial thing; since science can only function in material matters. So, a truly objective scientist can only draw the conclusion, "I don't know". The atheist thus claims two lies: a) it's good to be illogical (to demand material prove what it cannot prove) and b) not-knowing is good, since the material can NEVER 'know', by means of itself, what is beyond its own nature. In short, it's good to not know God. Which means it's bad to know God. But, oh! the atheist is 'objective' and 'scientific'! (See how vulnerable we humans all are to Satan&Co.'s word-games?)

    Here's a political example, which of itself seems to have nothing to do with God. But think: God is Truth, so anything which is claimed to be a truth is related to a claim about God. Can't get around it.

    So, let's take a commonly-heard claim that the poor should get something from the rich (i.e., welfare, higher wages, you pick something). Inherent in that claim is a Justice issue: that the rich owe the poor something. Also inherent, that the Way To Redress the alleged injustice is by a) some external mediator enforcing the redress (i.e., government), and b) getting that redress FROM 'the rich'. Thirdly, there's always some claim about what the redress should be. In the US, on the topic of taxes, for example, the 'redress' is that the rich should pay taxes at a higher rate. Now, if you know economics, you know that no matter how you change taxes, the poor are the ones who always end up paying the taxes, due to them always needing to buy products/services from those who are richer than they; since one has to be richer, to afford to offer some product/service. (BTW: this is why it's always dumb to sue, i.e., a corporation. You only hurt its employees, and those who buy its products. If you sue another person, you hurt those who depend on him, too. Hence the Biblical injunction against suing: 1Cor6:1,6, which is based on our witness function before men, also: fundamental principle remains Lev19:18, Jas2:8. Related verses are Prov25:8, Isa29:21(holy Enron!), Dan 7:10, 7:26 Matt5:40, NIV.)

      But, let's ignore economics, and just use the olive table. First, let's look at God's Attributes, to save time. Even if we don't understand much about God, even if we aren't sure He exists, if He did exist, He'd be Righteous. So, who's really the Best One to mediate injustice? Not a human being. So, shouldn't the issue of redress be mediated by God, rather than people? See Lev19:18 in this connection and its NT upgrade, Jas2:8; see also Ps46:10, "I will never leave you nor forsake you" passage, or whatever other verse you like which proclaims how the LORD is Provider and Judge Over All.

      Wow: in but a few seconds, the claim that rich owe poor, is proven to be based on a lie! For, a) the claim that the mediator should be human is itself a lie; b) the COMPETENCE of the claim itself can't be known as well by a human, compared to God! Further, which rich, which poor, and what redress? If only some of the rich are hurting the poor, is it fair to have all of them pay a higher tax rate? And which ones are hurting the poor, and what does "hurting" mean? If the poor person claims to be hurt, or if the rich one claims not to be hurting? How do we really know?

      More fundamentally: do we humans know as much as God? Are we humans as righteous as God? So how competent will we be at first knowing how righteous is the claim, and second knowing how to redress it? What if the redress unfairly affects the very victims it's supposed to help? What if innocent people are hurt by the redress? And so on. (Of course, since we have to make decisions like this in life, we can't avoid making mistakes. But we can avoid Satan's landmines better, by using the equivalent of this Lie Detector Matrix!)

    Have fun with the table, running through the bullets which most interest you! If you want a copy of only this table (rather than the entire webpage), click here to retrieve it.

    Matt4: Satan's Script against the Lord

    Let's now look at Matt4's structure, to see how Satan used his 'script' on the Lord. Here we'll see the entire picture, from Scripture itself. You'll need to look at the wording and turn the text over in your brain (use 1Jn1:9, or you'll end up as frustrated as Descartes was). 'Because, no amount of writing here can effectively list all the many meanings in this passage. (God's Mind is Infinite, so of course no verse in Scripture can have its meanings exhausted!) So, at best, as I tried to do in Parts I-V, here I can but highlight more meanings. The Holy Spirit will elaborate, by recalling to your mind common-sense things and other interrelationships you already know -- to see how vast are the temptations here.

    1st Temptation, speak-stones-into-bread. That's primarily REVERSAL, because body is emphasized, instead of God. Note the Lord's reply, so you can see how the Lord 'reversed the reversal' (God likes playing on words, too, heh).

