Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Can Washington overthrow three governments at the same time?
Thierry Meyssan
Washington, which failed in 2011 to bomb Libya and Syria simultaneously, is now engaged in a new demonstration of its strength: organizing regime change in three states at the same time, in different regions of the world: Syria (CentCom), Ukraine (EuCom) and Venezuela (SouthCom).
To do this, President Obama has mobilized almost the entire National Security Council team.
First, Advisor Susan Rice and Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power. These two women are champions of “democratic” talk. They have for many years specialized in advocating interference in the internal affairs of other countries under the pretext of preventing genocide. But behind this generous rhetoric, they couldn’t care less about non-US lives as shown by Ms. Power during the chemical weapons crisis in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta. The ambassador, who was aware of the innocence of the Syrian authorities, had gone to Europe with her husband to attend a film festival dedicated to Charlie Chaplin, while her government denounced a crime against humanity, the responsibility for which was placed upon President al Assad.
Then, the three regional co-ordinators: Philip Gordon ( Middle East and North Africa ), Karen Donfried (Europe and Eurasia ) and Ricardo Zuñiga ( Latin America).
• Phil Gordon (personal friend and translator of Nicolas Sarkozy) organized the sabotage of the Geneva 2 Peace Conference as long as the Palestinian issue is not settled to the U.S. liking. During the second session of the conference, while John Kerry spoke of peace, Gordon met with the heads of Jordanian, Qatari , Saudi and Turkish intelligence services in Washington to prepare for yet another attack. The plotters have gathered an army of 13,000 men, of whom only 1,000 were given brief military training, to drive tanks and take Damascus. The problem is that the column may be destroyed by the Syrian Army before arriving in the capital. But they fail to agree on how to defend it without distributing anti-aircraft weapons that could later be used against Israel.
• Karen Donfried is the former national intelligence officer for Europe. She has long led the German Marshall Fund in Berlin. Today, she manipulates the European Union to hide Washington interventionism in Ukraine. Despite the leak of a phone conversation involving Ambassador Victoria Nuland, she succeeded in convincing Europeans that the opposition in Kiev wanted to join them and was fighting for democracy. Nonetheless, more than half of the Maidan rioters are members of the Nazi party and brandish portraits of collaborator Stepan Bandera.
• Finally, Ricardo Zuñiga is the grandson of the namesake President of the National Party of Honduras who organized the coups of 1963 and 1972 in favor of General López Arellano. He directed the CIA station in Havana where he recruited and financed agents to form opposition to Fidel Castro. He mobilized the extreme Trotskyist Venezuelan left to overthrow President Nicolás Maduro, accused of being a Stalinist.
The whole process is hyped under the leadership of one Dan Rhodes. This propaganda specialist has already written the official version of September 11, 2001, drafting the report of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry. He managed to remove all traces of the military coup (power was removed from the hands of George W. Bush at about 10am and it was returned that evening; all the members of his cabinet and those of Congress were placed in secure bunkers “to ensure their safety”) so that we remember only the attacks.
In all three cases, the U.S. narrative is based on the same principles: accuse governments of killing their own citizens, qualify opponents as ’democratic’; impose sanctions against the “murderers” and ultimately operate coups.
Each time, the movement begins with a demonstration during which peaceful opponents are killed, and where both sides accuse each other of violence. In fact U.S. or NATO special forces placed on rooftops shoot at both the crowd and the police. This was the case in Daraa (Syria) in 2011, Kiev (Ukraine) and Caracas (Venezuela) this week. Alas for bad luck: autopsies in Venezuela show that two victims, one opponent and one pro-government, were killed by the same weapon.
Qualifying opponents as democratic activists is a simple game of rhetoric. In Syria, they are Takfirists supported by the worst dictatorship in the world, Saudi Arabia. In Ukraine, a few sincere pro-Europeans surrounded by many Nazis. In Venezuela, young Trotskyists from good families surrounded by goon squads. Everywhere the false U.S. opponent, John McCain, brings his support to true and false on site opponents.
Support for opponents rests with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). This agency of the U.S. government falsely presents itself as an NGO funded by Congress. But it was created by President Ronald Reagan, in association with Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia. It is headed by the neoconservative Carl Gershman and the daughter of General Alexander Haig (former Supreme Commander of NATO, then Secretary of State ), Barbara Haig. This is the NED (actually the State Department), which employs the “opposition” senator John McCain.
To this operating group, you must add the Albert Einstein Institute, an “NGO” funded by NATO. Created by Gene Sharp, it trained professional agitators from two bases: Serbia (Canvas) and Qatar (Academy of currency).
In all cases, Susan Rice and Samantha Power take on airs of outrage before imposing penalties, soon echoed by the European Union, while they are in fact the sponsors of the violence.
It remains to be seen whether the the coups will be successful. Which is far from being certain.
