Notes

I Peter II: IX
Attributed.

"......You are a Chosen Generation, A Royal Priesthood, an Holy Nation, a Peculiar People....."

• The phrase Royal Priesthood will be familiar to scholars who have studied the concept of priest kingship. The word royal derives from the Latin Regalis meaning to rule. Originally this meant ’to apply a rule’, meaning to be able to measure, observe and thus divine and understand the hidden span or workings of matter.
  
  In this sense a ruler was one who was born with the ability to measure and hence understand the hidden workings of the Cosmos. Here we have a direct reference to derkesthai. Hence the regalis was the derkesthai and the derkesthai was the Dragon King. The condition of being royal in the accepted sense is derived from being born into a royal family, clan, race (species) or tribe.
  
  Contextually and originally this phrase could only have been used in connextion with the Davidic concept of royalty passed through the blood as the ’holy spirit’ (genetic inheritance) of the gods: Mana, Maia or Maja (Maga or Magi, Magha, Maxa: greatness).
   

• The word priest is from the Old English preost related to the Latin presbyter, meaning an ’Elder’ who, in classical terms, was a priest-king. Essentially then a king and a priest were the same thing and could only be such by birth, as was the tradition.
   

• Holy is from the Old English halig and the word means: morally perfect, pure in heart, set apart to a sacred use. Holy is related etymologically to Hal: sound (of mind, body and spirit), and is connected with hail, heal and whole.
  
  The linguistic connection should be noted between the Old Norse Heil and the Germanic Haegl, meaning hailstorm: related to the sacred rune derived from the Star of Anu which is the basic device from which the christian Chi Rho cross is derived.
  
  In this we have a clear relation with the children of the Dragon; the sons and daughters of Anu who were the Eurasian sacral-royal Arya and the Sidhe or Scythian Nation of the Wise or holy; the "whole" or "complete" ones, the transcended god-kings and goddess-queens who obtained wisdom through holiness or wholeness: the Gnome or gnostic royalty whose wisdom was derived from their innate completeness as whole beings at one with themselves and thus with the Cosmos.
   

• The word nation is derived from the Latin root natio meaning ’to be born’. Here we enter in upon birth, gens and race; and hence blood and genetic inheritance. An Holy Nation means a race that is not ordained as being holy through ritual mumbo-jumbo but are automatically holy by birth, genetic inheritance and innate characteristic.
   

• The word Peculiar means: own (singular), of one’s own, appropriated, preserved, characteristic, special. The phrase "Peculiar People", as well as the rest of the passage used by Peter to describe gentile converts would originally have been used solely to describe a race or tribe, such as the priestly heirs of the family of Jesus (and those like him), who was an Essene, a Druid or Magus by St. Columba’s definition and recognized as such by the Magi of Babylon, and a priest of the Draconian White Brotherhood - the Egyptian Therapeutate - whose wife was the ’Ishtar’ or Ubaid/Scythian ’Inanna Priestess’ Mary Magdalene.
  
  If he wrote the foregoing at all, then Peter, whose treason against Jesus is documented and whose schism with Jesus’ brother James is academically accepted, appears to have used the passage to convince outsiders in foreign lands that they too could be the elect of God by courtesy of what has become to the Church, the somewhat abstract and nebulous ’Holy Spirit’: originally the very Mana or Maja which was the sole requisite or peculiarity of, and was only passed down through, the blood royal.
  
  Peter and Paul’s schismatic sect was struggling at the time and both men said anything that came to mind in order to gain as many converts as they could. If Peter actually wrote I Peter II: IX at all, then all one can say is that, having discovered a good money-making scheme, Peter and Paul were attempting to afford themselves some form of security in numbers in the face of growing Roman hostility, and ensure for themselves and their agents a free lunch and a warm bed, wherever those agents fancied taking a holiday break around the Mediterranean.
  
  This kind of scriptural and doctrinal manipulation later became endemic within the Roman Church who lied when they claimed to have the right to make kings from peasants through anointing and coronation in the same manner as Peter seems to suggest that priest kings can be created by splashing people with oil and sanctified water and feeding them nondescript groceries. What utter nonsense.
  
  This is why the Church is in such a mess today; it’s full of people who have swallowed the Church’s lies and have been baptized, anointed and given communion in the hollow sham mimicry of an equally hollow historical fraud.
  
  It is therefore very likely that along with the vast bulk of Christian scriptural history and doctrine, which was "canonized" - meaning doctored - by the Roman Church, the passage I Peter II: IX was attributed to Peter by the Churchmen who actually altered its emphasis post temps and ad hoc and further, deliberately took it out of context in order to make it apply to the masses they were targeting in order to obtain money and power.
  
