DrWearWord

:) :blink:

Here is something else I just wrote... A inquiry on the value of zero in light of spiritual matters. About the trinity and it being referred to as time being past, present and future. (kind of a vague but thought provoking answer) I consider the trinity not representing the value of "one" but instead representing "zero" in a quantum state (possibly even binary). Where zero is the seed of all numbers. This is my own unique idea and seems truly plausible. Where unity does not equal "oneness" but the lack of any value. Oneness with zero... Meekness and humility to the creator of all value. Zero equals creator and one equals creation. The value of one must reflect the nature of zero to become eternal which would be zero in a quantum state of eternal "timelessness". Where matter and mass transcend the physical model of the universe. And zero reflects in it's creative ability omnipresence on the "timeline" and all of the vector planes of creation show their abeyance to an imageless, sizeless point. As infinity in PI is also the diameter of a circle (seed). A point has no length, breadth, depth or height. Only God can reveal the hidden value of all numbers. Mt 11:27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him. Comment: When we are created (born again) in the "image of zero" we become quanta. Peace with God RexRed

I don't completely get it myself but I feel I have ventured farther than most... By my thinking out loud someone else is seeing something maybe I don't. If they are a giving in a meek and kind manner hopefully they may share it and add to what I have provided here. You can be sure I will continue to expound on these principles as we relate to other aspects that parallel this discussion. A bit about me. I had an A+ in high-school geometry and B+ in high-school chemistry (non catholic private schools) and still have most of my assumptions, axioms, corollaries and theorems memorized (I could prove nearly any geometric hypothesis placed in front of me as a teen.). Heck, I still have all of the prepositions and form of the verb TO BE dedicated to memory. Besides I am an entertainer and have hundreds (if not a thousand) of songs lyrics/melodies/chords committed to memory including all of the scripture I know. Yet my knowledge of the scriptures far surpass any base knowledge I possess. (at least in personal value) So with all of this knowledge it seems I have the most to lose in a non-gnostic hierarchy. But besides all of this knowledge I have empathy and compassion for others. So I know well the spirit and it's "way"... If I was dishonest with God and the innate equality of the holy spirit I would be a gnostic. Even with the "knowledge" of the spirit, sometime it is difficult for me to even touch down let alone land...

I have had people frustrated with me and tell me. "can we please stop talking about God?!!!"... I remark then let's talk about geometry and math, zeros and ones, lets talk about genetics X and Y, let's talk about the existence of life... :)

Abigail asked the same question, I must be being really vague. Please give it some thought though. God cut out the male Y lineage in the Christ line and replaced it with a sinless life in the Y chromosome. God created a new Y chromosome in Mary. This Y chromosome was the SON of God. We cut out the flesh (X Chromosome) when we die and we leave our fleshly DNA in the ground. Thus X and Y are only a launching ground for the spirit which in the end has no need of with our own X or Y Chromosome because God replaces these earthly constructs of those with heavenly quantum or zero. For we become sons of God and not sons of man. An we become siblings of the generation of Christ rather than generations on our own. (this is hard even for me to explain) This flesh part is the egg part contributed by the female of which the Y chromosome (except for the life in the Y chromosome) is a mutation of the DNA of X... So when God created a Y chromosome he still borrowed the flesh from X but he created the life in the Y mutation. This is why Jesus resembled Mary his mother also but was undoubtedly male. This Michael who "fights for God's people" is a "physically" oriented being (wrestling with Jacob) where Gabriel who has been depicted in the clouds can easily be associated with the life force of the physical and Christ being the son of God becomes the head and ABOVE merely formed or made beings. For Christ walked in body, soul and spirit. This spirit of Christ was the throne once belonging to lucifer that was lost through lucifer's treachery. The two parts (Gabriel and Michael) and this (light) part he will take with him into the cosmos. This X chromosome of Mary, Jesus kept and though we will leave our X and Y chromosome in the dust at our grave we will be part of Christ's X chromosome that he derived from Mary. Kind of convoluted huh? These holy angels are embodied within each "one third of the "heavens" one third being brought back into submission to God through Christ Jesus the heavenly complete future body, soul and spirit of creation which we someday will inherit in the fullness of "time". I find that these angels are part of the "creature" (creation). This creature being separate from God in visage but ultimately in the same spirit and image with God and thus still quantum.

