What if the Jesus of the NT came today?

[ManFromHeaven]

The so called miracles of old and new testament scriptures have reasonable explanation. They are not magical events or supernatural events. Yeshua said; "How evil the people are of this day that they expect a miracle or sign in the sky as evidence of God's approval."
A sign in the sky would be a comet depicting the sword (word of God), proclaiming the coming of the Messiah. Yeshua proclaimed "I come with the sword (words of God), to divide fathers and sons....." And Yeshua walked his spiritual journey on water (Knowledge)
His healing's were purely spiritual in nature, not metaphysical or literal but allegorical and only understood with insight of the symbolism.

Certainly the deliberate deception of the churches makes true revelations to John; The great harlot or whore spreading her legs across all the nations.

And some guy's are so deceived that they think not of their Mother earth! Satin is the collective deception of the churches.

[RBerman]

The so called miracles of old and new testament scriptures have reasonable explanation. They are not magical events or supernatural events... His healing's were purely spiritual in nature, not metaphysical or literal but allegorical and only understood with insight of the symbolism.

How do you know they were only allegorical?

[ManFromHeaven]

How do you know they were only allegorical?

I discern from reading scripture that everything in nature from the sun moon and stars to the animals trees water fire the bread the grain etc etc... have symbolic meanings or representations. When a man walks on water he is walking a spiritual journey upon the knowledge (water) that rains down from heaven. Yeshua alluded to these understandings when he spoke to his disciples and explained the meaning of the (bread) which is not literal food but the mana from heaven, Spiritual food which he compared to the food that Moses gave which tasted of milk and honey.
The language that I have come to understand gives reasonable allegorical spiritual meaning to what fundamentalists believe is literal meaning.
The most important in my opinion is The New Jerusalem city coming down from heaven. The New Jerusalem represents a new city of faith in which all are invited to enter. Ma hummed may have understood this as indeed Baha'ullah The Glory of God certainly did.

One is able to discern symbolism and allegory throughout old and new testament from the great flood on condemnation in Noah's time to the parting of the Egyptian sea of people to the New Jerusalem city of faith come down from heaven, to all manner of miracles and wonders throughout.

[RBerman]

Jesus' healings were purely spiritual in nature, not metaphysical or literal but allegorical and only understood with insight of the symbolism.

How do you know they were only allegorical?

I discern from reading scripture that everything in nature from the sun moon and stars to the animals trees water fire the bread the grain etc etc... have symbolic meanings or representations. When a man walks on water he is walking a spiritual journey upon the knowledge (water) that rains down from heaven. Yeshua alluded to these understandings when he spoke to his disciples and explained the meaning of the (bread) which is not literal food but the mana from heaven, Spiritual food which he compared to the food that Moses gave which tasted of milk and honey.
The language that I have come to understand gives reasonable allegorical spiritual meaning to what fundamentalists believe is literal meaning.
The most important in my opinion is The New Jerusalem city coming down from heaven. The New Jerusalem represents a new city of faith in which all are invited to enter. Ma hummed may have understood this as indeed Baha'ullah The Glory of God certainly did.

One is able to discern symbolism and allegory throughout old and new testament from the great flood on condemnation in Noah's time to the parting of the Egyptian sea of people to the New Jerusalem city of faith come down from heaven, to all manner of miracles and wonders throughout.

You're not explaining how you know they were allegory. You're explaining what the allegory would mean, if it were an allegory at all. It seems that answer to "How do you know?" is simply, "I don't know it. I choose to believe it."

[ManFromHeaven]

You're not explaining how you know they were allegory. You're explaining what the allegory would mean, if it were an allegory at all. It seems that answer to "How do you know?" is simply, "I don't know it. I choose to believe it."

OK I know because Revelation to John gives some meanings to symbolism. I know because Jesus told his disciples the meaning of the bread! I could say that I know because God told me so and to make know'n this revelation! I could say that a reasonable explanation of scriptural meaning is much more likely to be true.

I say because when Miriam was spat in the face by God, and her face turned white, she was shocked! This is a reasonable interpretation. As for her leprosy one can reasonably discern that this was spiritual leprosy, and a person so afflicted should be kept apart from others.

I could say that given there is reasonable symbolism and allegorical interpretation for the entire scriptures I can say "I know" with total confidence.
For one to believe in literal interpretation is a state of faith only without reasonable explanation.

The New Jerusalem according to my understanding has come down from Heaven on two or more occasions. A literal Jerusalem city has not ever come down form above the sky, and to believe this is really a bit crazy.

