Is God a substitue for man, or is man a substitute for God?

[UrbanMonk]

We are told over and over that God died for man. But, can God really die? Seriously folks, can LIFE really cease to exist? That's why I say that man is a substitute for "god". In other words, man dies for "god". The question, then, is why does "god" want to "die"? The answer to this mystery may be traced through the lineage of the "prodigal son". It must first be understood that the "prodigal son" is a "god"...whether he lives in his Father's Kingdom, or whether he leaves his HOME. This get's back to the "God from God"..."like from like" statement in the Nicene Creed. If HOME is LIFE...then home away from home must be a kind of death, or at best "life and death". If the prodigal Son leaves LIFE, then he must be asking for "death". And if man is the descendant of the prodigal son, man must be asking for the "death of god". The death of god saves the prodigal son and his descendants. But it does not save THE TRUTH.

I submit that man substitutes for a "god" that wants death to be the truth. .

[RBerman]

This is the kind of thing that comes from reading "A Course In Miracles" instead of The Bible. You're coming from such a radically different definition of key terms like "God" and "life" and "prodigal son" and "home" and "truth" that discussion is very difficult.

[UrbanMonk]

This is the kind of thing that comes from reading [Edit by UrbanMonk] instead of The Bible. You're coming from such a radically different definition of key terms like "God" and "life" and "prodigal son" and "home" and "truth" that discussion is very difficult.

That's right. I call it "redemption". You see, "the world" is a redefinition of Christ/God/Life/Home/Truth. It deems these (truths, terms, conditions) as different from what they ARE. To deem is to estimate...to esteem...to evaluate...to "judge" as LESS THAN or DIFFERENT. To re-deem is to restore the values those terms had in the first place...when they were "born of Spirit". Only the "prodigal Son" has the kind of "power" to "deem" "god" to be less than or something other that what God IS. The world is the prodigal Son's OPINION OF THE TRUTH...and as such, his opinion of himSelf. It boils down to low self-esteem. Salvation, then, is to edify our self-esteem...build it up...until we understand that we are indeed the Son of God...and not the "son of man" or anything that is guilty.

[RBerman]

Definitely some irreconcilable definitions at work here. I encourage you to put away "A Course in Miracles" and let the Bible define your terms for you.

[UrbanMonk]

Definitely some irreconcilable definitions at work here. I encourage you to put away [Edit UrbanMonk] and let the Bible define your terms for you.


Or, I could simply employ reason.

[John Goddard]

Or, I could simply employ reason.

Why can't you just employ, a human Jesus completely obeyed God to his martyrdom and was given God-powers for his obedience like it says in Hebrews 5:8-9.

The Prodigal Son is about sinners gone astray returning to God, and being more treasured than those who always remained faithful, also Matthew 18:13. Your theory that God returns to God as a sinner doesn't even make sense anyway, in the context of Trinity.

[UrbanMonk]

God as a sinner doesn't even make sense anyway, in the context of Trinity.

No, god leaves as a "sinner" and comes back as the "Son of God". A "sinner" denies it is the son of the Father of Reality. A sinner becomes the "son" of another "father", namely, the "son of man". Such a geneology is neither real nor true. And whatever fathers man must be an imposter, a usurper upon "Our Father". So, Jesus said, "Call no man father", to break the cycle of lies the prodigal so has told himself since "the beginning". A "sinner" thinks the laws of God can be broken. But the law of God can't be broken. So, a "sinner" is arrogant, and not a little crazy. A "sinner" fools himself into thinking erroneously about God...driving himself mad as he departs from REALITY. Thus, a "sinner" is psychologically "sick" and in need of "healing"...NOT PUNISHMENT.

The prodigal Son needs to be "baptized" back into the Trinity. Meaning, all false and erroneous thoughts about his Father and himself must be washed away by the truthful words and provisions of the Spirit of Truth (the Holy Spirit). Erroneous thoughts about God cover the Son of God like dirt, dust and mud...hiding his "glory" under many layers of thick theological grime. When the grime is gone, the "glory" appears again, as it is, was, and always shall be. When baptism into the Trinity is finished, there is only the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. THERE ARE NO MEN. Man is like "dirt" which covers (veils) the face of Christ, the beloved Son of God. So Jesus said, "Do not hide your light under a bushel". This is a call to be baptized in a way that reveals the LIGHT (glory) of the Son of God...hiding beneath.

[UrbanMonk]

The Prodigal Son is about sinners gone astray returning to God, and being more treasured than those who always remained faithful, also Matthew 18:13.

Well, Matthew didn't know what Jesus knew...so he died. Matthew is dead. So there. Matthew was a "sinner". So what would he know about God or the Son of God? Sinners, as a rule of thumb, can't interpret parables correctly. You could tell a sinner the same parable for three years and he still wouldn't get it.

Men didn't leave God, so they don't return to God. They aren't his Son, so who the hell are they? They are the sons of a rogue father...that cannot possibly exist...because OUR FATHER has a monopoly on REALITY. That is why "flesh and blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God". Only a "King" can inherit a "Kingdom" in which ALL ARE EQUALS.

Men didn't come from God. Whatever descended from God ascends back to God...and only that. Whatever that was, MEN ARE NOT PART OF IT. Men are a manifestation of what descened from God. They are temporary substitutes for what descended. The personify what descended. They "anthromophize" what descended. Therefore, what ascends must be TRANSFORMED and have THE MIND OF CHRIST.

[UrbanMonk]

Why can't you just employ, a human Jesus completely obeyed God to his martyrdom and was given God-powers for his obedience like it says in Hebrews 5:8-9.

First of all, the will of the Son of God is the SAME as his Father. So it's not a matter of obedience. The concept of obedience is subversive to a Kingdom built on EQUALITY. Obedience is an attribute of a HEIRARCHY. Heirarchy is OF THE GOD OF THIS WORLD...namely, the "prodigal son". The prodigal son must learn that his will is the same as the will of his TRUE FATHER...not the will of his FAKE FATHER, namely, "the devil". The prodigal son does not call his father "the devil". That's what Jesus called the "father" of mankind...a "liar from the beginning". The prodigal son must let the idea of another will "die". There is no other will besides the will of God. Another will is a LIE.

So, I do not respond to obedience oriented paradigms. My will is the same as the will of my Father. My Father is not the heirarchy oriented god of this world. OUR KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD. I am NOT the KING OF THIS WORLD. That is for the "PRODIGAL SON". "The world" is his kingdom. The scribe of Hebrews unwittingly references the god of this world, NOT the "Our Father" that Jesus understood.

The will of our Father makes us happy. Manhood does not make us happy. So, manhood is not the will of our Father. To "do" the will of our Father is to "die" to the concept of manhood. That is as far as "obedience" goes. We must let the idea of another will go...let it "die". When it is dead, we will be happy again. The will of God is more than what we "do". Christ - being pure joy - IS THE WILL OF GOD. If we are not Christ, we will not be happy, so we will not be "doing" the Will of God. The Will of God IS. It does not "do" anything because the Will of God is a BEING, namely, Christ.

[UrbanMonk]

This is the kind of thing that comes from reading "A Course In Miracles" instead of The Bible. You're coming from such a radically different definition of key terms like "God" and "life" and "prodigal son" and "home" and "truth" that discussion is very difficult.

The bible says God can die. And it says God can't die. So, it is forked-tongued to begin with. Furthermore, it says God has died a substitutionary death...for mankind , er, at least anyone foolish enough to believe such an unreasonable supposition. Only men die. God is eternally alive always. Accordingly, A MAN - namely Jesus - SUBSTITUTED FOR THE DEATH OF GOD...not the other way around.

To me, this teaches that the "death of God" is a metaphor, and Jesus death was a PARODY (parable in deed). The lesson teaches that the "son of man" dies in god's place...as a kind of scapegoat. What kind of god wants or thinks it needs a scapegoat? A guilty god! Or, one who thinks it is guilty. Not surprisingly, at the very beginning of the bible, we see that "god" is blaming his creatures for no good reason, practically "framing" them for crimes against himself, for which they are exiled and gradually executed (by aging process) notwithstanding various other kinds of punishment. In his parody, Jesus played the role of "Adam", who is blamed for the sins of the whole world. Through his crucifixion, Jesus was mocking the god of this world and what it does to its children. Through his resurrection, Jesus was honoring our TRUE FATHER...the God of LIFE...not the god of death.

[UrbanMonk]

Can God really die? Who says? And if God could die, why would God die for men? Can men live without God? If God did not exist, how could men live? Can a part of God die? Can a Son of God die? How is that even possible? THINK ABOUT IT FOLKS! If that were even possible, and if the Son of God died, then why is the Son of God alive, NOW, in HEAVEN? Would God exchange his only Son for obsequious believers of an improbable impossibility...especially in light of the fact that the Son of God IS NOT DEAD according to biblical sources? Clearly, God did not sacrifice ANYTHING.

So, what's going on?

Man is a substitutionary scapegoat for a "guilty" god who wants to die but can't. That "god" is the legendary "prodigal Son"...a tormented time traveler tripped up by trashy theology and false suppositions about his own Father. As man dies, the prodigal son lives to perpetuate improbable problems of his own making. Meanwhile, man takes all the guilt of his "god" upon his shoulders, and dies from the load of it.

[Bosco]

We are told over and over that God died for man. But, can God really die? Seriously folks, can LIFE really cease to exist? That's why I say that man is a substitute for "god". In other words, man dies for "god". The question, then, is why does "god" want to "die"? The answer to this mystery may be traced through the lineage of the "prodigal son". It must first be understood that the "prodigal son" is a "god"...whether he lives in his Father's Kingdom, or whether he leaves his HOME. This get's back to the "God from God"..."like from like" statement in the Nicene Creed. If HOME is LIFE...then home away from home must be a kind of death, or at best "life and death". If the prodigal Son leaves LIFE, then he must be asking for "death". And if man is the descendant of the prodigal son, man must be asking for the "death of god". The death of god saves the prodigal son and his descendants. But it does not save THE TRUTH.

I submit that man substitutes for a "god" that wants death to be the truth. .

The Spirit cannot die, but the flesh or body which contained the fullness of the Godhead can and did. While the body lay dead, by the Spirit he went and preached to those once disobediant in the days of Noah. Why he did this isn't the point... we know he did because it says so. We do not die for God, DEATH was not part of the original intent. Surely being God and living outside of time he knew Adam would fail him, but death was not part of the initial equation. Death came as a result of sin. When Adam sinned the clock for him began to tick when it wasn't ticking before.

Seeing also that there will be some who live through the tribulation and won't taste death, these will not "die for God." And if some do and some don't... God is a respector of persons.

Sorry brother... I don't see your point aligning to scripture.

Peace.
Ken

[RBerman]

Or, I could simply employ reason.
Reason is a process that requires data with which to operate. You have to choose which data to trust. I encourage you to use the Bible as your data source, asking God to help you understand it, and using a local church to "error-check" your conclusions.

[RBerman]

Can God really die? Who says? And if God could die, why would God die for men? Can men live without God? If God did not exist, how could men live? Can a part of God die? Can a Son of God die? How is that even possible? THINK ABOUT IT FOLKS! If that were even possible, and if the Son of God died, then why is the Son of God alive, NOW, in HEAVEN? Would God exchange his only Son for obsequious believers of an improbable impossibility...especially in light of the fact that the Son of God IS NOT DEAD according to biblical sources? Clearly, God did not sacrifice ANYTHING.
This all amounts to saying, "If I can't understand something about God, it must not be true." Seems kind of presumptuous to me.

[John Goddard]

First of all, the will of the Son of God is the SAME as his Father. So it's not a matter of obedience. The concept of obedience is subversive to a Kingdom built on EQUALITY. Obedience is an attribute of a HEIRARCHY. Heirarchy is OF THE GOD OF THIS WORLD...namely, the "prodigal son". The prodigal son must learn that his will is the same as the will of his TRUE FATHER...not the will of his FAKE FATHER, namely, "the devil". The prodigal son does not call his father "the devil". That's what Jesus called the "father" of mankind...a "liar from the beginning". The prodigal son must let the idea of another will "die". There is no other will besides the will of God. Another will is a LIE.

His will is only the same as God's because he remained obedient to God, and not giving in to temptation.

Without hierarchy we would all be gods, is that what you are proposing?

[UrbanMonk]

His will is only the same as God's because he remained obedient to God, and not giving in to temptation.

John, you don't understand what temptation really is. Temptation is the temptation to see the Son of God as unequal, as different, separate, apart and SPECIAL. This causes a "fall" from "grace". This cuts the Son down to some kind of heirarchy within a "good and evil" kingdom. This is what the prodigal Son imagines ABOUT the Son of God...which is what he imagines ABOUT HIMSELF. The world, as such, is a SELF CONCEPT. Temptation is what attracts us to see the Son of God as guilty, as small, as weak, as powerless...as...flesh.

The Son's will is the same...BECAUSE IT IS THE SAME...not because of obedience. It's the way he was created. God's will is the Son's inheritance. It can never be taken away. Nor can it be given away. Nor can it be bought back. It can only be given back to the one who has tossed it away, namely, the "prodigal Son".

Without hierarchy we would all be gods, is that what you are proposing?

