What are people to do?

[Waterfall]

I think it is very strange that people have to wait forever to be resurrected.

Has this idea not a time limit? 1000 year? 10.000 year? 100.000 year? 1.000.000 year?

If there is no time limit then people could wait forever, right?

Would God not demand a time limit (or date) if someone were to say things like that?

When should people abandon this idea?

Lets say Satan tells Jesus that he will destroy him and Jesus respond by saying...very well...can you give me a date? When will you destroy me? Someday? Thats like forever and never? How long time should I wait for this destruction or should I say...when things do not happen then we know it was not true, so can you give me a date - 2040?

How can we tell truth from lie whitout a date?

Maybe it has nothing to do whit time...but something else.

When this happens, then...

But then we would ask about that...what has to happen? Will it happen when everybody is dead (God will raise mankind from the dead?)? Then there could go a very long time, so...

What are your thoughts about this idea?

[Waterfall]

[Replying to post 40 by 2timothy316]

Did you read the book?

Maybe it takes 1 hour to read the book, so...45 minutes...maybe if you are a fast reader. Anyway it only takes a litle time and then we can talk about it.

Let me start the conversation whit this. Because I have read the book and can´t understand what this pastor is talking about:

(14:20 into the video)

Did he just erase things from the Bible:

http://thelightuniversal.org/page75.html

Precepts for offering sacrifices are given by Jehovah in the Pentateuch. They are given as commandments and they thus become laws. Jehovah, for example, bids the people of Israel bring “unblemished� animals for the sin-offering to the door of his tent, that they may be sacrificed before the tabernacle. The blood must be sprinkled upon the altar, and the offering “shall one carry forth without the camp; and they shall burn in the fire their skins, and their flesh, and their dung.� (Leviticus 16: 27). But those who follow the ancient custom, those “that killeth an ox, or lamb, or goat, in the camp, or that killeth it out of the camp. . .that man shall be cut off from among his people�; for if they continue to sacrifice in this manner, they “offer their sacrifices unto devils, after whom they have gone a-whoring.� (Leviticus 17: 3, 4, 7).

In explanation, it is stated in Leviticus 17: 11:1 “For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.�

And in verse 14 it is further stated: “. . . therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh; for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof; whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.�

Thus: if the blood of the unblemished offering is sprinkled upon the altar of Jehovah, it then atones for or cleanses the guilt of sin of those who make the offering; but if the blood is shed in the open field, then they have “gone a-whoring� after evil spirits, and Jehovah condemns them to be “cut off� from among the people.

Is this not true?

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 41 by Waterfall]

There are no true prophecies in that book. So I do not trust it.

[Waterfall]

[Replying to post 41 by Waterfall]

There are no true prophecies in that book. So I do not trust it.

What will happen in the future? And why?

According to this book:

http://thelightuniversal.org/page75.html

Human beings themselves delivered him to death! And when one is guilty of a wicked and unjust act, one normally seeks by every possible means to embellish it so as to make it appear less offensive! But no matter how much it is adorned and disguised, the act itself becomes neither more glorious nor more exalted. It is better by far to face the truth, to acknowledge the errors and evil deeds and to seek through grief and repentance to make amends, so that the act is not repeated.

Human beings wronged Jesus, and after his death, when they began to understand what precious teaching he had given them, they washed their hands of the evil deed and placed the guilt upon God, their Father, in whose name Jesus had spoken! And where the contemporaries of Jesus ceased,8 the succeeding generations continued to disguise and adorn the evil deed with more and more embellishment. And all this adornment, all this seemingly beautiful embellishment, has in the course of time led to endless strife and violence!

In the centuries that followed the crucifixion of Jesus, the leaders, the theologians and authorities of the Christian congregations, built what they themselves believed to be a great and glorious House of the Church. But they failed to take into consideration the spiritual development to which every human being is subject. More and more voices are raised against the House, more and more hands seek to remove the concealing adornments, or to dislodge the stones of which it is built.

The House is leaning! Further embellishment or bracing is impossible; for the House is built upon the sand—and the sand is shifting!

What can be done to arrest its fall?

Nothing! The House is doomed, sooner or later it will fall!