      Satan's also using 'misemphasis' in a very subtle way: power-of-suggestion to the Lord's hungry Humanity, to subliminally cause Him to 'imagine' bread -- a natural reflex of a hungry body when it wants food is to imagine food -- and subliminally get that 'picture' to go to Deity, through Satan's merely speaking his own thought. Brainwashing, in other words, using body mechanisms to shoot past volition.

      Satan's also using 'noise': his very speaking covers up the below-radar 'hit' on the Lord's hungry body, above. His tone-of-voice (which the English doesn't properly render) is extremely deferential and polite. That's a temptation to reciprocation. When you hear someone speak nicely, you're subliminally inclined to give in to what the person asks. That's the value of 'noise'. [It's called the 'imperative of entreaty' in the Greek, and is always used to connote a very respectful inferior (Satan) begging a highly-respected superior (Jesus) to do something. Satan's not kidding around when he uses this highly-deferential tone. He has a lot of admiration for the Lord's Humanity. Mixed with apoplexy, consternation, confusion, despising...you name it.]

      Satan's OBVIOUSNESS should be obvious. He's making an allusion to 2nd Meribah, where Moses struck the Rock, instead of speaking to it (Num20:8-12). So, he's trying to strike Christ by tempting Him to speak-Rock -- see the OBVIOUS REVERSAL? He's also making an analogy between the bread for the body and the bread of the Word, and is deliberately insulting -- which is even worse, due to the polite 'noise': he's making fun of his own concern over the Lord's hunger (which concern is genuine). Satan's also making fun of the Lord obeying the Father's command to go hungry; he's also making fun of the Father, that way. In short, OBVIOUSNESS (here) is designed to bait Him into hostile reaction, in order to defend Father against such an insult. [Don't be surprised Satan holds contrary attitudes. He loves and hates all at the same time, because he's fundamentally attracted to AND repelled by God/Christ at the same time -- just like anyone else. In fact, you can see here how he manages to 'resist' his own 'temptation' to Love the Lord -- by making fun of his own admiration of Him. It's truly sad, and very revealing. This is how we all think, too. Naturally, due to sin's nature. It's a defense mechanism!]

    2nd Temptation, jump from Temple. That's primarily 'MISEMPHASIS', twisting the quoted verses of Ps91 into a 'blanket immunity' clause. It's thus also reversal, too, because Satan's trying to tempt the Christ by REVERSING the verses' meaning. That portion of Ps91 is a promise that the Lord will protect one from danger -- not a promise that the Lord will protect one from self-inflicted folly. Satan misemphasizes, thus, the 'protection' without noting the context -- danger which is NOT self-inflicted -- hence leaves out a key phrase in Ps91 when he quotes the clause.

      It's also REVERSAL in another way. The Cross will be a visible display (so Satan thinks) -- so, Satan substitutes a different kind of display (and death, maybe): prove self God by jumping, rather than by hanging. (Father probably wouldn't save Humanity if Son jumped, so Son would have to 'show off' Deity in an impermissible way, by jumping to a 'safe landing'.)

      Satan's thus using the 'noise' of a VISIBLE jump to appeal to the Christ's ardent desire that everyone believe in Him for salvation. Satan's thus using OBVIOUSNESS (the visible jumping) to satirize the Cross, 'push Jesus over the edge': to bait Him into anger. So OBVIOUSNESS is also employed to make it clear to the Christ that Satan truly thinks the Cross is 'beneath' Christ's calling. (See how a-compliment-becomes-an-insult, just like the first Temptation?)

      Yet another layer (there are a bizillion more): Satan's blatantly telling the Christ that His Payment for Sins is suicidal: of no more value than jumping from a cliff, for very few will ever believe in Him. So, why not jump? Satan's also making fun of the Father's requirement that sins be paid, since after all, God is Inviolably Righteous. Thus Satan deliberately puts down the 2nd facet of Righteousness; for, if that 2nd facet is so good -- why should sins be paid for, at ALL (same argument as is made in the Koran)? So, it's just as stupid, this paying for sins, as jumping from a Temple. So why not jump? Father just wants you to be a masochist...

