Man invents rules and then claim that these are God’s rules. But God never said such a thing. These are all creations of man. However, most times, man invents things and then blame God for it.
Did you know that about 200,000 years ago, homo sapiens were not the only “human” family? Just like cats share the same genus with their other feline members, like lions, tigers, leopards, panthers, etc. we too cohabited Earth with humans belonging to other species. The most famous example being homo neanderthalensis, the Neanderthals.
According to experts, at least 6 other species of our same homo genus once existed. Well that may be good and all, but here comes the big question:
What happened to them? Or to be more precise, what did we, homo sapiens, do to them? And how exactly did sapiens manage to dominate the whole of planet Earth?
If God had a face what would it look like? And would you want to see if, seeing meant That you would have to believe in things like heaven And in Jesus and the saints, and all the prophets? #oneofus
The Greatest Talent
Many would say it was events like discovering fire and its uses, or our tool-making skills, or because of our superior genes, or that we are able to form large groups.
Apes are well-proficient at making primitive tools. And our DNA is embarrassingly similar to that of the same ape.
Now we come to the last-standing argument- Mass Communication.
But apes also communicate. They can form societies with at most 150 members.
BUT sapiens can form groups of 1000, 10000 and even millions.
A feat no other species of homo genus was able to accomplish.
Then how come we are able to do it? A superpower perhaps?
As MAN Plays God
THE STORY OF MOSES AND KHIDR
“Who is the most learned man among the people?”
He said: “I am the most learned.”
One day, Moses delivered such an impressive sermon that all who heard it were deeply moved. Someone in the congregation asked: "O Messenger of Allah, is there another man on earth more learned than you?" Moses replied: "No!", believing so, as Allah had given him the power of miracles and honored him with the Torah.
However, Allah revealed to Moses that no man could know all there is to know, nor would one messenger alone be the custodian of all knowledge. There would always be another who knew what others did not. Moses asked Allah: "O Allah, where is this man? I would like to meet him and learn from him." He also asked for a sign to this person's identity.
In reply to his question, he was commanded to seek Khidr, who would instruct him in knowledge which he did not possess as yet. He was to take a fish with him, as its disappearance would be an indication of the place where he was to meet Khidr. Accompanied with his servant, Moses set out to seek Khidr, and when they arrived at the junction of the two seas they forgot the fish which made its way into the waters. After a tiring journey, Moses asked for the fish to be brought, but his servant explained apologetically that the fish had made its way into the sea and Satan had made him forget to mention this to him. When Moses heard this, he retraced his steps back to the spot where the fish had disappeared and met Khidr.
Verses 66-70:
“Moses said to him: ‘May I follow you, so that you may teach me something of the (Higher) Truth which you have been taught?’
He said: ‘Verily you will not bear with me. And how can you bear those things with me that which is beyond your knowledge?’
Moses said: ‘If Allah wills, you shall find me patient and I shall not disobey you in anything.’
He said: ‘If you are bent on following me, ask no questions about anything till I myself speak to you concerning it.’”
Having met the True Master, the seeker implores the Holy One to accept him as his disciple (murid) and teach him the knowledge of Higher Spiritual Truths which would lead him to the Supreme Goal.
Knowing that Spiritual Knowledge can often confuse the minds of the seekers, the Master warns the seeker that it is a difficult path on which he embarks. He will see and experience many mysterious things and may neither be able to bear them calmly nor patiently. The ardent seeker demonstrates his true attitude as a student to the teacher, promising to follow and obey his Master under any circumstance. But this assurance is not enough and so the Master places a final condition before the seeker that he should not question him about anything whatsoever, and the seeker agrees to it. Baiyat (Oath of Allegiance) is pledged by the devotee creating a Murshid-murid (Teacher-disciple) relationship between the two. A spiritual bond, now binds them.
“Verily! You will not be able to remain patient with me, O Moses! I have some of the knowledge of Allah which He has taught me and which you do not know, while you have some knowledge which Allah has taught you which I do not know.”
Verses 71 and 73:
“The two set forth, and when they were in the boat, he made a hole therein. Moses said: ‘Have you made a hole to drown those who are in it? Verily you have done a dreadful thing.’
He answered: ‘Did I not tell you that you will not be able to bear with me?’
And Moses said: ‘Do not be angry with me for my forgetfulness and pardon me for my fault.’”
Verses 74-76
“They journeyed on until they met a young man and he slew him. Moses said: ‘You have killed an innocent man who has done no harm. Surely you have done a wicked thing.’
