Insight Footnote [104]

Read Online

[4]

For the killing of Abel by J Lucifer, see:

i. Place of murder known to Mary Jesus:
Luke 11, ‡ 51: " ... from the blood of Abel [down to the blood of Zechariah] who was slain between the altar and the house" (New world translation, p.1132) (italics added)

ii. Place of murder known only to Mary Jesus:
"genesis" 4, ‡ 9: Later on jehovah said to Cain: "Where is Abel your brother?" and he said: "I do not know. Am I my brother's guardian?" (ibid., p.12) (italics added)

iii. Place of murder rebelliously falsified by Mary Jesus:
Knox bible, Luke 11, ‡ 51: " ... from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zacharias, who was killed between the altar and the temple" (cf. i. above) (p.69) (italics added)

(Here see Webster's for distinction between house and temple:

(p.549 for "house": a building that serves as living quarters for one of a few families; p.1191 for "temple": an edifice for religious exercises, as one of three national sanctuaries in ancient Jerusalem - italics added)

iv. Cain actually, and at the same time rebelliously, admitted by J Lucifer as innocent of killing Abel:

a)
--Dublin bible, op.cit., p.7: "And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and slew him" (genesis, chapter 4, ‡ 8, sentence 2); Gideons bible, p.4: " ... and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him" (ibid.) [italics and emphasis added on comma following "Abel" and "brother"]

--For incidence of above comma as admission of Cain's impeccability and of the "lord's" culpability for murder of Abel, see Webster's, p.1515 for its definition/illustration: "Comma: 1. SEPERATES main clauses joined by a coordinating conjunction (as and, but, or, nor, or for) ... " - [Illustration:] "She knew very little about him, and he volunteered nothing" (emphasis added)

b) For rebellion against the above admission of Cain's impeccability, see suppression of above comma:

--Knox bible, loc. cit., pp.3-4: " ... and while they were in the open, Cain turned upon his brother Abel and killed him"

--Good[sic] news bible, ibid., p.7: " ... When they were out in the fields, Cain turned on his brother and killed him"

--New world translation, ibid., p.12: "So it came about that while they were in the field Cain proceeded to assault Abel his brother and kill him"

v. Mary Jesus as fraudulent liar the same as his so-called father:

i. a) Matthew 23, ‡ 35: " ... to the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias ..." (Knox bible, p.25) (italics added)

b)For the above as factual lie, see:
2 Chronicles 24, ‡ 20: Then the spirit of god took control of Zechariah son of Jehoiada the priest. ... ‡ 21: King Joash joined in a conspiracy against Zechariah and the king's orders the people stoned Zechariah [to death] in the temple courtyard [Good(sic) News Bible, p.451] (italics added)

For the above lie by Mary Jesus admitted as lie in/by Knox, see footnote at p.25, Knox bible:

Footnote: "Barachias will have been the name of some ancestor of Zacharias, son of Joiada; there can be no reference to the persons mentioned in Is. 8,2 and Zach. 1,1" [namely, respectively, "Zacharias, son of Barachias", and "Zacharias, son of Barachias, son of Addo"] (italics added)

Here see Hutton Gibson, op.cit., p.31:

"Logically, christ is either exactly what he claimed and proved[?]--god--or the worst faker and liar ever seen. There is no middle ground." (italics added)

ii. For his "father" also being the same fraudulent liar, see "genesis": 2, ‡ 16: "From every tree of the garden you may eat to satisfaction. But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die" (New world translation, pp.10-11); ibid.: 3, ‡ 22: "Here the man has become like one of us* in knowing good and bad, and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually TAKE fruit also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite,--"** (op.cit., p.12); & ibid.: 5, ‡ 4: "And the days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years" (ibid., p.13) (italics and emphasis added)

* "One of us": Therefore, the so-affirmed "only god" admits here that he is one of many, one of a multitude. That necessarily means he is a devan--a god--and not the "God" as he rebelliously self proclaims, out of unilateral mälsaryam (rivalry) with Sivan who by definition is "Eka Devan"--uni-devan.

See corpus, p. for enmity against man as Lucifer's drive supreme. Paramountcy of this drive here compulsively overrides even the räga (demoniac passion) of mälsaryam--, such that he here self contradictingly admits he is one among many.

Note on Etymology of "Us":

"Us": objective case of WE (Webster's, p.1279)

"We": "[ME, fr. OE we, akin to OHG wir we, Skt wayam]" (ibid., p.1316)

** "Tree of life": Singular ban on fruit of tree of knowledge under pain of death necessarily means all other fruits should be freely available to man for the taking, without knowledge being a pre-requisite for such taking. Driven by Bhoothadaya--supreme compassion, the fount of all his eight excellences (Ashtaguna's)--Sivan redeems Eve from illusion of fear of death which Lucifer had implanted in man. She now is fearless, has a look and finds for herself that the fruit was good to eat, good to look at and good for knowledge. After they ate, Lucifer verbally auto cogitates in Sanskrit that Knowledge which he had closed to man as deadly was actually a pre-requisite for acquiring the fruit of the tree of life--specifiedly, the knowledge that the fruit must be grasped from the tree, not picked up from the ground as Lucifer had demoniacally forsworn.

Note:
Where does John find the fruit of the tree of life at the end of the bible book. He finds the fruit still aborne, the tree not having shed any. "On either side of the river, mid-way along the city street, grows the tree that gives life, bearing its fruit twelvefold, one yield for each month. And the leaves of this tree bring health to all nations."

Therefore, had man obeyed Lucifer, that would have been the suicide of the specie. He would have been unknowing as well as animmortal, distinguished from beast alone by awareness of death imminent!

See corpus, pp. For:

i. the phenomenon of Buddha in context of awareness of death imminent

ii. the future of man as knowing and immortal being with his foundation made upon positive disobedience to Lucifer

* * *

For the distinction between Zacharias, son of Joiada, and Zacharias, son of Barachias, here see Titus ms., p.21:

There exist two persons in the old testament with the name of Zacharias. One is a son of Joiada, who was a priest in Jerusalem temple. The other Zacharias is author of one of the books in the old testament. The book is named after him.

After Joiada's death Zacharias his son is killed in the temple courtyard by worshippers who stoned him on orders of the king. He offended them by criticising them for not worshipping the jehovah [alias Lucifer--Ed.]

The other Zacharias is identified at the beginning of his book as a son of Barachias, who is again a son o Addo. This Zacharias was never killed.

The lie of Jesus consists in the statement that the murdered Zacharias was son of Barachias. J utters this lie out of compulsion of his Luciferian personality as rebel against reality. This compulsion drives him first of all to declare that he is Abel's killer. This is stage one--declaration of reality. The next drive is rebellion against this declaration. So he selects another killing. Again he rebels against this compulsive selection. This is why he lies about Zacharias' parentage. This is stage three.

The Jesus emerging from Mary is thus proved a relentless rebel. His identity lies repeatedly covered all the time. This is why it is at once so hard and so simple to penetrate.