      Satan's also offering a SUBSTITUTE Cross, here. (He also does this in the 3rd Temptation). See, the First Temptation's topmost rationale was basically, "it's unfair of Father to ask you to fast." As always, Satan uses Truth in a shaded way. Here, his favorite use of truth: a lower truth, emphasized to drown out the higher Truth of life-with-God-is-more-important-than-food. Having failed that ruse, Satan's topmost rationale in the 2nd Temptation is, ok, if you want to be a martyr, why not jump, since that shows more effectively that you really ARE the Messiah than by dying on a Cross as if you were merely a man. Again, the lesser truth of Christ's Own Purpose, Motive and Nature, compared to the FATHER getting paid. Satan upped the ante on what lesser-truth he used, you see. So this 2nd Temptation is even greater than the first one.

    The Lord's Reply thus has so much more meaning, when you recognize the many temptation layers. The verses He picks as reply match the superficial level of the temptation, again. First temptation was about 'bread', so He replies with a 'bread' verse. Second Temptation is the famous OT doctrine of testing-and-tasting-God's-promises, see-how-He-delivers (a frequent exhortation in OT), of which Ps91 is a sample; so He responds with a 'test' verse (Greek pereizo means to test, or to tempt, but since God is not temptible, 'test' is the better translation).

      Think over how the verse He picks answers every argument Satan makes. The Lord's tenderness is astonishing, especially since He picks such a superficially-harsh verse. For, in saying "Thou shall not put the Lord Your God to the test", He's saying you can trust God for EVERYTHING, even a Cross. Awesome. That meaning is really patent, considering how many verses there are commanding one put God to the test: when you add the do-test and don't-test verses together, you get: there's no test God can't pass, so you don't need to doubt Him. Awesome. No wonder Satan is so flummoxed in his 3rd Temptation!

    3rd Temptation, kneel-to-'win'. By accepting all the world, in exchange for token obeisance to Satan. Important: it's a genuine offer. 'OBVIOUS REVERSAL, too. Satan's offering to 'kneel' his real defeat, if Jesus will 'merely kneel' to Satan. Really fantastic, this last temptation's reciprocal, punning structure. (Satan even reverses proper Greek syntax when he says this: making fun of his own bewilderment that the first two temptations didn't 'work'. He's truly got a wicked sense of humor, just like God does; and is likewise fond of self-deprecation. Remember, God made Satan, so naturally the two would share some appreciations in common. That's what makes this story so very tragic. Satan&Co. are beautiful: it's really hard on Christ to have to condemn them. Why else do you think Christ has 'delayed' so long? Like Father, Christ is "not willing that any should perish" -- 2Pet3:9.)

      In many ways, this last temptation is the most complex. All four characteristics are so tightly interwoven that it's hard to discuss them separately. See, Christ was Ruler anyway, but to get the Rulership vested, He had to go to the Cross. Satan's tempting the Lord to reject the Father's Plan in the 'Name' of allegedly 'sparing' the Father the pain of having to judge His Own Son. This REVERSAL is requested in the name of the very LOVE Christ has the most: toward the Father.

      Satan's not being duplicitous -- had the Son taken the offer, Satan really would have admitted 'defeat'. Of course, he'd then 'save' all demons/unbelievers from the Lake of Fire, since the Son's acceptance would mean no Cross could occur. So, Satan's putting his own life on the line, here. That's one of the layers-of-meaning in this offer. See, if the Christ had accepted, He could easily zap Satan into oblivion (from His Deity), instead of doing any 'obeisance' at all. Satan was taking that chance. Hoping for it, even. (Again, this was but one of many layers of meaning to this temptation.)

      Its OBVIOUS baldness is stated -- as are the other two temptations -- in a disarming way. Satan is truly flummoxed. He uses his own weakness as a weapon, by truly communicating his flummoxed attitude, by reversing the apodosis and protasis in the temptation. Moreover, the if-you-will-kneel is 2nd class condition, in the Greek: the "if" is used with a Greek verb tense which denies truth -- meaning Satan was admitting he was defeated, that he knows the Lord will not 'kneel'. This is a genuine statement on his part. It tempts the Lord's compassion. So, he ends the temptation that way, to 'hook' the Lord's compassion in the first clause: the I-will-give-you-all clause. In short, he's using self-deprecating humor, plus truth of his future -- aiming them all at Christ's body: its reciprocity reflex, again. 'Trying to get the Lord to rationalize a token obeisance, or an-immediate-destruction-of-Satan, so to 'save the innocent' from the Lake of Fire. The Lord loves Satan very, very much, and Satan knows it. He's using the Lord's own Love as a weapon against Him! And Satan's making himself the substitute savior in the process!