Yes. We are "god" with or without a heirarchy because it is the truth. Heirarchy is what "gods" do with thier power...to suppress their brethren and cut them down to size. This allows the concepts of comparison and competition to make for some hairy drama. This is how "gods" play. They play hard when nothing they think is real...when nothing they think is of their Father. The concept of "gods" is problematic if one god be different from another god. This makes for war. But if they are all the same, having and being everything, then this makes for peace. Our Father gave his Son everything, making him an equal...and thereby securing peace in "the Kingdom". In "the Kingdom" all are Kings...and each is a King of Kings. This describes and equality. God created all equal. It is the prodigal Son that makes everything/everyone unequal. This leads to "iniquity"...the fallout of a heirarchal system. In such a system, power corrupts.

[UrbanMonk]

This all amounts to saying, "If I can't understand something about God, it must not be true." Seems kind of presumptuous to me.

What are you saying? Are you saying, "If I can't understand something about God, it must be true"?

I am merely stepping through a process of reason. The fact is, God did not sacrifice his Son! Even the orthodoxy claims his Son is sitting at his right hand...even now. Therefore, nothing has died. If the Son died, he wouldn't be sitting at his right hand! So, who is fooling who?

[UrbanMonk]

Reason is a process that requires data with which to operate. You have to choose which data to trust.

Yes. The good sheep hear the voice of the Good Shepherd's data. The goats are happy to consume disinformation.

I encourage you to use the Bible as your data source,

Goat's are happy to consume disinformation. Seen as a semi-historical document that gives us a picture of ancient belief systems...yes, it can be helpful. Seen as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth...it is a fraud.

asking God to help you understand it,

The Good Shepherd helps me when I read confusing documentation.

and using a local church to "error-check" your conclusions.

Ever heard of "memes"?

[UrbanMonk]

Sorry brother... I don't see your point aligning to scripture.

Peace.
Ken

I'm not attempting to align with what is confused and confusing. I interpret what is confusing in an effort to sort out the wheat from the tares. The orthodoxy has paved over "the Way" in favor of a super-hiway for the guilt responsive masses. What i do is point out where the original greenery pushes up through the asphalt, despite the efforts of the blackness to keep is suppressed.

[UrbanMonk]

The Spirit cannot die, but the flesh or body which contained the fullness of the Godhead can and did.

This is exactly what I mean. Flesh is for substituting for God, who can't die. To make God die, one must use word-magic (spells) to somehow put the "fullness" of God into such a small container. Conversely, the gospel dispells such a wicked spell by stating the obvious. The unlimited cannot be made limited!

[barnasha]

What are you saying? Are you saying, "If I can understand something about God, it must be true"?

I am merely stepping through a process of reason. The fact is, God did not sacrifice his Son! Even the orthodoxy claims his Son is sitting at his right hand...even now. Therefore, nothing has died. If the Son died, he wouldn't be sitting at his right hand! So, who is fooling who?

yes, God did not sacrifice his sons.

[UrbanMonk]

While the body lay dead, by the Spirit he went and preached to those once disobediant in the days of Noah.

The world is the "dead" Christ. The Savior has come to rescue the mind that makes it, raising up preachers, like Jesus, to tell us that the world is a kind of destruction of the Son of God...and will destroy anyone who thinks it is real or is home. We are called to escape such a world by tying our hopes to the truth as spoken by the Savior through various channels, especially through the unedited version of the historic Jesus.


Why he did this isn't the point... we know he did because it says so.

Well, would you blow your brains out with a shotgun because it says so...according to your understanding of the scribes understanding of what it is we are trying to understand?

We do not die for God, DEATH was not part of the original intent.

Oh yes it was. For death has been part and parcel of the world experience...since the beginning. Deny motive and intent all you like. I have motive and a weapon, and I'm saying that the world is a covered-up crime scene that tries to put the Truth six feet under, and get rid of the evidence.

Surely being God and living outside of time he knew Adam would fail him, but death was not part of the initial equation.

You just contradicted your testimony.

Also, what you are calling "God" is the "prodigal Son"...the author of time and all time holds...all of it's pre-scripted scenes and scenarios.


Death came as a result of sin.

Well yah. But sin reared its ugly head before the foundation of the world. The world was made for dying...for a killing field. In the world...everything is born to die...even everything we would not consider to be a sinner...including our stars (suns).

When Adam sinned the clock for him began to tick when it wasn't ticking before.

When the prodigal Son walked away from eternity, the clock started ticking...ticking down to the time he would return from the "dead".

God is a respector of persons.

No.

Sorry brother... I don't see your point aligning to scripture.

Brother, I am writing scripture.

[RBerman]

What are you saying? Are you saying, "If I can't understand something about God, it must be true"?
I don't believe I said any such thing. Any particular claim may or may not be true. But my ability to understand it (or lack thereof) doesn't mean anything about the truthfulness of the claim about God. It just says something about me. Or, more to the point, you.

I am merely stepping through a process of reason. The fact is, God did not sacrifice his Son! Even the orthodoxy claims his Son is sitting at his right hand...even now. Therefore, nothing has died. If the Son died, he wouldn't be sitting at his right hand! So, who is fooling who?
By your "reason," if I went to China and came back, then I never went to China.

[UrbanMonk]

I don't believe I said any such thing. Any particular claim may or may not be true. But my ability to understand it (or lack thereof) doesn't mean anything about the truthfulness of the claim about God. It just says something about me. Or, more to the point, you.

Ditto.

By your "reason," if I went to China and came back, then I never went to China.

No, by my reason, if you went to China and died and never came back...then you died. If you went to China and came back, you went on vacation. By your reasoning, we are saved because the Son of God went to Vegas ("sin city") and came back. Actually, I think I like that metaphor. It's jives with the parable of the prodigal Son.

[RBerman]

No, by my reason, if you went to China and died and never came back...then you died. If you went to China and came back, you went on vacation. By your reasoning, we are saved because the Son of God went to Vegas ("sin city") and came back. Actually, I think I like that metaphor. It's jives with the parable of the prodigal Son.
Your argument is essentially, "No one comes back from death, period." What makes you so sure?

[UrbanMonk]

Your argument is essentially, "No one comes back from death, period." What makes you so sure?

Well, if death is not possible or true, then we may be in agreement. But if death is not permanent, then you lose the "sacrifice" aspect of the alledged death-of-Christ argument. He didn't die. He just went on vacation.

Let me ask you, what word would you use to describe total anihilation...non-existence...the end of life forever?

[Bosco]

This is exactly what I mean. Flesh is for substituting for God, who can't die. To make God die, one must use word-magic (spells) to somehow put the "fullness" of God into such a small container. Conversely, the gospel dispells such a wicked spell by stating the obvious. The unlimited cannot be made limited!

When John was in prison he sent two of his disciples to Yehoshua to ask, "are you the one who should come or do we look for another." His answer, "you go and tell John the things you see and hear, the deaf hear, the lame walk, the blind see, the dead raised...etc." What was Messiah saying? He was quoting from Isaiah 35:4-8. A prophecy, of what would happen when God came.

John too prepared the way for YHWH (all caps LORD used in Isaiah 40:3).

Unto Abraham God appeared as one of three men, the other two we later learn were angles. Abraham called him by NAME, and He responded without rebuke. God has taken many forms the latest being that He came in the form of His son, prophecied in Isaiah 9:6. His would be called Yehoshua (Jesus) "for He will save his people from their sins." Yehoshua was worshipped, without rebuke. Thomas called him "My Adonai (Lord/Master) and my Elohim" and again, no rebuke came from Messiah. He is the second Adam, and according to Paul, the second Adam was "the Adonai from Heaven." Who is the Adonai from Heaven? (see Matt. 11:25, Luke 10:21, and especially Acts 17:24) There are NOT two Lord's of heaven! The Son of God raised himself from the grave (John 2:19-21) yet we know the Father raised the Son from the grave. (Acts 3:15) Paul states that the "fullness of the Godhead" was in that body and we are "complete in him!" (Col. 2:9-10) He (Yehoshua) is said to be the very Creator who spoke in Genesis 1. (John 1:3, John 1:10, and particularly Col. 1:15-16) He was Theos, manifested in the flesh. (1 Tim 3:16)

I can go on... point is, the scriptures both old and new support Yehoshua as being God. Whether you accept that, believe that, live according to that, that's entirely up to you. The "rock" isn't a man, it is the understanding of WHO he is. Do with that as you will.

Peace.
Ken

[RBerman]

Well, if death is not possible or true, then we may be in agreement. But if death is not permanent, then you lose the "sacrifice" aspect of the alleged death-of-Christ argument. He didn't die. He just went on vacation.
Let's crucify you for the sins of the world and see how much of a "vacation" you find it to be. You speak of things of which you know nothing.

Let me ask you, what word would you use to describe total anihilation...non-existence...the end of life forever?
Annihilation describes not only the end of life, but the end of existence.

[UrbanMonk]

Let's crucify you for the sins of the world and see how much of a "vacation" you find it to be. You speak of things of which you know nothing.

Now you are changing the method of salvation. Now you are saying it is a matter of excruciating pain for a matter of time. You seem to be saying that a bad vacation is able to save. If that's not what you are saying, then what else could you be saying? Are you saying that salvation is brought about not by the death of the Son of God...but by an assault of Father on Son that keeps the Father from assaulting the world/mankind? Was it a Son on Son assault that preempts the Father's wrath? What exactly are you talking about?

Annihilation describes not only the end of life, but the end of existence.

So would annihilation be a better word for death? And would death become more like a "sleep"? How will you maintain that the Son of God was sacrificed if you are not willing to say he was annihilated? If you want to say he slept, I would join you in that interpretation.

[RBerman]

Now you are changing the method of salvation. Now you are saying it is a matter of excruciating pain for a matter of time. You seem to be saying that a bad vacation is able to save. If that's not what you are saying, then what else could you be saying? Are you saying that salvation is brought about not by the death of the Son of God...but by an assault of Father on Son that keeps the Father from assaulting the world/mankind? Was it a Son on Son assault that preempts the Father's wrath? What exactly are you talking about?
If you want to compare Jesus' torture, death, and resurrection to the most nightmarish vacation ever, I suppose. Seems like a goofy metaphor, though. Just drop the "vacation" part and stick with what the Bible says: Jesus died, and Jesus rose from the dead, for the forgiveness of our sins.

So would annihilation be a better word for death? And would death become more like a "sleep"? How will you maintain that the Son of God was sacrificed if you are not willing to say he was annihilated? If you want to say he slept, I would join you in that interpretation.
Annihilation would mean non-existence. I see nothing in the Bible that makes me think Jesus was annihilated. Death is "like sleep" in some ways (e.g. your body stops moving) but not the same as sleep.

[Bosco]

I don't see the hangup either UM. Adam sinned, death (not part of the original intent) resulted from sin.

SIN = DEATH!

Messiah was born without sin, lived a sinless life, and was put to death despite being perfect.

A LIFE OF PERFECTION= LIFE!

We then identify with Messiah in death and are raised to walk in the newness of life. (Symbolically what baptism is, see Romans 6) We repent of doing things our way, believe on Messiah, and he (Messiah) who gained the right to perfect whom he wills because he is the first fruit of the dead, will perfect us at his coming.

I see the above as the nutshell version of the gospel starting in Genesis 1 and ending in Revelation 22.

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

If you want to compare Jesus' torture, death, and resurrection to the most nightmarish vacation ever, I suppose. Seems like a goofy metaphor, though. Just drop the "vacation" part and stick with what the Bible says: Jesus died, and Jesus rose from the dead, for the forgiveness of our sins.

Excuse me but Jesus never died. I don't consider three days R and R to be death. So "torture" is all you've got.


Annihilation would mean non-existence. I see nothing in the Bible that makes me think Jesus was annihilated.

So we are in agreement.

Death is "like sleep" in some ways (e.g. your body stops moving) but not the same as sleep.

So, "torture" is all you've got as the method of your salvation. That's got to be torture!

[Bosco]

If Yehoshua did not die, we are still dead to sin! I once posted on another forum a question: If you were in the courtyard and his life was in your hands, would you scream for his release or allow his death to occur? The results of that thread were split 50/50. But, they shouldn't have been. Yehoshua was "appointed to die" and did, in the flesh. Three days later he was raised and because of that resurrection, sin and death, the true bondage, has been done away with. So to say that "Jesus didn't die" is to say, "we are still guilty under the law" and will die in our sins.

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

I don't see the hangup either UM. Adam sinned, death (not part of the original intent) resulted from sin.

SIN = DEATH!

Yes, sin and death go hand in hand. They are nearly synonymous as sin leads to the experience of death. But sin is a belief in what is not true. Only LIFE is true. In order to experience death, we must first deny LIFE. To deny life is to deny sanity...is to embrace insanity. Insanity and "sin" are "sin"-onymous. To be insane is to be in-"sin". Christ is reality. And when we deny Christ, we deny ourselves sanity. And going insane, we embrace the experiences that deny that Christ is the Truth. Since Christ is LIFE, the denial of LIFE leads to the experience of death. Death is an experience. Death is not the truth. Therefore, we continue to die, over and over and over again....until we accept the TRUTH. When did we deny Christ? Before the foundation of the world. The world is a "dead Christ"...the experience of death that results from denying the universal truth of LIFE. As such, "the world" is imaginary...a mental manifestation in a powerful mind gone mad. It is not true.

[UrbanMonk]

Messiah was born without sin, lived a sinless life, and was put to death despite being perfect.

A LIFE OF PERFECTION= LIFE!


Christ was born without sin...born of Spirit. The prodigal Son is born in sin...born of separation. Separation manifests the physical world-story. Notice, everything in the world is separate from everything else. And everything in the world-story is "born to die". Thus, it is the prodigal Son symbolized by the "son of man" which is born to die. It is Christ which is born to live. We must choose whom we identify with. As we identify with Christ, we shall live truly...born of Spirit. If we identify with anything else, we identify with death and other experiences of ignorance.

