True Follower's Of Christ

[Ouroboros]

NBBTB, I always love the thought provoking insights you share. I will look up that site you posted. Along with you and OM, I also believe in the ONENESS of ALL things. If everything came out of the Big Bang, wouldn't that mean ALL things came out of the same thing? Maybe the only conflict we have is how each of us define God?

Very true.

 

I do think everything is connected. If the theories about the singularity of "nothing" being the starting point of "big bang", all quarks/particles/energy is interconnected through quantum entanglement. If the universe have some superior intellect or not, that is a question we can't answer yet. Not until we know what intellect, consciousness and "free will" really is.

[NotBlinded]

NBBTB, I always love the thought provoking insights you share. I will look up that site you posted. Along with you and OM, I also believe in the ONENESS of ALL things. If everything came out of the Big Bang, wouldn't that mean ALL things came out of the same thing? Maybe the only conflict we have is how each of us define God?

Thanks Amanda! I think all things did come out of the same thing and that same thing is still within all things.

 

Very true.

 

I do think everything is connected. If the theories about the singularity of "nothing" being the starting point of "big bang", all quarks/particles/energy is interconnected through quantum entanglement. If the universe have some superior intellect or not, that is a question we can't answer yet. Not until we know what intellect, consciousness and "free will" really is.

Afterall...all things must exist in 'something'. I actually don't think something is the right word to use here because it implies that there is something. Maybe it should be...all "things" exist in "no-thing". Kind of like how sound exists in silence.

[dibby]

Kind of like how sound exists in silence.

 

Yes. And the beauty is we can find out for ourselves through experience. In quiet. In meditation/contemplation. There is a time to forget about thoughts, concepts, beliefs, reasonings, imaginings, arguings etc and just go within and find out for ourselves what is. It is an experience not a concept.

 

Heraclitus said, "All human opinions are toys for children"

[Ouroboros]

Here's a conundrum the Bible doesn't explain: how could God say "let there be light" before air existed? Did he say it in another universe that already existed before ours?

[NotBlinded]

It is an experience not a concept.

Oh...I like that!

 

Here's a conundrum the Bible doesn't explain: how could God say "let there be light" before air existed? Did he say it in another universe that already existed before ours?

Okay...I am going to speculate and say that the writers said that god said that in order to have a good creation story! Emphasis on story...

[Open_Minded]

Hello Julian:

 

Is Christianity not centered around the assumption that Jesus is somehow a "saviour" (among other things)? I mean, Christianity is the -ianity of Christ. This is very important, because IMO if you take away that assumption as well as the conclusions that go along with it (being saved from sin, one "god", heaven and hell, etc...), what are you left with? To be honest, it is difficult or perhaps impossible to separate the claims of a "saviour" and the like from Christianity and the Bible. So my point is that even if you are absolutely not a literalist, the Bible is still what it is, no (sorry if you explained that in the thread you gave me)?

 

Well, literalist Christianity is definitely centered around the literal idea of being “saved” from a literal “hell”. But, there are many Christians who do NOT believe in a literal hell. I am one of them.

 

There are all kinds of “hell”. We put ourselves in “hell” on a regular basis – because of the way we think and the way we act. We make mistakes, or we do things without fully realizing the consequences of our actions and there is “hell” to pay. “Salvation” to me is not being spared from eternal damnation in a literal “hell”. “Salvation” for me (and I rarely use that word – I hate the connotations) is being liberated from my very human attachments to things like (for example) extreme emotions that cause me to make destructive decisions for myself, and others. Humans need “liberation” or “salvation” from all sorts of attachments. Intelligent and mature people recognize this. Intelligent and mature people also recognize that this is a life long process and that it is an individual process. That the answers one person finds for their individual journey are not necessarily the answers that will connect with another person.

 

For those of us who practice a non-literal form of Christianity – we look at salvation much like I just explained.

 

I believe “Divine LOVE and WISDOM” to be intimately connected with infinite ONENESS. INFINITE ONENESS is a lot of things – but fiction it is NOT. There is at some point – UNITY – ONENESS. At some point all that IS – is all in ONE. I connect LOVE and WISDOM with this.

 

Just to clarify, would you say that this oneness would mean that any rock is fully one and unified with you and I and everything else? Would you say that this lies within the entity itself? Would you say that this point of unity is everything and all things?

 

I have reached a point in my life where I recognize that there is a dimension where everything is distinct within and of itself – but that there is also another dimension to reality in which everything is “no thing” (for lack of better language). Where there is pure energy in all – through all and beyond all – and that every distinct thing is first energy before it is any thing. To me (and I acknowledge that many would disagree with this statement) to me – LOVE and WISDOM are intricately linked, connected, a part of this ONENESS. So – yes – on one level (in one dimension) I do believe the rock and I and you and all is ONE.