Washington is thus attempting to show the world it is still the master. To be more sure of itself, it launched the Ukrainian and Venezuelan operations during the Olympic Games in Sochi. It was certain that Russia would not move for fear of having its party upset by Islamist attacks. But Sochi ended this weekend. Now it’s Moscow’s turn to play.
Translation
Roger Lagassé
Credit to Infowars
Russian Ships Arrive On Ukraine's Crimean Coast As Fears Mount Over Russian Invasion In the Region
Russian ships have allegedly landed in the Crimea ahead of what many experts are calling a military build up to a coup in the Crimea Ukraine Photos
According to Russian news site flot.com, Russian military ships carrying soldiers have arrived on Ukraine’s Crimean coast in what some are claiming could be the early signs of a Russian coup in the hotly disputed autonomous region of the Crimea.
Russia’s large landing ship Nikolai Filchenkov has arrived near the Russia Black Sea Fleet's base at Sevastopol, which Russia has leased from Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The ship is reported to be carrying as many as 200 soldiers and has joined four additional ship carrying an unknown amount of Special Forces troops. Flot.com also reported over the weekend that personnel from the 45th Airborne Special Forces unit and additional divisions had been airlifted into Anapa, a city on Russia’s Black Sea coastline. In addition, it is believed that Russia's Sevastopol base contains as many as 26,000 troops already, according to the German Institute for International And Security Affairs.
It remains to be seen if a weakened Ukraine in the midst of revolution can respond to the Russian military developments or if NATO will take the United States' line by telling Russia to stay clear of a region it has long considered it own.
However, a Russian invasion of the Crimea seems to be popular with the largely Russian population of the Crimea after a flurry of pro-Russian protests have called for Russian intervention.
Aside from the Crimea, there are concerns from the United States and European governments that Russia could attempt a much larger intervention in Kiev and restore a Russian-friendly government.
Credit to International Business Times
According to Russian news site flot.com, Russian military ships carrying soldiers have arrived on Ukraine’s Crimean coast in what some are claiming could be the early signs of a Russian coup in the hotly disputed autonomous region of the Crimea.
Russia’s large landing ship Nikolai Filchenkov has arrived near the Russia Black Sea Fleet's base at Sevastopol, which Russia has leased from Ukraine since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The ship is reported to be carrying as many as 200 soldiers and has joined four additional ship carrying an unknown amount of Special Forces troops. Flot.com also reported over the weekend that personnel from the 45th Airborne Special Forces unit and additional divisions had been airlifted into Anapa, a city on Russia’s Black Sea coastline. In addition, it is believed that Russia's Sevastopol base contains as many as 26,000 troops already, according to the German Institute for International And Security Affairs.
It remains to be seen if a weakened Ukraine in the midst of revolution can respond to the Russian military developments or if NATO will take the United States' line by telling Russia to stay clear of a region it has long considered it own.
However, a Russian invasion of the Crimea seems to be popular with the largely Russian population of the Crimea after a flurry of pro-Russian protests have called for Russian intervention.
Aside from the Crimea, there are concerns from the United States and European governments that Russia could attempt a much larger intervention in Kiev and restore a Russian-friendly government.
Credit to International Business Times
This is no recovery, this is a bubble and it will burst
Stock market bubbles of historic proportions are developing in the US and UK markets. With policymakers unwilling to introduce tough regulation, we're heading for trouble
'Share prices are high mainly thanks to quantitative easing not because of the strength of the underlying real economy.' Photograph: David Levene for the Guardian
According to the stock market, the UK economy is in a boom. Not just any old boom, but a historic one. On 28 October 2013, the FTSE 100 index hit 6,734, breaching the level achieved at the height of the economic boom before the 2008 global financial crisis (that was 6,730, recorded in October 2007).
Since then, it has had ups and downs, but on 21 February 2014 the FTSE 100 climbed to a new height of 6,838. At this rate, it may soon surpass the highest ever level reached since the index began in 1984 – that was 6,930, recorded in December 1999, during the heady days of the dotcom bubble.
The current levels of share prices are extraordinary considering the UK economy has not yet recovered the ground lost since the 2008 crash; per capita income in the UK today is still lower than it was in 2007. And let us not forget that share prices back in 2007 were themselves definitely in bubble territory of the first order.
The situation is even more worrying in the US. In March 2013, the Standard & Poor 500 stock market index reached the highest ever level, surpassing the 2007 peak (which was higher than the peak during the dotcom boom), despite the fact that the country's per capita income had not yet recovered to its 2007 level. Since then, the index has risen about 20%, although the US per capita income has not increased even by 2% during the same period. This is definitely the biggest stock market bubble in modern history.
Even more extraordinary than the inflated prices is that, unlike in the two previous share price booms, no one is offering a plausible narrative explaining why the evidently unsustainable levels of share prices are actually justified.
