Judging the spirits

[Guest Guest]

Exactly WHEN did I tell you, SerenityNow. that YOU are wrong in your beliefs in your god(s)?

 

Have you read your own posts?

 

 

If YOU have the holy truth for all to know, then WHY aren't you filling us in on YOUR great wisdom?? Rather than "merely telling us how wrong everyone (including ME) is?

 

I never claimed to have "holy" truth. Nor claimed to be wise and where have I told you or anyone else that they are wrong

 

YOU have claimed that the OT has "clear and perfect everlasting laws"

 

No, I never made such a claim...the writer's of the OT make the claim

 

So your saying that YOUR belief is the same as the Jew?

No. I'm saying that the Christians claim the god of the OT but really the NT authors made a bad attempt at rewriting Jewish beliefs...they are not the same god

 

That you believe in the ONE God of the OT? Is that your belief?

 

Um, what part of "I don't believe in YHWH" didn't you understand?

 

Or are you just supporting the OT for the sake of attempting to show how wrong someone ELSE is while never helping to explain what the RIGHT is?

 

I don't "support" the OT, I use it to discredit the NT that is all. I discredit the OT too and so have others, there are writings all over the place on this board. Myself and others have explained plenty.

[Ssel]

...and once again, you avoid telling us what is RIGHT but merely tell of how wrong everyone ELSE is

[spamandham]

IYour “knowledge” comes from your best guess. That best guess begins with your perception of what merely appears to be. That perception is then tested by scrutinizing it to see that it is a consistent thing and to what degree.

 

That's the whole point of this thread. From a Biblical perspective, god may appear to people and contradict what he has previoulsy said. There is no way to discern whether it is really god or a demon if god appears to people and contradicts what people already think they know about him, while at the same time demons may appear and reinforce what people think they know about god.

 

The rest of your post regarding knowledge isn't specific to this topic as best I can tell.

[Ssel]

From a Biblical perspective, god may appear to people and contradict what he has previoulsy said.

From what I can tell, the issue is

1) How and an SCC tell (being someone who doesn't fully understand his religion)?

2) How can ANYone tell?

3) IF your dealing with the "Unknown" then it is impossible.

 

the answers I was trying to point out;

 

1) The SCC has chosen a path of faith. Meaning that he doesn't care if he "knows" he cares only that he follows what he BELIEVES his is his Lord. He already has an image in his mind that he follows (seriously breaking a rule from Moses). Either;

a) Let him go and follow what he thinks is right because he basically doesn't believe that God will allow any deception. or

Explain to him (preferably in a loving tone, that God has told him to KNOW God, not merely worship him, IF the person can manage such (a preference). But tell him what the RIGHT thing to do is (how to KNOW), not merely that you are an adversary and think that his entire religion is full of crap.

 

2) Either Christians of higher understanding of their religion OR merely thinking people with or without religion depend on thought and knowing. Thus to come to KNOW, follow the directions that were pointed out prior, regardless of who you are.

 

3) For the reasons explained prior, the seemingly impossible is how you ever got here to begin with. KNOWing, is NOT impossible (unless you choose to join on the ID side of the evolution debates).

[crazy-tiger]

...and once again, you avoid telling us what is RIGHT but merely tell of how wrong everyone ELSE is

Just to clarify something for you... (and believe me, you desperately need to listen to this)

It is impossible to say what is RIGHT until you have ruled out everything that is WRONG.

 

You have been proclaiming your own opinions as right without ruling out all opposing opinions... you have been claiming that your view is right without ruling out all other views...

 

 

For example...

Just for a brief moment to perhaps clear a little air...

 

"seeing the light" means realizing a clear new understanding.

 

"hearing a voice" means discussing an issue in your mind from a different perspective than your normal.

 

"that voice answering with I am Jesus" means that he realized that this new perspective was the same as Jesus had spoken about.

 

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks." means that he realized that all of this time he was futility fighting.

 

"what wilt thou have me to do?" means he was contemplating what that (now better) perspective would guide him to do.

 

"And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do." means that he couldn't figure out how to proceed, but in the city, he could find out.

 

"hearing a voice, but seeing no man." meaning to sense a calling or urge but not being able to identify the source.

--------

 

In short, you have been reading a poetic/metaphorical story as though it was literal. Paul was not talking about a fantasy dream. He was talking about a realization that he had been fighting against the wrong cause.

