You really need to figure out how to explain this stuff in a way ordinary people can grasp before you hit them in the head with this. I, for one, would very much love to understand it. But you write in such a way that is beyond me, and very little I can do gets me that first building block as a foundation of where you're going. Before I can get even that, you're off to some distant galaxy and I have no idea what is going on. I'm OK with being called stupid.
That's the kind of thing they say in North Korea where blind obedience is also required. Evil there has it's origins in rebellion against their Glorious Leader too. Evil is actually defined as morally objectionable behavior. That which causes harm, destruction or misfortune. It is being morally wrong in principle or practice. Read the Bible without pre-formed delusions and it's perfectly clear those are all evil things in which the concept of what you call 'the holy nature of God' is itself guilty of. Of course rebellion against evil and evil doers is not evil, whether they be imaginary concepts like God or dictators or anything else.
What is astonishing is the way a very poorly thought out irrational Bible tale like that one can convince anyone it makes any sense. You supposedly have two people in a garden where an imaginary God, having given them no knowledge, expects them to have knowledge to know what is right and wrong! It is amazing and it has to be said somewhat creepy the way some are willing to make themselves so incredibly gullible. The giant superstition of religious belief is categorically based on such nonsense. Like in the image of imaginary God and Garden of Eden, there seems a desire by the religious to deprive themselves of any knowledge which basic human reasoning can provide. I don't write this to be argumentative either but for the purpose of discourse. It's what is known about "Him" that is the problem. You're describing a superstitious religious belief based upon a rudimentary FOMO. Maybe you should also consider being saved isn't the thing. As the associated rule book not unusually but nevertheless rather absurdly declares.. "The last will be first, and the first last." Seems as if you should become something of a laggard and carry out your 'love my savior to be saved' mantra as late as possible, according to the Bible.
I'm going to take this nice and slow, starting with a definition for heaven, which I have not settled on yet. I will note however that heaven can be kind of nebulous because there is not just one thing a person might be referring to when using the term. So, in the next post I will consider at least three different heavens—the past heaven, the present heaven, and the future heaven.
I wanted to continue with the last post, but it won't be possible since there are only two minutes left in which to do so, so I will have to consider the past, present, and future heaven later. What I just did was try to find out if the term "heaven" is actually even used in the Bible (since I speak neither Hebrew nor Greek) but could not find an answer to this question in any of the websites returned by my search. I am therefore going to begin the process of defining heaven by starting to synthesized the idea of a "final resting place," which I believe is a widely held concept, and with the idea put forward by the Bible Project of heaven being "God's space."
Good video. Adding to the concept of animal sacrifices vs the once for all sacrifice that Jesus made for us, here is Hebrews 9:26-28: "He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation." If anyone finds the topic interesting, the article at this link discusses how animal sacrifices covered sin, but could never remove sin, vs Christ shedding His own blood for the remission of sins: https://answersingenesis.org/sin/did-animal-sacrifices-remove-sin/
It could well be i'm not cut out to explain it. Could be there are more articulate peoples. I sometimes think i could connect with a very well spoken person and finally have them "get it". Then maybe they could make alot more people understand than i can. On the other hand maybe i'm doing ok and this subject matter is simply not easily grasped by anyone still identifying as a human being of any race or any intelligence level. It could be that the ability to intellectually grok this is subject to one's wishes...how one wishes the world to be (one's preferred world view). I feel i'm being more clear than perhaps Jesus ever was, using modern terms. But that he had more followers just because he was able to back things up with miracles that drew peoples attention. And yet, though they paid attention, i would estimate only 5% of anyone who paid attention even understood what he was really saying. For me, the hump that i needed to get over was this idea that this world we think we live in (a world of stars, planets, seas bees and trees) does not actually exist, and must yield to a reality that really does exist as a Living Being (but not a person). I had taken this world be be "real" without question, without doubt since birth, reinforced by everybody else who thinks so. Only when i allowed a doubt about it's validity to enter my mind, only then did i really start to make progress on this philosophy. So maybe people need to make a minimal consolation to intellectually entertain some maxim that i am proposing...first...before much more understanding will come? Can't say for sure. But that was a r-e-v-e-l-a-t-i-o-n to me, even after 25 years of high interest in the world's most advanced philosophies. What i propose is to keep asking questions and it may be that i might be able to finally state something that really hits home and makes sense the way anyone needs to hear it. Part of it may be that i've moved on somewhat, considering this world to be rather fluid, and subject to a higher level of psychology, completely dependent on "faith" for it's illegitimate "existence". I've accepted this. It's seems easy to grasp. Still, i have work to do to have more experience. Perhaps then i will be able to explain more. On the other hand, that might make my efforts yet even more unintelligible. I could point to two or three other voices in this world (mostly passed away by now) that might be able to explain it...persons who got as much experience as they would ever need or are very close. You could see if they have a way of explaining. But my policy is never to quote anyone. I avoid quoting the bible and never quote chapter and verse, or even point to better books. I don't think you're dumb as i don't think it has as much to do with intellect as perhaps thought. What part of the brain interprets parables? Abstraction. Deductive logic. Something like that. I'm suggesting that it's because there may never be any "proof" that could over-rule one's preferred world view. The reason there may never be sufficient proof to push anyone over the hill is because this philosophy suggests each of us is 100% "Lord" over our experiences, and if it is not our wish to wake up to reality yet, then we must sleep on a little longer...until we come to a point of maximum weariness. For me, that has been overwhelming. [edit] Oh, and last point. It's not that anyone is so dumb, it's just that this world is primarily a type of self-deception that infects all participants. This world is so off-the-rails in relation to reality that all participants are reduced to croaking frogs and barking dogs whenever anyone tries to describe our Original State of Being. The Being that decides to self-deceive concocts a puzzle so riddling, such an enigma wrapped in a mystery, that it would be very lucky if even one man in 1 billion would ever even suspect how backwards (upside down, inside out) this world really is. The architect of this confusion is vastly more intellectually powerful than any human, who do not stand a chance to be un-decieved, or dis-illusioned...unless they meet some very narrow criteria. I suggest one preliminary criteria is a very deep weariness with the status quo or at least some suspicion we may be experiencing some kind of "Twilight Zone" or "Matrix" that's very hard to understand. It would be easier to understand what actually happened on 9/11...or understand current US politics. Its like everyone is being swept along by an imperceivable psychological rip-tide.
