Abigail

And again, I say, what has really changed. I don't believe God ever instituted a "caste system", man did. Jesus may have knocked some holes in that system, but man has quickly filled those holes and we still to this day have caste systems. Agreed. But when you start "reproving" someone for questioning the sanctity of the scriptures, are you not denying the holy spirit within them? God will show them what they need. Answer questions, share your beliefs, debate with logic and reason sure, but reprove them?? But that is how you come across at times. As if you think it is somehow sin to question. I don't by that, I think if anything, it is sin to stop asking questions, to stop learning. Mattered to whom? Certainly that is not true of God and NEVER was. Show me one place in the OT where God didn't love and respect people who were "less intelligent." Pleaes, document how it is that prior to Jesus "only smart people mattered". And the spirit can work in a person regardless of what label they give themselves or others give to them. The spirit can work in them regardless of what "sect" they study with. The caste system has not been done away with. Inn God's eyes there never was a caste system, it only existed in the eyes of men, as it still today exists in the eyes of men. If we are to sit back and do nothing, then why the rest of the book? Why not end at Romans 10:9 and 10? Why are we told to speak the Word? to preach, to teach, to love, etc. etc.???? Obviously, there is more here for us to do.

DWW, even VPW questioned the sancity of the scriptures and taught "this verse is a forgery" or "this verse was translated incorrectly", etc. There is nothing wrong with questioning, even the sanctity of the scriptures. Indeed, I'd say it is a wise thing in that it prevents one from blindly following. And yet there are translations that have verses that one translation or another leaves out, again, even VPW pointed as much out. So yes, whatever the original scriptures contained may have been written by holy men as they were moved by the holy spirit, but what we have today is NOT the original scriptures. Likewise, there were many writings that may have been written by holy men as they were moved that were not included in what we call the Bible today. It is equally possible there are writings that were included that were NOT written by holy men as they were moved. The Catholic Bible has books that were not included in the King James. The Jewish Old Testiment has books and verses that fall in different order than the KJ and later version, etc. Meekness to whom? I'd say meekness not to man, but to God. God will let us know when we are on or off the right track. Perhaps so. But how can one know what charity is, without knowledge? Do you think Dan, Evan, or even I have spent hours upon hours studying because we don't desire faith?? What makes you so sure that our faith is somehow less than your own? Because it is somewhat different? So? Is it meek to assume our faith is less and your own greater? Its a circular argument, no?Th Ah, but the New Testament was hidden from the common man for hundreds and hundreds of years. Who knows what changes took place within it as it was translated over those years? One of the things I really enjoy about Judaism is that they have the Rabinical arguments regarding various verses and their meanings dating back to before jesus ever was born. All of the arguments have been preserved regardless of agreement. So, while some may follow one Rabbi more than another, the arguments of the "other" are still there for those who wish to study them. Maybe. But the religious leaders that followed put those walls back up again and what we have today may or may not even remotely resemble the original. I don't believe the new law was really new. It is there, in the Old Testament. It is there, in Kabbalah. What Jesus did was make the information known to the common man, who had likewise been denied access by the relgious leaders of their times - as with what occured in Christianity after his death. By whom? Certainly, not by God, IMO! By all men, or simply by those who wished to retain power over them? How is it different today, really? Even today you have Christians who claim other Christians are not truly Christian because they disagree on some silly doctrinal issue, so what has really changed?

Wanted to add. . . . It isn't that I entirely miss what you have been trying to say regarding Adam and Eve, DNA, quantum physics, etc. I am not totally ignorant of science, it is just a more difficult field of learning for me. It is more like I almost see your point, but there is a piece or two missing. But, that is often the case with me when it comes to the more mystical discussions. I have studied some of Kabbalah too. I get the simpler concepts within it. However, because I am a visual thinker and I cannot "see it" as a picture in my mind, it sort of lies just out of my grasp. I also think in terms of the practical. While the mystical fascinates me and I get a great thrill when I come to a new understanding, I have yet to put together enough pieces of it for it to have much practical meaning for me. In other words, I haven't seen how much of it effects my day to day living, how I would apply such information to how I live my life, how such information would help me to be a better person, etc. Also, understand, I do not view Jesus as traditonal, typical Christians do. I am not even sure he was anymore a son of God than you, I, or anyone else who has ever lived. I do think he had a deeper grasp of Kabbalah than the scholars of his time did - quite likely even more so than the scholars of our time. But in terms of my understanding of the Christian view of him, the jury is still out on that one for me. If I am ever to view him in that manner, it will be up to God to show it to me. I learned the hard way that following man is folly. I study what other's have written and learned, to be sure. But I only walk away with those things that sit right in my heart and mind. I figure that is God showing me what I need to see at that given moment.

