Did God create evil to ensure free will?

Forget my last comment, obviously he is one with the truth if he took up his cross. The only way he could not be one with the truth is if truth (logic) or lies cancelled him out. All who take up their cross are one with God (Truth).

[edit on 1-10-2009 by theyreadmymind]

reply to post by theyreadmymind


glorification means being one, so somewhere One, truth takes over,
and pulls a person into it's light. The cross of One, is it shared ?

the bible learns us in every story growth
repenting is growth, forgiving is understanding

Scriptures and Quran:

there is NONE outside God/truth

question:

Did anyone else take the cross ??? then truth, then god
who takes yours ? you ? or One ?

Originally posted by jmdewey60
When you check the other verses, wyerh has another number that has to do with herding flocks to pasture. So when the verse in Zechariah was talking about bad prophets leading the people, was it really saying "evil" or bad shepherding?
The first verse on the page for wyerh is Ezekiel 34:9 Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord:
In this verse the Strong's number is 07462, to pasture, tend, graze, feed

Interesting. So is evil actually in the bible at all?

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
reply to post by theyreadmymind

 

glorification means being one, so somewhere One, truth takes over,
and pulls a person into it's light. The cross of One, is it shared ?

the bible learns us in every story growth
repenting is growth, forgiving is understanding

Yes, it is shared because this life is God's cross.

Originally posted by pasttheclouds

Scriptures and Quran:

there is NONE outside God/truth

question:

Did anyone else take the cross ??? then truth, then god
who takes yours ? you ? or One ?

Whoever takes the cross is one with God (truth). It is taken both by you and One. Whoever doesn't take the cross has left God and is not God because God (truth) is one.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by theyreadmymind]

So did jesus died for us or for himself ? or is us included in 'himself' and is 'himself' the same as god ?

Did jesus take away the cross of himself ??
Or did he teach us to be like him

I'm just making statement eh, I'm not you,
I will never be able to answer your questions,
through me, god does it throug you.
Self-responsibility, that is God.
God is responsible, humans aren't yet for everything.

Is repenting seeing evil ? or is it seeing what happened,
and is regret actually another word for seeing the pain that
happened to a part of yourself and does regret allow
understanding (forgiveness) to take away the perseption
of evil that can not exsist in a god that is one.

You can not see Truth (God)
and stay alive as lie

There is only Truth.

reply to post by theyreadmymind
It changed my outlook a lot when I discovered that web site, because even if you are not the biggest expert on Hebrew grammar, you can use this tool to see exactly how the different spellings affect each word's use. So it is not so much theory, but practical examples where you can easily pick up on it, as you need to. I make sure I use it every day so I can progress in my understanding. The beginning of it is to care about it. Most people do not realize what lies beneath, so to speak, what a tenuous thing, the English version, is. It is not enough to have a version, but to know what it very well could be, too.


[edit on 1-10-2009 by jmdewey60]

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
So did jesus died for us or for himself ? or is us included in 'himself' and is 'himself' the same as god ?

Jesus showed us how to carry our cross. What is free is one. People are part of God unless they leave him. But even so, God is all.

Did jesus take away the cross of himself ??
Or did he teach us to be like him

Jesus showed us how to carry our cross.

I'm just making statement eh, I'm not you,
I will never be able to answer your questions,
through me, god does it throug you.
Self-responsibility, that is God.
God is responsible, humans aren't yet for everything.

Is repenting seeing evil ? or is it seeing what happened,
and is regret actually another word for seeing the pain that
happened to a part of yourself and does regret allow
understanding (forgiveness) to take away the perseption
of evil that can not exsist in a god that is one.

Repenting, seeing what is not true, keeping truth (logic).
Regret, seeing pain that was caused to yourself when you were part of God and made the decision to allow evil to happen to yourself.

Originally posted by pasttheclouds

You can not see Truth (God)
and stay alive as lie

There is only Truth.

How does this figure into that?

"To be truth (logic) you have to have untruth in you. If you do not want this you choose against being the truth (logic) as one, and you are divided against yourself."

[edit on 1-10-2009 by theyreadmymind]

reply to post by jmdewey60


Thanks, I'm definitely going to spend some time there and throw my Strong's out the window.

reply to post by theyreadmymind


Okay, evolution works in circles , like a motor:
negative-postive-negative-positive

to explain truth sometimes you have to go out from truth
and go back to a step you were before...to see it from
that perspective... it means growth is in stages,
and every stage has its own perspective.

