Are you a Gnostic Super Drone ?

[headheart]

A friend once said to me, "It is not the fool who gets into Mysticism, but the fool who does not plan to get back out."

Whereas I admit that many of my own ideas are of the Unorthodox variety, I generally try to keep to some Orthodox belief system (ie. Westiminster Confession, Apostle's Creed ) ...but there was a time when I was drinking from so many different wells that I lost my way.
I had become what might be called a 'Gnostic Super Drone'.

You see, I came from basic Pagan stock, and so I did not really have a Christian upbringing, though I most certainly was exposed to those elements at school and at play. Yet, my beliefs were probably closer to Buddhism and Mysticim. I was a free spirit and still am to some degree, but I was rootless. I was like a ship drifiting in the tide, and swept along by the tide of cosmic thoughts, by friends, television, books and my own inventive brain.

Unbeknown to me I was slipping deeper and deeper into a mystical coma of sorts, until eventually everything began to go wild, and when I say wild, I mean really wild. In my daylight slumber of Meditation and Contemplation I began to see butteflies coming out of the wall....and that was just the beginning. I really thought that I had reached the Philosopher Stone...or some other crazy idea. In the end it turned really bad and I lost my mind....I lost my way.

GOD healed my crazy brain, and helped me back into the real world. Today I tend to keep a watch over my mind, and what I read and what I suckle on. For there is a fountain filled with the poison of spider web, and crinkly crew that when it is sampled slowly opens one's eyes to blindness and darkness and lies.

Are you like I was.....are you a Gnostic Super Drone ?


67117

Sincerely,
HH

[Littlejoe9763]

Yes...at one time, I was really studying new age/mysticism type stuff. Reincarnation, the whole bit. But it was only a fad that faded as I realized there wasn't anything really there for me. In my spiritual wanderings, I went off on several tangents that eventually lead to hopelessness, and I resorted to numbing my mind a la drugs, alcohol, & sex. Until I went back to the true source of Jesus Christ. The one I had started with and decided it wasn't anymore real than the ones that followed. But this time, God showed me He was real, not only with salvation, but with the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. I call that the touchstone of my spiritual journey, and it forever changed and marked me as His. Any time in the past that I was in doubt, God would remind me of that moment, and I would immediately remember who I was in Him.

LJ

[headheart]

Add:
2. Gnostic Super Drone...

Dear Unorthodox collegues.

Just incase my opening post is taken by some here to be a mockery of Gnostic ideas, it certainly is not. For by the time I was 19, I had already slipped into the deep forbidden lake (http://staergetaleht.blogspot.com/2008/02/compare-contrast-deep-forbidden-lake.html) -which I wrote about in 'Abraxas to Jesus' - (check the link in my profile.)

67119
Just makes me wanna go fishing ?

This is a little information from the Wikepedia Online Enc. about "Abraxas" - well, the part that relates closest to how I came into contact with the ideas...(actually I got into them through reading Herman Hesse). I am still fond of his writings...and am currently listening to Siddharta...

The Swiss Psychologist Carl Jung wrote a short Gnostic treatise in 1916 called The Seven Sermons to the Dead, which called Abraxas a God higher than the Christian God and Devil, that combines all opposites into one Being.
Wikipedia - Gnosticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism)


Just as a show of respect for those who are engaged in Gnosticism from a Christian perspective, I am currently reading from this website : Gnostic Christianity (http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/)- in particular 'The ABC of the 5 states of Consciousness'... so hey, if you dig to talk about it all, don't be shy, I do not bite.

Love,
HH

[headheart]

Yes...at one time, I was really studying new age/mysticism type stuff. Reincarnation, the whole bit. But it was only a fad that faded as I realized there wasn't anything really there for me. In my spiritual wanderings, I went off on several tangents that eventually lead to hopelessness, and I resorted to numbing my mind a la drugs, alcohol, & sex. Until I went back to the true source of Jesus Christ. The one I had started with and decided it wasn't anymore real than the ones that followed. But this time, God showed me He was real, not only with salvation, but with the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. I call that the touchstone of my spiritual journey, and it forever changed and marked me as His. Any time in the past that I was in doubt, God would remind me of that moment, and I would immediately remember who I was in Him.

LJ

Hi LJ,

It seems like we have been down similar pathways in this dark forest, just out-of-sight of the pathway home.

( imagine a lovely picture of the Earth )

For all ye Unorthodox brother and sisters of Earth,

I have just got through reading 'The ABC's of the 5 stages of consciousness' and have two major passage of New Testament Scripture that need to be clearly understood. (I am not a close mind, and so will be willing to hear what each of your respective ideas are regarding these two passages.)

Let's just say they will the primary texts we are going to look at in their thread:

1. John 10:34-35

( refer note @ Gnostic Christianity - http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/frameset_CH8.htm )

My question is - Is the following statement true or false, if so please explain why you think it is, one or the other...

Jesus taught that we are all children of God and, therefore, have within us the potential to be perfect and loving, like God.

and;

2. Romans 8:29-30

( refer note @ Gnostic Christianity - http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/frameset_CH8.htm

My question is - Do you agree with the way that the writer has interpreted the passage of Scripture - Yes / No and please would you explain why.

This is the 1st stage as written by the Gnostic Christianity ( for the rest please follow the link )


Stage I of Consciousness: The "foreknown" refers to prehistoric beings who were not rationally conscious, but were predestined to develop the potential to reason. Mindless behavior characterizes Stage I. Jude 10 refers to those in this stage as "irrational animals."

Biblically, Stage I begins when God creates mankind and ends when Adam eats from the tree of forbidden fruit.

The key to Stage I is life. Our pre-rational consciousness in infancy exemplifies this stage.


Well, let's begin.... :pray:

[UrbanMonk]

Any time in the past that I was in doubt, God would remind me of that moment, and I would immediately remember who I was in Him.

LJ


Who do you say you are..."in Him"?

[headheart]

Seeing as I left out a picture of the earth in the primary post for this thread which is about two very important passages of New Testament scripture, I thought I would firstly put the picture in here and secondly give a link back to the pertinent post.

67129

Follow this link and discover what this thread is really ALL about.

THE GNOSTIC SUPERDRONE (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2739909&postcount=4)

Enjoy!

[UrbanMonk]

Enjoy!

Simply put, you believe in "heaven and earth". A gnostic is best understood as one who believes only in heaven (not both). To believe in "heaven and earth" is to eat of the tree of "good and evil" in which opposites are combined to produce a neo-fruit: "the world". A heaven-only paradigm is knowledge-based. A "heaven and earth" paradigm is belief based.

[headheart]

Simply put, you believe in "heaven and earth". A gnostic is best understood as one who believes only in heaven (not both). To believe in "heaven and earth" is to eat of the tree of "good and evil" in which opposites are combined to produce a neo-fruit: "the world". A heaven-only paradigm is knowledge-based. A "heaven and earth" paradigm is belief based.

:offtopic:

The Topic of Discussion is..... ((( read here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2739909&postcount=4))))

[UrbanMonk]

:offtopic:

The Topic of Discussion is..... ((( read here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2739909&postcount=4))))

Ok, let's look at this first one.


Jesus taught that we are all children of God and, therefore, have within us the potential to be perfect and loving, like God.

I am not fluent with the viewpoint of the webmaster you have quoted. I can say that if "children of God" means any kind of heirarchy or difference between Father and Son (Creator and created), then the phrase is a "dead metaphor" which has lost its meaning and power. There is a great effort to make us the children of the god of this world. This is not the same as accepting the fact that we are the Son of God. Those who use the phrase "children of god" are most often in support of the god of this world, and so, are not expressing a world-view from a basis of knowledge (gnosis).

Potential is a concept not of God, but rather, the god of this world. The children of the god of this world "grow" and "learn" and "develop" their "talents". The Son of God does not need to grow, learn, or develop. The Son of God possesses all talent...whatever has true value. Otherwise, talents are comparative devices. Comparison is not of the Father of the Son of God, for comparison is neither of love nor of knowledge.

On the other hand, the Son of God has imagined concepts which involve potential, growth, learning and talents. These concepts must all be "converted" for them to have any use at all toward the salvation of the Son of God who has used them to damn himself.

The Son of God damns himself when he transforms himself into "gods"...plural. This begets a downward spiral in which the Son of God descends into a heirarchy. When he hits rock bottom, he then begins to call upon "potential" to raise himself back up the ladder to become a "child of god". However, this is merely more toying around with the concepts of comparison whereby we may be special and different from everyone/everything else.

The truth is, there is no heirarchy. And potential - converted - means that we may all return to the glory from which we descended along a crooked path to the bottom, imposing upon ourselves a heirarchy of differences.

Jesus said, "Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect". By this he implores us to cast off the shakles of imperfect heirarchy for the freedom of perfect equality. We all have the potential to do this, just as Jesus did this. Not only the potential, but we also have the propensity, given enough time. After all, perfection is our natural inheritance, which we cast off in favor of the iniquity of inequality...which is unnatural to us.

Regards,
Urban Monk

[Littlejoe9763]

Who do you say you are..."in Him"?
Quite simply a child of the "King of Kings" and "Lord of Lords". A son of God....who is blessed and highly favored.

LJ

[headheart]

Quite simply a child of the "King of Kings" and "Lord of Lords". A son of God....who is blessed and highly favored.

LJ

Amen to that brother.


John 1:8-14
(8) He was not that Light, but wassent to bear witness of that Light.
(9)That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
(10) He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
(11) He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
(12) But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
(13) Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
(14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


For those who have just joined this thread, I would like to draw you attention to what will be discussed and hopefully, attp. I will present you with a summary of the ideas presented in the 'sister thread' relative to the two passages once they are being translated and commented on in Biblical Languages 301. < It will more than likely represent the Orthodox position, which should give ye all a opportunity to view and discuss the matter a little more deeply.

Here are the question, once again...


1. John 10:34-35 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+10%3A34-35)

( refer note @ Gnostic Christianity - http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/frameset_CH8.htm )

My question is - Is the following statement true or false, if so please explain why you think it is, one or the other...

Jesus taught that we are all children of God and, therefore, have within us the potential to be perfect and loving, like God.

and;

2. Romans 8:29-30 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Romans+8%3A29-30)

( refer note @ Gnostic Christianity - http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/frameset_CH8.htm

My question is - Do you agree with the way that the writer has interpreted the passage of Scripture - Yes / No and please would you explain why.

This is the 1st stage as written by the Gnostic Christianity ( for the rest please follow the link )

Stage I of Consciousness: The "foreknown" refers to prehistoric beings who were not rationally conscious, but were predestined to develop the potential to reason. Mindless behavior characterizes Stage I. Jude 10 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Jude+10) refers to those in this stage as "irrational animals."

Biblically, Stage I begins when God creates mankind and ends when Adam eats from the tree of forbidden fruit.

The key to Stage I is life. Our pre-rational consciousness in infancy exemplifies this stage.


Thank you,
HH

[shunyadragon]

A friend once said to me, "It is not the fool who gets into Mysticism, but the fool who does not plan to get back out."

Whereas I admit that many of my own ideas are of the Unorthodox variety, I generally try to keep to some Orthodox belief system (ie. Westiminster Confession, Apostle's Creed ) ...but there was a time when I was drinking from so many different wells that I lost my way.
I had become what might be called a 'Gnostic Super Drone'.

