PDA

View Full Version : We are All One



Rose
12-20-2011, 11:51 PM
We are all part of the same tribe, and need to realize that any organism at war with itself is doomed...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xxwG8RxQ5Zc

Richard Amiel McGough
12-21-2011, 12:07 AM
Excellent message in that video! :thumb:

Timmy
12-25-2011, 03:06 PM
We are all two
or is that just me
and not you?

Maybe this self-individuated-duality is a concept only peculiar to TTiiMMyy who wars with his selfs often.
Who woulda' thunk it?

LLiittllee TTiimmmmyy:winking0071:

duxrow
12-25-2011, 04:35 PM
Exception. What about the Tares (planted by the Adversary) as opposed to the One Bread? Any room for other options, you think?

heb13-13
12-25-2011, 04:37 PM
We are all two
or is that just me
and not you?

Maybe this self-individuated-duality is a concept only peculiar to TTiiMMyy who wars with his selfs often.
Who woulda' thunk it?

LLiittllee TTiimmmmyy:winking0071:

Hi Rose,

Merry Christmas.

Can we all be ONE? The Bible shows that there have only ever been two choices for us. Let's check this math.

There are only two characters
in this Universe,
not one
and
not three
and these characters
cannot be ONE
as in
UNITY.



Flesh + Spirit = 1?
Good + Evil = 1?
Life + Death = 1?
Love + Hate = 1?
Sin + Righteousness = 1?
Lies + Truth = 1?
Holy + Unholy = 1?
Heaven + Hell = 1?
God + Satan = 1?

Does 1 + 1 really = 1?

The Christian has Christ the Unbeliever has the "prince of the power of the air, the spirit working in the sons of disobedience" (Eph 2:2).

Christians have become 'partakers of the divine nature', the unregenerate are 'bynature children of wrath' (Eph. 2:3).

Notice, the choices that we have to derive your nature from. There is not a 3rd option.

Christians have the 'treasure (Christ) in earthen vessels' (II Cor. 4:7), those without Christ put forth evil things from an evil treasure' (Matt. 12:35).

Fallen mankind is under the authority & dominion of Satan, Christians are converted to the authority/dominion of God in Christ (Acts 26:18).

Non‐Christians are 'in the snare of the devil, held captive to do his will' (II Tim. 2:26), Christians are willing bond‐servants/love‐slaves of Jesus Christ (II Tim. 2:24; Rom. 1:8; Rom. 6:16‐20).

Christians are 'children of God' (Rom. 8:16) and call God, 'Abba, Father' (Rom. 8:15), Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of their father, the devil' (Jn. 8:44).

These are but a few of the either/or contrasts in scripture that indicate that all human beings derive spiritual character & relation from either God or Satan – and there is no third alternative or option of self‐source.

We (humans) all derive our nature or character from either God or Satan. We are not self-generating and cannot invent a third standalone consciousness, nature or character.

We sow to the Spirit or to the flesh. And conversely, we receive from either God (Spirit) or Satan (carnal flesh).
There is not a 3rd object you can sow to and reap from.

Freedom of Choice
To sow to the flesh (carnal man) is to choose the likeness and character of the selfish-nature of Satan (deeds of the flesh).
To sow to the Spirit is to choose the likeness and character of God.

Man either sows to the flesh or sows to the Spirit. You have never seen man sow to anything else.

We are either for Him (Christ) or against Him. Two alternatives, not three or four.

There is good and there is evil. Sorry, not a third choice and good and evil cannot be ONE.

1 + 1 = 2 not 1 or 3 or 4.

Only God has free-will. Humans have freedom of choice and we have been given the freedom of choice to choose who we derive our character from. Yep, that's right God or Satan. Has there ever been a third?

The following from Jim Fowler -
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/pdfs/FrequentlyAskedQuestionsEbook.pdf


GOD acts ek autos
'out of Himself'
to express His character

MAN receives by
deriving from a spiritual source
– ek Theos (out of God)
– ek diabolos (out of the devil)


DERIVATIVE MAN
EVERYTHING about man’s being and function
is derived.

Derived nature
'nature of wrath' -or- 'divine nature'

Derived identity
'sinners' -or- 'saints'

Derived character
'sinfulness' -or- 'righteousness'

Derived image
visible expression of God or Satan

Derived ...
'life' -or- 'death'

Derived immortality
'Immortal God' brought 'life and
immortality to light through the gospel'


God, the three-in-one Divine-being, is independent, contingent, Self-determinative, and Self- generative.
God is the only 'Independent Self' with absolute 'free will,' whereby He Self-determines His own action in accord with His own character, and Self-generates such action ek autos (out of Himself).




A very prosperous and Joyful New Year to all,
Rick

Timmy
12-25-2011, 07:57 PM
Hi Rose and Richard,

Oh, youze guys really gotz me thunkin' on dis' one:
all kinds of relative concepts wound up within the warp and weft of space and time.




Can we all be ONE? The Bible shows that there have only ever been two choices for us. Let's check this math.

There are only two characters
in this Universe,
not one
and
not three
and these characters
cannot be ONE
as in
UNITY.



Flesh + Spirit = 1?
Good + Evil = 1?
Life + Death = 1?
Love + Hate = 1?
Sin + Righteousness = 1?
Lies + Truth = 1?
Holy + Unholy = 1?
Heaven + Hell = 1?
God + Satan = 1?

Does 1 + 1 really = 1?

The Christian has Christ the Unbeliever has the "prince of the power of the air, the spirit working in the sons of disobedience" (Eph 2:2).

Christians have become 'partakers of the divine nature', the unregenerate are 'bynature children of wrath' (Eph. 2:3).

Notice, the choices that we have to derive your nature from. There is not a 3rd option.

Christians have the 'treasure (Christ) in earthen vessels' (II Cor. 4:7), those without Christ put forth evil things from an evil treasure' (Matt. 12:35).

Fallen mankind is under the authority & dominion of Satan, Christians are converted to the authority/dominion of God in Christ (Acts 26:18).

Non‐Christians are 'in the snare of the devil, held captive to do his will' (II Tim. 2:26), Christians are willing bond‐servants/love‐slaves of Jesus Christ (II Tim. 2:24; Rom. 1:8; Rom. 6:16‐20).

Christians are 'children of God' (Rom. 8:16) and call God, 'Abba, Father' (Rom. 8:15), Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of their father, the devil' (Jn. 8:44).

These are but a few of the either/or contrasts in scripture that indicate that all human beings derive spiritual character & relation from either God or Satan – and there is no third alternative or option of self‐source.

We (humans) all derive our nature or character from either God or Satan. We are not self-generating and cannot invent a third standalone consciousness, nature or character.

We sow to the Spirit or to the flesh. And conversely, we receive from either God (Spirit) or Satan (carnal flesh).
There is not a 3rd object you can sow to and reap from.

Freedom of Choice
To sow to the flesh (carnal man) is to choose the likeness and character of the selfish-nature of Satan (deeds of the flesh).
To sow to the Spirit is to choose the likeness and character of God.

Man either sows to the flesh or sows to the Spirit. You have never seen man sow to anything else.

We are either for Him (Christ) or against Him. Two alternatives, not three or four.

There is good and there is evil. Sorry, not a third choice and good and evil cannot be ONE.

1 + 1 = 2 not 1 or 3 or 4.

Only God has free-will. Humans have freedom of choice and we have been given the freedom of choice to choose who we derive our character from. Yep, that's right God or Satan. Has there ever been a third?

The following from Jim Fowler -
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/pdfs/FrequentlyAskedQuestionsEbook.pdf


GOD acts ek autos
'out of Himself'
to express His character

MAN receives by
deriving from a spiritual source
– ek Theos (out of God)
– ek diabolos (out of the devil)


DERIVATIVE MAN
EVERYTHING about man’s being and function
is derived.

Derived nature
'nature of wrath' -or- 'divine nature'

Derived identity
'sinners' -or- 'saints'

Derived character
'sinfulness' -or- 'righteousness'

Derived image
visible expression of God or Satan

Derived ...
'life' -or- 'death'

Derived immortality
'Immortal God' brought 'life and
immortality to light through the gospel'


God, the three-in-one Divine-being, is independent, contingent, Self-determinative, and Self- generative.
God is the only 'Independent Self' with absolute 'free will,' whereby He Self-determines His own action in accord with His own character, and Self-generates such action ek autos (out of Himself).




A very prosperous and Joyful New Year to all,
Rick

Hmmm Rick and Duxrow,

Ya'll sed what i should have said.

Let's see if we can stimulate these points to more keyboard interaction through the alternating altercating perspectives here?

Seriously though, we're well inclined to shy far far away from this oneness stuff, even we are godz concept, except in the fact of this power of choice=free will?
Tried it...and if indeed we are all already one there would be no opposition, in fact no motion at all.

Again and again this "I am God" doctrine has never provided much evidence, except of power lent for purposes other than our own. It soon stinks, translating into its reverse form; our exteriorizations and extroversions are un-godly, and to become 'ourselves' we must become unlike them. God 'realizes' not by negation of others nor by seeing others as inferior. He just is immensely incomprehensible and perfect.

Human facts, on the other hand, are mere figments of truisms; therefore all facts are inconclusive. Fictions are devices to explain the indefinables; our whole systematic coherence is so forged. I am incessantly finding out what I am doing, and what it means. I can always read into it something other than I did mean as well as what the doing towards objectification really means; never the meaning of my meaning, or the whole meaning. Then we wonder whether anything has any more meaning than anything else!

How do we know anything? Our own eccentric rhythms are not synchronized to the Cosmos, nor the Maker thereof. So, with a mildewed ear for the brassy cacophony of imaginary menageries dissonant to each other, it all ends drooling over minutiae to discover oneself. Our acceptances become our conclusions. Existence is alogical to any 'logic' we know, so it is irrational to attempt to rationalize, except in cases of our own prejudices which inform our mentation.

Actually rationalization is the nice way of saying a nasty sounding word in the Bible: wickedness.

If all phenomena are a fluxing unabsoluteness and are Absoluteness manifest, then is it surprising that we manufacture our individuality that is neither-either but a weirder autism? Yet none remember having desired existence… but indisputably we have individuality, the only certainty we know. Within the sensorium is a transcriber, or a synthesizing faculty, using synonymous intangibles where association and experience fail: as the capacity of certain sounds to induce colour images, certain arabesque forms may find aesthetic truth.

Amorphous to our own existence, yet knowing we are individuated, our nature to sin blinds our own eyes to the truth beyond facts.

Besides, if i were he
...and he were she
...then we'de be three
he-shes altogether.
(and that's just not right!)

Sincerely,
Twinme
(...and i believe in the twinity... two.)

kathryn
12-26-2011, 06:55 AM
Rick...
Christians are 'children of God' (Rom. 8:16) and call God, 'Abba, Father' (Rom. 8:15), Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of their father, the devil' (Jn. 8:44).


Hi Rick...In and through whom, was Jesus addressing as "satan", when Peter didn't agree with the necessity of Jesus going to the cross... A child of God, or a child of the devil?

kathryn
12-26-2011, 07:52 AM
Rick..
1 + 1 = 2 not 1 or 3 or 4.


Rick....how would you fit the description of the "cutting of the covenant" into this understanding? It was ONE animal, cut in half with the "smoking furnace and burning torch" passed through the pieces. 1/2 + 1/2= 1. (Genesis 15)

Charisma
12-26-2011, 09:09 AM
Wow, Timmy (Ttiimmmmyy),

I'm stuck between, 'What was that about?' and, 'I think I did understand some of it'; and, I look forward to 'more keyboard interaction through the alternating altercating perspectives here', you have stimulated.


Hi Rose,


We are all part of the same tribe, and need to realize that any organism at war with itself is doomed...Yeah! God has the same idea. He put an offer on the table which gets rid of the bad stuff that comes out of the hearts of people in wicked words and actions, and allows their hearts to be transformed. Isn't that brilliant? That would get rid of ALL the warring - if only everyone would agree with Him.



:playball:

kathryn
12-26-2011, 09:09 AM
Exception. What about the Tares (planted by the Adversary) as opposed to the One Bread? Any room for other options, you think?

Hi Dux! The "tares" are the "leaven" in the ONE bread. The tares are planted in the field ...the leaven is mixed in the loaf....both are applied to "heat":winking0071: Both are left until they "rise"...the seed grows UP and forms a "head"....the loaf rises with the action of the leaven. Both describe a process used by God, to perfect us. When the Baptism of Fire is over, the tares are burnt...the action of the leaven has been stopped.

duxrow
12-26-2011, 09:11 AM
I see it as a "rightly dividing" of a body (like mankind)... An OT precept of the NT, as they were a schoolteacher to bring us to Christ. Gal 3:24.

kathryn
12-26-2011, 09:15 AM
I see it as a "rightly dividing" of a body (like mankind)... An OT precept of the NT, as they were a schoolteacher to bring us to Christ. Gal 3:24.

Perhaps you could go into a bit more detail. I agree about the rightly dividing...but what is the end result? (after the smoking furnace and burning torch has passed through) All of mankind is redeemed?
Jesus called Himself the Son of Man. How does He fit into the One animal of mankind (in the cutting of the covenant)?

duxrow
12-26-2011, 10:13 AM
Dont' really know what you're looking for, Kathryn. The waters were divided in the OT before we were aware of the spiritual Water -- now it's "correctly understanding" (like what RAM is always questioning..)

kathryn
12-26-2011, 10:26 AM
Dont' really know what you're looking for, Kathryn. The waters were divided in the OT before we were aware of the spiritual Water -- now it's "correctly understanding" (like what RAM is always questioning..)

I'm asking you to explain the process of "rightly dividing" in more detail. You mentioned the one animal was mankind. What , in your opinion, does the smoking furnace and burning torch signify? What does mankind look like afterwards? Are they united or still separated? Was Jesus part of the one animal?

duxrow
12-26-2011, 10:27 AM
Sorry Kathryn, missed the 'leaven' comment till just now -- sounds great except I don't see any unbelievers "Rising" on that cloudy day. Still, these diff points of view may be helpful for others to get on the same page. The "lurkers", if you please. :Thumb:

I see Jesus as "the Leaven" (as well as The Bread) so those who believe him will get their 2nd chance...

kathryn
12-26-2011, 11:06 AM
Sorry Kathryn, missed the 'leaven' comment till just now -- sounds great except I don't see any unbelievers "Rising" on that cloudy day. Still, these diff points of view may be helpful for others to get on the same page. The "lurkers", if you please. :Thumb:

I see Jesus as "the Leaven" (as well as The Bread) so those who believe him will get their 2nd chance...

Jesus was the UNleavened bread...the spotless passover Lamb Dux. How could he then represent leaven? Leaven , in typology, is never anything but the condition of iniquity. It is used as a tool, like an irritant in an oyster, to form the "pearl". The Bride must make herself ready. She isn't "spotless" until she comes out of her Baptism of Fire. This is all through typology. Please explain the shift to me. I do see how you understand it as a "rising" agent and therefore "good"...but I can't see how you get the rest. Please 'splain.

duxrow
12-26-2011, 11:16 AM
Shoulda said "New Leaven" , also "hidden leaven" -- not the "old leaven" -- As the Alpha and Omega, first and last, he's not simply the Lamb, but also the Lion -- just posted re 'last metaphor' (must've had this in mind, maybe) ha.

I realize about bad-leaven notoriety, but just don't see it. All the new-wine, new-cloth, new song, new creature, etc. is a lot like the multiple "walks" throughout scripture. Hallelujah!

heb13-13
12-26-2011, 11:44 AM
Rick...
Christians are 'children of God' (Rom. 8:16) and call God, 'Abba, Father' (Rom. 8:15), Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of their father, the devil' (Jn. 8:44).