DWW, I have asked Sushi to read and will get his thoughts tomorrow evening, as I won't see him much before then. But I did want to respond to one thing you said: I only believe in one "God of this world" and it isn't the Christian devil. One of the problems I have with Christianity is that they give far to much power to this being called the devil. They study him, fear him, often see him in nearly everything that doesn't go their way. I'm sorry, but to me that borders on idolatry. I am not saying there may not be "evil spirit beings", I really have no idea if such things exist or not. I've never seen one, but then, I've never seen God with my eyes either. What I do know, is if such beings exist, they are not all powerful and all knowing. I do know my God does not wish me to have any other God's before him. And, I know that focusing my thoughts on such things does not bring good things to me emotionally or spiritually. So ultimately, I really don't have much of a biblical perspective of the devil, nor will I credit such an entity as the God of this world. When negative things happen in life (and everyone experiences negative things sometimes) I prefer to look for the lesson in it. Look for how I can grow or become stronger by overcoming, etc. I think that is one of our primary purposes in these bodies on this planet. To learn, to grow, to become stronger by overcoming. edited to add a p.s. read my tag line in blue below and that will tell you what I think about "evil".

Sorry, W, but I still don't get it. Then again, math and science were always my weak areas in school. I do better with reading, writing, history, social studies, etc. So, I am not arguing with what you are saying, I just don't understand what you are saying. Don't worry though, it happens to me too. I'll read something that communicates very well to me and share it with others, who end up scratching their heads and staring at me blankly. Or I'll come up with an analogy that I think works really well, but in the end just doesn't communicate what I was trying to say.

Well, I am hit and miss in these forums as I have time and am moved to participate. I only today got around to wading through that somewhat lengthy post of yours. :) Well my 10 year old son would present a very strong argument that it does. He and I have had that conversation a few times and he would point out that the vibrations, which to our ears make sound, are there whether our ears are there to vibrate along with them or not. He would further point out there are always insects and animals in the forest. But I understand that is not your point. :) I agree the two must agree and when they don't, either the scientists got it wrong or we are understanding doctrine wrong. 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 think you will find the vast majority of people who participate down here in the basement are seeking truth. Some have rejected portions of VPW's teachings. Some have rejected all of it and started over, and would say where the two agree the credit is not necessarily VPW's. Myself, I went back to scratch and am studying Judaism. There is a tremendous amount of information to be found there.Ultimately, it matters not to me whether we agree or disagree. God tells us those who seek shall find. Right or wrong, I figure if we are seeking, we will ultimately find. Whatever path I am on is the path to God, even if starts from a different place than yours, even if it at times branches off in different directions than yours. Defend? no. Explain, expound, be willing to give, take, discuss, etc., yes.

Some would say time began the moment the earth became formless and void - when God retracted the infinite to make room for the finite. Some would say time was actually the first act of creation. But would it have been a free-will choice then? How could one make a free-will choice to walk with God, to walk with a being separate from him/herself, without self awareness? Agreed. Can you explain what this means? Most scholars would agree there is no way Moses could have written the book of Genesis. It is believed Genesis is a conglomeration (SP) of two different authors, one a male, the other a female. I have more on this somewhere in the "Harlot by the Side of the Road Thread" but I don't know what page. The how does one who is not "born again" learn and ever become born again? It can't simply be from reading the bible, or that would seem grossly unjust and for hubndreds of years there were people who never had access to it. That God knew what Adam and Eve would do, I can buy. That God formed and made them in sin - that you'd have to document. There is a post on this in the Adam and Eve thread, if you are intersted. Why can't it be? Just because your mind can't grasp it, doesn't mean it cannot be, no? While I would agree God has no image, God does have aspects, traits, character, elsewise, how could God be love, spirit, holy, etc. Can you document this scripturally or even scientifically?