You see, I came from basic Pagan stock, and so I did not really have a Christian upbringing, though I most certainly was exposed to those elements at school and at play. Yet, my beliefs were probably closer to Buddhism and Mysticim. I was a free spirit and still am to some degree, but I was rootless. I was like a ship drifiting in the tide, and swept along by the tide of cosmic thoughts, by friends, television, books and my own inventive brain.

Unbeknown to me I was slipping deeper and deeper into a mystical coma of sorts, until eventually everything began to go wild, and when I say wild, I mean really wild. In my daylight slumber of Meditation and Contemplation I began to see butteflies coming out of the wall....and that was just the beginning. I really thought that I had reached the Philosopher Stone...or some other crazy idea. In the end it turned really bad and I lost my mind....I lost my way.

[quote] GOD healed my crazy brain, and helped me back into the real world. Today I tend to keep a watch over my mind, and what I read and what I suckle on. For there is a fountain filled with the poison of spider web, and crinkly crew that when it is sampled slowly opens one's eyes to blindness and darkness and lies.

Are you like I was.....are you a Gnostic Super Drone ?


67117

Sincerely,
HH

Why did God consider you special and treat you and not many others? I personally prefer the Buddhist/Taoist view over the Newtonian theology of Christianity.

The New Age Mysticism of Astrology, Crystals, dabbling in drugs and coincidences is an interesting problem in the modern world, and I consider it a series guru con games, but Mysticism is not in of itself necessarily bad.

[headheart]

Why did God consider you special and treat you and not many others?

Actually I had no idea that I was special ( though please do not think that I regard myself as the only one idea, we are all unique), until some time after I asked Jesus into my heart. It was only once I had been baptised with the Holy Spirit that I really realized that I was a child of GOD. Prior to that I had more of a brotherhood, sisterhood of man idea. -- I think that most people do.

I personally prefer the Buddhist/Taoist view over the Newtonian theology of Christianity.

Me to, there is much that we can learn from Buddhism, and Toaism. I wanted to write more, but my computer is on the blink. (this is my sons) lol.


Mysticism is not in of itself necessarily bad

I agree. Yet I think when it touches the dark side, then bad things can happen.

Sincerely,
HH

.

[headheart]

The New Age Mysticism of Astrology, Crystals, dabbling in drugs and coincidences is an interesting problem in the modern world, and I consider....... .....it is the result of a deeper mental malaise of sorts. The search for meaning and happiness does not simply end because one ignores it. We try to hide it, but it is always there,....


'The current passion for drugs reveals the same lostness, the same despair. LSD, heroin, cocaine, as well as reefers and purple hearts, are enormously on the increase. Why ? 'I was bored?,' said one addict. 'Did it for kicks,' said another. 'What else is there to live for?' asked the third. The drug addict is the extreme example of twentieth century man more dead than alive. He is only really 'alive' when he is 'high'. What a travesty of living!'

The words of Rector of St. Aldates Church, Oxford....Michael Green in his 1967 book, Man Alive!


Sincerely,
HH

[headheart]

Ok, let's look at this first one.


Hi U.M,
When I first started this thread, I had the presense of mind to submit both passages to Biblical Languages 301, and though there have been three responses to my request, I have decided only to post the two by John Reece. ( to read the other responses, and hopefully other responses from Jaltus and Heterdoxus, follow this link - here (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=130594) )


Throughts about the first passage (from B.L. 301)


From The Gospel According to St. John, by Alfred Plummer, originally published in 1882 as part of the Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (brackets added):
34.....ἐγὼ εἶπα· θεοί ἐστε ["I said, you are gods"].....The argument is both a fortiori and ad hominem. In the Scriptures (Ps 82:6 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Ps+82%3A6)) even unjust rulers are called 'gods' on the principle of the theocracy, that rulers are the representatives of God (compare Exodus 22:8 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Exodus+22%3A8)). If this is admissible without blasphemy, how much more may He call Himself 'Son of God.'

35.....εἰ ἐκείνους εἶπεν θεοὺς....Probably, if it called them gods, namely, the Law. 'Them' is left unexplained ; a Jewish audience would at once know who were meant. But how incredible that any but a Jew should think of such an argument, or put it in this brief way ! These last eight verses alone are sufficient to discredit the theory that this Gospel is the work of a Greek Gnostic in the second century.
Psalm 82:6-7 (NET) (http://www.bible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl?header=on&book=psa&chapter=82&verse=6)
I thought, ‘You are gods (’ᵉlōhîm); all of you are sons of the Most High.’ Yet you will die like mortals; you will fall like all the other rulers.”
Exodus 22:8 (NET) (http://www.bible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl?header=on&book=exo&chapter=22&verse=8)
In all cases of illegal possessions, whether for an ox, a donkey, a sheep, a garment, or any kind of lost item, about which someone says ‘This belongs to me,’ the matter of the two of them will come before the judges (hā’ᵉlōhîm, 'the gods'), and the one whom the judges (’ᵉlōhîm, 'god's') declare guilty must repay double to his neighbor.



This is text translation and commentary by F. F. Bruce in The Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983):
John 10:34-36 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+10%3A34-36)
Jesus answered them, 'Is it not written in your law, "I have said, 'You are gods'"? If those to whom the word of God came were called gods by him (and scripture cannot be annulled), do you say, "You are a blasphemer" to the one whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world because I said, "I am God's Son"?'
Jesus rebuts their charge of blasphemy by means of an argument from scripture, of a kind with which they themselves were quite familiar. In Psalm 82 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Psalm+82) the supreme God rises in the divine counsel to pronounce judgment on beings called 'gods' (’ᵉlōhîm). His charge against them is that they administer justice unjustly, showing favour to the wicked instead of upholding the right of the helpless and oppressed; the sentence which he passes on them is death:

I have said, 'You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
nevertheless, you shall die like men,
and fall like any prince.

Bruce notes that the 'Jewish interpreters were divided (as well as other interpreters have been since then) on the question of whether those addressed in these terms are celestial beings or human judges.' However, he says that's not really 'of the first relevance: what is relevant is that they are manifestly inferior beings to the supreme God, and yet he calls them 'gods' (verse 6) — theoi in Greek. If God himself calls them 'gods' (and sons of the Most High at that), why should it be counted a capital offense in the sent one of the Father if he calls himself the Son of God?'

More than that must be said however: the beings addressed in the psalm were unjust judges, whether of human or angelic rank, divinely sentenced to death. But Jesus was 'the one whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world'. Before he was sent he was sanctified, i.e. set apart for his special mission in the world.

He adds, 'We may compare the inaugural word of the Lord to Jeremiah: 'Before you were born I sanctified you (the verb in LXX is hagiazō as here); I appointed you a prophet to the nations' (Jer. 1:5 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Jer.+1%3A5)). 'He whom God has sent utters the words of God' (John 3:34 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+3%3A34)); if he says 'I am the Son of God', his words must be treated seriously.' Then he concludes with this: "'Your law' (verse 34) is here a comprehensive term for the Hebrew Bible. They acknowledged its authority, and should therefore accept the implications of what it said. 'Scripture cannot be annulled' or 'made void' (Mark 7:13 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Mark+7%3A13)); it cannot be set aside when its teaching is inconvenient. What is written remains written."


I will feed any further posts by John Reece, and hopefully a response to the second passage as well.

Take care, and have a great week.
Peace,
HH

[headheart]

Not wanting to appear biased, or one-sided about this, I have decided to bring more of the commentaries give regarding the two questions I have raised on this thread.

These are in response to the second question (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2739909&postcount=4), which considers Romans 8:29-30, which was provided by Jaltus (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2741285&postcount=14).


My translation:

"because those whom he foreknew even he predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his son, to be the firstborn among many brothers, those he predestined, he also called, and those he called, he also justified, and those he justified, he also glorified."

What is often overlooked in terms of understanding these verses is the direct connection to the preceding verse, namely that this talk of those who are glorified stems directly from Paul's discussion of those who are called according to God's purpose.

The calling is based on God's working together with the person (συνεργει in 8:28), and therefore the "Golden Chain," as 29-30 is often called, stems directly from that.

For the significance of Jesus being the firstborn, I would note the similar (if more elevated) construction in Col 1:15 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Col+1%3A15):


Originally posted by A Jaltus' Article
While some argue that the status of firstborn is achieved through his resurrection, and literally speaking this would be true, this does not encompass the fullness of the term. Within Paul’s works, the title holds at least two distinct meanings, signifying both unique status and the ability to inherit. Colossians 1 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Colossians+1) covers both meanings, as 1:15 speaks of Jesus’ special status with respect to creation as being “firstborn,” yet Paul juxtaposes this with being “firstborn” from among the dead, a clue to the type of inheritance. Dunn speaks of this as intentionally carrying the tension between immanence and transcendence.50 In addition, Col 1:15 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Col+1%3A15) ties the language of firstborn directly to the image of God language, which gives a direct link in answering
the question posed earlier.51 To claim that one meaning of firstborn is in view without the other misses the context of Paul’s
argument in Romans 8 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Romans+8). This title shows the uniqueness of Christ’s
position, that he alone can claim such status or such a relationship
with the Father, as opposed to the adopted sons.52 Firstborn also
holds connotations of inheritance, which directly connects to the language of 8:17. Jesus holds the special honor of being the firstborn, in contrast with those adopted as being born later, and he holds the proverbial rights to doling out the inheritance, which is life.53 The title stresses his preeminence among the sons of God; while there are many sons, there is only one who is firstborn.
FOOTNOTES:

50 James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (NIGTC; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996) 90.
51 For more on this, see Peter O’Brien, Colossians, Philemon (WBC 44; Nashville:
Nelson, 1982) 42–45.
52 Cranfield, Romans, 1.432.
53 See Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans (PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1988) 332–33

[headheart]

The second contribution to the first passage was by Heterodoxus. (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2740306&postcount=3)


John 10:34
Manuscript style: ΟΥΚΕΣΤΙΝΓΕΓΡΑΜΜΕΝΟΝΕΝΤΩΝΟΜΩΥΜΩΝΟΤΙΕΓΩΕΙΠΑΕΟΙΕΣΤΕ;

TR 1550: ουκ εστιν γεγραμμενον εν τω νομω υμων εγω ειπα θεοι εστε
Tischendorf’s 8th (T) 1869 and W&H 1885: ουκ εστιν γεγραμμενον εν τω νομω υμων οτι[1] εγω ειπα θεοι εστε
NA/UBS (matches T 1869 and W&H 1885): Οὐκ ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν ὅτι[1] Ἐγὼ εἶπα, Θεοί ἐστε;
Pre-KJV literal Greek-Old English rendering: Not it-be having-had-come-to-be-written in unto-the-one unto-a-parcelee of-ye which-a-one, I I-said, Deities ye-be?
KJV (rendered per older TR 1550): Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
Peshitta (rendered per later T 1869 and W&H 1885): Is it not thus written in your law that I have told you that gods you are
John 10:35 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+10%3A35)


Manuscript style: ΕΙΕΚΕΙΝΟΥΣΕΙΠΕΝΘΕΟΥΣΠΡΟΣΟΥΣΟΛΟΓΟΣΤΟΥΘΕΟΥΕΓΕΝΕΤΟΚΑΙΟΥΔΥΝΑΤΑΙΛΥΘΗΝΑΙΗΓΡΑΦΗ
TR 1550: ει εκεινους ειπεν θεους προς ους ο λογος του θεου εγενετο και ου δυναται λυθηναι η γραφη
Tischendorf’s 8th (T ) 1869 and W&H 1885: ει εκεινους ειπεν θεους προς ους ο λογος εγενετο του θεου[2] και ου δυναται λυθηναι η γραφη
NA/UBS (matches TR 1550): εἰ ἐκείνους εἶπεν θεοὺς πρὸς οὓς ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ οὐ δύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή,
Pre-KJV literal Greek-Old English rendering: If to-the-ones-thither it-had-said to-deities toward to-which the-one a-forthee of-the-one of-a-Deity it-had-became, and not it-ableth to-have-been-loosed the-one a-writing
KJV (rendered per older TR 1550): If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Peshitta (rendered per later T 1869 and W&H 1885): If those people he called gods because with them was the Miltha[3] of God and scripture is not able to be broken
1. John 10:34 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+10%3A34) -- variant(s) found: 1) addition of ὅτι, that.
2. John 10:35 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+10%3A35) -- variant(s) found: 1) placing του θεου, the God of, after εγενετο.
3. “'Miltha' has no direct English equivalent. It can mean ‘Word’, ‘Manifestation’, ‘Instance’ or ‘Substance’,among many other things. In this context, it is best left untranslated." ~peshitta.org (http://www.peshitta.org/)



I hope to add others a.t.t.p. on Biblical Language 301.

