How to turn the tables ....

[J Williams]

Many good, honest progressives are trying to point out the truth. The trouble is, only progressives want to hear it. It falls on the deaf ears of too many who simply don't want to hear.


But now there is something that will effectively deal with the right-wing arrogance, hypocrisy, and religious bigotry that has produced so much inequity, conflict, trouble and violence in the world.


Someone has effectively turned the tables on the Bible thumpers, and confronted them with truth they cannot deny. He presents the truth that will bring down the arrogantly proud and militant, and enable the humble, gentle, meek and truly faithful to inherit the earth.

But he doesn't seek personal power. As Lao Tsu wrote: "When the best leader’’s work is accomplished, the people say, ‘‘We did it ourselves!’’"

Ironically, that same idea was expressed in the Old Testament in the Bible, which says: "Be wise and consider the ways of the ants, which having no guide, overseer or ruler, provide food in the summer and gather in the harvest." Similarly, it also says, "if you want a king, you reject God," and "besides God there is no Savior."

The error of humanity is to expect a savior-king, and to accept leadership from egocentric men who try to play savior-king but are merely pretenders to the throne.

The truth is that the prophesied servant-messenger of God is neither a savior or a king. He says we are all joint heirs, and we shall all share the throne of government that will be truly of, by and for the people. He provides an innovative way for the people to unite, determine our own destiny, and cooperatively accomplish goals for the common good.

You see, the Bible acutally says the witness and servant-messenger of God "shall not cause his voice to be heard in the street" (Isaiah 42:1-2); is "hidden" (Isaiah 49:2-5); sends "his work before him" and will be "sought out" (Isaiah 62:11-12).


That is why the Christ Jesus said the future"son of man will first suffer many things and be rejected by his generation." (Luke 17:24-25) And that is why Jesus also said he had to "go away" but"the Spirit of truth shall come to guide you into all truth and show you things to come." (John 16:7-15)

The fifth installment of the unexpected message has just been delivered. (The first four have been rejected, as was prophesied by the prophets Isaiah and Jesus.) It's titled Memoirs of a Prodigal Son of Man, by Joseph J. Adamson, and you can browse it for free at:

http://books.iuniverse.com/viewbooks.asp?isbn=0595393322&page=fm5

http://realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com

Please spread the message of truth, for the truth shall set us free.

[J Williams]

1. I forgot to add...

How to Turn the Tables, and WIN

[Generic Brad]

2. Welcome to DU!

Anyone who quotes Lao Tsu will always get my attention. I also liked the Bible quotes you compiled. You nailed it!

:hi:

[J Williams]

3. Thanks

Thanks. Much appreciated. Unfortunately, not many people can recognize the truth. It's not what's expected. Not traditional. Not according to what most people think of....

[nmliberal]

4. You did a wonderful job. Thank you.

I am bookmarking this, because I KNOW I will use it in the future.

[trotsky]

5. Good luck in your quest to out-Jesus the fundies.

Do you have any place in your revolution for non-Christians?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

6. I am wondering if out-Jesusing them

might not be the only way? But then again, nah. Most of them (in my humble opinion) really don't give a hoot what JC said. There might be a few who would listen.

Nice try, though.

[trotsky]

7. Secular enlightenment

has an exemplary track record defeating religious fundamentalism. But whenever it's brought up, we get shouted down as "atheist whackjobs" who are hostile to faith.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

8. Maybe we need to rethink

the word "whackjob" and look at its root words. Whack is not always a bad thing. Ask Tony Soprano. And job is a good thing.

Be a proud whackjob and go for it. Anything we can do to weaken their numbers is a good thing.

Whack on!

[varkam]

9. I love you Grannie n/t

:)

[TallahasseeGrannie]

10. whack on, dude...

whack on.

[J Williams]

11. It's a Call for Reformation of All Religions, for All Religions

Trotsky asked: "Do you have any place in your revolution for non-Christians?"

Joseph J. Adamson (the author's pen name) does not advocate any particular religion, but points out the eternal and universal truths in all of them. He says they have all been distorted in various degrees by egocentric, ethnocentric men. He also believes in complete separation of church and state.

