xjwsforChrist

AGuest, this is my current understanding on the matter:

The Son is an Eternal Aspect, one of Three. The Son is the ONLY entity who is exactly like the Father, a clone of sorts. When the Son was destroyed in the Beginning he remained conscious and formed everything in the universe. He was "destroyed" in the manner that He could never return to the previous state before the creation of the heavens and earth, which was eternal BLISS. It was a costly loss. Through his disembodied "Essence" he formed the stars which in turn provided the organic material that eventually ended up on earth, which he also formed. This is why when he spoke to people on earth he didn't have a physical form, because we was everything. That's why when Moses asked him who he was he said, "I AM." ALL physical matter makes up the "comic man." It took Him billions of years to form the known universe (Yahweh IS Jesus, btw see Philippians 2:9-11).

The Father remained an impartial Observer through all of this and still does to this day. Eventually the Son will hand back everything to the Father which will complete the entire cycle and bring back that eternal bliss with one addition: us. The Holy Spirit works in harmony with the Son by providing the laws of the universe, the laws of Matter and Energy. What science doesn't fully understand yet is that the laws that govern our existence are ALIVE and "breath."

Mary was the Holy Spirit incarnate which then gave birth to the Son in the flesh. She was the culmination of the Essence that formed all before her. Her and Joseph were of the same blood which goes back to Abraham who was tested and found worthy.

The argument against the Arrangement is the same argument atheists make against the story of Abraham and Isaac. They call it an act of barbarism and believers call it an act of love. Would the Son in the Flesh turn against the Father? Would he "agree" with the creation of the universe at the disembodiment of the himself? Would he continue along the same path which would come with even MORE destruction? Remember, he IS everything and therefore has felt the pain of everything in existence. That's a lot of time to harbor resentment for the Person who started all, the Father. When he came to earth the Devil hoped that he was resentful and could use that again him. What he found was an entity with full understanding of His purpose.

The Devil's argument is that the Father is a monster who demands blood sacrifice. Amazingly, the Son continued with the original vision of the Father and finished his earthly course with his BLOOD SACRIFICE once and for all. This is especially astounding because this just started the cycle of pain all over again. We always have the opportunity to avoid pain, but is avoiding pain the right choice? What followed Christ's death was the brutal persecution of the Christians, the Dark Ages, bitter wars and revolutions and horrors like the Holocaust. How could he have known it would all be worth it? Because he knows what he's doing.

As we have seen since the death of Christ 2,000 years ago, all things are being "made new." The Dark Ages have past and were replaced with law and order. Today's problems will all pass away and be replaced with better systems which will also pass away.

What must be understood is that the Son is present within all cultures and all people's. Yet, where there is light there is also shadow. The Adversary exists and works not against us, but the Son who IS EVERYTHING including US. What "they" want is the same thing the atheists want. The universe to be consumed by eternal darkness. Why? Because there will no longer be any pain if we are all gone. So many unbelievers take comfort in the idea that the universe will eventually freeze over. What they don't understand is that eternal oblivion is not the only way to avoid pain. There is another way and we are all living in the midst of it because of the choice of the Son. If he had not died on the cross we would NOT be speaking right now. There would be nothing. These are just my thoughts, but I admit I don't understand exactly where they come from.

-Sab

Dear Sab... peace to you, and once again I am confused. Well, that's not entirely true: I think YOU are confused and so your comments now are confusing. You see, dear one, like so many, you often forget what YOU state at one time, and so then state something else at another. You even once acknowledged that you do this, citing your bipolar condition as the culprit. You openly stated that you didn't really know what you believed, but were trying to work it out. And I personally think you are still doing that... yet, wishing others... and me in particular... to NOW believe you are "there." But I don't think so. Here's why:

If you recall, you recently commented to me to "tell JaHVeH" ("Yahweh", to some)... that "Elohim is coming for him." Now, given the comments before, there is NO way I could assume you meant anything other than coming for him in a "bad" way. Unfortunately, the post no longer exists but that doesn't matter - you know you posted such as do I, and so I don't care who else remembers or not. WE, you and I, remember. If you don't, then I have even less reason to believe you now... as such selectivity, regardless its reason, means little if anything that you state is reliable, IMHO.

