I was rarely realy happy during my conscious life until maybe 16 or 17 when I personally experienced my fiath wasn't dead. Later too, at many times I felt seriously cut short, pushed away from who I am and what I can do, and always took that simply as a part of life, and in my faith life (until I dropped that at 23 or so, see other pages) I was aware of it that there the Holy Spirit isn't the only spiritual entity, and that I wasn't quite where and who I felt like being yet. I didn't take that as a serious problem, I just felt cut short, and didn't think much of it.
I was not depressed or unhappy, and I sure was happy at some times, but there always seemed to be something wrong, something in the way, something oppressive, and I certainly didn't have many people that I could honestly share my feelings with, most of the time I wasn't even aware of them consciously. I also never took the human spirit for capable of communicating with other human beings, to God, yes, but not to others humans, see also other pages, even though I almost always had pretty strong 'gut feelings' about situations and places, that I simply subscribed to physical factors, but which doubtlessly were more than that. when I started to take serious that human beings can in fact have even fairly strong mutual interaction in spirit, the girl (who I didn't meet in person at the time) who did effort to make that clear (and who was a physics student at the time, certainly very serious, and not some vague new age-ist or something), communicated things that were so horrible, gross, unimaginable and relevant, that at the time I didn't know what to think of it (see also other pages).
Interesting enough, when I didn't consider myself an active christian, after I left the bible school I was in, on the personal level I felt ambiguous. I wasn't concentrated on the same things, and I certianly lived in a way that before I wouldn't have persued, if anything for instance having sex without direct marriage thougts (although being very serious about the relations and wanting then to last).
There were many things I simply didn't seem to get the point of, and it wasn't without reason tha I wanted to life in the US for some time, I just never realy felt in place to do and be what I unconsciously new I was and could, even though I did have a relatively speaking interesting postion in university, and did many things quite out of average. What I didn't get the pint of is the lives of many people I dealt with, and their motivations. For instance when people have a reasonable life (materialistically speaking), enough possibilities to express themselves (if that is the term), for instance in art, than why are some things so difficult? I figured jelousy, mismatches in people capacities and their thoughts about themselves, simply annoying people, all kinds of experiences causing mischief, and probably lack of desirable parts of life, of which a matching relationship would score high.
I had bad emotional experiences, I couldn't by far be what I could, (although I considered that it seemed I had a lot of future possibities), yet I gave a lot of people a lot, and I to focussed on a life I found important and was active to achieve it, and for a long time I didn't have too high-spun expectations on my value in the latter.
What does this have to do with the title of this section? To put it simple, 'why are we here on earth'. A simple answer is that there is no particular reason, which is fine with me, but than I see no reason to not make things as enjoyable and happy as possible. A well known (wrong) answer is that we are on earth to pay for a place in (future) heaven. That a christianity I have nothing much in common with. To serve God ? Stricly speaking, if He exists, is serious about human beings, and as almighty as depicted in the bible, that is inevitable. Then it is completely relevant to know what He wants, and good too. During my life in the bible school (and some time before and after) I also considered the powers of darkness a factor to take into account, not to bargain with, but take authority over, to win from, and to crush, methoforically speaking of the tangible components of it. That's winning and getting out of life the bad parts, and I considered God as wanting people to be happy, capable of achieving that (which caused me problems at times, because I wasn't always, though I considered Him being there when I searched Him), and asking the ones that know Him to serve him by doing the above. i also was aware of it that in natural man there is no good of the kind He values (scriptural, see e.g. Rom. 3) and that suited me fine, in fact my awareness of my own shortcomings, eventhough was was pretty capable in relevant areas, made me realize very well that the glory of God is not a man made or producable commodity, and I also knew that I couldn't be good in general, I simply lacked the facilities. I was aware of that in my christian life, and did see change, but never felt satisfied in all areas, even though I tried real hard, and was completely sincre towards Him. That is quite a statement, but it is completely true, for years.
I expected other christians that took their faith seriously to be similar, and that has been and is probably a big mistake, t be frank I think there have hardly been any that I've seen or met that are like that. I did read about them (assuming their personal stories aren't a lie), and they were the major reason for finding a meaningfull personal faith. Did I meet Christ? Paul did, that is: it is scriptural, and it is also scriptural that he didn't look for it, was immedeately confronted with another one of Chist that met him (being blind) to jerusalem, and experienced no public altar call. I'm not Paul. Not even close. I'm trying very slowly to translate and understand what he (and others) wrote already 1950 years before my epoch. But it means something to me that people who in prayer with the Holy Spirit are honest with themselves and actually do what he makes clear they should do. I did. Many years, almost always without speaking against Him or erring to much untill doing what I knew He wanted, both for me personally and in general, from reading the bible. And I want to stress that I absolutely cannot stand people who in prayer make clear that they just refuse to do what he has made extremely clear to them, and then still claim to be his, and to be taken serious. Of course, when He picks a person their not going to be lost, so they will stay His, He cannot deny Himself, when He has said yes once, it stays like that. But I find it incredible that when you know that the almighty God of the universe (assuming He is) want you to do something, that a bag of water and some minerals is going to hve different opinions on that and than expect me to take them serious. Paul talked about giving christians (should be singular) over to the satan, to teach them not to blaspheme, which I find very clear in various aspects. He didn't say: I give up, this person is to powerfull, I need to make a better deal here, or whatever, no, he was aware of how bad things get without the Holy Spirit (also called the withholder), and how great (in the good sense of the word) God's gift of salvation is, and said: ok, have it your way, go back o your natural father (scriptural, see other pages) and slave owner, and see if you like it. When you try to ake God jeleous you'd better be stronger than Him.