You have not ruled out the possibility of it being a literal account, yet proclaim the possibility of it being metaphorical as fact.

 

 

Do not berate us for doing EXACTLY WHAT YOU DO... especially when we aren't doing it.

[NotBlinded]

Spamandham, I would like to show the relevance of Ssel's post if neither of you mind.

 

I started to reply to several of the details, but decided to just cut to the chase..

<snip>

Your “knowledge” comes from your best guess. That best guess begins with your perception of what merely appears to be. That perception is then tested by scrutinizing it to see that it is a consistent thing and to what degree. Then you decide to call it “knowledge” because it has been tested. But it didn’t begin as knowledge, but mere perception.

 

Maybe you aren’t really sitting there reading. Maybe what you’re reading isn’t really there. Maybe it meant something totally different than what you think it means. Maybe nothing exists in front of you at all. Maybe YOU don’t really exist

 

IF you have those kinds of questions or feel they have significant value then OBVIOUSLY you are in the DARK FOG.

 

The purpose of your brain/mind is to help you solve the problem of staying alive. So the only things that have any real relevance are things related to that. If you’re truly in a position where absolutely NOTHING is known at all, then your mind has no function at all and you can simply stop attempting to do anything what so ever, even going to the bathroom, reading your email, getting out of bed, or eating. Because how do you know that any of those things are happening anyway? Maybe by trying to DO them you’re really undoing them somehow, You can’t really know, huh. So why try?

 

The effort to think is just that, it’s a “effort”. It constitutes your best guess. But by “best guess”, I mean that you examine and scrutinize what you think MIGHT be true in order to mentally test it. But the end goal isn’t to find what ISN’T true, but rather what IS. Don’t get lost in the testing and forget your goal. If your life depends on making a decision, then saying “I don’t know” doesn’t help a bit. You are forced into a position of having to make your best guess. In most cases, your life isn’t being threatened, in which case avoid deciding with uncertain guesses.

 

In the analogy of the man in the dark fog, you mentioned that he could simply lay and wait. That’s right assuming that was good enough. But why did he lay? How did he know the road was beneath his feet? Maybe it really wasn’t. Maybe it really wasn’t dark. Maybe by moving at all, he was going to get into massive trouble. Maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe… or maybe he just has to scrutinize what little information he thinks he has and take the risks that he thinks are worth taking.

 

Realize that IF you really did that (1) posted up there for Amethyst then you would suddenly find that you have nothing of relevance to say. This is a temporary stage. But how many people have told you that “the first step to wisdom is discovering how much you really don’t know”? That step (1) up there is how you find out. BUT it is also how you begin to build your real understanding of what you DO know. No one said that you become wise by maintaining that you know nothing, but by realizing where ground zero is and that you’re at it BEFORE you start building your understanding and arguments.

IMO Ssel is trying to convey the message that our minds are just a tool to be used when needed and that we shouldn't allow the tool to control the user.

 

The Taoist, the Buddhist, the Hebrew, Moses, Jesus, and about a thousand philosophers and great names throughout history have said that same thing. “You know nothing, let it go for a while. Then you will awake to the REAL enlightenment.” Realize that even today, they are telling you to realize how little you really know. "Perhaps this is true instead, perhaps that."

I think Ssel here means that if one can clear their minds for awhile, real understanding will set in. I could say that I am done with the tool (mind) for now so I can put it aside. This isn't a deadening of consciousness, but an awakening to what is real. Here is where you will find the true message. It won't be from demons or from any understanding of what a god entails, but you will know it's true because it will present itself as joy.

 

The man in the fog only had hints of what reality might be. He could feel the ground under him, but that was it. As he takes a step, does he just say “it’s all a big risk anyway, so..” and then JUMP to where his untested guess is? Nooo.. he feels carefully, testing that the step is on SOLID ground, BEFORE he puts his weight on it. His first scary realization is that he REALLY doesn’t know anything of what is in front of him. He very slowly discovers how far the road goes. Now of course it would be great if the fog would just leave and the lights would come on, but they aren’t going to for a while. If he can just go to sleep there, fine. We are assuming he has sufficient need or desire to keep going.

 

When you sleep, is when your mind returns to zero so that it can try to rebuild what might be a solid understanding for tomorrow. The “mind of Mankind” is asleep, thus he says, “How do we really know anything?” He wants everything to lose meaning just long enough for it to begin building up from ground zero. So GO to that ground zero. Help all of Mankind and do that step (1). But the mind doesn’t die, it still listens. It just stops presuming. It waits for a need to know and then a clear testing of solidity of what is perceived.

