Originally posted by justamomma
The similarity was this.... Paul and some of the chief priest were trying to submit these things as physical and thus, many lost the DEEP truths that were in the words. The Tanakh was ALL written while the Jewish people were in babylonian custody and it was written in a dramatized way to deptict deep wisdom!

What was written in the Tanakh was allegorical... the chief priests (though not all and as Paul did with Jesus) were submitting them as realities. Consider the following:

In Joshua 7 Achon is not the only one who suffers in the Valley of Achor (vv 24,25).

It is an allegory. It speaks for how our selfishness not only affects our life, but it affects the lives of those around us.

The story of Achor, if at all factual, is the story of terrorism. For this reason, I have described ancient Israel as an expression of the "Stockholm syndrome". This is the syndrome that motivated Patty Hearst to rob banks for a radical extremist group.

If it is allegorical, the priests of the Babylonian captivity who penned it must be behind a kind of terrorism of priest-on-people. For it would be better in the case of a story like Achor, that the moral of the story be told at the end so that the reader may understand that it is a story. But no. And many more stories of terrorism are told to captivate the peoples minds. Jesus stood up to this. Paul betrays Jesus, and carries on the ways of priestcraft.

You are comparing apples and oranges when quoting Jesus use of graphic language to describe the intensity of will required to end sin in one's experience. Regarding eyes, he is teaching about how we think...because we see through mental filters. Regarding the right hand, he is talking about our secret subconscious mind. We must expose it to the light, and be vigorously vigilant to what our mind is hiding deep down.

And ultimately, we must be willing to let eyes and ears and hands and legs go for true life in and as Spirit. True baptism washes away all physical form. If we would be truly baptised by words of truth [word of GoD], we must be willing to let these things go...these things we consider to make up our so-called "life". So his graphic use of language is not too far off what he meant.



Christ!



[edit on 29-1-2009 by Christ!]

Originally posted by justamomma

The similarity was this.... Paul and some of the chief priest were trying to submit these things as physical and thus, many lost the DEEP truths that were in the words. The Tanakh was ALL written while the Jewish people were in babylonian custody and it was written in a dramatized way to deptict deep wisdom!

Jesus seemed to understand that the stories of the OT were just stories. He said, for example, that the coming of the Son of God would be "as in the days of Noah". And the earliest interpretation of this was that it is a reference to baptism [example letter of Peter].

The correct interpetation is: True baptism washes away the whole world from one's mind, revealing the Son of God, there, where he always was but for our blindness. This is the "return" of the Son of God...to our awareness.


The story of Noah is a story of terrorism. And, as baptism is interpreted by Peter to be as in the days of Noah, Peter taught that the end of the world will come likewise as divine terrorism...after which the Son of God would return. But this is not what Jesus was talking about. Baptism washes away the whole world from one's mind. This is how *wisdom* interprets the allegory. Paul and Peter left instead, a legacy of priest-on-people terrorism...because they were unwilling to correctly interpret the wisdom of Jesus.

I would be hard-pressed to interpret the terrorism stories of the OT as anything other than terrorism, either gOd-on-man, or priest-on-people.

Can you provide better...more...examples of OT allegorical interpretation that teaches a lesson toward truth?


Christ!




[edit on 29-1-2009 by Christ!]

Originally posted by justamomma
Consider the following:

In Joshua 7 Achon is not the only one who suffers in the Valley of Achor (vv 24,25).

It is an allegory. It speaks for how our selfishness not only affects our life, but it affects the lives of those around us.

Let us suppose your interpretation is correct, that, our selfishness somehow invokes collective punishment upon ourselves and those around us.

Now you are interpreting in the realm of the mind, and the laws of mind.
And if one goes down this path, s/he may as well follow through.

If we say that Achor must take responsibility, and/or those around him, then the lesson is a lesson in taking responsibility.

The story challenges us to take more responsibility.
As we take responsibility, we come to learn that we are responsible for all of the stories of collective punishent in the OT.