Christ is perfect...born perfect. The prodigal Son is the idea that perfection can be added to or taken away from. The prodigal Son takes himself away from the Kingdom of God with the idea of adding to himself...making an imperfection of himself...making himself a "sinner". The prodigal Son was crazy enough to think that he could add something to everything....and reaching beyond everything grasped nothing. The prodigal Son virtually transforms himself into what we call "the universe", that is, the world of time and physical phenomenon. It is an imperfection in which everything that is born within it dies...even the stars. As an expression of this neo-kingdom, the "son of man" is "born to die". The world is the "nothing" the prodigal Son added to the perfection that was the Son of God...by grasping for more than everything.

[RBerman]

Excuse me but Jesus never died. I don't consider three days R and R to be death.
Why not?

[Bosco]

Yes, sin and death go hand in hand. They are nearly synonymous as sin leads to the experience of death. But sin is a belief in what is not true.

Respectfully UM, I couldn't disagree with this statement more. Sin exists, it is not relevant to one's belief. An atheist who has a live in girl friend and is having an afair with his best friend's wife is sinning, yet an atheist doesn't care about what God determines as sin.

Look, Adam did not believe in sin when he sinned. His eyes to what was good and evil were not opened UNTIL he took a bite of the fruit of "good and evil." THEN, his eyes opened, but, he sinned without knowing sin existed.

Only LIFE is true. In order to experience death, we must first deny LIFE.

If we are going to believe in Jesus/Yehoshua as our Messiah, if we are to follow the will of God, it can't come from some new age enlightenment that contradicts scripture. We are warned, repeatedly, that many false ways will come, and the one thing we know we can trust to help us avoid the pitfalls of deception is Scripture. Islam has a foundation in Torah but is based on the "revelations" of a man who came many hundreds of years after Messiah. Now, look at their fruit... roadside bombs, innocents being killed, a desire to exterminate Jews and Christians. Why? Because they left their foundation and followed a man. Even Mormons, most unknowingly, have followed a man who added to scripture. While they maintain a good moral center in their life, they do not practice this faith as the disciples did. If anyone had it right, it wasn't the "church fathers," it was those who walked with Messiah.

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Mans's logic, personal experiances, traditions, nor the rudiments of the world should not ever be preached in a manner which trumps established scripture. "Denying life is to deny sanity," sounds great, but that has no contextual basis in scripture. "To be insane is to be in sin" also sounds good, even makes some sense to some degree, but sin is disobediance to God's established will. Nothing more! Messiah is life, and denying him will bring about death... but to make the word "life" fit only in THAT parameter is cutting scripture short. It would be akin to saying the word Israel means only land, or a country... and not admit it was another name for Jacob OR a word used to describe God's people. (i.e. "My people Israel.")

Peace.
Ken

[Bosco]

Christ is perfect...born perfect. The prodigal Son is the idea that perfection can be added to or taken away from. The prodigal Son takes himself away from the Kingdom of God with the idea of adding to himself...making an imperfection of himself...making himself a "sinner". The prodigal Son was crazy enough to think that he could add something to everything....and reaching beyond everything grasped nothing. The prodigal Son virtually transforms himself into what we call "the universe", that is, the world of time and physical phenomenon. It is an imperfection in which everything that is born within it dies...even the stars. As an expression of this neo-kingdom, the "son of man" is "born to die". The world is the "nothing" the prodigal Son added to the perfection that was the Son of God...by grasping for more than everything.

You have an interpretation of the prodigal son parable, and I must admit it is as valid as any other interpretation. However, that doesn't mean it is correct, nor does it mean anyone else has to accept it. Another interpretation of the prodigal son parable can be that it points to either the Jews who have a veil over them regarding Yehoshua at the moment, or, and more likely I personally believe, it's a story meant to teach us on one end the grace of God... but also prophetically speaks about the Lost Sheep of Israel. Messiah's words:

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

The Northern Kingdom which was dispersed coming out of Babylon is still dispersed. Many are Christians, but hardly any know they are bloodline Israel anymore. They lived in the promised land, ruled under the authority of God (which no other country since has), but left it for idols and sin. I might be a descendent of them, you might be... we don't know. What we do know is that prophetically speaking (Ezk. 37/ Jer. 31-Heb 8), they will come back to God and be reunited with the Southern Kingdom as the Whole House of Israel, never again to be divided. So the prodigal son, like I said, teaches us on one hand, but speaks to us on another. IMHO

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

Respectfully UM, I couldn't disagree with this statement more. Sin exists, it is not relevant to one's belief.

Respectfully, I couldn’t disagree with this statement more. This statement is really what sin is all about. It’s about making declarations that what is true is not true…and what is not true is true. It’s about making what is not true a premise upon which is built an edifice that is also not true. The world is just such an edifice…built on the sand of false premises. As such, the world begins with just this kind of judgment…and is maintained by just this kind of judgment. Sin would replace the Truth with “truth” of it’s own…and proceed to prove it come hell or high water. Well, hell has come…but it is still not true! The world, time, hell, sin…these are all beliefs, albeit IN A VERY POWERFUL MIND.

An atheist who has a live in girl friend and is having an afair with his best friend's wife is sinning, yet an atheist doesn't care about what God determines as sin.

Sin has blinded your eyes to what sin even is. If you can see bodies, you are “in-sin”…synonymous with insane. There is no world! The “fact” that you think you can see “bad behavior” is because YOU are sinning at a very deep level of a very powerful mind. Only bodies can behave badly. You see bodies because you want to see bad behavior. This is sin because it is an attempt to prove that there is more than good…more than God…more than the truth…more than peace…more than life….more than everything. There is no “more than” God…period. If you don’t believe it, you are officially an unbeliever. Therefore, if we are “men” or any kind of body, you can be sure that “we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”.
Only as we insist that we are men, or that the world is true…do we continue to sin. When we finally accept that sin is not true, we will come to accept the Truth.

Look, Adam did not believe in sin when he sinned. His eyes to what was good and evil were not opened UNTIL he took a bite of the fruit of "good and evil." THEN, his eyes opened, but, he sinned without knowing sin existed.

We have all bitten the proverbial “apple” of self-deception along with Adam which is a metaphor for the prodigal Son. And we are yet suffering under a strong delusion which would make “good and evil” TRUE. IT’s NOT TRUE. The “apple” is not real. And yet, it has yielded the whole world. Still yet, the whole world is not true nor real. It is something we are digesting within our mind’s imaginative powers. As we contemplate opposites to our truth, our power is “squandered” on what is powerless…and we come to believe that we have no power. And in this state of mind, we cannot overcome the world. But if we, like Jesus, can understand that we are responsible for making the world, then we can begin to overcome it.

If we are going to believe in Jesus/Yehoshua as our Messiah, if we are to follow the will of God, it can't come from some new age enlightenment that contradicts scripture.

If you are swallowing the orthodox brand of “scripture” whole, you are still willingly eating of the “fruit” of “good and evil”…because the bible is a mixture of contradictory themes combined into one fruit (book). It is NOT holy, but rather, contradictory, controversial and fragmented. It separates what ought not to be separated, and combines what ought not to be combined.

We are warned, repeatedly, that many false ways will come, and the one thing we know we can trust to help us avoid the pitfalls of deception is Scripture.

That is, unless the concept of “Scripture” is one of those many false way that will/have come. The faith you are placing in this oracle is quite audacious when you think about it. Sin is about insisting what is false to be true. And our judgments maintain these false structures…these TRADITIONS which work to nullify the truest word(s) of God.

Islam has a foundation in Torah but is based on the "revelations" of a man who came many hundreds of years after Messiah. Now, look at their fruit... roadside bombs, innocents being killed, a desire to exterminate Jews and Christians. Why?

You are using Islam and it’s “holy book” as a scapegoat..,.a distraction…a diversion to draw attention away from your “holy book” and it’s fruit.

Because they left their foundation and followed a man.

When you put faith in the bible, you are putting faith men. You are putting faith in your own judgment as to what the gospel ought to be, and how the Holy Spirit intends to save the world. You don't know what the gospel is, nor how the Holy Spirit is saving the Son of God. Be honest, or be confused. Your choice.


Even Mormons, most unknowingly, have followed a man who added to scripture.

The prodigal Son adds to the perfection of Christ, the Son of God. And in the process, makes a mess of things. The Bible, the Koran, the book of Mormon are all part of a cosmic mess. The world functions according to a “blame game”. You are playing this game well. But you are not exempted when you point a finger. Three fingers are still pointing back at you.

While they maintain a good moral center in their life, they do not practice this faith as the disciples did.

Islam and Mormons are there are mirrors, reflecting what you yourself are doing. The disciples did not practice the kind of faith Jesus practiced, and so, did not believe they nor anyone else but Jesus was the Son of God. So, they were not ready to follow his example at that time.

If anyone had it right, it wasn't the "church fathers," it was those who walked with Messiah.

You are making an assumption…a judgment. It is not well-founded. If anything, those who walked with Jesus got it wrong, which is why anyone who puts faith in authority-by-association will get it wrong. Jesus got it right. Everything we know – biblically - about Jesus is from those who got it wrong.

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Any heretic can say these words about his own belief system. They are not worth the paper they are printed on.

Mans's logic, personal experiances, traditions, nor the rudiments of the world should not ever be preached in a manner which trumps established scripture.

Here again, you are reinforcing the very sin that prevents you from understanding what is true. There is only one explanation for this kind of devotion…you are interested in self-sacrifice…in self-crucifixion…in self-sabotage. This is what sin is all about. Your alledged scriptures ARE man's logic, personal experiences, traditions and rudiments!!!

"Denying life is to deny sanity," sounds great, but that has no contextual basis in scripture.

Would you blow your brains out of “scripture” told you to? You, my friend, are under a spell…not the gospel. The gospel would dispel this spell you are under, if you were interested in the truth. But, alas, the prodigal Son is not interested in the truth, but only in wandering about aimlessly. When you are “weary” of your little games, then come to Christ…the Truth.

"To be insane is to be in sin" also sounds good, even makes some sense to some degree, but sin is disobediance to God's established will.

Sin is thinking you can disobey God. This is an impossibility. God’s law cannot be broken…not even by self-proclaimed sinners. Because it is impossible to break the will of God, sin is about arrogance. God’s will has never been disobeyed but in the wild imagination of the prodigal Son, the author of “the world” story. It’s his story...his "truth"...his fiction…not God’s.

Nothing more!

This is a good example of “sin”. You have slammed down a gavel upon the truth, declaring what is not true to be the truth. Your definition of sin will trap you virtually forever…so long as you believe it. That is what sin does. It entraps…and drives your mind deep into a dark labyrinth in which you become “lost” to what is real.

Messiah is life, and denying him will bring about death... but to make the word "life" fit only in THAT parameter is cutting scripture short. It would be akin to saying the word Israel means only land, or a country... and not admit it was another name for Jacob OR a word used to describe God's people. (i.e. "My people Israel.")

I will probably end my communication with you here as you are determined to go your own way. You are not ready to be a student of mine. Come back in a thousand years, when your idea of “life” has taught you a few lessons in it's school of hard knocks. Come back when you are "weary" of this. Come back when your sword of judgement get's heavy and the fight gets futile.

True Life is all-encompassing. All is alive eternally. If not, you are denying that life is all encompassing...denying LIFE, CHRIST and the TRUTH. The intensity of your denial is what sin is all about. The Holy Spirit teaches that this is just a mistake...and cannot possibly be made true...or hurt what is true...YOU. Come back whenever you want. But I, as a man, don't plan to be "here" a thousand years. Time is an illusion which competes with the eternal for the title "reality". We wander in time till we "get" the truth. Life is the Truth. The "messiah" is anyone who will tell us the truth. Who tells us the truth, especially through demonstration, is our "savior" from a world of falsehood. As we forgive our neighbor, we will be saved...from what our neighbor appears to be. Our neighbor is our self. And our self is Christ.

[barnasha]

A sin is a conscious act which is not in harmony with divine principles.

I.e. DOING something which is consciously known as being "wrong".

[UrbanMonk]

A sin is a conscious act which is not in harmony with divine principles.

I.e. DOING something which is consciously known as being "wrong".

Barnasha, thanks for all your support heretofore. But in this I must strongly disagree. Your salvation...my salvation, depends on it.

A Being as all-encompassing as Christ does not act...because a Being of this magnitude does not "do" anything. It IS EVERYTHING. There is nothing to "do"...there are no places to "go". All doing is an imaginative game played by the prodigal Son...who "goes" here and "goes" there and does this and does that. This is a state of mind that says that what is"there" is not "within". The prodigal Son is the author of the law of perception, which enables the phenonenon of acting and doing. All actions are belief driven. The belief come first, and the act comes second. The Being known as Christ does not believe anything...consequently, does not do anything. All beliefs are beliefs...meaning, they are not true...not the truth. Therefore all actions are not the truth. What is not true is not "wrong". It is not true! Salvation is not a matter of right and wrong. It's a matter of true and false. Jesus didn't say, 'I have acted rightly'. He said, "I am the Truth". This is how he established his innocence, as well as the ability to "forgive" those who acted "wrongly" according to their beliefs...including those who nailed him to a cross. They were not guilty. The "know not what they do". Their actions were a function of insanity. Insanity is something we all share if we think we are bodies that act and do. Salvation depends on doing nothing, and Being everything. What IS has never sinned...never done anything "wrong"...because it has never done anything! All actions have been imagined. And what has been imagined does not change the Truth about who we really are as the Being known as Christ. So, unless we are Christ, we will continue to believe in "sin"...in actions that change the Truth. All acts are roboticized. They are programmed according to prescriptions scripted by the prodigal Son. They are not "conscious" at all. Actions come from a state of trance...a kind of spell cast over our mind. The gospel would dispell this spell, and teach us that we are not bodies, but Christ, who knows and does not act.