And the way to discover what is true is being able to calm the mind long enough to glimpse what is really true. The mind then becomes the tool (as it should be) and the user is once again in control. It's after that that one can understand and judge the voices the mind puts forward.

 

You need to stitch your unconscious, your subconscious, and your conscious all together into harmony. When you have done this, you will attain what they have been calling the “holy spirit” (why that is so, isn’t important). When you sleep, you do that step (1) on a subconscious level. You step into the void of silence for a short while and let a deeper spirit (effort to live) be the only life. You need to do that also when your awake so that the inner you and the conscious you can begin to relate and stitch into a harmony. This is what the Taoist refers to as the Tao. It is that step into the unknowable void. It leads to what they called the “Chi”, a totally harmonious “spirit” of your life and what the Buddhists call “enlightenment”. It causes a feeling of serenity that they perhaps unwisely called “heaven”. If you will note, the Hebrew referred to a “firmament” that divided the higher waters from the lower waters. This came to be called “heaven” as well. But note it was a “FIRMament” …solidity (not a cloud). Find the firmament, the solidity of the understanding for your thoughts and you will find that you’re in a heaven. But this is merely a heaven for and within your mind. There is another heaven, a “real” heaven in the physical.

This is how you discern the voices. It comes from inside (the god essence in everyone). This heaven or joy as I used above can't come from anything other than that divine spark (or holy spirit). God is just not a voice in your head, but a feeling that comes from being totally in touch with who you are.

 

They told of 7 “days” (metaphorical) for going from semi-chaos to harmonious order (creation). Another later told of merely 3 “days” that would do the job (resurrection). Those who understood, rejoiced greatly. But every step of both plans have carried the burden of slight misunderstanding in each step. Their “days” have not been wrong, merely not completely free of misunderstanding by those carrying them out. I would tell you of merely 2 “days”. But the first “day” begins as a short journey into that void of silence, a waking sleep for the mind, meditating while you walk and watch.

Here Ssel is just trying to explain how to get to where one needs to be in order to understand the messages.

 

You want to argue how wrong everyone has been before you. “We have knew information today.” But realize that the information of “today” is just another day, just as all the others. If you’re going to forget the past because it is old information then why not forget today too. To me, your “today” is just another “yesterdays news”. But there is one thing that they have all said and still say today, “realize how much you don’t really know.” I am telling you this too. The difference is that I’m telling you “why”.

This is pretty self-explanatory, but I would add that the past maybe should be looked at and then set aside because understanding will come in the present moment whether that be today, tomorrow or longer (if ever). The past will present itself (internally) when it is needed.

 

I’m not here to tell you of the errors of all those who came before you nor the errors of today. They all fell short to some slight degree. Nor am I here to tell you of who was right. They were all right to a large degree. I am here merely to “answer the question”. You asked a question. I answered it. Now it is up to you to perceive the answer and seek the solidity of it. But try to remember that you’re looking for what IS true, not merely what ISN’T and the “Who” part of it all is totally irrelevant. You find the solidity (the firmament) by seeking the ground and carefully building your foundation of understanding from there.

 

Stitch your spirit and mind into harmony. That is the first step of a total of 4 which will lock the eternal harmony in forever. I don’t really care who told you that such can’t be done. Take it as arrogance if you like, or authority. I don’t really care. Like every great building or house, it begins by clearing the growth (into the void), then a solid foundation (the firmament), and THEN the framing and rest of the mansion. Then work to prevent the corruption and corrosion (it is my "yesterdays news" that such can not be prevented).

Ssel has taken an opportunity to discuss the micro verson of discernment in how it relates to your question S&H. I think he is referring to the 4 Truths or 4 Vedas. To take it even further, the 4 gospels (as much as it can be obtained from them). So, he did answer your question really.

[crazy-tiger]

From what I can tell, the issue is

1) How and an SCC tell (being someone who doesn't fully understand his religion)?

2) How can ANYone tell?

3) IF your dealing with the "Unknown" then it is impossible.