        This temptation layer is by far the most pressing. For Satan reasons, ok, you wanna be a martyr. Ok, I give up. Let me be killed, then, for blasphemously proposing you kneel; so to save my own demons and the unbelievers, I make this offer. Surely, as Savior, you can understand that, can't you? You can zap me alone into the Lake of Fire and free the others -- then you can go to Your Cross, and I can go to Hell, where I belong, happy knowing that at least the others I duped aren't there with me. (Don't be surprised that he has this attitude. It's genuine, alright, and contradicts his despising. Arrogance is like that, when mature: it has its own docking method for contradictory attitudes!)

      So, the 'noise' tactic here is -- again -- Satan's own tone-of-speech. Subliminal, again -- an appeal to love, an appeal to reciprocity, be it compassion -- or, anger.

      Satan's 'misemphasis' should be OBVIOUS: he's stressing his own being-conquered, to hide the conquest OVER the Cross.

      Thus, he's OBVIOUSLY insulting, again! He's insulting the Lord's love of mankind, the Lord's long training to learn how to NOT use His Deity, the Lord's Love of the Father, and -- especially -- the Father's Will. So, he's still trying to bait the Lord to react in anger.

    Now, look at the Lord's fantastic reply. On the surface, as usual, it seems small and matches only the superficial angle of the temptation: "You shall love the Lord Your God and Him Only Shall You Serve." (I may be misquoting the verse.) See? Satan is making a bid for the Lord to 'serve' those who are self-destining themselves for the Lake of Fire, making himself a ransom. This, of course, is Christ's Own Purpose, "to be a ransom for many". So, even that, high as it is, the Father's Own Purpose for Christ, is still -- still! a lesser truth, for if Christ gives in, He's giving in for a reason other than God-First. Could there be a temptation greater than this one? The only 'higher truth' remaining, is GOD-FIRST. Satan's choice of lesser truth aimed just below the highest Truth there is: God is. See how the 2nd facet of Righteousness is denigrated by Satan, but displayed by Christ? IN His Humanity??!! Awesome, Awesome, Awesome!

    Gist of Satan's Approach in Matt4

    Note carefully how all three temptations are works temptations which seductively influence the world's will. In each case, Jesus would have done a 'good deed' if He gave in. It's a good deed to make bread, for that could feed the world. It's a good deed to do a miracle (jump), thus showing He's really God -- and thus get everyone to believe in Him. It's a good deed, to take over the kingdoms of the world, and fix the world's ills. It's a good deed to obliterate Satan, the archfiend and deceiver -- especially since he's admitting he's wrong, and deserves it, thus acknowledging his defeat -- even before the Cross is completed. This last good deed is the most powerful one, for if Christ had done it, the Conflict would be over. But -- Righteousness would not be propitiated for sin. See how important it is to get Bible Doctrine? Who could resist such competing loves? Why didn't Christ rationalize that He could zap Satan, and then go to the Cross, anyway? Who of us wouldn't have accepted Satan's offer?

    Again, to stress the point about seduction: WORKS SEDUCE. They are visible, they tempt reciprocity, they mask the soul's need-to-grow in favor of the body's need-to-do. They seduce the worker into thinking he's "in the Light". They seduce the recipient(s) into thinking works are the way to be spiritual. They seduce anyone knowing about them into thinking BOTH categories of evil (being-in-the-light, works=spirituality). Matt4, in spades.

    That's one reason why, when the Lord finally did 'go public', only a few were healed, only a few times were people fed. He did such things as a calling card -- but only rarely, lest people only want Him for the goodies. As it was, due to even the few miracles He did do, so many 'groupies' came around, He had push them away -- responding somewhat coldly, as in the foxes-have-holes verse. The Worm ("tola", in Hebrew: see Ps22) had to be crushed -- and anyone following Him would be crushed, too. Such seduction-counters were constantly stated, so that people wouldn't be seduced by the visible miracles. Principle: God WON'T seduce. So that 'sign' or 'proof' of Him you may be disappointed in not getting -- you won't get, until you don't need it anymore. So that you don't want God due to goodies. God doesn't want you to need Him, but to Love Him. Love and need are mutually-exclusive. Ergo, no seduction. (Tie-in corollary concept: Gen14:21-23.)