[RBerman]

OK I know because Revelation to John gives some meanings to symbolism. I know because Jesus told his disciples the meaning of the bread! I could say that I know because God told me so and to make know'n this revelation! I could say that a reasonable explanation of scriptural meaning is much more likely to be true. I say because when Miriam was spat in the face by God, and her face turned white, she was shocked! This is a reasonable interpretation. As for her leprosy one can reasonably discern that this was spiritual leprosy, and a person so afflicted should be kept apart from others. I could say that given there is reasonable symbolism and allegorical interpretation for the entire scriptures I can say "I know" with total confidence. For one to believe in literal interpretation is a state of faith only without reasonable explanation. The New Jerusalem according to my understanding has come down from Heaven on two or more occasions. A literal Jerusalem city has not ever come down form above the sky, and to believe this is really a bit crazy.

"John's Apocalypse is full of symbols," is not a good reason to change all the miracles in the historical books of the Bible into symbols. Genre determines interpretation.

[ManFromHeaven]

"John's Apocalypse is full of symbols," is not a good reason to change all the miracles in the historical books of the Bible into symbols. Genre determines interpretation.

I am not solely using John's Apocalypse. Indeed it is the genre style of symbolism, parables, and allegory, throughout the scriptures that give understanding to me. Jesus is referred to as the True Vine and the vineyard his church. I am the bread of life. Whoever believes in me will never thirst. etc
I am not turning miracles into symbols. I am interpreting an allegorical meaning of miracles through understanding a specific word or words that have a symbolic meaning.

Of course some seed falls on rocky ground and many do not have ears to hear!

[RBerman]

I am not solely using John's Apocalypse. Indeed it is the genre style of symbolism, parables, and allegory, throughout the scriptures that give understanding to me. Jesus is referred to as the True Vine and the vineyard his church. I am the bread of life. Whoever believes in me will never thirst. etc
I am not turning miracles into symbols. I am interpreting an allegorical meaning of miracles through understanding a specific word or words that have a symbolic meaning.

You also seemed to be denying that the miracles historically happened. Or did I misunderstand you?

Of course some seed falls on rocky ground and many do not have ears to hear!

How very true.

[ManFromHeaven]

[QUOTE=RBerman;3172865]You also seemed to be denying that the miracles historically happened. Or did I misunderstand you?

You miss understand me; It is the nature of the miracles that I see as *spiritual* rather than physical or metaphysical. There is no magic. "How evil it is to expect a miracle or a sign in the sky for Gods approval."

I presume that you have a literal interpretation of (the sword) or do you choose to believe it to be metaphorical when Jesus speaks "I come with a sword"; And perhaps literal? when Jesus asks one of his disciples to bring a sword when they are summoned to make account of themselves to the Hight Priest, and the disciple cuts off the ear of the High Priests slave!

It is my interpretation that the sword is the spoken word of God that divides, and in the case of the High Priests slave, one may not have an ear to listen or to understand. Jesus touches his ear and heals him. The healing is spiritual understanding. There is no magic!

[RBerman]

[QUOTE=ManFromHeaven;3172915]

You also seemed to be denying that the miracles historically happened. Or did I misunderstand you?

You miss understand me; It is the nature of the miracles that I see as *spiritual* rather than physical or metaphysical. There is no magic. "How evil it is to expect a miracle or a sign in the sky for Gods approval."

I presume that you have a literal interpretation of (the sword) or do you choose to believe it to be metaphorical when Jesus speaks "I come with a sword"; And perhaps literal? when Jesus asks one of his disciples to bring a sword when they are summoned to make account of themselves to the Hight Priest, and the disciple cuts off the ear of the High Priests slave!

It is my interpretation that the sword is the spoken word of God that divides, and in the case of the High Priests slave, one may not have an ear to listen or to understand. Jesus touches his ear and heals him. The healing is spiritual understanding. There is no magic!

In your view, there is also no physical healing; you take events that are presented as historical, and you say that they are not historical, just because other events that are presented as metaphorical are metaphorical.

[ManFromHeaven]

In your view, there is also no physical healing; you take events that are presented as historical, and you say that they are not historical, just because other events that are presented as metaphorical are metaphorical.

No that is not my view nor what I say! It appears that your previous post has included my post with yours so I shall reiterate here and explain:

You miss understand me; It is the nature of the miracles that I see as *spiritual* rather than physical or metaphysical. There is no magic. "How evil it is to expect a miracle or a sign in the sky for Gods approval."

I presume that you have a literal interpretation of (the sword) or do you choose to believe it to be metaphorical when Jesus speaks "I come with a sword"' And perhaps literal when Jesus asks one of his disciples to bring a sword when they are summoned to make account of themselves to the High Priest, and the disciple cuts off the ear of the High Priests slave!

It is my interpretation that the sword in the spoken word of God that divides as in the case when Jesus proclaims " I come with a sword", and in the case of the High Priests slave, again it is the spoken word of the disciple that the slave does not have an ear to listen! Jesus touches his ear verbally and heals him. The healing is spiritual understanding. There is no magical physical healing. No literal re-attachment of the ear!