I would put in a bit of a laugh here, considering the proposterousness of such a thought, but I've experieced that some people even need explanation to get the point of this. Lets make it clear. One: God. Than: lots of nothing, and than again lots of nothing, and than the rest: human beings, angels, devils, in a further to be determined constellation. Pauls opinion: human beings are more than angels, nothing is bigger in any sense than Christs love (and power to excert it), and even powers and authorities in the heavenlies are subjected to Christ's name. By far.
So are christians predestined to be confined to a completely seerate life, or being schizofrenic? That would be assuming that Gods way of dealing with an evil world is to offer it His own, make them as corrupted as needed to gain position, power and possessions, and than maybe return or something. Again, I would laugh here, but I take it that very many (even of the ones that know Him) consciously or unawarely think like this. This is where Jesus' brother, the head of the (mostly jewish) church in Jerusalem, considered as having authority on the matters, as the very first to write new testament written accounts that have remained with us, has somethings very profound to say about. In the very first part of this first letter, he seems to find it essential, as the jews did already for many centuries, and is still in honor in most scientific articles, to sum up the essence of what is on his mind: be not double-life-ed (my litteral rendering og the greek), because if you are, you'll be tossed back and forth as on waves (for instance of underestimated doctrine), and, most important, and explanatory for MANY people not finding what He promises: He will receive nothing of what is God's. Period. There are probably a variety of situations and areas of life this applies to, but the bottom line is the same, it is the double lifedness that is at stake, not how much you work yourself up to try to believe that He will give something or do something.
That in my mind meant (and means) that God and His will should be first, and I subdue to what he wants, and apply His principles as much as appicable and possible, and not that he wants me to be a liar, just to suck up to Him. I agree that there are various phases in christian life, different persons for whem He will want different things, and that victory over everthing evil or currupted in all aspects of life that christians have to live in is a matter of doctrine, maturity, and what God gives in a certain situation (was Stephan stoned because of disobedience, if so: of whom, and if not: what did it give him), but the principle stayes the same: don't expect anything of God when you try to bullshit Him in His face. Strong language on purpose, because it makes me angry. I ONE christian would have had the guts to do as He undoubtably has made clear personally, but certainly in general, that is to take me serious enough to inform me about the general situation I've dealt with unkowingly for years, lives would have been (more, and possibly litterally) saved, some very evil people wouldn't have had the chance to try to take my place, a lot of people wouldn't have been as damned as they are because they would have received proper teaching, and most of all, the thing that can real enrage me: more than a few people would not have continued to be the victims of the worst kind of abuse, wrape, and torture that I can think of.
And that realy enrages me. When I hear some priest in Belgium after two girls have just been tortured to death suggest litteraly that maybe through their death some kind of peace might be achieved, I can understand why Jesus finds it already sufficient for some when they realy hate that kind. Machine guns might not be the answer to people that do these kind of things, but Jesus considered it better for them (let alone their victims) to be dumped in the ocean with a millstone around their neck. BEFORE.
And what does the large christianity say, that is probably to busy sucking up to the wannabee, non-god of the world that leagally already is Christ's, and to its great whore that is all to instrumental giving space to any angel of light that is popular enough? Lets leave somebody that is honest, and seriously equiped to realy make a difference, at least for some, on the street. Literally. Let's play the mystery game. God probably wants that. Otherwise all these evil forces might be released, and he might be killed, and many people would be abused, or something. Here I find it hard not to get sarcastic or cynical.