Someone mind telling me how you know that you fully understand the religion? I mean... you must do to be able to shovel all this stuff out at us as what is RIGHT.

the answers I was trying to point out;

 

1) The SCC has chosen a path of faith. Meaning that he doesn't care if he "knows" he cares only that he follows what he BELIEVES his is his Lord. He already has an image in his mind that he follows (seriously breaking a rule from Moses). Either;

a) Let him go and follow what he thinks is right because he basically doesn't believe that God will allow any deception. or

Explain to him (preferably in a loving tone, that God has told him to KNOW God, not merely worship him, IF the person can manage such (a preference). But tell him what the RIGHT thing to do is (how to KNOW), not merely that you are an adversary and think that his entire religion is full of crap.

Strangely enough, you have also taken a path of faith... You don't agree? Well, what else would you call the belief that what you think is right, IS right, while not knowing that what you think is right, is right?

 

Just like a SCC has faith that his belief is RIGHT, you have faith that what you believe is RIGHT. And just like the SCC, you will proclaim anything that doesn't agree with you to be WRONG and anyone who believes otherwise to not KNOW.

2) Either Christians of higher understanding of their religion OR merely thinking people with or without religion depend on thought and knowing. Thus to come to KNOW, follow the directions that were pointed out prior, regardless of who you are.

 

3) For the reasons explained prior, the seemingly impossible is how you ever got here to begin with. KNOWing, is NOT impossible (unless you choose to join on the ID side of the evolution debates).

It's all faith... You believe that you are right, you believe that others are wrong, you believe even though there is nothing to suggest that your belief is justified other than your belief...

 

You have unshakable faith in what you believe... that same thing you rail against in the SCC's.

[spamandham]

2) Either Christians of higher understanding of their religion OR merely thinking people with or without religion depend on thought and knowing. Thus to come to KNOW, follow the directions that were pointed out prior, regardless of who you are.

 

I think the "problem" only applies to those you refer to as SCC's. Who else would take seriously the stories about god talking to people?

[SkepticOfBible]

Just for a brief moment to perhaps clear a little air...

 

"seeing the light" means realizing a clear new understanding.

 

"hearing a voice" means discussing an issue in your mind from a different perspective than your normal.

 

"that voice answering with I am Jesus" means that he realized that this new perspective was the same as Jesus had spoken about.

 

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks." means that he realized that all of this time he was futility fighting.

 

"what wilt thou have me to do?" means he was contemplating what that (now better) perspective would guide him to do.

 

"And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do." means that he couldn't figure out how to proceed, but in the city, he could find out.

 

"hearing a voice, but seeing no man." meaning to sense a calling or urge but not being able to identify the source.

--------

 

In short, you have been reading a poetic/metaphorical story as though it was literal. Paul was not talking about a fantasy dream. He was talking about a realization that he had been fighting against the wrong cause.

 

Nice rewrite about the bible, in order words the above text actually means something even though it says something else. Unfortunelately for millions of christians, they take this event as literal event, and call this a miracle. So why isn't holy spirit telling them that this a metaphor?

Apparently you have little regard for God's clear warning to people who rewrite his word.

 

Prov 30:5-6

Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

 

The Bible and God's so-called word can and will mean anything a believer wants it to mean.

 

If your looking for wisdom by trying to read a metaphorical book literally

 

Is everything in the bible a metaphor?How do you decide which one is metaphor and which is not?

 

If your trying to shoot down the NT by using the OT, then I have to ask why you think the OT is right?

 

Because million of christians think it is right. They follow cafeteria style religion and pick and choose laws that they (like homosexualility) and shove them in peoples face. And if you tell them about the other laws from OT that christians are breaking(eg breaking the Sabbath or celebrating Christmas), they go "Oh Paul said that Ye are not under the law"

 

Surely, SURELY your not telling us that the Old Testiment has a set of truly perfect everlasting laws??

 

Did you ever read Psalm 119. It's all about how the law is perfect and everlasting, and how you gain salvation from following the law.

 

Psa 19:7

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

 

Psa 119:160

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments(laws) endureth for ever(are eternal)

 

Psa 111:7-8

The works of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure.

They stand fast for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.

 

 

But realize Jesus said "laws make nothing perfect,... follow the HOLY spirit"

 

Here is something which the Jesus also said about the Holy Spirit in OT

 

Ezekiel 11:19-20 RSV

"And I will give them one heart, and PUT A NEW SPIRIT WITHIN THEM; I will take the stony heart out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, THAT THEY MAY WALK IN MY STATUTES AND KEEP MY ORDINANCES AND OBEY THEM; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God."