During the dotcom bubble, the predominant view was that the new information technology was about to completely revolutionise our economies for good. Given this, it was argued, stock markets would keep rising (possibly forever) and reach unprecedented levels. The title of the book, Dow 36,000: The New Strategy for Profiting from the Coming Rise in the Stock Market, published in the autumn of 1999 when the Dow Jones index was not even 10,000, very well sums up the spirit of the time.
Similarly, in the runup to the 2008 crisis, inflated asset prices were justified in terms of the supposed progresses in financial innovation and in the techniques of economic policy.
It was argued that financial innovation – manifested in the alphabet soup of derivatives and structured financial assets, such as MBS, CDO, and CDS – had vastly improved the ability of financial markets to "price" risk correctly, eliminating the possibility of irrational bubbles. On this belief, at the height of the US housing market bubble in 2005, both Alan Greenspan (the then chairman of the Federal Reserve Board) and Ben Bernanke (the then chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President and later Greenspan's successor) publicly denied the existence of a housing market bubble – perhaps except for some "froth" in a few localities, according to Greenspan.
At the same time, better economic theory – and thus better techniques of economic policy – was argued to have allowed policymakers to iron out those few wrinkles that markets themselves cannot eliminate. Robert Lucas, the leading free-market economist and winner of the 1995 Nobel prize in economics, proudly declared in 2003 that "the problem of depression prevention has been solved". In 2004, Ben Bernanke (yes, it's him again) argued that, probably thanks to better theory of monetary policy, the world had entered the era of "great moderation", in which the volatility of prices and outputs is minimised.
This time around, no one is offering a new narrative justifying the new bubbles because, well, there isn't any plausible story. Those stories that are generated to encourage the share price to climb to the next level have been decidedly unambitious in scale and ephemeral in nature: higher-than-expected growth rates or number of new jobs created; brighter-than-expected outlook in Japan, China, or wherever; the arrival of the "super-dove" Janet Yellen as the new chair of the Fed; or, indeed, anything else that may suggest the world is not going to end tomorrow.
Few stock market investors really believe in these stories. Most investors know that current levels of share prices are unsustainable; it is said that George Soros has already started betting against the US stock market. They are aware that share prices are high mainly because of the huge amount of money sloshing around thanks to quantitative easing (QE), not because of the strength of the underlying real economy. This is why they react so nervously to any slight sign that QE may be wound down on a significant scale.
However, stock market investors pretend to believe – or even have to pretend to believe – in those feeble and ephemeral stories because they need those stories to justify (to themselves and their clients) staying in the stock market, given the low returns everywhere else.
The result, unfortunately, is that stock market bubbles of historic proportion are developing in the US and the UK, the two most important stock markets in the world, threatening to create yet another financial crash. One obvious way of dealing with these bubbles is to take the excessive liquidity that is inflating them out of the system through a combination of tighter monetary policy and better financial regulation against stock market speculation (such as a ban on shorting or restrictions on high-frequency trading). Of course, the danger here is that these policies may prick the bubble and create a mess.
In the longer run, however, the best way to deal with these bubbles is to revive the real economy; after all, "bubble" is a relative concept and even a very high price can be justified if it is based on a strong economy. This will require a more sustainable increase in consumption based on rising wages rather than debts, greater productive investments that will expand the economy's ability to produce, and the introduction of financial regulation that will make banks lend more to productive enterprises than to consumers. Unfortunately, these are exactly the things that the current policymakers in the US and the UK don't want to do.
We are heading for trouble.
Credit to The Guardian
Will Foreign Troops Commit Genocide In US Concentration Camps?
It’s What They Are Not Saying That Is Worrisome, It Is What They Are Not Saying
Training Foreigners To Take Over the Camps
“This appendix addresses aspects of developing confinement officers in other countries. For the purposes of this appendix,the terms foreign and HN confinement officers are synonymous”.
Conclusion
Pentagon Set to Slash Military to Pre-World War II Levels
Firing the opening salvo in a bloody budget battle, U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel recommended drastic cuts of billions of dollars that would take American military forces to its lowest level since before World War II.
The cuts in military spending, forces and weapons programs address the stark reality of growing budget pressures at home while pointing to the improbability that the United States will engage in a large ground war.
“As we end our combat mission in Afghanistan, this will be the first budget to fully reflect the transition [the Defense Department] is making after 13 years of war,” Hagel said in the Pentagon briefing room.
The reductions will come at a price, he said.
“As a consequence of large budget cuts, our future force will assume additional risk in certain areas,” Hagel said, citing gaps in training and maintenance and a smaller force that would be stretched thin if major conflicts broke out in several places at once.
The plan — which asks for $522 billion, more than China, Russia and the British defense budgets combined — is certain to face stiff opposition on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers will battle for every troop, weapons program and dollar.