I hope it is clear what I mean by that, because it pisses me of. Not sorry for the language, it is way to weak. I should say something along the lines of: a great whore is sinking her cunt over the waters to own everything that gets its head above the water, and you don't realize that the sign of the beast is pretty much the same as the thing she has written all over her forehead: MYSTERY, you get that MYSTERY, Babylon (Rome, in case you were wondering, in every possible incarnation), the great, mother of all whores and abominations, and that you want exactly what it wants. What do I do to get through to a christianity that I give prints of pages (Yes, I did realy try), that contains stuff like this in language that a five year old could understand, and that doesn't even consider that serious enough to at least the silence. If God doesn't punish you, you are either not his, or he has cast you aside and your following something else. And I am sorry to write that, when you have received the greatest gift of all, and you dispise the Giver of it so much that you think you can fuck about with it (consciously used X word) in any way you see fit you deserve to die. At least of Him. I remeber I myself have been prophesying against some 'daughter' (assuming that to be a female christian present), with words that were strong enough to say that if she didn't shape up, God would be against her, and not let her get back in the position she was, irrevokably (unless in the case of real repentence, I guess), and wondering who was so evil and devoid of fear of God to listen to such prophesies for weaks, even months on a row. It was the F* leader of the group herself, I realized many years later. Who was so full of doctrine that she actually preached me away from one of the very few girls I realy felt love with at the time (and who even an accepted christian, for whatever that is appearently worth), and who was so instrumental of letting everybody but me make a real differennce, in final instance also only by playing the sleezy, backstabbing, cowerdice and ultimate proof of powerlessness mystery game. And from what I gather she IS respected right until today. Learned to play the game nicely.
How are these people going to meet Christ and collect their rewards ? I know for a fact that people all over the world have been reading my pages and been aware of some parts of my life, and that amoung them, there are quite some official and unofficial christians. Not ONE, not f* ONE has in person or not informed me clearly of the things they know are going on. Not one. If I follow the same God, He must have had some people called to do something. To listen to Him, and what I can have to say, teach or do, and to be with me. Nobody. Zip. Not a single one.
Now there are a few possibilities (I'm an engineer and scientist, I think I can rely on myself thinking logically): I don't follow Him, because he doesn't exist, or because I follow a deamon, have a vivid imagination, or whatever. Or I get Him wrong: that is, He says one thing, but means something else, that would make Him a liar. Unacceptable.
Maybe, and I mean maybe, some people REALY believed I had been bad, should be punished, and already knew what was going on first hand. Maybe. But than why not at least give me the benfit of doubt and F*ing ASK me. TELL me what goes on and ask me if I knew. The term that comes to my mind is: assholes. But I guess that is not nice to say about respected, very friendly fellow christians. Well well. Using swearwords. Guess her cunt was considered big enough for a person who in good faith still had enough common sense, revelation, or discernment of spirits to NOT spill his guts, and completely have his trust destroyed. What a power to maintain a lie. Makes God realy happy. Seriously, I felt that I couldn't trust he i the personal, though I wasn't aware of it. I wouldn't have been able to imagine that: a old christian, spirit filled, leading a F* bibleschool who trusts lies more than God, and is willing to try to in many ways kill the best thing she's ever been close to. Took me a lot of thinking and an definately not official christian (Ingrid, think what you want), to in prayer tell enough truth to make it dawn on me that this must have been the situation, and I guess she wouldn't be respected as a person even, probably becase they realy considered her owned by her family and a whore. I would hope not, but I think this is characteristic for those who call themselves official christianity. And time and time again I've left them. As a group and personally. Call it death.
What does this have to do with death? 'tanatos' in greek, 'thou shalt kill them with death', 'put such a person away fromyour midst', thou shalt kill a sorcerer, immoral person, adultaror (especially against God, see other pages, too), by stoning, and the best one: mark such a person and do not converse with him, do not even greek him, not to have part of his evil works. What shall cause joy in heaven? What does the real rock do when it crushes the appearently evil one after it has released itself, and what does it mean: 'keep the old man crusified'. The doctrine I received (and can simply read in various NT letters) simply states that before a person finds Christ he is at enmity with God and cannot please Him (which doesn't mean that He still cannot save them), and that the new heart (not of stone but of flesh) that he gives in a persons inner being should be the center of a person that accepted Him because the Father drew them. Does that mean that such a person must be a sucker (excusez the to the point mot), and can such a person than have no authority, joy, or condamnation of evil or evil persons or even evil christians?
That touches upon the question of what God is realy like, what does he want, why did he give rules (the law, NT rules), what's the place of suffering (see other pages, too), and what does He need? The last question is the easiest one, the answer is: nothing. He simply kicked the satan (why does that resemble 'sucker', I guess when you don't realy have something its the only way to be without Gods grace) out of heaving, including the angels that were equally disobiedient, and Job 1 gives a very nice account of the global state of affairs in the heavenly (free translation: God has a session where he summons some of His to get their * to, askes some questions, gets pityfll responses, and sais what He will tolerate happening, and the session is over, of and it happens according to his word), God seems to need only ONE angel to kill all firstborn in Egypt (interesting by the way, the firstborn thing, also for people in christianity, and in the sense that those second borns in Egypt will not have been too unhappy about such a punishment), and in revelation the whole earth and everthing on it is dealt with in many cases by the simple command of ONE angel. That's a God I can take serious.