[Bosco]

A sin is a conscious act which is not in harmony with divine principles. I.e. DOING something which is consciously known as being "wrong".

This is for Urban Monk more than you Barnasha. There are different kinds of sin, do you know that? But instead of listing them, I am simply going to state the obvious, which Barnsha basically nailed... Sin is an action which goes against the established will of God. Torah defines sin. When Paul said that "all scripture is given by the inspiration of God and is profitable for...instruction IN RIGHTEOUSNESS," he wasn't speaking about the NT because there was no NT at the time. He was speaking about the Torah and Prophets!

So God tells us in clear speak what he considers to be sin, and what he considers righteous behavior. Stealing is sin... not because I believe that but because God declared it. Whether I believe stealing is a sin or not is irrelevant. Making idols and serving other gods is sin, not because I believe that, but because God stated it. Our entire life is supposed to be geared around a reconcilliation with our Creator. Creator is the key word... you didn't make me, therefore, your rules do not matter. I am indebted to YHWH, for he is our Creator. Therefore, I answer to him and no man. So if he says cheating on my wife is sin, then cheating on my wife is sin... whether I believe that, like it, respect it...or even adhere to it...cheating on my wife is sin before GOD.

Peace.
Ken

[Bosco]

Barnasha, thanks for all your support heretofore. But in this I must strongly disagree. Your salvation...my salvation, depends on it.

A Being as all-encompassing as Christ does not act...because a Being of this magnitude does not "do" anything. It IS EVERYTHING. There is nothing to "do"...there are no places to "go". All doing is an imaginative game played by the prodigal Son...who "goes" here and "goes" there and does this and does that. This is a state of mind that says that what is"there" is not "within". The prodigal Son is the author of the law of perception, which enables the phenonenon of acting and doing. All actions are belief driven. The belief come first, and the act comes second. The Being known as Christ does not believe anything...consequently, does not do anything. All beliefs are beliefs...meaning, they are not true...not the truth. Therefore all actions are not the truth. What is not true is not "wrong". It is not true! Salvation is not a matter of right and wrong. It's a matter of true and false. Jesus didn't say, 'I have acted rightly'. He said, "I am the Truth". This is how he established his innocence, as well as the ability to "forgive" those who acted "wrongly" according to their beliefs...including those who nailed him to a cross. They were not guilty. The "know not what they do". Their actions were a function of insanity. Insanity is something we all share if we think we are bodies that act and do. Salvation depends on doing nothing, and Being everything. What IS has never sinned...never done anything "wrong"...because it has never done anything! All actions have been imagined. And what has been imagined does not change the Truth about who we really are as the Being known as Christ. So, unless we are Christ, we will continue to believe in "sin"...in actions that change the Truth. All acts are roboticized. They are programmed according to prescriptions scripted by the prodigal Son. They are not "conscious" at all. Actions come from a state of trance...a kind of spell cast over our mind. The gospel would dispell this spell, and teach us that we are not bodies, but Christ, who knows and does not act.

UM...just curious... does your understanding of the prodigal son come from scripture alone or a course in miracles?

Thanks.
Ken

[Bosco]

I will probably end my communication with you here as you are determined to go your own way. You are not ready to be a student of mine. Come back in a thousand years, when your idea of “life” has taught you a few lessons in it's school of hard knocks. Come back when you are "weary" of this. Come back when your sword of judgement get's heavy and the fight gets futile.

Are you serious? No offense, but I did not come here to become a student of yours! What arrogance!! I am starting to wonder (as per my last post) if your understanding is coming from scripture or a new age source. Regardless, I KNOW this much... no man alive has the answer to every question. We are in a corruptible state, must stay on alert for deception, must study constantly and prayerfully rightly divide the Word of God... and always prove all things. You sir, seem to have your mind made up on regarding every subject concerning God. So unless you are God, (are you?) that is simply not possible. When Yehoshua returns and we are changed, made incorruptible... things will be different.

Until then, a closed mind proves an inability to learn new things. May yours open wide to more complete understanding... as you end your communication with me!

Peace.
Ken

PS... I NEVER make assumptions and if I do, I say so. Do not put words in people's mouth Urban Monk. And as for putting my trust in man because I trust scripture... open your eyes sir... if scripture isn't inspired, you have virtually no other proof "Jesus" even exists! Unless of course you are a member of some new age cult whose leader has some special connection to God. (Just don't drink the Koolaide!) ;-)

[John Goddard]

Are you serious? No offense, but I did not come here to become a student of yours! What arrogance!!

Urban Monk saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. :lol:

[UrbanMonk]

UM...just curious... does your understanding of the prodigal son come from scripture alone or a course in miracles?

Thanks.
Ken

The source you mention is clear that the story of the prodigal Son is about the Son of God, not about men. Here is an eight sentence mention...

No-one created by God can find joy in anything except the eternal. That is not because he is DEPRIVED of anything else, but because nothing else is worthy of him. What God AND His Sons create is eternal, and in this and this only is their joy. Listen to the story of the prodigal son, and learn what God's treasure is and yours:

This son of a loving father left his home and thought he squandered everything for nothing of any value, though he did not know its worthlessness at the time. He was ashamed to return to his father, because he thought he had hurt him. But when he came home the father welcomed him with joy, because only the son himself was his father's treasure. HE WANTED NOTHING ELSE.

"Man" is how the prodigal Son expresses the denial of divine sonship/heritage.

[UrbanMonk]

This is for Urban Monk more than you Barnasha. There are different kinds of sin, do you know that?

No there aren't. There is only one: "unbelief"... in Christ. Unbelief in Christ translates into faith in what is anti-christ. This is the "faith" that made the world...faith being the "evidence" of things hoped for, the "substance" of things unseen. So, it is faith in anti-christ that puts mountains in place, and faith in Christ which removes them.

But instead of listing them, I am simply going to state the obvious, which Barnsha basically nailed... Sin is an action which goes against the established will of God.

Sin is faith in what is anti-christ...faith in all that is not true..faith in fantasies...faith in more than God. More than God yields "man" and his "actions" through the imagination of the prodigal Son. The Truth does not recognize more than God. So, the prodigal Son and his action figures are of no consequence...and do not change the Truth. They do not exist because there is no world because there is not more than God. There is no such thing as God AND the world...or anything different from God. Sin, in the mind of the prodigal Son, builds a world out of "nothing" upon false premises (sand). It is temporary - of time - and will pass away at the end of time.

Torah defines sin.

John chapter 16 defines sin: unbelief in Christ.

When Paul said that "all scripture is given by the inspiration of God and is profitable for...instruction IN RIGHTEOUSNESS," he wasn't speaking about the NT because there was no NT at the time. He was speaking about the Torah and Prophets!

Then P(s)aul was a Gamaliel trained Pharisee the likes of whom Jesus warned us: "Beware the leaven of the Pharisees".

So God tells us in clear speak what he considers to be sin, and what he considers righteous behavior.

Sin and righteousness are defined in John chapter 16. Don't pretend they are anything else from the "old". Don't try to put new wine into old wine skins.

Stealing is sin... not because I believe that but because God declared it.

The prodigal Son steals God's identity, calling himself "God". This is identity theft. It is consequent of unbelief in Christ. Unbelief in Christ is still the only sin involved here.

Whether I believe stealing is a sin or not is irrelevant.

Whether you believe in Christ or not is all that is relevant.

Making idols and serving other gods is sin,

Man is an idol...a graven image, made in the imagination of the prodigal Son. The prodigal Son is another "god". This all derives from unbelief in Christ.

Creator is the key word... you didn't make me, therefore, your rules do not matter.

You, the "son of man", are made in the imagination of the prodigal Son. You, the "son of man" are an idol in the temple of God, an engine of destruction against the mind (temple) of Christ.

I am indebted to YHWH, for he is our Creator.

YHWH is the prodigal Son.

Therefore, I answer to him and no man.

Whether you answer to man or man's maker, it is the same.

So if he says cheating on my wife is sin, then cheating on my wife is sin... whether I believe that, like it, respect it...or even adhere to it...cheating on my wife is sin before GOD.

There would be no such thing as male and female but for sin...unbelief in Christ. There is no male or female in Christ.

[Bosco]

The source you mention is clear that the story of the prodigal Son is about the Son of God, not about men. Here is an eight sentence mention...



"Man" is how the prodigal Son expresses the denial of divine sonship/heritage.

So the answer to my question is, you get your understanding of the prodigal son from an outside of scripture source. Thanks.

Peace.
Ken

[Bosco]

Urban Monk, I fear for you. A Course in Miracles is not scripture, at best it is one man's interpretation of scripture. We should NEVER place all our eggs in one basket, for no man is infallible!

You (and your sources) say sin is unbelief.... scripture says otherwise:

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the Torah: for sin is the transgression of the Torah.

We follow man or we follow God. Scripture is inspired by God and can't be contradicted, or it isn't inspired and we make up our own rules....create God in OUR image.

Peace.
Ken

[Bosco]

Lastly Urban Monk, I want to address something you wrote. Many make mistakes like these, I see it often.

You wrote: "Insanity and "sin" are "sin"-onymous."

Well, let's look at the words....

insane
1560, from L. insanus "mad, insane, outrageous, excessive, extravagant," from in- "not" + sanus (see sane). Originally only of persons; of actions, from 1842. Cf. lunatic; and It. pazzo "insane," originally a euphemism, from L. patiens "suffering." Ger. verrückt, lit. pp. of verrücken "to displace," "applied to the brain as to a clock that is 'out of order' ".

So insane is from a Latin word and was transliterated into English as insane in 1560.

The origin is the word sin is uncertain, (OE?) but defined according to Websters and Dictionary.com as a transgression of divine law. Noah Wesbters 1828 dictionary says sin is: the "voluntary departure" of moral structure... in this case, God's law.

So insane is being mad (crazy) and sin is a voluntary act against the will of God. (That's really transgression when looking at the original languages, but I need not bother with that now) How are they sYnonomous then? They don't mean the same thing and appear to derive from two different languages? Just because two words sound the same do not mean they are the same in origin. Many Sacred Name groups liken the name Jesus to Zeus, which is, well, it's stupid! Just because they sound similar (Jesus in Greek has an ending that sounds similar to Zeus) does not mean they are. Greek has a Z (zeta) and Iesous does not contain said Z. It is simply bad scholarship. So is likening sin to synonomous. Two different meanings, two different words, two different languages!

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

So the answer to my question is, you get your understanding of the prodigal son from an outside of scripture source. Thanks.

Peace.
Ken

No. I get it from my Guide within. The source you mentioned is a source I was Guided toward. I selected it according to my internal Guidance. That source is still within me...because all things are within me. True thoughts are within me, and false thought are within me. My internal Guide helps me sort out the difference between the true and the false, between the sheep and the goats, between the wheat and the tares. That is "the Way".

[UrbanMonk]

Urban Monk, I fear for you. A Course in Miracles is not scripture, at best it is one man's interpretation of scripture. We should NEVER place all our eggs in one basket, for no man is infallible!

You (and your sources) say sin is unbelief.... scripture says otherwise:

1Jn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the Torah: for sin is the transgression of the Torah.

We follow man or we follow God. Scripture is inspired by God and can't be contradicted, or it isn't inspired and we make up our own rules....create God in OUR image.

Peace.
Ken

My internal Guide defines what words mean, how they are similar, and how they are disimilar. My internal Guide is the Word of God.

[RBerman]

My internal Guide defines what words mean, how they are similar, and how they are disimilar. My internal Guide is the Word of God.
Your internal guide is at best the voice of your own ego, at worst a demonic influence, because it doesn't teach you what Jesus taught. Also, you left off with our conversation back here. (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2756722&postcount=36)

[Bosco]

My internal Guide defines what words mean, how they are similar, and how they are disimilar. My internal Guide is the Word of God.

Then your internal guide is leading you astray. Words are words, languages are languages, and they are in pen and ink for all to study. One cannot take a word that sounds like another word and assume it is the same as another. Well, you can do that all you want, but it doesn't make you right. Sin is defined by God, not by Websters or even Urban Monk. Insanity is defined by it's Latin usage as well as by those who brought it into English.

Urban Monk, somebody decided to call a tree a tree. So the hard wooded (or soft wooded) plant that grows tall, is perennial, has leaves, maybe fruit... whose leaves die off each fall and come back every spring... that is a tree. If your inner guide (or the author of a course in miracles) says the metal object with an engine that uses gas to run and has 4 wheels is a tree, they (or you) would be wrong. A tree is a tree. Sin is defined by God, an action you take which stands against his laws... that is sin. Insanity comes from the word insane, and means mad, crazy. You can change the meaning just like homosexuals want to change the definition of marriage (I guess their inner guide told them to)... but that doesn't make it correct.

Peace.
Ken

[John Goddard]

Then your internal guide is leading you astray.