    Now, think: if Satan tempted the Lord to do works, what do you think Satan&Co. are constantly tempting us to do? Really, really think this over. Christ had already finished learning. He was on the verge of 'going visible', to do the 'work' of teaching, the 'work' of suffering man's calumny, the 'work' of the very Cross! But even so, these three temptations' works -- which any Christian falls for, instantly -- were not right. Worse, we Christians fall for them before we even get an ounce of learning about God. So we really produce evil, and can't possibly be doing anything else. Moreover, even when one is grown up, 'works' are to be avoided like the plague. If you can't prove conclusively (why, and to what extent) the proposed 'work' is ordered by God -- avoid it.

    After all, if you've got this burning urge -- it's not coming from God, who uses "still, small voice".

    Unconditional Love for the Truth

    Most importantly: as noted in the "Fourth Reason for Royalty", the essential contention behind Satan's temptations to the Lord, was that Satan himself felt that for Jesus to pour Himself out on the Cross, was useless. Only cost, no gain, a sort of sham, in the sense that all the pour-out accomplishes, is endless Crosses. That is true. Again, in that same "Reason", was God's reply: whatever the meaning is, good, bad, indifferent -- Truth Is Truth. So, if total cost forever, then Good. Even when the Truth is maximally bad: 'like God always since forever totally experiencing the Lake of Fire.

    The Lord's Humanity feels exactly the same way. His replies to Satan prove it. Each reply is a command verse, which has zero comment about what benefit there is to the one obeying it. Live on every word which proceeds from the mouth of God. Do not put God to the test. Do not worship anyone but God alone. No statement there about why those commands would be beneficial to obey. Because, to Love, it doesn't matter if the commands are beneficial to obey. Because, to Love, it's Unconditional. The command exists, and it's from God. No 'benefit' need be there. Just as, the content of some Truth need not be beneficial, either. It's Truth. It's a command. That's Enough.

    Granted, God exploits every bad and also turns every bad into pure profit. But, that's extra, and is the other side of full-spectrum Truth. Foundationally, though, bad can just be whatever it is, free to be ugly, painful -- forever -- and that, too, is enough. Just because bad is a truth, too. And, just because it IS the foundational Truth (of finity, for the very act of creating puts into being derivative power), all other Truths can freely exist. So all that exploitation can exist. So any merit is free to be enjoyable, no longer a required-thing which of itself can never be enough. But, the Truth is enough, because Free. Good, bad, or indifferent. The Second Facet of Righteousness is thus expressed by the totality of LOVE for the Truth. All Truth. Any Truth. Just Because. [Derivative power is the essential reason why bad exists, which means either God never creates, or He commits to the full-spectrum results. Fixes.htm's "Topics Related to the Nature of God" covers this issue in detail, from the standpoint of Essence of God compared to the essence of finity, etc. Start reading from that section's beginning, and keep reading until you've finished the combat-green table regarding how the Lord in Hypostatic Union solved the problem of derivative power by means of the Cross.]

    Christians, like Satan, are totally flummoxed by this UNCONDITIONAL LOVE of even such horrendous Truths. We want to do something to change it, fix it, and we think that God was Propitiated by the Lord's Sacrifice solely because the Lord would be making Righteousness out of us. That, in fact, was extra. What really happened was, Christ wanted to just pour Himself out to the Father, using something useless. Just because it was there, just because it was true, just because There Was No Merit. Just because. So, to the extent we Christians don't grow up and go through our own useless crosses (the can't do, not the can-do); to the extent we don't learn our own kenosis in the face of maximum loss with no merit -- we, too, will fall prey to Satan's temptations, and never understand Unconditional Love. So, will never reach Pleroma.

    Other examples: Satan's Genius Exposed

    To see His Genius 'spin' on Trib events: |Click Here|

    Here are some daily things you can analyze to see his 'spin':

    • Movies, TV, books re 'angels'. Notice how the depictions tend to be not very flattering. Or, how depictions tend to be titillating. Ask yourself: what's being 'sold', here?
    • Psychic programs, telephone numbers, new age, 'the unexplained'. Horror stories (ghosts, goblins, people coming back from the dead, you-name-it). Ask: what's being 'sold', here?