IF i say truth can not exlude untruths, but still includes them,
then those untruths become part of truth, but from truth's
point of view they are part of truth, untruths are not believed
on the level of truth, only as 'game', to play in heaven,
or in this world, untruths are believed by untruths.

reply to post by theyreadmymind

Interesting. So is evil actually in the bible at all?

Ha Ha. I can't really tell you that. It does exist, in the Bible, but you have to realize that it is not just one particular thing. Now, that's the old testament. The new testament seems to be less ambiguous.
Anyway, my way of looking at the Hebrew situation is that there were better and worse translation jobs done on it, between different sections, and when they were done, and by who. I was discussing this the other day about Saint Jerome. He single handedly translated the entire old testament. To this day, the book of Psalms exists exactly as he translated it from the reworked version of the Greek translation, from the Hebrew, that was done by Origin (he took the older Greek, and improved it, of course without the use of the Hebrew, the translation from Greek to Hebrew was done so long ago, no one knows who did it). Jerome translated that, into Latin. Someone brought up a verse in Psalms, about, Happy is who takes your babies and smashes them on the rocks. You can go to the Greek and see that it was metaphorical, very clearly, and even in the Hebrew, you can see that was not what it was saying, but for some reason, because Jerome, back in the fourth century, all by himself, decided to say it like he did, in Latin, all the Bibles follow it, using the Latin as the most authoritative source. Ridiculous, so if you want to know what the old testament really says, work on your Hebrew, and with that site, it is no big deal, for anyone who gives a whatever.


[edit on 1-10-2009 by jmdewey60]

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
reply to post by theyreadmymind

 

Okay, evolution works in circles , like a motor:
negative-postive-negative-positive

to explain truth sometimes you have to go out from truth
and go back to a step you were before...to see it from
that perspective... it means growth is in stages,
and every stage has its own perspective.

IF i say truth can not exlude untruths, but still includes them,
then those untruths become part of truth, but from truth's
point of view they are part of truth, untruths are not believed
on the level of truth, only as 'game', to play in heaven,
or in this world, untruths are believed by untruths.

This is complex. Can you give me an example of an untruth that is part of truth, believed by untruth, but not believed by truth except as a 'game'?

Originally posted by theyreadmymind
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Thanks, I'm definitely going to spend some time there and throw my Strong's out the window.

I had someone challenge me on a forum about my claim that there was about eighty different words for eat, in the Hebrew. He asked me to give a few examples, and it turned out to be a hundred and thirty something. Just for one Strong's number. It is not that Strong's is wrong, but it does not tell the whole story. It is only as accurate as whoever the Greeks were that made one translation or another, probably back in the days of Alexander, for all we know.

reply to post by jmdewey60


I am guessing that one can not know what is metaphorical and what is literal unless one has the Holy Spirit to guide them, or else one's perspective is in proper alignment with truth?

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by theyreadmymind
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Thanks, I'm definitely going to spend some time there and throw my Strong's out the window.

I had someone challenge me on a forum about my claim that there was about eighty different words for eat, in the Hebrew. He asked me to give a few examples, and it turned out to be a hundred and thirty something. Just for one Strong's number. It is not that Strong's is wrong, but it does not tell the whole story. It is only as accurate as whoever the Greeks were that made one translation or another, probably back in the days of Alexander, for all we know.

I am wondering how anyone can be sure of the definitions for so many different words when they are used so sparingly through the scriptures. Like if a word is only used twice in the whole bible as you showed me for "created", then how do we know the proper definition of its meaning? It couldn't have been used very much outside the bible.

reply to post by jmdewey60


You know, the more I think about that. "Happy is he who...smashes his baby against the rocks." What was the purpose of that being in the bible? What if someone took that literally? Do you suppose that is how God created evil? Like it's a metaphor or it's literal. Who knows? So if someone actually does it then they are choosing evil. But if they see it as a metaphor then they are choosing good. Do you think God put that in the bible on purpose and that, metaphorically, is how God created evil? Could he have created evil by allowing the bible to be seen from multiple perspectives?

Untruth: Literal - Happy is he who takes your baby and smashes them on the rocks.
Truth: Metaphorical - Happy is he who takes your baby and smashes them on the rocks.
Believed by untruth (Literal), but not believed by truth (Metaphorical).
A game.