But you posted that. NOW, however, you state "Yahweh IS Christ" (no, no... don't try to change it and now post something like, "No, I mean "Jesus. Yahweh is JESUS, but HE (Jesus) isn't the Christ." Because in another place you commented that "Jesus is Christ.") So, if your previous words are to be believed... and why wouldn't they be... Elohim is coming for Christ. Yet, NOW... Christ is "all that." So, even though Christ is "all that"... "Elohim is coming for him". Meaning, Christ ISN'T all that, afterall... but someone Elohim is going to bring to nothing at some point (remember? You said "Yahweh" was a "bad" god and Elohim was going to bring him to nothing? So, per you, Elohim is going to bring Christ... to nothing. NOT to create something this time, but because he's a "bad" guy. Well, "Yahweh" is a bad guy... and "Jesus" is Yahweh, so...

See what I mean? And you've been doing this since we first made acquaintance... which is why my responses to you have always been far and few between.

And that's my issue with you, dear one: your "belief" is still "evolving," apparently, and so appears to change with the wind. It seems that whatever religion or belief you HAPPEN to be reading about, studying, associating with, attending church with, AGREEING with at the moment... is what your overall "belief" is derived from. As a result, what I have seen you do is CREATE a belief... based on Buddhism, christianity, judaism, science, and whatever else is out there that you've come in contact with... for YOURSELF... based on YOUR "understanding,"... which you wish others to receive, accept, even adopt. And when they don't... your feelings are "hurt."

At one point, you were adamant that the Bible was to be followed. At another, the Torah. Now, it appears to be the I Ching. And on and on... depending on what is striking your particular "fancy" at the time.

Now, don't get me wrong: I don't CARE if that's how you are developing your belief. But I have to be HONEST with you and tell you that it doesn't work for ME. The inconsistencies serve as "gongs" to my hearing. A "sour" taste to my palate. A "strobe light" to my eyes. NOTHING is clear... although all appears to be based on "high" intellect.

Unfortunately, I am not only able to tell brilliance, dear one, and I see that with you to some extent, dear one, but I can also see the BS. Not all can, though, even the one doing it, sometimes. And I think in this case, your OWN brilliance... is rendering you too blind to see the BS. You are "blinded" by the "wonderful" things you think you are figuring out.

And I get that. No, really, I do. I am sure some think the same as to me. The difference is that I KNOW the things I share are not mine, that I didn't figure them out... but that they were given to me. I KNOW... I am simply not THAT smart, luv. You, however, just may BE that smart. But I think we, the two of us, are just to have to wait it out and see... rather than try to convince one another of anything.

So, to the extent your (thoughts) are consistent, I will endeavor to continue engaging. When they become inconsistent, as they usually do... I will have to back away. Because I see no point in commenting to such... or that which is offered to support it.

Hence, I cannot see, no matter how I read it... how you got what you did from 2 Peter 2:9-11. Truly. I cannot. And I am too tired, just now, to try and break those verses down for you. Maybe when I return... if I'm feeling up to it. Maybe it's just not that important, in light of your previous comments about "Yahweh" and Christ.

Again, peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

AGuest, obviously I don't believe your lord is JahVeh that's just what YOU say.

When I don't make sense it's not automatically because I am confused. It may just mean I have am having a hard time explaining what I know. Not everything can be easily articulated in English or any human language for that matter. Truth is best explained to us in pictogram, actually. For example the Tetragrammaton has an incredible amount of information packed into it.



You got it all wrong, gurl. What I choose to engage in is in accordance with my own methods, not my "fancy" as you call it.

-Sab

More confusion. I am going by what YOU posted, dear one (again, peace to you!). So what you believe may not be as obvious as you... believe.