Hi Rick...In and through whom, was Jesus addressing as "Satan", when Peter didn't agree with the necessity of Jesus going to the cross... A child of God, or a child of the devil?

Hi Kathryn,

Satan speaks to and tempts Believers, too. It doesn't matter whether Peter was a child of God or of the Devil at this time. What matters is who he was choosing to listen to. Jesus pointed out who he was listening to.

According to Scripture the cause of sin in man is the devil. He sinned first and then seduced man. Man has free-choice and made a choice to derive his spiritual identity, character and behaviour from Satan and not God. Man has always had only two sources in which to derive his spiritual condition and behaviour. Satan or God. There is not a third choice. Man is a dependent being and must derive his spiritual character from a source outside of himself because he is not a god. He is not autonomous and self-generative, he is a dependent and contingent being.

And precisely because Man is a dependent being and Adam and Eve were deriving their Godliness from God in the garden an outside spiritual source had to tempt them to make a choice to change the source in which they derived their behaviour (from some other than God). They were tempted outside of themselves by another spiritual being to switch their heart allegiance, to look to another as their source. Even today, when man thinks that there is a third source to look to (namely himself), he is being deceived and does not know that he is deriving his character and behaviour from Satan.

Satan's story to Eve in Genesis 3, and to Jesus in Matthew 4, was that you can live independently of God, that you can be your own god and set your own standards. BUT IT IS A LIE. Either God controls your life by your choosing to let Him, or Satan controls your life by your choosing (either by design or default) to let him. You and I were designed by God to be ruled by a spirit. Our choice is not whether or not to be ruled, but rather, by which spirit we will be ruled!"

It is ludicrous to think that of these two "spirits", only one is a personal being.

Satan is a personal being, not just an impersonal force.
a. speaks - Lk. 4:3
b. knows - Rev. 12:12
c. works - Eph. 2:2
d. disputes - Jude 9
e. desires - Jn. 8:44
f. requests - Lk. 22:31
g. schemes - II Cor. 2:11
h. conceit - I Tim. 3:6
i. wills - II Tim. 2:26
j. wrath - Rev. 12:12
k. deceives - Rev. 20:2

Humanism aggrandizes man's ability. But what has really happened is that the Deceiver has sold the same bill of goods to man that he sold them in the garden. And he tells man (especially the worldly wise, educated ones) that every individual person is independent, autonomous and self-generative of his condition and behavior. But man is none of these things. He is a dependent being, always deriving his spiritual condition and behavioral expression from a spiritual source. Satan is still the power propelling unbelievers to sin and tempting believers to sin. And he tempted Peter to sin.

Jesus Christ in speaking to the unbelieving Jews, (John 8:44) "Ye are of your father the devil." Because he seduced men to sin, the devil is called a "murderer from the beginning" (John 8:44); and since he is the one that sinned first and thus the inventor of sin, we call sin, with good reason, a 'work of the devil,' even in the case of sins committed by believers. That is the case clearly pointed out by Christ when He says to Peter, who sought to keep Christ from suffering and dying: "Get thee behind Me, Satan" (Matt. 16:23).

Let me just reemphasize that: Peter was listening to the lie being breathed from Satan's mouth and Christ clearly pointed that out.

Kathryn,

It seems that you are saying that man's sin is self-originated within himself. If that were true then self-originated sin would have made man himself a Satan.

Back to you, :)
Rick

duxrow
12-26-2011, 12:03 PM
Even today, when man thinks that there is a third source to look to (namely himself), he is being deceived and does not know that he is deriving his character and behaviour from Satan.

Satan's story to Eve in Genesis 3, and to Jesus in Matthew 4, was that you can live independently of God, that you can be your own god and set your own standards. BUT IT IS A LIE. Either God controls your life by your choosing to let Him, or Satan controls your life by your choosing (either by design or default) to let him. You and I were designed by God to be ruled by a spirit. Our choice is not whether or not to be ruled, but rather, by which spirit we will be ruled!"''

Good one, heb -- In that first song when "horse and rider' went into the sea, Ex15, I first thought maybe God didn't like horses... now I see that WE are the horses (like Jesus a lamb and satan a snake) and it depends on whom we give our reins to..

Isn't that delicious?

kathryn
12-26-2011, 12:05 PM
Shoulda said "New Leaven" , also "hidden leaven" -- not the "old leaven" -- As the Alpha and Omega, first and last, he's not simply the Lamb, but also the Lion -- just posted re 'last metaphor' (must've had this in mind, maybe) ha.

I realize about bad-leaven notoriety, but just don't see it. All the new-wine, new-cloth, new song, new creature, etc. is a lot like the multiple "walks" throughout scripture. Hallelujah!

Hi Dux...it's not a question of it getting a bad rap....It simply isn't in typology as ever being anything good. It is the HIDDEN MANNA (SEED) that destroys the hidden leaven. It is the Word of God, that removes the Lies (carnal mindsets). You can't just suddenly change typology like that. Jesus was the UNleavened bread. The church in the refining stage, is having the condition of iniquity removed. That's why the wave offering for firstfruits contained leaven. It was a symbol of the church in the Baptism of Fire.

kathryn
12-26-2011, 12:13 PM
Rick: It seems that you are saying that man's sin is self-originated within himself. If that were true then self-originated sin would have made man himself a Satan.


I don't know where I said this Rick. I said we are a conduit for thoughts/spirit and that our refining process is a process of "weighing" thoughts/spirit from the Holy (WHOLE Spirit) and the separated or divided spirit of satan, that has no agreement with the Holy Spirit. I also said that Christ is "in and through" ALL things....and the Mind of Christ is resident in our virgin subconcious. This is why Jesus said to enter the Kingdom, we must become "as a child".

Adam was innocent...but his mind was corruptible. The whole process of covenant is learning to "weigh" the Truth of God's Love as the "light is passed through the pieces". This is why the ONE animal was separated in half. God fully intended Adam to "fall" and satan was/is used as a tool to perfect us.

duxrow
12-26-2011, 12:29 PM
Hi Dux...it's not a question of it getting a bad rap....It simply isn't in typology as ever being anything good. It is the HIDDEN MANNA (SEED) that destroys the hidden leaven. It is the Word of God, that removes the Lies (carnal mindsets). You can't just suddenly change typology like that. Jesus was the UNleavened bread. The church in the refining stage, is having the condition of iniquity removed. That's why the wave offering for firstfruits contained leaven. It was a symbol of the church in the Baptism of Fire.

Couldn't care less about any "typology studies" -- but unleavened is with sincerity and truth, 1Cor5:8, and implies the old-new contrast.
About the "wave offering" - I think of as the "waiver" we receive on account of the Resurrection! Hallelujah!

Rose
12-26-2011, 12:36 PM
Hi Rose,

Merry Christmas.

Can we all be ONE? The Bible shows that there have only ever been two choices for us.







A very prosperous and Joyful New Year to all,
Rick

Hi Rick,

Hope you had a wonderful Christmas with your family...

Your question "can we all be one?" begins with the presupposition that the Bible answers that question by giving us two choices. The way I see it is that the Bible is just one part of many that makes up the whole. It is a part of the whole, but is also a whole in itself made up of parts, both light and dark. Sort of like a picture made up of thousands of pixels, each pixel having its own individual color, but at the same time adding to the all the colors that make up the whole picture. We are all just pixels in the whole cosmic picture. :winking0071:

All life emerges out of the whole (Ground of Being), thus making it part of the whole while remaining an individual. Instead of seeing "God" as being outside of creation, I see "God" as being the creation which I am a part of. Looking into myself I see "God", because I see that which I emerged out of. That is where our intuitions come from, or what we call being guided by the Holy Spirit. When we look deep into our hearts we feel a sense of oneness and connection with "The Whole", which many call God...we are all an individual part of that "God".

Many wishes to you for a wonderful New Year,
Rose

Timmy
12-26-2011, 01:06 PM
Dear Rose,

The nature for us to sin is self-originating. To power to choose is not.:deadhorse:




HA! Caris'? Curveballs and sliders to boot. There is far more left unsaid than the animals once wandering the deep dark forest of these TWO minds creeping into the light of memory:
atavistic intellections?:egad:



Dear kathryn,

Could we just a bit, for clarity sake, reason and re-think your already stated premise together?

...we were lurking
then
Duxrow (who has answered:thumb: in part) said "anyone?"
but we're anytwo:lol:
yet hopefully
this should do::pray:
to help get this ball
rolling back towards
an appropriate direction.

Wheat is not candida.
When is a full blown free-standing roots in the ground plant an air-bourne micro-organism called yeast?
(BTW, both tares and wheat are infected with yeast before ever baked.)

Consider what Paul wrote concerning our memorial through which is symbolised our taking part in this Covenant complete in Yeshua ha' Maschiach, then reconsider:

"When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus with my spirit and with the power of our Lord Jesus, turn that one over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the Day of the Lord.

Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast permeates the whole batch of dough? Clean out the old yeast so that you may be a new batch. You are indeed unleavened, for Christ our Passover has been sacrificed.Therefore, let us observe the feast, not with old yeast or with the yeast of malice and evil but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote to you in a letter not to associate with sexually immoral people. 10 I did not mean the immoral people of this world or the greedy and swindlers or idolaters; otherwise you would have to leave the world. 11 But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who claims to be a believer who is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or verbally abusive, a drunkard or a swindler. Do not even eat with such a person. For what business is it of mine to judge outsiders? Don’t you judge those who are inside? But God judges outsiders. Put away the evil person from among yourselves."
(I Cor. 5.4-13, HCSB)

Herein lies one hint as to what tares really are considered as.

Yeast is clearly defined here...
...and is to be removed before the lump ever makes it into the oven.


This whole concept of yeast concerns the issue of maturity in Jesus. To be ‘in Christ’ is to be personally, vitally, organically related to him. In this sense, to be mature is to have a mature relationship with Christ in which we worship, trust, love and obey him.

Paul talking about yeast is carrying on from earlier references back in the third chapter, verses one through nine. Inference here is that the assembly itself is the field and we are the plants/wheat (or worse: 'terrors'):

"Brothers, I was not able to speak to you as spiritual people but as people of the flesh, as babies in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food, because you were not yet ready for it. In fact, you are still not ready, because you are still fleshly. For since there is envy and strife1 among you, are you not fleshly and living like unbelievers? For whenever someone says, 'I’m with Paul,' and another, 'I’m with Apollos,' are you not unspiritual people? What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? They are slaves through whom you believed, and each has the role the Lord has given. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. Now the one planting and the one watering are one in purpose, and each will receive his own reward according to his own labor. For we are God’s coworkers. You together-form God’s field, God’s building."



Does the analogy still apply???
...and what of what Paul is talking about?



Curiouser and curiouser,

Timmy

kathryn
12-26-2011, 01:43 PM
Timmy:
Yeast is clearly defined here...
...and is to be removed before the lump ever makes it into the oven.


Hi Timmy Tim Tim! What are you seeing as the "oven"? All of the instructions on sanctification/the denying of the "old" man, to become the New Man etc. were given as the Church was entering the refining process. In typology, this is the kitchen/oven where the 2 loaves of fine flour are baked for the firstfruits offering.

Jesus fulfilled the wave sheaf offering as the FIRST of the Firstfruits. He goes before us as our example. The wave sheaf offering was of the UNleavened, spotless Lamb...the RISEN, perfect Son of Man/God.

His Body , however, still has the condition of iniquity in it (although they are covered in the blood of the Lamb). This was why the wave sheaf offering in Leviticus was the ONLY offering that was allowed to have leaven it it...as it was a type of the church in the refining stage. It was the "oven" that stopped the action of the leaven when the loaves were RISEN. This is the Baptism of Fire of the Body of Christ.

heb13-13
12-26-2011, 02:24 PM
Rick: It seems that you are saying that man's sin is self-originated within himself. If that were true then self-originated sin would have made man himself a Satan.
Hi Kathryn,

It just seems that you are saying man's sin is self-originated or generated and my statement "it seems" is just me looking for clarification.


I don't know where I said this Rick. I said we are a conduit for thoughts/spirit and that our refining process is a process of "weighing" thoughts/spirit from the Holy (WHOLE Spirit) and the separated or divided spirit of satan, that has no agreement with the Holy Spirit.

We are more than just conduits, Kathryn, we are receptacles/receivers for Satan's thoughts/lies/deceptions. They don't just flow through us to others, but take up residence in us.
Some questions for you.

1. Satan is divided/separated from what?

2. Are you saying he is not an independent spiritual being that communicates his thoughts/lies/deception to humans?

3. What is Satan in your opinion and where can you back it up in the Bible?

Satan cannot be in Adam and Eve when they were innocent and pure (meaning no sin) and at the time they were innocent/pure they were deriving their spiritual character from God by virtue of being in relationship with Him and looking ONLY to Him. Satan entered the scene to try to get Adam and Eve to change the spiritual source in which they were deriving their behaviour and character. To get them to choose to "turn away" from God.


I also said that Christ is "in and through" ALL things....

There is no phrase "in and through" in the Bible. This is a phrase that you coined so what does it mean? Are you saying that "God is ALL / ALL is God"?


and the Mind of Christ is resident in our virgin subconcious. This is why Jesus said to enter the Kingdom, we must become "as a child".

4. Where does "virgin subconscious" come from in the Bible and why is our sub-conscious virgin (I assume you mean pure). Show me in the Bible.


Adam was innocent...but his mind was corruptible.

His mind was a receiver for other thoughts. What brought corruption/sin was not a bad/diseased mind but when he was enticed, drawn away by his lusts (this includes Eve, too), made a wrong (disobedient) choice and changed the source of this spiritual "life". It was not life at all, he soon found out, but death!!

He was not only innocent but pure, also and he was the only other being directly by God as a man. Jesus is called the "last Adam", but he was not like the first Adam in ALL ways (only a human body). Jesus was Incarnate Deity and from birth always had the Holy Spirit and never needed to be "born-again". Adam had the Spirit of God breathed into him but later chose to align himself with Satan's lies and therefore fell into disobedience to God and spiritual death immediately and physical death, eventually.


The whole process of covenant is learning to "weigh" the Truth of God's Love as the "light is passed through the pieces". This is why the ONE animal was separated in half.

No idea what you are talking about here. Why do we "weigh the Truth of God's Love?" The whole process of relationship with God is receiving His love and learning to live by the Life of Christ through faith and obedience to His Word (not the Bible, but the Spirit). To choose Christ and not Satan. We are perfected by His sacrifice, by His Word (not the letter) and by the Holy Spirit. Satan was the first to fall before man was created and brought sin to the economy of God. It is true that he is used to test man, whether man will choose God or Satan. The road is narrow and "few there be that find it". In other words, many will not choose to derive their life by the life of God. We are not dragged to love God.

Christians are perfected by one offering.
Heb 10:14For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Perfected by God's Word.
1Jn 2:5
But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.

Perfected by the Spirit.
Gal 3:3Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

The Law was perfect but could not make anyone perfect and our own abilities cannot make us perfect.

Christian perfection can only ever be the perfect character of God as it is expressed in Christian behavior. Christian behaviour comes from choosing God as our spiritual source (which implies a turning away from Satan). In this respect can Christian behaviour be perfect but it is always one choice at a time, moment-by-moment but Christian perfection is never full attained on earth as it will be consummated in the future. (1 Cor 13:10) "But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away."


God fully intended Adam to "fall" and satan was/is used as a tool to perfect us.