Spirit guides can go by many names. Often they connect with more than one people at a time, using identities that are comfortable to those they communicate with. (http://www.crystalinks.com/spirit_guides.html)

[Bosco]

My internal Guide defines what words mean, how they are similar, and how they are disimilar. My internal Guide is the Word of God.

In ANY place in scripture...old testament, new testament, is there EVER a time when the phrase "my internal guide" is used? If you answer yes I guess I would need to know which new version has decided to translate a word or phrase in that way. If you say no, then you are admitting you are walking according to your own will and not according to inspired scripture. And that's ok if it works for you.... but all you have when you disregard scripture like that or pick and choose which parts you think are applicable to your new found ideology is a new religion based on personal experience and man's logic, and not God's. Without the Tanach or Brit Chadasha (OT/NT) working together to bring us understanding and revelation, we have nothing but ourselves and our own logic making God into an image we want him to appear in. Disregard what I say, go ahead, but think about that last line for more than 10 seconds at least.

I wish you well.
Peace.
Ken

[Bosco]

Spirit guides can go by many names. Often they connect with more than one people at a time, using identities that are comfortable to those they communicate with. (http://www.crystalinks.com/spirit_guides.html)

I work late night at times from home, I screen print. So I have the Coast to Coast radio show on and have heard the term and guests sharing their views on this often. All I can say John, and thanks for sharing it, is this.....

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Angels are spirits, and there is a HOST of them who have followed the adversary and indeed, preach "other gospels." I am not judging UM unto condemnation, that is not my job. But he is clearly attempting to teach another gospel!

Who is called GREAT in the kingdom of heaven? Who is called the LEAST?

Mat 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

UM is not teaching commandments, he is teaching new age spirit guide theology which has no foundation in scripture at all. Sure he (they) use some scripture to back their positions... but so do snake handlers. Context, the whole of scripture... must be weighed together and we are to prove all things by "rightly dividing the Word of Truth." Not only is Yehoshua the Word of truth, but what he spoke is the Word of truth.

Eph 1:13a In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth

And where is that word of truth they heard today? It was written and recorded and is now considered scripture. The apostolic writings is that record.

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

Your internal guide is at best the voice of your own ego, at worst a demonic influence, because it doesn't teach you what Jesus taught. Also, you left off with our conversation back here. (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2756722&postcount=36)

There are at any given moment, a voice which represents us, and a voice that doesn't...."within". You have correctly identified one of them as the "ego", or whatever other word you want to call it. The other is the Word of God...the Good Shepherd...the Spirit of Truth...the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit tells us we are the beloved Son of God, the other "spirit" resists this...and fights against it using it's own brand of "logic" and word-magic to justify it's position.

So all you have to do is listen to the Voice that reinforces the idea that you are the beloved Son of God, and dismiss the other...to begin hearing the Voice of the Good Shepherd. If you listen to the Spirit of Truth, you will be "baptized"....that is, cleansed of doubts, and "reasons" why you are not the beloved Son of God. When your baptism is finished, you will emerge on the other side as the beloved Son of God. Till this end is your goal, don't even bother calling yourself a christian.

I am vigilant to the fact that at any given moment, I may be listening to the spirit of untruth. It is because of my vigilance that I am more often than not, a mouthpiece for communicating messages from the Spirit of Truth. As I listen, I speak. It is not my intent to speak my own words, that is, the words of the spirit of untruth. So, it's not likely that is the case.

Oh, I teach what Jesus taught alright. No doubt about it. You just aren't ready to hear...and so you are not yet ready to understand. Lay your "self" aside, and hear the Voice representing the Self God gave you for your salvation.

I will pick up on where I left off before.

[UrbanMonk]

In ANY place in scripture...old testament, new testament, is there EVER a time when the phrase "my internal guide" is used?

Yes, Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice". He didn't say, 'My sheep read the old testament'. Jesus didn't carry a bible with him. He listened and spoke. That is all I am doing.

If you answer yes I guess I would need to know which new version has decided to translate a word or phrase in that way.

I just translated the above phrase. I have the authority to do so because I hear the Voice of the Good Shepherd. As I allow myself to be Guided, I am able to guide. My Guide is a better guide than I, so I follow, until we are the same caliber of teacher, in fact, the same Teacher.

If you say no, then you are admitting you are walking according to your own will and not according to inspired scripture.

Brother, all scripture, both true and false, leading and misleading...is within me, just as the Kingdom of God is within me. The Spirit of Truth points me in the direction of green pastures, and away from wasteland. If you want to forage for food in a wasteland it's up to you. Meanwhile, I will enjoy DAILY BREAD.

And that's ok if it works for you.... but all you have when you disregard scripture like that or pick and choose which parts you think are applicable to your new found ideology is a new religion based on personal experience and man's logic, and not God's.

I'm going to point out just how hypocritical you are about this. What gives you the right to choose any text whatsoever, let alone the bible, as your daily bread? Have you chosen a text? How did you choose? Have you rejected other texts? On what basis did you reject them?

So, you are doing the exact same thing I'm doing, except you are choosing, from an internal/personal point of view, what you want to be called "the truth". And if you are listening to the spirit of untruth - which is always ready to speak at a moments notice - then you will choose foolishly instead of wisely.

You are being hypocritical, because even should you choose some kind of Pope, it is YOU WHO HAVE CHOSEN...and the accuracy of your selection will be based on WHO YOU THINK YOU ARE.

Without the Tanach or Brit Chadasha (OT/NT) working together to bring us understanding and revelation, we have nothing but ourselves and our own logic making God into an image we want him to appear in.

You see, you have chosen a text(s)...YOU! I select some phrases from your text...and interpret them...because some of the phrases came from an authentic teaching legacy. I simply restore (redeem) their original meaning through the help I recieve from the Spirit of Truth within me. This is a selection and rejection process...separating the sheep (thoughts) from the goat (thoughts). You have selected and rejected too, according to which spirit?

Disregard what I say, go ahead, but think about that last line for more than 10 seconds at least.

You have chosen, from within you, to select texts that make God into an image you want him to appear in, using logic from that text, to justify your selection. Don't you see you've got yourself into a logic loop? YOU stepped into it, and pretend to be bound by it. Therefore, YOU have the power to step out of it...if you want.

[UrbanMonk]

UM is not teaching commandments, he is teaching new age spirit guide theology which has no foundation in scripture at all.

It doesn't have any foundation in Harry Potter either, so what? YOU have selected "scripture" over other fictions in which to believe, wholeheartedly. I have given my whole heart to the love of God, and the love of my neighbor as my self. YOU have selected what you call "the truth". Now, I am calling on you to "sell" everything you ever thought you knew was "the truth"...and follow me...or not. Sell your beloved Tanach on Ebay...because you can't go where I'm going unless you go the way I go.

Sure he (they) use some scripture to back their positions... but so do snake handlers.

So do Pharisees. Again, SELL everything you ever thought you knew about salvation and how to achieve eternal life. THEN, follow me...or not.

Context, the whole of scripture... must be weighed together and we are to prove all things by "rightly dividing the Word of Truth."

Let us not continue with this hypocricy. YOU are dividing and combining text(s) you call "the truth" ACCORDING TO YOUR OWN CHOICE OF WHICH SPIRIT YOU CHOOSE TO LISTEN TO AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT. The text itself is "dead letters" that will deliever death to your door UNLESS YOU INTERPRET WITH THE SPIRIT OF TRUTH.


Not only is Yehoshua the Word of truth, but what he spoke is the Word of truth.

Yes, and as I speak the words of the Word of Truth within me, I too shall be cleansed of any and all "logic" or "reason" which says that I am not the Truth. This is "the Way". Speak and be. Teach and reach. Follow or wallow. Begin by letting the Word of Truth speak through "you"...until "you" no longer exist, and only the Word of Truth remains where once there was a "person" in a "body". In this way, you give your hand, feet, eyes and mouth to Christ...to be Christ.

And where is that word of truth they heard today?

It is written on your heart...within. You just aren't hearing it because you are not ready for what it tells you.


It was written and recorded and is now considered scripture.

Then, when I write, you may consider it to be scripture.

The apostolic writings is that record.

Unless their record has been tampered with, embellished, lost, rejected, edited...or unless they listened to the "logic" of the spirit of untruth...which is ready to speak in the name of "God" at a moments notice. In the records that you accept, there is more evidence that they didn't understand, than they did.

[John Goddard]

So all you have to do is listen to the Voice that reinforces the idea that you are the beloved Son of God, and dismiss the other...

Again, SELL everything you ever thought you knew about salvation and how to achieve eternal life. THEN, follow me...or not.

Why would we need to follow you if we are Christs like you?

Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

You are just looking to dazzle the ignorant and gain a following, not here to discuss the real Gospels and Scriptures of the Bible.

(like Brother Daniel over at ulc.org :wink:)

[UrbanMonk]

Why would we need to follow you if we are Christs like you?

Because there is a temporary lag in our learning curves. We are equals in eternity, and temporarily unequal in time. Jesus is behind the Holy Spirit (who represents Christ in the "world"), I am behind Jesus, and you are behind me.

[John Goddard]

Because there is a temporary lag in our learning curves. We are equals in eternity, and temporarily unequal in time. Jesus is behind the Holy Spirit (who represents Christ in the "world"), I am behind Jesus, and you are behind me.

So if you are behind Jesus and I am behind you, gee, it sounds like you are describing a hierarchy.

Goddard is proposing a heirarchy, which is not really monotheistic unless there is a single "god" at the top and non-gods below. Goddard promotes the dollar-bill scenario (pyramid and all-seeing eye). I say that all are born equal in the Kingdom of God.

You can't even remember what you say from one post to the next your doctrine is so corrupt. :lol:

[UrbanMonk]

You are just looking to dazzle the ignorant and gain a following, not here to discuss the real Gospels and Scriptures of the Bible.

Think of me as the student sitting in the front row. I am letting the Teacher teach through me. The lessons are for me first. If anyone else can benefit from them, so be it. My task is to learn first...as I teach. Your next assumption is truly disengenuous. Reference to my preferred text has been banned, so I have been cross-examining the tesimony of the witness (the bible) you are bringing against my testimony of Christ and the equality within the Kingdom of God. And I've shown your witness to speak with a forked-tongue from a double-minded position. I merely select what testimony supports the universality of Christ as the only name by which we may be saved. And unless the name of Christ is also our name, we will not be saved, having refused the only name that saves.

[John Goddard]

Think of me as the student sitting in the front row...

...teaching everyone else to follow you in a hierarchical system you say you are against.

You're not going to squirm out of such doubletalk unless you admit you are wrong on at least one of your points.

Then maybe you can start fresh with some credibility.

[UrbanMonk]

So if you are behind Jesus and I am behind you, gee, it sounds like you are describing a hierarchy.

You can follow me or not. If you don't, you will follow something else, defaulting to a heirarchy of sorts....IF you can call a temporary lag in learning curve a heirarchy. But then you'd be stretching the truth for word-magic kicks. The Teacher teaches those who have imposed upon themselves ignorance...that they are equals equal to the Teacher...and equal to One the Teacher represents. You could, theoretically, bypass me and learn directly from the Teacher. You will do this eventually, whether you follow me or not. Till then, you have an opportunity to follow...that your way may be hastened upon the path that leads where Jesus leads us...TO CHRIST AS SELF. Because you are an equal, if you don't follow me, you are allowed to go your own way, as long as you like. But it won't be the way that Jesus went, and will never end until you go the way he went. Only the truth will set you free.

[John Goddard]

You can follow me or not. If you don't, you will follow something else, defaulting to a heirarchy of sorts....

You said earlier, "We are "god" with or without a heirarchy because it is the truth. Heirarchy is what "gods" do with thier power..."

So you are trying to establish yourself as a God over other men in a hierarchy of others as your mortal followers.

Which means you are a nut. :lolo:

[UrbanMonk]

...teaching everyone else to follow you in a hierarchical system you say you are against.


Is a temporary lag in a learning curve between one mind and another a heirarchy? If it is, then there is only a heirarchy of students who are learning that they are equal. In that case, you would be like a sophomore, and I would be like a senior and Jesus would be like a "master". The master teaches equality, and I teach equality to you...who still believe in heirarchy. So you will continue to fall behind as you mock the lessons of the master and his student aids. Pretending to be wise, you merely show that you are a sophomore in terms of the temporary lag in learning curves on our way to the reality of equality.

[UrbanMonk]

You said earlier, "We are "god" with or without a heirarchy because it is the truth. Heirarchy is what "gods" do with thier power..."

So you are trying to establish yourself as a God over other men in a hierarchy of others as your mortal followers.

No. It only shows you are needing a special tutor for reading comprehension skills. We have all been given unlimited power from our Father equal to his own. Our power is is irrevocable. Therefore, no matter how we use our power, we are still with our power, and we are still equal to God. When we use our power to express plurality and inequality through heirarchy, we merely default to a game that "gods" play. You still want to play the game. I don't. When every mind understands and accepts that equality is not a game, its "game over" for inequality and the "iniquity" (fruit of inequality) that it yields.

[John Goddard]

Pretending to be wise, you merely show that you are a sophomore in terms of the temporary lag in learning curves on our way to the reality of equality.

But you said we are all equal from birth, so there is "no on our way..."

I say that all are born equal in the Kingdom of God.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, just to set yourself up as someone with "special knowledge" in the meantime.

Seems you are new at this game, compared to those who are ahead of you. Like me.

When you start talking about yourself as the solution as much as you talk about the Gospels and more, your are setting yourself up to be a false prophet.