We are responsible for the collective punishment of Adam's progeny.
We are responsible for the collective punishment of Noahic civilization.
We are responsible for the collective punishment of Achor and his family.

In brief, we are responsible for all of the terrorism in the world done in the name of GoD.
In other words, we are responsible for blaspheming the name of GoD with our selfish stories of collective punishment, guilt, terrorism...all in the name of GoD.

This is an example of following through on the moral of the story...following through on the "truth" of responsibility.

Originally posted by justamomma
The similarity was this.... Paul and some of the chief priest were trying to submit these things as physical and thus, many lost the DEEP truths that were in the words. The Tanakh was ALL written while the Jewish people were in babylonian custody and it was written in a dramatized way to deptict deep wisdom!

Did you take it literally when the Word said in Matthew 5:

Is anyone starting to see how the view I have been shown by the Father is more consistent than the view many are all holding to? Do you all still have your right eye? your right hand?

So, if these things are not physical, they must be mental...imaginary.
In otherwords, the outward signs of physical phenomenon and events and circumstances depict inner - mental - turmoil, conflict and attack.

And if you are interpreting this way, then we are in agreement.
I am merely following through on the lessons learned.
So must have Jesus.
For, to compare the coming of the Son of God to "the days of Noah", and, to compare the flood to baptism...this shows that Jesus interpreted also entirely at a mental, allegorical level...on a grand scale. [ie. a house divided against itself cannot stand]

If it's true that the world is something that is washed out of our mind by baptism, then all of the terrorism stories of the OT are a kind of collective punishment we've inflicted on the whole world because of our selfishness...ultimately to inflict it upon our *collective self*.

And now, your interpretation of the Achor story and my interpretation line up and agree.
How else could we agree?

I simply follow through to the end of the story.
At the end of the story we find that it was all just a story.
In the story, we find the Son of God...asleep...dreaming.
As the story continues, the Son of God begins to awaken.
At the end of the story we find the reality: The Son of God...awake.
Washed away are all those things that caused us to "sin", such as...eyes and hands.
Dreams all.
Stories all.
All washed away.
By...*taking responsibility*.
By...extending our circle of responsibility to its reasonable conclusion.

One final note.
If we are to interpret this way, we must conclude that the gOd of the OT is a kind of subconscious mind involved with self-sabatoge at an individual and collective level. And it is precisely this that causes us to "sin". And it is this that Jesus calls our "right hand". And seeing through its mental filters, it is this gOd we must "gouge out" and toss it away.

Otherwise, we have lost the lesson of taking responsibility for our selfishness, and how it affects those around us.


Christ!


[edit on 29-1-2009 by Christ!]

Originally posted by Christ!

Originally posted by badmedia
But, you are still actually seeking separation. You are still seeing yourself today as being separated. I do not see myself as separated.

"See" is ambiguous.
For example,
"I can't see myself..." doing something, acting some way, identifying with something.
Then, there is another kind of seeing...call it "vision".
Vision starts with a definite purpose.
This would be like a shift in will after a period of reasoning.
The kind of vision Jesus was talking about was a perceptual shift.
Perception must yeild to the will to be one.
It yeilds a perception of the Son of God...Christ.
This is to be "seen" through "vision".
It is not the end of the journey.
It is still a perception.
The end of the journey is the end of perception.
The end of perception yields Christ...*known*...nOt perceived.
There is no "seeing" in Christ.
There is only *knowing*.
If one does not yet *know* Self as Christ, then the journey home is not finished.

Many people are playing the game of masks who are more interested in the masquerade than the masquerader...or in unmasking.
Christ consciousness is used to fuel the party and spike the punch.

Others understand that they are experiencing a masquerade, and its past midnight. These are the "weary" who are ready to return home. For these the will to go home gradually becomes stronger than the wish to stay and pray for party favors.

I am one who experiences the effects of an ancient wish to masquerade. I have seen the icebergs ahead, and I am turning the proverbial Titanic around. Like Amy Grant sings, "it takes a little time, to turn this Titanic around".