God placed in every persons heart the desire for eternal life... Even animals can perceive the importance of survival. Believing only requires the instinct for survival (life) and the ability to ask God for this gift. Also, a brain size large enough to contain the idea of a creator (or sanctification by others). Do you need to know what is in a gift before receiving it? Yes, we perceive that this gift is the source of life. We need to trust those who bear gifts. People are aware of what they are receiving before they obtain they simply do not comprehend its greatness until they have a chance to operate it once it has been received... lambano dechomai The spirit does not give us believing it give us faith. ("before faith came...")

Wow Abagail! Thanks for taking the time to respond so succinctly. I can tell by your questions that I am not making myself clearly understood. I will admit that I did traverse a large amount of ground but it seems that maybe thinly in some places. Time has two beginnings for humans and the earth the first was the physical time and the second was perceptible time. For God is timeless and has no beginning or end. When a tree falls in the forest alone does it make a sound? Just because time began at the creation of the heavens and the earth is it really time where there is no one within creation capable of perceiving it. Was the devil able to perceive days and nights when there was no moon yet? Possibly not, considering Lucifer's kingdom is not infinite for even light has a finite amount of energy with which to radiate once disconnected from God's unlimited power source of zero, for zero feeds and supports an infinity of numbers both positive and negative. We cannot reason the Bible in a void we must see creation in light of science. Science says time began in the big bang but was there anyone able to perceive it back then? So I reckon that time does not begin at creation but it begins when creation is capable of perceiving it is just as a tree makes no perceptible sound unless there is someone present to hear it. For God did not create the world in vain. The purpose of time was humanity and the spirit (of consciousness and fellowship with God) not the flesh and the physical world. I will come back and address each of your thoughtful points. I thank you Abigail for taking the time to compose your thoughts and I will do my best to try to make a sometimes seemingly confusing doctrine a bit more clear. I beg for opposition and debate. This is why I am so wordy... It gives so much room and rope to dissect and disassemble and catch me in my unawares. I am used to forums where I have to explain every single detail because they have never heard the rightly divided word of God. I become first a novelty and the over time a profound peculiarity. Yet here some say that I am telling them nothing new but they deny the truth (figure that one out) That is like being aware of time but denying it's existence... Well I am aware that what I says is new, not all of it but a degree of it is out of my own reasoning and I have never been taught it other than from my own induction from the word. Parallel lines never meet. I have over six thousand replies (over 8 years) that I have written, some very lengthy replies, in another forum on spirituality. So I am not new to this and I am ready for the ride of my life with this forum because I know that the participants in this forum ARE (spiritually) educated and will give me a run for my money (so to speak). I am ready to preach the gospel to those who are at Greaspot! :) You will hear some very strange things come out of me and I do care what others have to say. I don't do it for the shock value I do it because I believe in the love of God and that this love is complete and without prejudice. I prefer if you want me to read a book or link that you not just post the book but you say in your own words what it is in the book that actually contradicts in particular what i am saying. If it is the entire book that contradicts me please give me the highlights. you can totally disagree with me and I will not hate you or hold a vendetta. I want to learn... I am not just quoting scriptures at people but I am giving my own time and energy into saying what I think about them. I expect the same strategy out of others and not just hit and run tactics. Say in our own words why... for I have taken the time to read and formulate my own ideas and share them and I expect no less from others who choose to challenge me with empty rhetoric. I have been challenged in the very same manner many times and be it my brother/sister in Christ Jesus or a new believer they both are substantively lacking when they do not expound their ideas in their own words. As Dr. would say "they have not made it their own..." So if they do not believe enough to make it their own why should I have to defend something that is suspect to begin with?

You are saying nothing NEW... I have documented my opinion with both scripture and sound logic and you are busy stroking yourself... Time will tell who knows what when you get you head out of your butt (infidels my foot!) and write in a post, your lack of understanding and commitment to the word will stand out like a sore loser... Your lack of patience and and doctrinal skill already stands out, and it ain't pretty...