Kathryn,

If God fully intended Adam to "fall" then that means God tempts and God has sinned. So I object to that statement as being false and has no backing in the Bible. The Bible tells us that God does not tempt. There is no evil in Him. We are tempted when we are drawn away by our own lusts. He gives man freedom of choice. Where do you find this notion that "God fully intended Adam to "fall""?

Jas 1:13
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

Jas 1:14
But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
(Satan entices us and we are drawn away completely on our own. God has nothing to do with it)

Jas 1:15
Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
(Adam's sin brought forth death immediately)

Jas 1:16
Do not err, my beloved brethren.

I may have another post by you that I have to answer. Will look for it now.

Be blessed in Him,
Rick

Charisma
12-26-2011, 03:01 PM
Oooh! Timmy! :signthankspin:


HA! Caris'? Curveballs and sliders to boot. There is far more left unsaid than the animals once wandering the deep dark forest of these TWO minds creeping into the light of memory:
atavistic intellections? :egad:Don Francisco has a line about two minds --

'one man knows eternity, the other knows the dust'.


'we were lurking'......


That did cross my mind.



And then I thought......
I might get away with changing my mind, as a first step towards the great 'unsaid'.
It was worth a try!



But 'sliders'?

In Scotland, that means delicious Italian ice cream sandwiched between two wafers...

Mmmm!!!




Now, :focus:

Timmy
12-26-2011, 03:07 PM
Timmy:
Yeast is clearly defined here...
...and is to be removed before the lump ever makes it into the oven.


Hi Timmy Tim Tim! What are you seeing as the "oven"? All of the instructions on sanctification/the denying of the "old" man, to become the New Man etc. were given as the Church was entering the refining process. In typology, this is the kitchen/oven where the 2 loaves of fine flour are baked for the firstfruits offering.

Jesus fulfilled the wave sheaf offering as the FIRST of the Firstfruits. He goes before us as our example. The wave sheaf offering was of the UNleavened, spotless Lamb...the RISEN, perfect Son of Man/God.

His Body , however, still has the condition of iniquity in it (although they are covered in the blood of the Lamb). This was why the wave sheaf offering in Leviticus was the ONLY offering that was allowed to have leaven it it...as it was a type of the church in the refining stage. It was the "oven" that stopped the action of the leaven when the loaves were RISEN. This is the Baptism of Fire of the Body of Christ.

Does the waving itself, in the hands of our High Priest represents the removal of the yeast or innundation with more of the same?
Do not all things in the hands of the Cohanim while representing God become as pure, even when what is tainted is not percieved through observation. . .and the fire of God finishes this work of cleansing?
(...will the above stated lend to any further innappropriate analogies that are not in sync with the congruent whole of scripture?)
Is this not all the work of the Spirit or not? (see Acts 2)

As for the oven=altar...well we covered a bit of this above.
Is not our God a consuming fire?
Indeed it is the oven that puts an end to all the yeast (and everything tainted by it, two.)
What did Yeshua say about fire?
Everyone will be salted with fire.
(Mk. 9.49)
[It ^ might help to read all of that starting at v.42 through to 50; but this is leading to all of what chapter 10 is talking about, so Ch.10 is suggested with the aforementioned as this is all concerning remaining in God's kingdom.
:Investigate:(additional: Is. 33.10-22 / Ps. 15)]

As for Jesus "fulfilled" should be understood in the sense of making our destiny in Him complete: The Way, the Truth, and the Life to take part in: following in Jesus' footsteps. . .and the fire shall not burn you. (As you said, "our example.") We are not risen perfect as yet.

Something about as long as a grain of wheat lives, it remains alone...and to live we must die fits right nicely here.
:sCo_hmmthink:
Was what was being questioned missed or is this suitable opinion?

:uplane:Wondering?:planeup:

Timmy

heb13-13
12-26-2011, 03:34 PM
Hi Rick,

Hope you had a wonderful Christmas with your family...

Your question "can we all be one?" begins with the presupposition that the Bible answers that question by giving us two choices.

Do you see more choices in the Bible?


The way I see it is that the Bible is just one part of many that makes up the whole. It is a part of the whole, but is also a whole in itself made up of parts, both light and dark. Sort of like a picture made up of thousands of pixels, each pixel having its own individual color, but at the same time adding to the all the colors that make up the whole picture. We are all just pixels in the whole cosmic picture. :winking0071:

Where does this understanding come from? Your-self?


All life emerges out of the whole (Ground of Being), thus making it part of the whole while remaining an individual. Instead of seeing "God" as being outside of creation, I see "God" as being the creation which I am a part of.

God is greater than the creation and is able to create things lesser than Himself.


Looking into myself I see "God", because I see that which I emerged out of. That is where our intuitions come from, or what we call being guided by the Holy Spirit.

Actually, man has his thoughts and the thoughts of the Holy Spirit are entirely separate from men's thoughts. That is what the Bible teaches. (Oh Yes, and thoughts from Satan).


Then we look deep into our hearts we feel a sense of oneness and connection with "The Whole", which many call God...we are all an individual part of that "God".

Many wishes to you for a wonderful New Year,
Rose

Hi Rose,

Thank you very much!! I hope you had a very Merry Christmas, too.

I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and what you believe. I tend to feel more like what Jesus articulated in John 17. When I look deep into my heart, I want the oneness that Jesus talked about. The oneness that He talked about was being one in He and His Father through believing on Him through His Word. Not anyone else's word and no mention about the Universe or other non-human forms of Creation.

John 17:16
They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
John 17:20
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

John 17:21
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

I don't see God being the Creation. That is generally known as Pantheism, as I am sure you know. I see God being the Creator of that which is created. The Greater is able to create that which is lesser than Himself.

I have no oneness with a crocodile, or a monkey or a tree. I can admire God's creative genius and enjoy His creation, but I don't think I will ever feel one with a snake or anyone that hates God.

Why do you think that Jesus' rendition of Oneness only included He and His Father and those who loved them?

Happy New Year,
Rick

Timmy
12-26-2011, 03:42 PM
Dear kathryn,

After completing the previous text about the wave offering, what was previously said about 'virgin subconscious' just kinda' made my i wonder what psychocosm (mental map) do you adhere to?
Wasn't it Sickman Fraud who coined that notion?

Kind of like when you can see the moon and stars sometimes during the day, we dream all the time (even as every other fascet of human mentation is operative.
It is the focus of attention that brings us to the certain modalities of this mentation, and away from others. It is all about the mental state spurred on by emotions and images induced through interaction with our environs, isn't it?

If so, me cannot see how anything of the STS 'subconscious' is actually virgin at all.
LEIK THIS:
No environment = No intellections = No consciousness of anything at all = No 'subconscious'


How do you see it?


TTiimmmmyy

heb13-13
12-26-2011, 04:07 PM
Hey there Rose,

That was one wild thread that I just posted. It was premature to hit enter, so please take another look at my answer to you.

All the best,
Rick

Richard Amiel McGough
12-26-2011, 04:37 PM
Hi Rose,

Merry Christmas.

Can we all be ONE? The Bible shows that there have only ever been two choices for us. Let's check this math.

There are only two characters
in this Universe,
not one
and
not three
and these characters
cannot be ONE
as in
UNITY.

Flesh + Spirit = 1?
Good + Evil = 1?
Life + Death = 1?
Love + Hate = 1?
Sin + Righteousness = 1?
Lies + Truth = 1?
Holy + Unholy = 1?
Heaven + Hell = 1?
God + Satan = 1?

Does 1 + 1 really = 1?


Hey there Rick, :yo:

I trust you had a wonderful Christmas.

I think Kathryn's response (1/2 + 1/2) points in the right direction. All "dualities" that you listed are two sides of a single coin. This is the concept is Yin and Yang. The concept of Up implies a Down, and the idea of Light implies Darkness.
251

The concept of Left entails the Right, and so it is with all dualities.

And the dot of Yang in the center of Yin reminds us that each contians it's opposite.

The idea of "sin vs. righteousness" is itslef the cause of sin and righteousness. This is similar to Paul's teaching that sin is no "imputed" or "known" without the Law to define it. It is the Law itself that creates the duality of "sin vs. righteousness." We don't have to use those categories to "divide" Reality.

There is no place for "Duality" if God is "All in All."



The Christian has Christ the Unbeliever has the "prince of the power of the air, the spirit working in the sons of disobedience" (Eph 2:2).

Christians have become 'partakers of the divine nature', the unregenerate are 'bynature children of wrath' (Eph. 2:3).

Notice, the choices that we have to derive your nature from. There is not a 3rd option.

Yes, any your understanding of the Christian doctrine is fundamentally dualistic. That's why Christianity creates such problems in the world. It divides humanity against itself, teaching that some are "of Adam" and other's "of Christ" and that some are destined for God's eternal Love and other's will received God's eternal Hatred. It appears to be a symptom of the fundamental problem that causes all the pain in the world - the division of the world into "US" vs. "THEM." It is the antithesis of Love.

It doesn't have to be interpreted that way. Those that are "in Adam" are in a state of fallen consciousness, because they mind the things of the flesh. Those "in Christ" have been awakened and so "mind the things of the Spriit." The only problem is that you divided the world into "Adam vs. Christ" and say that this represents a fundamental and eternal division of people. It doesn't have to be that way.



Christians have the 'treasure (Christ) in earthen vessels' (II Cor. 4:7), those without Christ put forth evil things from an evil treasure' (Matt. 12:35).

And what is that "treasure?" If it is anything, it is the vision of God as the All in All. There is no place for "Duality" if God is "All in All."



Fallen mankind is under the authority & dominion of Satan, Christians are converted to the authority/dominion of God in Christ (Acts 26:18).

Sure, there are two states of concsiousness. The Unitive (Love/God) Consciousness and the Divided (Flesh/Material) Consciousness. One sees Illusion. One sees Reality.



Non‐Christians are 'in the snare of the devil, held captive to do his will' (II Tim. 2:26), Christians are willing bond‐servants/love‐slaves of Jesus Christ (II Tim. 2:24; Rom. 1:8; Rom. 6:16‐20).

That's right, if by "non-Christians" you mean anyone trapped in the "mind of the flesh." The language is all symbolic of two states of concsiousness, else it must be rejected as false since there is no literal devil gong about holding people captive.



Christians are 'children of God' (Rom. 8:16) and call God, 'Abba, Father' (Rom. 8:15), Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of their father, the devil' (Jn. 8:44).

Again, that makes perfect sense we see the devil and the flesh as symbols of a mind focused on duality, us vs. them, good vs. bad, etc. But the mind that sees God as the All in All would not think that way.



These are but a few of the either/or contrasts in scripture that indicate that all human beings derive spiritual character & relation from either God or Satan – and there is no third alternative or option of self‐source.

We (humans) all derive our nature or character from either God or Satan. We are not self-generating and cannot invent a third standalone consciousness, nature or character.

We sow to the Spirit or to the flesh. And conversely, we receive from either God (Spirit) or Satan (carnal flesh).
There is not a 3rd object you can sow to and reap from.

That works if we recognize it as a symbolic way of describing the Unititve vs. Dualistic Consciousness. It is a fascinating challenge to put into words. You either see all as ultimately God/Spirit or you see All as divided between God/Spirit vs. Flesh/Matter. That makes the created equal to the Creator. That's how your categories strike me. It seems like you make Satan equal (and opposite) to God.



Freedom of Choice
To sow to the flesh (carnal man) is to choose the likeness and character of the selfish-nature of Satan (deeds of the flesh).
To sow to the Spirit is to choose the likeness and character of God.

Man either sows to the flesh or sows to the Spirit. You have never seen man sow to anything else.

We are either for Him (Christ) or against Him. Two alternatives, not three or four.

There is good and there is evil. Sorry, not a third choice and good and evil cannot be ONE.

That all works fine if you understand it as two kinds of consciousness. God-Consciousness vs. Matter-Consciousness.



1 + 1 = 2 not 1 or 3 or 4.

You really can't use arithmetic to prove anything, else God = Father + Son + Holy Spirit = 3 and God is not One.



Only God has free-will. Humans have freedom of choice and we have been given the freedom of choice to choose who we derive our character from. Yep, that's right God or Satan. Has there ever been a third?

That's not true at all. Only people have free will. God has no freedom at all because he is omiscient so he always knew what he would do and so never had a chance to make any choice about anything. God is a static entity that has never been able to make a choice about anything. The logical consequences of omniscience kill God.



The following from Jim Fowler -
http://www.christinyou.net/pages/pdfs/FrequentlyAskedQuestionsEbook.pdf


GOD acts ek autos
'out of Himself'
to express His character

MAN receives by
deriving from a spiritual source
– ek Theos (out of God)
– ek diabolos (out of the devil)

DERIVATIVE MAN
EVERYTHING about man’s being and function
is derived.

Derived nature
'nature of wrath' -or- 'divine nature'

Derived identity
'sinners' -or- 'saints'

Derived character
'sinfulness' -or- 'righteousness'

Derived image
visible expression of God or Satan

Derived ...
'life' -or- 'death'

Derived immortality
'Immortal God' brought 'life and
immortality to light through the gospel'


God, the three-in-one Divine-being, is independent, contingent, Self-determinative, and Self- generative.
God is the only 'Independent Self' with absolute 'free will,' whereby He Self-determines His own action in accord with His own character, and Self-generates such action ek autos (out of Himself).


A very prosperous and Joyful New Year to all,
Rick
That's not far from the truth. God is All in All so any finite "part" of the All is "derived" from the All. Indeed, that was the whole point of the video.

The idea of being "derived from Satan" must be understood as the error of thinking that there is something other than God. This happens when one has divided the Ground of Being into a "god" that is "other" than the All in All, the Alpha Omega, the Beginning and the End.

The title of God in the Bible declares that God is All in All. There is no "other" except in the false perceptions of humans who do not yet see the truth.

Great chatting, my friend! This is a most interesting topic.

Richard

Richard Amiel McGough
12-26-2011, 04:58 PM
Hi Rose,

Thank you very much!! I hope you had a very Merry Christmas, too.

I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and what you believe. I tend to feel more like what Jesus articulated in John 17. When I look deep into my heart, I want the oneness that Jesus talked about. The oneness that He talked about was being one in He and His Father through believing on Him through His Word. Not anyone else's word and no mention about the Universe or other non-human forms of Creation.

John 17:16
They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
John 17:20
Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

John 17:21
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

I don't see God being the Creation. That is generally known as Pantheism, as I am sure you know. I see God being the Creator of that which is created. The Greater is able to create that which is lesser than Himself.

I have no oneness with a crocodile, or a monkey or a tree. I can admire God's creative genius and enjoy His creation, but I don't think I will ever feel one with a snake or anyone that hates God.

Why do you think that Jesus' rendition of Oneness only included He and His Father and those who loved them?

Happy New Year,
Rick



Hey there Rick,

You have a lot more "oneness" with a "crocodile, monkey, or tree" than you realize. You are made of precisely the same set of chemical elements and many the genes in your DNA are identical. Your sense of being so "different" than the rest of the universe is an error. It is this sense of "US vs. THEM' that is the root of most problems on the planet, from poverty, to war, to the ecological haulocaust we are wathing unfold before our eyes.

The idea that we are "not of the world" means that we are not of the consciousness that focuses on the "world" as if it were separate from the One. It is the consciousness that sees God as the All in All, the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. God is the Ground of Being and encampasses all things. Those who do not have this knowledge look at the "world" to draw their sustenance and so are "fleshly minded" because they see "US vs. THEM" rather than the Divine Truth of Unity of All.

Great chatting!

And Happy New Year! 2012! :woohoo:

Richard

heb13-13
12-26-2011, 05:02 PM
Hey there Rick, :yo:

I trust you had a wonderful Christmas.