Would it not then be far better, far more worthy, if the leaders of the Christian congregations—the clergy and the scholars—joined together in united action, convened the members of their congregations and informed them of the imminent fall of the House of the Church? To err is human, and those who acknowledge error can attain forgiveness, but they who seek to conceal the error when it is discovered, must bear the heavy burden of responsibility!

How are we to understand Isaiah 53?

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=KJV

Should this sacrifice not be in accordence whit the sacrificiel law already given by God? Was this prophet talking about another God? What about this:

for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

My people = mankind? Or just the Isralite?

If Jesus had not died on the cross what scriptures would you then point at? Are there words for a living Christ in the old testament?

[shnarkle]

I think it is very strange that people have to wait forever to be resurrected.

I agree. It is completely insane and has nothing to do with what the gospel narratives are talking about.

When should people abandon this idea?

Immediately.

How can we tell truth from lie whitout a date?

Most certainly. Forget about dates altogether and focus on the main subject.

Maybe it has nothing to do whit time...but something else.

Yes, it has to do with what Jesus taught. He taught to deny yourself, to stop living for yourself. To see that there is no difference between you and your neighbor. There is no essential difference between you and Jesus. He says that he is the light of the world, then he says to his disciples that they are the light of the world. He points out that he is the way, and they refer to themselves as the way as well. He says when you come under his authority and accept his teachings, wherever you are he is there with you. He is pointing out that one must die to this world in order to live. One must die to self itself. Forget about "your" life to enter into eternal life. Once this happens, it happens "in the twinkling of an eye" according to Paul. Augustine says you then "step into eternity". There is nothing to wait for. The gospel accounts are simply illustrations of reality.

The gospels are the antidote to Adam's curse. God says to Adam that he is dust and to dust he will return. Why? Because Adam has fallen into the error of believing that he is his body. This is what he hears God saying because of his deception. Christ comes and points out that we are not what we have. We are not what we possess. We have a body, but we are not a body. The gospel writer asks the reader to peer into the empty tomb because looking for a body will never allow one to see Christ. These physical bodies are nothing but animated dirt. When one ceases from identifying with their body, they begin to see that they are not their body. Thoughts are the same thing. They are not who you are. Your separate identity is nothing more than an idea, and will cease along with the death of the body. What remains is who you really are.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 33 by Waterfall]

the word is but the means whereby divine thought is revealed unto human beings;

No, the DIVINE word is the means whereby divine thought is revealed.

for many believe that the word is in God, and of God, but this is not so.

If the word is divine, it most certainly is. Why would he suggest that ordinary words are in God? Who would even suggest that to him?

Words, in the form you know them, are of earthly origin. But the simpler the word, the more clearly will it convey the thought, which comes from God and is in God - Thought - the source of all that is.

This is simply not the case. He's suggesting that thoughts are fundamental to existence; they're not. Thoughts do not generate existence. Existence is fundamental to thoughts. There are plenty of beings that never generate a single thought while they exist. For a thought to be the source would necessarily mean that everything is intelligible and requires an origin in intelligibility. The problem with this is the fact that the apophatic isn't intelligible. Thoughts are the domain of the understanding and can in no way be fundamental to existence. Thoughts must first exist in order to be thought. A thinker must also exist in order to have the thought. Thoughts are reflected in the intellect, therefore they cannot be the origin of what they reflect.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 41 by Waterfall]

Let me start the conversation whit this. Because I have read the book and can´t understand what this pastor is talking about:

(14:20 into the video)

Did he just erase things from the Bible:

This pastor is presenting a straw man argument. He says that Jesus is being punished for sin, when this nowhere to be found in the biblical texts at all. Christ is a sin offering rather than a punishment. He also conflates the offering with the scapegoat which is to conflate Christ with Azzazel (a type for Satan). He's seriously confused.

[Waterfall]

The gospels are the antidote to Adam's curse. God says to Adam that he is dust and to dust he will return. Why? Because Adam has fallen into the error of believing that he is his body. This is what he hears God saying because of his deception. Christ comes and points out that we are not what we have. We are not what we possess. We have a body, but we are not a body. The gospel writer asks the reader to peer into the empty tomb because looking for a body will never allow one to see Christ. These physical bodies are nothing but animated dirt. When one ceases from identifying with their body, they begin to see that they are not their body. Thoughts are the same thing. They are not who you are. Your separate identity is nothing more than an idea, and will cease along with the death of the body. What remains is who you really are.