  Here we have the birth of the modern, rabid PC preoccupation with equality as a moral right. The homogenous fantasy-nightmare in which we are all trapped today began with the Church’s desire to include the masses in order to sell them a lie and bleed them dry in vast numbers. Contemporary homogeny and equality are the children of this ancient, thoroughly dishonest pecuniary greed, and like the greed and fraud that inseminated it, the concept of human equality is as equally dishonest and fraudulent, and is championed today for exactly the same pecuniary reasons as it always was.
  
  A bit of bathwater, a dab of face cream and a light lunch may be refreshing, but they are not substitutes for, and nor will they confer, the Sang Rael; the ’Blood Royal’. But poor, stupid, acquisitive people believe that this has made all the difference and in consequence their belief refuses to allow them to see what others see: that Christians are a bunch of blind, self deluding hypocrites and fools; whitened sepulchers whose all too manifest sin is compounded by a greed which is all the worse for believing nonsense, simply in order to obtain - prompted by irrational, deliberately inculcated fear - the non-existent salvation of their non-existent souls. They are no different post hocus pocus than they were before. People really are gullible.
  
  Even in Jewish sacred tradition, of which New Testament Christianity was a significant and legitimate part, the priesthood was a caste that one was born into, as was kingship. The idea that anyone, particularly gentiles, could become Levite priests or Davidic kings at the whim of a non-Davidic, non-Levite Galilean malcontent like Peter was unthinkable, especially as ’christianity’ at that time was a Jewish, genuinely royal, priestly sect.
  
  At his birth the sect’s leader, as a scion of the Royal House of David, posed a threat to the throne of Israel that was genuine enough to have Herod scouring the country seeking to kill him and thus secure Herod’s continuing position as a puppet king. If Jesus’ kingship had been merely symbolic, Herod would have considered him harmless.
  
  The original Church or Circle of Jesus was, by its very nature and existence, a royal court and an holy temple, not an open house for allcomers.

I Peter I: vs II

Peter calls these peasants "The elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, (the elect) through sanctification of the (Holy) Spirit, (the elect) unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ".

This passage basically says that mere belief in, and obedience to, the sanctions and tenets of the schismatic, bloodless Church (of those who were thrown out by Jesus’ own family) will confer upon the new, non-royal convert, a special royal role and identity previously and exclusively set apart for Priest Kings whose magical ability to act as both priests and kings only derived from a genetic capacity passed down as the unique quality Of The Royal Blood.

Supposedly, if one allowed the bloodless protagonist of a manipulated interpretation of Jesus’ message to wet one’s head with water made holy solely by that person’s opinion; and one allowed one’s mouth to be stuffed with cheap bread and wine made sacred solely by wishful thinking, this gave one the right to think of one’s self as a member of the Davidic Royal House.

If this is the case, then if I buy a load of Corgi dogs, make offensive observations about the Chinese, wear a tacky Hannoverian interpretation of the equally tacky Stewart tartan, drink gin all day and attempt to seduce anything on two legs, I would legitimately become a member of the Royal House of Windsor, by opinion and wishful thinking alone, am I right?

No, I didn’t think I was. So how come a coward like Peter, who wasn’t a relative of Jesus, who betrayed him in fact and split from Jesus brother James because he wanted to be top dog, how come He gets to decide who will and who will not be a member of the Royal House of David and a Priest of the Royal Eurasian Druidhe?

In its original context the entire passage from I Peter II vs IX would have been used to describe and could only have applied to those who - like Jesus and his Aryan-Scythian, elven ancestors - were of the blood royal and thus Dragon Kings.

The entire battle between the Roman Catholic Church and the desposyni has been exactly about this point: who are the true spiritual descendants of Christ and hence his rightful and genuine royal, priestly successors? In any area of social convention past or present, blood always takes precedence.

The "Royal priesthood" and the "Holy Nation" of the Christian Bible are not the Christians themselves as they have always prided themselves as being, but rather; their sworn enemies the Elven Anukim: The Annunagi or Shining Ones; the Dragons whose land of Idumea the Christian God set apart and made sacred to the Dragons alone.

(Isaiah 34: 5-17 & 35: 1-10)

Idumea, the land of the Repha’im, was a land of blessing and abundance, a second Eden, in which was found the Holy Way (Tao), the road of the wandering men (the Scythian kings; the sons of Cain the wanderer) whom Isaiah calls The Ransomed and Redeemed, and to whom in prophecy the Christian God promises Zion. This was fulfilled when Baldwin de Vere - a Son of Cain and a scion of kings - became King of Jerusalem.


The Dragons - and in the King James Version of the Holy Bible - the Daughters of the Owl (Lilith), are therefore - according to Isaiah - the true children of God; "A Chosen Generation, a Royal Priesthood, an Holy Nation, a Peculiar People......".

St John XVII: XIV

......."and the world hath hated them because they are not of the world".

St John XVII: XVI

......."They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world".

(Attributed to Jesus)
 

Go Back