Great chatting, my friend! This is a most interesting topic.

Richard

Hi Richard,

I was wondering about you today and glad to see you post. I trust your Christmas was very enjoyable.
Ours was (thanks for asking) and we will be enjoying it until Jan 3rd. Going to a movie soon:pop2: but wanted to acknowledge your post on Dualism. I have some thoughts and will respond probably tomorrow.

Much peace and joy to you,
Rick

Richard Amiel McGough
12-26-2011, 05:05 PM
Hi Richard,

I was wondering about you today and glad to see you post. I trust your Christmas was very enjoyable.
Ours was (thanks for asking) and we will be enjoying it until Jan 3rd. Going to a movie soon:pop2: but wanted to acknowledge your post on Dualism. I have some thoughts and will respond probably tomorrow.

Much peace and joy to you,
Rick
Thanks for letting me know buddy!

It's a great day for a movie. What are you going to see?

Christmas was great with us. Glad to hear the same from you.

Charisma
12-26-2011, 05:19 PM
Hi Rick,

I want to remind you about this passage, which seems to support Kathryn's 'in and through' idea, apart from the very great differences (from Kathryn's thesis) which Paul has included in his use of 'in' and 'through'.

Colossians 1 (some 'in' and 'through' statements in bold).
14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.
19 For it pleased [the Father] that in him should all fulness dwell;
20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven.
21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in [your] mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled
22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:
23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, [and] which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:
25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;
26 [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
27 To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: 28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:
29 Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.

The thing that stands out in those verses, is the fulness and completeness of Christ's work on the cross.

Ephesians 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him: 18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, 19 And what [is] the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, 20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set [him] at his own right hand in the heavenly [places], 21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: 22 And hath put ALL [things] under his feet, and gave him [to be] the head over ALL [things] to the church, 23 Which is his body, the fulness of [B]HIM that FILLETH all in all.

duxrow
12-26-2011, 05:28 PM
Joseph's explanation of the Pharaoh's dreams, Gen41:32, may be more apropo to this subject. Many multiple two's: 2 trees, 2 great lights, 2 Covenants, 2 witnesses, etc.

Putting two and two together is what we try to do,
To some the answer's four, and to others twenty-two.

Even acrostics get into the act -- part of the challenge of the SCRIPT, wouldn't you say?

Rose
12-26-2011, 06:06 PM
Where does this understanding come from? Your-self?


God is greater than the creation and is able to create things lesser than Himself.


Actually, man has his thoughts and the thoughts of the Holy Spirit are entirely separate from men's thoughts. That is what the Bible teaches. (Oh Yes, and thoughts from Satan).

Hi Rick,

My understanding comes from the only place that understanding can come from, and that is ourselves. Everything we see, hear, and read is interpreted through ourselves. Whether it be a intuition that someones calls the Holy Spirit, or and insight our brains must interpret it...so every thought is colored by our own personalities and life experiences.





I don't see God being the Creation. That is generally known as Pantheism, as I am sure you know. I see God being the Creator of that which is created. The Greater is able to create that which is lesser than Himself.

I have no oneness with a crocodile, or a monkey or a tree. I can admire God's creative genius and enjoy His creation, but I don't think I will ever feel one with a snake or anyone that hates God.

Why do you think that Jesus' rendition of Oneness only included He and His Father and those who loved them?

Happy New Year,
Rick




Have you ever thought that everything we see around us can be traced back to an origin. Whether it be the expanding universe traced back to the Big Bang, life traced back to DNA, or Atoms that are made up of smaller particles like "strings", everything that we see around us evolved from those beginnings. If you want to believe that a creator exists then that creator must be pushed back to before, and outside of those origins. If that is the case than "God" is not a being that interacts personally with humans, or any other form of living or inorganic matter.

All the best,
Rose

Timmy
12-26-2011, 06:12 PM
What drives anyone to assume things non-based in the here and now without tangible proofs confirming?
Existential 'faith'?
In what?

How does recognizing God as the ground source of all things transmute one to be the very same as He is:
knowing everything
seeing everything
and
everywhere present?

Is my i missing something
or does this reik of pride in what our Maker has enabled us to become in ignorance of Him: fragmented figments of our own imaginary menageries?

When does recognition of anything imply such innate identification with the object contemplated to make it so that it is no longer a degree of identification achieved, but rather becoming exacly the same as the object.

If indeed we are gawds on such a scale, we could not only imagine a maggot, but be the maggot imagined at the same time, right?
Follow this through to it's conclusion, and wala, god is a maggot.

This seems quite bassackwards.

Should these notions be correct, then Abel and all the prophets following, including the very source of prophecy, Jesus Christ Himself, had it all wrong: bing, the Bible suddenly becomes obsolete or at least frozen in time.
Can a man kill God?
Can God kill a man?

Subjectivity is not objectivity...is it???
...and finite is not infinite, except perhaps as being infinitely finite.


Paul proclaimed Jesus Christ as Lord—as Lord of creation (the one through whom all things were made) and as Lord of the church (the one through whom all things have been reconciled). Because of who he is (the image and fullness of God) and because of what he has done (the one who brought about creation and reconciliation), Jesus Christ has a double supremacy. He is head of the universe and head of the church. He is the Lord of both creations. This is the apostle’s masterful portrait of Jesus Christ.

Can we reduce God in Jesus Christ down to an issue of imagining ourselves to be and we are? Is God the entity to carucature?

Can i scream blasphemy?

Away with these petty, puny, pygmy Jesuses!

Away with all the Jesus pop stars!

Get rid of the idolized preachers and prophets and teachers and riff-raff that goes along with these programs.

Away too with any political Messiahs and revolutionaries and consumer religion along with all of it!

Jesus has never been the icon of any certain cultured religious notions.

It is not by forming God into what we imagine Him to be that we become like Him. Reading the Bible without rationalizing anything away, this is the process prescribed into alienation from and emnity with Him.

Identification with God comes through relationship with Him in Jesus Christ ALONE.

This is how many think of him: a person to conform to our puny ideals, so it's no wonder all the succeding variations of idolatrous rationalizations result.

Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Master over all things.
(...So we all fall down and extremely far short of what He is. There has never ever even been a human alive who has even come close to what He became even on earth: coming in the form of a man and laying aside all of God Himself, operating in the full capacity of what man was made to be...PERFECT.)



"...Walk worthily of the Lord to all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work and growing into the full knowledge of God; being empowered with all power according to the might of His glory, to all patience and long-suffering with joy; giving thanks to the Father, who has made us fit for a share of the inheritance of the saints in light, who delivered us out of the authority of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the remission of sins; who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of all creation. For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible; whether thrones, or lordships, or rulers, or authorities, all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and all things have subsisted in Him. And He is the Head of the body, the assembly, who is the Beginning, the First-born out of the dead, that He be preeminent in all things; because all the fullness was pleased to dwell in Him, and through Him making peace by the blood of His cross, to reconcile all things to Himself; through Him, whether the things on the earth, or the things in the heavens. I charge you before God, He making all things alive, and Christ Jesus, the One witnessing the good confession to Pontius Pilate, that you keep the commandment spotless, blameless, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, who in His own time will reveal the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, the only One having immortality, living in light that cannot be approached, whom no one of men saw, nor can see; to whom be honor and everlasting might.
Amen.
(I COr. 1.10-19 / I Tim. 6.13-16, YLT)

We all have alot to learn, and most will not see any of the above quite so clearly as when the inevitable 100 percent statistic for all humanity manifests as physical reality for them.
You, me, everybody will die, and after that, the judgement.

Does our notion of God measure up to what God says of Himself or what we ourselves must do?



Timmy

Charisma
12-26-2011, 07:16 PM
Hi dux,


About the "wave offering" - I think of as the "waiver" we receive on account of the Resurrection! Hallelujah! Good word, bro!


To Timmy and Kathryn, (since you are discussing leaven),

Subtitled a sermon to myself


Kathryn, you said,

His Body , however, still has the condition of iniquity in it (although they are covered in the blood of the Lamb). This shows you are judging the New Covenant by Old Covenant parameters, which can never lead to an accurate analysis of the glories of the New Covenant. Nor does it accord with apostles' doctrine in general. Nowhere does the NT report that the sins of believers are 'covered in the blood of the Lamb'.*

I'm aware there is, worldwide, a regular public proclamation of this* - as if it be 'truth'. But really, it's part of the 'dual covenant' confusion which, to one degree or other, all legalistic schools of 'Christian' thought, proclaim.

Hebrews explains the detail, and Rick quoted an important verse - 10:14.

Again:
1 John 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not [practise NASB] the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

1 John 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

This means we all have to give up looking in the Old Covenant for our understanding, and we have to fix our eyes on the One who said, 'This is the new covenant in my blood'.

And we have to believe:
1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. 30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? 31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. 32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. 37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. 42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven? 43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. 44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. (Matt 16:17, Hebrews 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.)

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. 48 I am that bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat? 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. 58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

John 11:25 Jesus said unto her [Martha], I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:



Note, if Jesus was correct in His claim that 'few' find the way He described above (the narrow way), then don't be deceived by an easier gospel.

My impression of the doctrine you share, Kathryn, is that it focuses on the typology of the Old Covenant - the shadow - rather than Christ the true Light and the complete efficacy of the power of His resurrection in those who believe, to whose souls His blood is applied continously by the Holy Spirit. (Continuously means it doesn't ever stop. It doesn't come and go.)

What I'm trying to say is, that when a person decides to believe in Jesus Christ on the terms set out in Acts 2:38, he or she sets off a spiritual chain reaction which while the Christians is guided by it, cannot fail, and thus, he/she lives and walks out life in the Spirit - a life which is wholly pleasing to God. (Romans 6 explains this. Galatians 5:16 Walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.)

Oh for grace to come now and drink, ere the sun sets upon the year's last day!

No waiting or preparation is so much as hinted at. Drinking represents a reception for which no fitness is required. A fool, a thief, a harlot can drink; and so sinfulness of character is no bar to the invitation to believe in Jesus. We want no golden cup, no bejewelled chalice, in which to convey the water to the thirsty; the mouth of poverty is welcome to stoop down and quaff the flowing flood. Blistered, leprous, filthy lips may touch the stream of divine love; they cannot pollute it, but shall themselves be purified. Jesus is the fount of hope. Dear reader, hear the dear Redeemer's loving voice as he cries to each of us, (John 7:37)

"IF ANY MAN THIRST,

LET HIM

COME UNTO ME

AND DRINK."

kathryn
12-26-2011, 07:50 PM
Hi dux,

Good word, bro!


To Timmy and Kathryn, (since you are discussing leaven),

Subtitled a sermon to myself


Kathryn, you said,
This shows you are judging the New Covenant by Old Covenant parameters, which can never lead to an accurate analysis of the glories of the New Covenant. Nor does it accord with apostles' doctrine in general. Nowhere does the NT report that the sins of believers are 'covered in the blood of the Lamb'.*

I'm aware there is, worldwide, a regular public proclamation of this* - as if it be 'truth'. But really, it's part of the 'dual covenant' confusion which, to one degree or other, all legalistic schools of 'Christian' thought, proclaim.

Hebrews explains the detail, and Rick quoted an important verse - 10:14.

Again:
1 John 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not [practise NASB] the truth: 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Yes Charisma...but the cleansing hasn't completed yet. Until the condition of inquity has been completely removed, we still have the "old" Adam to contend with. The old man was crucified with Christ...but we still have to "die to self" daily.

1 John 2:8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

Our "eye" is not single yet. If it was, everyone on the forum would be seeing the same thing.

This means we all have to give up looking in the Old Covenant for our understanding, and we have to fix our eyes on the One who said, 'This is the new covenant in my blood'.

And we have to believe:
1 John 1:5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

James 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. 30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? 31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat. 32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread. 35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. 36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. 37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. 38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. 39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. 40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. 42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven? 43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves. 44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. 45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. (Matt 16:17, Hebrews 8:11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.)

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. 48 I am that bread of life. 49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. 50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat? 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. 58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

The whole process of sanctification is a "consuming" process. As we consume the flesh and blood of Christ (the Word made Flesh)...He is consuming the old man within us. When Life/Light enter, all darkness is made desolate. We are still in this process Charisma.

John 11:25 Jesus said unto her [Martha], I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:



Note, if Jesus was correct in His claim that 'few' find the way He described above (the narrow way), then don't be deceived by an easier gospel.

The narrow way is the birth canal . Yes...there are the firstfruits who "find" it first....but when the "head" crowns, the rest of the Body follows. We are ONE man being birthed. Jesus said "IF I BE LIFTED UP, I WILL DRAW ALL MEN UNTO MYSELF". What part of "ALL" don't you understand Charisma?

My impression of the doctrine you share, Kathryn, is that it focuses on the typology of the Old Covenant - the shadow - rather than Christ the true Light and the complete efficacy of the power of His resurrection in those who believe, to whose souls His blood is applied continously by the Holy Spirit.

Then you have misunderstood what I have been saying. I have simply been trying to establish the "plummet line", which most of the Church has tossed aside and as a result....believe in doctrines that go against the character and purposes of God.

(Continuously means it doesn't ever stop. It doesn't come and go.)

What I'm trying to say is, that when a person decides to believe in Jesus Christ on the terms set out in Acts 2:38, he or she sets off a spiritual chain reaction which while the Christians is guided by it, cannot fail, and thus, he/she lives and walks out life in the Spirit - a life which is wholly pleasing to God. (Romans 6 explains this. Galatians 5:16 Walk in the Spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

)I agree...He cannot fail...but a great percentage of the church have no idea WHO they are believing in. They don't KNOW Him. They still think He's capable of sending His children to eternal hell, etc etc.

Oh for grace to come now and drink, ere the sun sets upon the year's last day!

No waiting or preparation is so much as hinted at.

[B]How does the Bride make herself ready? What does it mean to become a "living sacrifice"? Where in typology are you seeing this concept of no preparation? It simply doesn't exist Charisma. As I said before, you really need to do some foundational study.

Drinking represents a reception for which no fitness is required. A fool, a thief, a harlot can drink; and so sinfulness of character is no bar to the invitation to believe in Jesus. We want no golden cup, no bejewelled chalice, in which to convey the water to the thirsty; the mouth of poverty is welcome to stoop down and quaff the flowing flood. Blistered, leprous, filthy lips may touch the stream of divine love; they cannot pollute it, but shall themselves be purified. Jesus is the fount of hope. Dear reader, hear the dear Redeemer's loving voice as he cries to each of us, (John 7:37)

What about homosexual lips Charisma? It's ok if they're leperous...but not Gay? I'm not sure what you're talking about here as far as "drinking". The only think that keeps us from drinking is stinking thinking about God's Love and purposes towards His people. The majority of the church are serving a toxic brew of dung and luke warm water.

"IF ANY MAN THIRST,

LET HIM

COME UNTO ME

AND DRINK."

heb13-13
12-26-2011, 08:09 PM
Thanks for letting me know buddy!

It's a great day for a movie. What are you going to see?

Christmas was great with us. Glad to hear the same from you.

Well, I made a mistake about the movie "Puss N' Boots" so we went to Panera bread for soup n sandwich and now at Barnes and Noble. We have fanned out in every direction to find a comfortable "nook" and peruse the world of books. (all 6 of us).

Rick

Rose
12-26-2011, 09:04 PM
What drives anyone to assume things non-based in the here and now without tangible proofs confirming?
Existential 'faith'?
In what?

How does recognizing God as the ground source of all things transmute one to be the very same as He is:
knowing everything
seeing everything
and
everywhere present?