He does, however, explain the real prophecies (as apposed to symbolic prophecies) in Judaism and Christianity, and points out that they are consistent with the prophecies of other religions. They all have to do with why and how the rich, proud and militant will lose power, and why and how the humble and meek shall inherit the earth, empowered by the truth that shall unite us and set us free.

[trotsky]

12. So, other religions are welcome...

(as long as their overall message synchs up with your spin on Christianity), but atheists and agnostics are not.

How inclusive of you. :sarcasm:

[J Williams]

13. Inclusiveness is the AIM

Trotsky, your assumption is not correct.

The beauty of the message is that it's based on the golden rule, the idea that we should treat other people as we want to be treated. That is at the core of all religions and civilized societies. It's the highest principle and ideal, the ideal all humanity agrees to, and even our secular, civil laws are based on it.

The fact is that the message emphasizes inclusiveness, of all religions, all races, and all cultures. It repudiates partisan politics and sectarian religious bigotry, which are divisive, intolerant and not inclusive.

[beam me up scottie]

15. Then why not just use the golden rule?

A secular version of it, that is.

Why bring religion into the equation?

I reject the idea that ANY religious message can be "the truth" because it automatically implies exclusion (or just as bad-patronizing inclusion) of non-believers.

If you want to preach inclusion to progressives, try using secularism.


Uppity atheists like trotsky and I have heard this song and dance one too many times.

We don't have deaf ears, just long memories and a basic knowledge of history.

[greyl]

26. Not TRUE inclusiveness, no.

From reading the beginning of his memoirs, it's obvious to me that he only wants to include some gullible peoples money with the rest in his bank account.
As far as cultural and religious inclusion, I see zero evidence of that in his writing; I only see evidence of the opposite, in fact.

[J Williams]

14. Furthermore....

Here's a quote from Memoirs of a Prodigal Son of Man, by Joseph J. Adamson:

"The truth is that the Christian Golden Rule, that we should treat others as we would like to be treated, is the core value and principle of all religions. As I’ve said, all the other great spiritual teachers have said basically the same thing. That’s why Jews are taught that we should not do to others what is hurtful to our self. Buddhists are taught that we should treat others as we treat our self. The Hindus are taught that we should not do unto others anything that, which if it were done to us, would cause us pain. The Muslims are taught that no one is a true believer in Allah until he loves for others what he loves for himself. The Taoists are taught that we should regard our neighbor’s gain as our own gain, and our neighbor’s loss as our own loss. And, like Jesus, the founders of all true religions have also said that the search for the Divine should be not in the world, but within.
"Of course, in the course of human events we generally do reap what we sow, and poetic justice prevails in most human interactions. Certainly not all, but most, even if we’re considering the material realm only. That is self-evident to most reasonable, rational, aware people. That is why Jesus advised that we judge not and treat each other as we ourselves want to be treated. Again, it is the Golden Rule at the core of all religious teachings. It generally works to the benefit of all concerned, if we abide by it, and if we don’t we usually suffer the consequences sooner or later. Even though we often forget or ignore that, most of us understand it. If we judge, we are judged, and if we treat others badly, we are treated badly. That’s just the way it works."

One of the main problems in the world is that religious bigots ignore the golden rule because they think everyone must believe as they do. Adamson respects athiests and agnostics who, like him, cannot abide with religious bigotry.

[beam me up scottie]

17. You just proved my point.

"The truth is that the Christian Golden Rule, that we should treat others as we would like to be treated, is the core value and principle of all religions.

No, it's NOT.

The core value of most religions is to separate their followers from others.

One of the main problems in the world is not that religious bigots ignore the golden rule, it's that the religious are more often than not incapable of recognizing that morality existed before religion, and no doubt will exist long after it, if they don't destroy us all in their separate quests to establish the "one true religion" first, of course.

Nice platitudes, really, but like I said, we've heard all of this before.

Leftists who seek to use religion to manipulate the masses are as suspect as their right wing brethren.

[The Magistrate]

37. A Person Of Cruel Disposition, Ma'am

Might be moved to state that the nearest thing to a consistent core value of organized religions is "Feed the priest...."

