Know Thyself, “Human,” -or- “Man”

Posted: Thursday, July 29, 2010 in What Do I Believe and Why

Are you certain that you want to use the word, “Human,” when referring to the Sons of the Living God? (Man)  I believe that you are aware of this, however for the sake of sharing of my thoughts on this matter, we know that God created Man in his image and likeness, and that image and likeness is BOTH,  “Male and Female,” no exceptions. So then, since Man, the Sons and Heirs of the Living God, is the image and likeness of God both male and female, and since Man both Male and Female is the determined and declared ruler of His dominion (Genesis 1: 26-28), where did this “human,” come from?

Broken down the word, “human,” becomes, “Hu,” or, “Hue” and “Man.”  The definition for the word, “hue,” is of course “color.”  Specifically, “A particular gradation of color; a shade or tint.”  However, the interesting definition is the 4th one, “APPEARANCE; aspect: a man of somber hue.”

When someone is invited to visit the corporate world they are asked to make the NAME APPEAR, correct?  Why do they ask for the NAME to APPEAR?  Because they are looking for the Living Man who is the Son and Heir of the Living God, to become the surety to any charges that are charged up against the NAME, and if one plays “THEIR,” game, then they become associated with that NAME through APPEARANCE, which is through a false identity.  So then, “human,” is to  APPEAR to be Man, but is  not truly Man at all, but is only an APPEARANCE of the real through a FICTIONAL  and color-able façade.  Therefore, to APPEAR in HUMAN form, is to appear in an alien and foreign identification, and therefore be subject unto the jurisdiction of the rules, laws, and regulations of the egos that rule such things.

This foreign jurisdiction only recognizes its IDENTIFICATION of NAMES and not, “the Man created in the image and likeness of God both male and female.”  Does, “Human = Man?”  I say that, “Human <> Man.”  Therefore, human is, “color-of-man,” as in, “color-of-law.”  And I think you are aware that anything which is, “color-able,” is for the purpose of a, “cover-up,” and is not truly what it APPEARS to be.

On another thought, how is it that the prefix, “Hu,” or, “Hue,” precedes Man?  When did that happen?  How did that happen?  Furthermore, “Is it necessary to redefine that which was already determined and defined before the foundation of this world was laid?”  The answer that came to me is, “Only for the purpose of deception.”  So then, it APPEARS that, “hu-man,” is a “cover-up,” for Man employed as a distraction to keep the sexes divided and therefore to perpetuate a feeling of being separate from opposite sex and not that of Be-ing One.


Comments are closed.