 

Ezekiel 36:26-27 RSV

" A new heart I will give you, and A NEW SPIRIT I WILL PUT WITHIN YOU and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I WILL PUT MY SPIRIT WITHIN YOU AND CAUSE YOU TO WALK IN MY STATUTES and BE CAREFUL TO OBSERVE MY ORDINANCES."

 

As usual Jesus (or which ever author wrote the book) also said something during his incarnation on earth about the law

 

Matt 19:17

if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

 

John 14:15

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

 

John 14:21

21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me:

and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and

will manifest myself to him.

 

John 15:10

10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have

kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

 

Rev 12:17

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the

remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the

testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

Rev 14:12

12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the

commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

 

Rev 22:14

4 Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the

tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

 

Matt 5:17-20(Jesus speaking)

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

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

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

[thomas]

 

 

Because million of christians think it is right. They follow cafeteria style religion and pick and choose laws that they (like homosexualility) and shove them in peoples face. And if you tell them about the other laws from OT that christians are breaking(eg breaking the Sabbath or celebrating Christmas), they go "Oh Paul said that Ye are not under the law"

 

 

Allegorical reading of the bible used to be an established part of the christian tradition.

 

Philo of Alexandria and earlier Jewish tradition allowed that literal reading could by supplemented by allegoric interpretation. And Clement, Origen and Didymus took up the same approach. Origin interpreted Joshua’s concquest of the promised land, as an allegory for Christ’s conquest of sin upon the cross.

 

In contrast to this, the Antiochene school emphasized interpretation in light of historical context, so within this tradition, only very few passages in OT was seen as a reference to Christ.

 

In the western church, Ambrose of Milan developed a threefold understanding, where scripture both had a literal, a moral and a rational/theological sense. Augustin took this route, but argued for a twofold sense with a literal/fleshy/historical sense and a allegorical/mystical/spiritual sense. According to this, Adam represented Christ, Eve represented the church, Noah’s ark represented the cross, the door toe Noah’s ark represented the pierced side of Christ and the city of Jerusalem represented the heavenly Jerusalem.

 

In the middle ages the standard method for interpretation became the “fourfold sense of scripture”. This contains:

 

1. The literal sense

2. The allegorical sense (used to find doctrine)

3. The moral sense (used to find guidance for Christian conduct)

4. The anagogical sense (used to find ground for Christian hope about the future)

 

The allegorical sense were generally applied on obscure passages or on passages with a literal meaning that was unacceptable to the church.

 

Martin Luther also used these four senses and he even found that each sense could both be used in historical and in prophetical reading. So he used eight combinations (literal historical, literal prophetic, allegorical historical, allegorical prophetic etc.) in his interpretation of scripture.

 

As the time on the enlightment came a more critical approach to bible reading developed. Allegory is generally not accepted any more, because of the obvious risk, that the reader simply just may read his own ideas into scripture.

 

Much of my knowledge on this subject comes from “Christian Theology, An introduction” by Alister E. McGrath. When I first read it, I lost a lot of respect for the Christian churches and for biblical theology, since there are so many possibilities for the reader to pick and choose.

 

But allegory is part of the Christian tradition, and if Ssel can demonstrate one single allegorical method that can be used in a consistent manner on all of the bible, then I see no reason to dismiss it.

[Guest Guest]

But allegory is part of the Christian tradition, and if Ssel can demonstrate one single allegorical method that can be used in a consistent manner on all of the bible, then I see no reason to dismiss it.

 

 

My opinions are coming from a fundementalist attitude that I've carried here and apparently, being an exchristian hasn't changed how I see the bible. I've been debating a side of bible understanding that I have never even bothered to look at, I'm going to look into allegorical interpretations. I began this morning at this site Allegory in the Bible Not even 1/4 of the page down and I started to see a differnt side that I've never saw nor tried to understand. I cannot see it clearly, BUT I'm not going to dismiss it anymore. Having trouble getting past the brutality and petty laws and those against homosexuals as being allegorical but with further study, perhaps I can get a better understanding.

[euphgeek]

We are told that the spirits can be judged by what they tell you. If a spirit tells you to do something you know is wrong, then it is an evil spirit. ...seems simple enough.

 

Now for the hard part (for Christians):

 

God told Abraham to kill his son. Apparently, Abraham didn't consider sacrificing your son to god to be wrong, or he would have recognized this as an evil spirit rather than god talking to him!

