PART III - TIMELESS REMINDER OFFERED FROM ESU 'JESUS' SANANDA
ESU 'JESUS' SANANDA
6/8/91 #1 ESU "JESUS" SANANDA
A ROSE BY ANY NAME
Stop it--I weary of your picking and poking over things which are absurd. If your name is George Hornblower and it is changed by someone named Paul, does it mean you are no longer George Hornblower? Saul of Tarsus labeled my being "Jesus" AFTER I was no longer in the "Holy Land". Moreover, the one Paul, who thought better to call himself that than remain with Saul (of Tarsus), probably because he feared the tar and feathers, did-in the Christian "movement". With friends like "Paul the Apostle" I certainly needed no enemies. If you don't believe me, especially you women who seek equal rights, read the edicts he handed down in my name. Paul was no friend of mine; he was one of your first REAL "mattoids". Esu here to continue our reconstruction of Truth.
I certainly expect you to be as careful this day as I efforted to be in those days long ago. There were those who tried to compromise me with the Romans or the Judaists by asking what I thought about the payment of tribute. I replied, pointing to the effigy on a coin, if I had one, and told them to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's. [Emphasis added] Since the authorities did not dare arrest me by day, when I was always surrounded by the multitude, they sought me by night and then I hid, always in a different place. I did not know exactly that which I would do in case of arrest or whether or not I would resist should they do so--most surely my friends (disciples) were not certain. I did tell them to get swords but I had little intention of resisting. One of my people did smite a servant of the high priest and severed his ear--I did not reprove him for it was in defense of self as by their attack upon me, they also attacked those with me. I did bid him hold his peace for the entire episode was getting out of hand and a riot was about to get under way in which all of my people would have been slain.
I never hid any of my actions in Jerusalem--all was perfectly open. The entrance into the city was prepared and I purified the Temple on the strength of the position I held in the Judean community. To the Sanhedrin I was a rebel against the Judaist theocracy and a blasphemer. I avoided any reference or statement of what I took myself to be. Actually, I made no statement until the very end. A high priest asked me if I was the Christ, to which I replied: "I am". To Pilate's question: "Art thou the King of the Judeans?" I only responded: "You say!" Then on the cross they established a bunch of garbage as to my being.
So I ask you of the readers of Truth: If I was not an active political leader; if I desired no social revolution; if I did not seek a martyr's death as proof of my message; if I led the life of a believer, awaiting God's action but making no attempt to force God's hand; if I was far from any desire for self-aggrandizement, and my whole life was an act of obedience to God's will, my conduct becomes somewhat hard to understand, apparently. It seems I did provoke violence against myself when I cleansed the Temple, for which I sorely suffered the consequences of that act. In all this there must be accepted an unmistakable militancy against a "system" of unGodly behavior which was present in other manifestations of my personality as well. I was serving in a human form and living in a human experience--I WAS HUMAN.
My teaching was not unclear in any manner whatsoever as is now laid forth unto you--the lack of clarity comes from the deliberate and ignorant repeating of that which I supposedly did and said. It is said there was a discrepancy between what I was, saw, and strove for, and what others understood. No--people simply did not want to heed nor hear--and it is no different today. The people followed eagerly for in their way they seemed to need me. I could not prevent them from attaching themselves to me and raising me more and more above myself. But the development of my picture of myself seems to lack clarity--but not through anything I did or said. The contradictions in my utterances seem to show that there was such a development and that perhaps it was never completed in the minds of the receivers. So what was it I said?
Well, I said such things as "I am come..." "But I say unto you..." is taken to pronounce an awareness of my vocation. I made it quite clear that I believed myself to by extraordinary by likening myself to light and fire: "I am come to send fire on the Earth." I knew my mission for I had been carefully taught in the higher universal realms as to my purpose. There was simply no way in which the ones of that day could relate. They could have not concept of spacecraft even though such was frequently present in relationship to my own whereabouts. You see, man cannot accept that which he understands not nor has relative comparison to that which IS known.