He answered: ‘Did I not tell you that you will not be able to bear with me?’
Moses said: ‘If ever I question you again about anything, abandon me; for then I should deserve it.’”
AI-Khidr replied:
“Did I not tell you that you cannot remain patient with me?”
They went farther till they came to a town. They asked the people for food, but they refused. In this town they found a wall which was on the point of collapsing. Al-Khidr repaired it with his own hands. Moses said:
“If you had wished, surely you could have taken wages for it.”
The Quran states this as:
“Then they both proceeded, till, when they came to the people of a town, they asked them for food, but they refused to entertain them. Then they found therein a wall about to collapse and he (Khidr) set it up straight. (Moosa (Moses)) said: If you had wished, surely, you could have taken wages for it!” (Quran, Surah Kahf:77)
Al-Khidr then replied:
“This is the parting between you and me.”
Man Plays God By knowing and interpreting the Future
Al-Khidr then explained all his actions which had astonished Moses and made him question them. He said that the ship which he had damaged, belonged to a few poor people working in the sea. A king was behind them seizing every ship by force. So by making it defective, he had saved it for its owners. As for the boy, his parents were believers, and there was a fear that the boy would oppress them by his rebellion and disbelief. So Allah planned to take him away and give them another child instead who would be more righteous and kind. As for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the town. A treasure was hidden under it which also belonged to them; their father had been a righteous man, and Allah intended to safeguard their treasure. Building the wall ensured that the treasure would be protected till they reached maturity. Al-Khidr concluded that he had not done anything of his own accord but had followed Allah’s instructions.
In spite of repeated reminders from Khidr, and assurances from Moses that he would be patient and not question any of Khidr’s actions, Moses forgot his promise and demanded immediate explanations for actions that seemed to him unjust and inexplicable at the moment.
Voices - Talking To GOD...
JOAN OF ARC - SAINT OR WITCH?
It is sometimes stated that on the 30th of May 1431 the Catholic Church condemned Joan of Arc as a witch, and on the 16th of May 1920 declared her to be a saint. The conclusion is then drawn that judgements made by the Church can be very unreliable. But the history of Joan of Arc does not support the basis for this conclusion.
Joan lived during the 'Hundred Years War' between England and France and, by the time Joan became involved, all northern France had fallen into English hands. A further large area, controlled by the Duke of Burgundy, had revolted against the authority of the French king, thereby commencing a civil war.
The Burgundians made a pact with the English and fought on their side. A skilful propaganda campaign was launched, alleging that Charles, heir apparent to the French crown, was illegitimate and therefore had no right to the throne. Many people became confused by the conflicting claims and tended towards neutrality. A number of towns were unwilling to resist what appeared to be the winning side. French morale was very low, and it seemed likely that France as a distinct monarchy and nation would cease to exist.
Rheims Cathedral, the traditional site for coronations, had been captured by the English, so preventing Charles being invested. This had a further demoralising effect on the ordinary people as many felt that Charles was not fully a king until he had been crowned.
As Joan grew into her teens she developed a deep spiritual and mystical life of prayer. She claimed that the 'voices' of saints were instructing her to raise the siege of Orleans, capture Rheims and have Charles crowned as king. They also instructed her to dress as a man while carrying out this work.
Joan left home in early 1428 and, following a Church trial at Poitiers clearing her of any suspicion of witchcraft or heresy, animated Charles and the French troops with the belief that God wished them to be victorious and would help them. Joan did not take command of the army but, with Joan providing inspiring personal leadership in key places at crucial times, the French won surprising victories leading to Charles being crowned in Rheims Cathedral in July 1429.
Although Joan said that her mission was now been completed, she continued to take part in the fighting and was captured in May 1430.
The English-Burgundian forces did not deny Joan's superhuman powers, but ascribed them to the Devil. So the English commanders arranged for bishop Cauchon, who was more interested in politics than in religion, to establish a court to prove that Joan was a witch.
Cauchon was zealously pro-English and chose Assessors (Jury-men) who were either biased, timid or both. Even so, as the trial proceeded he found it necessary to falsify evidence, terrorise the Assessors, misquote Joan's defence in a report to Paris University, and refuse to grant Joan's repeated demand to be tried by the Pope or an unbiased Church Council.
In this fraudulent Court, Cauchon found Joan 'guilty' and the English prepared for her execution. When at the last moment Joan, out of fear, signed a document promising to obey 'The Church', she was given a light sentence, and ordered to dress as a woman, which she did.