Rep. Buck McKeon, a California Republican and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said President Obama and Hagel are trying to “solve our financial problems on the backs of our military — and that can’t be done.”
The key components of the Pentagon proposal:
♦The Army would be reduced to between 440,000 and 450,000 — a 10 percent deeper cut than originally planned and the lowest level since 1940, when it had 267,000 active members. Hagel said the current troop level of 520,000 is bigger than necessary and “larger than we can afford to modernize and keep ready.”
“Our analysis showed that this force would be capable of decisively defeating aggression in one major combat theater…while also defending the homeland and supporting air and naval forces engaged in another theater against an adversary,” he said of the pared-down Army.
Special operations forces will grow from 66,000 to 69,700 to deal with counterterrorism and crisis response.
"As a consequence of large budget cuts, our future force will assume additional risk in certain areas."
♦The entire fleet of A-10 “warthogs” would be eliminated and replaced by the F-35. The so-called tank-killer, designed in the 1970s to go after ground targets, is not nimble enough and too expensive to maintain because of its age, Hagel said.
Cutting it would save $3.5 billion over five years. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., whose husband was an A-10 pilot, has already vowed to fight plans to ditch the fleet.
SHAH MARAI / AFP - GETTY IMAGES FILEU.S. Air Force A-10 fighters stand in line on the runway at Bagram Air Base north of Kabul, on Dec. 18.
♦The U-2 spy plane, the stalwart of Cold War reconnaissance, would be retired in favor of recon drones. The U-2 would be replaced by the unmanned Global Hawk, which is considered to have greater range and endurance. “This decision was a close call,” Hagel said, but reduction in the Global Hawk’s operating costs made it a better bargain.
♦The Navy would buy two destroyers and two attack submarines a year, but 11 cruisers would be mothballed for modernization.
♦The Army would retire its Kiowas and Jet Ranger training helicopters. Meanwhile, the National Guard would trade the Army its weapons-laden Apaches for Black Hawks, which are seen as more suited for peacetime activities and disaster response.
♦The Air Force would slow the growth of its drone program, increasing to a force of 55 around-the-clock combat patrols of Reaper and Predator aircraft, instead of a planned 65.
♦One-percent raises would take effect, but there would be other benefit changes – making military members pay for some of their housing, cutting $1 billion in commissary subsidies and changing health-care benefits.
“Although these recommendations do not cut anyone’s pay, I realize they will be controversial,” Hagel said.
Blue Star Families expressed concern: "When too many of aspects of the pay and benefits structure change at the same time or there is too much uncertainty with the compensation system, we fear reaching a tipping point where our military families can no longer recommend service, recruiting becomes even more difficult, and our nation's security needs cannot be met."
♦The Pentagon will also push for base closings in 2017, though Hagel pointedly noted that Congress has rejected its last two requests on that front.
Credit to NBC News
♦The U-2 spy plane, the stalwart of Cold War reconnaissance, would be retired in favor of recon drones. The U-2 would be replaced by the unmanned Global Hawk, which is considered to have greater range and endurance. “This decision was a close call,” Hagel said, but reduction in the Global Hawk’s operating costs made it a better bargain.
♦The Navy would buy two destroyers and two attack submarines a year, but 11 cruisers would be mothballed for modernization.
♦The Army would retire its Kiowas and Jet Ranger training helicopters. Meanwhile, the National Guard would trade the Army its weapons-laden Apaches for Black Hawks, which are seen as more suited for peacetime activities and disaster response.
♦The Air Force would slow the growth of its drone program, increasing to a force of 55 around-the-clock combat patrols of Reaper and Predator aircraft, instead of a planned 65.
♦One-percent raises would take effect, but there would be other benefit changes – making military members pay for some of their housing, cutting $1 billion in commissary subsidies and changing health-care benefits.
“Although these recommendations do not cut anyone’s pay, I realize they will be controversial,” Hagel said.
Blue Star Families expressed concern: "When too many of aspects of the pay and benefits structure change at the same time or there is too much uncertainty with the compensation system, we fear reaching a tipping point where our military families can no longer recommend service, recruiting becomes even more difficult, and our nation's security needs cannot be met."
♦The Pentagon will also push for base closings in 2017, though Hagel pointedly noted that Congress has rejected its last two requests on that front.
Credit to NBC News
FOUNDATIONS: The Only Begotten Son
John 1:14
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
From the time I was a child I heard Christ described as “the only begotten son.” Like many Christians I could quote John 3:16 from my youth.
John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Astoundingly, although I heard this expression thousands of times throughout my life, I had never heard any minister, author, Bible teacher, or Christian explain what the words “only begotten Son” meant in a way that was clear and satisfying. There was always a nagging thought that something was missing, or not quite correct, in the common explanations of this Biblical expression. Following are a few more occurrences.