 

In what way does the Bible show any suggestion of oneness? I personally don't think that the Bible provides for such a basis. The point of unity is this one "god" (which is not only an illogical and flawed concept but also unethical and worse). If you look at the Bible, it very clearly puts divinity squarely in the hands of one "deity" which is completely removed from our world, while "his" "spirit" dabbles with us (oh, and other animals and nature is just our toy, too); this is the very much opposed to the concept of unity and oneness IMO. Moreover, Christianity claims that it is the only way to divinity, the only way to life and truth (John 14:6, for example). That, IMO, is opposed to the reality that there is truth in all things. I could go on.

 

My main point is that the beliefs you put forth seem to be in spite of the Bible and Christianity and not because of it. Please believe me when I say that I pretty much agree with what you're saying, but what you're saying is far from Christianity.

 

Well – it is far from the Christianity you know. However – I grew up free from many of the literalist views I’ve been exposed to on this board. And – as a result –I’ve been free to look at Christianity from a different angle. Following is a post from NotBlinded – thanks NotBlinded I agree completely ... and have a bit more to add.

 

Jhn 10:30 I and [my] Father are one.

 

This verse alone doesn't speak of oneness, but when the Jews were about to stone him, he goes on to say:

 

Jhn 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

 

Jhn 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

 

Jhn 10:36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

 

What I would add to this is John 14:16-19

 

And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate, to be with you forever. This is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, because he abides with you, and he will be in you.

 

"I will not leave you orphaned; I am coming to you. In a little while the world will no longer see me, but you will see me; because I live, you also will live.

On that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.

 

Julian I know on the surface – there can be exclusivist attitudes tied to John. But, it may help you to understand the light I see these verses in if you know how I see the Gospel of John overall.

 

Following is a post from another thread about this -

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&a...st&p=146978

:

 

So... let's look at John. What did the author of John see in Jesus (mind you I am not saying what did ALL early christians see in Jesus, specifically what did the author of John see)?

 

Well following are the first verses of John:

 

 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people.

 

The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father's only son, full of grace and truth.

 

Now... to take this a step further. LOGOS is the greek word for "THE WORD". Logos also points to Wisdom of God, Sophia, etc...

 

So.. the author of John was pointing to Jesus as the WISDOM OF GOD MADE FLESH.

 

Keep this thought in mind .... let's go a bit further into John.

 

 

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am."

Once again, the author of John is pointing to Jesus and seeing something IN him that transcended time. When he made this "before Abraham was, I am." he was not pointing to the physical Jesus who walked the earth. We all know the physical Jesus did not walk the earth BEFORE Abraham.

 

The author of John pointed to Jesus and saw IN him something that transcended time and space twice that I can think of off hand. He specifically pointed to this WORD IN Jesus at the beginning of the Gospel. Then he used John 8:58 to point once again to something he saw IN Jesus as existing before Abraham. AND he picks up on language any Jewish listener would understand when he says "before Abraham was, I am." Those words were pointing to something infinite, eteranal the Sacred ONE IN Jesus.

 

ONLY in this context do the verses like:

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

.... make any sense.

The I AM verses are abundant in the Gospel of John, they MUST be read in light of the whole gospel, in light of what the author saw IN Jesus.

 

You are right NotBlinded ... when Jesus says "I am the way, the truth, and the life" he is saying "The WORD (WISDOM, LOGOS, SOFIA) IN me is the way, the truth and the life." Infinite Wisdom, Logos, etc... is infinitely available to all of creation. It is NOT limited to one specific group of human beings.

 

Julian ... John is my favorite gospel. But I do not see the exclusivist attitudes in it that other people do, simply because I was FIRST exposed to reading it this way. Only later – after I had already learned to read the Bible as I do now – was I exposed to the more literal interpretations. (I have my father to thank for that).

 

But, there are differences in the way humans perceive this. For my own part – I perceive this ONENESS as intimately linked with LOVE and WISDOM. This ONENESS IS the Alpha and the Omega to me. It is the Infinite, eternal I AM, the “WORD” (LOGOS) unspoken.

 

So... yes... I do see a connection between Jesus/Christ and all of this...

 

OK, nothing to object to the first paragraph, but I'm not sure how Jesus is involved. Is it simply what you identify with more than anything else? How could a person who supposedly said "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) connect with unity?

I hope you see from my posting above – how I can read these verses and still be open to other points of view... other experiences of this ONENESS....

 

BTW .... I’ve been popping in and out of this thread all afternoon, as I work. EVERYONE I have to tell you I LOVE the conversation. It has been fascinating. My only frustration is that I’ve not been able to participate.

 

But, this ONENESS .... how absolutely breathtaking to read what you all have to say about it. I wish I could respond to each and every post – it’s been fascinating to read.