Are you turning the Titanic, or, are you still heading out to sea in the dark?
Heading out, we can arrange the chairs on the deck all we want, but it still goes down, over and over again.

Christ!

I'm sure by now you've heard me mention the film and the movie. Where in the eyes of the father, all knowing, he sees the entire film at once. There is no change, no time and so on. The only moment is now, and now lasts for eternity.

Now, we(the son/daughters) are in a limited perception. We see instead of the film, a movie. We see in "separations". Instead of the entire film stretched out, we see 1 frame at a time. This gives us the illusions of time, space, change and so on. Only from this separation does this occur.

I completely understand that separation is a lie and not true. The mask is what separates the entire film into separate frames. Separation from the entire truth. As I mentioned before, I know this is true and I get it. Where we disagree is on purpose.

Because I think the entire purpose is to return to that. It is the journey that it is done for, the journey back. While what you say is no doubt the end destination, I do believe it is the journey and joy of gaining those lessons, or gaining that "new" bit of "truth" that it is done. As the bible says, all those of the spirit of God will return in the "end".

And part of all knowing is to also know the separate "paths", the "individuality", to know what it is like to know only "part" of the truth, part of the perception, and so on. I believe to deny this separate part completely is in itself to separate from truth. As we age we uncover different truths, and this is why 1 man in his time plays many parts. Because the parts we play are related to how limited our perception.

Of course, the speed in which we all "return", or where each individual path goes is completely up to each person. When you seek more, you will find more. To deny this is to deny the will of the father. My path is not dependent on any one elses path. To realize and live this is to let go.

Originally posted by badmedia
I'm sure by now you've heard me mention the film and the movie. Where in the eyes of the father, all knowing, he sees the entire film at once. There is no change, no time and so on. The only moment is now, and now lasts for eternity.

Now, we(the son/daughters) are in a limited perception. We see instead of the film, a movie. We see in "separations". Instead of the entire film stretched out, we see 1 frame at a time. This gives us the illusions of time, space, change and so on. Only from this separation does this occur.

I completely understand that separation is a lie and not true. The mask is what separates the entire film into separate frames. Separation from the entire truth. As I mentioned before, I know this is true and I get it. Where we disagree is on purpose.

Because I think the entire purpose is to return to that. It is the journey that it is done for, the journey back. While what you say is no doubt the end destination, I do believe it is the journey and joy of gaining those lessons, or gaining that "new" bit of "truth" that it is done. As the bible says, all those of the spirit of God will return in the "end".

And part of all knowing is to also know the separate "paths", the "individuality", to know what it is like to know only "part" of the truth, part of the perception, and so on. I believe to deny this separate part completely is in itself to separate from truth. As we age we uncover different truths, and this is why 1 man in his time plays many parts. Because the parts we play are related to how limited our perception.

Of course, the speed in which we all "return", or where each individual path goes is completely up to each person. When you seek more, you will find more. To deny this is to deny the will of the father. My path is not dependent on any one elses path. To realize and live this is to let go.

There are two types of lessons.
A. Lessons that lead away from reality [dark lessons], and,
B. lessons that lead back to reality [light lessons].
Is it possible to rejoice over dark lessons?
Sure.
Is it possible to rejoice over dark lessons and light lessons at the same time?
Not really, unless one is rejoicing over liberation from the dark lessons.
The purpose of heading out is not the same purpose of heading back.
In other words,
There is no round-trip purpose that is the same except to satisfy curiosity.
On the way back, there is less and less curiosity about the dark lessons.
There is no extra "truth" to be found in the dark.
There is no *booty* that can possibly be brought back to the totality of perfection.
Assuming so is a *lesson*...a dark lesson.
Dismissing it is also a lesson...a light lesson.
These lessons head in opposite directions.
The joy heading out is not the same as the joy heading back in.
Heading out is for feelings not part of the perfection.
We cannot feel the feelings not part of the perfection and also the feelings of the perfection at the same time.
These are feelings opposing.
One feeling must cancel out the other.