Is my i missing something
or does this reik of pride in what our Maker has enabled us to become in ignorance of Him: fragmented figments of our own imaginary menageries?

When does recognition of anything imply such innate identification with the object contemplated to make it so that it is no longer a degree of identification achieved, but rather becoming exacly the same as the object.

If indeed we are gawds on such a scale, we could not only imagine a maggot, but be the maggot imagined at the same time, right?
Follow this through to it's conclusion, and wala, god is a maggot.

This seems quite bassackwards.

Should these notions be correct, then Abel and all the prophets following, including the very source of prophecy, Jesus Christ Himself, had it all wrong: bing, the Bible suddenly becomes obsolete or at least frozen in time.
Can a man kill God?
Can God kill a man?

Subjectivity is not objectivity...is it???
...and finite is not infinite, except perhaps as being infinitely finite.



Does our notion of God measure up to what God says of Himself or what we ourselves must do?



Timmy

Hello Timmy :icon_hello:

We have no tangible proofs of God, but we ourselves.

There is no god except that of our own making...those fragmented figments of ones own imagination cast onto the pages of a book called holy...fashioned and formed from our own knowings.

Can those whose imaginations projected onto the pages of Scripture, be anything but the same object that was cast there.

How can the Bible be anything but frozen in time and obsolete?...The same as the notion of God contained within its pages, so then what can God say of himself when he is but a notion of men?

May you have the happiest of New Years,
Rose

Timmy
12-26-2011, 09:57 PM
Hello Timmy :icon_hello:
Howdy Doody Rose: :yo:(39888=28=10=1)
We pray that both of your Christmas was well as our Chchanakkcha is, and that the New Year for youz two is even better than the previous ones combined.


We have no tangible proofs of God, but we ourselves.
Do you mean as observers?
What of the ever expanding clockwork universe?
(...or is this just an exercise in pacing and leading?:egad:)


There is no god except that of our own making...those fragmented figments of ones own imagination cast onto the pages of a book called holy...fashioned and formed from our own knowings.
i don't know about that?
There just is too much of it all that fits together as a congruent whole via the Bible to simply discount God's place in it all like that. . .and all the different penmen through the succession of time.
What other book compares?


Can those whose imaginations projected onto the pages of Scripture, be anything but the same object that was cast there.
...and the miracles?
...or the fulfillment of prophecy after prophecy after prophecy et al?
Where these all imagined too?



How can the Bible be anything but frozen in time and obsolete?...
The same as the notion of God contained within its pages, so then what can God say of himself when he is but a notion of men?
You have more faith than me to believe in matter over a designer that made it in the first place, though to us here it is appearing quite misplaced to say the least.

Follow your thought through to it's conclusion and what do you come up with?

It is thouroughly understood (through experience) where you are coming from, where it will lead, and where it ends. There is a front side and a back side to everything...and then there is that which transcends the two...something way beyond any I.A.O.

It is deeply desired and prayed you will know the peace found in Jesus Christ alone long before our own acharit.


May you have the happiest of New Years,
Rose

...and to you and Richard a hearty happy festive time even before the ball drops.

May your table always be full
and plenty of hospitable friend be with you
to share company throughout
this upcoming year.

Our prayers shall continually to be brought before His throne
only for ya'lls best in all things you put your hands to do.



Timmy

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 12:36 AM
"The Christian life is the life of the Lord Jesus Christ lived nineteen hundred years ago, lived now by Him in you!" (W. Ian Thomas - The Saving Life of Christ. Zondervan Publishing 1972. pg. 120)

Is this the life that you once knew, Richard and Rose?

Kindest regards,
Rick

kathryn
12-27-2011, 06:34 AM
Rick: here is no phrase "in and through" in the Bible. This is a phrase that you coined so what does it mean? Are you saying that "God is ALL / ALL is God"?


Hi Rick...Here is that verse you were looking for:

Rom 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are ALL things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

The rest of your questions on satan we've been speaking of in the "demons" thread.

kathryn
12-27-2011, 06:48 AM
Dear kathryn,

After completing the previous text about the wave offering, what was previously said about 'virgin subconscious' just kinda' made my i wonder what psychocosm (mental map) do you adhere to?
Wasn't it Sickman Fraud who coined that notion?

Kind of like when you can see the moon and stars sometimes during the day, we dream all the time (even as every other fascet of human mentation is operative.
It is the focus of attention that brings us to the certain modalities of this mentation, and away from others. It is all about the mental state spurred on by emotions and images induced through interaction with our environs, isn't it?

If so, me cannot see how anything of the STS 'subconscious' is actually virgin at all.
LEIK THIS:
No environment = No intellections = No consciousness of anything at all = No 'subconscious'


How do you see it?


TTiimmmmyy

Hi Timmy...We've been discussing this on the "demons" thread, as well as other ones. The whole of Temple/Tabernacle typology reveals the heart/mind. In fact, all of scripture is primarily about the circumcision of the heart and the renewing of the mind.
I still have a houseful of company, but will gladly discuss this with you when I have more time. (if you are interested:winking0071:)

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 09:02 AM
"The Christian life is the life of the Lord Jesus Christ lived nineteen hundred years ago, lived now by Him in you!" (W. Ian Thomas - The Saving Life of Christ. Zondervan Publishing 1972. pg. 120)

Is this the life that you once knew, Richard and Rose?

Kindest regards,
Rick
I certainly would have said "yes" when I was a Christian, but now I see things differently.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 09:23 AM
Rick: here is no phrase "in and through" in the Bible. This is a phrase that you coined so what does it mean? Are you saying that "God is ALL / ALL is God"?


Hi Rick...Here is that verse you were looking for:

Rom 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are ALL things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

The rest of your questions on satan we've been speaking of in the "demons" thread.
This is very relevant for this topic. The language seems pretty emphatic:

of him (ex autou)
through him (di autou)
to him (eis autou)

are ALL things (ta panta)

Note the "pan" in "panta." These are forms fo the word "pas" (all). People are very happy to take this word literally when it condemns humanity, as in "all (pas) have sinned" but they are not so happy to take it literally if it suggests that all will be saved in Christ as in "For as in Adam ALL (pas) die, even so in Christ shall ALL (pas) be made alive." When I was a Christian, I argued that this verse did not imply universalism because while everyone begins in Adam, not everyone ends up in Christ. But that's mere assertion. How do we know that not everyone will end up in Christ? Folks then present arguments - setting Scritpure against Scripture - and conclude whatever they want to conclude.

Long ago I saw a fundamental problem with the doctrine of hell because it contradicted the idea that God would be "All in All." The doctrine teaches that there would be an eternal and unresolved evil in God's universe. I found that logically (and morally) irreconcilable.

Anyone, we see similar language "pan-theistic" in more then a few places:

Did God reconcile ALL THINGS or just the parts of creation that were willing?

Colossians 1:20 And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile ALL THINGS unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

And where do we exist? Are we >>IN GOD<< or not?

Col 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and IN HIM ALL THINGS consist.

Acts 17:28 For IN HIM we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

So it looks to me like there is MUCH more evidence for Christian Pantheism than the doctrine of an eternal hell of separation from God.

Richard

kathryn
12-27-2011, 09:37 AM
Richard:
Did God reconcile ALL THINGS or just the parts of creation that were willing?


Hi Richard...you bring up a good point here and it's one that needs to be examined by those who still believe that this is just for the few who are willing. Scripture says that we were subjected to "vanity"...and not of our own will. It states that some were made "enemies" for our sake, so we could grow in understanding. It says that God hardens the hearts of some, and draws others. Somehow, we've managed to make our willingness and our ability to believe, virtues, and in doing this, we harass , condemn and demonize others for the path they're walking.

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 09:45 AM
Rick: here is no phrase "in and through" in the Bible. This is a phrase that you coined so what does it mean? Are you saying that "God is ALL / ALL is God"?


Hi Rick...Here is that verse you were looking for:

Rom 11:36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are ALL things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

The rest of your questions on satan we've been speaking of in the "demons" thread.

Thank you Kathryn,

I did not think there was a phrase "in and through" in the Bible. Now, do you mean "God is ALL and ALL is God"? If you do, could you elaborate a bit?

What do you think the context of Romans 11:36 is?

All the best,
Rick

kathryn
12-27-2011, 09:56 AM
Thank you Kathryn,

I did not think there was a phrase "in and through" in the Bible. Now, do you mean "God is ALL and ALL is God"? If you do, could you elaborate a bit?

What do you think the context of Romans 11:36 is?

All the best,
Rick

Hi Rick...are you saying my paraphrase is incorrect? If so...how?
The context of Romans is that all Israel will be saved....His Body. The dividing wall has come down...this is ALL. Again...this birth happens in 3 stages...but it is all ONE man.

kathryn
12-27-2011, 10:19 AM
And yes...I understand that God is ALL in ALL.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 11:09 AM
Richard:
Did God reconcile ALL THINGS or just the parts of creation that were willing?


Hi Richard...you bring up a good point here and it's one that needs to be examined by those who still believe that this is just for the few who are willing. Scripture says that we were subjected to "vanity"...and not of our own will. It states that some were made "enemies" for our sake, so we could grow in understanding. It says that God hardens the hearts of some, and draws others. Somehow, we've managed to make our willingness and our ability to believe, virtues, and in doing this, we harass , condemn and demonize others for the path they're walking.
Yep, and that "how" is through the slow accretion of dogmas upon dogams based on a fundamentally flawed philosophy that says God is fundamentally separate from her creation.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 11:22 AM
Thank you Kathryn,

I did not think there was a phrase "in and through" in the Bible. Now, do you mean "God is ALL and ALL is God"? If you do, could you elaborate a bit?

What do you think the context of Romans 11:36 is?

All the best,
Rick
There are multiple contexts nested within contexts.

The immediate context is the proclamation that the wisdom of God is way over our heads:
Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! 34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? 35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? 36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.
Paul introduced the statement in 11:36 with the explanatory "hoti" (for = because) - so we must ask, what was he explaining when he said "For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever." This "for" is preceded by another "for" - "For who hath known the mind of the Lord?" This is a quote from Isaiah:
Isaiah 40:9 O Zion, that bringest good tidings, get thee up into the high mountain; O Jerusalem, that bringest good tidings, lift up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God! 10 Behold, the Lord GOD will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him. 11 He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young. 12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? 13 Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him? 14 With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding? 15 Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing. 16 And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt offering. 17 All nations before him are as nothing; and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity.
Now this is extremely enlightening, because we see that the context of the quote is itself dealing with similar issues as the context of Romans 11, namely, the relation between Israel, the "nations" and the Gospel. But I don't think any furhter analysis will change the meaning of the verse in question. The fact that Paul saw ALL THINGS as from God, through God, and for God is established.

Richard

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 12:36 PM
Hi Rick...are you saying my paraphrase is incorrect? If so...how?
The context of Romans is that all Israel will be saved....His Body. The dividing wall has come down...this is ALL. Again...this birth happens in 3 stages...but it is all ONE man.

Hi Kathryn,

Let me be more direct. What I am trying to determine is if you believe created things should be worshipped as God?

If God is in ALL and ALL is GOD, does that mean that we worship trees, rats, cockroaches, etc?

Thanks,
Rick

kathryn
12-27-2011, 01:29 PM
Hi Kathryn,

Let me be more direct. What I am trying to determine is if you believe created things should be worshipped as God?

If God is in ALL and ALL is GOD, does that mean that we worship trees, rats, cockroaches, etc?

Thanks,
Rick

Hi Rick....I see all created things as expressing the character and purposes of God . The Creation, as it says in Romans, was/is the first and intended witness. As I mentioned before, we were never meant to learn of God "precept on precept", but through the Word made Flesh in Creation.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 01:38 PM
Hi Kathryn,

Let me be more direct. What I am trying to determine is if you believe created things should be worshipped as God?

If God is in ALL and ALL is GOD, does that mean that we worship trees, rats, cockroaches, etc?

Thanks,
Rick
It depends upon what you mean by "worship." And of course the concept of "God" as a separate being is not consistent with the understanding that God is All in All. So we have to choose which verses we will take as "definitive" and which we will force to conform to the "definitive" verses. That's what everyone does, but people seem to forget what they have done. They select a set of ideas that they insist are correct, and then force everything else to conform to those few verses. Harold Camping is a perfect example of this error. He took the Reformed teaching that no one can get saved by works, and then reinterpreted "faith" as a "work" and so taught that you could not get saved by your faith since that is a work. What then about the Bible verses that say we are saved by faith? Well, he said that those verses teach that we are indeed saved by the "work of faith" but it was not our faith, but rather Christ's work of faith that saves us. But he still had one verse left to "harmonize" with his strange doctrine - namely:
Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Now obviously, "his faith" refers to the believer's faith, not Christ's, but that didn't "harmonize" with the "rest of the Bible" so Harold spoke about how many long hows he struggled to understand this verse. Finally, the light of God's Wisdom lit his humble soul, and he understood the "Truth of God." The word "his" is actually "of him" and that referred to Christ! Woohoo! We've harmonized the Scriptures!

This is why I found Harold so very fascinating. He was the ultimate "case study" in self-delusion. And nothing - absolutely nothing - could penetrate the shell he had encased himself in, not even making absolutely and irrefutably false predictions about the Rapture on May 21, 2011. After declaring for years that it was absolutely impossible for him to be wrong about that date, he simply said that it really did happen "invisibly" on that date, and that the annihilation of the universe would happen on schedule on October 21, 2011. When that failed to happen, he said that God was free to mislead his people for his own purposes! :doh: I tell ya, there's never been a more entertaining kook to listen to. The thing is, his followers gave him over a hundred million dollars to preach the "Gospel" before the end! Now that's some real money ...

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 03:29 PM
It depends upon what you mean by "worship." And of course the concept of "God" as a separate being is not consistent with the understanding that God is All in All. So we have to choose which verses we will take as "definitive" and which we will force to conform to the "definitive" verses. That's what everyone does, but people seem to forget what they have done. They select a set of ideas that they insist are correct, and then force everything else to conform to those few verses. Harold Camping is a perfect example of this error. He took the Reformed teaching that no one can get saved by works, and then reinterpreted "faith" as a "work" and so taught that you could not get saved by your faith since that is a work. What then about the Bible verses that say we are saved by faith? Well, he said that those verses teach that we are indeed saved by the "work of faith" but it was not our faith, but rather Christ's work of faith that saves us. But he still had one verse left to "harmonize" with his strange doctrine - namely:
Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Now obviously, "his faith" refers to the believer's faith, not Christ's, but that didn't "harmonize" with the "rest of the Bible" so Harold spoke about how many long hows he struggled to understand this verse. Finally, the light of God's Wisdom lit his humble soul, and he understood the "Truth of God." The word "his" is actually "of him" and that referred to Christ! Woohoo! We've harmonized the Scriptures!

This is why I found Harold so very fascinating. He was the ultimate "case study" in self-delusion. And nothing - absolutely nothing - could penetrate the shell he had encased himself in, not even making absolutely and irrefutably false predictions about the Rapture on May 21, 2011. After declaring for years that it was absolutely impossible for him to be wrong about that date, he simply said that it really did happen "invisibly" on that date, and that the annihilation of the universe would happen on schedule on October 21, 2011. When that failed to happen, he said that God was free to mislead his people for his own purposes! :doh: I tell ya, there's never been a more entertaining kook to listen to. The thing is, his followers gave him over a hundred million dollars to preach the "Gospel" before the end! Now that's some real money ...

I think Robert Tilton, Mike Murdock, Jim Baaker, Paul Crouch are in the same class as good ole Harry.