Whether gnostics have some hertiage that traces back to Buddah is somewhat irrelevant. Almost all religions have borrowed and swapped from each other. Christianity has its roots in Judaism and has borrowed much from paganism. Native American religions, Judaism, Christianity, also have much in common. Even Islam, Judaism, and Christianity have a lot of common ground. It seems like you close yourself off to an awful lot. That is sad and I can't help but wonder why. Joseph Campbell has some great writings on comparative religions. I somehow suspect you wouldn't be overly interested in reading his works though.

Thought I would toss this into the mix for anyone who is interested Kabbalah teaches that God is light (as does the Bible). In the beginning God who is light filled the entirety of existence because He is infinite. Our would, however, is finite. In order for the finite to exist, the infinite had to "contract" and create a "void" or empty space. He then drew a line of light down into this finite space we call our world. (This isn't to be understood as literal, necessarily, but is a means of communicating an idea.) The role of human beings is to now refill that void with God's light, by performing Mitzvoh (obeying a commandment of God, which is viewed as doing a good work). In other words, even if one does not obey all of the laws perfectly, one is still drawing down some light whenever he/she performs even a single act that is commanded by God.

Cman, I thought you might enjoy this The Lubavitcher Rebbe explains it this way (I would post the link but it comes up as a pop up and I can't figure out how to do it)

HAHAHA, As it turns out, I could have worn my Greasespot T-shirt, if I owned a Shabbos Robe. It was a very warm and friendly Shabbos (as they say instead of Shabbat - just depends on which part of the world you are from or something). Not entirely different from spending a holiday with my cousins, except this family is more strictly observant of the rituals. When I first arrived it was a room full of women, the Rabbi's wife and her sisters, sister-in-laws, etc. They were all wearing these long black robes and I decided I chose well to go with a nice grey outfit instead of something in bright colors. We (or should I say the younger girls, mostly) chatted and everyone was very relaxed. Later, one of the girls explained her family was not orthodox, but she enjoyed the time she spends with at the Chabad House a lot and so she goes fairly regularly and is learning as she goes. She told me not to be afraid to ask questions and so I asked about the black clothing. She explained that it was mostly coincidental that tonight they all wore black robes because the robes come in many colors, including bright flowery ones. The purpose of the robe is comfort - you wear whatever is most comfortable underneath it. The idea being you want to be comfortable on your day of rest. :) I liked that. Eventually the Rabbi appeared with two other men and the prayers and meal started. First the song welcoming in the Sabbath, then the Kiddush (wine). After that there is a ritual handwashing, which they were very kind in explaining to me, without me having to ask. Then of course the Challah (bread), followed by salad, and then matzah ball soup. Throughout the evening other men and women came in (one or two were professors from the university and a few were students), and joined the meal and conversation. All in all it was a very peaceful and wonderful experience and I look forward to returning. If I can swing my schedule right I will go back for the Torah reading tomorrow morning. Otherwise, I will go again on Thursday when they are having a guest speaker come in to speak on women in Judaism.

Hammeroni's post got me wondering about death, so I've been doing some digging and here are two interesting things I came across. one translation regarding "for on the day you eat of it, thou shalt surely die" renders it "thou shalt be deserving of death." Another version I came across reckons 1 day is 1,000 years to God. Adam lived another 930 years after eating thereof. hmmmmm

Thanks, Eyes! I will let you know how it goes. :) I keep wondering, should I dress all in black? :D I think I will just wear something conservative and nice - lol

Here are some Rabbinical theories regarding Adam and Eve and the eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that I thought some of you might find interesting I cannot say with a certainty that these statements are 100% accurate. But human nature being what it is, I think there is truth in the notion that often it is only when we are at our worst, that we turn to God with the most passion. Likewise, we are often more merciful and compassionate toward those who have fallen into the same "traps" that we have. We understand them more, because to some extent or another we have walked in their shoes. When someone's troubles are alien to us, because we have never faced them, we often have a more difficult time relating, empathizing, being compassionate.

Sometimes it is just a matter of clearing the air a bit. Hash it out, and it's done. I prefer a little verbal anger over silent anger. :)

okay Larry, I found what I can for you at the moment. The teachings that the Tree of Knowledge was always intended to be eaten from at the PROPER Time comes from the Midrash Rabba. More information on this can be found HERE Information on the Midrash in general can be found HERE This is an interesting "side subject" within this thread that I would like to come back to and discuss further. Agreed. I think the same could be said of the very existence of God. Yet, it is what I chose to believe, because it is what sits right in my heart.