Dan, You are just fracturing the truth with pure rhetoric. Either we are saved by the spirit and grace or not. To "confess" and "believe" as suggested in Romans 10:9 + 10 has no mention of "works" in that verse... and thou shalt be saved. The works are not our works but the works of God the deeds are not our deeds but the deeds of God "lest any man should boast". Faith without the works within of God is empty. Love without the spirit of God is vanity. Now I am sure you could find a hundred contradictions in what I just wrote and fill volumes in this library that I should go and spend some time in.

What exactly am I saying? I am relegated in this post to constantly trying to justify the sanctity of the scriptures rather than simply accepting the word and trying to understand it's various interpretations and meaning. I never doubt the integrity of any verse of scripture. I do not doubt that they are written by holy men as they were moved by the holy spirit. I just think that holy men (and women) were moved by the spirit in varying degrees. I am sure there are many mysteries in the word that may never be revealed. But the mystery of Christ in us... NOW we know this mystery. Some may scoff at it but some hold it dear to their hearts. For faith does not require rocket science but simply meekness. We cannot hold God accountable for the actions of people including ourselves. God is only trying to help us. Paul teaches us that charity comes before knowledge. For knowledge is what led to caste systems and divided the common people with the priestly orders and "medicine men". I do know this stuff and I could become "advanced" and write in a critical fashion quite fast if need be. Yet you imply that Paul divided people but it is quite the contrary. If a human desires faith they will find the spirit if they desire fear they will find death. This is quite a new concept considering the spirit was first written "upon" stone and now written "within" the heart. This new testament is a work of God not man/woman, it requires faith not genius. With this written on tablets then only a few people would have known how to read and write and been able to glean the message from the words. Thus with the old testament God was divided by a wall of partition from the common person. Christ broke down that wall spiritually and Paul broke down that wall in word. For Christ Jesus promised before the ascension that the world would receive gifts but he did not specify in what form these gifts would take. He spoke of a new law but the idea of how this new law would work was completely unknown. Known possibly only by Christ Jesus and God. If not only by God. Paul in taking the spirit and using it as the gift in his writing liberated the world. THIS WAS RADICAL. THIS IS WHY PEOPLE BECAME CHRISTIANS. Not because Paul revealed nothing new... It gave a person who cannot read and write freedom from spiritual scrutiny. For before Christ those without "the law" in their minds were considered dogs. Now God became the judge of this aspect. So for someone to be calling Paul zealous for the law simply is completely errant. It was the spiritual reality/law within the believer (revealed by Paul) that was the fulfillment of the wall of partition being broken down in the Gospels. This completely obliterated the caste system that people (unbelieving believers) like Cr@ig Martind&le try to re-institute... So we are here ultimately all pulling toward freedom of the soul but you do not have to hate Paul to find freedom from tyranny. We just need to recognize that this freedom we seek is in these words if you look close enough. Little babies sometimes grow up to be the next crack dealers and serial killers (advanced class again), It is a fact of life. It is not whether if you are a Buddhist or an American Indian or a whatever, if you do not recognize the holy spirit and equality in others and that it is the gift of God (endowed by the creator), then you are not living up to the level of your spiritual potential as a citizen of this earth. It is not a matter of my opinion or that of Paul for once you understand this you can never unknow it and it will always be the truth that you perceive when you see your "brother" or "sister" in Christ Jesus. For we do not imitate Christ because we have Christ genuinely within us already we simply put the love and faith of Christ on in the mind. Peter and the disciples tried to imitate Christ before the holy spirit came (just as some of you think you can do without the revelations to Paul) and it did not work they fell short of the mark. It was only until the spirit came that they lost their fear and became bold in the mind concerning the spirit. (We do imitate Paul though but we do not have Paul genuinely within us except in word from God) Yet it is not primarily the mind of Christ that saves us but the spirit of Christ is our salvation. For it is the spirit of Christ that is the image of God. For if we imitated Christ we would all die in the flesh prematurely. But we instead live imitating Paul and the Christians after the day of Pentecost with the mind of Christ (will of God/law of liberty). So it is a mixed bag... Takes a bit of spiritual discernment. This is where the law of liberty helps sort things out and solidifies our standing and state. For we already died with Christ so we now live in the spirit, yea, the logic even goes deeper. Paul hashes it all out but the translation makes things a bit hard to conceptualize. Ultimately we bear the image of God, as if we are equal to God in the state of quantum (or zero). The only hope was spiritual redemption, for the flesh would never have been able to reach perfection without it. Only the perfect flesh of the passover lamb Jesus Christ could atone for our sins. The walk of the spirit in Christ could open the door for us to likewise walk in the spirit. It is the writhing of Paul that details this SPIRITUAL perfection and no matter how much Paul or whoever the writers were that seemingly retract this freedom with scriptures about "deeds" and "occasions of the flesh" we are still free spiritually and nothing can ever change that. This very thought came straight from the apostle Paul. Jesus Christ never once taught of the perfect spirit within people other than his own (from God). In fact many of the spirits that Jesus cast out of people were far from perfect. Even John the baptist was unworthy to tie Jesus' shoes and John was "born with spirit from the womb" but Jesus was the "son of God" So without Paul's teachings we would have no more "holy" spirit WITHIN... and the "same" measure of faith, but we would have a caste system where some know and some don't, and the reason why some don't is because they can read and write rather than equality in the form of spiritual perfection. God would prefer to create the spirit in a barbarian than to create the fully educated mind of Einstein or some other great thinker. For it is the spirit that teaches the mind God's wisdom not the soul. You accuse Wierwille of enslaving people with law but it was Wierwille that taught me that I was free spiritually in Christ Jesus. (The exact opposite of what you claim) I do not doubt that Wierwille may himself have been troubled just as Paul was troubled by his own life and the the law of liberty and the constant wrestling over the flesh and the spirit. WE ALL WRESTLE IN THIS SAME WAY. For we all have a legalistic nature that we need to cast away for preferably the perception and standards of the holy spirit. Jesus told us he was "the way" but Paul revealed the way, through the spirit of Christ within. Have you have ever considered what life would be like without the "gift of the holy spirit"... For without this gift it would be only the smart people that mattered. Christ would have died on the cross like countless other Jews and everyone would have forgotten about it... Gnosticism, just another self worshiping caste system... Only the spirit can teach us the way of God's perfect holiness. I am not advocating faith without works... Just that the "works" were done by God. For what works can a dead man do to please God?