John 1:18
No man has seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
John 3:18
He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
I John 4:9
By this the love of God was manifested in us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world so that we might live through Him.
The Greek word translated as begotten is “monogenes.” You may recognize elements of this word. The prefix mono means “one.” It is from this prefix that the English word “only” finds its way into the expression “only begotten.” The latter part of monogenes is taken from the Greek word ginomai. Strong’s Concordance defines this word in the following manner.
NT:1096
ginomai (ghin'-om-ahee); a prolongation and middle voice form of a primary verb; to cause to be ("gen"- erate), i.e. (reflexively) to become (come into being)...
What this Greek word is expressing is that Jesus Christ/Yahshua the Messiah is the only Son that was directly generated from the Father. There are other beings that are referred to in Scripture as the “son(s) of God,” but none of these beings were the direct generation of Yahweh God, the Father of Yahshua. Consider the following Scriptures. In Luke chapter 3 we are given the supposed lineage of Yahshua through Joseph the husband of Mary. I use the word “supposed” because this how the lineage is presented.
Luke 3:23
And when He began His ministry, Yahshua Himself was about thirty years of age, being supposedly the son of Joseph...
The following genealogy is interesting because it follows a very consistent pattern. Each man listed is declared to be the son of his father. Following is just a portion.
Luke 3:23-25
Yahshua Himself was about thirty years of age, being supposedly the son of Joseph, the son of Eli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos...
This lengthy genealogy continues all the way to its root in Adam, whereupon we read the following:
Luke 3:38
...the son of Adam, the son of God.
In my years growing up in church I never heard a minister or teacher define what the difference was between Adam’s creation and Christ’s creation. (Some may be troubled that I use the word “creation” in reference to Christ for many have been taught that Christ has always existed co-equal with the Father and is not a created being. Please be patient as I will address this momentarily.)
What was unclear to me in childhood was how Christ and Adam differed as sons of God. Both are called “the son of God.” Yet only Yahshua is called “the only begotten Son of God.” Did not God also beget Adam? Was not Adam the direct generation of God? The answer to these questions has in part been obscured due to the way in which various Hebrew words in the book of Genesis have been translated into English. For example, we read:
Genesis 1:27
And God (Elohim) created man in His own image, in the image of God (Elohim) He created him...
Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God (Yahweh Elohim) formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
When we read these statements in English we do not clearly see what was expressed in the Hebrew. The word Elohim is a plural word. The singular form isEloah. Both words are masculine gender. Whenever the Bible uses the word Elohim as a reference to God (uppercase) it is a reference to the godhead. The godhead is comprised of God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Because there is more than one member of the godhead, the Hebrew language uses the plural word Elohim in reference to the godhead, rather than the singular Eloah.
In Genesis 2:7 the expression “Yahweh Elohim” is also a reference to the godhead. If the writer had meant to speak of the Father only, who is called Yahweh, he would have written “Yahweh Eloah,” or even just “Yahweh.” What is actually being communicated is that the godhead of Yahweh, which includes the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, acted in concert to create man (Hebrew Adam). This becomes apparent in other verses in Genesis.
Genesis 1:26
Then God (Elohim) said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Ourlikeness...”
The words “us” and “our” indicate a plurality. The members of the godhead are speaking to one another when they say “Let US make man...” This raises an interesting point for consideration. If Adam was directly formed by Yahweh the Father, then we could not say that Yahshua is the monogenes, only direct generation, of the Father. We have to look to other passages of Scripture to resolve this conundrum. In his gospel, the apostle John speaks of Yahshua as “the Word.” What John states about the Son of God is pertinent to our investigation.
John 1:1-3
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
The apostle Paul provides further insight in his epistle to the saints in Colossae.
Colossians 1:13-16
For He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. And He (the Son) is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him (the Son) all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities - all things have been created by Him and for Him.
Contained in these passages is a very important revelation. From the Father came forth the Son at the beginning of the creation. This is what is declared as the apostle states that “He (the Son) is... the first-born of all creation.” Yahshua the Son was the ONLY direct generation from the Father. All other things were created through the instrumentality of the Son. Both man and the angels were created directly by the Son. The Son did not create anything of His own initiative, however, for we are told that the Son ever lives to do the will of the Father.
John 4:34-35
Yahshua said to them, “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to accomplish His work.”
John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing... because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
These verses, and many others, reveal that the Son has always existed to do the will of God the Father. Although it is common to depict God’s hands forming the creation, the Bible tells us that the it was spoken into existence.
Psalms 33:6
By the word of Yahweh the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their host.
For those who are quick of spirit, you may have noticed that a double meaning lies hidden in the verse above. Suppose we change one letter above from lower case to upper case. Consider what revelations would then come forth.
Psalms 33:6
By the Word of Yahweh the heavens were made, and by the breath of His mouth all their host.