[Quantess]

16. to be fair,

did the OP try to alienate anyone? I didn't read the links.
If the OP's biblical message is good, then why discourage him/her?
He/she has a good point. Many Democrats may be swayed by Sunday's Finest.

edit: change "some" to "many"

[beam me up scottie]

18. Religion alienates people.

That's the idea.

[Quantess]

19. self-edit

[bluesbassman]

20. People alienate people.

Your point is well taken bmus, and I agree with your observation that people use religion to divide, segregate and exclude (my paraphrase). But I do think that you're being overly critical when you assert that the core value for all religion is to be alienating. People tend to segregate themselves on their own (tribal instinct?), corporate religion just provides certain people with another vehicle to achieve their agenda. But as I haven't read the resource cited in the OP, and therefore can't comment as to it's veracity, I do believe that the concept of treating each other with respect, and with a spirit of humility is a core tenet of the major faiths. Just my take on the subject, and you're welcome at my table anytime.:)

[beam me up scottie]

22. Thank you.

But I'm not the only one who views organized religion as a vehicle to separate and elevate its followers.

"We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another."
-Jonathan Swift

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity."
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

I'm certain that most liberal theists believe that respect and humility are core tenants of their faith, but history shows that those weren't the ones used to justify persecuting and slaughtering those of other faiths or none at all.



And you are welcome at my table as well, but I must warn you, I'm a strict vegetarian. :)

[bluesbassman]

23. You're welcome.

And bring on the veggies.:toast:

[trotsky]

27. Maybe because the OP

is not clear as to whether it's the poster's or someone else's words. But clearly the appeal to "more religion" is not a call that non-believers want to hear. It's exclusionary.

[greyl]

28. I would add

that they're probably not trying to alienate anyone.
Every person who doesn't buy the "inclusionary" line is one less potential buyer of the book.

[greyl]

21. "The error of humanity is to expect a savior-king" ? Baloney.

That's a very arrogant and culture-centric statement.
That error isn't made by all of humanity, it's only made by certain members of 1 culture out of 10s of thousands of other cultures who don't believe that humans are born in need of salvation.

[greyl]

24. I just read up to page xviii of "Memoirs of a Prodigal Son of Man"

That guy is either a lunatic or a knowing fraud - I lean toward somewhat crazy knowing fraud.

He's writing under a pen name, he says he was "drawn up out of his body and into the presence of God - the real actual God", he says he is the one phrophesied messenger of God(!).

[beam me up scottie]

25. Well,

how about that?

Score another one for atheist intuition.

We can smell them way before anyone else even knows they're there.

[salvorhardin]

30. Yes, and surprise -- he has a series

You too can reach New Jerusalem in only 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 or... easy steps of $16.95-$23.95 each.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0595298931

[J Williams]

32. What about the rest?

I find it interesting that you read that far before finding something you could object to. Makes me question your motivation and intent. And what's wrong with him saying he is the messenger who fulfills prophecy? Someone must, to satisfy all those who believe in prophecy.

[greyl]

33. What do you mean; rest of the book, or rest of the intro?

If you're asking why I didn't read more of the book, it's because there isn't any more of it available for free online, afaik. I read the part of the book that was created, released, and marketed online, in order to encourage book sales. The seductive infomercial, if you will.

"I find it interesting that you read that far before finding something you could object to."

What do you mean by "that far"? Which are you implying: "not far" or "far"? Iow, are saying I jumped the gun, or are you saying I could only find 3 criticisms in all those 12 pages?

[J Williams]

34. I meant what I said

I said what I meant. I find it interesting that you read that far before finding something to object to. And then all you had to say was your objection.

[greyl]

39. an elephant true, 100 percent." Enough of the cartoon talk.

I seriously wasn't sure what you were trying to say, and I was only asking for clarification.

To be clear, I chose to highlight 3 of my manifold objections instead of spending the time necessary to intelligently share my critique every single line.

[charlie]

40. Well, I read a little farther than greyl did

And I'll say his polemic is a pretty incisive indictment of popular USAian Christianity. It's really good. And he seems to have had a classic experience of (for want of a better phrase) "cosmic consciousness", so he's not deluded with notions of God as Daddy Grouch.