You guys are like spoiled little kids with new toys, you go around bragging to all the other kids in the neighborhood about how they can play if they just obey your every whim.

Then a bigger kid comes along and rips it out of your hands and smashes it to the ground. And then you cry.

So you better start all over again. Try using the Bible this time.

[UrbanMonk]

But you said we are all equal from birth, so there is "no on our way..."

I said we are equal in terms of our birth of the Spirit...of our eternal heritage. As "god" toying with inequality, not one "person" is born the same as another. To be "born again", we must deny what makes us unequal...deny it is our genesis...deny it is our origin...deny it is our "father". Instead, we must insist we are born of Spirit as equals in the Kingdom of God, which still abides "within" despite every appearance that would show us otherwise. In believing our divine heritage, we must also disbelieve any other kind of heritage, be it physical, national, genetic, or gender oriented.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, just to set yourself up as someone with "special knowledge" in the meantime.

We can't avoid the temporary differences that appear as one learning curve exceeds another. The difference is in how special status is converted to save ourselves instead of damn ourselves. In insisting we are equals at the highest possible divine "level" (there are no levels in reality), I appear to be difference, hence, special. It goes with the territory. Deal with it. The conversion process takes everything we ever made to hurt ourselves (specialness) and uses it to save ourselves. This is a function of God's plan for our salvation...not mine.

Seems you are new at this game, compared to those who are ahead of you. Like me.

Brother, this game goes back before the beginning of time, and I've been in it as long as you. The difference is that while you may decieve yourself, you can't decieve me. I acknowledge who and what you are, and overlook who and what you are NOT.

When you start talking about yourself as the solution as much as you talk about the Gospels and more, your are setting yourself up to be a false prophet.

If you print out what I've scribed here, and put it in a three-ringed binder, you've got yourself a "gospel" as "good" as any "news" you've ever heard of. Why fight scripture when you can write it?

You guys are like spoiled little kids with new toys, you go around bragging to all the other kids in the neighborhood about how they can play if they just obey your every whim.

Obedience belongs to, your dictionary, your world, your heirarchy, your domain, your game. There is no obedience among equals. There are only games. And there is only one way to escape from the game you play. It is not a matter of obedience. Its a matter of healing and truth.

[Bosco]

I'm going to point out just how hypocritical you are about this. What gives you the right to choose any text whatsoever, let alone the bible, as your daily bread? Have you chosen a text? How did you choose? Have you rejected other texts? On what basis did you reject them?

I accept that the Torah, Prophets, Writings, (Tanach) and the Brit Chadasha (NT) are inspired by God. Without the latter, you can't even prove Yehoshua existed to any great extent at all. What version do I use? All of them, mainly, the Hebrew and Greek/Aramaic manuscripts our versions are translated from.

So, you are doing the exact same thing I'm doing, except you are choosing, from an internal/personal point of view, what you want to be called "the truth". And if you are listening to the spirit of untruth - which is always ready to speak at a moments notice - then you will choose foolishly instead of wisely.

You ask me a question, and before I answer, you provide yourself with my answer. 10 years ago my choices were personal, and I believed many doctrines which do not align to scripture. Was I lost? I do not believe so, redemption is a process.

Isa 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts

Heb 5:14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

You are being hypocritical, because even should you choose some kind of Pope, it is YOU WHO HAVE CHOSEN...and the accuracy of your selection will be based on WHO YOU THINK YOU ARE.

My choices are not my own. I did not WANT to leave the church I was a member of to explore the roots of the faith... I was clearly led to do this through a series of events which can only have come from God. My desire to please God, to do things His way and not MY way are paramount and at the forefront of my head and heart at all times.

separating the sheep (thoughts) from the goat (thoughts). You have selected and rejected too, according to which spirit?

Again, you are taking words which are clearly defined in scripture and making them become something they were not meant to be.

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Is "sheep" in the above verse just a thought, or those who were dispersed after Babylon and Assyria? Your translation has the above saying, "I am not sent but unto the lost thoughts of the house of Israel." That makes no sense.

You have chosen, from within you, to select texts that make God into an image you want him to appear in, using logic from that text, to justify your selection. Don't you see you've got yourself into a logic loop? YOU stepped into it, and pretend to be bound by it. Therefore, YOU have the power to step out of it...if you want.

Amusing you use the same exact line on me I used on you. I am allowing scripture to speak to me through the spirit... I allow scripture to define God. You seem to be using outside sources and non-scriptural terms to define God. In any event Urban Monk, I have enjoyed our conversation, but I see no reason to continue. You have correctly stated that I am no student of yours, and your mind is closed to others who use "texts" to learn, so we have little more to say to each other. Respond if you must.

I wish you well.
Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

Is "sheep" in the above verse just a thought, or those who were dispersed after Babylon and Assyria? Your translation has the above saying, "I am not sent but unto the lost thoughts of the house of Israel." That makes no sense.


The house of Israel is a metaphor for the prodigal Son...who is lost. Israel is one nation which is a metaphor for all nations. The problems of Israel are the problems of the world...are the problems of the prodigal Son. The prodigal Son is a fragmented being, each being going it's own way. Each "being" in the prodigal Son's mind is a "thought". These thoughts are being redeemed...re-esteemed...re-interpreted...re-translated...re-formed. They are hybrids...half-breeds...half goat (false), half sheep (true). The idea is to separate what is false from what is true about the prodigal Son and its thoughts. This is the essence of "religion". Using the "Matrix" as a metaphor, religion is about separating man from machine. Only, in the kind of redemption Jesus is offering, man is the machine, and mind is what's real (true). Salvation is for the mind...NOT man....for the Thought(s) of God...NOT the thoughts of the prodigal Son.

[Bosco]

[QUOTE=UrbanMonk;2758601]The house of Israel is a metaphor for the prodigal Son..../QUOTE]

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

You're probably right.

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

[QUOTE=UrbanMonk;2758601]The house of Israel is a metaphor for the prodigal Son..../QUOTE]

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

You're probably right.

Peace.
Ken

The old covenant is an agreement amongst ourselves to love each other covertly.
The new covenant is an agreement amongst ourselves to love each other overtly.

I can explain this in more detail.

The old covenant is about self-crucifixion.
The new covenant is about Self-resurrection.

In the old, we are one covertly, conspiring to hurt ourselves.
In the new, the old is exposed to the light, and we are one overtly, conspiring to heal ourselves.

In both covenants, we are given what we have asked for. Therefore, both are about love. In the new, we simply decide that we don't want to use our brothers to hurt ourselves...don't want to participate in the blame game...don't want to want spend our lives according to a pre-scripted existence in which we really have no freedom except to fulfill our roles, be they noble or ignoble. Either way, the Law of Love has never been broken, therefore, we are innocent (sinless), and worthy of forgiveness.

[John Goddard]

I said we are equal in terms of our birth of the Spirit...of our eternal heritage.

An eternal spirit is not born, it is eternal. If God is eternal but our spirits are born, then there is still a spiritual hierarchy with God at the top.

As "god" toying with inequality, not one "person" is born the same as another.

You still propose a hierarchy as the only tangible solution. By your own language, you as Ascended Master helped by a Spirit Guide at the top, your students at the bottom.

Your intentions may not be ominous, just horribly confused. I'm undecided.

[Bosco]

[QUOTE=Bosco;2758603]

The old covenant is an agreement amongst ourselves to love each other covertly.
The new covenant is an agreement amongst ourselves to love each other overtly.

I can explain this in more detail.

The old covenant is about self-crucifixion.
The new covenant is about Self-resurrection.

In the old, we are one covertly, conspiring to hurt ourselves.
In the new, the old is exposed to the light, and we are one overtly, conspiring to heal ourselves.

In both covenants, we are given what we have asked for. Therefore, both are about love. In the new, we simply decide that we don't want to use our brothers to hurt ourselves...don't want to participate in the blame game...don't want to want spend our lives according to a pre-scripted existence in which we really have no freedom except to fulfill our roles, be they noble or ignoble. Either way, the Law of Love has never been broken, therefore, we are innocent (sinless), and worthy of forgiveness.

The word for "new" in relation to the covenant in Jeremiah 31 is chadasha, which from it's root means "renewed," not new. When that set of verses is repeated in Hebrews 8, the Greek word kainos is used, which also means renewed. The Greek word for new, nehos, is not used in those verses. So covertly, overtly....(?).....irrelevant seeing the word new isn't new at all anyway but renewed. Not popular, not going to be accepted by most... but that is what chadasha and kainos mean.

Peace.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

An eternal spirit is not born, it is eternal. If God is eternal but our spirits are born, then there is still a spiritual hierarchy with God at the top.

Those who have damned themselves to words and time have a hard time understanding words that describe a wordless realm that has nothing in common with what has been imagined as physical, and therefore "real". So, "born" is a word to help link one's understanding of the physical with the spiritual...as in "born again"..."of the Spirit". "Born" is not a reference to a heirarchal type of birth of a human nature. "Born" is a reference to how Spirit is born..."without beginning and without end".

Born of the Spirit, there is no "top", because what is "born" is an equal. But there is a FIRST such that there is Creator and Created...Cause and Effect. It's for this reason that Jesus used the metaphor of "Father" and "Son". Accordingly, the Son is a Creator...making the Son a FIRST. In this way, the Father and Son maintain an equality. Both are "Father/FIRST/Creator". In this way, the Kingdom of God is constantly being shared/extended.

When cause and effect are reversed, all hell breaks loose, so-to-speak. This is what ignites the beginning of the world, an imaginary conceptual realm in which everything is backwards masked. The solution involves putting cause and effect back in order. For this reason Jesus was keen to acknowledge our "Father", unlike the prodigal son who denies his Father fatherhood, and makes his own father instead, and gives it all the titles belonging to "our Father". But the "father" of the prodigal son is of his own making, thus reversing cause and effect, making the son his own father. Such a father is an idol. And yet, that is what makes "the world"...a GREAT REVERSAL of cause and effect. This means that man is responsible for everything that happens to him...even though it appears that man is not the cause of what happens to him. And if man is responsible for what happens to him, he must, somehow, be responsible for the world around him. This is hidden under layers of psycho-secrecy within a compartmentalized mind.

You still propose a hierarchy as the only tangible solution. By your own language, you as Ascended Master helped by a Spirit Guide at the top, your students at the bottom.

The Spirit Guide is for teaching what has imposed a heirarchal existence upon itself by dumbing itself down through self-imposed ignorance. Having learned to be unequal, the mind must now learn how to be equal again. If you wish to continue to insist that this IS a heirarchy, then you are resisting the lessons of the Spirit Guide...choosing to remain a sophomore by your own volition...oblivious to your own dishonesty. Salvation is for mind...for what has confused itself....for one mind that has fragmented itself into compartments and levels in spite of the ultimate impossibility of such an endeavor. It's a game for "gods". Seems you are not yet finished playing hard ball.

Your intentions may not be ominous, just horribly confused.

I am very consistent in my presentation. You are looking for a weak link. But you are coming from - judging from - a confused point of view. Simply be honest. That is the only way to counter a condition - the "world" - that initiates with self-deception. Salvation calls for extreme self-honesty.

[UrbanMonk]

The word for "new" in relation to the covenant in Jeremiah 31 is chadasha, which from it's root means "renewed," not new. When that set of verses is repeated in Hebrews 8, the Greek word kainos is used, which also means renewed. The Greek word for new, nehos, is not used in those verses. So covertly, overtly....(?).....irrelevant seeing the word new isn't new at all anyway but renewed. Not popular, not going to be accepted by most... but that is what chadasha and kainos mean.

Peace.
Ken

The interpretation I've given you is of the Spirit Guide...not of an archane set of books in foreign languages. It's not what the word is (the form)....it's what the words mean when strung together. As they are written by Spirit, you must listen and read WITH Spirit...not with dead letters. Are you seriously quibbling over the difference between "new" and "renew"? That's like quibbling over a gifted sack of gold coins because the sack is gold colored, but not actually made of gold. This gives "new" meaning to the usefulness of self-imposed ignorance , which is what it takes to maintain such a silly little world.

Let's review...

The old covenant describes how the Son of God is "crucified."
The new covenant describes how the Son of God is "resurrected."

The whole bible can be considered part of the old covenant. It describes the crucifixion of the Son of God...and crucifies the truth. The new covenant must rely on other texts, if it relies on texts at all. Rather, it relies on the Spirit of Truth to speak to us directly. If we cannot hear, the Spirit can Guide us to texts (green pastures) that can help us hear better. Once we hear better, we do not need the texts....because what we need to know is "written on our hearts".

[UrbanMonk]

Originally posted by UrbanMonk
Excuse me but Jesus never died. I don't consider three days R and R to be death.

Why not?

Even according to the orthodoxy, Jesus was anything but dead for three days, but rather, preaching to those in hell. Clearly, "death" and "gone" are synonymous depending on ones perspective. Jesus translated "death" as "sleep". He didn't believe in total annihilation. So at best he was fully awake, and at worst, just sleeping. Anything but "dead".

Once again, there has been no sacrifice unless you think that three days gone from the world is a sacrifice. When a soldier goes on leave, do we say he is "dead"? Finally, you are equating the truth to a body if you actually think the truth died for three days. But the body is not the Truth, so the Truth was not really dead during a time when we could not see "Jesus" because of the invisibility of his Mind-Spirit reality.