 

_______________________

 

Antlerman: you did direct the following comments specifically to me – so I’m going to respond as best I can in a short amount of time.

 

If we therefore acknowledge as living human beings an interconnectedness and ONENESS of life, we must include a NON-ONENESS in there somewhere in order to call it ONENESS. What is that sense of NON-ONENESS, a reality or a perception? If it is a perception, then is ONENESS only a perception of human thought? If it is a reality, than is GOD dualistic in its nature? If it is reality and external to GOD (i.e. a fallen spirit being), then ONENESS is doesn't exist.

 

Is this making sense? This is touching on why I see this as all centered in the human perception of the universe it finds itself contemplating in its particular biology organ called the brain. Is it possible to know reality outside of opposites? Even transcendent experience is rooted back into the perception of opposites through our brains. Your thoughts?

 

I do understand what you are saying. Within the Christian tradition there is definitely a real dualism going on. (sigh) But, within the contemplative dimension of Christianity this dualism is something we perceive, not necessarily THEE underlying reality. Within the Christian mystic tradition there is a point at which dualism is reconciled into ONE ... (all will be reconciled in Christ). Within the Christian contemplative tradition it is possible to experience a non-dualistic state of awareness – it is referred to as Union with God. It is even possible for this “union” to be continuous, part of a person’s daily awareness of life.

 

Julian, Antlerman, NotBlinded and everyone else.... this line of discussion has been fascinating - even if I haven't been able to participate as fully as I would like. Thanks for the good reading. You all are fantastic....

[Antlerman]

Here's a conundrum the Bible doesn't explain: how could God say "let there be light" before air existed? Did he say it in another universe that already existed before ours?

It's only a conundrum if you read the bible literally. Read it allegorically, metaphorically, mythologically, and it shouldn't be a problem. It could be any kind of light: a spritual light for instance. Of course once you start not taking the Bible literally you could wind up risking your very salvation by accepting what science reveals that the Universe is as old as it is, rather than as young as some preacher from Kansas claims it is!

[Ouroboros]

Nah, silly, I didn't think of the "light", I was thinking about: how the heck can you make sound when you have no air? Sound is waves traveling in the air, and God supposedly "said". Of course he could have "thought" it, or "said" it in another dimension, but he didn't "say" the same way as we do here.

[Amanda]

Kind of like how sound exists in silence.

 

Yes. And the beauty is we can find out for ourselves through experience. In quiet. In meditation/contemplation. There is a time to forget about thoughts, concepts, beliefs, reasonings, imaginings, arguings etc and just go within and find out for ourselves what is. It is an experience not a concept.

 

Heraclitus said, "All human opinions are toys for children"

Dibby, I really like the Heraclitus saying! I envy all of you that have the patience for meditation!

 

Sound existing in silence, I took that to mean that there is sound all around us... yet if we do not have the ability to perceive it, experience it, we will not hear it. Is that what you are saying about meditation?

 

HanSolo, as far as "let there be light"... it could mean, let there be the ability to see, think, comprehend. That may have been the beginning of God's conscious manifestation.

[Ouroboros]

Oh, another little thingy to insert in all this discussions.

 

The word "void" in Genesis, is more correctly translated to "chaos", and it reflects the earlier Creation stories that God, not omnipresent, not omnipotent, more of the traditional gods like Zeus etc, gave order to existing matter. Not creation from nothing, like most Christians think of the Genesis story. (I learned this yesterday, by listening to Doc Robert Price. )

[Antlerman]

Oh, another little thingy to insert in all this discussions.

 

The word "void" in Genesis, is more correctly translated to "chaos", and it reflects the earlier Creation stories that God, not omnipresent, not omnipotent, more of the traditional gods like Zeus etc, gave order to existing matter. Not creation from nothing, like most Christians think of the Genesis story. (I learned this yesterday, by listening to Doc Robert Price. )

Ooooh! That's cool, and it actually would somewhat square with evolution. In other words he came traversing across the many universes which we cannot see; saw our newly created expansion of a recently "popped" singularity; spoke into the vacuum of that space, making no sound of course (had to correct my miss there) and injected some laws into this universe that would allow it to coalesce and combine to create matter and eventually life however the weighted chips fell. Now if it said all that... then maybe it might garner some real attention for some remarkable insights.

 

Now this is what the world needs, Zeus Hawking, an old god with a new mind for an educated world! Yes, I might even make a pilgrimage to that shine.

[Amanda]

Oh, another little thingy to insert in all this discussions.

