Is this "The Final Word" ?

[J Williams]

See what you think of this. It has a religious tone, but it treats all religions as equal, and it proposes a new political system. It's a new page on this web site.

http://realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com/Web_Site_Curre/The_Final_Worx.html

[orpupilofnature57]

1. I have a God that said the same stuff ,and his fans put him on a cross

He refered to it as 'The Word'.He sounded a bit authoratative too ,judged people less than Fundies and never denied he was a man.

[J Williams]

5. No, Jesus said he was a son of man, and he said another would come.

See the page titled Real Prophecies of the One to Come on the web site.

[orpupilofnature57]

7. John the Baptist said "Another will come after me"

[J Williams]

11. What Jesus said was this....

Jesus said that he "must go away and be seen no more," but "the Spirit of truth shall come, to issud judgment, guide you unto truth, show you things to come, and glorify me." - John 16:7-15

Jesus also said the the "son of man to come shall first be rejected by his generation, and suffer many things." - Luke 17:24-25

And Jesus wasn't talking about himself there, because he wasn't rejected by his generation, and his suffering was not first or beforehand, but only after his mission was complete.

[orpupilofnature57]

15. It's a parable about enlightenment, not another Messiah.

http://www.newadvent.org/bible/luk017.htm

[J Williams]

18. That's erroneous interpretation of scripture. Look...

“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)

That's not talking about Jesus, because he did rise up, and he did cause his voice to be heard in the street.

“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)

That's not talking about Jesus either. It's talking about the "son of man" who Jesus said would "first be rejected by his generation and suffer many things." And Jesus wasn't talking about himself, because he didn't suffer first or beforehand, but only after his mission was complete, and he was not rejected by his generation.

You should read this: http://realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com/Web_Site_Curre/The_One_To_Cox.html

Also check out Isaiah 45:15 and 21, Isaiah 49:26, Hosea 13:4, Luke 1:47, and 1 Timothy 2:3-5.

[More Than A Feeling]

2. Sounds like the Ba'hai to me.

They are based around a guy they think was a new prophet who said the same or similar things to your guy 150 years ago.

Your guy doesn't have more or less evidence that he was "divinely inspired" than anyone else.

[orpupilofnature57]

3. Hawaii via Vermont ,My sister in-law has practiced it since the 70's

Yuppie health spa religion.

[J Williams]

4. No, this is entirely new and unique.

[cyborg_jim]

17. There aren't many things like that any more

[J Williams]

19. There is now.

[cyborg_jim]

20. I firmly disagree

It's not anywhere near as original as you think.

[J Williams]

26. That's only partly true.

The early Greeks had some pretty good ideas about democracy, and many other great thinkers throughout history have indeed though about this kind of thing.

However, what makes Admason's idea unique is that he is tying religions prophecy with it. And he does it in a very convincing way to turn the tables on religious bigots and hypocrites.

Right now we don't have democracy, not even in America. We have divisive partisan rivalry for the monarchial throne of the presidency, and we have a divisive partisan head of state.

Adamson's idea can change that, and create the closest thing to democracy that the world has yet seen.

[cosmik debris]

6. Everybody has to do things your way?

"There should be a reformation of all religions, for all religions and religious sects should respect each other, and they should honor, abide by and teach the universal divine imperative as the core value and principle."

Government decides which religions to respect??

"Government and religion must be separate, and government must equally respect all religions that honor, abide by and teach the universal divine imperative as the core value and principle."

The more I read, the more this conflicts with our Constitution.

So I say I hope it is the final word from this crackpot!

[J Williams]

9. It does not conflict with the Constitution.

It say exactly what it says, that there must be separation of church and state.

[cosmik debris]

13. You are advocating theocracy

A theocracy where every church must teach the universal divine imperative as the core value and principle.

A theocracy where only churches that teach the universal divine imperative as the core value and principle get the respect of the government.

If you want a theocracy that is fine with me, but not in MY country.