    • Religion: note what's stressed, what's not stressed. Notice the primacy of do's, taboos, versus learning. Note how 'God' is usually represented as unknowable, except through some 'experience' or 'miracle'. Notice how nearly everyone thinks all faiths lead to God, but 'their' brand is 'special'. So, notice the competitiveness -- or else, apathy, which apathy is touted as 'love for all of differing faiths'. Notice how God really isn't the focus -- but instead, man. How everything 'spiritual' is defined in terms of to-people stuff. How "God" is always deprecatingly sold as being both a Sugar Daddy and a Petty Judge.

    • What's considered "good" politically. Focus on 'mainstream' concepts. Analyze how they might be satanic.
    • What's considered "bad" politically. 'Same idea.
    • What's considered 'okay', morally. Again, 'mainstream' concepts. Note carefully how 'okay' is always associated with 'doing' something.
    • What's considered not-okay, morally. 'Same idea. Note carefully how not-okay is always associated with things which make your body feel good. Or, things which actually make sense (like saving your money for your family or self, versus giving it all away to some 'charity').
    • What's considered 'fun'. Again, 'mainstream' concepts. Note carefully how 'fun' is always associated with 'doing' something, 'feeling' something.
    • What's considered not-fun. 'Same idea.
    • What's considered 'boring'. Again, 'mainstream' concepts.
    • What's considered self-improvement. Again, 'mainstream'. Note carefully the emphasis on looks, body-stuff.
    • Advertisements: notice how stress is laid on looks, body-stuff, on how others will think of you if you had that product/service. 'Especially, how jealous they will be, or how attracted they will be.
    • What's considered 'hard'. Again, 'mainstream'. Note again how body is emphasized, or thinking is emphasized. Ask yourself: how often is thinking sold as pleasant? Almost never.
    • Soundbytes. Noise. Busyness. Doing-more-than-one-thing-at-a-time.
    • Emphasis on Quantity rather than Quality, but always using the idea of quality to push quantity.
    • The 'equality-is-good' mantra.
    • The 'rich-people-are-always-bad' mantra.
    • The 'poor-people-are-always-virtuous' mantra.

    • Above all, Black/white thinking: as if life was an either-or, without anything in between. Black/white thinking is a precursor of, or even a symptom of, obsessiveness, which is a type of neurosis. Black/white thinking may also indicate mental arrest -- a stuckness in childhood. (Children think in black/white terms until they grow to understand life isn't like that.) Finally, all prejudices are rooted in black/white thinking. In a word, black/white thinking is: shallow. Insecure. The person using it feels threatened by anything 'in-between'. So Satan assiduously promotes black/white thinking in order to block truth, and foment mental illness.

      Some Examples of black/white thinking: if a Christian acts badly, the Christian God must not be the right God. If a verse doesn't make sense, it can't be 'my' misunderstanding, it has to be a flaw in the verse, or in someone else's interpretation. If I can't see God, He must not exist. If a 'God' says one goes to Hell, such a 'God' can't have a good reason for saying that. If God killed people in the Bible, He must be a Murderer. Whatever a "Christian" says is true about the Bible, it must really be true. If it's 'scientific', it must be true. If the Pope says it, it must be true. If Daddy says it, it must be true. If it's popular, it must be 'okay'. If an expert says it, he must be right. If I feel pain, whatever's causing the pain must be bad. If I feel good, whatever's causing the good feeling must be good. You get the idea.

      Another Very Tragic Example of black/white thinking: if abortion isn't murder, then it must be 'okay'. [Sorry to stress the 'prolife' problem, but it's a classic satanic ruse to curse Christ.] That's the prolifer 'logic': why they crusade to get laws passed making abortion murder. Satan then makes this 'logic' fulfill Phili3:18-19 -- how it hurts to write what follows! The blindness is twofold:

      1. They've got to MAKE abortion 'murder' in order to justify it being not-okay, because they find abortion offensive. ('And who doesn't?) In short, they don't think they can 'sell' the (true) idea that abortion is not-okay unless they call it murder.

        "Prolife Blasphemy" videos are viewed off-Youtube, here: click here. Anti-semitic gambit, this one. Every Jew knows there's no soul life in a 'golem' (Hebrew word for fetus, used in Psalm 139:16 and always mistranslated). They even made Frankenstein-like stories out of them for centuries. Yeah, because they know what the Bible says here; but we Christians won't read it! So now the Jews who DO read it on that topic, are made out to be pro-abortion. Christians, of course, ignore what GOD says in Exodus 21:22 and elsewhere. So the playlist proving what BIBLE says versus Christians who won't disdain to learn it, will grow as I've time to document the 340+ verses.