The English commanders were furious. It was essential for them to have 'The Church' condemn Joan for witchcraft so that they could execute her and be able to claim that Charles owed his coronation to the power of the Devil. They hoped that her execution as a witch would provide a blow to the new found confidence of the French troops and cure the fear and fatalism of the English.
One night, Joan's clothes were removed, and in the morning she had to dress in male attire. Cauchon rushed to her cell and sentenced her for 'disobeying The Church', thereby providing the English with the excuse that they needed to burn her as a heretic and a witch.
Rouen was captured by the French in 1449, and the Pope ordered an investigation into the trial. In 1456 Cauchon's sentence was declared null and void. The inquiry was not asked to make a judgement on Joan's holiness, and it was not until more than 400 years later that an upsurge in public opinion asked for this. The request was granted, and after careful consideration Joan was canonised as a saint. (i.e. declared to be in heaven) in 1920.
The miracles of Virginity
"I must keep the vow and promise that I have made to Our Lord, to keep well my virginity of body and of soul."
"The first time I heard the Voice I vowed to remain a virgin for as long as it pleased God."
For only In Virginity Does Miracle Happens...
"There is no sign of corruption or violation, She is Intact..."
Joan of Arc Virginity Tested
When Joan was first visited by the "Voice" from God she pledged to remain a virgin as part of her acceptance that God had called her for a special "mission." At the time that Joan was "called" by God she was thirteen, as she later testified at her trial, and probably had all the same hopes and dreams of the average young woman to eventually fall in love and marry. As Joan did throughout her life she surrendered her personal desire in order to fully serve God. Joan later testified at her trial that the "Voices" called her "Joan the maid, daughter of God." Joan actually underwent examinations to prove her virginity at least twice. In medieval times people believed that a women in league with Satan could not be a virgin so proving Joan was a virgin was part of verifying that she was indeed sent by God. As Jean d"Aulon later testified about Joan's first physical examination: "The master's report having been sent to the King, this maid was put into the hands of the Queen of Sicily [Queen Yolande], the mother of our Queen, and to certain ladies of court with her, by whom this maid was seen, visited and secretly tested and examined in the secret parts of her body. But after they had seen and looked at all that there was to look at, the lady said and related to the King, that she and her ladies found with certainty that she was a true and complete maid in whom appeared no corruption or violence."
Torn by Earthly gods...
Joan was also examined by her enemies after her capture as a way to show she was a witch as they claimed however she was again proven to be a virgin. As Jean Massieu, one of the priests involved in Joan's trial, later testified: "I well know that she was examined to discover if she was a virgin or not by some matrons and midwives, and that on the orders of the Duchess of Bedford and notably by Anna Bavon and another matron whose name I do not remember. After the examination they declared that she was a virgin and intact and I heard it said by Anna herself for which cause the Duchess of Bedford forbid the guards and others from offering her any violence."
Jeanne d’Arc was both a heretic and a witch under the teachings of the Catholic Church. However, her timely arrival on the French political scene provided the exiled French court with a much needed psychological weapon. In this, Jeanne’s‘holy’ mission to ‘save’ France was manipulated to provide ‘hope’ for the French people and to break the morale of their superstitious English suppressors.
By ecclesiastical and secular law she was a heretic, yet theoretically, and by interpretation of her actions as outlined by the University of Paris, she was a witch. The ability to foretell the future (sortileguim), being led astray by illusions and fantasies and believing in the visions of angels of light (muliercualae) as well as an ability to locate hidden objects (maleficium) and other such phenomena were ideologies developed by the Church to implicate the Devil as responsible for dissention against the autocratic control of the Church.
Jeanne denied being the author of these phenomena, however, her activities being defined as witchcraft were suspect due to her devotion to God and the Saints, her obsession with Catholic practices and in her vow of chastity. As such, her alleged visions and fantasies did lead her to forsake her gender identity to embark on a politically dangerous move to install the disinherited dauphine to the throne of France. Her elevation to fame became possible because of the need and superstition of the French people. Her peasant status, her obsessive piety and vow of chastity, combined with the general belief in prophetic literature also made Jeanne a reliable candidate to fulfil the well-known prophesies to ‘save’ France.
The arrival of the prophesised ‘saviour’, a peasant girl as the virgin warrior, who had gained notoriety throughout Christendom challenged English authority on all levels, whereby not only invoking intense fear of social disobedience against the Church, she also provided a politico-religious tool for the English to challenge the legitimacy of Charles claim in the war over the throne of France.