But he irretrievably goes off the rails when he finds himself prophesized in scripture. That he finds a few general correlations like "stricken and afflicted" and says HEY THAT'S ME doesn't reflect well on his abilities for sensible discernment, even if he does report this remarkable commission with a generous dollop of humility. If it pegs my bullshit meter, imagine what the ordinary Christian he's trying to reach is going to think. I'm afraid he's sunk his cause before it could get started.

[greyl]

41. Where? edit:

Holy crap, why did I think it ended at the intro? I see now that it doesn't.

[J Williams]

46. Charlie, at least that's giving it a little more thought..

I can understand your "bullshit meter" comment, but it's pre-judging without really knowing what it's all about.

Adamson didn't just go "Hey, that's talking about me" in noticing prophecies. If you bothered to look into it, you'd see that this actually fulfills prophecies, which is extemely important. And he does it in a way that can and eventually will reconcile Jews with Christian, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, etc. It's actually very simple, and yet extremely brilliant.

[moggie]

50. Speaking of fraud

I wonder whether he has sock puppets spreading the Word? Why stop at just one pen name?

[Ron Green]

29. Religion is not going away, any more than other human institutions are.

So why not strive to make it better? Education can bring enlightenment. Tarring it all with the same brush is like some D.A.R.E. cop telling 5th-graders that pot is just as bad as meth. Rather, as liberals, let's work for knowledge and love instead of rejection and fear.

[J Williams]

31. Interesting Responses

The responses are interesting, but somewhat expected and predictable. I fully understand where they are coming from, however.

I think the beauty of Adamson's work, aside from the religious part, is his call to do away with partisan politics and the presidential monarchy. He suggests a refreshing, innovative way to do that, and I think that is his most valuable contribution.

Having read all five of his books, I believe the religious part is mainly to establish credibility to expose rhe religious bigotry and hypocrisy of the Religious Right. That is sorely needed, and crucial.

But I'm not here to argue with those who simply want to argue. I just thought I'd point out something new, that has potential to really make a difference. You can take it or leave it.

[SidDithers]

35. Thank you...

I'll leave it.

Sid

[J Williams]

36. Thank you

You are quite welcome to leave it. That's what religious freedom is all about.

Unfortunately, the Religious Right thinks religious freedom means the freedom to try to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.

[greyl]

38. You may enjoy reading some Daniel Quinn.

Excerpt from a speech delivered October 18, 2000, as a Fleming Lecture in Religion, Southwestern University, Georgetown, Texas

Our Religions: Are they the Religions of Humanity Itself?

<snip
No tribal people has ever been found that claimed not to know how to live. On the contrary, they're all completely confident that they know how to live. But with the disappearance of tribal law among us, people began to be acutely aware of not knowing how to live. A new class of specialists came to be in demand, their specialty being the annunciation of how people are supposed to live. These specialists we call prophets.

Naturally it takes special qualifications to be a prophet. You must by definition know something the rest of us don't know, something the rest of us are clearly unable to know. This means you must have a source of information that is beyond normal reach--or else what good would it be? A transcendent vision will do, as in the case of Siddhartha Gautama. A dream will do, provided it comes from God. But best of all, of course, is direct, personal, unmediated communication with God. The most persuasive and most highly valued prophets, the ones that are worth dying for and killing for, have the word directly from God.

The appearance of religions based on prophetic revelations is unique to our culture. We alone in the history of all humanity needed such religions. We still need them (and new ones are being created every day), because we still profoundly feel that we don't know how to live. Our religions are the peculiar creation of a bereft people. Yet we don't doubt for a moment that they are the religions of humanity itself.

This belief was not an unreasonable one when it first took root among us. Having long since forgotten that humanity was here long before we came along, we assumed that we were humanity itself and that our history was human history itself. We imagined that humanity had been in existence for just a few thousand years--and that God had been talking to us from the beginning. So why wouldn't our religions be the religions of humanity itself?

When it became known that humanity was millions of years older than we, no one thought it odd that God had remained aloof from the thousands of generations that had come before us. Why would God bother to talk to Homo habilis or Homo erectus? Why would he bother to talk even to Homo sapiens--until we came along? God wanted to talk to civilized folks, not savages, so it's no wonder he remained disdainfully silent. continued...