My point was to not just disagree and post links, whole books...

The only condemnation in this thread that I detect thus far is "people" condemning the apostle Paul... My point is that I simply don't agree... Is that ok? I reserve making such a sweeping judgment of the work as to simply declare it null and void because the task that is necessary to understanding it is too difficult to easily perceive. Paul had a difficult task and he gave us the most honest and forthright part of himself. Your argument is the subservience of the wife to the husband then why should the husband be subservient to God? It is marriage and as I said he also said that there was "neither male nor female"... 2000 years later and the world still has a battle of the sexes going on. You really can't call him sexist when he declares there is neither male nor female... Had they only listened... He spoke of "cultural norms", lust and hate and his own "thorn in the flesh". Theses are certainly not easy subjects to handle. Cut him some slack, especially if you expect others to do the same for you. I tend to think that the writings of Paul are so mystical that they may take a few (or many) more years before the world really begins to understand them in a collective consciousness. I know I spend almost every day thinking the same thoughts that rolled over in his mind so if that makes me an imitator of him I don't know how more of an impression he could have left on the world. Namely my world that is.

Again criticism on the surface but no content... Shall we get to the bare facts?

I am glad your "um ... knowledge" can be a new found form of selfish pride. You admonish human pride and the scriptures, Godly pride seems foreign to your reckoning. 1Corrinthians 2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. Comment: You can deny the wisdom of God for your own it is not my choice to make for you. It was your choice that you scrubbed toilets and likewise your choice to now scrub the gutter seeking your own pound of flesh. I might recommend in all meekness and my own humility that you stop blaming others and God for your own poor decisions in life. The way ministry did not hold you against you own will... I am well aware of this because I was there too. These are harsh words spoken in love, I do care about you and your own delicate plight but should I kowtow to you at the expense of the truth? Is this what you want? How could the mystery of "God in Christ in you" have been known before Christ?