I have admitted to purpose: curiosity about feelings not relative to the feelings of the original perfection.
But you seem to insist that the purpose must have some more significance than this...that the journey out must somehow be very important to the perfection, as if to add to it.
There, I disagree, and with good reason.


Christ!





[edit on 29-1-2009 by Christ!]

Originally posted by Christ!
There are two types of lessons.
A. Lessons that lead away from reality [dark lessons], and,
B. lessons that lead back to reality [light lessons].
Is it possible to rejoice over dark lessons?
Sure.
Is it possible to rejoice over dark lessons and light lessons at the same time?
Not really, unless one is rejoicing over liberation from the dark lessons.
The purpose of heading out is not the same purpose of heading back.
In other words,
There is no round-trip purpose that is the same except to satisfy curiosity.
On the way back, there is less and less curiosity about the dark lessons.
There is no extra "truth" to be found in the dark.
There is no *booty* that can possibly be brought back to the totality of perfection.
Assuming so is a *lesson*...a dark lesson.
Dismissing it is also a lesson...a light lesson.
These lessons head in opposite directions.
The joy heading out is not the same as the joy heading back in.
Heading out is for feelings not part of the perfection.
We cannot feel the feelings not part of the perfection and also the feelings of the perfection at the same time.
These are feelings opposing.
One feeling must cancel out the other.

I have admitted to purpose: curiosity about feelings not relative to the feelings of the original perfection.
But you seem to insist that the purpose must have some more significance than this...that the journey out must somehow be very important to the perfection, as if to add to it.
There, I disagree, and with good reason.


Christ!

There is no memory of heading "out", the only memory is of coming back. In fact, you can have no memory of heading out, because if you did then you not be subject to evil in the first place, because in your memory of heading out, you would already know the good, and so you wouldn't accept evil. The trip out is just the removal of previous knowledge, not an actual trip in itself.

Father and son relationship. There is no perfect son in the sense of that which is not in same way limited of the truth. That is only the perspective of the father. To return to a perspective that is all knowing is to return to the father. In order for the son to exist separately at all requires limited knowledge and truth. The son can however live by the commandments, be wise and gain much knowledge. And this process is the journey back and the entire point. Eventually, there will be a point when all is known again, and this is the point you enter back into the father and lose your individuality as the son. To be equal of the father is not possible, at such a point you are merely absorbed by the father, which is all knowing and so on. Because you were the father and came from the father originally.

Originally posted by badmedia
There is no memory of heading "out", the only memory is of coming back. In fact, you can have no memory of heading out, because if you did then you not be subject to evil in the first place, because in your memory of heading out, you would already know the good, and so you wouldn't accept evil. The trip out is just the removal of previous knowledge, not an actual trip in itself.

Father and son relationship. There is no perfect son in the sense of that which is not in same way limited of the truth. That is only the perspective of the father. To return to a perspective that is all knowing is to return to the father. In order for the son to exist separately at all requires limited knowledge and truth. The son can however live by the commandments, be wise and gain much knowledge. And this process is the journey back and the entire point. Eventually, there will be a point when all is known again, and this is the point you enter back into the father and lose your individuality as the son. To be equal of the father is not possible, at such a point you are merely absorbed by the father, which is all knowing and so on. Because you were the father and came from the father originally.

"Heading out" is a metphor to describe a withdrawing into one's own mind. That is, the journey of the proverbial prodigal son is a journey within his own mind as he wanders away from reality. So, the prodigal son lives in his own little world in his own mind. When humans do this we consider them to be "crazy". In the big picture, as a rule of thumb, if one can see humans or hear voices, he is experiencing insanity inside his own mind. The world is a hallucination inside your own mind. It's a way of looking at everything that is beyond Everything [you]. Conceptually, what is beyond you is *outside*, or, *out there*. The truth is there is nothing out there. The world is about proving there is indeed something out there, and something of value.