Sincerely,
HH

[UrbanMonk]

[SIZE=3][B]Not wanting to appear biased, or one-sided about this,

Uh...aren't you only accepting responses from John Reece? Why don't you move this thread to the forum he frequents?

[headheart]

Uh...aren't you only accepting responses from John Reece? Why don't you move this thread to the forum he frequents?

You aught to pay closer attention to my posts. The one above yours is from Heterodoxus, and the one above that is from Jaltus. I suggest you read them, and check out their profiles, and credentials.

Sincerely,
HH.

pssst. I have a new one from John, and am hoping to get something from Heterodoxus soon. I have tried to hold off the posts so that we can at least get a body of posts on BL 301, and then there will be more accurate responses. What did you think of Jaltus' commentary on the second passage etc.?

[headheart]

Dear Urban Monk,

This relates to the first passage...


From The Gospel According to St. John: An Introduction with Commentary and Notes on the Greek Text, Second Edition, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1978), by C. K. Barrett (brackets added):
John 10:34 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=John+10%3A34). ἐγὼ εἶπα· θεοί ἐστε [egō eipa; theoi este ‘I said, you are gods’]. Psalm 82:6 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Psalm+82%3A6), ‏אֲנִי־אָמַרְתִּי אֱלֹהִים אַתֶּם [’ᵃnî-’āmartî ’ᵉlōhîm ’attem I said, 'You are gods']. John quotes the LXX exactly. [...] The most common interpretation seems to have been that the words were addressed to Israel when they received the Law at Sinai. Thus Abodah Zarah 5a: R. Jose (circa A.D. 150) said: The Israelites have only received the Law that the angel of death may have no power over them, as it is written [Ps. 82:6 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Ps.+82%3A6)]. Later passages make the same statement more explicitly, and in others the idea of receiving the Law and so becoming ‏אֱלֹהִים [’ᵉlōhı̂m, divine], is made personal rather than historical, but the active and decisive agent remains the Law. In the passage above it is Israel's sin (in the Golden Calf) that revokes the promise, in the words of Ps. 82:7 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Ps.+82%3A7) (Ye shall die like men); while in others the same notion is expressed in more general terms.

From: John Reece (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2742447&postcount=19)


Sincerely,
HH.

[headheart]

Hi LJ,

Seeing as most of the Unorthodox crowd are probaby too busy to reply, I thought you might enjoy reading what John Reece posted to BL301, in response to the first of the passages that are being considered in this thread (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2739909&postcount=4).


(please read back for the others by Heterodoxus (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2742128&postcount=17), Jaltus (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2742126&postcount=16) and John Reece, (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2741257&postcount=15) .................there is also one just above this one...) - link to BL301 observation of the texts is in body of the quote. (below)


From The Gospel According to John (Pillar; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), by D. A. Carson:
Jesus defends his claims by quoting Psalm 82:6, here drawn exactly from the LXX. The entire verse, and the next (Ps. 82:7), develops a single line of argument: 'I said, "You are gods'; you are all sons of the Most High." But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler' (NIV). As Jesus uses the text, the general line of his argument is clear. This scripture proves that the word, 'god' is legitimately used to refer to others than God himself. If there are others whom God (the author of Scripture) can address as 'god' and 'sons of the Most High' (i.e. sons of God), on what biblical basis should anyone object when it is remembered that Jesus is the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world.
Carson lists a number of interpretations as to the identity of those whom God is addressing in Psalm 82 and selects the interpretation that appears best to him:
God is addressing Israel at the time of the giving of the law. There is good evidence that many rabbis understood Psalm 82 this way. The curse that fell on the Israelites was then in consequence of the golden calf episode. The word of God pre-eminently came to Israel at Sinai (as virtually all Jewish leaders believed), but the subsequent rebellion, compounded by the failure to take the land at the first approach, led to the death of that entire generation. This interpretation is strengthened when it is remembered that Israel is also called God's firstborn son (Ex. 4:21-22), generating a typology which Jesus has already claimed to have fulfilled.

He lists three observations that help to clarify the line of thought:
First, the words the Scripture cannot be broken mean that the Scriptures cannot be annulled or set aside or proved false (cf. Mk. 7:13). Consequently, it complements your Law: it is reprehensible to set aside the authority of Scripture, the Scripture whose authority you yourselves accept, just because the text I have cited seems inconvenient to you at the moment.
Second the clause whom the Father set apart as his very own (literally 'sanctified', hagiazō) and sent into the world points to Jesus' entire mission as the Father's emissary, a mission culminating in the cross, resurrection and glorification. At the same time, it probably echoes the Feast of Dedication, which commemorates the sanctification of the temple after it had been desecrated. The Jews celebrate the sanctification of the temple, but they, like the disciples, remain unaware of the ways in which the temple points to Jesus (2:19-22), so that the really critical 'sanctification', the crucial act of setting something or someone aside for God's exclusive use, was the setting aside of the pre-incarnate Son to the work of the mission on which he was even then engaged. In this way Jesus outstrips and fulfills this Feast as he has the others. If this reference is allusive, it is of a piece with the development of the fulfillment motif in connection with the other feasts.
Third, although the argument is ad hominem — i.e. it does not require Jesus to subscribe to the same literal exegesis as his opponents — it is not for that reason silly. Jesus in not using this argument to prove that he is God or the Son of God, in the full-blooded sense propounded in this Gospel. In that case the argumentation would be without merit. Rather, he recognizes that the animus of his opponents has not been thought through. In the heat of their opposition to what they hear Jesus to be saying, they are partly right (he does make himself equal with God), partly wrong (this fact does not establish a competing God), and profoundly mistaken (they have not grasped the drift of their own Scriptures to see how he fulfills them, nor have they known God well enough to perceive that the revelation he is and brings is in continuity with and the capstone of the revelation of God already provided). The stated context — mob humours heated to the threshold of explosive violence — does not provide him with the leisure for cool theological dialogue. So he administers a short, sharp shock, a scriptural reason why they should not take umbrage just because he calls himself the Son of God. That reason does not establish the nature of his unique sonship: that is presupposed, rather, by his self-reference as the one whom the Father set apart ... and sent into the world. But the ad hominem rebuke stalls the crowd long enough for him to appeal once more to the testimony of his words and works (verses 37-38).

John 3:34-35 and Romans 8:29-30 (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=130594)< from


I suspect this will be the final explanation, and perhaps now the thread can get underway.

Here's hopin'
HH

[headheart]

67309

[Bernie]

Amen to that brother.



For those who have just joined this thread, I would like to draw you attention to what will be discussed and hopefully, attp. I will present you with a summary of the ideas presented in the 'sister thread' relative to the two passages once they are being translated and commented on in Biblical Languages 301. < It will more than likely represent the Orthodox position, which should give ye all a opportunity to view and discuss the matter a little more deeply.

Here are the question, once again...


Thank you,
HH
I try to read from other realms of belief to mine the truths they contain, but ultimately the gnostic thing fails for me in large part because of its lack of belief or interest in the sovereignty of God in the spiritual matters of human beings. In fact, gnostic principles seem tailor-made for the more radical forms of arminianism. There are many who appear to connect on this level, for example this from one of barnasha's posts, I think.....
Jesus said, "Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect". By this he implores us to cast off the shakles of imperfect heirarchy for the freedom of perfect equality. We all have the potential to do this, just as Jesus did this. Not only the potential, but we also have the propensity, given enough time. After all, perfection is our natural inheritance, which we cast off in favor of the iniquity of inequality...which is unnatural to us.
My own spiritual experiences have cemented in my understanding of God as supreme and sovereign ruler over all His creation, life-bearing as well as inorganic, and there's really no room for this doctrine in most gnostic types of belief. To my understanding, the degree of true faith determines how one "hears' Mat 5:48: non-faith "hears" a directive or command here, faith, recognizing lack of ability, "hears" a promise.

[headheart]

I try to read from other realms of belief to mine the truths they contain, but ultimately the gnostic thing fails for me in large part because of its lack of belief or interest in the sovereignty of God in the spiritual matters of human beings. In fact, gnostic principles seem tailor-made for the more radical forms of arminianism. There are many who appear to connect on this level, for example this from one of barnasha's posts, I think.....


Thanks for you insight Bernie.

Sincerely,
HH

(((NB)))

I see the second quote you referenced, is no mine, but that of Urban Monk....(((here it is again)))


From Urban Monk (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2740370&postcount=9)....

Jesus said, "Be ye perfect, even as your Father in heaven is perfect". By this he implores us to cast off the shakles of imperfect heirarchy for the freedom of perfect equality. We all have the potential to do this, just as Jesus did this. Not only the potential, but we also have the propensity, given enough time. After all, perfection is our natural inheritance, which we cast off in favor of the iniquity of inequality...which is unnatural to us.

Your reply..... (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2744058&postcount=23)
My own spiritual experiences have cemented in my understanding of God as supreme and sovereign ruler over all His creation, life-bearing as well as inorganic, and there's really no room for this doctrine in most gnostic types of belief. To my understanding, the degree of true faith determines how one "hears' Mat 5:48 (http://biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&version=KJV&passage=Mat+5%3A48): non-faith "hears" a directive or command here, faith, recognizing lack of ability, "hears" a promise.

[UrbanMonk]

Dear Urban Monk,

This relates to the first passage...

Sincerely,
HH.

First of all, we don't know if this is an authentic quote from Jesus, or whether it is just another string of words shoved into his mouth. If he did say it, then to understand what he meant, we must look at the context in which he was using it to discover the most probable meaning...as he meant it to be understood. The context is of a miracle-worker, whose identity is being questioned. He is claiming to be the Son of God. He seems to be implying that godhood is applicable to him because of some certain scripture which says something to the effect of "ye are gods". The problem people are having with his use of this scripture is that if it applies to Jesus, it applies to all. Jesus uses scripture inclusively, not exclusively, as if to make himself something special. Likewise, his baptism in the same waters as everybody else...suggest that he was not intending to make himself special. Rather, baptism is the process of including oneself in what is the "beloved Son of God". LIkewise, scriptures are to be used to wash away the notion that one is not the Son of God...the "dirt" of denial.

[barnasha]

Jesus taught gnosis (self knowledge)
.
"kingdom is within you"... if that's not gnostic, nothing is.