And if you want a good retirement income, start a "worldly church" and franchise it. Probably the best proven money-maker there is and you don't even have to pay any taxes. Such a deal!!!:thumb:

I felt you were going to ask that question about worship. :)

By worship I mean:

Worship is recognizing God for who He is and ascribing worth (value) and honor and service to Him. It is the Believer telling Him of the worth they see in Him.

Hebrew word shachah - "bowing down before an object of honor"
Neh. 8:6 - Israelites "bowed low and worshipped the Lord"
Ps. 95:6 - "let us worship and bow down"

Hebrew word abad - "service or work for God"
Deut. 6:13 - "fear the Lord your God and worship Him"
Ps. 2:11 - "Worship the Lord with reverence"

Hebrew word segid - "showing respect" or "doing homage"
Dan. 3:5-18 - "worship the golden image"

Greek words gonu and gonupeteo - "bending the knee"
Eph. 3:14 - "bow my knees before the Father"
Phil. 2:10 - "every knee should bow at the name of Jesus"

Greek word proskuneo, derived from pros, "toward" and kuneo, "to kiss"
Matt. 4:10 - "You shall worship the Lord your
God"John 4:24 - "worship Him in spirit and truth"

Greek word latreuo, derived from latris - "servant"
Rom. 12:1 - "spiritual service or worship"
Phil. 3:3 - "worship in the Spirit of God"

Greek word leitourgeo, derived from laos, "people", and ergeo, "to work"
Acts 13:2 - "ministering to the Lord"
II Cor. 9:12 - "ministry of service"

English word "worship" derived from old Anglo-Saxon
weorthscipe, meaning "worth-ship" (Jim Fowler)

The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ should be the only subject and object of Christian worship.

-rick

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 03:47 PM
It depends upon what you mean by "worship." And of course the concept of "God" as a separate being is not consistent with the understanding that God is All in All.

Monistic monotheism that claims that "God is all in all" as "the only Person in the universe" is a denial of Trinitarian monotheism, merging the three onenesses in a false unity that makes the Christological and Christian onenesses superfluous and unnecessary, since all is one with God already. If everything and everyone is inherently and intrinsically one with God, then we are lulled into a deterministic passivism of universalism that ends up being fatalism.

Consideration of the oneness of God's Being requires the explanation that although ousia referred to an abstract sense of existence in general in some of the Greek philosophers, the Christian use of "oneness of Being" does not mean that God is all that exists. Such a monistic monotheism portrays God as a singular and universal God-reality that incorporates and includes all that exists in a pantheistic monism that fails to distinguish the Creator from the creation. Some have misused Scripture to attempt to justify such monistic monotheism, arguing that the KJV rendering of Isaiah 45:5,6 is God's
declaration, "I am the Lord, and there is none else. ...There is none beside Me," implying that God is all that is. They also misuse I Cor. 15:28, Eph. 4:6, and Col. 3:11, claiming that these verses state "God is all in all." God's Being is not to be abstracted as a monistic universal existence that comprises or is intrinsic to everything in a pantheistic or panentheistic sense. The traditional Christian understanding of Trinitarian monotheism regards the three persons of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as constituting the personal divine Being of the Godhead.

If you would like to read the entire article: Three Divine Onenesses - http://www.christinyou.net/pages/3divineonenesses.html
(http://www.christinyou.net/pages/3divineonenesses.html)
All the best,
-rick

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 03:50 PM
Hi Rick....I see all created things as expressing the character and purposes of God . The Creation, as it says in Romans, was/is the first and intended witness. As I mentioned before, we were never meant to learn of God "precept on precept", but through the Word made Flesh in Creation.

Hi Kathryn,

You are having a difficult time answering my question directly?

I agree with you that God's character is expressed in His creation. But that really wasn't my question, was it?

Thanks anyway,
Rick

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 04:17 PM
Richard:
Did God reconcile ALL THINGS or just the parts of creation that were willing?


Hi Richard...you bring up a good point here and it's one that needs to be examined by those who still believe that this is just for the few who are willing. Scripture says that we were subjected to "vanity"...and not of our own will. It states that some were made "enemies" for our sake, so we could grow in understanding. It says that God hardens the hearts of some, and draws others. Somehow, we've managed to make our willingness and our ability to believe, virtues, and in doing this, we harass , condemn and demonize others for the path they're walking.

Hi Kathryn,

Sorry, I did not see this one. Are you referring to me or others on this forum regarding harassment, condemnation, demonization? Just want to clear the air, so please let me know. I thought we were discussing and trying to get clarification from one another. It is difficult getting clarification from you because of your "mixture". You seem to be introducing/mixing Gnostiscism, Kabbala, Midrash and Christian Mystic notions into the Bible. The things you are talking about (which is not the language of the Bible) I have found in the aforementioned resources. So, please bear with us as we try to decipher and then interpret what you are saying.

Peace and love,
Rick

kathryn
12-27-2011, 04:43 PM
Hi Kathryn,

Sorry, I did not see this one. Are you referring to me or others on this forum regarding harassment, condemnation, demonization? Just want to clear the air, so please let me know. I thought we were discussing and trying to get clarification from one another. It is difficult getting clarification from you because of your "mixture". You seem to be introducing/mixing Gnostiscism, Kabbala, Midrash and Christian Mystic notions into the Bible. The things you are talking about (which is not the language of the Bible) I have found in the aforementioned resources. So, please bear with us as we try to decipher and then interpret what you are saying.

Peace and love,
Rick

Hi Rick...I don't see how I'm not speaking the language of the bible. If I don't give an exact wording of a verse, doesn't mean I'm not expressing what's in the bible. We should be able to explain the concepts through many different examples. I realize you have problems with what I've been saying, but I've supported everything with scripture...and will continue to do so as long as you want to keep conversing.

As far as the harassment, condemnation, demonization....these are the natural outcome of any doctrine that divides people. If we don't do it openly, we do it in our heart and either way, it defiles us and the Body of whom we desire to see come to an understanding of God. I know this, because I believed this way for many years.

I find you to be very gentle and open in discussing these things Rick...and I don't believe you would purposely or knowingly do these things to anyone.

kathryn
12-27-2011, 05:03 PM
Hi Kathryn,

You are having a difficult time answering my question directly?

I agree with you that God's character is expressed in His creation. But that really wasn't my question, was it?

Thanks anyway,
Rick

Sorry Rick...I thought I had. Worship is a natural outflowing of Love, respect, awe and appreciation for God and Creation. No...I don't worship a cockroach..or another person...or a tree etc...but my heart sings with Praises for how the Creator has put it all together. The more I grow in understanding of God's Love the more I feel in harmony with mankind and creation. When I meet another person, I am full of anticipation to discover what unique song has been placed in them that will tell me more of myself. Does that answer your question or would you like me to explain more?

heb13-13
12-27-2011, 05:12 PM
Hi Rick...I don't see how I'm not speaking the language of the bible. If I don't give an exact wording of a verse, doesn't mean I'm not expressing what's in the bible. We should be able to explain the concepts through many different examples. I realize you have problems with what I've been saying, but I've supported everything with scripture...and will continue to do so as long as you want to keep conversing.

As far as the harassment, condemnation, demonization....these are the natural outcome of any doctrine that divides people. If we don't do it openly, we do it in our heart and either way, it defiles us and the Body of whom we desire to see come to an understanding of God. I know this, because I believed this way for many years.

I find you to be very gentle and open in discussing these things Rick...and I don't believe you would purposely or knowingly do these things to anyone.

Hey Kathryn,

Where do you get the "virgin sub-conscious mind is pure" in the Bible. That is not Bible "talk" and not a Bible concept.

And I don't need a verse by verse reiteration, but even your concepts aren't generally known. So, since I want to understand what you are saying I have to spend some time researching your concepts and I am seeing these concepts turn up in Gnosticism, Kabbala, etc. So you see, I am trying to figure out what you are saying since it is not that clear.

All the best,
Rick

kathryn
12-27-2011, 05:27 PM
Hey Kathryn,

Where do you get the "virgin sub-conscious mind is pure" in the Bible. That is not Bible "talk" and not a Bible concept.

And I don't need a verse by verse reiteration, but even your concepts aren't generally known. So, since I want to understand what you are saying I have to spend some time researching your concepts and I am seeing these concepts turn up in Gnosticism, Kabbala, etc. So you see, I am trying to figure out what you are saying since it is not that clear.

All the best,
Rick

Hi Rick....This is a subject that has to be studied from the foundation up. I began to discuss this on the "demons" thread, but you gave no response.

Here's the link for anyone trying to follow this thread: http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?2638-Demons/page10

Charisma
12-27-2011, 06:02 PM
Hi Richard, :)

I have one thought about this that you said:

Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Now obviously, "his faith" refers to the believer's faith, not Christ's,There is a verse which helps us understand this better - and not unlike Mr Camping's conclusion.

Mark 11:22 And Jesus answering saith unto them, 'Have faith in God'.
My margin has a note attached to 'Have', which says, 'Have the faith of God'.

If we 'hear' this as a gift from the Lord to His disciples, rather than as a command, it is perfect. The way I heard it preached is also helpful (for those who feel they have no faith), namely, 'Hold the faithfulness of God'.

We can, also, add another experiencial truth, that the commands of God become promises to His children.


Just on a point about God's children, they are divided into two groups in the NT - obedient children, and disobedient children.

The disobedient children are also called 'children of wrath', better translated, 'children of unbelief'.

Clearly, 'obedient children' are children of faith - faith, which is the gift of God.

(Faith is in the fruit of the Spirit, Gal 5.)

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 06:38 PM
Monistic monotheism that claims that "God is all in all" as "the only Person in the universe" is a denial of Trinitarian monotheism, merging the three onenesses in a false unity that makes the Christological and Christian onenesses superfluous and unnecessary, since all is one with God already. If everything and everyone is inherently and intrinsically one with God, then we are lulled into a deterministic passivism of universalism that ends up being fatalism.

Consideration of the oneness of God's Being requires the explanation that although ousia referred to an abstract sense of existence in general in some of the Greek philosophers, the Christian use of "oneness of Being" does not mean that God is all that exists. Such a monistic monotheism portrays God as a singular and universal God-reality that incorporates and includes all that exists in a pantheistic monism that fails to distinguish the Creator from the creation. Some have misused Scripture to attempt to justify such monistic monotheism, arguing that the KJV rendering of Isaiah 45:5,6 is God's
declaration, "I am the Lord, and there is none else. ...There is none beside Me," implying that God is all that is. They also misuse I Cor. 15:28, Eph. 4:6, and Col. 3:11, claiming that these verses state "God is all in all." God's Being is not to be abstracted as a monistic universal existence that comprises or is intrinsic to everything in a pantheistic or panentheistic sense. The traditional Christian understanding of Trinitarian monotheism regards the three persons of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as constituting the personal divine Being of the Godhead.

If you would like to read the entire article: Three Divine Onenesses - http://www.christinyou.net/pages/3divineonenesses.html
(http://www.christinyou.net/pages/3divineonenesses.html)
All the best,
-rick
hey there Rick,

The "doctrine" of the Trinity - in as much as it is derived from Scripture - is not necessarily inconsistent with "monistic monotheism." The apparent "inconsistencies" arise from philosophical elements added to what the Bible actually states. The most obvious is the idea that the Trinity is "eternal" and that there never was a "time" when there was not a Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Upon what is that based? Pure philosophy, nothing else. Personally, I don't think it makes any sense at all. The philosophy of God is fraught with speculations about things of which no human has any knowledge. What does it even mean to say that God is "outside of time?" If that were true, then God could never "do" anything like "make a choice" because he always knew what he would do. Omniscience "freezes" God into a static being that cannot even make a choice. I've brought this up many times recently on this forum, but to my knowledge, no one has attempted any kind of response. I think this shows that the philosophy of God and the Trinity goes well beyond what the Bible actually states.

The Bible almost always refers to God in the singular masculine pronoun. Therefore, the Doctrine of Three Persons directly contradicts that Biblical witness. The Bible never speaks of "them" when referring to God. The Bible presents God as a "single" person. Even so, there is no reason that Monistic Monotheism could not be consistent with the Trinity. We only need to assert that God is the only "Person" - it matters not if that "only Person" is really three persons like the Trinity says.

Why should the idea that God "incorporates and includes all that exists in a pantheistic monism that fails to distinguish the Creator from the creation" be a problem? What Scripture does it violate? You assert that this would be a "misuse" of "I Cor. 15:28, Eph. 4:6, and Col. 3:11" but that is mere assertion. I could just as well assert that you are "misusing" the verses that speak of God as "all in all" "in whom all the fulness dwells" and "in whom we move and have our being." You need to show why those verses would be "misused" if interpreted in that way.

The article you linked it long, but I'll take a look and comment in a separate post.

Great chatting!

Richard

kathryn
12-27-2011, 07:05 PM
Richard: What does it even mean to say that God is "outside of time?" If that were true, then God could never "do" anything like "make a choice" because he always knew what he would do. Omniscience "freezes" God into a static being that cannot even make a choice. I've brought this up many times recently on this forum, but to my knowledge, no one has attempted any kind of response. I think this shows that the philosophy of God and the Trinity goes well beyond what the Bible actually states.

Hi Richard....Your comments on Omniscience are fascinating. I haven't responded because I still don't grasp what you mean by freezing God into a static being that can't make a choice.
What if you took this into the realm of music? There are infinite variations on a theme. How would your choices be limited? Isn't the nature of a creator self-perpetuating?

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 08:00 PM
Richard: What does it even mean to say that God is "outside of time?" If that were true, then God could never "do" anything like "make a choice" because he always knew what he would do. Omniscience "freezes" God into a static being that cannot even make a choice. I've brought this up many times recently on this forum, but to my knowledge, no one has attempted any kind of response. I think this shows that the philosophy of God and the Trinity goes well beyond what the Bible actually states.

Hi Richard....Your comments on Omniscience are fascinating. I haven't responded because I still don't grasp what you mean by freezing God into a static being that can't make a choice.
What if you took this into the realm of music? There are infinite variations on a theme. How would your choices be limited? Isn't the nature of a creator self-perpetuating?
Hi Kathryn, :yo:

I'm glad you asked. What I meant was that God never had a chance to make any choices because he already knew what he would do. So when did God "choose" anything? He didn't. He's a "static being" like a frozen thing that never did and never could "do" anything. In other words, God's Omniscience would imply he has no freedom! That's my intuition. Does it make sense now?

Great chatting,

Richard

kathryn
12-27-2011, 08:22 PM
Hi Kathryn, :yo:

I'm glad you asked. What I meant was that God never had a chance to make any choices because he already knew what he would do. So when did God "choose" anything? He didn't. He's a "static being" like a frozen thing that never did and never could "do" anything. In other words, God's Omniscience would imply he has no freedom! That's my intuition. Does it make sense now?

Great chatting,

Richard

No:p...but as you know, I come at logic a different way than you. If God's nature is perfect harmony, doesn't this transcend the concept of choice and move it into something that is self-perpetuating from that harmony?

Timmy
12-27-2011, 08:22 PM
kathryn,

Though you addressed Richard, it's hoped you mind not i chime in...with just a few words.

You are very right that teachings of men extend far beyond what the Bible says.

There is no statement of God being trinity from beginning to end of the Bible. Those who are trinitarian are assuming things never expounded in the Bible. (Along with this comes assuming the hypostasis of God.)
[They take things never stated, and assuming they are implied through their own sense of reason, jump to conclusions that when contradicted through even Biblical proofS, so proud of what they have assumed, they crucify the questioner as a heretic...and the Faithful and True revealed through scripture right along in this.