,

(Raising eyebrows - er?!) I say nothing of the sort. Neither that my Lord is JaHVeH... or that JaHVeH is Christ (and you implying that I do makes me wonder if you're yet another who doesn't really read what I post... but just comments so as to be commenting. I mean, I am verbose, so I get if you DON'T read 'em... but why you would deign to comment having NOT read them is... interesting...).

I DO say... and have always said... that MY Lord is the Holy One of Israel and Holy Spirit, JAHESHUA, who is the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah)... the SON of JAH[VeH]... JAH, who breathes armies (of spirits into existence)... the MOST HOLY One of Israel.



Okay.



Then why not wait until you can explain it... with ease? Or at least so that it's understandable by your target audience...?



Okay, as to the first, I get that. There are many languages for which there are no English words, and vice verse. As to the second, though, my thought is "Call me silly, but that's all WE here speak, human language, so to be unable to explain what mean in ONE of them..."

But perhaps WE are just not READY, dear Sab (I am would certainly offer than I am not). If so, perhaps YOU should wait until either (1) we ARE ready to understand in a non-human language... (2) you (or maybe Elohim) CAN explain it in a human language, even if it's not English. Otherwise, isn't all of this "knowledge" just going to waste? I mean, if you KNOW it can't be easily explained in any human language, let alone English, why call upon those who only SPEAK a human language, even English, TO understand it. Are you (and/or perhaps Elohim) not asking the impossible?



Yet, even a pictogram can be explained... in human language. Even English. Yes? I mean, I get it: you can "see" what you mean, but not articulate it. Again, though, I have to ask... why expect others to UNDERSTAND what YOU cannot clearly communicate? Also, and I mean NO offense but think you might want to ask (yourself): why/how is it that a God that Elohim obviously despises can communicate what HE means, and have it clearly articulated, but Elohim can't break what HE has to say down into human terms, let alone English? Is he not the CREATOR of language... and so able to have what he means stated clearly, whether on an advanced level... or elementarily?



Well, I agree. As my Lord has shared with me, it is not just some consonants strung together, but MEANS something). But I can articulate that information... because it CAN be summarized.

But NONE of this addresses what I stated to you in my post, though. I do marvel at people who [think they] are able to deflect... without detection. Folks DO love to fool themselves, don't they? My Lord knows... I truly don't know why as such always comes back around... and tends to "bite" when it does.

Ah, well...

Again, peace to you, dear, dear Sab!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

Shellama

AGuest wrote:




Which Bible verse gives the name Abaddon?

_________________
To fear me is to love me....

You don't seem to understand what I posted. I must conclude you to the be the confused one in this matter. Here's a hint: EGO.



You are right, I am in error. You never said your lord was Jahveh. I stand corrected. A better way to put it is that I don't believe your lord is real. I think he's in your head and serves as the perfect deflection of responsibility.



I won't know if I can explain it to others until I try. I am quite happy with what has come out so far. I understand there are inconsistencies, I expect them because I am not perfect. You are really good at pointing them out and I appreciate it when you do.



Actually, that's not true. There are MANY forms of unspoken language one being BODY language.



No, you are ready.



You must understand that I am being put through a type of training. Even if my knowledge doesn't ring with others the process of explaining it will always benefit me. "The path of the righteous is like the morning sun."



It's not impossible it's just extremely difficult. Gotta learn somehow.



No, this isn't true. The human brain absorbs information from pictures differently than it absorbs it from language. Some pictographs can be translated into written language, but not many. Most of the information comes through a type of "epiphany" that cannot be replicated. Buddhist monks describe this through the word "enlightenment." It's not a matter of education it's a matter of revelation which is usually highly personal. A good example would be the concept of a joke. Some get it and some don't.



I don't expect others to understand, but that doesn't mean there's no reason to try.



Language, especially written language, is a technology. And as such it has a linear progression. In 100 years humans will have a better language technology and therefore the deeper things of God will be more easily articulated. What if our language simply LACKS the words to describe something divine? That happens all the time and we simply have to wait for our communication technologies to develop. There is so much more to discover, that's why an important part of my ministry is to advocate the scientific method.