[UrbanMonk]

Jesus taught gnosis (self knowledge)
.
"kingdom is within you"... if that's not gnostic, nothing is.

Good point. Knowledge and gnosis are the same. For that matter, Knowledge and Christ are the same. Beyond Knowledge is a land of belief. This is where the "prodigal Son" wanders...in his own imagination. The land of belief is opposed to "truth". It's inhabitants prefer to make up their own truth...and believe in it. This tends to "kill" the true "Truth"....by substituting lies in it's place. "Believers" are inherently against "knowers". And Knowledge will always be foreign to the ignorant. Knowledge comes from beyond this world to those who are weary of believing lies...to those whose "ear" can "hear"...the "truth". Some of us can hear better than others, having opened their minds. We can learn from them...until we learn to open our minds as well...that we may hear as well. All knowledge is about Self...and is taught to those in self-denial...when they are ready and willing and "weary" of what belief has wrought. "Know thy Self" is what the gospel is all about.

[UrbanMonk]

Again, Knowledge, Gnosis, and Christ are the same. "The world" is a belief system antithetical to Knowledge/Gnosis/Christ.

[headheart]

Again, Knowledge, Gnosis, and Christ are the same.


Only if they are uniquely indentified as flowing from the Lord Jesus Christ, and to a lesser degree with us mere mortals, but with potential to reach something closer but always subordinate to our big brother, once reconciliation has been established.

"The world" is a belief system antithetical to Knowledge/Gnosis/Christ.

The physical earth has always been a lesser body, and so also the people of the earth, and definitely those who are enemies of the light.

Sincerely,
HH.

[UrbanMonk]

Only if they are uniquely indentified as flowing from the Lord Jesus Christ, and to a lesser degree with us mere mortals, but with potential to reach something closer but always subordinate to our big brother, once reconciliation has been established.



The physical earth has always been a lesser body, and so also the people of the earth, and definitely those who are enemies of the light.

Sincerely,
HH.


The enemies of the light are those who think there can be another world other than the World of God...or that a world in which everything dies can possibly be part of the World of God. They are those who would compromise, combine and mix things up. They are those who would combine a world of heirarchy with a World of Equality...as you are attempting to to in your first paragraph...through word magic. The enemies of the light are those who believe in the concept of "lesser", whatever that may be. All "people of the earth" are enemies of the light until they embark upon a path to relenquish seperate, different, unique, or otherwise "lesser" existence.

[headheart]

The enemies of the light are those who think there can be another world other than the World of God...or that a world in which everything dies can possibly be part of the World of God. They are those who would compromise, combine and mix things up. They are those who would combine a world of heirarchy with a World of Equality...as you are attempting to to in your first paragraph...through word magic. The enemies of the light are those who believe in the concept of "lesser", whatever that may be. All "people of the earth" are enemies of the light until they embark upon a path to relenquish seperate, different, unique, or otherwise "lesser" existence.

Though we are all children of God, though we all possess the light/spirit/image of God we are all capable of that black darkness/or organized evil energized by the demonic.
Like orphans we are in this orphanage of the cosmos, and people, and capable of great acts of kindness, great acts of love.
Uniqueness is as clear as our fingerprints, as the sons and daughters we can be and become more so as we look into the light of truth.

Sincerely,
HH.

[UrbanMonk]

Though we are all children of God,

What is born of flesh is the child of our step godfather, the "father" we have set up to replace "Our Father", the One Jesus honored.

though we all possess the light/spirit/image of God we are all capable of that black darkness/or organized evil energized by the demonic.

What is born of Spirit is not subject to change. While we think we can change, confusion will possess our minds, manifesting all kinds of dark, painful, strange experience. These experiences cannot change what is changeless. Therefore, we are not truly capable of change from what is good but that we imagine and think it so. The gospel is about dispelling what possesses our mind to think thoughts not of God.

Like orphans we are in this orphanage of the cosmos, and people, and capable of great acts of kindness, great acts of love.

What thinks it can change what God created makes itself an orphan of an evil step-father...a dead-beat dad. Our Father does not abandon his Son. It is the Son which abandons himself to his own imagination which gives rise to the concept of, and the experience of, abandonment.

Uniqueness is as clear as our fingerprints,

It may be clear, but it is not true.

as the sons and daughters we can be and become more so as we look into the light of truth.

There is no male or female in Christ....because there are no differences. If you are looking at, or looking foreward to a more glorified fingerprint, you are not looking to the truth, but rather, chasing carrots. Usually, the carrot is offered only after you drink the Kool-Aid.

[headheart]

The enemies of the light are those who think there can be another world other than the World of God...or that a world in which everything dies can possibly be part of the World of God. They are those who would compromise, combine and mix things up. They are those who would combine a world of heirarchy with a World of Equality...as you are attempting to to in your first paragraph...through word magic. The enemies of the light are those who believe in the concept of "lesser", whatever that may be. All "people of the earth" are enemies of the light until they embark upon a path to relenquish seperate, different, unique, or otherwise "lesser" existence.

Embarking upon a path to relenquish seperate, different, unique, or otherwise "lesser" existence if that is your wish, but look down and see the footprints of the unique one. Here the voice of our heavenly Father saying, 'This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, here ye him.' Unique words pour from the Lord Jesus Christ, 'My sheep hear my voice and follow me.'

Sincerely,
HH

[headheart]

What is born of flesh is the child of our step godfather, the "father" we have set up to replace "Our Father", the One Jesus honored. Those who are the children of God are all flesh, but once they have been adopted they are then born of God by a circumcision not in the body, or of flesh, but one of the spirit and that of the heart whereby they receive their uniqueness.

What is born of Spirit is not subject to change. While we think we can change, confusion will possess our minds, manifesting all kinds of dark, painful, strange experience. These experiences cannot change what is changeless. Therefore, we are not truly capable of change from what is good but that we imagine and think it so. The gospel is about dispelling what possesses our mind to think thoughts not of God
though we all possess the light/spirit/image of God we are all capable of that black darkness/or organized evil energized by the demonic. .


What thinks it can change what God created makes itself an orphan of an evil step-father...a dead-beat dad. Our Father does not abandon his Son. It is the Son which abandons himself to his own imagination which gives rise to the concept of, and the experience of, abandonment.

Changing is intiated by our heavenly Father.
It may be clear, but it is not true.
Or it might be a half truth.

There is no male or female in Christ....because there are no differences. If you are looking at, or looking foreward to a more glorified fingerprint, you are not looking to the truth, but rather, chasing carrots. Usually, the carrot is offered only after you drink the Kool-Aid.
Our first heritage is as children of God, both male and female, for it was his pleasure to make us so, and to bring us a defined uniqueness in the Lord Jesus Christ. Who needs Kool Aid when you can be circumcized by the Holy Spirit.

[UrbanMonk]

Embarking upon a path to relenquish seperate, different, unique, or otherwise "lesser" existence if that is your wish, but look down and see the footprints of the unique one.

What unique one? Jesus gave up what makes him unique to accept the truth about himself...the truth that he is the Son of God. The Son of God is NOT UNIQUE...but rather the common truth of all...making all the same. The internet is not the great democritizer, rather, it's the Son of God.

Here the voice of our heavenly Father saying, 'This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, here ye him.'

These are the words the truly baptized hear as they emerge from the washing of their minds by the Spirit of truth. Jesus was truly baptized. Who does not hear these words as his own as not been baptized. Who will not consider that he is baptized in the same waters as Jesus...has not even begun to be baptized.

Unique words pour from the Lord Jesus Christ, 'My sheep hear my voice and follow me.'

Words of God meant for all ears that can hear the voice of the Good Shepherd within.

[Vivian]

Greetings HeadHeart!

I hope I am not too late to join in this dicussion. I was quite busy these last few weeks and just now came across this thread.

I understand your distaste for Gnosticism! The first self-proclaimed Gnostics I encountered were heavily rooted in the head - walking an intellectual spiritual path. Gnosticism being reduced to mentalizations, or intellectual ideas and concepts. But I have since learned that all traditions in this dark world do become distorted. - as has Gnosticism.

The definition of the term Gnostic actually means one who has experiencial knowing of God - or a Mystic that has accessed the realms of revelation and prophecy and I have since encountered Mystical Gnostics who are founded in direct experience and revelation of the divine, instead of stuck in their own logic and rationalizations.

The definition of Gnostic I now use is one who believes that salvation comes through an intimate experiential relationship with God. And by this definition, I call myself Gnostic - a Gnostic Christain or a Mystical Christian.

If I might address your queries...

Hi LJ,

It seems like we have been down similar pathways in this dark forest, just out-of-sight of the pathway home.

( imagine a lovely picture of the Earth )

For all ye Unorthodox brother and sisters of Earth,

I have just got through reading 'The ABC's of the 5 stages of consciousness' and have two major passage of New Testament Scripture that need to be clearly understood. (I am not a close mind, and so will be willing to hear what each of your respective ideas are regarding these two passages.)

Let's just say they will the primary texts we are going to look at in their thread:

1. John 10:34-35

( refer note @ Gnostic Christianity - http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/frameset_CH8.htm )

My question is - Is the following statement true or false, if so please explain why you think it is, one or the other...

Jesus taught that we are all children of God and, therefore, have within us the potential to be perfect and loving, like God.

I would put it a bit differently...

One of the reasons we all live in inner turmoil and struggle is because we are cut of from an intimate connection with our soul and Spirit. As we are healed by Grace, if we allow ourselves to be healed by Grace, this inner connection is established so that we at this level of existence become temples for Spirit, for our Spirit, which is One with God, and this Spirit is the child of God that is already perfect and loving.

And so what really happens is that the already perfect and loving Spirit is like a seed inside of us, and when it is fed and watered properly, when the soil is furtile, this seed becomes through us, we then being the vehicle or temple in this world for our already perfect and loving Spirit.

Jesus speaks of this process in many of his parables - the parable of the mustard seed for example.

The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed... (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+13&version=NKJV)


and;

2. Romans 8:29-30

( refer note @ Gnostic Christianity - http://www.gnosticchristianity.com/frameset_CH8.htm

My question is - Do you agree with the way that the writer has interpreted the passage of Scripture - Yes / No and please would you explain why.

This is the 1st stage as written by the Gnostic Christianity ( for the rest please follow the link )



Well, let's begin.... :pray:

No. I do not agree with that interpretation.

It is man's nature to limit understanding to what can be perceived in time and space - with the 5 mundane senses. In these verses, Paul is referring to something before this time and space, before the beginning of this world as we know it. He is speaking of our Spirits.

I do agree that there is a development or evolution of human consciousness in this world. Logic tells us, when we look around the world, that either God is not very loving or fair or we are only looking at a moment in time and space, where each soul is in a different place in consciousness development or evolution.

But this is not what Paul is speaking of with these verses. And here we have an excellent example of the failings of a intellectual theology - a theology based on thinking or mentalization instead of true experiencing of God, or revelation from God, or Gnosis. The Gnostic Christians on that web site are probably defining their theology based on a little true Gnostic experience, and a whole lot of 'Gnostic' rationalization and logic. If they kept their knowing to purely experiential knowing, they might be able to call themselves true Gnostics.

We have to trust, as a true Gnostic, that God will only reveal to us what we are ready to hear or see or know, and not try to fill in the blanks with our own rationalizations, or worse the rationalizations of others!

This is how we become lost in the awakening process; this is how our mysticism becomes dark.