The death of the old person (for every human being) is the result, the retribution for sin. In Genisis it sais: 'I will not contend with them forever, their days shall be 120 years' (or somthing to that extend, assuming the translation renders the meaning correctly), which I take as Gos saying: after about so many years, I'm going to end it, than it is enough misery (for them, their victims, or his Holy Spirit). And so it is. That means that death is instituted by God, maybe not nice, but or a reason. Jesus talkes about eternal life, what's the point of being a chirstian if you don't believe in that, not just the fact that there is something after physical death, but that siome things are eternal by nature. If God is not like that, it hell.
The point in the personal sense is that one can be considered to be dead to certain aspects of the life that are in the world, and that that is not a bad thing, not a reason to be not in the world, not a reason to lose, and not a reason to have no life at all. As I've stated before, I have for many years have certain feelings about what I wanted to achieve, only to come to the conclusion that even though I didn't for years even think much about Him, they were right, the law wouldn't have been against me, and I can see myself as an example in various ways. The point is that the old man (funny expression) can be dead, yet I can live, and I had no need to be kept under something, to be with evil intentions be put up against somebody, or to be kept short.
I did fall short, as I've also indicated before. Seriously. That has not to do with the fact that I turned my back on 'official' christianity as I knew it, I prayed about that, and i now know for a fact that they are bad enough still not to have the guts to face me, in any way. It also isn't anout the things I did. It is the simple fact that if (some years later) I would have listened to Him, and also maybe earlier would have put myself in a position to dig into the hebrew and greek by continuing to study His word (so the questions I dealt with later could have been dealt with earlier), I might have been alerted to the situation of some of the people, especially some of the girls I've written about on my other pages, the incredible ordeal they undergo as part of their life, the reasons the f* christianity doesn't give a s*, and the need for killing bad people. What's that? That's not a very catholic thought! Real whores never ignore bad people to death, that's not nice (though not ugly). You must always search for the good in othe people, that s love, isn't it? All that rebukal, refutation and edification by a young person is certainly not going to give us the life we bargain for. Image that, Annanias and Saphira woud get company! But than the seperation of evil would be too much, Christ might have changed His mind: He's probalby not powerfull enough to return, all those satanists (or moloch lovers, or whatever seems real pwoerfull to you) are keeping Him away, and thats for the better, because we shouldn't try to be ready yet, because than there would be not power (of the machiavallian kind) left, and he would look bad. Sicily tought us that. We'd better listen to Rome, because the reason that God doesn't reveal the time yet is probably jus as much a lie as not fucking your own children, and being real, and not double lifed with one another, God's just affraid to loose is face. That's why we must steal as much evil (but powerfull, haha) faces as possible, and give Him just enough to go on, and everything can go on it seems to have ever been, and thats probabably best (for whom ? I'm glad that revoltion has at least provided a solid constitution, and kicked Alpha out of the Netherlands, though probably we should have flower-loved the nazi's out. Or just have called them rediculous from the start. Would have saved a lot of jews. But they might not have gone to israel as a reward! Hu? Couldn't the british simply have given them their own gouvernment?). Oh, and authority is old fashioned and bad. And a good person should be dispised. Not European enough yet, should learn that mixing things up is realy inevitable. (Ok that's pushing it, but worshipping and following the doctrines of deamons sure isn't). Must learn that power is a valuable thing, and that even Jesus learned that, too. Dying, imagine that. You'd lose. Unless you defeat death, of course. Then He suffered for a day or so, but it is worth it: death defeated forever ! Hard to believe. For me too, but the fruits of what He does I can perceive, and that's good enough already.
As an interlude, and remember, I consider this a personal page, because I consider these issues completely basic, and the indirect reason why some people have called litterally nuts, officially, consider my motivations, for instance leting myself be run out fo university by simply being bluntly lied to, and not even having started a singe court case yet, also not against provable lies that had almost ruined my credibity (consider building prototypes of the kind of things that you can see in actual pictures on my other pages as a nice pass-time in the nuthouse, for one thing, this is officilly recorded, believe it or not). Does that mean I'm weak, as a lamb to the slaughter? No, I've already explained that there was only one eternal, perfect sacryfice, ans that is Christ. Does it mean I lost (considering I ever had it, ask some people about that, seriously, if that's your problem) my manhood, or even my basic self-esteem? Or does it mean that that world meant so little to me that I was close to dead of it. For many years, I've communicated (in words, not thoughts) that I wanted to get the hell away from the environment I was in. But I gues some real knowledgeable people jsut couldn't be considered so meaningless and unattractive to somebody like me, so they just had to make clear I just wasn't up to staying. Wrong. I hated the environment, and wanted to go, and there are dozens of university level and other people that could testify that I've said that from before I graduated, and many years after. I guess I've just expressed my opinion, but that means the glorious europe, Delft, family, Holland, or whatever shoulf be yeleous, or something. Or there is so much shit I exposed without even realizing it that I should thoroughly be killed out of my personal and professional life. Just a pitty I was so capable in some areas, so they had to officially and thoroughly undermine that as well. A professor, imagine that, the idea. He just CAN'T lead his own life, he didn't simply test the lying family and 'friends' for their seriousness about the things he actually talked about many times, of course not, they would expose their lifes, which are appearantly the reverse of transparent. Probably, they even think that is good. But the christians at least shouldn't, and lying under oath, and using eastern european methods to silence people certainly aren't constitutional.
