Rev Dr Reuben Swinburne Clymer

Opal

Premium Member
Page 209

"The masses today, as always in the past, reject that which is not easily comprehended.

They prefer the few to think for them, and to dictate to them, telling them what to do. They are either wholly ignorant, or indifferent to the fact that the ancient mode of teaching was by symbolism and parable, a method that was followed by the Nazerene.

Aesop's Fables, Ovid's Metamorphoses, the Arabian Nights Entertainments, the various histories of the Greeks, the ancient gods, and various amours---and there were many---the Gods of heathenism: all were identical in character, as were the amours of the patriarchs, of David and Solomon."

And so we should be able to see, the repetition of the skies. The ages, being told, in the above tales, and others. The Knight of the Round Table with Arthur. Any group of twelve, and their leader.

Round and round we go. Do you see yourself as superior to the crow?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Xv8nYvolwY
 
Last edited:

petosiris

Banned
It would depend on what you personally choose to believe. If you need to believe that he and others were real people, that is what most of the masses believe.

I believe in the dance of the constellations, and the many similar stories they tell, over and over and over and

So here, Clymer is using exoteric language talking about Jesus as a real historical figure, but esoterically he is telling us that he is a constellation? Is that right?
 

Opal

Premium Member
You mentioned Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls, but you do not seem familiar with their content and historical background very much, if at all, to be able to prove anything to someone that has put some effort into studying them, not just reading for dem fuzzies.

If you would like, I could consider doing a book report on one. But that would be extremely long, not sure if I really want to do a report on one of them.

This thread is already about a subject, if I decide to, I will after this. I would have to decide if I wanted to expend my time doing it.

One book would take at least a year, and I am pretty comfortable with my style of reading, for me, when I want.
 

Opal

Premium Member
So here, Clymer is using exoteric language talking about Jesus as a real historical figure, but esoterically he is telling us that he is a constellation? Is that right?

He is telling you that all of the myths lead to the same constellations, and Jesus is not a real human figure.

You, I don’t think, could ever believe that though. And that is fine by me.
 

Opal

Premium Member
Page 210

“The ability to discern the meanings behind these ancient symbols will assist in revealing the hidden meaning of Biblical allegorical and parable writing.”

“As so frequently stated, the most ancient name for God, or the Sun, even before he was known as Osiris of Egypt, was On; in Chaldiac it was Bel or Baal; in Phoenician, the same, in Hebrew El. ALL WERE ONE AND THE SAME GOD IN A DIFFERENT TONGUE.”

Again, the capitalization is in the book. Earlier, I have not used the capitalization he used, because I didn’t want to be mistaken for yelling.

I find it soothing to believe that god, is light, god is sun, god is the universe, gods are watching down upon us, twinkling at us showing us their light.

The stories from my youth, have never satisfied my thoughts, but, Clymer, would seem quite easily to put my thoughts on theology into words. Very rare indeed.
 

Opal

Premium Member
Finally.

When I open the book, as I said at the beginning of this, it was to the chapter, that I am about to start.

The title is

"THE CHERUBIM AS THE HIERARCHIES OF HEAVEN
The mystery of the Cherubim. The ark of the Covenent a substitute for the Egyptian Oracleship."
I will give you the first paragraph. Then, I will read. I have been waiting for this chapter. Page 213 of the book.​
"The cherubim furnish one of the greatest mysteries in the Bible, despite the fact that nothing else so completely connects later forms of worship, especially the Jewish, with the Egyptian, as does this mysterious creature with his four faces (natures)."​
We are back to the ages. The bull, the lion, the eagle, and man.​
I will be back soon, but, for now, I want to read it. :smile:
 

Opal

Premium Member
Page 218

“The story of the coat of many colours is a parable, in which was described the variegated beauty of the forest in November, 4,000 years ago, as it is even today. This beautiful coat excited the envy of the eleven other months (the other brothers). He was sent to Egypt by falling below the ecleptic, and by his “passing” into another month, or his “fall”, he lost symbolically, his “coat” to the other “brothers”.

These twelve sons, or twelve tribes, represented the twelve sign of the zodiac.”

Again, we are here. Time watchers, or time keepers, or maybe just observers of time. Again the names change but the purpose remains the same.

The cherubim, man enters from the North, god’s on the east, west and south. Aquarius is North. Man. On some cherubim, man is missing, North is not represented.
 

Opal

Premium Member
Page 219

“The ox or bull, was the emblem of Noah, or the great father. The ark itself was called Ken-Taurus, “the stimulator (or creative ability) of the bull.” He was worshipped with splendid rites when the sun was in Taurus. The bull was a well known symbol of Bacchus.”

I had not heard of Ken-Taurus before, being a name of the ark. I will have to look further into that. Curious.
 
Last edited:

Opal

Premium Member
Page 221

“Man, or an idol in human shape, was worshipped all over the world. Man, being “made in the image of God,” was considered of the highest conceivable pattern of divinity. Since God was invisible and could not be seeable, He was, and is still worshipped, under this form, as symbolized by the Nazarene.”

Is it easier to believe, in a religion if it has a human figurehead? If the universe is as “God”, then are we not angering, or maybe amusing, the Gods, with our need to humanize, his presence.
 
Last edited:

Opal

Premium Member
Page 221

“Man, or an idol in human shape, was worshipped all over the world. Man, being “made in the image of God,” was considered of the highest conceivable pattern of divinity. Since God was invisible and could not be seeable, He was, and is still worshipped, under this form, as symbolized by the Nazarene.”