Shalom.

Viv

[UrbanMonk]

[/INDENT]Those who are the children of God are all flesh, but once they have been adopted they are then born of God by a circumcision not in the body, or of flesh, but one of the spirit and that of the heart whereby they receive their uniqueness.

Utter kabballa. Call no man father, nor call man's maker "father"...like the Pharisees did...boasting of their unique status. Flesh and blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God. Flesh and blood is the "son of man"...abandoned by his "father" and his father's "father"...and so on. The "son of man" is an orphan indeed, having abandoned the Father of the equal and the spiritual and the whole. The "son of man" is the son of the "prodigal Son"...who abandoned is home for whatever it is he thought he could find beyond reality.

You must be born of the Spirit to enter the Kingdom of God. Meaning, you must agree that you genesis is of Spirit, before ever any such thing as another cosmos besides the World of God. And you must deny any other genesis. For unless you do, your genesis is of the flesh. Orphans are "adopted"...when they call no man (flesh) father, and call the Father of Spirit "Father" instead...as did Jesus. An orphan adopted is the same as a "lost" that is "found". Adoption a metaphor for the salvation of the self-abandoned. It's not a legal transaction to bring what is not of Spirit to the Kingdom of God.


though we all possess the light/spirit/image of God we are all capable of that black darkness/or organized evil energized by the demonic. .

As sons of man, we possess only the image of the prodigal Son, whom we call "God".

Changing is intiated by our heavenly Father.

Salvation is to be saved from the change we thought we could impose on the World of God, that we might make our own "world"...a world where the only thing that remains the same is change. Salvation changes the always changing back to what never changes...the Son of God and the World Our Father gave us as our Self.


Our first heritage is as children of God, both male and female,

Then you are not yet "born of the Spirit", nor "born again". This is not our heritage, but rather, a culture we gave ourselves as masters of imagination...which is what the prodigal Son is all about.

for it was his pleasure to make us so,

More denial. More unbelief in Christ...the way "Our Father" created us...the one and only Son of God. It is the pleasure of the prodigal Son to make us something else...something not Christ...something unique and special and therefore separate.

and to bring us a defined uniqueness in the Lord Jesus Christ.

This is merely evidence of an ancient wish...a wish that leads to the making of another world in which all that is unholy can be expressed without consequence. In this world, there is much gnashing of teeth in order to justify what Our Father did not create, nor give us, nor will it to be.

Who needs Kool Aid when you can be circumcized by the Holy Spirit.

You have yet to be circumcized by the Holy Spirit, for what you wish for is neither holy nor spiritual. You have yet to accept that your heritage is of the Spirit and is Whole (holy), and not of the flesh...of what is not whole (holy). Christ is Spirit in truth...and only Christ is Whole (holy). All else is an imaginative wish for what is antithetical to Christ...none of which can ever be true...and can be released whenever we are willing that the spell cast upon our minds be lifted by what is truly Holy.

[headheart]

What unique one?

The Lord Jesus Christ.

[headheart]

Utter kabballa.

Oh, yeah. :sigh:

[headheart]

Greetings HeadHeart!


Hi there. :pray:

I hope I am not too late to join in this dicussion. I was quite busy these last few weeks and just now came across this thread.

There is no such thing as too late, unless somebody closes the thread. :teeth:


I understand your distaste for Gnosticism!

My primary markers are Galatians 1 , Galatians 3 , Colossians 2 and 1 Corinthians 2 ( read from either the NIV / NASB )

Sincerely,
HH

[Vivian]

Hi there. :pray:



There is no such thing as too late, unless somebody closes the thread. :teeth:



My primary markers are Galatians 1 , Galatians 3 , Colossians 2 and 1 Corinthians 2 ( read from either the NIV / NASB )

Sincerely,
HH

HI headheart!

There are indeed a lot of 'lesser' gospels out there, causing many to stray, and I have often thought that for many, the mainstream Christian church is just where there need to be! For there one can work on the salvation of their soul - if they are moved into healing and service to others.

The mainstream church though does not have all that Paul taught or even understanding of the words recorded by Jesus, but it does take a certain level of purity, a certain heart, to be able to endure finding the way, if we can use temple imagery, from the outer court into the holy of holies.

A key is heart motivation. If one has any animosity or hatred for the outer church and goes about either consciously or unconsciously trying to prove them wrong, or if they have any negative feelings or thoughts in their motivations, they will find a lesser gospel, one that vibes just as they do, with negative, separative ideas that coincide with their own hearts.

And so many, who have not been sufficiently healed or transformed, sanctified, who turn their backs on outer Christianity, will find themselves in the arms of a deceiving entitiy or spirituality. And this does open the gateway into spiritual darkness.

And so I strongly recommend that we each be very honest with ourselves, about the state of our hearts (all we have to do is look to our thought life, what do we think about? Loving and helping others - compassion, or judgment, anger, hatred, jealousy, etc? The former is the path to Unity with God, the latter is the path to destruction.)

And so if you have found a place that allows your heart to flourish and grow, then that is just where you need to be and do not let anyone's intellectualizations, rationalizations, or words, pull you away.

[And I will add that if anyone follows a doctrine that conflicts with the markers you have given, HH, or anything of the Bible, then one ought to run in the opposite direction as fast as they can. A true tradition will only take you deeper in the Bible, not teach in contradiction!]

May all know the Peace of Christ.


Viv

[headheart]

HI headheart!

There are indeed a lot of 'lesser' gospels out there, causing many to stray, and I have often thought that for many, the mainstream Christian church is just where there need to be! For there one can work on the salvation of their soul - if they are moved into healing and service to others.

The mainstream church though does not have all that Paul taught or even understanding of the words recorded by Jesus, but it does take a certain level of purity, a certain heart, to be able to endure finding the way, if we can use temple imagery, from the outer court into the holy of holies.

A key is heart motivation. If one has any animosity or hatred for the outer church and goes about either consciously or unconsciously trying to prove them wrong, or if they have any negative feelings or thoughts in their motivations, they will find a lesser gospel, one that vibes just as they do, with negative, separative ideas that coincide with their own hearts.

And so many, who have not been sufficiently healed or transformed, sanctified, who turn their backs on outer Christianity, will find themselves in the arms of a deceiving entitiy or spirituality. And this does open the gateway into spiritual darkness.

And so I strongly recommend that we each be very honest with ourselves, about the state of our hearts (all we have to do is look to our thought life, what do we think about? Loving and helping others - compassion, or judgment, anger, hatred, jealousy, etc? The former is the path to Unity with God, the latter is the path to destruction.)

And so if you have found a place that allows your heart to flourish and grow, then that is just where you need to be and do not let anyone's intellectualizations, rationalizations, or words, pull you away.

[And I will add that if anyone follows a doctrine that conflicts with the markers you have given, HH, or anything of the Bible, then one ought to run in the opposite direction as fast as they can. A true tradition will only take you deeper in the Bible, not teach in contradiction!]

May all know the Peace of Christ.


Viv

Thanks for you thought Viv.

Add to that Psalm 1 , James 1:21 , John 4:14 & Psalm 119:11

I used to be terrified of reading anything else but my Bible, but I am not so frightened anymore. Though I like to read a lot, I find a few words from the mouth of God are a full meal.



What do you think of Bible Wheel - http://www.biblewheel.com/Gr/GR_FOL.asp

Sincerely,
HH

[Vivian]

Thanks for you thought Viv.

Add to that Psalm 1 , James 1:21 , John 4:14 & Psalm 119:11

I used to be terrified of reading anything else but my Bible, but I am not so frightened anymore. Though I like to read a lot, I find a few words from the mouth of God are a full meal.



What do you think of Bible Wheel - http://www.biblewheel.com/Gr/GR_FOL.asp

Sincerely,
HH

Hi headheart!

The numeric values of the Hebrew alef-beis and meanings behind them have existed as part of Jewish tradition since its inception!

Hebrew is an incredible, multidimensional language that offers us a description or explanantion of God and His Creation on many levels - offers us an explanation of God and His Creation in a way that blossoms, or flowers out, which brings awe and adoration to the human heart!

So I can understand the love and excitement that the author of the Bible Wheel encountered when he made this discovery, and if the versification of the New Testament was made in the same spirit, then wonderful. Certainly the New Testament could have been put together in the same spirit.

However, this understanding is only a pointer. Just as you described certain sections of scripture as pointers for you. I have used similar terms myself - markers, signposts, buoys.

I mean we all know that Light is the foundation of Life, even Physicists are now discovering this with things such as String Theory. But we cannot confuse the marker or signpost with the Object to which it is pointing. We cannot make the Bible our God, it is only a marker, and we cannot make the alpha-beis or the versification of the New Testament our God.

They too are only markers.

The Christian tradition that I follow sees all these things as well, but puts them in the proper context. We call this following the First Commandment, or functioning according to the First Commandment.

I am presently participating in an aleph-beis study, where we take several weeks to cover one letter. There is so much imagery regarding God and Creation found in each letter! But this imagery is only a marker, a pointer, and not God Himself. The key in this study is to find God through the aspects of God in His Creation that are expressed in the imagery of the aleph-beis. This flowering or blossoming found in the Hebrew aleph-beis speaks to our soul in a nonverbal way, aiding us finding the deeper Truth within Creation - which often cannot be put in words, only sensed, felt, intuited.

Applying this same concept to the Bible Wheel I would ask how does the Bible Wheel aid us in finding and knowing God? So we have a mental understanding that Light is the foundation of Life, have we found the Light that is behind all Life? Do we know It? Do we know the Light of Christ or is our understanding limited to intellectualizations or premises or statements such as Light is Life?

To bring this back to the topic of this thread, one way we can tell a lesser gospel from the true gospel is when the First Commandment is not honored, when words and ideas and forms and images of creation, or lesser gods, are placed before the One True God. When we stop at the idea or shadow instead of the Real Thing. This is when legalism sets in, when the understanding of a marker takes the place of God Himself in our worship.

Legalism sets in when we break the First Commandment.

Certainly there is a Law that defines and governs all creation - we see it in the aleph-beis as well as in the stars and planets. But we as children of God are not bound by that Law - nor is God! When Mercy enters in, all things are possible, so we cannot hold our discoveries or understandings up as absolutes. [And actually the premise of Mercy overruling Law is found in the imagery of the aleph-beis. There are just some things about God and Creation that can only be known, and not described with human linear logic.]

Shalom.

Viv

[headheart]

Hi Vivian.

I think I am going to use very easy to read words on these threads, for when so many of us are using words, it is easy for us to get lost in the many meanings and miss each other.

To me the whole of history, however far back it goes is filled with the glory of God. Not everyone sees it like the next person, but when the Lord Jesus Christ appeared the glory of God was revealed in a way like never before.

I actually have not had time to look at the site, for I was on my sons computer. Mine is always going off-line. (poor signal strength) Now when I was at Tanachi Bible School in Muizenberg, I learned a lot about Hebrew, but the number thing can be very distracting, so I am probably going to give the site a miss. I am having a look at Metacrock's site 'Doxa (http://www.doxa.ws/)'. It is totally awesome!

I have a very childlike approach to the whole idea of how God revealed himself to us. I totally wish I had grown up in China, just so I could have learned from the early philosphers like Mencius, and Laotse. Considering so many of their really profound philosophers lived as early as 300BC I find their wrtings enthrall me. Especially when one realizes that was like just one place, and light has been touching mankind since the earliest times.