When I, in thoughts, or prayer might be the appropriate expression, although in an at the time new, for me, interpretation, perceived some of the kinds of sexual and emotional abuse at least one person I cared for had undergone, I found both the commucication method so unrelyable, and the content of what Ingrid (it was her) communicated so unbelievable, that it gave me a real hard time to promise in thoughts that is was actually true. The fact that I closely worked with, and that she seemed real scared when I saw her made things worse, I didn't want to risk simply asking her.
Why is it that I never prayed with people, so to speak? Because Paul was blinded so people would have wanted to give him their eyes? I don't know. Simply because some of the people I would have cared emough for to try to set free if I had been aware of what they tried to communicate to me (probably starting decades before) had to be stopped by leaving me unaware of certain spiritual facilities, appearantly with the years-long approval of various brands of so called christianity? Because I would have been to dangerous to people so close and accusable by me, assuming they could have nothing on me to officially indight me or proclaim I have a serious, medical deficit, or to claim I know certain things while I didn't, and try to make it seem I'm weak or blackmailed.)
Let's keep that truth captivated in unrighteousness a little longer, probably those cathedrals aren't rich enough yet for Christ to return (if He does at all, we might help him to acquire some power first, probably).
In short: does the fact that in retrospect I may (mind you: may) have been pointed by Him to certain problems if I would have listened, instead of saving myself from a sect, and be carefull not to get entanged in all kind of things that could have messed me up mean that I take the blame, and repent towards christianity?
(Long pause, smoke coming out my ears, starting to hulk (just joking), counting to relieve some anger if (I'd be the person to need that).)
And everybody that dares to seriously challenge that gets the same
reaction as I've given many: who are you? And do I want You? No.
I don't. And i have no need to give people over to the satan, they
need me to teach them the first principles. Guess they don't want it
though. What does God do when he treats somebody as a son? He
punishes them. Lucke * if you are, otherwise: will He tell you to
get away from Him in the end, because He simply didn't know
(interesting expression) you, even though you have done I don't
know what in His name? You'd better think.
Ask God the Father, God the Holy Spirit, and God the Son first if I indeed am an apostle, if He will let you lie about the whole story that has been spun around me, and if he likes you to play the Babylon mystery whoring game that is hardly new or sophisticated in essence. Let me know when you figured out the anser.
Oh don't expect too much of Him in the meanwhile, that mighty revelation, that real uprise of the Holy Spirit, that reinstating of the charimatic life without the abuse and fear for the powers unleashed (to prophesy the truth against group leaders, for instance, preferably by unknowing sons and daughters), might just not happen.
I think there is a big lesson to be learnt here. A real big one. Just a pitty that the educational material was already around for millenia, assuming SOMEBODY would have taught it. Seriously, and with a serious audience. Nagh, God would never ne powerfull enough.
Just to make sure my long sentences' meanings aren't misconstrued: the lesson is that when you mess with what you know about Gods revealed will, you are in for trouble, and may cause serious hurt, problems, and even death. That is scriptural: the Corinthians were informed that not few of them passed over to be with Jesus, or in plain english, physically died because Gods will was messed with. God is not a gamer, he takes his fatherhood serious, and expects is children to learn, and otherwise He cuts them of (pretty much 'seperation', the meaning of death), so they won't grow in Him anymore. And that is NOT good. Ever. I think realy nobody has ever truly benefited from goinf against His will. Simply because contrary to the former, wannabe (non) god of this world, God is a loving God, who can punish out of justice and serious correction, not becasue He needs people to give Him power (or anything at all, for that matter), and who does so to the people He loves, because he knows that the fruits of righteousness and of the things that he has to teach are worthwhile by themselves, not even in comparison with something bad.
What does it mean that God wants a peacefull, and 'tranquil life' ? Is that far away from what I tried to comunicate for years by my behaviour, not to mess with people, don't create completely meaningless and missing-the-mark hell fire, and wanting simply to enjoy being with friends, make nice music and do something interesting, honorable and uncorrupted professionally, preferably in an environment that gives space for that ? Oh, and touch persons (girls / women, let there be no misunderstanding, that means sex according to my hebrew interpretation of the phrase amen) that I can feel easily towards as depicted in 1 Cor 13 (my straightforward interpretation, see other pages), meaning not gaming, without missing the mark, without running on jeleousy, and without wanting to compromise myself or others.