Is it easier to believe, in a religion if it has a human figurehead? If the universe is as “God”, then are we not angering, or maybe amusing, the Gods, with our need to humanize, his presence.

Hmmm, was just rereading what I wrote. It dawned on me that, I have humanized, the planets have feelings, about how any of of would choose to believe.

Do planets, stars, and other entities have feelings?

Or do they just emit, energy, that we observe, and explain in humanistic terms.

We are so programmed to think that way.
 

petosiris

Banned
Hmmm, was just rereading what I wrote. It dawned on me that, I have humanized, the planets have feelings, about how any of of would choose to believe.

Do planets, stars, and other entities have feelings?

Or do they just emit, energy, that we observe, and explain in humanistic terms.

We are so programmed to think that way.

The term you are looking for is anthropomorphic, not humanistic, which has a different connotation.

The main problem with this thinking is that you can only arbitrarily decide what is figurative language, usually based on preconceived notions and personal feelings. So you can mistake well intended literal language for figurative error.

''Facts don't care about your feelings.'' - Ben Shapiro :smile:
 
Last edited:

Opal

Premium Member
“If he wasn't God as Son and Word, then such worship would be profoundly misguided and idolatrous.”


Yes.
 
Last edited:

Opal

Premium Member
The term you are looking for is anthropomorphic, not humanistic, which has a different connotation.

The main problem with this thinking is that you can only arbitrarily decide what is figurative language, usually based on preconceived notions and personal feelings. So you can mistake well intended literal language for figurative error.

''Facts don't care about your feelings.'' - Ben Shapiro :smile:

Thank you! Good word!

And you are correct, or, Ben Shapiro’s quote is.
 

Opal

Premium Member
Page 222

“In the study of Numbers, 2nd Chapter, we find that in the encampment of the learned Moses an inexcusable blunder was made in placing Reuben in the South, or next to Judah.”

“The question is: was Moses actually guilty of such an error or did later writers make the mistake? According to astronomy or astral science, the lion being in the summer solstice, the south would have been his proper position; but as he constituted the highest state of the nation, they placed him in the van, as they were travelling in an easterly direction. Reuben belongs opposite, as the water-bearer; his monogram or presiding genius was in January, opposite Judah or July. The conclusion must be that Moses did not arrange the tribes as described.”

What’s your take on this Petosiris?

Was there an error? Why would Reuben not be in the North? The direction that Man enters from is North.

Aquarius is man, is Reuben, is North.
 

petosiris

Banned
Page 222

“In the study of Numbers, 2nd Chapter, we find that in the encampment of the learned Moses an inexcusable blunder was made in placing Reuben in the South, or next to Judah.”

“The question is: was Moses actually guilty of such an error or did later writers make the mistake? According to astronomy or astral science, the lion being in the summer solstice, the south would have been his proper position; but as he constituted the highest state of the nation, they placed him in the van, as they were travelling in an easterly direction. Reuben belongs opposite, as the water-bearer; his monogram or presiding genius was in January, opposite Judah or July. The conclusion must be that Moses did not arrange the tribes as described.”

What’s your take on this Petosiris?

Was there an error? Why would Reuben not be in the North? The direction that Man enters from is North.

Aquarius is man, is Reuben, is North.

The scriptures do not contain errors. Moses arranged the tribes as the Lord commanded, not how you wished them to be, probably for different symbolic and military reasons than you do for your alleged astral and Julian/Gregorian calendar (which didn't exist at the time) arrangement.

All the sons of Israel are men, Reuben is the firstborn, but he lost his double portion to Joseph, because of a sin he had committed.
 

petosiris

Banned
“If he wasn't God as Son and Word, then such worship would be profoundly misguided and idolatrous.”


Yes.

Do you believe he is Son and Word? All the texts of the heretics call him Son and Word as far as I know.

Why did God allow the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile of the Jews by the Romans if the first time he did that because of idolatry and his people not obeying his commandments - 2 Kings 17:7?

for the scripture says ''no one who denies the son has the father. whoever confesses the son has the father also'' and ''by this you know the spirit of god - every spirit that confesses that jesus christ has come in the flesh is from god'' and ''whoever confesses that jesus is the son of god, god abides in him, and he in god''.

If God has Son and Word and Messenger, then not paying homage to the second incurs wrath as not paying homage to the first as Psalm 2 plainly says (cf. John 5:23).
 
Last edited:

Opal

Premium Member
The scriptures do not contain errors. Moses arranged the tribes as the Lord commanded, not how you wished them to be, probably for different symbolic and military reasons than you do for your alleged astral and Julian/Gregorian calendar (which didn't exist at the time) arrangement.

All the sons of Israel are men, Reuben is the firstborn, but he lost his double portion to Joseph, because of a sin he had committed.

What I have learned from reading Astrology is contradicted in the paragraph I quoted from the book.

The quotes, are Clymer, not me.

I agree with much of what he writes, but I am not the originator of the thought.
 
Last edited:

Opal

Premium Member
Do you believe he is Son and Word? All the texts of the heretics call him Son and Word as far as I know.

Why did God allow the destruction of the Second Temple and the exile of the Jews by the Romans if the first time he did that because of idolatry and his people not obeying his commandments - 2 Kings 17:7?

for the scripture says ''no one who denies the son has the father. whoever confesses the son has the father also'' and ''by this you know the spirit of god - every spirit that confesses that jesus christ has come in the flesh is from god'' and ''whoever confesses that jesus is the son of god, god abides in him, and he in god''.

Not as you do. You don’t like how I see. The Sun and the words.
 
Top