At some time determined by the Father, the Son of God began to act to accomplish His Father’s will by forming the creation; the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. “For by Him (the Son) all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible.” Solomon, in the book of Proverbs, affirms this truth as he speaks of the Son of God under the simile of Wisdom. That the Son of God is Wisdom is affirmed in various Scriptures.
I Corinthians 1:24
Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Observe then the parallels between the declarations of the apostles John and Paul, and the words of King Solomon.
Proverbs 8:12, 22-30
I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion... Yahweh possessed me at the beginning of His way, before His works of old. From everlasting I was established, from the beginning, from the earliest times of the earth. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no springs abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills I was brought forth; While He had not yet made the earth and the fields, nor the first dust of the world. When He established the heavens, I was there, when He inscribed a circle on the face of the deep, when He made firm the skies above, when the springs of the deep became fixed, when He set for the sea its boundary, so that the water should not transgress His command, when He marked out the foundations of the earth; Then I was beside Him, as a master workman...
“As a master workman” the Son of God formed the heavens and the earth, mankind and angels. When the apostle Paul states “whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities - all things have been created by Him and for Him,” those beings named are members of the heavenly host. They are angelic beings. The Son of God has created them all.
Some are offended when they hear it taught that the Son of God is also a created being. They fear that to believe Yahshua was created in some way diminishes His divinity. Yet, those who would “rightly divide the word of God” cannot escape the truth of His creation. At the same time, the Son of God is preeminent, for He is the only begotten of the Father. He is the only direct generation of God. All other things were created by the Son, and for the Son. The apostle Paul continues to extol the surpassing greatness of the Son of God in his epistle to the Colossians.
Colossians 1:17-20
And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father's good pleasure for all the fulness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.
It is in the son’s ministry of reconciliation, the returning of all the creation to a state of peace and oneness with the Father, that we find an affirmation of the truth that the Son of God came forth from the Son at some time in the distant past, and at the end of the ages He will return to the Father.
I Corinthians 15:25-28
For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death. For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. And when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, that God may be all in all.
In the end of the age when all things that came forth from the Son are subjected to the same, the Son will in turn return to the Father that God may be “all in all.” Paul writes of this mystery elsewhere.
Ephesians 1:9-10
He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him with a view to an administration suitable to the fulness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things upon the earth.
The English word “sum” is derived from the Latin “summa.” When the Romans would add together figures they would put the total, the sum, at the top of the list of numbers. This is the opposite of how people in English speaking nations do sums. The expression “to sum up” is a direct reference to the Roman practice of placing the sum at the top of a list of figures. It is from the Latin summa that we derive the English word “summit,” meaning the highest point.
When Paul wrote to the Ephesians he had the Roman practice of summing up in mind. Consider that when we sum up a list of numbers that the sum necessarily encompasses and contains everything that is being summed. The reconciliation of the heavens and earth will only be accomplished when all that is contrary to the nature of God has been removed. All rebellion and all sin must cease. Those who were angry with God, the rebels and the wicked, must repent and be purified by fire before all can be summed up in Christ. There can be nothing unholy, and no rebellion, that is contained in the Son of God.
Isaiah 45:23-24
“I have sworn by Myself, the word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness and will not turn back, that to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. They will say of Me, 'Only in Yahweh are righteousness and strength.' Men will come to Him, and all who were angry at Him shall be ashamed.”
The fact that these former rebels are ashamed reveals that repentance has come to them. That they would freely confess that “Only in Yahweh are righteousness and strength” demonstrates that the ministry of reconciliation has been fully accomplished by Yahshua, the Son of God.
Philippians 3:20-21
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Yahshua Christ; who will transform the body of our humble state into conformity with the body of His glory, by the exertion of the power that He has even to subject all things to Himself.
When Yahweh’s plan of the ages has finished its course, all that came forth from the Son will be reconciled to the Father. All things, whether in heaven or on earth that have been in a state of rebellion and sin will be reconciled to the Father. All will be subjected to, and summed up in, the Son of God. He will in turn be subject to the Father so that He is “all in all.” This is the glorious cycle of creation established by the Father. Solomon observed the cycle of creation in that which is observable on earth.
Ecclesiastes 1:5-7
The sun rises and the sun sets; And hastening to its place it rises there again. Blowing toward the south, then turning toward the north, the wind continues swirling along; And on its circular courses the wind returns. All the rivers flow into the sea, yet the sea is not full. To the place where the rivers flow, there they flow again.
The grandest cycle of all began with the creation of the Son of God. Before there was anything, the Son came forth as the only begotten of the Father. Through the Son the heavens and the earth were made, and all they contain. We are now seeing the firstfruits of the creation returning to Christ as those who are overcoming sons and daughters born of the Spirit of Christ are being cleansed of all sin and that which defiles. Yet these are merely firstfruits. The entire creation must be restored to the Son, and then the Son Himself will return to the Father so that He is “all in all.”