Heading out requires denial...another attribute of the insane. We must deny the totality of total knowledge to have an insane experience. So, as Guatama noted well, the world arises out of ignorance. The reverse of ignorance is the acceptance of knowledge, aka *the Truth*. An example of true knowledge might sound something like this: *There is no past*. That kind of information does not come from within the proverbial "Matrix", which programs a detailed past for each one, which does not include the true present, in which none of the past is true at all.

Heading out is a metaphor for a narrowing of awareness into *narrow-mindedness.* This is also a metaphor for a *closed mind*. Heading in is the reverse: the restoration of awareness to its original state of mind. This requires an *open mind*. The knowledge of truth, metaphorically, stands at the door of the closed minds, knocking politely, waiting for them to open. Truth does not break down the door. This means that the insane can go nuts forever if they want. It also means they can be healed if they want. Depends on what is wanted...desired.

Father and Son is a metaphor for Cause and Effect...nOt gender. It is also a metaphor for sameness, however that is expressed. This means that the Son is also a *Father* through true Creation. So now it is Father and Father. And if they are the same, they are now equal. If the Son's true creation creates as he does, then the Son's true creation is a Father also. In this way, all in the Kingdom of God are equal in everyway...except in the Cause and Effect relationship.

Understanding and accepting the Cause and Effect relationship is important if one wants to return to the original state of perfection. It's important because, among everything that is denied in order to head out and go insane...is the Cause and Effect relationship. The net effect is a "world" in which cause and effect are reversed. This is the nature of the "Matrix"...and how it traps. So one must address this issue and deal with it, if one wills to reverse denial.

To understand the Cause and Effect relationship, it needs to be tacitly accepted, more and more, that the Kingdom of God is all about sharing. The Kingdom of God is a perfection that cannot be improved or deproved. There is no "new" perfection. There is no "other" perfection and there is no sense in having more than one perfection. So, *Our Father* has One "only begotten Son". Likewise, we have only One, only begotten Son. So we are Father's like our Father. As wanderers, we are more like 'dead-beat dads'. Fortunately, it's not true.

If you insist that there is only a *Father* which morphs for growth or improvement in knowledge of perfection, you miss the point, and may not be able to extract from the Matrix. The Matrix is all about the reverse of cause and effect. The net effect is that the Matrix becomes our *lord*, and events and circumstances seem beyond our control. This is because we have set up our own "father", that we may become our own father. The way this plays out, conceptually, is we become the sons of gOd, the maker of the world. I will call this the Great Reversal...which gives genesis to "the world".

The dirty little secret about this reversal, however, is that we are the makers of the gOd who makes "us". As we give honor to our fake father, we effectually deny our true *Father*. And this is what justamomma is into for now. Her persona and motive and allegience are all effects of an ancient wish to reverse cause and effect. And now we are the "son of man", which in turn, is the son of man's maker. Man's maker makes diversity and differences. So, mankind is both "sons and daughters". It is precisely because this is a denial of our true *Father* that Jesus implores us to "call no man father".

It is man's maker that morps for the growth of "knowledge". And this is because, not really knowing, it must *learn*. So it is a learning machine, conceptually speaking. It issues haptic devices [bodies] which collect data that is then termed "knowledge"...falsely so-called. This explains why in some circles of "knowledge" it is "known" that gOd is growing, and with our help. As we "grow" gOd grows. In this way, gOd is always the most knowing of the unknowing....one step ahead of the pack. In this way, there will always be a heirarchy of unequals.
Christ!

[edit on 30-1-2009 by Christ!]

Originally posted by badmedia
To be equal of the father is not possible, at such a point you are merely absorbed by the father, which is all knowing and so on. Because you were the father and came from the father originally.

With GoD all things are possible. We are equal because *Our Father* has extended himself. This is not like human genesis in which a child is cut off to be a separate thing that must grow and learn. A separate thing that is cut off to be separate that it must grow and learn...describes the genesis of the gOd of this world...which we have made. In turn, we are made in its image as sons and daughters of man.

