2. Water into "Wine" (urine)

Firstly, I’d like to state that these creative writers, the authors of the New
Testament, used every conceivable means by which to state things in just
the ways that were required in order to achieve their true goals. They were
determined to deliberately deceive their readers and have done so most
successfully for these many hundreds of years via the most ingenious means.

For instance, it would be the "truth" to say that Jesus (or the person who
was playing Jesus, i.e. Arrius Piso) changed water into wine simply by
doing so in the story that was written. It’s like saying that you wrote
down the word ‘water’ and then scratched it out and wrote down the
word ‘wine’ instead. "Water" WAS changed to "wine". This, is an
example of how they were able to claim to be telling the "truth" -
although this ‘truth’ was in fact also deliberate deception at the same
time!

The sick joke here (in John 2:9, 4:46) reveals itself to those who are
very familiar with ancient Roman history, and who have knowledge of
the fact that the Romans were extremely cruel in their acts of war with
regards to their enemies. With this ‘joke’ they do more than one thing,
they speak the ‘truth’ about what they had done in taking advantage of
the thirsty and starved Jews who were resisting them in the war, and they
ridicule the surviving Jews, as well as ‘honoring’ (acknowledging) their
own patron god/ancestors "Dionysis" and "Hercules".

They were joking here (sic) about taking advantage of the situation of
the Jews who were surrounded by the Romans at Jerusalem in 69/70 CE,
by feigning ‘compassion’ upon them by giving the ‘sustenance’. Knowing
full well that the Jews who were holding out at Jerusalem were thirsting
and starving to death, and were dying now from it, the Romans took this
as an opportunity to perpetrate the most cruel and unusual acts ever
committed in war. They took the water that they drank which were held
in animal bladders and in hides (early forms of ‘canteens’) and this water
was changed into what was urine for the Romans, but what the Romans
called ‘wine’ for those poor suffering Jews who were desperate for any
form of sustenance. So, the water that the Romans soldiers drank,
changed to ‘wine’ that was to be give to their suffering Jewish enemies.

And we are able to deduce this as the fact of the matter because of the
other ‘jokes’ that are inter-related with this one. It will be necessary to
make cross-references for all of these ‘jokes’ in order to understand them
fully. This fact alone, that there are indeed other jokes that relate to one
another in the New Testament should also be considered as proof that
these were in fact ‘jokes’ that were deliberately placed in the New
Testament by the very authors of it themselves. They did this in this
particular way so that "one joke would lead to the discovery of another"
for the purpose of another fact, and that is so that eventually this all
would be discovered and that it would be unraveled for what it truly
was.

The old god Dionysis was the patron god (ancestor) of the Piso family.
Dionysis was the god of ‘wine’, and Arrius Piso saw himself as the new
Dionysis and the new Hercules incarnate, and therefore entitled to use
the attributes of those gods. The Piso family honors their patron god and
ancestor Dionysis in Acts 17:34. And, a statue of Hercules (obviously
drunk) fumbling to urinate was found at the Villa of the Pisos in
Herculaneum, at the Bay of Naples, Italy. for more on both Hercules and
Dionysis in relation to the Pisos, see the book "Herculaneum, Italy’s
buried treasure", Joseph Jay Deiss, 1985, page 2, 6, 106, 123, 181, 184,
and especially pg. 53. Also, see the other ‘jokes’ that relate to this one.

3. The "Third" Day (meaning ‘sex’ or fornication day)

It should be understood by now that these persons (the authors) did not
think as the common person did, but did understand the workings of their
minds. When they made ‘jokes’ or statements, not only did these have
double meanings, but as many as they could fit in or allude to. It was
never one meaning or the other - it was both or all possible meanings.
And the reader is required to have ‘wisdom’ in order to determine by
deduction which were the true intended meanings; or else to simply
‘believe’ the surface or superficial meaning that is the only one that
may be seen by those who are ‘ignorant’ and not able to understand
the rest of the full and true meanings that were actually there.

Matt. 27:63, "… that deceiver, whilst living, said; after three days I will
rise again." and Mark 8:31, "… and after three days (he will) rise again."

It just so happened that the crucifixion in the Jesus story took place on
Friday, while the sun was still out and Jesus, by law would have had to
have been taken down from the cross by dusk. And also because dusk
Friday was the beginning of the Sabbath period which lasted till Saturday
at dusk). Let’s say for the sake of argument, that he was (in the story)
crucified at dawn. Then, let’s count the days. Friday, 6:00 a.m. to Sat. at
6:00 a.m. is one day. The last mention that we have in the NT of Jesus is
before the end of the Sabbath, which is Saturday at dusk. The next is that
he has risen before dawn on Sunday. That’s not even two days! But in the
story, "three" days are mentioned so as to be able to refer to "three" even
though there were really not even two full days in which all of this was
supposed to have occurred in the story. That’s where we may have gotten
the expression "what a difference a day makes."

The most familiar or well-known meaning or reference for ‘3’ is the trinity
of course, but how many know that the trinity of the New Testament was
really just a remake of the even more ancient trinity of Egypt. Several of
the scholars in this day and age may be aware of this and even those others
who research these matters including preachers and other religious leaders,
but how many of those religious leaders who know this and many other
things that the average person does not know will ever tell those followers
the truth of the matter? Not very many. Why should they? What would
they gain if persons knew the truth?

[CONTINUE]

( =)=