What is this all about? I CLEARLY laid out my definition of what gnosticism (from my stand point) meant... Where did I get my definition? Not from wikipedia but long ago I studied it in the new advent Catholic encyclopedia. Several days of reading the various links... The "Roman" Catholics (of which I am not one and never been one) trace gnosticism back to Buddha... I believe this... The illustrious one and holiness based upon knowledge and life experience rather than holiness based upon the works of God? You write a paragraph and dissect my method and you do not even address the substance of my post. Hmmm... Now in any of your two link is the connection to Buddha revealed? Probably not. I rest my case. Don't believe everything you read on the net. Much of it (regarding faith) is shallow and grossly uninformed. Wikipedia also has the statue of liberty defined as pagan symbol too while it was made by devout Christian masons... Figure that one out... I had to on my own with NO help from the wiki... Nowhere in the net will you find an article revealing the Christian symbolism of the statur... Even the so called Christian sites on the net don't describe the statue as a Christian symbol. They all point to early pagan America and do not even wonder what law tablets she is holding in her hand. What are the chains at her feet, Greek tyranny??? It is the law of liberty of the new testament... (You will not find this information in wikipedia or on any other website...) My father was a 14th level grand Mason and my mother a worthy matron of the "eastern star" (which represents Christ Jesus) and I know first hand how "Christian" the Masons really can be. The Masons carry on the same tradition of protecting the faith (even if in only symbolism) as the Teutons did during the crusades. Wikipedia is dumb when it comes to spiritual matters and I hold little hope that it will change soon. Excerpt from wikipedia... "the Statue of Liberty appears to draw inspiration from il Sancarlone or the Colossus of Rhodes."

Was Dr. wrong about the gospels not belonging in the new testament? "New wine in old bottles..."

Acts 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses. Comment: We are in the era/age of the sabbath... Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Hebrews 8:7 For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. 8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: 11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. 12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. 13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. Deuteronomy 5:3 The LORD made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day. Comment: This new covenant is written in the hearts not on stone... 2 Corinthinans 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament [covenant]; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he [Jesus Christ] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.

also... Was Jesus Christ himself the sabbath? Mt 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Agape is impossible without the law of liberty... John 13:34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. Comment: Is this NEW commandment (golden rule) to love each other as we love ourselves or rather to love others as Christ loved us? Moses' law was an eye for an eye or, love others as you love yourself.... where the new law is love others as Christ has love us. Luke:6:35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Matthew 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also. 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. 42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away. 43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; Colossians 3:14 And above all these things put on charity [agape], which is the bond of perfectness.

Could you point our where I was wrong instead of just telling me I am wrong and then giving a slew of links. (That is in your own words...) The Holy Bible taught me what gnosticism is not wikipedia... If I relied on wikipedia for faith and practice I would be agnostic... To imply the Bible (i.e.Paul's revelations) is not needed to know God's wisdom is inane... I love you all and before this gets out of hand I thought I would let you know this first...

1Co 2:4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. Comment: God implies NONE are exempt from the nature of man's wisdom... I prefer to believe the word because it leads to humility and not human pride (which you seem full of...) You reject the great mystery, as if you knew it all along... maybe it is time to get honest WITH YOURSELF... <_<

Gnosticism is holiness through knowledge rather than holiness due to the gift of God. 1Corinthians 8:1 Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. 1Corinthians 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing 1Co 13:8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. Comment: Our English word for knowledge comes from the root word gnosis... It seems more that he has rewritten history with pure supposition...

Paul nor his writings are "Gnostic"... If they were then salvation would be of works and not of the grace of God. You might want to sturdy that foundation of yours a bit before you start breaking up the writings of Paul with supposed "other" authors... Also, the immortal leaves his/her earthly "imperfect" flesh behind for the body for Christ. 1Corinthians 4:14 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.

Before Paul's conversion he was not much more (comparatively) than an radical Muslim cleric...

So are we the fleshly reality or the spiritual reality? You cannot be perfect and imperfect at the same time.