...not frozen in time.
(Outside of time, like a cone==>[representing time from an eternal perspective] being turned with it's wide circular base down. We find ourselves somewhere at a certain point along the perimiter of the base. God, on the other hand, is looking down from the apex, from the very top of the cone.)

Neither are you frozen in time.

Contemplating Ain, and still wondering...like how is it there: within light unapproachable.


Shalom,

Timmy

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 08:28 PM
If you would like to read the entire article: Three Divine Onenesses - http://www.christinyou.net/pages/3divineonenesses.html
(http://www.christinyou.net/pages/3divineonenesses.html)
I read the first big chunk of the article that dealt with the Trinity. I didn't see any reason to insist that God is "eternally" a Trinity. The best anyone could do is to speak of Jesus being "with God" prior to the creation of the world, but that doesn't imply "eternally." I think it makes a lot more sense to think that God morphed from Singular to Trinitarian. Of course, this touches the problem of the concept of eternity as "timelessness" which I think is logically incoherent because this universe has not always existed. Therefore, if it was created by an Eternal God, then there was a "time" on timeles eternity "before" there was a universe, and then there was a "time" in "timeless eternity" when there was a universe. But the concept of different "times" in a "timeless" eternity is a contradiction. Therefore, the concept of "timeless eternity" is logically incoherent.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 08:30 PM
No:p...but as you know, I come at logic a different way than you. If God's nature is perfect harmony, doesn't this transcend the concept of choice and move it into something that is self-perpetuating from that harmony?
What do you mean when you say "eternity?" There are two different uses of that word. One means "to go on forever - time without end." The other means "timeless." Which do you mean when you say "eternity?"

kathryn
12-27-2011, 08:32 PM
Timmy:
You are very right that teachings of men extend far beyond what the Bible says.


Hi Timmy...don't mind if you chime in at all! The more the merrier!
It's interesting, isn't it, that Jesus rarely went into the written word when He taught. He used examples from His creation far more readily. We've become locked in Christian lingo and have no idea how many perverted mindsets we're harboring because of it. Ever heard a so-called prophet speak in King James english...with the "thees and thous"? We do the same thing with the written word. For many of us, Jesus could sit down beside us and speak, and we wouldn't recognize him because we're so used to thinking of him inside the box of the written logos.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 08:33 PM
kathryn,

Though you addressed Richard, it's hoped you mind not i chime in...with just a few words.

You are very right that teachings of men extend far beyond what the Bible says.

There is no statement of God being trinity from beginning to end of the Bible. Those who are trinitarian are assuming things never expounded in the Bible. (Along with this comes assuming the hypostasis of God.)
[They take things never stated, and assuming they are implied through their own sense of reason, jump to conclusions that when contradicted through even Biblical proofS, so proud of what they have assumed, they crucify the questioner as a heretic...and the Faithful and True revealed through scripture right along in this.

...not frozen in time.
(Outside of time, like a cone==>[representing time from an eternal perspective] being turned with it's wide circular base down. We find ourselves somewhere at a certain point along the perimiter of the base. God, on the other hand, is looking down from the apex, from the very top of the cone.)

Neither are you frozen in time.

Contemplating Ain, and still wondering...like how is it there: within light unapproachable.


Shalom,

Timmy
Hi Timmy,

Glad you jumped in!

What do you mean by "outside of time?"

When you speak of the cone, are you thinking of space-time of general relativity?

252

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 08:35 PM
Timmy:
You are very right that teachings of men extend far beyond what the Bible says.


Hi Timmy...don't mind if you chime in at all! The more the merrier!
It's interesting, isn't it, that Jesus rarely went into the written word when He taught. He used examples from His creation far more readily. We've become locked in Christian lingo and have no idea how many perverted mindsets we're harboring because of it. Ever heard a so-called prophet speak in King James english...with the "thees and thous"? We do the same thing with the written word. For many of us, Jesus could sit down beside us and speak, and we wouldn't recognize him because we're so used to thinking of him inside the box of the written logos.
How is it that the written word causes "perverted mindsets" but creation does not?

If someone is going to pervert the meaning of the written word, what would stop them from perverting the interpretation of creation?

kathryn
12-27-2011, 08:35 PM
What do you mean when you say "eternity?" There are two different uses of that word. One means "to go on forever - time without end." The other means "timeless." Which do you mean when you say "eternity?"

hmmm...I would say timeless. I see time as eternity divided, as everything else was divided or separated; something that is swallowed up when its purpose has been accomplished.

kathryn
12-27-2011, 08:59 PM
How is it that the written word causes "perverted mindsets" but creation does not?

If someone is going to pervert the meaning of the written word, what would stop them from perverting the interpretation of creation?

Just using some of the examples in creation given in scripture that deal with the heart....parental love, spousal love...the renewing of the seasons, the one body with many parts; those things we can't pervert as easily.

Obviously there are many who choose to pervert much of the science of creation but it's usually because they're looking at it from a pre-conceived mindset from the written logos, wouldn't you say?

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 09:40 PM
Just using some of the examples in creation given in scripture that deal with the heart....parental love, spousal love...the renewing of the seasons, the one body with many parts; those things we can't pervert as easily.

Obviously there are many who choose to pervert much of the science of creation but it's usually because they're looking at it from a pre-conceived mindset from the written logos, wouldn't you say?
Well, I can't see much difference - people are free to interpret things anyway they want whether it be written words or "creation." But given that words have definitions given in dictionaries, I'd say it's a more difficult to pervert the written word than interpretations of "creation" if folks choose to adhere to the rules of logic and hermeneutics. And if you appeal only to creation you would never even know the name of Jesus or anything about the Gospel. So I don't really understand your idea of basing Christian doctrines on "creation." Sure, you could find plenty of illustrations of Christian doctrines in creation, but I don't see how you could ever establish them upon creation since you had to get them from the written logos.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 09:42 PM
hmmm...I would say timeless. I see time as eternity divided, as everything else was divided or separated; something that is swallowed up when its purpose has been accomplished.
OK - if you mean "timeless" how do you "divide" that?

And where in "creation" do we see "eternity?"

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 09:48 PM
Hi Richard, :)

I have one thought about this that you said:
There is a verse which helps us understand this better - and not unlike Mr Camping's conclusion.

Mark 11:22 And Jesus answering saith unto them, 'Have faith in God'.
My margin has a note attached to 'Have', which says, 'Have the faith of God'.

If we 'hear' this as a gift from the Lord to His disciples, rather than as a command, it is perfect. The way I heard it preached is also helpful (for those who feel they have no faith), namely, 'Hold the faithfulness of God'.

We can, also, add another experiencial truth, that the commands of God become promises to His children.


Just on a point about God's children, they are divided into two groups in the NT - obedient children, and disobedient children.

The disobedient children are also called 'children of wrath', better translated, 'children of unbelief'.

Clearly, 'obedient children' are children of faith - faith, which is the gift of God.

(Faith is in the fruit of the Spirit, Gal 5.)
Hey there Charisma,

Yes, I've seen that interpretation before. Most folks like to use Galatians 2:20 "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." There is some merit in that, but nothing like Camping's craziness. The fact that saving faith is grounded in God does not mean that there's nothing we can do to "get it" which is the Reformed view. They see everyone as DEAD and therefore unable to even ask God for salvation. Then God looks over all the corpses and regenerates the souls of those he labeled for salvation before the foundation of the world and they "wake up" and discover that they have faith in God.

The problem with those kinds of views, and the one that you suggest (I believe) is that it destroys the meaning of faith as "to trust in." It treats faith as if it were a "substance" or a "thing" that can be "given" to a person and so causes them to be "saved." That's not what "faith" means at all. Faith is trust. Or that's how it seems to me anyway!~ :p

Great chatting,

Richard

kathryn
12-27-2011, 09:59 PM
Well, I can't see much difference - people are free to interpret things anyway they want whether it be written words or "creation." But given that words have definitions given in dictionaries, I'd say it's a more difficult to pervert the written word than interpretations of "creation" if folks choose to adhere to the rules of logic and hermeneutics. And if you appeal only to creation you would never even know the name of Jesus or anything about the Gospel. So I don't really understand your idea of basing Christian doctrines on "creation." Sure, you could find plenty of illustrations of Christian doctrines in creation, but I don't see how you could ever establish them upon creation since you had to get them from the written logos.

I'm taking this from two things...my own experience in having to learn scripture from the physical creation and then find the concept in the written logos . It wasn't until much later that I realized that this appears to be the intention from the beginning as stated in Romans 1:18-21.

As far as never knowing the name of Jesus or the Gospel...I don't know how that would work either....except it says in Romans that God made His divine nature plain to them through what He made. I don't know this first hand, but I have heard stories of peoples who had never had any access to the written word, have the gospel presented to them as well as Jesus, in ways they could visualize and understand.

kathryn
12-27-2011, 10:03 PM
OK - if you mean "timeless" how do you "divide" that?

And where in "creation" do we see "eternity?"

Good question Richard...I have no idea how you would divide that:p It's just an intuition as you mentioned earlier.
I can't answer the second one either. Again...it is something that just seems to be deep inside somewhere, although I know that's not a satisfactory answer.

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 10:48 PM
Good question Richard...I have no idea how you would divide that:p It's just an intuition as you mentioned earlier.
I can't answer the second one either. Again...it is something that just seems to be deep inside somewhere, although I know that's not a satisfactory answer.

I understand "intuition." And respect it - the deepest truths often remain "beyond words" for a long time.

But my intuition says that the concept of timelessness may not be coherent or if it is then we can't talk about it - it's beyond words. :p

Timmy
12-27-2011, 10:59 PM
Hi Timmy,

Glad you jumped in!

What do you mean by "outside of time?"

When you speak of the cone, are you thinking of space-time of general relativity?

252

Hi Richard
and
Hi kathryn,

Thanks for the ameniability.

"Outside of time" is meaning time is as much of a creation of God as eternity.
These things do not contain God so much as these being His possession.

On the nature of thought, and being perfect: it is not--in effect--that God is limited so much as His creating limitations so that we can better comprehend Him just a bit more through what He has created. He limits knowledge of Himself, revealing some of His Self expression through creation.

Being perfect, God cannot be limited except by limitation He creates for Himself..which is no limitation to Him at all.

Parameters help us to distinguish things, so God chooses to operate in relation to these limitations He designs for us to perceive of Him, or misconstrue, accordingly.
Following His direction, we STS fly further faster.

We often tend to think in terms of things having two dimensions,--(thus the linear model of the cone)--yet we are actually living, as your diagram somewhat shows, in a quantum flux. The universe is far more than 4 dimensions.

All things are ultimately, more or less, composed of light in motion, and for the most part,--even of what light approaches us--this light is receeding.

We are not the light.

Micro particles (such as bosons and quarks and leptons) are not really particles at all. With variation of depth to percieve this noumena/phenomena, we will each tend to represent this in various manners, some more or less correct than others.

The trouble we often make for ourselves is when we confuse the models we create to represent what is for the real McCoy.It is in mistaking the map for the road--or worse thinking because we travel the road we and the road are one--that can create so many problems for us all.

Lord willing, more later.

My body could be dead by daybreak;
but sleep signifies death anyway,
and i could think of worse ways to go
so
Good night,
sleep tight.
Don't let the bedbugs bite.
If they do
Take a can
of hairspray.
shake it
and with a lighter in the other hand
depress the spray nozzle
while igniting what sprays out.
Torch those little critters to a crisp:
Wala! Crispy critters...
then think about God.
and how you saved your shoe to sail away
with Wynkin', Blynkin', and Nod.

...but i'm gonna' :sBo_reflection2: on the bed first

Shalom,

Little Barefoot TTiimmmmyy

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2011, 11:27 PM
Hi Richard
and
Hi kathryn,

Thanks for the ameniability.

"Outside of time" is meaning time is as much of a creation of God as eternity.
These things do not contain God so much as these being His possession.

Hey there Timmy,

I don't understand what you mean by saying that both time and eternity are a creation of God.

The problem with eternity as "timeless" is that it doesn't make sense because if the universe had a beginning, then there was a "time" in "eternity" when the universe did not exist, and then there was a "time" when it did. This means that eternity is not timeless, but eternity is defined as "timeless" so we have a contradiction. This is why I said the concept of eternity as timelessness is logically incoherent.



On the nature of thought, and being perfect: it is not--in effect--that God is limited so much as His creating limitations so that we can better comprehend Him just a bit more through what He has created. He limits knowledge of Himself, revealing some of His Self expression through creation.
Being perfect, God cannot be limited except by limitation He creates for Himself..which is no limitation to Him at all.

Why do you believe this? Where did you get this idea? It seems pretty confusing to me, so why do you believe it?



Parameters help us to distinguish things, so God chooses to operate in relation to these limitations He designs for us to perceive of Him, or misconstrue, accordingly.
Following His direction, we STS fly further faster.

How did God "choose" anything if he already knew everything?



We often tend to think in terms of things having two dimensions,--(thus the linear model of the cone)--yet we are actually living, as your diagram somewhat shows, in a quantum flux. The universe is far more than 4 dimensions.

I think the universe is multi-demensional too, but I wonder what that means to you.



Lord willing, more later.

My body could be dead by daybreak;
but sleep signifies death anyway,
and i could think of worse ways to go
so
Good night,
sleep tight.
Don't let the bedbugs bite.
If they do
Take a can
of hairspray.
shake it
and with a lighter in the other hand
depress the spray nozzle
while igniting what sprays out.
Torch those little critters to a crisp:
Wala! Crispy critters...
then think about God.
and how you saved your shoe to sail away
with Wynkin', Blynkin', and Nod.

...but i'm gonna' :sBo_reflection2: on the bed first

Shalom,

Little Barefoot TTiimmmmyy
Poetry is refreshing. Thanks.

Sleep easy, let your dreams be breezy!

Richard

Timmy
12-27-2011, 11:33 PM
Timmy:
You are very right that teachings of men extend far beyond what the Bible says.


Hi Timmy...don't mind if you chime in at all! The more the merrier!
It's interesting, isn't it, that Jesus rarely went into the written word when He taught. He used examples from His creation far more readily. We've become locked in Christian lingo and have no idea how many perverted mindsets we're harboring because of it. Ever heard a so-called prophet speak in King James english...with the "thees and thous"? We do the same thing with the written word. For many of us, Jesus could sit down beside us and speak, and we wouldn't recognize him because we're so used to thinking of him inside the box of the written logos.



Hoah!

Broke the boards under the boxspring and out of breath anyway.

Then we decided to write you kath, about what was realized while banging my head against the ceiling.

Yeah, i get a kik out of those profits speaking all that christianese.
Wonder what ole' Jeramiah would say to em'?

So, here is what was thought: Jesus spoke in terms that those who heard would best understand, yet would have to seek Him further to understand it all better...and he often made it extremely unappealing--in the human sense of 'coziness'--to pursue Him.

Kultus lingo just adds to the mix that makes even many 'insiders'of whatever sectarian demonization that much more the dumbed down as to the true intention of what was long ago once meant.

G'night!

:pray:

Now i lay me down tonight,
i thank you Lord for life delight,
and if i wake before i die,
You know that i know You know why.

AMEN

"Where's my bolt cutters!"


Barefoot Lockcutting Little Timmy

kathryn
12-28-2011, 06:41 AM
Hoah!

Broke the boards under the boxspring and out of breath anyway.

Then we decided to write you kath, about what was realized while banging my head against the ceiling.

Yeah, i get a kik out of those profits speaking all that christianese.
Wonder what ole' Jeramiah would say to em'?

So, here is what was thought: Jesus spoke in terms that those who heard would best understand, yet would have to seek Him further to understand it all better...and he often made it extremely unappealing--in the human sense of 'coziness'--to pursue Him.