When among those who had long known me I also encountered an indifference or contempt that offended my sense of my own being as much as deploring the lack of respect for their own beingness. Since I was accepted in other locations, I said that "No prophet is accepted in his own country." And brothers, if you think it differs this day--you had better ask some valid prophets. I don't mean the cute little game players--I speak of the ones who bring Truth unto your world. I could not "heal" among my own people--for they had no faith in me or in the God they claimed. They had less faith in themselves and, yes, it surprised me for I was not prepared for such rejection--just as the bringers of Truth are not prepared for that which is thrust upon them this day. My entire makeup within Creation could not accept the absolute inability of Man to see into the beyond and into the goodness and perfection of God Creator and yet see the evil as it prevailed about him and have no incentive to do a thing about it save join with it. Please don't effort to tell me that it differs this day.
I was sent forth to bring the WORD and I set about to do exactly that. I regarded myself as a prophet and I believe that is the way I am accepted even by those who would renounce myself as anything other than that. I did recognize myself as the "Messiah" but not THE ULTIMATE MESSIAH. I was come as a Messenger of Truth (Messiah). Even that picture was molded by the prevalent conceptions of prophecy; the worldly and divine "king" would somehow come out from the house of David who would be around in the "last days"; the angel who would appear as the "Son of Man" in Daniel's prophecy of the end of the world; the servant of God, the suffering, dying, rising Savior of Deutero-Isaiah. It is as with now--Man will conjure that which he wishes to note and/or pronounce and fact has little if anything to do with the picture projected. All these conceptions were echoed over and over in sayings pronounced stated by me--and a great many of them are quite accurate as far as they go. One correct statement was "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man hath no where to lay his head." I was a threat to those of evil intent and it is not surprising that suspicions could arise that I aspired to the crown or something such, and certainly my accusers conjured such conjecture.
Did I regard myself as the Christ? How about the Messiah? I called myself Esu and Emmanuel. I commanded that no one speak of me as the Messiah and forbade those possessed to address me as the son of David. I charged my friends (disciples) to tell no man that I was the Christ. Further, you ones relate even that as "Jesus" the Christ. No, the term Jesus was not even in consideration relative to myself until long after my departure. I did blatantly ask them who they would say I am. Good old Simon Peter responded--for he always likes puzzles, "Thou are the Christ, the Son of the living God." I answered then as now; "Blessed thou art, Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." Could the entire statement be misconstrued and out of context? It would seem to me that the theological tone seems to brand it inauthentic. For example: "All Things are delivered unto me of my Father, and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomever the Son will reveal him." and "Why calleth thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." Good, beloved ones, meant "perfection". It mattered not whether I be a Christ or a heathen--I certainly knew the language even if the note-keepers did not.
Taken all together, the words of which I supposedly am attributed must supply much less than unequivocal answers. Even the projections of my enemies could not attribute to me such dogmatic formulations and apparently they could come to no definite conclusion about the nature of my person. I find that it is quite interesting to note that to this day there is no conclusion regarding my being. The question itself seems to be a fallacy resulting from dogmatic bias.
Why do you believe things which are so entirely fabricated? Let us look at that which supposedly occurred in "the garden". Dear ones, the story as told could not have been an eyewitness account for who could attest and who could have observed my own vacillation, my own struggle with my own weakness? I believe any crippled lawyer would be able to recognize that as speculation or conjecture. But, rather, it was a fiction calculated to confirm to the fulfillment of God's will as revealed in the Old Testament.
What about my "last" words? "My God, my God, why hast you forsaken me?" Are they not interpreted according to the same method? All of you miss something most important: afterwards, it is explained, the Christians, drawing on the Old Testament, came to believe that I had despaired and cried out in lamentation but had found consolation in prayer. Thus they arranged it so that my last words are not the cry of a despairing man but the beginning of the nice Twenty-second Psalm, and the man who prays in these words is not a rebel against God, but one who lives and dies at peace with God. Well, precious ones--it matters not a whit who I was--it matters greatly WHO I AM!
It certainly seems more than a species can do to tear yourselves away from the beliefs as poured forth upon you in order to continue control over you. I guess it takes some very compelling reasons to make you abandon the belief that there is reality at the base of these moving episodes and speeches. I was a Man and I tried to always reveal myself in the purity of my soul and in my struggle with unexpected realities. The struggle culminated in no finished awareness nor dogma for that matter. In the face of terrors, in the face of my mounting disappointment, all that was left me was my prayer--"Thy will be done." WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE AND SAID? THAT ALONE BECOMES FAR MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT WHICH I DID AND/OR SAID. FOR THAT WAS MY PATH--WHAT MIGHT YOURS BE?