          SATANIC STRATEGY KEY==>This is the classic satanic method: NOISILY twist truth in the name of "good". It used to be "good", for example, to make the Bible inaccessible to the common man, 'just in case' he'd misinterpret it. Thus Satan gains control of interpretation. Also, Talmudic scholars decided it would be "good" to say human life began in pregnancy, instead of TEACHING the Bible's many statements that it begins at BIRTH. 'Just in case' some couple would transgress the real Law -- which was, 'learn God's Will on the matter': First Commandment. As always, the "good" was, to out-do the Bible's precepts, in the name of guaranteeing obedience to them. Even so, the Talmudic scholars never called abortion, "murder". Now: see how Satan's using today's abortion issue to trash the First Commandment? See also how he can trick some poor expectant father into murdering his own wife, if he has to choose between 'saving' her, versus the fetus?

      2. So, prolifers don't CHECK Scripture, to verify what it says. (It takes at least a year of diligent research, because "abortion" is part of the entire 'what is life' doctrine, so there are hundreds of verses to analyze.) Instead, they just assume it's murder. Big Mistake. Worse, when confronted with verses to contradict their assumption, when suggestion is made that they study those verses -- these folks become strangely hostile. Scrambling for their Bibles, they grasp and twist a few verses, like the one where John the Baptist 'leapt' in his mother's womb (not knowing that's an idiomatic expression of a hopeful-mother's joy at the reflex motility called 'kicking', in every language). Bigger mistake.

      Ergo their Biggest Mistakes: to make the state the arbiter here is to rob God of His choice in the matter, to give to Caesar what belongs to God. So the state is smarter than God. So God is a murderer, too, since spontaneous abortions occur regularly (apart from human will).

      In short, no brains are turning on, among those enamored of prolife arguments: Satan's blinded them. You can prove it quickly, because these people become implacably hostile to any suggestion that maybe the real Bible doesn't agree with their view. The suggestor is skewered as 'evil', a murderer. Strange, this hostility. From a "strange god". For, implacability is obsessiveness, so it is never from God, and is never a virtue. (English translations fail to translate "from the womb" passages idiomatically -- "from birth" is the idiomatic meaning of the Hebrew. This of course compounds their blindness. Still, they should honor God enough to at least check out the suggestion. After all, even French Bibles translate such passages "from birth", so a whole bunch of folks know the right translation.)

      Satan thus works on prolifers to make their compassion serve his own denigrate-God ends. The results are so tragic. Satan's pulling the same ploy he did on Saul (who later became 'Paul'): make God a Murderer, a Sadist. To Saul(Paul), the sales pitch was that Saul should 'help' God kill Christians. To the prolifers, Satan's sales pitch is the same: 'kill' the freedom of people over whom they themselves have no rights. 'As if God needs help. Plus: 'make God a sadistic idiot, by saying He'd impute a complete soul to a partial body, which doesn't even have a finished brain! most of its time in the womb. Could Satan deride God more than this? Don't we 'catch on' to his wiles? [In Part II, just after the "SINE QUA NON..BALANCE" table, are many other points, so the reader can grasp the depth of how satanic a claim soul-in-womb really is. Satan uses man's compassion here, as always -- to impugn God's Character.]

      Note how horribly his counter-God script works on the unsuspecting prolifer:

      • REVERSAL: body, not soul, makes one 'alive'. Just as Satan stresses the body after birth, so also he stresses it before birth. Typical: he cuts God out of the picture. So, crusading against abortion SUBSTITUTES for learning God, for one's time is spent crusading -- DOING something, rather than LEARNING something.

      • MISEMPHASIS: on biological components, on reflex motility. Notice how the motility is what's called "life". As if man had no immaterial soul. As if it were unimportant that the soul can't even 'hook up' to the brain until the brain is fully-developed (right before birth). As if it were unimportant that the so-called 'baby' cannot BREATHE on his own until BORN. So: above all, as if it were unimportant that salvation wouldn't be possible if Jesus' soul were ever in the womb! (Think about it.)