What about marriage in this context ? I consider marriage a serious and possibly god given institution, if it is based on free choice, unaffected by lies or lack of information, and it might even apply to me. I say might, because I could seriously want to marry Ingrid. Seriously. Even though I haven't seen her in years, know that she has not wanted to accept me for everything, and in my interpretation at the time was scheming and trying to use jeleousy that I didn't accept, and not doubting that she has been forced to have sex in ways i can't even start to imagine the miserable feeling of with hundreds of men. Would I dispise them? Depending on how they are I might want to kill them for what they do. Literally. Physically. BEFORE they do it. And consider that scriptural, and not even feel bad about it. Bang, dead. Next. I won't do that. They'd better thank Christ for that, that that isn't necessary. Oh, and it unlawfull, too, so don't do it. Put that does clearly answer the question what I'll do personally and society-wise. People like that are not going to by in the midst of something that I run. Can they be forgiven? Let me put it this way: they'll have a hard time convincing me. I gave everything I had when I found Him. And I was absolutely not even 10 million miles away from these types of crimes. I worked at my continuing salvation in real fear of Him, for more than a decade. If they do the same, they are still not equal in terms of credibility. Clear enough?
I make this so clear because in the first place it is scriptural that a conversion is real. When Paul left to Arabia for three years his complete former life was out the door. Completely. Considering he agreed on Stephans killing, they may even have tried to physically kill him. And than he still went away for years to be edified. His christianity didn't profit him in a non-(divine) lawfull way. You want to be forgiven of THAT? You torture people in a institutional, organized way, you actually, physically kill babies, or are involved in this (I'm not talking abortion here), let children EAT them, wrape little people, do everything to bring them under the most horrible oppression and fear, and you think you get A LITTLE BIT away from that, and say it is not so bad, or 'everybody is doing that?' Talking about being nuts.
Not in a million years. When you realy feel bad about it, the 'Please save this wretch' is easy enough to percieve as being meant, and those conversions in the bible were clear, and John even made them actaully say what they did wrong in public. No child stuff, you want to put yourself up against me as a seriously authorative figure in 'te real' christianity, you'll be tested. Nobody can mess with that while I know about it. Having a law suit against a 'fellow christian' like that is no problem for me: you just aren't. Oh, and there is a system that will be happy to have you, so lets make a nice separation. Wait with your conversion until you are old though, those catholic tortures are not something you want to experience to young. You'd better wait a bit until you undergo that ordeal to convince peter that heaven needs you. Getting the point? You know where that 'charismatic' prophecy is for? To unveil the secrets of YOUR heart, so you might fall down and admit that God is realy in the mists of people that I would want to be with if I found them. And not to figure out which persons God has destined to nbe together to turture them more effectively the rest of their live and their places can be stolen, or at least so that the image produced that they are. Those nicolaitians weren't nice. Luckily, Peter warned us. Oh no, Paul did. Oh no, John. Well, what do you know, they all did. What a unity. And all Paul did was a very short visit to Jerusalem to be officially approved by Peter, they didn't even meet ever before. Must have been the same spirit that told somebody to visit Paul when he was just done persecuting people. I never did that, want that, or even consider it. Hu?
This is very personal, because I think it is the essence of a lot of (justified) fears, that keep people that I would love and want to live with away from me. And that hurts. Seriously. I'm not willing to risk the lives and health of people until I know that the One that is able to protect them gives me the goahead, and/or they themselves respond (by any applicable means) by indicating that they want to be with me. And that brings me to the direct purpose of this page, since it is hardly easy or desirable in general to spill my guts on the WWW. I want the people that can at least be with me in thoughts to have more tangible evidence of what I think and want (I would like the same), and I don't find anything at all in all the christian and non christian books or circles that I've known that seriously resembles my thoughts. So probably there is a point in ventilating them, and this way it is as with other personal things: internet is accesible from any inner room deemed appropriate for the purpose of good thinking. And it can hardly be traced that somebidy in life-dangerous situations actually reads something that directly would threaten their enemies. Because that is the right (and sciptural) term.
Coming back to marriage, the way I see it now (this is ammeanable to solid comments based on actual information, and therefore not likely to change too much), I see reason to believe otherwise than that Paul expresses it right (see other pages): it is excellent to give / form from a state of marriage, and it is better to do so without. Christ marries, and the Ephesians are called to adhere to the same purpose, God has (am image of) a wife without marriage (Israel). If I would feel it appropriate because of the person or the situation, and if God would allow it (and evidently if (thus far not when) He would want it), I can feel stronly about it. For myself, I don't seem to need it, but that doesn't in any way imply that (also a single) relationship means less.