ESU "JESUS" SANANDA
Blessings--and may our way be given into the Light that Man may find his way. I AM that you might Be. And, I am Come, that you might be given to KNOW. Dharma, allow the clarity into your being--for you only find ONE for there IS ONLY ONE! We come to commune in total balance and as you come into KNOWING--you cannot find difference in one from the other except as we project information--THAT is how it IS. Totality of ONENESS. Your path is blessed, scribe, and I give ye ones of my children, shielding that you faint not and find security within my protection for I am as close as your breath which gives unto you, LIFE.
Let us return to the history lesson for you shall learn of Me--from Me, that there cease the misunderstandings as thrust upon you by Man. He has given you things with no basis, lies with no foundation upon which to reason--and without reason, you cannot KNOW GOD, for that is the gift that sets you apart from other creations--free will choice and ability to "reason".
POSSIBLE PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF "JESUS"
I shall refer to myself as "Jesus" since that is the way the world has learned to refer to that incarnation of the Messenger.
I have been described in many ways and we shall look at some of them: Nietzsche described me as a psychological type, hypersensitive, prone to suffering and dreading it above all else. Well, what would you have done in my stead? He further theorized that "reality" was intolerable to me and stated that I could only accept it as a parable, a sign. No, the fact is--I KNEW AND KNOW THE REALITY, and I was experiencing in a facade, an illusion of "let's pretend". The fact is that I understood and KNEW that the journey was only that of physical and brief manifestation which would pass quickly--MY "REALITY" OF ME AND THAT WHICH I AM (AND YOU ARE). Nietzsche projected that I lived in a world which was not "real", but a world of vague, intangible symbols. Where do you suppose this great one, Nietzsche, lived--he certainly impacted your societies to a great extent.
Hostility, opposition, the resistance of concrete things were intolerable to me, says this great scholar and founder of societal structure. He says that I simply did not contend with the world, and further that "resist not evil" was the key to the gospel I brought. Where did he get his great wisdom and right to pronounce such information? Why do you, as a people, accept anything some self-styled "expert" and "authority" hand on your shoulders and denounce any who actually bring Truth directly from the mouth of the one who experienced? How many "PHYSICAL" beings do you see walking around who have lived infinitely? Do not all you see and know, make a transition of some sort-- leaving that old bag of bones? How do you balance eternity against some 70 to 110 years? Would it not appear REASONABLE that there is MORE than the 70 or 110 years?
It comes down into your day that I resisted not anything--brothers, this is lie--I resisted and got myself killed for the effort. I was labeled as unable to struggle or had no "capability" for struggle and that is somehow set up as an ethical principle. All I can say in this in the particular paragraph is that you had better cease and desist such an illusion right now. This is part of the lie handed down to you in order to render you helpless and docile and totally without reasoning stance.
Each decade a NEW LIE is introduced unto you sleeping masses and repeated until it becomes your very illusion. There was no mention in the original writings of "Jews", Zionists, "Raptures", etc. How dare you think that you can dump your load of transgressions on the shoulders of any INNOCENT Man and you get off with some nice RAPTURE TO PARADISE? How dare you!
I said that I would intercede and petition of behalf on you who were ignorant of Truth that you might be shown mercy in your ignorance--I DID NOT POUR FORTH MY BLOOD NOR LIFE THAT YOU SHOULD GET FREE OF YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES. NO MAN CAN DO THAT FOR ANOTHER--NO MAN! EACH WILL ANSWER FOR SELF--ONLY SELF! [Emphasis added]
The only true reality is the inner reality, which is called LIFE, TRUTH, LIGHT. The Kingdom of God is a psychological state. It is not expected, but it is present everywhere and nowhere. It is a state of beatitude which cannot be demonstrated by miracles or by scripture, which offers no promise of reward, but is its own proof, its own miracle and reward. Its proofs are inner lights, feelings of pleasure and self-satisfaction--peace. The problem is, then: How shall you live in order to feel that you are in heaven or this state of grace, at all times divine, the child of God? For this sense of beatitude is the sole reality.