 

The word "void" in Genesis, is more correctly translated to "chaos", and it reflects the earlier Creation stories that God, not omnipresent, not omnipotent, more of the traditional gods like Zeus etc, gave order to existing matter. Not creation from nothing, like most Christians think of the Genesis story. (I learned this yesterday, by listening to Doc Robert Price. )

HanSolo, I wonder where he got that? If you go to Crosswalk.com and use their concordance, it says something different. If you go here, and click on the word void, you will find it means this:

 

emptiness, void, waste

 

However, my teacher in seminary pointed out that in Genesis 1:2, it says

And the earth was without form, and void;

and the word was could also mean became. If you go here and click on was, you'll find that it means became void.

 

Isaiah 45:18 says this:

 

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

 

So, I think this was built upon the Luciferion Theory, that the morning star came down and distroyed the earth. The dawn of man. See Isiaiah 14:12 here, go to verse 12, and click on Lucifer, and you will find the morning star. Do you know of any pagan beliefs that this was built upon?

 

I think it has something to do with "God" separating from creation, to some degree. It's about God able to "experience" through all things, therefore he had to separate himself from us in some way. It may be an extension of a Pagan belief system.

[Ouroboros]

Maybe I got the wrong word. The "without form" seems to have a meaning of Chaos though.

 

Doc Price said something about the "water" myths is recurring in the bible. And you can find it in some other old religions too. That the high god had to fight against the sea monster before the world was created. And there are verses in Job and the Psalms making hints to this old myth. For instance I think the dragon was this monster.

 

However, my teacher in seminary pointed out that in Genesis 1:2, it says

And the earth was without form, and void;

and the word was could also mean became. If you go here and click on was, you'll find that it means became void.

That explains the strange belief some have that the Earth was populated first, and then became void, and God created the new humans. Or something like that.

 

So, I think this was built upon the Luciferion Theory, that the morning star came down and distroyed the earth. The dawn of man. See Isiaiah 14:12 here, go to verse 12, and click on Lucifer, and you will find the morning star. Do you know of any pagan beliefs that this was built upon?

Good question. I've been listening to so many things last week that it's a bit information overload at the moment. I did hear something about the morning star. It is the brightest star just before the sun (God) comes up and kills it (or overtakes it powers). So the morningstar was a inferior god or "angel" (messenger of the coming God).

 

Jesus was said to be the morning star too. In Revelations.

 

I think it has something to do with "God" separating from creation, to some degree. It's about God able to "experience" through all things, therefore he had to separate himself from us in some way. It may be an extension of a Pagan belief system.

Enuma Elish

Wikipedia:Enuma Elish

Comparison Enuma Elish and Genesis

[Antlerman]

I do understand what you are saying. Within the Christian tradition there is definitely a real dualism going on. (sigh) But, within the contemplative dimension of Christianity this dualism is something we perceive, not necessarily THEE underlying reality. Within the Christian mystic tradition there is a point at which dualism is reconciled into ONE ... (all will be reconciled in Christ). Within the Christian contemplative tradition it is possible to experience a non-dualistic state of awareness – it is referred to as Union with God. It is even possible for this “union” to be continuous, part of a person’s daily awareness of life.

 

Julian, Antlerman, NotBlinded and everyone else.... this line of discussion has been fascinating - even if I haven't been able to participate as fully as I would like. Thanks for the good reading. You all are fantastic....

OM, I think where I was going before and struggling to articulate goes way back to previous dialog with you where you refer to Chaos in this world as the negative: as death, disease, disharmony, etc. Yet I always find myself in reaction to this as it sounds like that hardened dualistic mindset of traditional Christianity, that these things exist outside God. Yet logically, death and life are interdependent on each other. Death is not bad, death is death, and is good for life to live. We eat recently dead things. Our life depends on them. Death in this sense is good in that it allows life to be. It is not evil - but part of the natural order of life.

 

I think the problem may be in that you, as everyone else, speak in the language of duality or opposites. In what you are saying about ONENESS, being ALL, you are speaking of that "time" before the beginning of time, where there was no such things as opposites, "they neither marry or are given in marriage but are as the angels of heaven"; Time does not yet exist; the physical world does not yet exist; the laws of the universe do not yet apply; it is simply being beyond the natural world.

 

In the "fall of man" we move out of this perfection into the natural world of death and life, of separations, of oppositions. Chaos is disorder fallen from order. We live in imperfection. Chaos is the natural world.

 

Chaos is not the person getting a disease, but getting a disease is part of living in chaos, living in the natural world. Chaos is not bad; chaos simply is the state of our existence. Disease brings death, which brings life, which brings death, which brings life. This is the plane of our being. Being outside the mythological ideal of perfection.

 

My suspicion is that you understand it this way already, but the difficulty is in using language that is dependant on definitions off of opposites. How do you describe perfection without imperfection? How do you describe Good without Evil, and so on? I guess I would just be careful not to call things that happen in life that are distasteful to us and use them as examples of chaos, when in reality ALL of the natural world is, both the good and the bad.