Btw, religion as Adamson "knows" it isn't at all necessary to establish credibility in exposing the unethical behavior of the right. I find it profoundly odd that someone who is the prophesied messenger of God would be concerned with the artificial divisions of Republican and Democrat.

[J Williams]

45. Artificial Divisions?

They are not "artificial divisions." They are very real. And if you think a servant of God would not be concerned with politics, just consider that the Christ Jesus sharply criticized and rebuked the rich, and advocated for the poor and the least of our brethren. In fact, Jesus said he hated the "Nocolaitans" who sought wealth and political power for themselves at the expense of the majority. And many other pacifist-martyrs since have done the same thing.

[greyl]

48. Yes, artificial divisions.

And extremely culture-centric divisions at that.
Does this guy, as THE prophesied messenger of God have anything to say to the dozens of ethnicities in China?

I don't think so.
It's because he is only a product of our culture, and doesn't know god, even though he claims to.

There are pregnant mothers in Brazil with more wisdom than he, and none of them claim to have spoken to God in order to make a buck.
edit: well, maybe a few.

[Odin2005]

42. The desire for a savior-king is a result of a disintergrating civilization

All it does is rile up self-defeating violence among the oppresses members of said disintergrating civilization. The late British historian Arnold Toynbee thought there were 4 types of "saviors" of a disintegrating society: The savior with a sword (Napoleon, Hitler, Bush, Alexander the Great, Augustus), the savior as a creative genius (Marx, Plato), the philospher-king (Jefferson), and the God-incarnate in a man (Jesus, Buddha, etc.). The first three will try to repair the crumbling civilization, and fail doing so. Only the teachings of the last allow people to trancend a dying civilization and build a new one.

[Odin2005]

43. BUMP

[J Williams]

44. Toynbee was right

The U.S. as we now know it will "fall," because it is the divided "Babylon" of prophecy. But it won't be a terrible fall, except for those who will lose power because of it. It will be reformed, and a new government that is truly of, by and for the people will replace our presidential partisan monarchy.

[J Williams]

47. I should add....

While I expected skepticism and cynicism, it always gets to me. I really don't understand the negative feelings for someone who is sincerely given his life to trying to save and improve the world for the benefit of the vast majority of human beings. To me, he has hit the nail right on the head. And if we were to take his suggestions, this world would actually become a place NOT ruled by the wealthy, but governed by the people. That, to me makes a hell of a lot of sense.

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. If "Joseph J Adamson" has a message he wants to get to the world

it would be better for him to put it all on the web, for free, rather than publishing it as books. There's no real need for using publishing houses now, unless you want an income from your work. The "prophesied messenger of God" wouldn't sell the message, would he?

[bluesbassman]

51. Huge point muriel!

I don't know what Adamson does with the profit from his book sales, but regardless, it still seems a little unseemly for a "prophet" to be charging for his prophecies. Not saying that a workman should not receive his due, but if salvation is the free gift of God, (which is a bit more valuable than Adamson's utterances) I have a feeling that He wouldn't be charging to lay His "new" prophecies on us.

[godhatesrepublicans]

52. I've been using religious language against the Repugs for years.

I've won a few sheep away from their flocks, bringing them back into the fold of humanity.

As the past few years have shown, whoever gets to frame
how the debate is discussed will win the debate. For example,
when the Radical Right Wing in America dominated the media
in December of 2005 with talk about a fictional “War on
Christmas,” they automatically won the debate by getting
everyone to use the phrase “war on Christmas” to discuss it.

The latest attempt to create a debate and frame it was "The
War on Christians and the Values Voter in 2006" conference
held on March 27 and 28 of 2006 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel
in Washington, DC. Speakers at the "War on Christians"
conference included such “Values Vote leaders" as Sen. Sam
Brownback (R-KS), Gary Bauer, the president of American
Values, Alan Keyes, the recently defeated Republican
Senatorial candidate from Illinois, Phyllis Schlafly, the founder
of Eagle Forum and a 50-plus-year conservative activist,
Janet Parshall, a popular right wing radio talk show host,
Ohio's Pastor Rod Parsley, the founder and president of the
Center for Moral Clarity, the beleaguered and indicted
Congressman, Tom DeLay (R-TX), and Senator John Cornyn
(R-TX). These are all people who can get buzzwords out to
the world.