 

God told Joshua to commit genocide. Same thing.

 

How can you possibly judge god from a demon when god makes the same requests a demon might make?

I read somewhere that early Gnostic Christians believed that the God in the OT was actually Satan. One reason was the point you make above, and another one was that their God demanded that the Israelites worship only him.

[NotBlinded]

But allegory is part of the Christian tradition, and if Ssel can demonstrate one single allegorical method that can be used in a consistent manner on all of the bible, then I see no reason to dismiss it.

 

 

My opinions are coming from a fundementalist attitude that I've carried here and apparently, being an exchristian hasn't changed how I see the bible. I've been debating a side of bible understanding that I have never even bothered to look at, I'm going to look into allegorical interpretations. I began this morning at this site Allegory in the Bible Not even 1/4 of the page down and I started to see a differnt side that I've never saw nor tried to understand. I cannot see it clearly, BUT I'm not going to dismiss it anymore. Having trouble getting past the brutality and petty laws and those against homosexuals as being allegorical but with further study, perhaps I can get a better understanding.

 

 

Above statement is mine...

I can tell you from my experience that trying to understand it as allegory has made a world of difference to me. I can actually feel peace returning to my life. I will still say that reading the bible as a literal document causes more confusion than peace, but when viewed as Jesus being a man that found enlightenment, it becomes totally meaningful.

[SkepticOfBible]

 

But allegory is part of the Christian tradition, and if Ssel can demonstrate one single allegorical method that can be used in a consistent manner on all of the bible, then I see no reason to dismiss it.

 

 

My opinions are coming from a fundementalist attitude that I've carried here and apparently, being an exchristian hasn't changed how I see the bible. I've been debating a side of bible understanding that I have never even bothered to look at, I'm going to look into allegorical interpretations. I began this morning at this site Allegory in the Bible Not even 1/4 of the page down and I started to see a differnt side that I've never saw nor tried to understand. I cannot see it clearly, BUT I'm not going to dismiss it anymore. Having trouble getting past the brutality and petty laws and those against homosexuals as being allegorical but with further study, perhaps I can get a better understanding.

 

From the site

Many Jews of that day did not want to abandon the Law of Moses because they thought that the Law was the way to freedom

 

The law of Moses was given by god. The jews did not want to give up the laws because god told them it represented righteousness which uplifted his people over others.

 

Deut 4:8

And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I(God) set before you this day?

 

Righteousness and salvation are obtained by following God's Law.

 

Psa 119:41,44

Let thy mercies come also unto me, O LORD, even thy salvation, according to thy word.

So shall I keep thy law continually for ever and ever.

 

Psa 119:144-146

The righteousness of thy testimonies(laws) is everlasting: give me understanding, and I shall live(have salvation).

I cried with my whole heart; hear me, O LORD: I will keep thy statutes.

I cried unto thee; save me, and I shall keep thy testimonies(laws).

 

Eccl 12:13

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments(laws): for this is the whole duty of man.

 

Deut 6:25

And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the LORD our God, as he hath commanded us.

 

 

One can find peace by reading the Quran and the Bhagwad Gita as allegorical document, yet you won't do that will you?

[Amethyst]

I tried the liberal Christian interpret-it-only-as-a-myth route. It didn't help me any. I couldn't believe in hell, so I realized that I couldn't believe in the rest of it.

 

I also couldn't spend the rest of my life wasting my time and money on what I knew was a lie, nor could I spend it pretending to be someone I really wasn't.

 

There are much better myths for me to spend time and money on than Christianity. LoTR, Harry Potter, Star Trek, Star Wars...and none of them have claimed to be real, much less the absolute truth. Their authors didn't feel the need to lie to the general public. Go figure.

[NotBlinded]

That's the wonderful part about reading it as allegory...there is no need to claim a specific religion since they all point to the same thing. Hell is not a literal place, but a place that one creates in themselves.

[Ssel]

I offer an allegorical or metaphorical translation for consideration which will consistently fit ALL ancient manuscripts and scriptures whether they are about God, Satan, witchcraft, magic, Buddha, or any unseen mystical forces. And that is the word “water”. The word water in all ancient mystical references means the same thing. It is only one of very many translations to consider. It is a place to start.