 

Chaos is the knowledge of separation; the knowledge of imperfection.

 

 

Your thoughts?

[Open_Minded]

In the "fall of man" we move out of this perfection into the natural world of death and life, of separations, of oppositions. Chaos is disorder fallen from order. We live in imperfection. Chaos is the natural world.

 

Chaos is not the person getting a disease, but getting a disease is part of living in chaos, living in the natural world. Chaos is not bad; chaos simply is the state of our existence. Disease brings death, which brings life, which brings death, which brings life. This is the plane of our being. Being outside the mythological ideal of perfection.

 

My suspicion is that you understand it this way already, but the difficulty is in using language that is dependant on definitions off of opposites. How do you describe perfection without imperfection? How do you describe Good without Evil, and so on? I guess I would just be careful not to call things that happen in life that are distasteful to us and use them as examples of chaos, when in reality ALL of the natural world is, both the good and the bad.

 

Chaos is the knowledge of separation; the knowledge of imperfection.

 

 

Your thoughts?

 

I agree completely - just adding some of my own thoughts here ....

 

"Chaos is the knowledge of separation; the knowledge of imperfection." .... yes indeed .....

 

One might even say ....

 

Chaos is the "knowledge of good and evil".

 

......

 

I do understand what you are saying Antlerman ... we feel chaotic things in our life because we assign value to those happenings. Not necessarily pleasant value - but we do assign value to things that disturb our peace and we call them "chaotic".

[dibby]

Dibby, I really like the Heraclitus saying! I envy all of you that have the patience for meditation!

 

Sound existing in silence, I took that to mean that there is sound all around us... yet if we do not have the ability to perceive it, experience it, we will not hear it. Is that what you are saying about meditation?

 

Hi Amanda. Meditation has become such a burdensome sounding word...hasn't it?

It really just means that we calm down long enough to experience ourselves as we are. When we become aware that we are aware! Its that simple. We become still enough to recognise that within us is the "space" which contains everything....thoughts, body, feelings, objects, sounds, smells etc. These are experiences that each of us has.....contemplation/meditation is becoming aware of the EXPERIENCER of these experiences. If we pay attention to this aspect of ourselves habitually, then we realise that everything exists within awareness....including time! Time is the continual flow of experiences within awareness.

 

Going back to the sound analogy....if we just calm ourselves and really listen, we find that the sounds are an experience one is having. Awareness is the silence which witnesses the sounds.

[julian]

Open Minded, here is my somewhat delayed reply.

 

Well, literalist Christianity is definitely centered around the literal idea of being “saved” from a literal “hell”. But, there are many Christians who do NOT believe in a literal hell. I am one of them.

 

There are all kinds of “hell”. We put ourselves in “hell” on a regular basis – because of the way we think and the way we act. We make mistakes, or we do things without fully realizing the consequences of our actions and there is “hell” to pay. “Salvation” to me is not being spared from eternal damnation in a literal “hell”. “Salvation” for me (and I rarely use that word – I hate the connotations) is being liberated from my very human attachments to things like (for example) extreme emotions that cause me to make destructive decisions for myself, and others. Humans need “liberation” or “salvation” from all sorts of attachments. Intelligent and mature people recognize this. Intelligent and mature people also recognize that this is a life long process and that it is an individual process. That the answers one person finds for their individual journey are not necessarily the answers that will connect with another person.

 

Is such a "hell" really a Christian or even Abrahamic hell? I would not think so. A "hell" that we create in a mental or like way is not comparable to a hell which is very much portrayed in the Bible. To be honest, the former idea would be something far more compatible to another religion and belief system. Next, your idea of salvation is more like realization, which is a totally different concept IMO. Transcending petty emotions to reach a higher truth, for instance, has little to do with the whole "I die for your sins" thing.

 

My question to you is why hold on to the Bible if it is so opposed to much of what you believe? Why keep an identification when it scarcely applies? Another facet of this is that I am somewhat perplexed to see people hold on to a religion which has actively destroyed and raped countless belief systems and religions which are far more similar to those very people.

 

For those of us who practice a non-literal form of Christianity – we look at salvation much like I just explained.

 

While I am all for non-literal interpretations, I do think that there is a fine line between interpretation and outright rejection of many things.

 

I have reached a point in my life where I recognize that there is a dimension where everything is distinct within and of itself – but that there is also another dimension to reality in which everything is “no thing” (for lack of better language). Where there is pure energy in all – through all and beyond all – and that every distinct thing is first energy before it is any thing. To me (and I acknowledge that many would disagree with this statement) to me – LOVE and WISDOM are intricately linked, connected, a part of this ONENESS. So – yes – on one level (in one dimension) I do believe the rock and I and you and all is ONE.