To me all these things, even as you say the very creation speaks of the glory of God, but only those who have hearts of children, or have been reunited with the Spirit can begin to re-appreciate what we get a glimpse of in childhood. ( but many forget -- I saw halo's once when I was eleven. )

The notion of godhood, I find a little to much of a big step for us humans who only live a few years and then go to dust. By God's grace we might get as close at Paul, ie. Gal 2:20 but most of us are still trying to forget how to polish our shoes.

Sincerely,
HH.

[Vivian]

Hi Vivian.

Hi HeadHeart!

I think I am going to use very easy to read words on these threads, for when so many of us are using words, it is easy for us to get lost in the many meanings and miss each other.

Quite true! I often make the mistake of talking past another person, using words that are not common to our mutual knowledge base, or using words with differing definitions.

Take the word Gnostic, for example. I understand that many have a differing definition of the term than I, and have to add that by their definition I reject all things 'Gnostic' as well.

To me the whole of history, however far back it goes is filled with the glory of God. Not everyone sees it like the next person, but when the Lord Jesus Christ appeared the glory of God was revealed in a way like never before.

I agree wholeheartedly! This does not mean though that God was not revealed before Jesus, nor revealed since. Thus we can learn about God through any and all things in creation. But it was in the person Jesus that God's Glory was revealed in fullness.

However, most of humanity is not yet ready for that revelation!

I actually have not had time to look at the site, for I was on my sons computer. Mine is always going off-line. (poor signal strength) Now when I was at Tanachi Bible School in Muizenberg, I learned a lot about Hebrew, but the number thing can be very distracting, so I am probably going to give the site a miss. I am having a look at Metacrock's site 'Doxa (http://www.doxa.ws/)'. It is totally awesome!

I agree that the number thingie can be distracting and certainly knowledge of such is not necessary to know God, and can be a hindrance if we are legalistic about it! I am not drawn to the Bible Wheel myself, and imagine though that the advocates are a bit intense or rigid about what they are finding, with sincere motivations, no doubt. But the effect of legalism is to 'box out' the Spirit of God. When ever men make rules regarding things spiritual, they limit access to God.

I have a very childlike approach to the whole idea of how God revealed himself to us. I totally wish I had grown up in China, just so I could have learned from the early philosphers like Mencius, and Laotse. Considering so many of their really profound philosophers lived as early as 300BC I find their wrtings enthrall me. Especially when one realizes that was like just one place, and light has been touching mankind since the earliest times.

I so agree! So many seem to discount the teachings of such great men, thinking we can throw all of creation away, except for Jesus! They do not realize that every revelation of God helps us to better or more fully understand Jesus - or the revelation of God in full Glory, better!

My 12 year old daughter attends a Christian school and last year did a report on China. Together we looked at the religious traditions of China, even reading together twice The Tao of Pooh. She was enthralled! A few months later her class studied China, and she came home and asked me if Buddha was a bad person. For this is what was taught in her Christian history book. That Buddha was unimportant and even harmful to humanity.

I shared that Buddha lived long before Jesus and in another culture, so one would not expect him to be Jesus' follower. And also that Buddha was a pre-Jesus revelation of God, and just because he saw God a bit differently does not mean he was wrong! I took the opportunity to share that she ought not listen to anyone who says that God is this and only this. I mean there is no way shape or form that any human can come up with an idea or concept about God that is not in some way God! That is what is so marvelous about God - He is contained in all of his creation.

Just look at the example Paul set for us. When he went to Rome, he did not declare all the Roman gods and religions false. He said God is working everywhere and in everyone, and contained within the Roman idea of God is God and vice versa. But now we have a revelation of the full Glory of God in Jesus!

And like Paul, we cannot expect others to discard what God revealed to them in favor of what we think is right! An example of how God works to harmonize two cultures and religious traditions can be found in the story of our Lady of Guadalupe.
I
To me all these things, even as you say the very creation speaks of the glory of God, but only those who have hearts of children, or have been reunited with the Spirit can begin to re-appreciate what we get a glimpse of in childhood. ( but many forget -- I saw halo's once when I was eleven. )

Beautiful, headheart!

In the tradition that I follow, we believe that children are more spiritual, closer to the soul and spirit. And so function more 'naturally' in this world - being able to see the plays of Light and energy at varying levels. But as we age and conform to the image of the world, we lose that spiritual connection. We become spiritually blind and deaf.

We lose our spiritual childlikeness.

With the disciples of Christ though, spiritual eyes and ears are opened returning us to the childlike stae, so that we may walk as children in the world - full of awe and wonder. Part of this awakening is being aware of the shadows, the spiritual darkness, so that we our selves will not be entrapped, and so we can help others find freedom.

It is with our spiritual eyes and ears open that we can walk the path of sinlessness, eventually!

The notion of godhood, I find a little to much of a big step for us humans who only live a few years and then go to dust. By God's grace we might get as close at Paul, ie. Gal 2:20 but most of us are still trying to forget how to polish our shoes.

Sincerely,
HH.

Indeed such an idea is too lofty for most of us. What is not too loftly is faith.

If I might share a verse that was shared with me today...

If any of you is lacking in wisdom, ask God, who gives to all generously and ungrudgingly, and it will be given to you. But ask in faith, never doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind; for the doubter, being double-minded and unstable in every way, must not expect to receive anything from Adonai. (James 1:5-8)

This is a description of faith, faith that God will provide what we need, that God will redeem us. Faith that pushes away all fear. The faith of a child.


Shalom, HH.

Viv

[headheart]

I think I am going to use very easy to read words on these threads, for when so many of us are using words, it is easy for us to get lost in the many meanings and miss each other.


Quite true! I often make the mistake of talking past another person, using words that are not common to our mutual knowledge base, or using words with differing definitions.
Take the word Gnostic, for example. I understand that many have a differing definition of the term than I, and have to add that by their definition I reject all things 'Gnostic' as well.


I think one also has to consider that people read these threads, and if we really expect them to take us seriously we aught to make sure that our words are simple, and our (((DOT))) is first according to the Dictionary. ( I generally use the Merriam Webster Online )


ie.
Gnostic (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gnostic) - Latin gnosticus, from Greek gnōstikos of knowledge, from gignōskein
an adherant of Gnosticism. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gnosticism)

'the thought and practice especially of various cults of late pre-Christian and early Christian centuries distinguished by the conviction that matter is evil and that emancipation comes through gnosis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis)'


'Gnosis (from one of the Greek words for knowledge) is the spiritual knowledge of a saint or mystically enlightened human being.

In the cultures of the term (Byzantine and Hellenic) gnosis was a special knowledge or insight into the infinite, divine and uncreated in all and above all,rather than knowledge strictly into the finite, natural or material world which is called Epistemological knowledge.

Gnosis is a transcendential as well as mature understanding. It indicates direct spiritual experiential knowledge and intuitive knowledge, mystic rather than that from rational or reasoned thinking.

Gnosis itself is obtained through understanding at which one can arrive via inner experience or contemplation such as an internal epiphany of intuition and external epiphany such as the Theophany' (Courtesty Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosis))


Theophany (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/theophany)- a visible manifestation of a deity (MWO)


I have an objection to the idea that matter is evil, and of course the 'Gnostic' in 'Gnostic Super Drone' simply means a very large or powerful (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/super) male honeybee : that has no sting and gathers no honey (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/drone) and talks in a persistently dull or monotonous tone (verb - 'drone (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/drone)') who teaches that 'matter is evil'

The two passages that are being explored in this thread - John 10:34-35 and Romans 8:29-30 were submitted to Biblical Languages 301 ((link (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?p=2741285#post2741285))) to grant us a Biblical interpretation of the passages.

A GSD (Gnostic Super Drone) generally lifts passages out of their context and as a result distortions happen. ie. The heresy of Gnosticism (http://www.carm.org/apologetics/heresies/gnosticism).


The danger of gnosticism is easily apparent. It denies the incarnation of God as the Son. In so doing, it denies the true efficacy of the atonement since, if Jesus is not God, He could not atone for all of mankind and we would still be lost in our sins.
From: CARM - Gnosticism (read more (http://www.carm.org/apologetics/heresies/gnosticism))


I will reply to the rest of your thoughts, in a little while.

Sincerely,
HH

[headheart]

Hi Vivian,

It looks like I am going to have to reply in stages....


However, most of humanity is not yet ready for that revelation!


That word ‘ready’ is a gigantic word.

The parable of the ten virgins (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=MATTHEW%2025:1-13), comes to mind.

More to follow in awhile.

Sincerely,
HH

[headheart]

Whenever men make rules regarding things spiritual, they limit access to God.

I believe anyone can access God, but I believe that the Spirit of God will not always strive with the spirit of man.
Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." ( Genesis 6:3 NASB)
At some point we have to begin to obey the leading of the Spirit of God.
‘For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live, because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.’ ( Romans 8:13-14 NIV )

You certainly have given me much to consider, and for that I am grateful.

More to follow in awhile. I think it is probably best if you wait until I am finished. I will indicate on my last comment.

Sincerely,
HH

[headheart]

My 12 year old daughter attends a Christian school and last year did a report on China. Together we looked at the religious traditions of China, even reading together twice The Tao of Pooh. She was enthralled! A few months later her class studied China, and she came home and asked me if Buddha was a bad person. For this is what was taught in her Christian history book. That Buddha was unimportant and even harmful to humanity.


I was fortunate enough to get an education, which allowed me to ‘think-out-of-the-box’. As a result my own children are not hedged in by undeveloped views of things.

I find that early Chinese Philosophy is charming, however popular Taoism is a ‘shadow’ of the innocent wisdom of Laotse.

It is with our spiritual eyes and ears open that we can walk the path of sinlessness, eventually!
That is a hill I refuse to climb, for it has been climbed on my behalf. I would rather die than try to climb up such a hill. I remember what I felt like when I first discovered that I did not need to die, and that someone had climbed that hill and died in my place. The whole force of thinking in religion is about climbing the hill to sainthood, or godhood. Having spent so much time doing that, and finding that God had already climbed the hill, and died the death, for a moment I was speechless and did not know what I should do. That I believe is the first step of maturity. Maturity might be a better word than sinlessness.
Our Lady of Guadalupe
I am presently reading about this, from the Wikipedia Encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Guadalupe).
I planned to read the writings of St. Julian of Norwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_of_Norwich), but find that I just do not have time being currently busy with a book about the afterlife (next world).
The faith of a child.

Yes.

See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. (Matthew 18:10)

Thanks for your very interesting and engaging thoughts.
HH.

[headheart]

68750

The Toa of Pooh (http://www.just-pooh.com/tao.html)

[Vivian]

I was fortunate enough to get an education, which allowed me to ‘think-out-of-the-box’. As a result my own children are not hedged in by undeveloped views of things.

Hi Headheart!

This is good. It is fear that causes us to limit God. Of course there is healthy fear, but there is also unhealthy, unnatural fear that causes phobia. You know I just came up with a funny! Another name for apologetics - Godphobia. Definition: an irrational fear of God beyond a predetermined or legalistic understanding.

I find that early Chinese Philosophy is charming, however popular Taoism is a ‘shadow’ of the innocent wisdom of Laotse.

Unfortunately this is what happens in this world. All world religions or philosophies are a 'shadow' of the original wisdom. Again, it is fear that seeks to confine or define God and applies a legalistic box to any revelation of God. And years and years after the original revelations, the religions that remain all look different - all the revelations of God boxed in different wrappings and ribbons according to the culture that takes control.

