|
|
November 4th, 1957
Received by Dr Samuels
Washington D.C.
I am here, Jesus.
I am here tonight to tell you about that Christian rite called the mass,
or transubstantiation, and to give you further proof and additional reasons
why this ceremony is neither God-given, as the church claims, nor was
it ever, nor could be, instituted by me.
In my last sermon I have told you that the basic principle on which this
rite is founded, the sacredness of the blood, or, shall I say,
that the life of the living being is
in the blood, was never revealed to man by God, nor is it true to
the degree that blood is the component of man to which all other components
are inferior and on which the Father has made the life principle dependent.
First, because there are living organisms that do not contain a system
of circulating blood, and because, in the animal kingdom, life is dependent
in the last analysis upon the health of all the individual organs and
their interrelationship to form an integrated whole functioning as a unit.
And, further-more, life would be impossible without those physical conditions
upon which life on earth is contingent. Rather than to say that any particular
part of the being is sacred, it is the being itself that is sacred.
Now the church that developed in the several centuries following my appearance
on earth with the mission from the Father that the time of salvation had
arrived through prayer to Him for His Divine Love, this church, let me
repeat, brought into existence the rite of the mass taken from the pagan
ceremonies which revolved about the sacrifice of a god and his resurrection,
and the aspiration of achieving communion with that god through partaking
of his flesh and blood. This was done through participating in those pagan
festivals featuring the eating of the flesh and blood of that animal sacred
to, or identified with, that god. And thus much of the ancient world paid
tribute to the sacred bull through Siva, through Dionysos, and through
Mithra.
In Palestine the Canaanite cult of the bull extended temporarily to the
Hebrews and was found in the baalim, or gods. Since the early Christians
came to regard me as part of the godhead, and sacrificial in character,
they came to identify me with the sacrificial lamb of the Hebrews. But
as they could not partake of the flesh and blood of the sacrificial lamb
because of the Passover feast, they found a substitute in the bread and
wine instead - bread and wine because such a meal took away from the Christian
rite any superficial similarity with the current pagan practices of feasting
on animal flesh and blood, and because such a practice seem related, at
least to the church leaders of those days, to the bread and wine which
the king of Salem, Melchizedek, is supposed to have given Abraham in the
story in Genesis. This gave these churchmen the occasion to claim
that, since this Melchizedek was a priest-king, my appearance, also, was
in the role of priest-king.
I wish to state here very emphatically that I never have been a priest,
either on earth or in the spirit world these many centuries, and that
I never practice rites of a religious nature, and that my only act of
reverence to the Father is intense prayer to Him for His Divine Love,
which I did while on earth and ever since I entered into spirit life,
and to seek to carry out with all my power and influence to do the Father's
Will and help to turn mankind to Him and His Great Redeeming Love.
Never was I a king, as
was Melchizedek, nor did I ever seek to become one, and the New Testament
is correct in stating that I avoided the attempt of some of my unenlightened
followers to make me king in Palestine. And the only reason for being
Master of the Celestial Heavens is the state of my soul, which is filled
to a certain degree with the Father's Essence, His Love, and which I shall
continue to fill with His Love throughout all of everlasting eternity.
In no way was I ever connected with Melchizedek, either as king or priest,
nor did Melchizedek serve bread and wine with any other
purpose than to be host to Abraham;
and bread and wine was the repast because it was these foods which were
most available in Palestine, and this may be seen from the name of my
own birthplace, Bethlehem, meaning House of Bread, and the grapes decorating
the veil of the Temple in Jerusalem, and the many parables of the grapevines
I used in my teachings.
Now one of the reasons why the episode of Melchizedek has such importance
to the Christians, as evidenced by the epistle to the Hebrews, is that
Psalm 110 reads,
in part, "Thou art a priest forever
after the order of Melchizedek." This psalm is supposed to have
been composed by David, the King, so that the wording is presumed to mean
that the Father made David's Lord (taken by some churchman to mean me)
a priest like Melchizedek. Actually this psalm was never composed by David,
but by a member of his court and designed for David himself so that the
meaning was that David was not only king by God's Grace, but that such
loyalty also made him high priest. The occasion for this mention of David
in connection with ecclesiastical duties came when he was instrumental
in bringing the Ark to Jerusalem, when he danced before the Lord with
all his might, and was girded with a linen ephod, and when he also offered
burnt-offerings and peace-offerings and blessed the people in the name
of God.
In the same way the first lines of Psalm 110, stating,
"The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,"
does not mean, then, as has been interpreted, that God said unto David's
Lord, meaning me, but that God said unto the writer's Lord, meaning David.
If you will read this psalm carefully, you will see that the references
to God's wrath reveal that the song is not a revelation of God, as some
believe, but merely the embodiment of David, the King, as a servant of
God who will vent his wrath upon the heathen nations.
Jesus of the Bible
and
Master of the Celestial Heavens
|
|