[orpupilofnature57]

16. Yah ,what you said.

[J Williams]

21. No, it's the opposite of theocracy.

The Christian Right and radical Muslims want theocracy. Joseph J. Adamson doesn't. He agrees with the founding fathers that we must have total separation of church and state.

You may not realize that most religions are supposed to teach the divine imperative, or the golden rule. It is the core value and principle of most religions.

All the 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.

It's not theocracy for governments instituted by the people to abide by the divine imperative, especially if governments respect all religions as equal. In fact, our government is really supposed to do the right thing now, but it doesn't.

[cosmik debris]

23. And what about those who don't want your religion?

What about those who think your interpretation of scripture is bogus? What about those who think your divine imperative is nonsense? What about people who want to live in a secular state without the burden of your mythology?

Do those people have rights too?

And what about the sexist quotas for leadership positions? Why reserve seats for people based on their genitals rather than their qualifications?

This whole idea flies in the face of freedom and tolerance, but you pretend that it is alright because it is based on an interpretation of a book that you agree with.

And by the way, advocating a government based on your religion IS advocating theocracy. It is no more rational than Shiites advocating a government based on Sharia Law.

And I hope you realize that this could never be implemented in any community over 20 people much less a state, nation or world. Just like other utopian ideas that this copies, it has MANY fatal flaws.

[J Williams]

27. You see what's in the eye of the beholder.

You are looking at it and not seeing what it says.

You don't seem to be able to see that the whole idea is to ensure secular government, separation of church and state, and equality of religions.

You are seeing a problem where there is none.

[cosmik debris]

30. Fortunately there is no danger of these ideas becoming law

Even though you fail to see the problems with them. They are doomed just like the utopian ideas they copy.

[J Williams]

12. And it not "my way." It's the way to create true equality, which is divine intent.

That's what a true servant of God does, deliver the truth that will set us free from those who divide us trying to rule in the name of religion or patriotism. It establishes true equality.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

8. It doesn't seem any different from a thousand other organizations out there

Start with the Golden Rule, throw in a little mysticism, and call for a reformation of religion and you've got a pretty standard set of new dogmas.

[J Williams]

10. Not at all. You need to read it. But really read it.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

14. I did "really read it" - twice

Is there something "magical" in it that I missed?

[J Williams]

22. Does anyone have a better idea? No.

Adamson's idea will produce true religious and political equality and put an end to the conflict and division. If you think anyone has a better idea, I'd like to know.

[cosmik debris]

24. I prefer the Constitution of the United States to

"An executive council of six men and six women named and elected by the vast majority of the people could then choose, by unanimous consent, a facilitator and a spokesperson, but no council member should have any more authority or decision-making power than the others."

What do you mean by a "vast majority"? Will you require two thirds? Three fifths? Or are you saying that some won't be allowed to vote? What if there is not unanimous consent? This is all a bunch of nonsense.

[J Williams]

29. The People have the Right to.....

This is mostly taken from the Declaration of Independance, but it has been revised to reflect the current situation.

Quote:

Now granted, governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes. Therefore, the people have been more willing to suffer, while abuses and offenses seem bearable, than to free themselves by abolishing the government to which they are accustomed. However, when a long series of deceptions, offenses, betrayals, and abuses of power, invariably pursuing the interests and the favor of the wealthiest few at the expense of the many, creates conditions which reduce the majority to subservient, dispensable subjects, it is the absolute right and duty of the people to throw off such government, to institute new or better government, and to provide new guards for their future security, equality, prosperity, and well being.
Such has been the patient sufferance of the majority of the American people; and such is now the necessity to alter their system of government. The history of too many presidents and congresses of the United States of America is a history of repeated deceptions, offenses, betrayals, injustices, failings, injuries, and abuses of power, resulting in the establishment and perpetuation of an unjust, corrupt, inequitable economy and society in which a wealthy, privileged few disproportionally enjoy the fruits of the labor of the majority, while the lot of the majority diminishes and growing numbers of good, hard working people are reduced to conditions of poverty, to the extent that tens of millions of innocent children in America suffer from its devastating affects.