So where is the sacrifice? On the other hand, if the glory God gave the Son of God is somehow confined to an inglorious body...then yes, we may be able to call this a sacrifice. Conversely, release from the body cannot be interpreted as a sacrifice, but as freedom. So as far as I can tell, Jesus was free for three days. And when he seemed to return, he was in and out, appearing and disappearing at will. If anything, this is a demonstration of the reality of the mind, and the unreality of the body....the mind's ability to either confine (destroy) itself, or release (rebuild) itself.

What then is torture? How does torture save us?

[RBerman]

Even according to the orthodoxy, Jesus was anything but dead for three days, but rather, preaching to those in hell. Clearly, "death" and "gone" are synonymous depending on ones perspective. Jesus translated "death" as "sleep". He didn't believe in total annihilation. So at best he was fully awake, and at worst, just sleeping. Anything but "dead".

That doesn't follow at all. Even assuming that Jesus was preaching to those in Hell (which I'm not convinced of at all from the Bible, but I'll grant it for the sake of argument), those in Hell were dead (long dead, most of them), so Jesus would have been dead if he were talking to them. I don't know how "gone" enters into this discussion. "Sleep" was a common way to talk about death, since the dead and the sleeping both don't do anything but lie there. But Jesus was not shy about talking about death either:

[Jesus] went on to tell them, "Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up."

His disciples replied, "Lord, if he sleeps, he will get better."

Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. So then he told them plainly, "Lazarus is dead, and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him."

Then Thomas (called Didymus) said to the rest of the disciples, "Let us also go, that we may die with him."

[John Goddard]

Born of the Spirit, there is no "top", because what is "born" is an equal. But there is a FIRST such that there is Creator and Created...Cause and Effect. It's for this reason that Jesus used the metaphor of "Father" and "Son". Accordingly, the Son is a Creator...making the Son a FIRST. In this way, the Father and Son maintain an equality. Both are "Father/FIRST/Creator". In this way, the Kingdom of God is constantly being shared/extended.

I can agree somewhat, in that Jesus gave up his own will in favor of God's Will, through obedience, Matthew 26:39, Hebrews 5:8-9, etc.

And then he had God's Will, proving himself equal to God's Will, with all the power of God. And passing it on.

Revelation 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

A problem I have had with your argument, without deviating into personal suspicions, is that you deny the obedience and hierarchy that Jesus had to display before proving himself obedient to God's Will.

And that Jesus and everyone else who is resurrected has God's Will only at the pleasure of God, which is the eternal hierarchy.

So it's as if you are stealing the decision of God to allow us His perfect Will to be like equals, and taking it for yourself. Without acknowledging that Jesus or anyone else could only have such equality with God's permission.

[UrbanMonk]

I can agree somewhat, in that Jesus gave up his own will in favor of God's Will, through obedience, Matthew 26:39, Hebrews 5:8-9, etc.

The kind of obedience you are conditioned to believe in is not the same kind that Jesus learned. The will of man is the concept of another will, besides the Will of God. It can't be trained to conform to the Will of God. It simply has to "die". As it dies, our true will rises to resume it's proper place. As it turns out, our true will and the Will of God...are the same. No difference. The only "obedience" involved in this process is listening to the instructions given by the Teacher/Spirit Guide/Good Shepherd...and applying them in day to day, hour to hour practice. This is a learning process. Is learning obedience? When you go to university to become a "master" whatever, do you "obey" your professor? No, you simply meet the conditions that demonstrate you are a master.

And then he had God's Will, proving himself equal to God's Will, with all the power of God. And passing it on.

The thing is, Jesus genesis is not of this world as you presume. His will was the same as God's before the foundation of this world, and when the concept of another will finally died, what was left was his true will, which is the same as God since before the foundation of the world (which is the foundation of the concept of another will). Jesus genesis if of Spirit. As such, his will has always been the same as God's except for the illusiory imposition of the concept of the world...which he made...according to the concept of another will.

We do not need to prove ourselves to God. God knows that his will and our will are the same. What we need to do is let the concept of another will be dead and gone. The Teacher/Spirit Guide instructs us on just how to accomplish this "death" of the concept of another will.

Revelation 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

That's quite an argument in support of equality. What we are attempting to overcome is the concept of another will besides our own, which is the same as God. The other will is what makes the world. So, while it seems we are overcoming the world, what we are really overcoming is our desire to make and maintain the world and its ways.

A problem I have had with your argument, without deviating into personal suspicions, is that you deny the obedience and hierarchy that Jesus had to display before proving himself obedient to God's Will.

He only needed to get the order of Cause and Effect straight, and let the concept of another will (the one that makes the world) die. This is not a test. A test is not love. What it is is the removal of what was added to the will of God...the taking down of the defenses we put up against the will of God...which, ironically, is our own true will. Jesus did what he wanted to do. He wanted to lay down his so-called "life" as another will besides the will of God, and he wanted to know himself as one with the will of God. His will for the latter was greater than his will to save the so-called "life" of another will. He did this for himself...and for us. There is no greater love. Thus, it is about love...not obedience.

And that Jesus and everyone else who is resurrected has God's Will only at the pleasure of God, which is the eternal hierarchy.

Try to understand that our heritage in Spirit is ancient, and was given us before the foundation of the world. Our will was the same as God then, and ironically, it is still the same now. We did not have to learn it or earn it. It came with the power of our eternal genesis. Jesus understood this. So when our artificial other will is removed, our real true will is revealed to us. It is not one will that decides to be evil and then decided to be good. No. Its the concept of ANOTHER WILL besides the will of God. There is no other will, and so, the expression of another will is an illusion.

So it's as if you are stealing the decision of God to allow us His perfect Will to be like equals, and taking it for yourself. Without acknowledging that Jesus or anyone else could only have such equality with God's permission.

God has already given us his will as intrinsic to our eternal heritage that dates back before the foundation of the world. How he gave it and how we accepted it is for another thread. But he gave it and we accepted it and it has never changed since. What we are experiencing is the concept of another will...beside our own will!!!! The world is not really our true will. It is merely an expression of power according to curiosity. When the wish for the world passes, the world will pass with it, and we will find ourselves home, one with the will of God as always. In other words, the world is a mind that is secretly multitasking according to the concept of another will.

[John Goddard]

The kind of obedience you are conditioned to believe in is not the same kind that Jesus learned. The will of man is the concept of another will, besides the Will of God. It can't be trained to conform to the Will of God. It simply has to "die". As it dies, our true will rises to resume it's proper place. As it turns out, our true will and the Will of God...are the same. No difference. The only "obedience" involved in this process is listening to the instructions given by the Teacher/Spirit Guide/Good Shepherd...and applying them in day to day, hour to hour practice. This is a learning process. Is learning obedience? When you go to university to become a "master" whatever, do you "obey" your professor? No, you simply meet the conditions that demonstrate you are a master.

Meeting conditions of a more learned Master like Jesus, professor, employer, etc. is still obedience.

So basically you are still preaching obedience, but disguised as non-obedience and thus freedom to make it more palatable to your target audience.

Clever, but still transparent.

[UrbanMonk]

Meeting conditions of a more learned Master like Jesus, professor, employer, etc. is still obedience.

Nope. Keep hammering away at this John. Wisdom and obedience don't mix. What it takes to be a "master" is a matter of a curriculum...a course...a set of lessons, which when applied and practiced yield a result. These are not normal lessons. These are unlessons by which we unlearn what we've taught ourselves contrary to the truth. These lessons are about learning what the truth is. Meeting the conditions in which we can experience the truth is what its all about. To experience truth is to experience who we are, first washing away what we are not. Washing away and unlearning are synonymous. They are about removing what has been added. In this case, another will has been added to our own, which is the SAME as the Will of God. WHEN we learn these lessons is up to us, to learn now or a thousand years from now or more. We can procrastinate indefinitely. The thing is, we don't realy want to because our true will is stronger than our wish to explore the concept of another will added to and overlayed upon our true will.

The condition we must meet is peace of mind. How can we achieve peace of mind? This is achieved by resolving the conflict of mind presented by the idea of dual wills. The illusiory will must be layed aside. To lay aside our illusiory will, we must listen for instructions and practice. This is not obedience. It's called listening for instructions and then practicing. We are learning to undo what we have added to our original perfection, as it was given us before the foundation of the world.

[John Goddard]

What it takes to be a "master" is a matter of a curriculum...a course...a set of lessons, which when applied and practiced yield a result. These are not normal lessons. These are unlessons by which we unlearn what we've taught ourselves contrary to the truth. These lessons are about learning what the truth is. Meeting the conditions in which we can experience the truth is what its all about.

You fade away into LaLaLand after that, from the reality that preaching obedience to lessons of absolute freedom is simply preaching more obedience.

There's no escaping, no matter how you try to frame it.

[John Goddard]

What it takes to be a "master" is a matter of a curriculum...a course...a set of lessons, which when applied and practiced yield a result... It's called listening for instructions and then practicing. We are learning to undo what we have added to our original perfection, as it was given us before the foundation of the world.

Now then, since you have set yourself up as the Master, how exactly do your students do this?

enLIGHTEN ME (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/02/25/gallery/tomb_zoom.jpg) as Jesus said, Matthew 23:27.

LOL. You think maybe you are the only one who talks to Guides (http://bible.cc/mark/5-9.htm)?

[UrbanMonk]

You fade away into LaLaLand after that, from the reality that preaching obedience to lessons of absolute freedom is simply preaching more obedience.

There's no escaping, no matter how you try to frame it.

There's a commercial on TV telling us to "Obey your thirst". So, if you go to the story and buy a Mountain Dew, who or what are you really obeying? Mountain Dew is what you want. You go get it. You drink it. Who's obeying whom? You are just dewing what you want.

Likewise, the gospel is about obeying your thirst. It's about obeying your own TRUE WILL. Since adding another will to your true will, you have been confused since before the foundation of the world...following an unholy spirit. Your true will is represented by the "Holy Spirit". He does not require obedience, for obedience implies submission. He would only have you learn your OWN will. Obey YOUR OWN WILL.

If not, you will "obey" another kind of master...a cruel master at the top of a heirarchy, compelling you to do what is really not your will. And to this master you must display subservience if you would survive its impending wrath. It would punish you for considering abandoning it's heavy load, and join instead with the One whose burden is light. It would punish you for considering that equality, and not heirarchy, is the truth. You can "serve" one or the other, but not both. They ask different - conflicting - things of you. They have nothing in common.

Your problem, John, is you want to pretend you already know when, rather, you are in need of learning. You can't learn if you think you aleady know. And you are too arrogant to admit that repairing the ignorance you imposed upon yourself through rash judgement is not a matter of obedience or heirarchy, but mercy.

[UrbanMonk]

Now then, since you have set yourself up as the Master, how exactly do your students do this?

enLIGHTEN ME (http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/02/25/gallery/tomb_zoom.jpg) as Jesus said, Matthew 23:27.

LOL. You think maybe you are the only one who talks to Guides (http://bible.cc/mark/5-9.htm)?

You are growing more and more dishonest by the post in order to maintain an untenable position.

I have likened myself to a senior, Jesus to a master, and you to a sophomore. The curriculum leads the mistaken to the truth of equality. Inequality was self-imposed, arrogantly, upon the equality our Father gave us before the foundation of the world. And only arrogance would maintain it because re-education seems to involve steps, or degrees of understanding.

The all-seeing eye over a pyramid is quintessentially symbolic of the kind of heirarchy you want to make true through sophomoronic judgement that is anything but wisdom. It is a symbol of how the world of the prodigal son (man) operates...NOT the World of God.

You will be guided by the mind that makes the world of the prodigal son, or you will be Guided by the Mind that unmakes the world of the prodigal son. It is unmade as you allow it to be unmade. Till then, you will need to rely on your worn out defences....sophistry, skunking, false judgment, misinterpretation, miscontruction, verbal contortions, word-magic, mockery, misquotations, misdefinitions, exaggeration, and general self-dishonesty.

[John Goddard]

I have likened myself to a senior, Jesus to a master, and you to a sophomore. The curriculum leads the mistaken to the truth of equality.

I think you are rather trying to be a Master by asking people to follow you. Nothing in your posts indicates that you see yourself as a fellow student.

The all-seeing eye over a pyramid is quintessentially symbolic of the kind of heirarchy you want to make true through sophomoronic judgement that is anything but wisdom. It is a symbol of how the world of the prodigal son (man) operates...NOT the World of God.

I'm not the one asking people to follow me, you misunderstand that I am applying that to you.

[UrbanMonk]

I think you are rather trying to be a Master by asking people to follow you.

You mean like the impostle P(s)aul? You seem eager to follow characters you never met...and others who never asked you to follow them.


Nothing in your posts indicates that you see yourself as a fellow student.

Then you haven't been reading. I sit in the front row as I let the Teacher teach through me. So I'm a student here, by way of teaching. Like a teachers aid. If I was offering guitar lessons would that mean I'm saying I'm Joe Satriani?

I'm not the one asking people to follow me, you misunderstand that I am applying that to you.

Is there a rule here that says don't invite anyone to follow you? You're being dishonest if you think that when you offer a world-view, you're not asking anyone to follow you. We are all teaching, all the time. The question is, what are you teaching, and why? At this point, I'm saying you can't be a student of mine because you aren't up to speed. You have to be honest. Come back later...maybe a lot later.

[John Goddard]

You mean like the impostle P(s)aul? You seem eager to follow characters you never met...and others who never asked you to follow them.

Then you haven't been reading. I sit in the front row as I let the Teacher teach through me. So I'm a student here, by way of teaching. Like a teachers aid. If I was offering guitar lessons would that mean I'm saying I'm Joe Satriani?