In 2 Corinthians Paul the Apostle writes, "I know a person in Christ who…was caught up to the third heaven." This implies that there is a first heaven and a second heaven. So, what are they? The idea that more than one type of heaven exists is confirmed in Hebrews 7:26 which says that Jesus is "exalted above the heavens." Keep reading and one finds that there are two other realms to which the Bible might ascribe the term heaven. One references the sky, or the Earth’s atmosphere, where you find "the birds of the heavens," and the other references space, where one observes "the stars of heaven and their constellations." So then, Paul equates the third heaven with “paradise,” the realm where God dwells. Hence, the third heaven is, quite simply, God’s domain, and when the Creator is said to be "in heaven," rather than conceptualizing Him as being in some other physical place that we are not, we should think of God as existing on some other plane or within a completely different dimension. PAST HEAVEN Some believe that there was once a time when heaven and hell were two separate compartments in "the place of the dead," the netherworld, or underworld of the dead. One half was a place of suffering, and the other was a place of peace known as “paradise” or “Abraham’s bosom,” where the righteous souls from the Old Testament were waiting for the Messiah to come and pay for their sins by being crucified (sacrificed) on the cross so that they could then ascend into God's presence. Adding to this belief is Ephesians 4:9, where the apostle Paul says that Christ descended into the lower regions. There are people who assume that this took place between His dying on the cross and His being resurrected from the dead. They combine this with 1 Peter 3:19, which says that the Messiah preached (made declarations) to the spirits imprisoned. Since the Bible states that after Jesus was resurrected, the graves were opened and many dead also arose, some conclude that these were the souls from paradise ascending to heaven. However, others surmise that the imprisoned spirits to whom Christ declared His victory were the demonic powers and fallen angelic beings, and that this is when the Messiah took the keys to hell and death and ascended to the heavenlies in triumph. PRESENT HEAVEN Matthew 10:28 suggests that there is a soul which lives on after the death of the body. Jesus says to the thief hanging on the cross, "Today, you will be with me in paradise." The story of the rich man and Lazarus points to conscious life after the grave. Revelation 6 speaks of the souls that have been beheaded inquiring before the throne of God. 2 Corinthians 5:8 indicates that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord, and in Philippians 1:22-23 the apostle Paul indicates that to depart is to be with Christ. So, in this sense, to go to heaven simply means that one’s spiritual being is in the presence of the Lord. Again, heaven is a real place, but it is on a totally different plane. FUTURE HEAVEN The book of Hebrews states that the tabernacle that Moses built was constructed after the heavenly pattern, suggesting that there is a tabernacle (with God’s throne) in heaven. But again, it is not so much the case that God is located in heaven as it is that heaven is located with God. So then, the future heaven will be the New Jerusalem, as it is called in the book of Revelation… Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,” for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and He will dwell with them. They will be His people, and God Himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.” He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!”
i get the concept here. What comes to mind is the Matrix. You're saying everything we see and "live" through is false. But apart from you stating that, I don't know how you got here. I'm trying to see how to agree that this is a possibility other than "some guy on the internet told me." Let's start here. The concept is that the real world that we know is not real, and that there is a living beyond this. What would be the purpose of subjecting us to such a falsity? Or am I being too literal?