This historical event is spiritual understanding and spiritual healing. Just because I claim it is not physical does not mean that I claim it is not historical! Please do not confuse what I say or proclaim incorrectly my view.

Just as it is written "The dead will hear the voice of God" Please listen to my words more carefully.

[RBerman]

No that is not my view nor what I say! It appears that your previous post has included my post with yours so I shall reiterate here and explain:

You miss understand me; It is the nature of the miracles that I see as *spiritual* rather than physical or metaphysical. There is no magic. "How evil it is to expect a miracle or a sign in the sky for Gods approval."

I presume that you have a literal interpretation of (the sword) or do you choose to believe it to be metaphorical when Jesus speaks "I come with a sword"' And perhaps literal when Jesus asks one of his disciples to bring a sword when they are summoned to make account of themselves to the High Priest, and the disciple cuts off the ear of the High Priests slave!

It is my interpretation that the sword in the spoken word of God that divides as in the case when Jesus proclaims " I come with a sword", and in the case of the High Priests slave, again it is the spoken word of the disciple that the slave does not have an ear to listen! Jesus touches his ear verbally and heals him. The healing is spiritual understanding. There is no magical physical healing. No literal re-attachment of the ear!

This historical event is spiritual understanding and spiritual healing. Just because I claim it is not physical does not mean that I claim it is not historical! Please do not confuse what I say or proclaim incorrectly my view.

Just as it is written "The dead will hear the voice of God" Please listen to my words more carefully.

When I say "historical" I mean "physical." You are mistaken to conclude that because Jesus speaks in metaphors, therefore Jesus' actions are also only metaphors, rather than physical events that also have spiritual significance.

[ManFromHeaven]

When I say "historical" I mean "physical." You are mistaken to conclude that because Jesus speaks in metaphors, therefore Jesus' actions are also only metaphors, rather than physical events that also have spiritual significance.

Jesus was summoned to account for himself to the High Priest. To make account of ones self is to speak and explain, certainly not have your disciple bring a literal sword and use it violently! Is this the Jesus you believe in? A man who condone's violence!

The sword is the spoken word. The physical event was the meeting and discussion. The spiritual significance was the understanding of Jesus teachings. The healing was lending ones ear to listen. This was the work's of Jesus. Spiritual understanding and healing.

Chopping off a mans ear and magically healing it back on has no spiritual significance! Just plain black magic! Satanic deception!
Pray tell me; What is your spiritual significance of having a mans ear chopped off.

[RBerman]

Jesus was summoned to account for himself to the High Priest. To make account of ones self is to speak and explain, certainly not have your disciple bring a literal sword and use it violently! Is this the Jesus you believe in? A man who condone's violence! The sword is the spoken word. The physical event was the meeting and discussion. The spiritual significance was the understanding of Jesus teachings. The healing was lending ones ear to listen. This was the work's of Jesus. Spiritual understanding and healing. Chopping off a mans ear and magically healing it back on has no spiritual significance! Just plain black magic! Satanic deception! Pray tell me; What is your spiritual significance of having a mans ear chopped off.

Peter literally chopped the servant's ear off. It showed bravery and dedication to Jesus, but it also demonstrated his rash character, his predisposition to act without thinking, without considering what Jesus would have him do.

Jesus literally healed the servant's ear. It was not "plain black magic." It was the power of God, the sort of physical miracle Jesus did routinely, and which was the reason he had gained such attention. This miracle also was part of Jesus' rebuke of Peter, as well as undoing the damage Peter had done.

[ManFromHeaven]

Peter literally chopped the servant's ear off. It showed bravery and dedication to Jesus, but it also demonstrated his rash character, his predisposition to act without thinking, without considering what Jesus would have him do.

Jesus literally healed the servant's ear. It was not "plain black magic." It was the power of God, the sort of physical miracle Jesus did routinely, and which was the reason he had gained such attention. This miracle also was part of Jesus' rebuke of Peter, as well as undoing the damage Peter had done.

The Jesus you portray is one who is afraid to make account of himself without the aid of Peter and his (literal sword) as you perceive it, which Jesus asked for him to bring. Of course fear and violence go hand in hand. The Jesus you portray condones violence!

Peter's attack was verbal as was Jesus rebuke of Peter. The sword is the spoken word.
Jesus gained attention because he satisfied the peoples hunger and thirst for spiritual understanding. Jesus is the bread that satisfies their hunger and his teachings quench their thirst so they would never thirst again.
John 6.26 'In very truth I know that you have come looking for me because your hunger was satisfied with the loaves you ate, not because you saw signs'.
Not because they saw signs. How evil the people are that they expect to see a sign in the sky (A miracle) for Gods approval.

Your teaching is of Satan.