Analogies and metaphors are another form of language. They are often determined by human experience. So, the more EXPERIENCE we have the richer our analogies and metaphors will be. You seem to want it all and want all now. It simply isn't possible. "Good things come to those who wait."



Once again, you ASSUME we have the ability to translate when we just don't. You know what they say about assumptions...

-Sab

Revelation 9:14, dear Pup.

Peace to you!

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

Shellama

If what you ARE communicating IS understandable, dear Sab (peace to you!)... which SEEMS to be your confession that you are unable to communicate what you wish to... and I think that IS understandable, given what you've posted... versus what you seem to be TRYING to communicate... which isn't understandable, IMHO... methinks your responses show that WAY more bedda than my commenting further could ever do. So, I think I'll just leave things as they are... so that everyone else can see if THEY understand what you seem to be TRYING to communication... and simply bid you peace!

Peace!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

How does that quote from Revelation tie in with the story in Exodus about the death of all the first born? Do you believe Abaddon to be an aspect of God?

_________________
To fear me is to love me....

Just because you don't see it as "understandable" doesn't mean that's true for everybody. You are no authority on truth even though you present yourself as such. In contrast to you, I am not trying to give people comprehensive information and I'm not trying to build a cohesive theology for them. People will take pieces of what I have to say and it will help them on their own journeys. If I get people to think, I have accomplished my goal.

-Sab

C'mon people's stay on track here

_________________
To fear me is to love me....

Sorry!

-Sab

It is my view that to blasphemy is NOT the same as to talk against.
Allow to to explain.

We can talk against things we do not know and by know I mean to know intimately, to know in a personal sense.
Doing that is "talking against" but it is not a "blasphemy".
A blasphemy requires a personal knowledge of something.
An atheist can't blasphemy against the HS, he/she has no knowledge of the HS.
A believer, one who has accepted the HS and has been sealed by it, THAT person can blasphemy against the HS.

When we accept Christ and then proclaims a Christ different than the one we KNOW to be, that is blasphemy against the HS and there is no forgiveness because that is a conscious act in full knowledge that what we are doing is wrong.

The Trinity doctrine is a doctrine of the NATURE that is shared by Father, Son and HS.
They are all of the same nature and because they are "immaterial" ( spirit form) they are also in perfect union.
The term "God" is not the name but a "definition" of sorts.
Father is God, Son is God, HS is God because all share the same nature that is know to us as "God".
Because of their perfect union and their "immaterial nature" they are also ONE.
The HS can be the HS of The Father, just as it can be the HS of the Son, just as it can be the HS in of itself.
We have a hard time grasping this concept because we can't fully grasp that perfect "immaterial" union of spiritual beings, much less the union of Father/Son/HS.
Christ can say that He will send The Advocate to His followers and He can breathe the HS on His followers because He IS the HS.
Even though the wording may seem to imply He is sending "another", that Other is HIM, in the perfect Union of Father/Son/HS.
It may seem "confusing" if you hold on the the material view of things BUT keep in mind that spiritual beings are NOT bound by material laws, even more so God, then you realize that what doesn't seem "possible" to us is not relevant because we are NOT discussing Us.

The tricky part of the doctrine is where does one "stop" and the other(s) "begin" and that is tricky only because we THINK there is a beginning or an end.

The issue is guess is this:
The trinity is the first step in understanding the nature of God and that nature is "other-loving".
This is perhaps the most important thing to understand, that God is "other-loving", why?
Because if God is NOT "other-loving" then God is or at least was, at some point, "self-loving", His love was directed at Himself and as such it would be selfish and self-centered and if that was the case, God would be an inferior being for a mirad of reasons.
BUt if God was from the very "beginning" an "other-loving" centered being then God would be perfect and complete since God would not be lacking in anything.

THat really is the crux of the Trinity, that God is a being of complete and perfect other-centered love.

Thank you for contributing PSac

_________________
To fear me is to love me....