And the persecutions and wars begin.

There is a saying:

If Lao Tse and Buddha and Krishna and Mohammad and Jesus all met in a room, there would be tears of joy and hugging and laughing, all the while their respective followers would remain outside arguing and ultimately trying to kill each other.


That is a hill I refuse to climb, for it has been climbed on my behalf. I would rather die than try to climb up such a hill. I remember what I felt like when I first discovered that I did not need to die, and that someone had climbed that hill and died in my place. The whole force of thinking in religion is about climbing the hill to sainthood, or godhood. Having spent so much time doing that, and finding that God had already climbed the hill, and died the death, for a moment I was speechless and did not know what I should do. That I believe is the first step of maturity. Maturity might be a better word than sinlessness.

As you said before, mankind has a problem with definitions, and so we have come to see sin as something horrid that no one wants to admit to! Sin actually simply means 'missing the mark' or not doing things the best way or the most useful way. We are all on the same journey, all driven by the same Spirit, but that drive becomes distorted by the darkness in this world and so we do things to ourselves and to others that work against Christ, and not for. We thus sin. Sin keeps us separated from God not because of a moral issue, but because while we are missing the mark, we aren't going to find The Mark!

And certainly God is abundant Mercy and when we touch upon that Mercy and feel His love and compassion, we realize that there is no blame or guilt - accept what we inflict upon ourselves.

But God is also Judgment or Severity, not to punish us the way that some think, but to discipline us so that we will not miss the mark!

And so becoming sinless simply means walking the path to God without falling off, or straying.

If I might share a personal experience. In the study of the the Hebrew aleph-beis, my spiritual eyes and ears are being opened. This week I have been studying chet, which at first feels like a contradiction, for it is transcendence and it is both grace and sin. It is a bridge, or walking the narrow path that connects one world to another. {And certainly we as Christians can picture Jesus as this bridge!} And in contemplating on these things, I have begun to see the evil that surrounds each of us, the temptations, like huge mountains looming above this narrow path we are walking. And I now see where spirit's desire working through me as a temple becomes distorted when I step off the path and embrace one of these mountains,or fall for the temptation.

A specific: There is a woman I am friends with, an incredible A-personality woman. She is my daughter's girl scout troop leader as well as a friend. And things became kind of yucky with us, not face to face, but the feelings between us became all distorted, lacking love and compassion. You see, she needs lots of help, especially with her kids, because she is constantly over committing herself. And for a year, I stepped in and played second mother with her kids, while she was busy. But things became messed up - her kids needing their parents not me, my daughter's patience wearing thin with her kids, mine wearing thin, etc, and I knew I needed to set boundaries. But things didn't feel right. In the past, when this sort of thing happened I would just plug along with an ok relationship, where I would try to help but then occasionally would get angry and then I would feel guilty.

The inner life of a relationship of this sort becoming all confused and cloudy.

This last week, I saw a huge mountain related to her, trying to pull me off the path. I saw that I felt indebted to her for all she had done as troop leader. And when I saw this feeling of indebtedness, when this sin or missing the mark, or evil deed was brought to the Light, it was released - either I was never indebted or I was and my debt was forgiven - I don't know, but that huge mountain of distortion that was causing me to sin (feel angry, guilty, not treat everyone involved with love and compassion) moved away, and I was suddenly free (John 8:30-32). I was forgiven, healed and I am now sinning no more in this regard.

I am able to set healthy boundaries for all of us, and no longer get angry, or feel guilty or get impatient. In this regard, I am now sinless. This issue no longer makes me miss the mark.

I shared this, HH, because I wanted to share what God's Mercy and forgiveness mean to me in my journey. It is an active, living relationship.

Perhaps others have experienced the same.

I am presently reading about this, from the Wikipedia Encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Our_Lady_of_Guadalupe).
I planned to read the writings of St. Julian of Norwich (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_of_Norwich), but find that I just do not have time being currently busy with a book about the afterlife (next world).

What book about the afterlife are you reading? I have some excellent material to share if you are interested.

Shalom.

Viv

[headheart]

Another name for apologetics - Godphobia.


Apologetics and Theology are only bridges built by men. They are not designed to take us all the way home. Too many join T.Web expecting to argue their way to truth, only to discover as I did that that bridge is broken. The only bridge that is worth anything is the one that reached into all our hearts.

Meeow...

I find that early Chinese Philosophy is charming, however popular Taoism is a ‘shadow’ of the innocent wisdom of Laotse

Some ideas are retained, others are lost, and some are butchered by false teachers.

Perhaps others have experienced the same.

Maturity. :teeth:

What book about the afterlife are you reading? I have some excellent material to share if you are interested.

I have read enough to sink a battleship, and am currently writing the third part of a trilogy.

Sincerely,
HH

[Vivian]

Apologetics and Theology are only bridges built by men. They are not designed to take us all the way home. Too many join T.Web expecting to argue their way to truth, only to discover as I did that that bridge is broken. The only bridge that is worth anything is the one that reached into all our hearts.


Some ideas are retained, others are lost, and some are butchered by false teachers.



Maturity. :teeth:



I have read enough to sink a battleship, and am currently writing the third part of a trilogy.

Sincerely,
HH


Hi Headheart!

I too have found that theology and apologetics in and of itself is not truth. But I do understand that until we are ready, we can only move in the realm of ideas about God. And certainly ideas can be bridges to truth so to speak, but I think better put, ideas are bridges to the bridges to Truth. It is an inner journey, one indeed taken with and through our hearts, and ideas can point us to look within, can help us to look in the right places - to increase our awareness of our inner life. So that might find this bridge - Christ within - that will take us to the next world.

Christ promised to be within which is where we will find him, when we are ready!

Are your first two trilogies available for public view?

I was looking through your weblink on Tweb and places it led and found a What happens when you die? button which when pushed takes you to a video playing sounds from the waves of the ocean crashing on the beach. Since you offered such information this way, I assume that it does not come from ideas but with an experience.

I am very much interested to hear of your understanding or experience other expressions of your understanding, if you can share.

And PS - I took a peek at your music, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Had it playing on the computer here for a while. Thank you for your gifts! In the Christian tradition I follow, we place immerse value on all arts - seeing such as an expression of God.

Shalom.

Viv

[headheart]

Christ promised to be within which is where we will find him, when we are ready!


I prefer to think of myself as a tree that woke up one morning and found myself beside a very amazing river.

Are your first two trilogies available for public view?

Yes. here (http://www.delusionresistance.org/mapsub04.html)

I was looking through your weblink on Tweb and places it led and found a What happens when you die? button which when pushed takes you to a video playing sounds from the waves of the ocean crashing on the beach. Since you offered such information this way, I assume that it does not come from ideas but with an experience

:lol: -- I've been known to tease a lot.


I am very much interested to hear of your understanding or experience other expressions of your understanding, if you can share.

The idea you have brought up about Christ in us, is one that needs to be looked at very carefully. The modern idea is that somehow Christ in person, in all of His glory is in us. That I find painfully hysterical, for if that were true we would all be quite blind.
Probably a better way of understanding it is found in Colossians 2:10 - we are complete in Him. There is a completeness, or a maturity that is in Christ.

In simple terms.
God is an ocean, and we are trees. We get the sap from conception, but only if we are moved (translated - regenerated --- if you will) then are we given that living water Jesus talked about in John 7 and to the woman at the well. The idea of a completed state is expressed by Paul in Galatians 2:20 -- very few every reach that sort of fullness.

After reading some of Andrew Murray's testimony of how he came into the baptism with the Holy Spirit, it is clearly a gradual filling up, and not all in one go...theres is just too much of ourselves for that to come about instantaneously. It is a daily walk, so my view is rather keep the cross and the completed work, ..ie. Jesus sacrifice in view, and keep the mind off the mystical mumbo jumbo about Christ within.

It it true this is our hope, but it should never be our focus. Paul is right when he says our focus is Christ, and Him crucified.

And PS - I took a peek at your music, and thoroughly enjoyed it. Had it playing on the computer here for a while. Thank you for your gifts! In the Christian tradition I follow, we place immerse value on all arts - seeing such as an expression of God.

Yes.
HH

[Vivian]

I prefer to think of myself as a tree that woke up one morning and found myself beside a very amazing river.

Hi headheart!

Good analogy.



Yes. here (http://www.delusionresistance.org/mapsub04.html)

Ah thanks. I am reading. A lot of the information is familiar. I had a Road to Damascus experience about 9 years ago, and after a few years, I felt guided to go online. The first folks I associated with were some academic messianics who were Torah observant, and many many 'gentiles' who felt called out of mainstream Christianity. A popular place to gather online were the Lost Tribe and End Times sites, who offered a lot of the same information.

Since I have come to learn or believ, that one of the first things that happens when personalities are spiritually awakened is to believe that it is indeed the end times. I am not saying that we are not in such a cycle, just that this is not the first time that believers have been convinced the end times and return of Christ were soon or 'eminent'. One just has to read the New Testament to see this!

I have some other thoughts regarding this, but such is outside the OP.



:lol: -- I've been known to tease a lot.

Ha! A good sense of humor is essential in this world!

But I see from your other comments that there is some meaning behind the 'tease'.



The idea you have brought up about Christ in us, is one that needs to be looked at very carefully. The modern idea is that somehow Christ in person, in all of His glory is in us. That I find painfully hysterical, for if that were true we would all be quite blind.
Probably a better way of understanding it is found in Colossians 2:10 - we are complete in Him. There is a completeness, or a maturity that is in Christ.

In simple terms.
God is an ocean, and we are trees. We get the sap from conception, but only if we are moved (translated - regenerated --- if you will) then are we given that living water Jesus talked about in John 7 and to the woman at the well. The idea of a completed state is expressed by Paul in Galatians 2:20 -- very few every reach that sort of fullness.

After reading some of Andrew Murray's testimony of how he came into the baptism with the Holy Spirit, it is clearly a gradual filling up, and not all in one go...theres is just too much of ourselves for that to come about instantaneously. It is a daily walk, so my view is rather keep the cross and the completed work, ..ie. Jesus sacrifice in view, and keep the mind off the mystical mumbo jumbo about Christ within.

It it true this is our hope, but it should never be our focus. Paul is right when he says our focus is Christ, and Him crucified.



Yes.
HH

I understand what you are saying, or at least am in some agreement. There is a much misunderstanding, or rather lack of understanding, of Christ within, and much misuse of the concept - there are those who act of themselves, convinced though that it is Christ within them. They bully, hurt, persecute, even kill, all 'in the Name of Christ'.

These have no idea what the Name of Christ is, nor what Christ within is.

But as you have pointed out, Christ within is real. The Christian tradition that I follow teaches what is Christ within and what is not, but also teaches from a position of hope and faith, that the promise will be fullfilled and Christ will indwell within us. But it also teaches from a position of truth and honesty - humility, knowing when it is not Christ manifesting through us.

If Christ is within us, we are not sinning. We are hitting the mark. And for most of us, there is a flickering within, moving us into and out of higher states of being. So we all know brief moments of Christ within!

I offer, HH, that Christ within IS what the apostles taught. Not as an elite status, but for all followers of Christ. It is just that most of us do not have the faith sufficient to enter the promised land. We do not believe Christ can heal us and make us sinless. And so we remain in our sin.

God still loves and still guides us while we are in sin, but he is ever calling us to come out, to walk the path of Grace that will lead us back to Him.