Kultus lingo just adds to the mix that makes even many 'insiders'of whatever sectarian demonization that much more the dumbed down as to the true intention of what was long ago once meant.

G'night!

:pray:

Now i lay me down tonight,
i thank you Lord for life delight,
and if i wake before i die,
You know that i know You know why.

AMEN

"Where's my bolt cutters!"


Barefoot Lockcutting Little Timmy

Hee hee...you too funny TimmyTimTim. Yeah...that kultus lingo grabs me too:D Give me body parts any day! At least I understand those:p

Timmy
12-28-2011, 10:40 AM
Hey there Timmy,

I don't understand what you mean by saying that both time and eternity are a creation of God.

The problem with eternity as "timeless" is that it doesn't make sense because if the universe had a beginning, then there was a "time" in "eternity" when the universe did not exist, and then there was a "time" when it did. This means that eternity is not timeless, but eternity is defined as "timeless" so we have a contradiction. This is why I said the concept of eternity as timelessness is logically incoherent.


Why do you believe this? Where did you get this idea? It seems pretty confusing to me, so why do you believe it?
WHY?Because i can.:rolleyes::hysterical:

:sunny:
Seriously, the idea just whacked me in the head one day, and my i has never been 'right' since. It seems pretty confusing to me too, but it makes sense.

We mean that there comes a point when critical thought deconstructs the matter reasoned through to the point where nothing makes sense, and knowing that nothing comes from nothing via our own puny comprehension of things inconcievable, there comes in view a crossroad, a choice, and we ask ourselves, "What in tarnation is that thing?"

Having traveled the road to that point time and again and again and again and again and again and again again only to bravely run away, me said to one of my selfs, "Quit chickening out!" There either is a Master of the universe who has made things far more complex that you can grasp, or there is nothing...and there certainly is not nothing.

i thinks, therefore i am not what i thinks. This being the case, i is far from infallible, and my selfs are probably also misconstructions of the ways i misunderstand things the most concretely.

So, the issue at stake was "ground of being" along with how and why whatever i is exists in the first place.

When i used to wreak havok through occult means--sorcery, enchantment, sigil work tied in with eidelons and thoughtforms, it was a process of deconstructionalization onto restructuring my world view to achieve intended results...and it works more than quite well, BTW:
Create a system of beliefs coherent and congruent with the world around your selfs, make the change intended, and get the h-e-double hockey sticks out of Dodge...and a life lived on the razors edge resulted. However, in my's own linear time begain to see castles crumbling until i eventually hit rock bottom...
and the only way you can go from there is up, right?

Wrong.

i met Thanatos on hir own ground, and i was at a loss of ability to control or direct anything. (a Working gone awry.)

i hollered out to Yeshua, and He saved me, placing life back into my "ground of being"<(=soul life= ruach+nephesh onto reviving neshamah) which altercated perspectives immensely. Seeing things from outside the box (tent=body) and far from being connected to it, everything that happens within it's confines is now understood for what it is, the gift from God.

Because He loves me this much, i cannot really find anything more worthwhile than being His slave. The one who gives and calls back His spirit of life back onto Himself gave it back to my me...and life gets better all the time...but hardly in the sense most understand it.

Anyway, the idea came from the Bible and then experience according to what was bravely bolted from repeatedly, ending up being a choice between two things: The Life, or death.

Having existence within the quantum flux, anything that dwells beyond it seems non-logical. It is God's possession: God is all in all or we choose logical incoherency.

[That is the clearest this can be explained without going into a morass of details]


How did God "choose" anything if he already knew everything?
Entering His posession (space, time, mass, inertia, energy, perspective, belief (itself implies limitation), etc) becoming an active part in it, He operates within it's parameters.



I think the universe is multi-demensional too, but I wonder what that means to you.
More things exist than any human can concieve.

Sympathy becomes the deliberated representation of an event in miniature: a microcosmic representation. These pneumatic formulations of the psyche may or may not find their place IRL, depending on conformity with pre-established parameters already active.

Actually, there is only "one dimension" (cause and effect being one occurance:two sides of one coin) and our own perception comparmentalizes "each dimension" in order to handle what we have not yet utilized.
(Multi-dimensionality is the way we see it and not as it is. My i uses this term as a means to establish affinity towards information transfer.)





Poetry is refreshing. Thanks.

Sleep easy, let your dreams be breezy!

Richard

Take a walk on the wyld side.

Easy, breezy, beautiful (or not),

Tim Timmy Tim Tim

Timmy
12-28-2011, 11:09 AM
:prophet:

WHETHER CALLED UPON
OR NOT
GOD WILL BE PRESENT.

heb13-13
12-28-2011, 11:25 AM
I'm taking this from two things...my own experience in having to learn scripture from the physical creation and then find the concept in the written logos . It wasn't until much later that I realized that this appears to be the intention from the beginning as stated in Romans 1:18-21.

As far as never knowing the name of Jesus or the Gospel...I don't know how that would work either....except it says in Romans that God made His divine nature plain to them through what He made. I don't know this first hand, but I have heard stories of peoples who had never had any access to the written word, have the gospel presented to them as well as Jesus, in ways they could visualize and understand.

Hi Kathyrn,

I notice that you say many times that you have learned scripture from the physical creation, does that imply that you are learning it from the Holy Spirit giving you revelation and that the Holy Spirit is giving you revelation by showing you the analogies in creation?

I am trying to see if you regard that the only way we can "LEARN" the things of God is by revelation from God through the Holy Spirit or not.

Thanks,
Rick

Richard Amiel McGough
12-28-2011, 02:30 PM
:prophet:

WHETHER CALLED UPON
OR NOT
GOD WILL BE PRESENT.
Can't argue with that! Except perhaps the definition of "God."

Richard Amiel McGough
12-28-2011, 03:06 PM
WHY?Because i can.:rolleyes::hysterical:

:sunny:

Touche!

:fencing:


Seriously, the idea just whacked me in the head one day, and my i has never been 'right' since. It seems pretty confusing to me too, but it makes sense.

We mean that there comes a point when critical thought deconstructs the matter reasoned through to the point where nothing makes sense, and knowing that nothing comes from nothing via our own puny comprehension of things inconcievable, there comes in view a crossroad, a choice, and we ask ourselves, "What in tarnation is that thing?"

Having traveled the road to that point time and again and again and again and again and again and again again only to bravely run away, me said to one of my selfs, "Quit chickening out!" There either is a Master of the universe who has made things far more complex that you can grasp, or there is nothing...and there certainly is not nothing.

i thinks, therefore i am not what i thinks. This being the case, i is far from infallible, and my selfs are probably also misconstructions of the ways i misunderstand things the most concretely.

So, the issue at stake was "ground of being" along with how and why whatever i is exists in the first place.

When i used to wreak havok through occult means--sorcery, enchantment, sigil work tied in with eidelons and thoughtforms, it was a process of deconstructionalization onto restructuring my world view to achieve intended results...and it works more than quite well, BTW:
Create a system of beliefs coherent and congruent with the world around your selfs, make the change intended, and get the h-e-double hockey sticks out of Dodge...and a life lived on the razors edge resulted. However, in my's own linear time begain to see castles crumbling until i eventually hit rock bottom...
and the only way you can go from there is up, right?

Wrong.

i met Thanatos on hir own ground, and i was at a loss of ability to control or direct anything. (a Working gone awry.)

i hollered out to Yeshua, and He saved me, placing life back into my "ground of being"<(=soul life= ruach+nephesh onto reviving neshamah) which altercated perspectives immensely. Seeing things from outside the box (tent=body) and far from being connected to it, everything that happens within it's confines is now understood for what it is, the gift from God.

Because He loves me this much, i cannot really find anything more worthwhile than being His slave. The one who gives and calls back His spirit of life back onto Himself gave it back to my me...and life gets better all the time...but hardly in the sense most understand it.

I sincerely think that, despite it's apparent incoherence, I really truly do understand you!

I've had experiences that could perhaps be described with similar prose. But then I continued having experiences, and now I see when I cried to Jesus and was saved, it was yet another unfolding of the same process of thought that deconstructed "the matter reasoned through to the point where nothing makes sense." I speak now of course of the Bible doctrines that made so much sense at one stage of my growth and now appear empty.

It sounds like you were practicing Magick a la Crowley et al. Is that correct? If not, it certainly sounds like something similar. It would be interesting to learn more of your experience and how it led to faith in Yeshua.



Anyway, the idea came from the Bible and then experience according to what was bravely bolted from repeatedly, ending up being a choice between two things: The Life, or death.

Having existence within the quantum flux, anything that dwells beyond it seems non-logical. It is God's possession: God is all in all or we choose logical incoherency.

[That is the clearest this can be explained without going into a morass of details]

Hummm ... God is all in all ... that's a deep statement. But it is interpreted so very differently by folks here. Some think it means that All is a manifestation of God, whereas other think it means only that God is omnipresent, even in places he's not (like hell).



Entering His posession (space, time, mass, inertia, energy, perspective, belief (itself implies limitation), etc) becoming an active part in it, He operates within it's parameters.

Sorry, but your words make no sense to me because you wrote a temporal term "entering" and applied it to a being that does not exist in time. That seems incoherent to me. If God is "outside of time" then he can't "do" anything like "enter" into time. So why begin with a concept of "timelessness" if we don't even know what it means?



More things exist than any human can concieve.

That is true wisdom. The old bard (or a chunk of bacon) said it himself:

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.



Sympathy becomes the deliberated representation of an event in miniature: a microcosmic representation. These pneumatic formulations of the psyche may or may not find their place IRL, depending on conformity with pre-established parameters already active.

What does IRL mean?



Actually, there is only "one dimension" (cause and effect being one occurance:two sides of one coin) and our own perception comparmentalizes "each dimension" in order to handle what we have not yet utilized.
(Multi-dimensionality is the way we see it and not as it is. My i uses this term as a means to establish affinity towards information transfer.)

Yes, the cause/effect duality has been a buggaboo of philosophy for the longest time. I wonder what could cause such an effect upon the philosophical mind?



Take a walk on the wyld side.

Easy, breezy, beautiful (or not),

Tim Timmy Tim Tim
A walk? Phew! I'll take a ryde on the wyld syde!

Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde is a friend o' mine. He once famously quipped "A man who does not think for himself does not think at all."

And again he quipped another quippage: "Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future."


He seemed quite unable to quit quipping!

Timmy
12-28-2011, 07:25 PM
Touche!

:fencing:

I sincerely think that, despite it's apparent incoherence, I really truly do understand you!
It was an attempt to answer briefly...and it could have probably stretched out for miles and miles and miles.


I've had experiences that could perhaps be described with similar prose. But then I continued having experiences, and now I see when I cried to Jesus and was saved, it was yet another unfolding of the same process of thought that deconstructed "the matter reasoned through to the point where nothing makes sense." I speak now of course of the Bible doctrines that made so much sense at one stage of my growth and now appear empty.


Sorry for the seeming incoherence, You caught me off-guard. Touche':fencing:
Is turn about fairplay?
You know, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

Me too: i have the same type experiences.
Not right away mind you, but trial and my error led to more errors. Finally, rather than trying to figure things out beyond what applied directly to this life right here, i realized whatever i thought about what i thought God might be meaning in things not applicable is not only irrelevant to me, but probably misunderstood completely, not being able to relat with it IRL.


It sounds like you were practicing Magick a la Crowley et al. Is that correct? If not, it certainly sounds like something similar. It would be interesting to learn more of your experience and how it led to faith in Yeshua.
Nope, started in another school altogether. Egyptian magick via the Ogdoadic tradition (O. A. S. / O.S.V.) led to an assignment leading half way across the U.S., having completed all the grade work through proficiency in praxi, i was given the whole library of a 33rd degree Mason (R. M. O. K. M.) who had befriended me.

Finally ending up down in N.O.L.A. (1987), behind the scenes, we Worked and established an offshoot of Crowley's first works, through an order established in England (I.O.T). All of his writings were read through and studied at this point.

During this time, up to 1993 many of the old practices were groomed through, locating the working mechanisms behind the ceremonies and further developed "free-style" Workings that were absent of the usual crutches--regalia and rites--utilizing everyday objects through altercating states of consciousness to change things "unexpectedly." From here the magickal state of consciousness was explored to the point where there was no more need towards objectification at all--to "altercate" things.



Hummm ... God is all in all ... that's a deep statement. But it is interpreted so very differently by folks here. Some think it means that All is a manifestation of God, whereas other think it means only that God is omnipresent, even in places he's not (like hell).
Check out Isaiah 33.10-17 and please telo what you think this means compared to God not being completely omni-present. (There are more verses that confirm this concept in Isaiah...words out of Yeshua's own mouth.)


Sorry, but your words make no sense to me because you wrote a temporal term "entering" and applied it to a being that does not exist in time. That seems incoherent to me. If God is "outside of time" then he can't "do" anything like "enter" into time. So why begin with a concept of "timelessness" if we don't even know what it means?
entered, as in through Jesus Christ.


In another way, it doesn't seem so inconcieveable that someone above and beyond time can choose to be part of it or not, does it?


That is true wisdom. The old bard (or a chunk of bacon) said it himself:

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
:hysterical:Oh yeah. . .bacon. . .
...but i was thinking in terms of how much of what i think i know most probably is a contrivance and how much of it actually exists IRL?


What does IRL mean?


Yes, the cause/effect duality has been a buggaboo of philosophy for the longest time. I wonder what could cause such an effect upon the philosophical mind?
I(n) R(eal) L(ife)

In answer to effect, i'm guessing it's perspective based on our locale in the Universe.
Wherever i go, there i am (or not?).


A walk? Phew! I'll take a ryde on the wyld syde!

Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde is a friend o' mine. He once famously quipped "A man who does not think for himself does not think at all."

And again he quipped another quippage: "Every saint has a past and every sinner has a future."


He seemed quite unable to quit quipping!

Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde seems like my kinda' guy...but i play too much it seems.
(Mayhaps it helps to keep me from taking my selfs too seriously.):dontknow:
...and Mick's legendary singing comes to mind, "Every cops a criminal, and all the sinners saints..."

i try to think i think for myself but without our experience through our environs, what "free-thinking" or critique would exist?

i used to reach out to hug the universe only to repreatedly with arms wide open plunge into the abyss.

Hypomyocondritically...or something like that,
and catharsisically your Little Timmy
(now you've got my guard down moreso than before.)

Did you ever think that a capital B is just a one and a three smushed together?

kathryn
12-29-2011, 09:14 AM
Hi Kathyrn,

I notice that you say many times that you have learned scripture from the physical creation, does that imply that you are learning it from the Holy Spirit giving you revelation and that the Holy Spirit is giving you revelation by showing you the analogies in creation?

I am trying to see if you regard that the only way we can "LEARN" the things of God is by revelation from God through the Holy Spirit or not.

Thanks,
Rick

Hi Rick...sorry, I missed this. Of course I learn from the Holy Spirit as does everyone else in their walk towards understanding. I certainly have no ability in myself to appropriate it.
I don't mention this, because too many christians use the Holy Spirit as a battering ram in their discussions, pleading secret knowledge that unbelievers can't attain to, if they're not following their train of thought. A whole host of rotten doctrine has been attributed to this.

We need to be able to explain the Hope within us using the Biblical criteria for determining truth. If we can't provide the foundational understanding from the plummet line, and provide at least two or three witnesses that will enlarge on that foundation through the 3 phases of redemption...we need to wait until the Holy Spirit has enlightened the written Logos until we can,
rather than attribute a half digested mixture to the Holy Spirit.

If we're able to do this, it doesn't matter if the person we're conversing with understands it immediately or not; it won't return void.