It (this world) would be self induced through aberrations in normal psychology ( non normal functions of mind power). The "physical" world is more like psycho-somatic meta (mind) phenomenon. It has been described as an "illusion", "dream", or "mirage" (gospel of Thomas). The substance if a physical world is not really hard except through the belief (faith) of wishing participants (wishing rather than willing). There is only one participant divided into an apparent many. The organization of physical particles (physics) is mainly through intent. The seer sees what s/he wishes to see. This is not obvious hence the self deceiving nature of faith. Ok thats more of a what and how. What about why? Why is about a quest for more . MORE should be capitalized . It's not the exploration of evil or the absence of good. Neither is the intention to have less. Less is the functional consequence of exploring (through abnormal anger and functions of mind power) what might be more than everything. This exploration is conceptual (and can never be more than conceptual) because it goes off into the unknown beyond the pale of the possible . Using building terms of would be like blueprints that never actually got built (never became a reality). Archetypes. Theory. Concepts. Symbols. This is as far as "this world " goes. It never becomes a "reality " as though it would last forever. It is made in an abnormal domain I call "imagination". Man is manifest as an "image " out of the foundry of this imagination zone (think Twilight Zone). An image is an APPEARANCE (like a mirage). Man's world is everything a powerful imagination could imagine...but which could never be true. The reason it's not true is because it is not even possible . To understand this ask yourself if its possible to be dead and alive at the same time? Is it possible to be awake and asleep at the same time? Pregnant and not pregnant? Left and right? Hot and cold? Tall and small? In and out? High and low? Male and female? Black and white? Republican and Democrat? Finally , could you make good and evil (what is not good) coexist together in union? If you can somehow make these exclusive incompatibilities co-exist (in your experience) then you would have MORE than what is even possible. Not even Christ could make these impossibilities possible. They are simply mutually exclusive. You could only make them coexist by FORCE of FAITH. Indeed, faith is synonymous with force, as deception (in this case self deception) is the most fundamental phenomenon of force. All additional scenarios of force derive from a basic self deception about what is possible in order to gain MORE. Man's world is the manifestation of AN ATTEMPT to combine mutually exclusive qualities in order to achieve more. It is the reason we one should "be careful what you wish for). It is "real" only to participants . Again, there is only one participant. Mankind is still motivated by the same motives of the one participant. In this way mankind identifies with what makes man (man's "maker", think man's gods by any name) such that it is a truism that man is made in the image of his maker. It is beyond man's perview to say/explain how or why he was "made". But I'm trying. Going back to what I call the original condition there were only knowns, hence knowledge. There was (and still is) no such thing as faith, which is a theoretical opposite that cannot coexist with what is known (knowledge). What knows believes nothing, while what believes knows nothing . in a land of knowledge faith is anathema while in a land of faith (the Twighlight Zone slash Matrix) knowledge is anathema. Not surprisingly, in a narrative that glorifies the impossible union of mutually exclusive opposites (famous Jewish literature ) so also is knowledge made into some kind of sin (anathema) worthy of punishment. Going back once again to the original condition the original state of being includes everything that is possible (all things so-to-speak). Beyond the possible is the "unknown". It is not as though a realm of the unknown exists. It doesn't exist except through tricks one might play upon ones own mind (hence self deception). Thus, neither is it "evil" as we have come to experience it. The intention to explore the unknown is not knowingly self-destructive . it is, after all, the unknown! Thus the exploration of the unknown (through self deceptive force of faith ) cannot be described as "bad", "wrong", or "sin" . Maybe it could be described as curiosity. Theoretically if you start with everything and add more, you still have everything, except you now have more than what you thought you had in the beginning . In theory if it was ok to have everything before it's still ok to have everything (only more). But to get more you will have to start playing tricks on your mind as it is impossible to have more (or be more....more about that later) than everything! The primary trick one must play is what I call IGNORANCE. Ignorance derives from a mind that knows everything already (doesn't need to, nor can it know more) but must ignore that fact in order to gain more " knowledge". One achieved this ignorance by being vigilant against actual knowledge so that faith can just make shit up as it goes. This is the basis of "enmity" between "the flesh" (the ignorant) versus the "spirit " (that which knows). Anyway, faith does not explore anything that actually exists. It makes shit up as it goes, manifests its shit, then forgets how it made the shit up. Man then comes along and explores faith's manifestation and, accumulating more and more observations man acquires "knowledge" so-called. This is the pathetic way man is able to gain MORE knowledge than even Christ! But in gaining this so-called knowledge, man loses the soul (original condition) of the one participant. As faith-based shit is exchanged for true knowledge, man's "soul" is "lost" in ever more darker and darker confusion. So the impetus is MORE. This is still what motivates the extensions (mankind) of the one original participant, which I've called "the prodigal son". For example, when sailors leave shore to go into the unknown to look for MORE unknown spices, these sailors manifest the very same kinds of motive that motivate what I call the prodigal son, and what ignorant persons call "God" (man's maker). The sailors don't intend for themselves the pains of "evil" along the way. Evil is simply a functional consequence of their wishful thinking to add more to their wealth...a consequence of some kind d of ignorance . The further they go, the more likely they will be "lost" (confused about where they came from). The further they go the more lucky they will be to return "home" without permanent damage. Such is the quest of mankind, which is extremely far out from Reality. Going back once more to the original condition , it both knows everything (believes nothing) and IS everything. So it knows it's Self. "Know thyself" is a wise philosophical appeal to cease and desist vigilant ignorance (work) of one's original condition, in order to rest in peace.