Is there a rule here that says don't invite anyone to follow you? You're being dishonest if you think that when you offer a world-view, you're not asking anyone to follow you. We are all teaching, all the time. The question is, what are you teaching, and why? At this point, I'm saying you can't be a student of mine because you aren't up to speed. You have to be honest. Come back later...maybe a lot later.

The difference here is my arguments are mostly regarding different interpretations of Bible verses, I'm not asking anyone to follow me instead of what the Bible says as a basic foundational support.

While you cherrypick verses, books, apostles, so on and fill in the blanks with your own stuff. You ask others to follow what you say instead of what the Bible says.

So our situations are a bit different...

[UrbanMonk]

The difference here is my arguments are mostly regarding different interpretations of Bible verses, I'm not asking anyone to follow me instead of what the Bible says as a basic foundational support.

It's implied. If you don't think so, you're not being honest. And while you covertly ask for a following, you are following your own, what, will? And that is all my Teacher asks you to follow, asking it through me. The problem is, you are confusing a true will with a false will that functions like a demon functions in the mind of it's host.

While you cherrypick verses, books, apostles, so on and fill in the blanks with your own stuff. You ask others to follow what you say instead of what the Bible says.

Now you are being hypocritical in addition to dishonest. You say, for example, that Jesus genesis was of this world, and became a son of God through obedience to the "Word". So you must be ignoring latter chapters of John which explain, in Jesus own words, the glory he had been given before the foundation of the world, and to which he was returning.

So our situations are a bit different...

So you are doing the same thing you say I am doing. You have selected a text (the bible) to the exclusion of other, more worthy texts. Yet you criticize me for selecting phrases and themes from your preferred text, and interpreting them by an authority you think I don't have...and yet you excercise similar prerogative to choose which internal interpretive guide helps you select this, that or another text, call it "the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and proceed to give it meaning of your own choosing.

[John Goddard]

It's implied. If you don't think so, you're not being honest. And while you covertly ask for a following, you are following your own, what, will? And that is all my Teacher asks you to follow, asking it through me. The problem is, you are confusing a true will with a false will that functions like a demon functions in the mind of it's host.

I usually know when I'm following God's will and when I'm not. I don't claim to do it all the time. I don't claim to be the solution, I discuss solutions that already exist in the Bible.

Now you are being hypocritical in addition to dishonest. You say, for example, that Jesus genesis was of this world, and became a son of God through obedience to the "Word". So you must be ignoring latter chapters of John which explain, in Jesus own words, the glory he had been given before the foundation of the world, and to which he was returning.

So you are doing the same thing you say I am doing. You have selected a text (the bible) to the exclusion of other, more worthy texts. Yet you criticize me for selecting phrases and themes from your preferred text, and interpreting them by an authority you think I don't have...and yet you excercise similar prerogative to choose which internal interpretive guide helps you select this, that or another text, call it "the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and proceed to give it meaning of your own choosing.

I don't exclude any biblical texts or authors, but you do in favor of teachings from your Spirit Guide. As to support for my position:

Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

And you claim it contradicts this:

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

So we can examine this, to start:

Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

The popular view is that Jesus was there in the beginning with God creating everything. However, the usage here is more like this:

Matthew 5:34-35 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

What we're looking at is an action in the name of an idea. And so further:

Ephesians 3:10-11 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

It's about intents and purposes for Jesus conceived by God before the world existed, and all things created for the eventual goal of Jesus being King of Heaven. A glorious plan. Thus in John 17:5, Jesus is also talking about hope to soon realize God's glorious plan for him.

To reiterate, I don't exclude any part of the Bible in my understanding of proper interpretation, and if I learn of a better one from someone else, I am open to changing my position. So again our approaches are quite different.

[Bosco]

The interpretation I've given you is of the Spirit Guide...not of an archane set of books in foreign languages.

An archane sent of books in a foreign language the likes of which you have no proof that Yehoshua existed at all without? UM, you are welcome to continue in your path with your spirit guide. I hope it guides you in the path of righteousness and truth. I rather believe we have the word in written form and in us, guiding us as we "study" and "prove all things." By using the word as my foundation, I have something set in stone (so to speak) which I can align what I see and hear to. With that, I get to choose what is true and what is not, without the benefit of aligning what I see and hear to anything other than my logic... and what you may believe is God in you.

I will not respond to your posts any more, there is no reason for it. You have your mind made up, I certainly have no desire to becom a student of yours especially seeing this higher plane of existence you seem to think you live on creates the same animosity toward others that others who don't think like you might have for you. In other words, you offer me nothing but a spirit guide and nothing written I can count on as truth. So respond if you must, but I will (respectfully) ignore you from this day forward or until there is a change in your attitude.

Peace to you.
Ken

[UrbanMonk]

To reiterate, I don't exclude any part of the Bible in my understanding of proper interpretation, and if I learn of a better one from someone else, I am open to changing my position. So again our approaches are quite different.

Yes, our approaches to the Bible are quite different. I approach it like a psychic mine-field. You approach it like a weedless wheatfield. And that is your fatal - scholastic - flaw. It's a dishonest approach that builds on the sand of false premises.


[QUOTE]I don't exclude any biblical texts or authors, but you do in favor of teachings from your Spirit Guide.

To support my position I offer John 16:12-15

12"I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. 14He will bring glory to me by taking from what is mine and making it known to you. 15All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will take from what is mine and make it known to you.


As to support for my position:

Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

The Garden of Gethsemene is a lesson about the struggle we have between dual wills just before we lay down the will that is not God's will. Until we lay it down and let it die, we think our extra, other, alien will is "God's will"...because we have allowed it to usurp our Father's throne. And because our throne (dominion, kingdom) is the same as our Father's throne (dominion, kingdom), we have replaced even our own will with another will we think represents us. In the Gethsemene story, Jesus is teaching us how to lay down the false will through vigilance. Note however that his companions slept. Meaning, they were not interested in laying down their false will at that time. So, why do we follow their scripto-literary examples?

John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

Here again, Jesus is discerning between his false will, and the Will he shares with the Father. Of his false will (the goat), he could do nothing. By paying attention to the judgement of the Good Shepherd within him, he came to understand and experience his true Will (the sheep) as one with the Father.

And you claim it contradicts this:

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Like everyone who ever came to this world, we were all given the glory of God "before the world was". But as we added another will to our own, we masked our will with another, which took possession of our minds. Such were the plight of the prodigal Son, who falling short of the glory of God, became flesh. In returning home, our glory is restored, as Jesus fully expected his to be.

So we can examine this, to start:

Ephesians 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:


For the most part, Paul doesn't know what he's talking about, and merely repeats twisted catch-phrases he heard when he was fanatically suppressing "the Way". So I'll interpret for him. Christ has been hidden since the beginning of the things that the prodigal Son made, namely, "the world". The world is a lie that hides Christ, the Truth. The gospel dispells the lie that is cast as a spell upon our minds, revealing the Truth again.

The popular view is that Jesus was there in the beginning with God creating everything.

The pop gospel does not dispell the lie that casts a spell upon the mind of the prodigal Son...who makes manifest "everything" through the power of his imagination. Thus, the domain of the prodigal Son is that of imagination and the "things" is makes in the psychological foundry of its image (imagination).

On the other hand, Christ is a co-creator with God...actually creating reality...NOT imagining things, like, "the world".

However, the usage here is more like this:

Matthew 5:34-35 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

Matthew was an anonymous Hebrew-o-phile, bent on misrepresenting Jesus as a magical Jewish king to come after the order (likes of) of David. So, he was an overzealous betrayer who forced arcane literary passages upon Jesus' defenseless back like the Romans forced a purple robe on his back. Matthew was so duped that he argued for a "son of David" status for Jesus while in the same book, Jesus argues against it. Matthew lords his human geneology over us while Jesus himself mocks human geneology.

In brief, you've only managed to step on a psychic mine in Matthews mind-field.


What we're looking at is an action in the name of an idea.

The prodigal Son is an action in the name of a false idea.


And so further:

Ephesians 3:10-11 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

The "eternal purpose" is the salvation of the prodigal Son, who makes time and wanders within it...within his own psychic field of dreams. It is the prodigal Son who makes "principalities and powers in heavenly places". Those of us who have come to understand that we are the Son of God, have come to overcome the "principalities and powers" of "the world"...through the knowledge (gnosis) brought by our Savior, the "Holy Spirit", sent by "our Father" to represent our Self (Christ) to what has denied our Self (the prodigal Son).


It's about intents and purposes for Jesus conceived by God before the world existed, and all things created for the eventual goal of Jesus being King of Heaven. A glorious plan.

This could only be a glorious plan to "inglourious basterds" spawnedof the prodigal Son's wish to dethrone his own Father. A man who rules Heaven? Flesh and blood to inherit the Kingdom of God? Blasphemy.

Thus in John 17:5, Jesus is also talking about hope to soon realize God's glorious plan for him

God's "plan" is to restore the glory the prodigal Son threw away to the one who will come back home as "the Son of God". The one who comes back as the Son of God is the one who accepts his true heritage as "born of Spirit"...and NOT born of flesh. In this regard, Jesus set the example, and showed "the way". All are welcome. In fact, according to God's plan, all are destined to return.

[John Goddard]

The Garden of Gethsemene is a lesson about the struggle we have between dual wills just before we lay down the will that is not God's will.

What was God's will in the Garden since you imply here it was not for Jesus to die:

Why would "the life", the "son" of LIFE ITSELF...be told to die?

Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Matthew was an anonymous Hebrew-o-phile, bent on misrepresenting Jesus...

Why are you citing his account about the Garden then?

:duh:

[UrbanMonk]

What was God's will in the Garden since you imply here it was not for Jesus to die:

The G of G is an extended metaphor, probably a teaching device embellished and picked up by the anonymous "Matthew" decades later. How could we know what actually transpired there as all the witnesses were alledgedly asleep? As a metaphor, the G of G is where we are all located, phsycologically, as either sleepers or as one vigilant. We must be vigilant so long as we percieve we have another will, besides the Will of God. And we must remain vigilant until the alien will is dead. The alien will would rather be crucified than die. But so long as we keep the alien will alive in our minds, we will only be volunteering for more crucifixion. This is a story of two wills; the will to die ( the alien will) and the will to live (God's Will). Until the will to die (our secret death wish) is dead, we cannot truly live....cannot reach the "resurrection".

The "death" and "resurrection" of "Jesus" occured BEFORE the cross and the Houdini-like escape from a tomb. The death of the alien will in our minds is more like an exorcism. When the alien will (sin) is gone, we return to our Self...to our own will..."dead to sin". The alien will is exorcised by the will of Christ in us...which is our own will, one with God's Will. So long as an alien will rules our mind, we are "dead". When it is gone (dead), we live in Christ, as Christ. The death of the alien will is like an escape from a tomb of the walking dead. It's literally the escape from time...walking out of time into the timeless (eternal). The cross-tomb scenario were outward (external) teaching devices for the psychological transformation I've just mentioned. Jesus was a teacher, teaching through parables in word and deed.

Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Until we understand that God's will IS our will, we will resist the death of our alien will. Here, Jesus is teaching how to exchange one will for another by asking for help in overcoming the alien will with the power given of his true will, which is one with God's Will.

Why are you citing his account about the Garden then?

The Garden story isn't necessarily a Matthew construct. Matthew is an interpretive thief taking license with the popular stories about Jesus floating around decades after the fact. The pop gospels are fields of wheat and tares...mixed up...because the minds of the scribes were mixed up. There is a saying that even the devil can quote scripture...just enough to float its lies. So it is with the popular scribes and their scribbles.

[John Goddard]

TThis is a story of two wills; the will to die ( the alien will) and the will to live (God's Will).

That's not the story at all.

Jesus didn't want to die, self-will. But God's will was that Jesus have faith in God to save him from death through the resurrection. So Jesus obeyed God's will instead.

Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

Like I said you are mixed up. I hope no one ever actually takes you seriously, pity for them if they do.

[UrbanMonk]

That's not the story at all.

Jesus didn't want to die, self-will. But God's will was that Jesus have faith in God to save him from death through the resurrection. So Jesus obeyed God's will instead.

The Will of God is the will to live. An alien will, therefore, is the concept of the will to die....a death wish. All of the son's of man have a secret death wish. Faith that God's Will is our will does lead us from the temptation to die...to LIFE. And this is the actual resurrection, which Jesus experienced before the cross. The resurrection after the cross is an external visible demonstration that teaches what happens, invisibly, when we open up our minds to the truth. The cross is an external visible demonstration of what happens when we close our minds to the truth, and percieve an alien will instead. Truth and Life are synonymous, as are lies and death.

Matthew 26:39 And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.

What are you proving by quoting Matthew? Is Matthew some kind of Fuehrer? Unless you can interpret what is written with the Spirit of Truth, you have no clue what it could possibly mean. It could mean anything, including the meaning you force upon it through a blasphemous paradigm. The whole concept of bungy jumping into death upon the orders of a heirarchal dictator who holds the strings to LIFE is a mockery, if not outright sin (insane notions about Christ).

Like I said you are mixed up.

Sin mixes a mind up so thoroughly that mouths it manages learn to justify killing in the name of God. And as you try to convince us that the GOD of LIFE orders the DEATH OF LIFE simply to establish a heirarchal order of obedience, your mouth kills the authentic message of Jesus in the name of God.


I hope no one ever actually takes you seriously, pity for them if they do.

I hope no one actually drinks the Kool-Aid you are serving here in the name of God.