Scheduled panels included “The Gay Agenda: America Won't
Be Happy”; “The ACLU and Radical Secularism: Driving God
from the Public Square”; “Hollywood: Christians through a
Distorted Lens”; “Jews Confront the War on Christians”; “The
Judiciary: Overruling God”; “The Media: Megaphone for Anti-
Faith Values”; and “Taking Our Faith to the Ballot Box”.

Rick Scarborough, the President of the organization Vision
America said in a letter promoting the event: “The left intends
to eliminate God-based morality from our government to
achieve its goal of cultural Marxism in a secular state.”
Notice how many buzzwords Scarborough crammed into that
one sentence to whip his readers into an unthinking snarling
reaction, like a dog at the approach of a mailman. I counted
seven.

I see this as a glimpse of election tactics to come. The 1980s
gave us “the War on Drugs,” which was used as a
smokescreen to distract Americans from the Republican led
war on the Middle Class. The recent “War on Terrorism” has
fallen apart as a Republican rallying cry, because the Iraq War
has become a huge disaster for the Bush administration. As a
replacement, for the next several election cycles, the Radical
Right will try to whip its voting base into a frenzy of donations
with an artificial “War on Christianity.”

In 2004 John Kerry blew his chance to save the nation from
Neo-Conservativism because he thought countering the lies
told by the “Swiftboat Veterans for Truth” was beneath him.
Let’s not blow our chances in 2006 and 2008 to defuse the
rhetorical bomb of a “War on Christianity.”

We need to puncture this puffed up piece of nonsense, and do
it is such a way that every time some political hack or second
rate preacher tries to use it to drive their listeners to the polls,
the NASCAR dads, security moms and values voters will
laugh back in their faces. And I know how to do it.

Tell everyone you know my winning strategy, and maybe we’ll
get our country back. Otherwise, I’ll see you in the East Coast
“Rapture-Ready Concentration Camp for Damned Heretics” in
early 2009. I’ll be the one screaming “I Told You So!” at the
top of my lungs.

Here it is. Every time someone uses the phrase “War on
Christians” in your presence, reply as follows;

“You mean the War on Heretics declared by the followers of
the Rapture Cult? I think it’s a bad idea. I think the Rapture
Cult wants to start the same sort of Religious war in America
that the Neo-Cons created in Iraq.”

That’s it. With 42 words, you have Judo-flipped the framing of
the argument to where you can’t HELP but win the debate.
If asked about the phrase “War on Heretics,” point out that the
Rapture Cult is clearly attempting to persecute those who
disagree with their Cult’s take on theology. There is no way
for a Radical Right mouthpiece to argue away the point you
just scored. You’ve asserted a perfectly true charge that the
Radical Right is attempting to force others to bow before their
Altar in their Church. Congratulations, you have now reframed
the argument and have practically won the debate.

The other person now has to argue away the concept of Free
Will, the entire Protestant Reformation and two centuries of
American religious freedom to justify why their side should
have supreme religious authority over all Americans. Any half
awake debater could destroy them.

If challenged on the term “Rapture Cult,” my web site http:
//www.godhatesrepublicans.org is a good place to begin
gathering information on why the Radical Right is relying on
bad theology to browbeat people of faith into following them
on their path to destruction.

The short version is that the Radical Right’s religious arm are
preaching an interpretation of scripture that only goes back to
1835 and the Irish Protestant John Nelson Darby, and runs
counter to almost 2000 years of mainstream Christian
thought. Darbyism and the obsession with “true Christians”
being Raptured away from the final battle between good and
evil is a very recent invention, and isn’t “fundamental” to
Christianity at all. Darbyism and the Rapture is a minor cult, a
blip in the history of Christianity, and the Rapture Cult makes
up much of the leadership and donor list of the Radical Right
Wing Republicans.

Hit your opponent with this totally correct information, and
again, you’ve turned the argument away from the mythical
“War on Christianity” and forced your opponent on the
defensive. They’ll have to explain why 2000 years of
mainstream Christianity was wrong, and why the tiny minority
of worldwide Christians who support the Rapture Cult are right.