I was not a "hero" nor was I a "genius", but more in the nature of a total idiot, perhaps. I actually believed that Man could come into understanding of LIFE. I could not fit any historian's page of calculations for if you take my Truth as that laid forth you will find that the Sermon on the Mount with the Beatitudes is utterly incompatible with a "Jesus", the fanatical militant, the deadly enemy of the priests and theologians. Consequently, there becomes ascribed to me everything in the Gospels that does not suit the desired human picture of "Jesus" to the invention of the early militant congregation, which required a militant prototype. Therefore, guess what--I came across as an elemental power, by turns unbendingly aggressive and infinitely gentle. Herein I plan to present myself as a gentle, unbending Messenger of God. I weary of the foolish manner in which Man assumes his right to tamper with the TRUTH OF LIFE.
Did I do the things of which I stand accused? Like what? "He looked on them with anger", "He assailed them(him)", "He rebuked him", "He menaced him". And "Finding no fruit on a fig tree, I withered it with my curse that no man should eat fruit of it forever thereafter." And how about this one? "Those who do not do the will of the Father in heaven, "JESUS" WILL DENY AT THE LAST JUDGMENT!" Where are your EARS, friends? What right have I to even BE at YOUR judgment? Much less would I assume to DENY your entry into God's house. And why, indeed, would I destroy a fig tree when it was reasonable that it was out of season or barren? Could it be that MAN misled you and incorrectly projected the tale for your consumption? If they supposedly "crucified" me by the lie, is it not possible that a few other little errors might have slipped through? God gave YOU minds with which to reason, I remind you again and again until I hope you sicken of it.
Again--the assumption is that I would be that God of judgment and yet somehow I was also supposed to be there denying you if I didn't like something about you. It is said that I would toss you out and turn my back if you followed not the rules of God--I think HE is perfectly capable of handling that task Himself. Further, it is said that I projected to "cast into outer darkness, those ones..." and "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." [And:] "Whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on Earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother." Come, come, chelas--DOES THAT SOUND LIKE A SWEET CHRISTIAN ATTITUDE OR DOES IT SOUND LIKE THE TRICKS AND LIES OF THE ADVERSARY? IN THE PAST SENTENCE I WOULD HAVE BROKEN HALF THE COMMANDMENTS BY WHICH I LIVED UNTO MY DEATH OF FLESH.
More: I supposedly reviled the cities that did not repent: i.e., "Woe unto thee, Chorazin; woe unto thee, Bethsaidal! It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you." And when Peter is offended to hear that the Son of Man would suffer much, be killed, and rise again, I supposedly rebuked him: "Get thee behind me, Satan,...thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men." This is a bit much, is it not? And a strange thing comes to attention at this very projection of words regarding Peter. Is it not strange that one Sister Thedra would write to this scribe the very words: "Get thee behind me, Satan..." This is for my scribe who takes abuse daily: Satan was not "created" until in your recent history--satan (with a little s) simply means and meant "adversary". Peter was most certainly NOT my adversary! HOW MANY OF YOU TRAVEL ON INTO YOUR NEXT EXPERIENCE BEARING THE LIE? HOW MANY OF YOU EFFORT TO CLEANSE THAT WHICH IS NOT PRESENT? DOES NOT THE ADVERSARY ALWAYS KNOW OF THINE SOFT AND VULNERABLE PLACES AND THEREIN STRIKE YOU?
Boy, the really good one is how I handled those nasty old money-changers in the temple. "With a whip, he drove the money-changers from the Temple." And do you suppose I just turned around and grabbed a whip? Or, did I bring it with me unto the temple? Do I tell you to handle the situation of the tax-collectors and money-changers in that manner this day? Then why do you believe I would have done so in those days when I would have known it would have meant my physical destruction?
The next should also be most thought-provoking to you with "reason" in your mind: I was strangely dual in personality--gentle and uncompromising militancy: "My yoke is easy, and my burden is light", but then I would also command men to "follow me at once, without hesitation, and without reservation". To the young man who wished to first bury his father, I demanded: "Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead." I rather wish I had originated that one for it is so appropriate in your recent days. Again, I "cursed" the unbelievers and in the words of Isaiah: 'Ye shall hear, and shall not understand; for this people's heart was waxed gross.' " Then I turned about and gave thanks that God should have hidden the Truth from the wise and prudent, and revealed it to babes?? I tell you truly, I marvel that any could come into Godliness through that which is attributed unto me! Godliness through that which is attributed unto me! The very words are a mockery unto God of Truth.