Quoted from "The New Declaration of Independance," by Joseph J. Adamson.

[cosmik debris]

34. Don't forget

All just powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed.

Judging from the negative responses you have gotten here, I don't see much chance of consent.

[J Williams]

37. Yes, and there was a time when most people believed the world was flat.

People don't like to be told that what they believe is wrong, or should become obsolete. Change comes hard.

[orpupilofnature57]

25. Rhetorical questions display closed minds.

You have plenty of facts and figures , and you also have an Agenda. I'm sorry I thought I made it clear I BELIEVE (therefore not needing or being able to Prove) in Jesus Christ and don't feel the need to sell you on Christianity.

[J Williams]

28. But do you really believe?

“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)

That's not talking about Jesus, because he did rise up, and he did cause his voice to be heard in the street.

“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)

That's not talking about Jesus either. It's talking about the "son of man" who Jesus said would "first be rejected by his generation and suffer many things." And Jesus wasn't talking about himself, because he didn't suffer first or beforehand, but only after his mission was complete, and he was not rejected by his generation.

You ought to examine what Adamson is really about before you reject and condemn his work.


You should read this:
http://realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com/Web_Site_Curre/The_One_To_Cox.html

Also check out Isaiah 45:15 and 21, Isaiah 49:26, Hosea 13:4, Luke 1:47, and 1 Timothy 2:3-5.

[orpupilofnature57]

31. Like shrub ,you quote the old testament when talking about the new.

JESUS SUPERSEDED The letter of the law with the Spirit.

[J Williams]

35. Then you SHOULD believe this.

“I tell you the truth; It is to your advantage that I go away: for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him to you. And when he is come, he will reprove (admonish) the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they do not believe in me (or my teachings); of righteousness, because I go to our Father (to heaven) and you see me no more; of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. 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)

“For as the lightening that lightens one part under heaven shines unto the other part under heaven, so shall also the son of man be in his day. But first he must suffer many things, and be rejected by his generation.” (Luke 17:24-25)

Contrary to popular Christian belief, Jesus was not speaking of himself there. That has been misunderstood, though, because Jesus did speak of himself when he said something similar: “the son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain.” That is similar, so it’s very easy to see why there has been a misunderstanding. Jesus was certainly a son of man, and he said so. He certainly was rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and he certainly did suffer and was slain. However, his suffering was not first or beforehand. It was only at the end of his life and mission.

Furthermore, even though Jesus was rejected by those in power (the elders and chief priests and scribes), he was not rejected by the people of his generation. 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.”

Quoted from Memoirs of a Prodigal Son of Man, by Joseph J. Adamson.

[cosmik debris]

39. That is why you are destined to failure

No one wants to listen to people that tell other people what they should believe. It is arrogant, condescending, egotistical, and just plain rude. No one is going to be attracted to your utopia when you preach like that. And no one wants to live under a government that tells people what they should believe.

[J Williams]

43. Those are the words of Jesus, not mine.

Adamson is not telling people what to believe. He is pointing out what Jesus said, and explaining the full context to reveal what Jesus was talking about.

The fact is that Jesus was not rejected by his generation, and he did not suffer things first or beforehand, but only at the end of his life after his mission was accomplished.

All these things are facts.

[TRYPHO]

47. I must be getting tired, because...

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.”

That's so lame, old, disreputed and proven fakery that really, only a complete ignoramus would bring that up to prove the existence of Jesus. Do a google on Josephus/church/fake and let me go back to bed, I can't be bothered with this nonsense.

TRYPHO

[Meshuga]

48. Tell him like it is!

Glad to have you back TRYPHO!

:toast:

[EvolveOrConvolve]

33. Seems pretty presumptuous to question another's belief structure

when the position you advocate claims to be tolerant.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

32. I'm not sure why religion should even matter

We can have equality without wrapping it in a bunch of religious nonsense. Equality should happen for equality's sake, rather than because a religion dictates it.