      • 'NOISE': Notice how the motilities are loudly banged, yet the fact that they are well-known in medicine as reflexes goes quietly unsaid. Notice also how loudly abortion becomes a litmus of morality, drowning out other commandments, like the First One. Notice how 'morality' becomes the black/white concept of spirituality, thus ignoring God completely, and instead using His 'Name' to make people feel guilty for not obeying the prolifer position. Notice how, thus, it becomes perilous to disagree -- how folks feel they must 'fit in' with the alleged 'moral majority'. Notice how 'prolife' loudly drowns out coverage of other (political, news) issues in secular life. Above all, notice also how loudly abortion crusading REPLACES learning God -- which is of course drowned out. Notice also how loudness is deemed virtuous, which is of course the antithesis of God's Style.

      • OBVIOUSNESS: This is Satan's favorite. Look: Did anyone see Christ crusade against abortion? No? Did anyone see Christ condemn the adulteress everyone else wanted to stone? No? Did anyone see Christ crusade to make abortion laws in Israel? No? Did anyone see Paul do these things? No? Where's the NT command we must crusade about abortion, or anything else? Nowhere? So, where do we come off thinking a crusade is God's Will, if even Christ Himself didn't ever authorize or do it?

        Yet More Obviousness: Adam's body was first fully formed, and next God "breathed lives" into it, and next "man became a living soul". Hello? Does no one pay attention to God's order, here?? Ahh, but 'everyone' knows that passage. So, no one notices it. Never mind that Elihu cites that same order regarding his own birth, in his discourse to Job (33:4-6), thus proving that post-initial creation, the same order is followed. Let's go for more obviousness: brain in fetus isn't fully formed until just before birth. Everyone knows that. Yet no one knows that. Fetus can't breathe at all in the womb. Everyone knows that. Yet no one knows that. Lord said 'ye must be BORN again': everyone knows that. Yet no one knows that.

        Yet Even More Obviousness (aka 'could we be dumber?'): The anti-abortion crusade is a new thing -- people have believed for centuries that abortion was wrong, but look -- how many countries' governments called it murder? Ever? Where does the Bible call it murder? Nowhere. Everyone knows that, too -- since no one has put abortion on the books as murder, until very recently. Surely America was a more moral society in 1700-1940. When was abortion ever murder, in America, during that time? Could there just be a reason why not? Maybe our grandparents and great-grandparents understood the issue better than we do? Huh? What, were our grand-forebears all evil? And only 'we' see the light? Yeah, right. Gee, I guess God is the most evil, since Israel never had such a law in the Law. Ex21:22 proves why God did not make abortion murder, but hey -- who bothers to learn enough about what that verse actually says? It's like the "one" definition. Hiding in plain sight.

      Oh, how cheaply is God 'sold'. Oh, how Satan abuses prolifer compassion, to blaspheme the very God they mean to praise, through their naive activism! See how Satan makes God look bad? And laughs? See how the kernel of truth -- abortion is not always 'okay', you should seek the Lord's answer, First Commandment -- see how that kernel is overblown and hence REVERSED, so to cover up God's Truth, to cover up the spiritual life, to cover up Christ's Real Work on the Cross? If you don't understand there is no life in the womb, you will never understand the need for 1Jn1:9 and the role of sin. James makes quite a point about temptation being a PREGNANCY, so it's dead (so don't get anal over being tempted).. but when volition births (agrees to) the temptation, it only then becomes sin. So prolifers are necessarily carnal their whole lives, spiritual casualties of their own self-righteous arrogance. So Satan laughs his head off. They Got Aborted From The Spiritual Life By Crusading On Abortion, har har har!

      How many believers' souls are thus Aborted From The Spiritual Life? Thus, bringing ruin on their home countries, as bad Royalty always do? How many unbelievers' souls keep on being Thus Aborted From Christ? 'Because they look at the insanity of the prolife crusade, and, themselves infected by black/white thinking from the prolifers, conclude: "Christianity is bunk!"

    So, we know that Satan loves to abort us all, so that the Son of God in Heaven will have only spiritual-retards for companionship. So that the Christ will have paid..for nothing. And that, while Satan burns, will be his satisfaction. His fantasy, even.

    You and I have been exposed, now, to his sickness. But also, to the Lord's healing. May we grow away from Heb 5:11-6:6, and instead, up in Him, so to realize 2Pet3:18. Both we, and all our brethren! After all, that's truly being 'prolife'...

  • Sisyphus