Thus, we see in the creation cycle the preeminence of the only begotten Son of God. At the same time we understand that the Father is the source of all. It should not be surprising to anyone to learn that the Son had to arise out from the Father. The very words “son” and “father” convey a sense of order. A father always exists before a son. Likewise, a son always comes out of a father. Mankind was created in God’s image. The mystery of the godhead is revealed in humanity. Even as a man contains seed that must come out of the man to form something in his image, so too did the Son of God proceed out of the Father.
Some may still be troubled to think that the Son being created somehow diminishes His divinity. It is difficult to cast off the false concepts in which a person has been instructed for many years. A believer may inquire, “How can Christ be the direct generation of the Father and yet be One with the Father?” There are mysteries contained here, but Yahweh has not left us without understanding. In the creation itself Yahweh has demonstrated the glorious mystery of the godhead. He has revealed the relationship between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit through the example of speech. Having written on this subject previously in the book God’s Plan of the Ages, I will repeat a passage from that writing here.
---
Some years back I was meditating upon the doctrine of the Trinity. I wanted to understand the nature and relationship of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Yahweh, as He often does, brought understanding through means of a parable.
As I was sitting before the Father He asked me, "If you want to see the soul of a man, how would you view it?" I knew the soul to be invisible. It will not show up on an x-ray, or a CAT scan or MRI. A person cannot take a picture of the soul of man. Nonetheless, the soul can be seen. Yahshua said,
Luke 6:45
"The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.”
The heart is a metaphor of the soul. A man's soul can be seen in His words. Do you want to know if a soul is evil, listen to the words that come from a man's mouth. One can discern if a man is lustful by listening to his words. If the man is ruled by anger in his soul, his words will reveal it. Rebellion, covetousness, jealousy, pride, envy, and every evil characteristic of the soul of a man is exhibited in a man's speech.
The righteous man is also known by his words. You can discern whether a man is pure in heart, whether he is loving, merciful, patient, longsuffering, humble, and selfless by observing his conversation. Surely a man's soul is revealed through his words.
As the Father directed me to contemplate these things, He revealed to me the relationship of the Spirit and the Son to Himself through the parable of speech. Every created thing was crafted with masterful design to show forth hidden mysteries of the kingdom of God. Yahweh has revealed the Trinity through the miracle of speech.
Every word begins with a thought in the mind of man. The thought is made visible as a man exhales air from his lungs and shapes identifiable sounds as the air passes over the vocal chords. These sounds exit the man as words, and the words reveal the hidden things inside the soul of man.
Yahweh the Father is Spirit. No one has seen the Father at any time. The apostle John shared the following words of inspiration with the saints.
John 1:18
No man has ever seen God at any time; the only unique Son, or the only begotten God, Who is in the bosom [in the intimate presence] of the Father, He has declared Him [He has revealed Him and brought Him out where He can be seen; He has interpreted Him and He has made Him known].
(Amplified Bible)
God wanted to make Himself known to the creation. Yet a physical creation cannot see that which exists in Spirit alone. Yahweh had to do something to reveal Himself even as a man must do something to make the thoughts of his mind known to others. Yahweh formed a Word.
John 1:14
And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Yahweh exhaled His Spirit and formed a Word. It was a perfect Word that fully revealed Himself. This Word became flesh so that mankind could perceive it. The Word is the Son of God. The Son has perfectly declared, manifested, and made known the Father.
John 14:9
Yahshua said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father..."
When the Father wanted to reveal Himself to creation He formed the Word. As the Father showed this to me He showed me the process by which a word is formed. We utter forth speech as we breathe out. Yahweh designed speech to be accomplished in this manner. Speech is accompanied by the exhalation of man's breath.
Throughout the Bible the word for Spirit is always related to the word for breath, air, or wind. In the Old Testament the word is "ruach." The first occurrence is found in the second verse of the Bible.
Genesis 1:2
The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit [ruach] of God was moving over the surface of the waters.
This same word is used in the following verses.
Genesis 7:22
All in whose nostrils was the breath [ruach] of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
Genesis 8:1
And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind [ruach] to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged...
When man who has a body of flesh breathes out his exhalation is air. When Yahweh who is Spirit breathes out, His exhalation is Spirit. Even as man's breath is used to form words, so was the exhalation of the Spirit of God used to form Christ, "the living Word."
Luke 1:35
The angel answered and said to (Mary), "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God."
