Bastard

Deut 23:2 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.

Chances are that there was a "bastard" son somewhere in the family tree for all of us. Does this mean that we can't participate in church?

Other verses that seem to related...

Deut 23:1 "He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD."

2 Corinthians 6:14 "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?"

Deuteronomy 7:3 "Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, 4. for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the Lord's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you."

To understand the "bastard" verse, we've got to rethink lots of terms that we've taken for granted. For example, the Biblical term "Israel" has nothing to do with a piece of land and "heaven" has nothing to do with an imaginary part of space where a white bearded old man resides who is so dysfunctional that he can't wait until you get there to sing "Holy, Holy, Holy" to him forever.

Israel = free people. Plain and simple. Those who had no king but God. Kingdom of Heaven = wherever those free people reside. Egypt = slaves. Father = whoever is your provider, protector. Israel has no provider/protector but God. They had a decentralized government that depended on the love of people for one another, free will offerings, and servants to administer to the needs of the widows and orphans. Egypt's protector/provider does so through forced taxation and inscription of his subjects. http://www.hisholychurch.org/sermon/fatherabba.php

Abraham left his "father"--his city state--so his decedents could eventually become free people--Israel. Then those free people sold themselves into slavery--started working for (serving/worshiping) a new father who promised to provide for them as long as they paid tribute amounting to 20% of their lives. (The father US Citizens demands roughly 50%.)

The rightful heir to the throne of Egypt (Moses was a title of royalty, not a name), eyes were opened when he killed one of his servants. (Moses feared what he had become, not what would be done to him.) He "fled" to the desert where some of his relatives lived who still practiced the old ways because they had not sold themselves into slavery. He learned from these relatives how this freewill government "under God" functioned. He took the knowledge back to the slaves--the Egyptians and started teaching this alternative form of government.

A portion of Egyptians (those under tribute) takes the message to heart and "gathering their own straw at night," That is, they slowly weaned themselves off the education, welfare, health services, etc. provided by "drinking the blood"--the life force--of your neighbor through taxation enforced with a sword. While still paying the taxes their fathers had agreed to pay, they started building their own support structures based on loving their neighbor to the point that they were no longer dependent on the public schools, welfare, social security, hospitals of Egypt.

Then the inevitable "plagues" came. The people of Egypt lived beyond their means, built up mountains of debt, policed the world, and generally no longer cared for one another, only what they could milk out of the government (their fellow citizens) for themselves. The system started falling apart and the "father" was no longer able to offer the level of protection and provision he once did. But the want-to-be "Israelites"--those who were no longer dependent on the government that exercised authority--fared well. In fact, they were often able to come to the rescue of their fellow Egyptian citizens when Egypt couldn't help.

Lots of politics went on, but eventually these people were allowed to "opt out" of the Egyptian system and try their social experiment on their own in a remote place in Egypt. (The desert was still territory of Egypt. But because the want-to-be Israelites (free people) did not ask for any of the benefits of Egypt...and because Egypt was is such a financial mess that it helped to simplify things to get such a large group of people "off the books"...the "Israelites" were left to do their own thing.

But it was still a generation before the kids who where born without Egyptian birth certificates and social security numbers (the first generation that was no the property of Egypt) were able to truly become Israelites and enter "the Promised Land" and marry with Egyptian licenses.

Generations later this free people decided they wanted a king like the other nations. Despite God's warning that they would be choosing a new father and what the new father would do, they felt they needed centralized authority.

Generations later the centralized authority gets so bad that "Israel" rejects the kings and "goes back to their own home where every man does right in his own eyes." Don't just gloss over that verse. It doesn't have the negative meaning that our government-licensed churches have taught us all these years. When read in the context of the perspective offered above, there is actually a very positive connotation...all the tribes but Judah remembered what it was to have God as father/provider/protector rather than a centralized government.

We get the impression from the Bible that the other tribes now became insignificant to God and they fade away. But actually they were the ones that followed the true God/provider and didn't continue to serve the false god and be devoted to a piece of land and its "patriotic" symbols. (Patri means father.) The Bible continues on with the story of Judah because they were the hard-headed ones from which there are still lessons to be learned.

What follows is a host of convoluted governmental experiments that Judah tries other than the simple laws first taught be Abraham and Moses. By the time we get to Jesus, Judah is under a complicated system of forced taxation by the Pharisees.