"...where there would come a Maid... who should work miracles..."
Jeanne’s obsession with religious practices and the sacraments of Mass ensured her familiarity with Catholic doctrine as well as the folklore behind the legends of the Saints. Although Christianity overrode the older and deeper belief systems of the common people of rural villages during the High Middle Ages, with pagan rituals replaced by Christian rituals, the fairy tales remained. As such, once a year, the Church incorporated a mass on the fourth Sunday of Lent – Laetare Sunday, effectively Christianising the annual spring festival that was held in remembrance of the fabled tryst between a lord of Bourlémont and his supposed fairy lover under the local Beech tree.
As well as that, and in conjunction with the intensification of religious instruction to the laity, on holy days the village priest required crosses to be carried through the fields while he performed exorcism rites at the ‘Fairy Tree’ and surrounding springs. It was natural for Jeanne to partake in the Christian festival as part of the village’s ‘May fair’, as well as paying homage to the villages’ traditional
Patron Saint, ‘The Lady of Domrémy’.
Her Catholic teachings had made her well aware of idolatry, the devil and witch-craft and its association with pagan festivals, however, she fervently believed that the familiar images of the Saints painted on church walls had become real and were conversing with her.
She was also willing to adapt the well-known prophesies of Bede, Merlin and Marie Robine “… where there would come a Maid … who should work miracles ”, and to act out the symbolic idealism behind the legends of Deborah and Judith – deliverers from oppression, Clovis – the first anointed Christian king of France and those of St. Catherine - wisdom, St. Margaret - chastity and St. Michael – warrior and ambassador of God, in which to influence the superstitions of people useful to aid her to gain her objective.
Jeanne’s religious instruction was taught through the use of the prône – an informal method of delivering sermons in a simple, repetitious and oral format designed to include participation of the congregation. This method ensured learning though the use of memorisation, while also teaching social hierarchy, beginning with God at its apex then followed by the Church, king, nobility and so forth.
Because of this method of instruction, Jeanne’s understanding was that the ‘Church Victorious ’ in Heaven, overruled the Church Militant on earth. Her refusal to submit to the earthly Church constituted apostasy, which on that point alone, reinforced the theologian beliefs that her actions were the result of maleficium. With this mindset, the common festivals and folklore of her village were taken as proof of cult activity to which, they believed, she had been initiated into whilst still a small child. The ideologies pertaining to her visions, revelations and actions were based on fundamental theological teaching, whereby their interpretation of her purported visitations were believed to be those of Satan, Behemoth and Belial disguised as St. Michael, St. Catherine and St. Margaret, to lure Jeanne away from the faith.
It was natural then, to assume that her popularity within Charles’ royal court and of his Armagnac followers was due to the use of charms and spells, to deceive the royal court and others into becoming schismatic in the article Unam Sanctam Ecclesiam Catholicam while she herself attained the status of cult leader.
Her claim of being instructed by the Saints to cast off and abandon the attributes of womanhood and to clothe herself in male dress was in itself an admission of blasphemy against God and His Saints, an infringement of canon law, and a perverse deviance from the modesty of womanly decency, and heresy. Not only did the matter of her clothing and transvestism embarrass the Church at base level, her willingness to take up weapons of war to incite bloodshed on the besieging English at Orleans revealed her knowledge of Scriptural teachings and Church law, but it also revealed her understanding of the biases held by the Church. Her disenchantments also led her to publically partake in the machinations of politics, religion and war, which, traditionally was under the strict providence of men only. Her tenacity in insisting on wearing men’s clothing , and to forsake taking Mass and the Eucharist in preference to wearing women’s garb also reinforced their belief that Jeanne felt that she was above the authority of the Church and secure under the protection of evil spirits.
To add to this insult of the faith, her refusal to confide in or ask guidance of her parish priest in relation to her visions and revelations reaffirmed their belief that her visions were the result of conjuring up evil spirits for the purpose of idol worship. By her alleged blatant use of idols, such as her pennons, her obsessive worship of the images of the Saints, and by her revelations and prophesies, Jeanne purportedly seduced upright Christians into believing false doctrine in opposition to the doctrines of the Church.
She was not as ignorant as her judges believed, as she had extensive knowledge of the Scriptures and the legends of the Saints, as well as the common prophesies. In her mind, the bible stories and the common prophesies combined with regular snippets of news, and the images of the Saints she had worshipped in the local churches merged into a reality that controlled her conscience.