For some of us, we have done all we can do in this life. And the good news is that it does not stop here! If the choice is between being made sinless in this life, or not having to become sinless at all, of course the latter would be the sane choice. But this is not our choice. Our choice is obedience and faith. The rest is up to God's Grace.

Shalom.

Viv

[headheart]

...........the end times and return of Christ


The site is focussed on that, but I am a free spirit and find that most of my expression is in the music process.... cover design (doodles) music (noises) song writing (scribbles). I used to be very into writing exposes about the Occult, Cults & Heresies but something happened after I wrote the 2nd part of the Trilogy that changed my direction 180 degrees. After I wrote 'Abraxas to Jesus' (which took me 30 years to write --- a very long incubation, with numerous attempts in File 13) .... the bridge broke ... ... ... :eek:

Peace,
HH

[UrbanMonk]

That is a hill I refuse to climb, for it has been climbed on my behalf. I would rather die than try to climb up such a hill. I remember what I felt like when I first discovered that I did not need to die, and that someone had climbed that hill and died in my place.

You're being inconsistent here. If Jesus died for believers, why have two thousand years worth of believers died? Could it be because they refused to climb the same hill he climbed?

[UrbanMonk]

The idea you have brought up about Christ in us, is one that needs to be looked at very carefully. The modern idea is that somehow Christ in person, in all of His glory is in us. That I find painfully hysterical, for if that were true we would all be quite blind.

Yes, until we see what is within, we are quite blind. It' becomes problematic when, in a state of blindness, we claim to see. This blocks any hope of seeing.

It's not a person within. Christ comprehends the entire Kingdom of God. This means that in order to see what is within, you must utterly redefine who you think you are.


It it true this is our hope, but it should never be our focus. Paul is right when he says our focus is Christ, and Him crucified.]

So long as we are focused on the world, we are focused on Christ crucified. That's where P(s)aul's focus was...on the world. Christ comprehends the Kingdom of God within. And, unless we seek first what is within, we will remain focused on what is without.

[Bernie]

It is with our spiritual eyes and ears open that we can walk the path of sinlessness, eventually!

That is a hill I refuse to climb, for it has been climbed on my behalf. I would rather die than try to climb up such a hill. I remember what I felt like when I first discovered that I did not need to die, and that someone had climbed that hill and died in my place.
Excellent response, well put.

[headheart]

Vivian:
It is with our spiritual eyes and ears open that we can walk the path of sinlessness, eventually!




headheart:
That is a hill I refuse to climb, for it has been climbed on my behalf. I would rather die than try to climb up such a hill. I remember what I felt like when I first discovered that I did not need to die, and that someone had climbed that hill and died in my place.



Excellent response, well put.

All Glory to God.

[Eeset-Shadowgrl]

Yes, until we see what is within, we are quite blind. It' becomes problematic when, in a state of blindness, we claim to see. This blocks any hope of seeing.

It's not a person within. Christ comprehends the entire Kingdom of God. This means that in order to see what is within, you must utterly redefine who you think you are.




So long as we are focused on the world, we are focused on Christ crucified. That's where P(s)aul's focus was...on the world. Christ comprehends the Kingdom of God within. And, unless we seek first what is within, we will remain focused on what is without.
I have been reading this thread occasionally. Your comment reminded me of an enlightening section of the Gospel of the Holy Twelve from Lection 41. -->
10. AND there was a certain man who was blind from his birth. And he denied that there were such things as Sun, Moon, and Stars, or that colour existed. And they tried in vain to persuade him that other people saw them; and they led him to Iesus, and he anointed his eyes and made him to see.
11. And he greatly rejoiced with wonder and fear, and confessed that before he was blind. And now after this, he said, I see all, I know everything, I am god.
12. And Iesus again said unto him, How canst thou know all? Thou canst not see through the walls of thine house, nor read the thoughts of thy fellow men, nor understand the language of birds, or of beasts. Thou canst not even recall the events of thy former life, conception, or birth.
13. Remember with humility how much remains unknown to thee, yea, unseen, and doing so, thou mayest see more clearly.

[UrbanMonk]

I have been reading this thread occasionally. Your comment reminded me of an enlightening section of the Gospel of the Holy Twelve from Lection 41. -->

Excellent example.

[headheart]

It's not a person within.


It must surely be a very lonely place, for a Kingdom without a King is like a parlour filled with poisonous snakes.

So then who is the Spirit of God. (Deity or 'it' ) ?


So long as we are focused on the world, we are focused on Christ crucified. That's where P(s)aul's focus was...on the world. Christ comprehends the Kingdom of God within. And, unless we seek first what is within, we will remain focused on what is without.

John 5:4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%2015:4&version=MSG)( The Lord Jesus Christ ) and Colossians 1:2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%201:27&version=MSG) ( His apostle, Paul )

To speak of the writings of the apostle of our Lord Jesus Christ in this way, indicates to me that you have either not read them enough, or more possibly you cannot understand them yet.

These things certainly require considerably study and the anointing of God.

Sincerely,
HH

[UrbanMonk]

It must surely be a very lonely place, for a Kingdom without a King is like a parlour filled with poisonous snakes.

What does King... of Kings mean to you? In a World of equals, all are Lords. Got a problem with that?


So then who is the Spirit of God. (Deity or 'it' ) ?


Our Savior. The Spirit of God is what is it revealed that we are, as baptism washes away all that we are not (ie. flesh, bodies, people, persons, nations)

[UrbanMonk]

FONT=Arial Narrow]John 5:4 [/FONT][/URL]( The Lord Jesus Christ ) and Colossians 1:2 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians%201:27&version=MSG) ( His apostle, Paul )

To speak of the writings of the apostle of our Lord Jesus Christ in this way, indicates to me that you have either not read them enough, or more possibly you cannot understand them yet.

A.) Christ is in you, so therefore you can look forward to sharing in God's glory. It's that simple.
B.) Live in me. Make your home in me just as I do in you.

These, gleened from the quotes you provided, support my thesis. When these kinds of themes are put in the context of unbelievers, they take a different slant, another flavor...a bias. Paul did not believe it. Neither did John. They merely talked about it to the extent that they thought they understood it. It's up to us, Guided by the Spirit of truth, to determine what these things mean.


These things certainly require considerably study and the anointing of God.
[/quote]

The annointing of God and the Spirit of truth are the same. As we open our minds we are annointed with the oil of our own joy...the joy of Self. It is the Spirit of truth that must interpret today as it was necessary that the Spirit of truth interpret back then. Let us not be fooled by those who talk a good game, like James. The Spirit of truth is the sole interpreter of symbolism, words, parables, sayings, phrases, and metaphors. It does not matter who says them. No one has the same authority as the Spirit of truth, which is alive and well today and IN YOU just as Christ is IN YOU. Therefore, do not look for external authority by any kind of association. It does not matter who walked with Jesus how long. Their own records indicate they did not understand, even after three years. Nor are these to be understood overnight, if our minds are closed. A mind closed to what can be seen and heard for three years is not likely to open up what can't be seen, or necessarily even heard with words. Besides that, the spirit of untruth roams about seeking what is closed, that it may confuse.

[headheart]

What does King... of Kings mean to you? In a World of equals, all are Lords. Got a problem with that?


Maybe in your mind, but according to the Christian faith there is only one God and one mediator between God. There is only one who is worthy, and that is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world

Our Savior. The Spirit of God is what is it revealed that we are, as baptism washes away all that we are not (ie. flesh, bodies, people, persons, nations)

According to the Christian faith, baptism cannot wash away your sins, only the pure blood of the Lamb of God.

[headheart]

It's up to us, Guided by the Spirit of truth, to determine what these things mean.

68987
The uniquely inspired Scriptures are not open to any private interpretation, but are the rule of faith: for the upbuilding and edification of the body of Christ. who remain in constant and unbroken fellowship until the day that our Lord Jesus Christ returns. Maranatha.

The Bible can be interpreted in whatever way you want it to be, but once you become a part of the body of Christ, you are no longer allowed to be a 'Gnostic Super Drone.' Instead you must find your place in the ordered structure of a local Church for your protection, guidance, instruction and discipline in the way of the Lord.

Sincerely,
HH

[UrbanMonk]

Maybe in your mind, but according to the Christian faith there is only one God and one mediator between God. There is only one who is worthy, and that is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world


The Lamb of God is a metaphor for the Truth. The Truth takes away the sins of the world. In fact, the truth takes away the whole world...washed away (as in the days of Noah) in the waters of the baptism of the Son of God by the Spirit of truth.

Yes, there is only one God. And if you say that man, or anything other than God will enter the W0orld of God, you are quite mistaken. There is nothing else besides God. The "son of man" is competes with God for godhood. But all such efforts will fail and pass away.




According to the Christian faith, baptism cannot wash away your sins, only the pure blood of the Lamb of God.

"Pure blood" is a metaphor for divine origin. We are saved only as we identify with the same "bloodline" as the Son of God. The bloodline of the Son of God is not as the bloodlines of the sons of man. The bloodline of the Son of God is perfect Spirit, pristine unlimited Mind, whole Holiness, eternal Life, and absolute universal Truth. If these do not belong to you as your birthright (bloodline) you cannot enter the World of God. For the World of God is of such as these, and these only.

[UrbanMonk]

68987
The uniquely inspired Scriptures are not open to any private interpretation,

Your "uniquely inspired Scriptures" are...drumroll please...private interpretations. It is now up to the Spirit of truth to sort things out. This has already been done here. (http://www.forholyspirit.org/)

but are the rule of faith:

Are you in a trance of sorts? The book you mention is essentially a book of spells to be dispelled by the gospel as interpreted by the Spirit of truth (John 16:12-15).

for the upbuilding and edification of the body of Christ.

If you don't recognize Christ in your brother, you have no business going to "church", having no contribution to the building up of crucified and buried Christ. The "church" is built up on the mutual recognition of the Son of God in each other, beyond the appearances of the body. For if the Son of God is a body at all, it is a SPIRITUAL BODY - unlimited - and not like the bodies of the sons of man.

who remain in constant and unbroken fellowship until the day that our Lord Jesus Christ returns. Maranatha.

If you don't recognize your brother as the Son of God, you are refusing to have fellowship with him OR with Christ. Even Jesus called us brothers. And what is the brother of Christ but Christ? Get a clue!

The Bible can be interpreted in whatever way you want it to be,

Biblical scribes have already interpreted observation and hearsay as they pleased.

but once you become a part of the body of Christ, you are no longer allowed to be a 'Gnostic Super Drone.'

Gnostic Super Drone has not been defined.

Meanwhile, once you become a part of the "body of Christ", you are claiming your name/identity as the Son of God as the Spirit of truth reveals this to you in baptism (the washing of your mind with the words of the Spirit of truth). If you deny you are the Son of God, you have no business lobbing lip service, saying, "Lord this, Lord that...". Of course, you are allowed to do this, which is probably why most orthodox are doing this.

Instead you must find your place in the ordered structure of a local Church for your protection,

Are you under hypnosis? You don't even know why you are saying this...except that it says it in a book of spells somewhere.

guidance, instruction and discipline in the way of the Lord.

Clearly, your association with the blind has not helped you understand what it means to join with the "body of Christ". It means to join with Christ as one. Christ does not have a "body" as men have bodies. The "body of Christ" is unlimited Spirit, and therefore without any kind of form, which is a limitation. God does not create limits.

[headheart]

Gnostic Super Drone has not been defined.


69021