 

Well, I hope I didn't forget the point I was setting up with those questions, but here goes anyway. First, I think that when you recognize the deeper existence of other entities, that is radically different from (and actually opposed to) anything you will find in the Bible. Next, the connection between all things is equal, no? So, we can write off the possibility of the Christian "god", now can't we?

 

Well – it is far from the Christianity you know. However – I grew up free from many of the literalist views I’ve been exposed to on this board. And – as a result –I’ve been free to look at Christianity from a different angle. Following is a post from NotBlinded – thanks NotBlinded I agree completely ... and have a bit more to add.

 

Well, as I've said, I hold that it matters little if you are literalist or not, the Bible is still what it is, and I also hold that you simply can't get around a lot of it. Therefore, I think that your "different angle" departs from the source (the source being Christianity) entirely. That's just the way I see it.

 

Wow you got a long post there. Not sure if I can delve into it at 1:30 AM, but here goes.

 

Julian I know on the surface – there can be exclusivist attitudes tied to John. But, it may help you to understand the light I see these verses in if you know how I see the Gospel of John overall.

 

Following is a post from another thread about this - http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?s=&a...st&p=146978 :

 

So... let's look at John. What did the author of John see in Jesus (mind you I am not saying what did ALL early christians see in Jesus, specifically what did the author of John see)?

 

Well following are the first verses of John:

 

 

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people.

 

The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him. He himself was not the light, but he came to testify to the light. The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. He came to what was his own, and his own people did not accept him. But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father's only son, full of grace and truth.

 

Now... to take this a step further. LOGOS is the greek word for "THE WORD". Logos also points to Wisdom of God, Sophia, etc...

 

So.. the author of John was pointing to Jesus as the WISDOM OF GOD MADE FLESH.

 

You can say "God" made flesh or the wisdom of "God" made flesh, it doesn't change the concept one bit. Still, "all things came into being through him" and all that is very much present. Let's go further.

 

Keep this thought in mind .... let's go a bit further into John.

 

 

John 8:58 Jesus said to them, "Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am."

Once again, the author of John is pointing to Jesus and seeing something IN him that transcended time. When he made this "before Abraham was, I am." he was not pointing to the physical Jesus who walked the earth. We all know the physical Jesus did not walk the earth BEFORE Abraham.

 

The author of John pointed to Jesus and saw IN him something that transcended time and space twice that I can think of off hand. He specifically pointed to this WORD IN Jesus at the beginning of the Gospel. Then he used John 8:58 to point once again to something he saw IN Jesus as existing before Abraham. AND he picks up on language any Jewish listener would understand when he says "before Abraham was, I am." Those words were pointing to something infinite, eteranal the Sacred ONE IN Jesus.

 

ONLY in this context do the verses like:

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

 

.... make any sense.

The I AM verses are abundant in the Gospel of John, they MUST be read in light of the whole gospel, in light of what the author saw IN Jesus.

 

John 8:58 only shows the idea that Jesus is somehow "the son" while also being "the father", which is nothing new. It really is just advancing the assumption that Jesus came from "the father", or was/is "the father" or the like. Does this include anything besides the Nazarene and the "god" he claims to be the son of? No. Does this include us? No. Does this include nature, the universe, existence itself? No. It only relates to him and his supposed "god" and nothing more, and that is a problem.

 

That's my (tired) take on it.

 

Thanks for the response, I enjoy your thoughts and ideas and I appreciate you taking the time to share them with me. Basically, I've stated before that I have no problem with your ideas and your beliefs; I only object to the label and that is all. I hope you remember that we are in agreement on most things (and perhaps one of those things is that people can reach truth through many ways).

 

I hope we can continue this discussion, but it's OK if it's difficult.

[RHEMtron]

freeday... im still waiting for a response as to why it's alright for you to decide which "miracles" in the bible are deemed "heavenly" or human misunderstandings.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...mp;#entry192639

i completely agree with you on this, it is what he taught and what he stood for that is most important to me. although i tend to lean more towards the litaralist side. the only thing i really disagree with is the whole deamon possession thing. i think they thought that mentally ill people, mutes and what not were deamon possessed. i think they just didn't understand certain medical problems and just clasified it as such.

How is it you can pick and choose? Do you think we can say that about all miracles, dreams, visions, natural disasters, creation, and anything else that is deemed heavenly? That (like you said) they just didnt understand, and things are just classified as heavenly.

[RHEMtron]

So, I think this was built upon the Luciferion Theory, that the morning star came down and distroyed the earth. The dawn of man. See Isiaiah 14:12 here, go to verse 12, and click on Lucifer, and you will find the morning star. Do you know of any pagan beliefs that this was built upon?