Jeanne believed that the Saints had chosen her for the role of the foretold saviour of France whereby she acted out the combined prophesies to instigate the crowning of Charles VII. The exiled prelates of Charles VII were also conversant with the known prophesies and used Jeanne as an inspiration for the morale of the soldiers and the citizenry - and as an expendable pawn in the political manoeuvres between France and England over the crown.
The English crown, on the other hand, had been promised the French crown by an alliance of the former French king, whereby the personal enmity of the Burgundian regent to the English king towards Charles VII resulted in a one sided tit-for-tat smear campaign to discredit the legitimacy of the newly crowned French king. This was achieved through the English controlled University of Paris, by the capture of Jeanne, and her trial for suspected crimes against canon law and the authority of the Church.
By convicting her of the more heinous crime of witchcraft, they were able to contort her sayings and actions to discredit Charles VII ’ s coronation by the use of magic spells and charms derived from the devil.
The 25th of December celebration was Mithra’s sacrificing of the bull long before Jesus was born...
The Church of England regarded the celebration of Christmas as a pagan festival, the pre-Christianity Roman celebration of the sacrifice of the bull. In fact, there is no proof that Jesus was born on the 25th of December or even that it was 2,018 years ago. So, for all intents and purposes, Christmas Day is not a celebration of the birthday of Jesus but a pagan holiday.
Mithra, also spelled Mithras (Sanskrit Mitra), in ancient Indo-Iranian mythology, the god of light, whose cult spread from India in the east to as far west as Spain, Great Britain, and Germany. (See Mithraism.) The first written mention of the Vedic Mitra dates to 1400 BC. His worship spread to Persia and, after the defeat of the Persians by Alexander the Great, throughout the Hellenic world. In the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, the cult of Mithra, carried and supported by the soldiers of the Roman Empire, was the chief rival to the newly developing religion of Christianity. The Roman emperors Commodus and Julian were initiates of Mithraism, and in 307 Diocletian consecrated a temple on the Danube River to Mithra, “Protector of the Empire.” (The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica)
Hypocrisy / Heresy!!! - HereSay U!!!!
400 years ago King Charles 1 banned the celebration of Christmas and jailed shopkeepers who closed their shops on 25th December
In England, many people do not believe in God and have never stepped foot in church. Yet these people also celebrate Christmas — even if they are atheists and will laugh at you if you say you believe in God.
Hence Christmas is celebrated on the 25th of December just like Guy Fawkes Day on 5th November, Valentine’s Day on 14th February, Halloween on 31st October, New Year’s Day on 1st January, or your birthday, and so on. All these celebrations have nothing to do with religion.
In fact, King Charles 1 of England was the first person to ban the celebration of Christmas about 400 years ago in the 1600s because, it is 'syirik' or heresy. Shopkeepers who closed their shops on 25th December were arrested.
The Puritans eventually ousted Charles and chopped off his head in 1649 and, for a short while, England was turned into a republic until his son was brought back from France to be crowned as King Charles II in 1660.
Christmas is about shops making money
Since Christmas is no longer attached to religious beliefs but is about how shops can make more money selling you stuff you do not need.... Hmmmmm....
'Stop saying Christmas' Priest warns Christians to abandon the word
CHRISTIANS should stop using the word Christmas because it has been hijacked by “Santa and reindeer”, an Irish Catholic priest has urged.
By Ben Weich
PUBLISHED: 10:15, Mon, Nov 20, 2017 | UPDATED: 10:25, Mon, Nov 20, 2017
Father Desmond O’Donnell said Christians of all denominations should realise that Christmas and Easter no longer has any sacred meaning.
He told the Belfast Telegraph: “We’ve lost Christmas, just like we lost Easter, and should abandon the word completely. We need to let it go, it’s already been hijacked and we just need to recognise and accept that. I am simply asking that space be preserved for believers for whom Christmas has nothing to do with Santa and reindeer".
“My religious experience of true Christmas, like so many others, is very deep and real – like the air I breathe. But non-believers deserve and need their celebration too, it’s an essential human dynamic and we all need that in the toughness of life.
“I’m all for Christians choosing to celebrate Christmas by going out for meals and enjoying a glass of wine, but the commercialisation of anything is never good.”
Father O’Donnell, a registered psychologist and author, as well as a priest, added he did not intend his statement to be a criticism of non-Christians.
He said that unless Catholicism addressed the reality of what Christmas has come to mean “secularisation and modern life will continue to launder the church”.
OMG!!! No Present For Christmas...