But once again, God starts working through key people who recognize that there is a better alternative. John "the Baptist" was next in line to become the head Pharisee. He rejects this position of authority and starts baptizing people into a new system (actually the original system) of decentralized government where elders are kings of--protectors/providers for--their households and the people are ruled by God alone. People of the time could also chose Herod's baptism where they paid taxes to Herod for his protection/provision and they went to Herod's temples for their public education, welfare, social security, etc. When you came out of the Jordan your were given a white stone with your ID (Social Security Number) so that the temples could identify you as one of their dependents. http://www.hisholychurch.net/declarations/baptism/baptism.php

Jesus comes on the scene and also starts spreading the good news of the "Kingdom of God." As rightful and recognized king, he remolds the government of Judea into one based on love and charity and volunteer ministers (priests/Levites) who distribute the charity to the needy. As the very real and recognized king, Jesus fires those in charge of Judea's reserve banks and puts his own people in charge (turns over the tables--banks). The Pharisees hate loosing the power and the millions of dollars they take in through taxes and conspire to kill Jesus so they can once again assume their position of authority and subterfuge.

But the "good news" has already taken hold in people's hearts and they feel no allegiance to a piece of land and its sacred symbols and spread throughout the world the live in freedom under allegiance to God alone.

This story happens over and over again throughout history. The pilgrims came to the new word to create a "New Jerusalem" and the "Kingdom of Heaven." It wasn't about establishing a corporate nation of forced taxation and boundaries. But the people have once again lost their way and they now assume a corporate, centralized nation called the United States was established by God and they send their sons to defend it and their daughters to be "confectioneries for the king"--to work so she can pay taxes so her children can be provided for and educated by the king.

Now...we finally come to the meaning of the term "bastards." Plain and simple, bastard are those who have a father other than God. Every US citizen is a bastard. Our birth certificates and social security numbers (SSN) prove who is our father/provider/protector.

10 generations? Where do you want to start counting? - The creation of the US Constitution when the corporate government was created? - The 14th Amendment that made us all property of the US (US citizens) rather than free men? - The late 1800s and early 1900s when the first public schools started being created and we start praying to another father (the US government) for the education of our children? - When the Social Security Administration was created and we not only started praying to the new father for care in our old age, but we also started selling our children to the new father so that we could get all the benefits that came with the mark (tax deductions, easier entry into school, easier entry into jobs, access to government benefits)?

Today we can't even buy or sell without the mark. We have no support structures for our children so they have options if we choose NOT to sell them to Egypt.

Indeed, we are bastards who have no access to the "congregation of the Lord"--the Kingdom of Heaven, Israel. It will take at least another generation until there are true "children of God."

When God warns the sons of Israel not to marry women from the surrounding nations and Paul warns against being unequally yolked...

We are talking about a truly free people: Sons that are kings...whose only allegiance is to God, who have no SSNs, and truly own the land on which they live (not tenants paying taxes to the true owner). It was forbidden for these truly free men to marry women who insisted on keeping the benefits (and thus the identification with the other father/provider/protector). Any children born or this type of marriage would not be free children...by definition, they were not be Israelites. And there were contracts that would bind them for generations.

On the other hand, if a woman was willing to sever all connections to the "pagan" nation and potential benefits that came with it. she could enter into the Kingdom. Rahab and Ruth are primes examples of this. It wasn't bloodlines that mattered. It was the covenants and contracts that were attached...that would determine if offspring were "pure" or not.

Regarding the verse about the "wounded stones" and "privy member", it helps to understand that the Hebrew symbols translated into stones and alters also had meanings related to the practical organization of government.

Deu 23:1 "He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD."

Stones meant elders and alters where a gathering of stones...a gathering of elders. These elders would choose a Levite servant--a privy member to distribute the elders free will offerings to the widows and orphans. The privy member was also the "networker"--the person that stayed in communication with other Levites who knew the needs and gifts of the ten or so elders they served. In this way, the entire nation could stay connected, provide for emergencies, go to battle without the need for a centralized government of force.

So if a group of elders have not come together in agreement about who their privy member will be--a trustworthy and respected servant to connect them with other "altars", then they are cut off from the charity and covering of the larger assembly until they get their acts together.