What about being a christian, and wanting to know about ministries, gifts, a life volontarily in His service, in combination with people with very different backgrounds? When I think of it as having a meaning for my life, also with certain persons, which I do, and when I consider the horrible life some people come from, and the things I learned, it is inevitable that I persue giving my christian (in my interpretation) priorities space. I think that can easily mean that I love somebody, and care for a person, and that that itself is simply the right interpretation of the second (that is equal to the first ?!) major law of God. And that is all the way, without missing the mark, and without the horrible or at best stupid limitations the certain official christians, and a certain world system would impose. 1 Cor 13 in my interpretation, that is that the love that is explained there simply IS as it is described, and not pushed to resemble it, seems a very good lead.
So what about my 'doctrinal position', what about Him with capital H, and one or more hers, and hims small h? Should I convert people by my preaching, demand of everybody that is seriously involved with me to sign an agreement with my faith constitution, and preferably make them pay tithes of all they have for the incredible priviledge to be more or less intimately associated with a unique aposte (just showing that I have no problem assesing certain relative positions, but that I just don't care to much about being foolish enough (Pauls doctrine, approved of in general by Peter) to do a certain type of personal PR). I think you get my drift.
These pages are also to make clear that I do NOT have a problem expressing that I realy do need certain persons that have been tought and made into something resembling a whore, because that is not what I saw (honestly, because I simply didn't know, and what I perceived doesn't change by that added knowledge). And that that includes their sexuality, though it is not limited to it, and in fact is not the factor that makes me fall for person. I feel it necessary to express that, because if it is true that organized abuse has such a non-marginal role as I've unfortunately been made to think, and gouvernments and people in high people realy aren't man (or woman) enough to have a fulfilling relationship or even have their (pityful) needs quenched without a system that is not only not allowing to sell without making its subjects sexual gladiators, but simply is as described in Romans 3, and unfortunately I find that all to likely, even though appearently no represententative of it has deemed it opportune to inform me of its modus operandus, that appearently didn't naturally appear to be pleasing me, or christian-wise was powerful enough to sudue me, it must be very clear that I am not impressed with the power of all that to change what God has to give into something I don't want, and that I will absolutely, completely, and for ever want to holy from that. Meaning that I will not ask for subjection, whoring, lies, riches that I don't consider as such or I don't know what to relate to the people I indicate I love or want to love.
And that's a positive statement, not a negative one. If it seems right I will want (accept) subjection, efforts to be pleasing and acceptable, freely given riches, and I want to deal with the incredible hurt and wounds that have been inflicted, and considering my experience thus far I trust (I guess him) that healing of that is possible, and that the fact that I feel attracted and feel accepted after there is so much reason for these persons for rejection of anything even closely resembling human life forms and all forms of real contact with them makes me feel happy and honored.
The reason that when I found that Jolanda's story in her book (dutch girl who at least got the parents that abused her in ways almost to hard to describe behind bars) is incredibly more horrible than the short wave of media coverage she generated made me think (I don't know where whe got the courage from, but thanks to her I've come to understand some essentials, and at least knew I wasn't fantasizing, and that exactly that would be the worst, so I won't, I take it very and completely serious), I continued at first to work, and later on I tried to focus on the best I can achieve and to preserve and restore my credibitly in terms of various capabiliteis, such as my recent page indicate, is that I will not by happy to have (if that is best for starters) persons like that in my life, and make sure that anybody that dears threaten them would even be shot from my property (which is another issue no doubt raised be sweet christianity in the sense that I shouldn't be allowed to have it) if that would be needed, but that I want to crush the system and kill (as far as applicable) the people that coused their and similar victims' (in that sense) misery. I am realy a nice christian, so actual killing would only take place in case of real defense (hard to see of that person wase 'merely' wraped (hate that expression) or might have died, so I though I'd make sure the criminal was put out of action. Oh it was permanent. Ain't that something.), or as a member of an actual army in war, which I seriously hope will never be needed, but this is about the only reason that could realy motivate me. And that is very scriptural, ask the jews.
In short: I want society to be saved from this misery, and I mean for real. Consider it my duty as a citizen. Which is factually true, I should report crimes that I know about.
People, I don't need to wonder who, have tried to undermine my credibility, and I will give them back what they have tried. Not in revenge, I'm a nice christian, I just like to put things in the right place: sinners in hell, God's in heaven. And even though they have undermined my credibility, and probably my capabilities as well, I don't even need to know what they have done, they certainly haven't been able to actually kill me (and I figure they won't, although I realize they may try, if what I go against is only half as bad as I think), and I still have the same remarkable capabilities that let me design and built power mixers, computers and a synthesizer far before the end of my teens. For instance.
Try to beat that first, and then beat my scientific endeavours, that incidently will work (as pretty much everything that I ever seriously consider I could built), and let's than reassess who is in possession of very highly values capabilities and should therefore have a very honourable, and lets use the actual word POWERful position in society, democratically speaking, of course, we wouldn't want to be currupted and have our head shot of, wouldn't we?