Extention is a sharing. Sharing is an attribute of the perfection that is the Kingdom of God. The true GoD shares everything. The true GoD is everything, so, the true GoD shares Self whenever anything is given. Never is anything given that is less than the totality of everything. This is the "way" of true sharing. In this way, there is no loss. What is given is kept. And the way to keep it is to give it away. In this way, the Kingdom of God is always extending, always being shared. In this way, the joy is always increasing.

The world is the reverse of this way. In the world, less than everything is given, and what is given is not kept. In this way, the world reverses the ways of the Kingdom. In the world it is possible to lose. In the Kingdom, it is not possible to lose. It is aways win-win. The world shatters this with its own concepts of win and lose, gain and loss, more and less. So, for example, we think that we have some knowledge to gain that was not given us already. We can only think this way under a kind of self-induced hypnosis. Reversing the reversal is very much about un-hypnotizing our mind's. Hypnotized, they are limited and chained. Un-hypnotized they are free to be what Is.

Did you know, for example, that a strong body-builder can be hypnotized into thinking he is unable to pick a pencil up off the table? Try as he might, he can't. When un-hypnotized, it is an easy task, and one wonders how he could have beleived that he couldn't. Likewise, the world is a kind of self-hypnosis...a *spell*...in which a Son of God weakens himself with notions and concepts that oppose himself.

In reversing these false notions, we must learn again about true giving and recieving. Otherwise, we learn the dark lessons of sowing and reaping. If we sow confusion, we will reap confusion. If we sow truth, we will reap truth.

The world is the expression of the concept of nOt sharing. It is really a very private world...behind closed doors, so-to-speak. In this sense, it is virtually unknown in the Kingdom of God. Again, it exists but in our own mind, and nowhere else. *Our Father* knows nothing of it...of a concept of nOt sharing...of our own little world.

Our Father knows of true communication [communion]. The world symbolizes a lack of communication...a communication breakdown. It is for this that the Holy Spirit was created...to bridge between illusions and reality, that communication may restore the insane to sanity.

To the extent that a lack of communication is "new" to the Kingdom of God, the Holy Spirit is a "new" creation. Created by the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit stands in for the prodigal son, until the prodigal son is no more concieved of, and returns, as the Holy Spirit to the Kingdom. This is what it means to go "through Christ" to the Father. The Holy Spirit stands for Christ in the world. This is the same as to say that the Holy spirit stands for the perfect Reality in the illusive expression of unreality. Standing for the Reality, the Holy Spirit stands for the *Holy*. Standing for the unreality, the unholy spirit stands for the *unholy*. The Holy is the Whole, while the unholy is the halved...the limited...the fractioned...the separated...the reduced...the belittled...the different...the special...the unique...the masked.

Taught by the Holy Spirit, Jesus became the Holy Spirit, one and equal, and became nOt Jesus. In this capacity, Jesus became the Savior of the world because the Holy Spirit is the Savior of the world. Likewise, if we will follow, we too shall become the saviors of the world, without whom, none shall be saved. We have a part to fulfill, that only each of us can fulfill, through the Holy Spirit, that we who made the world may each play a vital role in its complete unmaking.

This is the Savior. What justamomma proposes as the "Savior" is not the Savior, even she uses capital letters to usurp the place of the true Savior. There is a false savior, pretending to be the true Savior. The false savior is always interested in saving the ways of the world. It does this by pretending to select the "good" of the world, and reject the "evil" of the world. Whatever it calls the "good", it is never truely GooD. It will often select good behavior, or the will to behave good. None of this is really Good because behavior is inherently deceptive. And this merely perpetuates conflict that the world may be extended in time. For time is its sole domain...and if fights for time through its savior: Confusion.

The true Savior of the world ends the world by clarifying what has been confused. As each accepts clarification, each becomes the "light of the world". And understanding, each is saved from self-concepts not the truth. Without understanding the knowledge that comes from the true Savior, "the people perish". This means that the ways of the world continue without knowledge. The way of the world is the way of death. The false savior saves the world for more death with pseudo-knowledge that is nOt true knowledge.