[End Excerpt]
What Yahweh did in sending His Son to the earth in the form of man was a physical re-enactment of what the Father did in the very beginning of the creation. He breathed out His Spirit and formed the Word, the only begotten, directly generated Son of God. This Son is a perfect expression of the thought, mind, character and being of the Father. All that pertains to the Father was embodied in the Son. Yet, the Son’s body in His original creation was different from the human form He took on when He was born of a virgin woman. The Son of God received a heavenly body. It was a body of great glory and immeasurable power. By the exercise of this body He created all things. We are told that when the time came for the Son of God to be born of a woman in order to redeem mankind, He had to lay aside the glorious form of His first creation.
Philippians 2:5-7
Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Yahshua, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
When the time came for the redemption of man to take place, Yahweh prepared a different body for His Son. It was a body like unto our own.
Hebrews 10:5
Therefore, when He comes into the world, He says,"Sacrifice and offering You have not desired, but a body You have prepared for Me...”
From the beginning of the creation the Son existed in the form of God. His was a celestial body. He was the heavenly vision of the invisible God. As the Son, Yahshua was granted the wisdom, character, and power of God the Father. By exercise of these attributes, and in subjection to the Father, the Son created all things.
If you are able to receive these things, you can then understand what is meant when the Bible describes Yahshua as “the only begotten of the Father.” In a sense we can say that all things have come forth from the Father. Yet, only one being was the direct generation, the monogenes, of the Father. This is the Son, the firstborn, the preeminent One of all creation.
Adam came forth from God, but he is not a direct generation of the Father. He was formed by the Son through whom all things both visible and invisible were made. The angels came forth from God, but neither were they directly generated by the Father. It was the Son who created principalities and powers, thrones and dominions. All things were created by Him and for Him.
It has been granted to mankind to become sons of God, yet there will only ever be one who is the only begotten Son of the Father. He issued forth at the very beginning of the creation. He is before all things, and through Him all things consist and hold together. Glory and honor belong to the Son of God!
Credit to Joseph Herrin
Another "Successful Banker" Found Dead
The dismal trail of dead bankers continues. As The Journal Star reports, a successful Lincoln businessman and member of a prominent local family died last week. Former National Bank of Commerce CEO James Stuart Jr. was found dead in Scottsdale, Ariz., the morning of Feb. 19. A family spokesman did not say what caused the death. This brings the total of banker deaths in recent weeks to 9 as Stuart is sadly survived by three sons and four daughters.
Mr Stuart's background (via The Journal Star),
Stuart was a native of Lincoln and graduated from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln with a degree in Business Administration.In 1969, Stuart joined Citibank in New York City and served as a loan officer until 1973, when he joined First Commerce Bancshares (then NBC Co.) as executive vice president. He was named president in 1976, chairman and CEO in 1978, and also became chairman and CEO of National Bank of Commerce in 1985. Stuart spent his life building the organization into an important business voice in Lincoln, friend and colleague Brad Korell said.“He was a very successful banker,” said Korell, who worked with Stuart for more than 30 years. “I always felt that he was a visionary. He really did build one of the most successful and admired banking organizations in the Midwest.”Stuart spent much of his career with First Commerce Bancshares, a $3 billion multi-bank holding company headquartered in Lincoln. First Commerce was sold to Wells Fargo in 2000.He is a former member of the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission and was appointed by Gov. Dave Heineman to the board of the Nebraska Environmental Trust in 2008. Stuart was also involved with natural resources-related groups such as Nature Conservancy, Ducks Unlimited and U.S. National Forest Foundation.He served on the international board of the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation and the boards of the University of Nebraska Foundation and Nebraska Wesleyan University.According to Korell, Stuart was living in Scottsdale, overlooking his family's financial investments, as well as golfing and fishing.
Which brings the total number of recent banker deaths to 9 (via Intellihub):
1 – William Broeksmit, 58-year-old former senior executive at Deutsche Bank AG, was found dead in his home after an apparent suicide in South Kensington in central London, on January 26th.
2- Karl Slym, 51 year old Tata Motors managing director Karl Slym, was found dead on the fourth floor of the Shangri-La hotel in Bangkok on January 27th.
3 – Gabriel Magee, a 39-year-old JP Morgan employee, died after falling from the roof of the JP Morgan European headquarters in London on January 27th.
4 – Mike Dueker, 50-year-old chief economist of a US investment bank was found dead close to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington State.
5 – Richard Talley, the 57 year old founder of American Title Services in Centennial, Colorado, was found dead earlier this month after apparently shooting himself with a nail gun.
6 -Tim Dickenson, a U.K.-based communications director at Swiss Re AG, also died last month, however the circumstances surrounding his death are still unknown.
7 – Ryan Henry Crane, a 37 year old executive at JP Morgan died in an alleged suicide just a few weeks ago. No details have been released about his death aside from this small obituary announcement at the Stamford Daily Voice.
8 - Li Junjie, 33-year-old banker in Hong Kong jumped from the JP Morgan HQ in Hong Kong this week.
Credit to Zero Hedge
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)