[J Williams]

36. Because religious bigots & hypocrites fight to rule the world.

Joesph J. Adamson turns the tables on all of them, and that's absolutely crucial in this world today.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

46. I'm not sure how he "turns the tables on them"

He's simply providing another unfounded belief structure which will eventually turn into a control mechanism.

Why can't we have the good things that religions provide without the religion?

[trotsky]

38. ...

[struggle4progress]

40. "The . message is . we should treat . other people . as we would like to treated"

I personally think that's a great point of view

If I remember correctly, several people may have suggested something along these lines.

About twenty years back, I heard that some guy had contacted a certain nun to explain he had had a revelation like this, and he was writing to world leaders to explain it to them.

The nun said that her experience suggested it could take many years to get the message out.

[bananas]

41. No, the "final word" is here - link:

Click on this, and all your questions will be answered: http://www.shibumi.org/eoti.htm

[struggle4progress]

42. Heretic! This is the true end of the internet:

http://www.weirdity.com/internet/eoti.html

[J Williams]

44. It’s about establishing equality, equity, and justice for all, not a religion.

I don’t know why some critics insist on claiming Adamson wants to establish a new religion, or push a certain one. That’s simply not true. He is advocating equality of religions to stop the conflict and violence perpetrated by religious bigots and hypocrites. He exposes them and points out scriptural truths. He also advocates total separation of church and state.

But his main goal is provide a way to put an end to conflict and division caused and perpetrated by partisan politics, and establish government that is really of, by, and for the people.

The problem is that most people reject new, innovative ideas. After all, the idea that the Earth was round was initially scoffed at and called ridiculous.

That’s part of the reason why the prophets Isaiah and Jesus prophesied that the messenger (who writes under the pen name of Joseph J. Adamson) would first be rejected by his generation.

But in due time the message will be recognized for what it is, the message from the Spirit of truth, in fulfillment of all the religious prophecies that speak of one to come.

I didn’t mean to come here and argue, though. Those who don’t like it, can ignore or reject it. And they are certainly no alone. He certainly has been and still is rejected by his generation.

[cosmik debris]

45. So how are you going to force the teachings of Jesus

on people and end conflict at the same time. If you take away my right to reject Jesus and his teachings, you will have one huge conflict on your hands.

Have you noticed that in this wide spectrum of view points and educational backgrounds, not one person has come forward to agree with you. But instead of taking a second look at your ideas, you just accuse everyone else of being wrong. Do you know the meaning of self-righteous?

[Rabrrrrrr]

49. Is Adamson a paranoid schizophrenic, or just a standard loony bin asshole?

I don't trust people who claim to be the incarnation of the messiah nor who claim to have, finally, for our edification, the ultimate final absolute all-encompassing truth.

The guy is fucking insane. And a jackass, to boot.

Jesus, look at the bullshit in the first two paragraphs:

his work is the prophesied message from the Lord God the Divine Spirit of truth,

he was called and chosen for this mission.

He delivers the prophesied judgment and the authoritative, final word fulfilling all genuine
religious prophecies and expressing divine will and intent regarding the religious
and political organizations and activities of the people of the planet Earth.

It is no wonder that his work has so far been rejected, as was prophesied

Even though it fulfills real, it is not what anyone expected.

That is no wonder either, because prophecies have been grossly misinterpreted and misunderstood due to the ethnocentric and egocentric notions of religious men with a patriarchal, theocratic mindset.

in due time the message from the Spirit of truth will establish the new covenant of God with humanity.

What a dick. I bet his name isn't really "Joseph" - clearly an attempt to put him on equal footing with Jesus - or Adamson, clearly another attempt to put him on footing with Jesus.

I have many times been blessed with the privelege of reading stuff written by people with extreme emotional/psychological problems (that is, in layman terms, the "insane") and this guy writes exactly like them.