Good question. I've been listening to so many things last week that it's a bit information overload at the moment. I did hear something about the morning star. It is the brightest star just before the sun (God) comes up and kills it (or overtakes it powers). So the morningstar was a inferior god or "angel" (messenger of the coming God).

 

Jesus was said to be the morning star too. In Revelations.

Now what cracks me up is that Paul said that "Satan transforms himself into an angel of light" (2 Corin 11:14), a deceiver, one with "a bag of tricks" (Ephesians 6:11).

 

How did Paul describe his assumed vision of Jesus in Acts 22:9 again? Light. So who really spoke to him... Jesus? Satan? Or the heat of the desert?

[Amanda]

Hi Amanda. Meditation has become such a burdensome sounding word...hasn't it?

It really just means that we calm down long enough to experience ourselves as we are. When we become aware that we are aware! Its that simple. We become still enough to recognise that within us is the "space" which contains everything....thoughts, body, feelings, objects, sounds, smells etc. These are experiences that each of us has.....contemplation/meditation is becoming aware of the EXPERIENCER of these experiences. If we pay attention to this aspect of ourselves habitually, then we realise that everything exists within awareness....including time! Time is the continual flow of experiences within awareness.

 

Going back to the sound analogy....if we just calm ourselves and really listen, we find that the sounds are an experience one is having. Awareness is the silence which witnesses the sounds.

 

Dibby, thank you so much! I will put forth great effort in these regards, however my mind wonders to chores, etc. *sigh* I am a firm believer in our thoughts go masquerading as ourself, but are not ourself. It is this essence that is actively aware of our thoughts, is who we really are. An idea I got from the book, The Power of Now.

 

Is such a "hell" really a Christian or even Abrahamic hell? I would not think so. A "hell" that we create in a mental or like way is not comparable to a hell which is very much portrayed in the Bible. To be honest, the former idea would be something far more compatible to another religion and belief system. Next, your idea of salvation is more like realization, which is a totally different concept IMO. Transcending petty emotions to reach a higher truth, for instance, has little to do with the whole "I die for your sins" thing.

 

Julian, I hope you don't mind if I make a comment, even though it is directed to OM. I'm very interested in what OM has to say also. OM has some different ideas than I, and I am always fascinated by her interpretations, and find them making sense to me.

 

However, if one takes these teachings metaphorically, it seems hell is just a state of mind, IMO. They might have thought that land separated from water by volcanos. If you didn't know the word "lava", what might you call it? A lake of fire? Maybe we're standing on it? If one has no solid foundations on which to stand, might it be called the bottomless pit? Purose is the Greek word for fire. It's prefix, pur, means to cleanse intensely. Fire was used for purification. That is how we got the word "pur"ification, as well as pure, purify, purge, and probably other words. Fire was a way of getting rid of the garbage in our life. Why would God go to all the trouble to cleanse us intensely to throw us away? :ohmy:

 

It is here on earth that we have weeping and gnashing of teeth. It seems to be a state of mind. These teachings also say that the kingdom of God is within us. The war between heaven and hell is within our minds, and the side that wins is the side we feed the most, IMHO.

 

As far as dying for our sins and its relation to transcending petty emotions, can be relevent, IMO. It is the principles related in this story. Jesus took on all the sins of the world, literally! He didn't become sin, all sin happened unto him... only not a bone was broken. This is metaphoric to me in that what gave support to the structure of his being always stayed perfectly in tact. Having gone through this torture at the hands of those he came to help, yet he forgave them. Forgiveness is for us, NOT the perpetrator. As I've said in another post, if Jesus would have said that they should be annhialated for what they've done, he would have been 'contaminated' by their offenses, because he would have hatred and vendictiveness inside of him. He refused to be 'contaminated' by understanding that's why they were acting the way they were! He understood and let it go, forgiving them for they know not what they do. However, he never condoned or excused the behavior, and people have to accountable for what they do. Once we see our perpetrator as the victim, it releases us from being the victim. It saves the emotional, vital life force that gives us the will to thrive, IMHO.

 

Also, where it says he will separate the wheat from the tares, that does NOT mean you are wheat and I am tares! It means there are wheat and tares in each one of us, and they will be separated from within us. Damnation only means 'judgement' for correction, which I think are just natural repercussions from our actions. Fire and brimstone, well brimstone means 'divine'. Aren't these all states of mind dealing with our emotions?

 

And Julian, I agree... the initial Christian movement does sound like another religion. I think it incorporated many other religions too. If it makes sense, why not incorporate it? I don't know how much we have now is really what happened or just mythology superimposed onto it. Since being on this site, I now know mythology has clearly been added, to say the least. Yet, there seems to me, to be many kernels of wisdom still there... if we AVOID a literal interpretation.