In every way, the ways of the world fake and mock and mimic the Truth, only to present a false face that saves the unholy from the end of time. The Truth of oneness will prevail over the false of separation. That is what Jesus meant when he said that as each of us recognizes each other as the Son of God, "the gates of hell shall not prevail...". In brief, the One perfection prevails over the many perfectly imperfect. One Will prevails of many separate will. And that is the end of time.

Christ!






[edit on 30-1-2009 by Christ!]

You can not be equal to the father because the father contains your individual perspective and many more. To become equal to the father is to gain perception that would make this reality no longer possible. Should you gain all the knowledge and perception of the father, then you have just entered back into where you came from to begin with.

I don't deny that ultimately such will happen, but surely one must realize and understand their limits in this current reality, and it's purpose.

Originally posted by badmedia
You can not be equal to the father because the father contains your individual perspective and many more. To become equal to the father is to gain perception that would make this reality no longer possible. Should you gain all the knowledge and perception of the father, then you have just entered back into where you came from to begin with.

I don't deny that ultimately such will happen, but surely one must realize and understand their limits in this current reality, and it's purpose.

Something like that, yes.
The Father does not percieve.
He knows.
So,
The Son knows.
What is beyond knowledge?
Perception was made to go beyond.
Beyond knowledge is belief.
Perception allows beliefs to "manifest".
There is no knowledge in perception.
Salvation is the end of perception.
The end of perception is the end of beliefs.
The end of beliefs is the end of "hell".
The end of hell is the return to Heaven, as it was, is and every shall be: Perfect.
Perception is the realm of the "prodigal son".
It is a "place" to wander, endlessly, on a journey going nowhere.
It allows for freedom of expression for an ignorance generated experience.
An accumulation of experiences never really adds up to knowledge, or anything at all.
Full expression of experience satisfies curiosity.
There is no consequence for this.
There are only consequences within perception.
Perception has its own laws, like "karma" for consequences.
There seems to be a cause and effect in perception.
But beware, cause and effect are reversed.
Things aren't what they appear to be.
What appears to be a cause may actually be an effect.
Actions, for example, seem to cause harm.
But actions are effects of beliefs in a powerful mind.
All beliefs start out as *unbelief in Christ*.
Converted, belief may be used to return to Christ.
And, as Christ, we return to the Father.
Therefore, we go to the Father "through Christ".
Perception is a realm in which we can deny we are Christ, and make it seem believable and 'real'.

Return to the Father is return to reality.
Return to reality is the end of perception.
Reality is the realm of knowledge and truth.
Perception is the realm of believing and lies and confusion.
Perception itself is a belief.
It shall pass.



Christ!



[edit on 14-2-2009 by Christ!]

I would just make the point that Paul’s conflict with Judaism and with the first generation of eyewitnesses were different conflicts.

Paul saw Jesus death and resurrection as fulfilling God's promise to mankind and so Christians who followed the Jewish Law, or more specifically, Christians who insisted that the converts to Christianity continue to follow the Law [as we see Paul was willing to follow the Law in Jerusalem] were essentially saying that Jesus’ death and resurrection were not enough to bring about salvation. This seems to be the heart of his conflict with the Jerusalem Church and those who had known Jesus in his lifetime. To the extent this was resolved in the lifetime of the Apostles is not clear, but it is clear by the time Luke and Acts are written ~40ish years later Paul’s view has “won” and are written to show that they all agreed that you can be a Christian and not keep the Law.

Paul’s tension with the Jews were his insistence on Jesus as the Messiah and probably poaching the “God fearers” Pagan converts in the synagogues throughout the empire – endangering an important political and social engine and causing dangerous unwanted hub-bub and attention there.

I am fairly confident nothing above is wildly off current scholarly thinking and ffi you were to take a comparative religion course at a major secular university they would teach all this.