It would have been nice with a commentary to this story (Adam and Eve).

How are we to understand it?

I have found an explanation in this book:

http://thelightuniversal.org/page67.html

The ancient biblical myth(7) of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is apparently symbolic of the human monogamous relationship. But this myth stems originally from one of the Youngest, who attempted during life on Earth to give an allegorical exposition of the concept of "Dualism", of Darkness and of the Light, of the life in God’s Kingdom of His first—created children - and of the fall of the Eldest. And the ancient maxim of the Church: "What therefore God hath joined together let not man put asunder" - or, more correctly, "no one" - applies in reality to the dual relationship to each other of God’s first created children, but in no way does it apply to human marital relationships. There is therefore no justification whatsoever for its application to human beings, except in connection with the duality(8) of the human spirit. For in the great majority of cases God has nothing to do with contracted marriages. God does not demand of human beings that they should enter into matrimony with any particular fellow human. In this respect everyone has a perfectly free choice, God makes absolutely no particular selection in this matter.

And the note (7):

http://thelightuniversal.org/page63.html

Even the ancient myth of Adam and Eve has in it some truth, though couched in purely human form. During an earthly existence, one of the Youngest tried through this myth to convey an explanation of the origin of humanity. Adam and Eve thus symbolize the Elder and his female dual; the serpent symbolizes the alluring, attracting and binding power of Darkness; the apple on the branch of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil symbolizes the life-principle of Darkness, surrounded by and held fast by the Light. The serpent represents Darkness which tempted the woman to sin; the woman tempted the man to eat of the Tree to gain knowledge — to master, that is, the life-principle of Darkness. Removing the apple from the tree symbolizes the separation of Darkness and the Light. By their fall, Adam and Eve (the Eldest) were banished from the Garden of Eden (God’s Kingdom). Cain and Abel symbolize the various types of human beings who owe their existence to God’s fallen children. Cain’s murder of his brother symbolizes how sin and death came into the earthly world through the birth, or creation, of Cain and Abel (humanity).

[Waterfall]

[Replying to post 33 by Waterfall]

the word is but the means whereby divine thought is revealed unto human beings;

No, the DIVINE word is the means whereby divine thought is revealed.

for many believe that the word is in God, and of God, but this is not so.

If the word is divine, it most certainly is. Why would he suggest that ordinary words are in God? Who would even suggest that to him?

Words, in the form you know them, are of earthly origin. But the simpler the word, the more clearly will it convey the thought, which comes from God and is in God - Thought - the source of all that is.

This is simply not the case. He's suggesting that thoughts are fundamental to existence; they're not. Thoughts do not generate existence. Existence is fundamental to thoughts. There are plenty of beings that never generate a single thought while they exist. For a thought to be the source would necessarily mean that everything is intelligible and requires an origin in intelligibility. The problem with this is the fact that the apophatic isn't intelligible. Thoughts are the domain of the understanding and can in no way be fundamental to existence. Thoughts must first exist in order to be thought. A thinker must also exist in order to have the thought. Thoughts are reflected in the intellect, therefore they cannot be the origin of what they reflect.

Existence whitout thought and will?

[Waterfall]

[Replying to post 41 by Waterfall]

Let me start the conversation whit this. Because I have read the book and can´t understand what this pastor is talking about:

(14:20 into the video)

Did he just erase things from the Bible:

This pastor is presenting a straw man argument. He says that Jesus is being punished for sin, when this nowhere to be found in the biblical texts at all. Christ is a sin offering rather than a punishment. He also conflates the offering with the scapegoat which is to conflate Christ with Azzazel (a type for Satan). He's seriously confused.

I am not sure what he is saying because he do not explain things, right?

But here is some more about his thoughts:

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 48 by Waterfall]

Existence whitout thought and will?

How does a thought exist if there is no such thing as existence in the first place? Existence must be eternal in order for anything to exist, including thoughts.

Existence is an intransitive verb which requires no object. Thoughts or the will don't think or will themselves into existence especially if there's no such thing as existence to begin with.

Existence allows things like intelligence to exist which in turn results in intelligent thoughts. Of course someone has to think those thoughts, and they also can't exist without existence.