I’m begging you, spread this talking point around. If we let the
Radical Right and their fictional “War on Christianity” takes
hold in the popular imagination, then they’ll win. If we reframe
the argument as it truly is, the Rapture Cult and their “War on
Heretics,” then we win. The stakes are high, time is short.

[J Williams]

54. I agree

The Christian Right has been claiming that they are being persecuted for years, even though in truth they simply resent the strong backlash that gradually built up against their aggression, imposition and hypocrisy.

Moreover, they even interpret the prophecy about the persecution of Christians. Jesus was talking about the persecutions of the early Christians which took place during the first few centuries after his death. He wasn't talking about now. There is no persecution of Christians now. There is only resentment of bigots who claim to be Christians.

[J Williams]

53. Consider this, and you may reconsider

The publisher has in the past posted entire books to browse for free. I don't know why they only posted the introduction and the first chaper. I think I'll ask them, because I agree that it should be available for free.

It should, however, also be available in book form, and books cost money. The Bible costs money. Also, the EBook is only $6.00, which is the cost a lunch and I think affordable for most people.

It seems to me the main objection and complaint is Adamson's claim that he fulfills the prophecies of the "one to come." There seems to be great resentment that anyone could dare to make such a claim. Even though his ideas are great and reflect the feelings and desires of many of us, some just can't get passed that. They dismiss his whole body of work because of that because they assume he's just a religious nut.

Nevertheless, that is why Jesus foretold that the "son of man" to come would first suffer many things and be rejected by his generation. And it is why the prophet Isaiah also foretold that the witness and servant of God would be rejected, and would even fear that his work was in vain and for nought.

I think it's a shame that so many are quick to reject and dismiss this message, when it is clear to me that it is exactly what the world needs, especially when it is plagued with so much conflict caused by religious bigotry.

[J Williams]

55. Furthermore...

Adamson begins Chapter 8 with this:

"Religion and politics have become so mixed and intertwined in the last twenty-five years that it is now practically impossible to speak of one without the other. I suppose that was inevitable, given the nature and extent of the political and religious conflict in the world, and it was particularly inevitable because of the political activism of radically partisan, right-wing religious zealots, and the conflicting opinions regarding the fulfillment of religious prophecy."

I think that is an absolutely true statement. There will be no solution to the problems the world now faces without addressing the false religious beliefs of religious zealots who call themselves the "true" Christians or Jew or Muslims.

THAT is what makes Adamson's work crucial.

[Odin2005]

56. Kick

[J Williams]

57. Kick?

I wonder what that means. Could it be that you "got a kick" out it? Or is it more like "kick the bum out"?

Either way, Odin, for a person only 20 year old, it seems you consider yourself pretty wise. Myself, a 65 year old who's learned a thing or two, I fully realize how much I don't know. But I do recognize the truth in Adamson's work.

[charlie]

58. A "kick"

Is a post solely for the purpose of moving a thread back to the top of the page, where others are more likely to see it. In other words, he's positioning your thread so it'll get more commentary. Relax.

[J Williams]

59. Oh. Sorry. I didn't know.

My apologies, Odin. It seems I need to thank you.

[charlie]

60. S'alright

You wouldn't know unless you'd seen it before. It's done on other forums as well, where threads are arranged by most recent posts -- "kick", "bump", "back to the top", and somesuch.

[Odin2005]

61. LOL, should of used "BUMP"

:dunce:

[J Williams]

62. Odin, you're too kind. And thanks, Charie, for the education

[J Williams]

63. And in the beginning....

"I am deeply sorrowed by the state of the world, and I grieve because so many of our fellow human beings are suffering from the terrible tribulation we are going through. But I am also incensed, because so much of the trouble in the world is caused by the greed, arrogance, self-righteousness and vain folly of misguided men."
"In fact, to be fittingly straightforward, I am even more incensed because many of those men make a show of religiosity and claim to be Christians or Jews or Muslims, when they are really just self-important, sanctimonious bigots and hypocrites who have lusted for, fought for and gained worldly power, wealth, and domain. They have been able to rise to positions of great influence and authority because they have very cunningly pulled the “wool” over the eyes of many people. They are as blind shepherds who divide and mislead their blind flocks, because they delude themselves and their flocks with egocentric notions of superiority and righteousness."