Bit cynical, because I don't realy care about those things, they serve a (possible good and even essential) purpose, but in general they don't make me tick. And thats the reason I bring these things up on this personal page, so it is clear what the purpose and means are. The purpose is what I described above, the means are government, police, army, or preferably a nice talk or if that is what it takes: a sermon. Seriously, I'd give sermons (if that is the right word: public statements, or whatever) to get accross what I think is needed, but I don't think it is very meaningfull unless the primarily intended audience doesn't want that. I might even like bringing serious doctrine to people who seriously want what he wants. But I'm not going to predend I have this incredible desire to be honored with that. I want to be listened to, and what I'd have to say now would not be nice. At all. That must be why hardly anybody is willing to give me solid information about the christian whereabouts. Because in terms of christianity I want to kill. Seriously. I will not let something so incredibly ugly, bad, blasphemous and cancerous live. It will have to die. Considering death can be interpreted as eternal seperation from God, that is the right expression. Not nice is it? At least I'll want the same as what Christ wanted: let that what is good become more so, and what is evil ditto. Death.
This preoccupation with the term death is for a reason. Call it on of the prerequisites to thouroughly understand my gospel. Everbody dies, and then what. It is of almost midieval simplicity, but nevertheless true. After about 120 years, God explodes his little built in time bomb: that's enough. Abd its very democratical: all have sinned, so everybody dies. This is not something to make death fashionable, and there is nothing fancy about it: you will die. Except maybe when you are on the earth when Christ returns. Those lucky once will never see death. Oh, and death is never called a person in the bible, its just a word to describe a place or situation, nothing personal. No matter what riches you gather up on the earth, in the end you die, and than what. Those nasty children of yours inherit them, but you die. Every single one.
The point is painstakingly clear: all things that end with death have only limited interest. You might inflate their relative value by considering death to be completely destructive: nothing remains after death. The power plug is pulled, the program is erased, end of story. Depression thought, but even than, it is completely irrelevant to suffer for something that is never going to give you something good, such as an evil system, for instance. You'd be a fool. Than rather dance on the vulcano or something.
When you do believe something will continue, the question that theology has to answer is a very profound, and essential one: what will happen, and what are the conditions for the various scenarios. And that is one of the main reasons I hate catholicism or what smells like it, and why I feel it is important to be clear about certain things. I believe that Christ will give rewards to the ones that have found Him, and that they depend on how much they followed the Holy Spirit (who is a person and God). And if somebody even suggests that they are dependent on a persons corruptability or fear of the wannabe (non) god of the world, they try to damn people (scriptural expression) and fuck (more or less my expression) with Christ' own. And I don't like that. Because I should be one with them, enjoy them, and do lots of good things with them. And not suffewr because they are tough to or made to suffer. I don't like that, and I will be against that if you trie. I don't think I can be more clear.
The working or suffering to go to heaven is similar: everybody is stimulated to do good, obviously, but if you take that as sufficient for God you're deluded, and damnation will be the result. And I don't like that either.
So God offers life, good fruits that last for ever, and the facilties to have them. Nice. I like that. Makes the rest pale in comparison. Scriptural. Probably defeats the world system and its players. Must have been the reason I am probably accused of despising it and it representatives. I do! And I didn't even try, I just honestly expressed what I though and felt about things, which is probably the worst part. Not for me.
And that pretty much sums up my motivation and the way I've dealt with and expressed things.
Teaching by example is usually effective, that's why I'm not realy focussed on verbal teaching, although the principles underlying life's essentials as I percieve then are important, hence these pages. If I don't need words to convince people of what is good and what isn't, that seems good to me. If all I get is lies and evasion of the real subjects I want to raise with people that I should teach, I'll tell them to go to hell, by ingoring the essence of what they say, too: you should mind the number and worship it (non-) god some more, otherwise you'll be in trouble. So I will be, at least in the end I can look myself in the mirror, and honestly, I don't feel as having lost something essential, in fact I feel like make a major difference and persueing to form some real good things. I don't have the need to be right, I want something that I find more valuable than an unstable stockmarket of crooked merchands.
Can people be the way I want them to be right away? Am I who I want to be? Is it possible to be reasonably acceptable, in Gods eye? When somebody finds Christ, or has found Him, a new heart is made in him or her, I believe that is true, and that new person overcomes evil, and is accepted and loved by God, and is now considered as part of His family (don't ask me how that is possible, it is scriptural, and scripture seems very accurate where I can verify it). And than a new life begins, and because God doesn't wrape and respects the integrity of His persons, there are choices to be made, and to make them right, doctrine is needed. Seriously. There is a spiritual battle, too, and the soldier comparison Paul makes probably isn't for nothing, neither is the fact that appearently those early christians had riches (in many senses of the word) that made it very worth while for other to try to claim what they had. It must have been attractive.