COULD IT BE, BELOVED BROTHERS, THAT THE TRAP WAS SET FOR YOU FROM THE BEGINNING? YOU HAD BETTER BEGIN TO LOOK UNTO THE FACTS FOR YOU ARE ABOUT OUT OF TIME FOR THE CHANGING. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM GOD--NOR ME. WHY DO YOU FOLLOW THE LIES SO WILLINGLY?
[Quoting from a "historical dissertation":]
HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF THIS STRANGE MAN
This so-called Jesus is a figure of late antiquity, living on the margin of the Hellenistic-Roman world. In a period of luminous history, he spent his life in obscurity, barely noticed by the outside world. What part could this man who did not calculate at all have in a calculating, realistic, rationalized world where nothing mattered but power? From the standpoint of all material reality, his life was a mistake and could only end in failure.
Compared to the archaic "Jewish" [?!?] prophets, who seem cast in bronze, he seems contemplate, ambiguous, and volatile. But compared with the Hellenistic-Roman world, he has the originality of a first beginning. Some have tarried to explain Jesus as one of the many religious or political fanatics of his time. He has been identified with the apocalyptic movement that was widespread in the Near East, with such sects as the Essenes who sought salvation in a life of purity and serene brotherhood, or with the revolutionary movements proclaiming a Messiah who would restore the kingdom of "Israel" [?!?]; he has been numbered among the wandering prophets spoken of by Celsus, who went about the cities, temples, army camps, begging, telling fortunes, claiming to be sent by God to save other men and cursing those who would acknowledge them; and he has been likened to the artisans who wandered about the desert with the Bedouins, destitute but carefree, watching their battles but taking no part, caring for the wounded on both sides, men of peace, living successfully among warriors. [End of quoting.]
Now I ask you to contemplate the above description--be it of anyone--and with reason, discern if THAT IS OF GOD? God is total clarity with the only mystery being that which is simply not yet understood--but totally open for the learning as ye will do so. He gave succinct and easily understood instructions for behavior of your species and gave forth the command, further, to live within the balance of the Natural Creation. Would a true messenger of God who already had given those pronouncements upon His people--present such stupid contradictions? If he truly did so, how long do you really think he would last? Ah, but the adversary deceives, confuses and lasts until the ending of your "physical" at which point he dumps you into the void of more confusion. WHO DOES THE ABOVE DESCRIPTION SEEM TO BEST FIT? GOD OR SATAN?
Ah yes, let us continue with this brilliant historical dissertation from a most learned historian. [Quoting:]
Jesus may have something in common with all these types. Certain aspects of their lives and modes of thought provide a possible framework for his existence. But once this is recognized, the reality of Jesus shatters the framework, for it is utterly different in meaning, origin, and dignity. He reveals breadths, and depths unknown to the others. All those who came forward as Messiahs were executed and forgotten; when they had failed, their followers ceased to believe in them. The religious fanatics lost themselves in particulars and externals. If so many heterogeneous types can cast a light on Jesus, it only goes to show that he belongs to none of them.
It has been said, rightly perhaps, that there was nothing new in the teachings of Jesus. He accepted the knowledge of those about him, worked with traditional ideas. The God that he loved so intensely was the "Jewish" [?!?] God. It never occurred to him to break with the "Jewish" [?!?] faith. Like the ancient Prophets, he lived in it, while opposing the congealed forms and dogmas of the priests. Historically, he is the last of the "Jewish" [?!?] Prophets. He cites them often and explicitly. [S: OR DID I? SEEMS I REMEMBER DENOUNCING THEM AS LIARS, THIEVES AND EVIL. I DENOUNCED THEIR RELIGIOUS PRACTICES AND CONTINUALLY GOT THROWN OUT OF THE TEMPLES--HOW SO, THAT I SO CONVENIENTLY GOT BACK WITHIN? But let us go on:]
But if only because of the changed world, there was a difference between Jesus and the ancient Prophets. They had lived in an independent Jewish [S: I give up--we will have to use the term for the historian used it over and over again] State and witnessed its decline and end. Jesus lived in a long-stabilized and politically dependent Jewish theocracy. Between the political independence of the Jews and their final dispersion after the destruction of Jerusalem, there elapsed a period of five centuries marked by many of the most fervent Psalms, the Books of Ecclesiastes and Job--and the career of Jesus. The Jewish theocracy cast him out, as the priests in the days of the Kings had attempted to cast out the Prophets. The Talmudic Jews of the Diaspora who accepted the old Prophets as part of the canon could no longer accept Jesus, for in the meanwhile Gentiles has built a world religion around him.