The first two paragraphs of the introduction to Memoirs of a Prodigal Son of Man, by Joseph J. Adamson.

He's tough... And right on...

[J Williams]

64. The Entire Book is Now Available to Read for FREE

Because someone complained that the entire book was not available to browse for free, I contacted the publisher, iUniverse. They said they would contact the author and, if he agrees, the whole book will probably be available to browse for free in a few days at:

http://books.iuniverse.com/viewbooks.asp?isbn=059539332...

[J Williams]

65. Who Is Joseph J. Adamson?

Joseph J. Adamson explains who he is in this way.

Through the prophet Isaiah, God said: “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delights. I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgement to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.” (Isaiah 42:1-2)

Jesus was a servant of God, but he did rise up and he did cause his voice to be heard in the street.

Adamson writes: “After all, even Matthew 4:25 states: ‘Great multitudes followed Him, from Galilee, and from Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea, and beyond the Jordan.’ Matthew 13:14 states: ‘Hearing of this, the crowds followed him on foot from the towns.’ Luke 14:25 states that: ‘Great multitudes went with him, and he turned to them and said...’ Those are but a few parts of the story of Jesus that make it very clear that he spoke to the multitudes who followed him during his travels on foot, on the roads and streets.”

Through the prophet Isaiah, God said: “He is my witness and my servant whom I have chosen, so you may know and believe me, and understand that I am the Holy One. Before me there was no God formed, and neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the Lord God, and beside me there is no Savior.” (Isaiah 43:10-11)

Jesus knew that very well. He knew he was not God, and he knew that only God is the Savior. That is why he said our “father is greater than I,” and “Of myself I do nothing,” and “Why call me good? There is but one who is good, and that is God.” (Matthew 19:17)

Jesus knew there would be another witness and servant of God who would fulfill prophecy. That’s why Jesus said the future “son of man” would “first suffer many things and be rejected by his generation.” (Luke 17:24-25)

Jesus was not speaking of himself there, because he did not first suffer many things. He suffered only at the end of his life, when his mission was completed. And Jesus was not rejected by his generation.

Jesus was rejected by “the elders and chief priests and scribes,” as he said he would be, but he was not rejected by his generation.

Adamson points out that: “In fact, Jesus was accepted by multitudes from every generation at the time. As I will show you, this is made clear throughout the book of Matthew and in the book of Luke. It is also confirmed by an impartial Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, who wrote at the time that Jesus ‘won over many Jews and many of the Greeks.’”

Jesus spoke of the future son of man who would fulfill Judeo-Christian prophecy, the same one who Isaiah called the “witness and servant of God.” That’s why Jesus said the following:

“I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth. For he shall not speak of himself (not on his own authority); but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he declare, and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine, and shall declare it to you.” (John 16:7-15)

Adamson writes: “That is why Jesus said that he ‘must go away’ and there would be one to come at the end of the age who would guide humanity unto all truth, issue judgment, show us things to come, glorify him (Jesus), and deliver his testimony. And Jesus further confirmed that when he said that even though he would ‘not judge,’ his ‘words’ and ‘testimony’ ultimately will. (John 12:47-48 and Revelation 19:10)”

The servant of God who fulfills Judeo-Christian prophecy does not rise up or make his voice heard in the street (in public). And, according to Isaiah, he sends “his work before him,” and is “hidden” and “sought out.”

That servant is he who writes under the pen name of Joseph J. Adamson, and that’s why he writes anonymously.

That is plausible and credible to me. And because Adamson exposes the “virgin birth” and “second coming” myths, the truth will ultimately reconcile Judaism, Christianity and Islam. All three Abrahamic religions will recognize their familial relationship, and their relationship to Buddhism, Hinduism, and all other genuine religions.

When his mission is fulfilled on earth, the people will be free of all forms of monarchial political and religious leadership. They will no longer be divided by self-important pretenders who seek personal power, wealth and domain. They will be united, and determine their own collective destiny through truly representative government that is truly of, by, and for the people.