 

Water = issues / concerns

 

Whether the water is in the form of a sea, river, drinking water, ocean, pool, or just about anything else it still means “issues”. The form of the water indicates more detail of exactly which water (issues) are being addressed.

 

If you will merely try to see how this translation actually fits, then an entirely new picture of these documents begins to come to light.

 

By saying this, I am NOT saying that ANY of these documents are truly holy and should be worshipped. I am merely pointing out that the more serious and relevant understanding of those ancient documents lay in the metaphorical understanding, not the literal.

 

As you get into the “red sea”, you will quickly come to the issue of the Staff of Moses. This Staff will suddenly take on a new understanding that is very relevant to YOU right NOW at this very moment.

[NotBlinded]

Is this something that you have discovered or is this something you have studied? I only ask because I would like to view the source. It sounds a lot like what I have been reading. If you are the one, then I will wait for more.

[Fweethawt]

If you are the one, then I will wait for more.

Trinity?

[Cerise]

If you are the one, then I will wait for more.

Trinity?

 

LOL that's just what I was thinking Fwee. Quit reading my mind!

[Fweethawt]

If you are the one, then I will wait for more.

Trinity?

LOL that's just what I was thinking Fwee. Quit reading my mind!

 

My phone just rang.

 

I'm not too sure that I should answer it.

[Ssel]

Is this something that you have discovered or is this something you have studied? I only ask because I would like to view the source. It sounds a lot like what I have been reading. If you are the one, then I will wait for more.

I'm not sure what you are asking here. I'm NOT saying to merely take my word for it. I'm saying to consider it and find out for yourself. The translation causes the mystical events to begin to look far more like common sense events which are merely stated in a mystical manner.

 

Arguing over the literal version of ancient mystical scriptures is a lot like arguing whether superman is more righteous than batman.

 

If you wish to understand the documents, then it takes a little effort to translate them into your own terms. They were written in mystical form for a reason. But that is another issue.

[SkepticOfBible]

I offer an allegorical or metaphorical translation for consideration which will consistently fit ALL ancient manuscripts and scriptures whether they are about God, Satan, witchcraft, magic, Buddha, or any unseen mystical forces. And that is the word “water”. The word water in all ancient mystical references means the same thing. It is only one of very many translations to consider. It is a place to start.

 

The water anology is more or less inclining towards hinduism than christiantiy.

 

I used to think in the same way before I had my encounter with Fundamentalism. I think what you are alluring to is pluralism.

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_plur1.htm

 

Which I have discovered is noble concept, but in reality it is not a practical one.

 

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rel_plur.htm

Does pluralism mean that all religions are factually true?

 

No. Multiple religions cannot all be absolutely true for the simple reason that they hold conflicting cosmological, moral, and theological beliefs.

.......

Obviously, only one of the above religions can be absolutely true according to the Law of Non-contradiction. 5 In fact, none may be. Thus, two or more of the above religions cannot be absolutely true simultaneously.

 

 

Can many religions be valid without being absolutely true?

 

Yes. We can recognize the validity of other religions, even though they are very different from our own.

 

Conflicts between exclusivism and religious pluralism:

 

Exclusivism and religious pluralism are two opposing ways of looking at world religions in relation to one's own faith.

 

Most people in North America and the rest of the world probably take an exclusivist position: they believe that their religion, and only theirs, is completely true. Most believe that their God communicated universal truths by special revelation given to their spiritual ancestors or patriarchs. This knowledge has been passed on to present-day humanity, often in the form of religious texts. People hold tenaciously to their particular faith, believing it to be God's revealed wish for all humanity. They view the Gods of other religions as false. Some may even view other faith groups or denominations within their own religion to be false.

 

 

Many religion in the world(eg chrisitianity and Islam) actually follow the exclusive path rather than a pluralist path.

 

 

One of the strongest case I have heard against pluralism is ironically by an christian

 

The Myth of Tolerance - Not All Views Are Equal

 

Off course Greg Koukl has inappropraitely used the word tolerance instead of pluralism.

[Ssel]

The water anology is more or less inclining towards hinduism than christiantiy.

 

.... I think what you are alluring to is pluralism.

The translation has to do with a common language of mystics used in many religions and magic oriented scriptures. It has nothing to do with being specifically Christian or anything else. And has nothing whatsoever to do with pluralism.

 

I am merely referring to understanding the document, not attempting to worship this one or that one.

[Guest JPD]

Tell us all about "the Jewry" Ssel.