Historically, Jesus' faith in God is one of the great creations of Jewish Biblical religion. The God of Jesus, the God of the Bible, is no longer one of the Oriental gods from whom Yahweh was descended. Gradually He had lost his Oriental cruelty and lust for offerings, largely through the Prophets who molded a more profound conception of sacrifice and spoke their last word in Jesus. Nor is this God one of the grandiose mythical figures who symbolized and so sublimated and guided the primordial forces of human existence, after the manner of Athene, Apollo, and all the rest; He is the imageless, formless ONE. Yet He is not a mere universal power; He is not the world reason of Greek philosophy, but an active person. Nor is He the unfathomable Being with which man achieves mystical union in meditation; He is the absolutely Other, which can be believed but not seen. He is absolute transcendence, before the world and outside of the world, and He is the creator of the world. In relation to the world and man, He is will: "He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast." Impenetrable in His decisions, He is trusted and obeyed without reserve. He is the judge who sees man's most hidden thoughts, and before whom man must give an accounting. He is the father who loves and forgives, in whose presence man knows himself to be a child of God. He is jealous and hard, but merciful and compassionate. Remote and unapproachable, He governs from afar, but He is close at hand, speaking in man's heart and intangible like the One Being of speculation; rather, He is the living God who speaks directly to each man.
[And he goes on to say:]
Jesus believed in the God of the Old Testament and fulfilled the old Prophetic religion. Like Jeremiah, he was a Jew, pure of heart, freed from all bonds of law, ritual, and cult. He did not reject all these forms, but subordinated them to the present will of God. Once again Jesus embodied the Prophetic faith, which sustained him as it had sustained men for centuries. [End of quoting.]
Is it yet occurring to any of you that the one labeled "Jesus" by Paul was not the one who experienced in Christness? Does it yet touch your imaginings that this "Jesus" conjured by Saul of Tarsus and about whom Paul spent his remaining days touting--was simply a conjured symbol of this misgiven man? There is almost NOTHING within the writings of your so-called Bible which reflects that which a Christed being would be! The things that were given in Truth regarding the Commandments and method of life law, are now finally being voted-in/out as well.
The one who pronounced himself "apostle" of the Christ and labeled that one, Jesus--wrote the "bible" to suit his needs for control and power --began the "churches" and destroyed the species! I SUGGEST YOU PONDER THIS FOR A WHILE BEFORE WE MOVE ON. SINCE PAUL WROTE THE INSTRUCTIONS AND SUPPOSED WORD OF GOD AND CHRIST--CHRISTIANITY BECAME THE MOST HEINOUS, UNMERCIFUL AND DEADLY MURDEROUS MOVEMENT ON THE FACE OF YOUR PLANET! AND STILL, YOU GO TO WAR WITH THE BANNER OF GOD FLAPPING IN THE WINDS WHILE YOU DEFILE THE VERY PRESENCE OF HIS GODNESS. SO BE IT FOR I JOSH YOU NOT--YOU WILL SET THINGS TO RIGHT OR YOU SHALL FIND YOURSELVES AND YOUR UNHOLY NESTS IN THE PITS WITH THE VIPERS WHOM YOU HAVE COME TO WORSHIP! AND SO HAS IT COME TO BE UPON YOUR PLACE--JUST AS THE PROPHECIES SAID IT WOULD COME TO BE. SALU.
Sananda to bless you, chela, for I see the pain and agony within your being. I never, never said that to bring the TRUTH would be easy--only glory, joy and infinite blessing. Man must be given into TRUTH before he passes from this experience. MAN can no longer live by the lie for he has destroyed all that has come into his clutches--Man has become one with the adversary whom he serves. Ah yes, were today to be the ending journey--the ships would indeed be uncrowded. Hold unto ME for I AM YOUR SHIELD AND YOUR BUCKLER AND NO MAN NOR EVIL CAN NOR SHALL STAND AGAINST ME--FOR I AM COME THAT THIS KINGDOM BE COME AGAIN UNTO GOD. WE HAVE BUT TO PLAY OUT THE FINAL ACT AFORE THE CURTAIN FALLS.
To be continued...
Source: CONTACT: THE PHOENIX PROJECT, April 2, 1996, Volume 12, Number 10.
Thank you, Rocky Montana for transcribing this into html format. :) A & PHB