Larry, I will see if I can find the source for you, it comes from the oral traditions, which have since been put into written form. As for death, I guess I would ask death of what, the body? soul? spirit? Death is sad for those of us who are left behind to mourn. I think it is also sad in the sense that it can often be the loss of potential, in terms of what the person may have gone on to do and accomlish. But death is a temporary thing, the body dies and the soul goes on. In other words, death is sad for the living, but I don't believe it is sad for the dead.

And I would agree that is part of the equation, for sure. But I would ask, is self-determination a bad thing? How can one choose what is right without it? Judaism teaches that the eating of the tree in and of itself wasn't wrong, God always intended for them to eat AT the PROPER time. What messed things up was that they didn't wait for the proper time and thus were not properly prepared for what was to come.

There is a passage, I can't remember the chapter or verse, but it is in the section where God is telling Moses he will not enter the promised land, but that Joshua will. In that passage, God refers to the children of those who have wandered the desert and who will enter the promised land as those who "know neither good nor evil." In other words, being children they do not know the difference between right and wrong and therefore everything they do is right or good in the eyes of a child. Anyone who has raised children realizes that all kids do go through a phase like this. So, Adam and Eve, before eating, were children who did not know the difference between good and evil. Everything they did was right in their own eyes. It was only after eating that they had an understanding that they could also do tings that were not good. Again, an evolutionary step forward from being apes to being human beings.

As some of you know, for the past few years I have been studying Judaism on-line. My family is Jewish, though very few of them are observant. A couple of years ago I decided I wanted to learn more about my heritage. The website where I do most of my studying is run by Chabads, which are an ultra-orthodox group. I think they are somehow affiliated with Chassidics but I still haven't been able to piece that together, it may be that they are Chassidic and have simply changed their "label". I have attended two of the three local synagogues on a number of occassions and neither of them felt like the right fit for me. The third one is geared solely toward the college students on campus, so I don't think that is the right on either. While I cannot imagine I would every observe the strict practice of the Chabads (I lack the discipline to say the least), I do love the heart in their teachings. Also, they are open to all Jewish people, regardless of the level of observance an individual chooses to practice. I have wanted to check them out in a more face to face setting for a while, but the nearest center is over an hour away. :( Anway, earlier this summer I discovered a Chabad House a couple blocks away from where the kids go to daycamp. I noticed it because I saw the Rabbi leaving one morning, and there is no mistaking one. ;D I then noticed the big sign in the window that said Chabad House on it. So, I went to the Chabad website and found some information on the MSU/Lansing Chabad house and contacted the Rabbi. This Friday, if all goes as planned, I will attend a Shabbos service and dinner with them. I'm nervous, but also excited.

Alright Larry, I'm willing to "give you a chance." But I will point out that many people get defensive when someone is "attacking". There are ways of disagreeing or offering other viewpoints without "attacking" the view point of the person you are responding to. You might find you get better results and a better reception if you try it sometime. I know you would from me. I don't feel particulary defensive when you respond to my posts. I just feel like you have no respect for my thoughts, words, beliefs and therefore I do not feel particluarly compelled to offer much respect in return. It is something of a two way street. You may note on pages 3 and 4, I did start out quite respectful. I quit being respectful because I figured if you had no respect to offer me, I would save my respect for someome more deserving of it.

Lol, now I'm confused. Did someone suggest we should remain or become suppressed? Did someone suggested we should place a schism between our spiritual family and earthly family? (I mean here on the forums, anyone who was in TWI in the 90's knows Martindale and company certainly suggested such things). Personally, I am thankful for my past, it has helped build me into the person I am today. Certainly I endured hardship and pain, I think most people who grow into adulthood experience such things in the process. But out of that hardship and pain came strength, or at least a recognition that I have strength.

Well, yeah, I confess I have bonds with some of the posters down here. Yet, we don't always agree and manage to discuss our disagreements without anger or insults. I could just as easily get to know you and develop a bond with you at some point down the road, or not. Agreement is NOT required, respect on the other hand . . .

Maybe. I suspect it has more to do with the fact that Jewish people do not embrace the NT as part of their bible and therefore have little interest in the writings of Paul.