[Ouroboros]

Now what cracks me up is that Paul said that "Satan transforms himself into an angel of light" (2 Corin 11:14), a deceiver, one with "a bag of tricks" (Ephesians 6:11).

 

How did Paul describe his assumed vision of Jesus in Acts 22:9 again? Light. So who really spoke to him... Jesus? Satan? Or the heat of the desert?

Very true!

 

And what's more, Satan was supposedly an angel from the beginning, and an angel of light (morning star), so Satan never had to transform himself to anything, he is a frigging angel already (maybe not just a nice one).

 

Paul must've missed that part of the theology, maybe he didn't read the same books as us?

[NotBlinded]

 

Sound existing in silence, I took that to mean that there is sound all around us... yet if we do not have the ability to perceive it, experience it, we will not hear it. Is that what you are saying about meditation?

Hi Amanda,

 

I mentioned this to my brother because it is the only words I can come up with in order to convey what I'm trying to say. He answered just as you did here. What I was trying to do was to show how silence is ever prevalent just at this 'no-thing' and that is cannot be apart from sound. Okay...this still isn't coming out right.

 

I'll try again...

 

Just as sound arises from silence and then retreats back into silence, all forms, or things, arise from this 'no-thing' and then retreats back into it (upon death). Sound cannot exist apart from silence, just as, IMO, things (forms) cannot exist apart from No-thing (the formless). This tells me that God/Formless/No-thing is one with everything.

 

Man...I hope that made sense!

[Antlerman]

I'll try again...

 

Just as sound arises from silence and then retreats back into silence, all forms, or things, arise from this 'no-thing' and then retreats back into it (upon death). Sound cannot exist apart from silence, just as, IMO, things (forms) cannot exist apart from No-thing (the formless). This tells me that God/Formless/No-thing is one with everything.

 

Man...I hope that made sense!

How's this: Good cannot exist with Evil. Death cannot exist with Life. Sound cannot exist without Silence.

 

This is duality. Understanding the world in terms of opposites. "This is good, because that is bad; This is sound, because that is silence", "I am male, you are female", etc.

 

In the mythic beginning of time, before the natural world; we existed in a dimension or a universe that is not ours; where duality did not exist. All was one: no evil and good; no sound and silence; no death and life; no man and woman, no man and God; but a unified everything, where all just "is" formless and undefined. At birth (or the birth of the universe) we moved into a world of opposites, of dualities, of separations.

 

At death we leave this universe of duality into either non-existence, or to some different universe outside of the realm of definition within our language of duality; or we return to that mythic universe of pre-duality, of undefined existence; (or I suppose.... one last possibility to accomodate the uber-fundi's amongst us: It is a land that looks a lot like here, except with candy canes and lollipops; where we skip along on streets of real gold and all live in great big McMansions; and Jesus smiles big on us every day, all - day - long!!! )

 

Is this what you mean? (not the streets of gold thing! )

[NotBlinded]

I'll try again...

 

Just as sound arises from silence and then retreats back into silence, all forms, or things, arise from this 'no-thing' and then retreats back into it (upon death). Sound cannot exist apart from silence, just as, IMO, things (forms) cannot exist apart from No-thing (the formless). This tells me that God/Formless/No-thing is one with everything.

 

Man...I hope that made sense!

How's this: Good cannot exist with Evil. Death cannot exist with Life. Sound cannot exist without Silence.

 

This is duality. Understanding the world in terms of opposites. "This is good, because that is bad; This is sound, because that is silence", "I am male, you are female", etc.

 

In the mythic beginning of time, before the natural world; we existed in a dimension or a universe that is not ours; where duality did not exist. All was one: no evil and good; no sound and silence; no death and life; no man and woman, no man and God; but a unified everything, where all just "is" formless and undefined. At birth (or the birth of the universe) we moved into a world of opposites, of dualities, of separations.

 

At death we leave this universe of duality into either non-existence, or to some different universe outside of the realm of definition within our language of duality; or we return to that mythic universe of pre-duality, of undefined existence; (or I suppose.... one last possibility to accomodate the uber-fundi's amongst us: It is a land that looks a lot like here, except with candy canes and lollipops; where we skip along on streets of real gold and all live in great big McMansions; and Jesus smiles big on us every day, all - day - long!!! )

 

Is this what you mean? (not the streets of gold thing! )

Thank you!

 

I like to apply that 'understanding' to this world of form and duality. All that isn't is still an integral part of what is...so where is the duality anyway? In our perception of course.

[Ouroboros]

Absolute moral or good, without the counterpart of evil, represents an infinite regression of inflation of good. "Good" can not exist anymore, or doesn't represent anything anymore. It's like storing sand in Fort Knox as the financial backing of the dollar instead of gold. If gold was as common as dust, then gold wouldn't be as valuable. Same thing with "good", it doesn't have a value if it existed only by itself.