Did God create evil to ensure free will?

That's exactly how it works actually.

Literal started the clock,
abstract ends it.

A circle !! 360 degrees turn around.

The truth is the abstract,
it's 11 o clock PM
but people like to be in the AM

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'?

----

answer:

you and me

how is truth alive ?

by dividing himself

he beliefs by being other beliefs,
a belief is always part truth

to be one, he believes from the whole truth
but still includes his desires into himself

truth has many faces
that's jacobs stone (=symbol)

but every eye is connected to the whole structure,
and the eye looks into that structure, not outside it

Originally posted by pasttheclouds


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'?

----

answer:

you and me

How are you and me believed by untruth, but not by truth except as a game?

reply to post by theyreadmymind

It's not that difficult, cant you just read something and tell what it is?
Normally you should be able to, if it was written in your language.
Once it goes through four or five transformations, it is not so easy to tell. If you just go back to the original, you can see it for what it is. The Holy Spirit says, Use your brain, look around, spend a little bit of time and energy. We don't get inspiration by being idle.
Somebody else did the work, as in writing the Bible. We can afford to do a little to decipher it. There are profound prophecies in things that superficially look really mundane. They are there, but you have to look. They are graded over, but you can see them anyway. Then the Holy Spirit comes in, when you go as far as you can, then it decides how much to give you.

reply to post by jmdewey60


No, I can't tell honestly, seeing is that I see symbolism/metaphor in things that most people take literally. I find it very difficult to distinguish between what is literal and what is metaphorical.

reply to post by theyreadmymind


its true what jmdewey says, it's exaclty how the spirit works////
if the spirit leads a life it will give reasons (cross)
to take effort to change negatives into positives
also because the need grows to do the effort.
That's why a life in spirit is not one of rest.
in spirit = growth = evolving by the motor of live (neg-post = understanding)
which is based on honesty.
which is opposite of it ? ignorance

to answer:
How are you and me believed by untruth, but not by truth except as a game?

my answer:
I have to be carefull that it is not becoming our game of words eh
always try to keep in mind, these are words, words are symbols too

i exsist as a person, that is your belief, it is an untruth believed by an untruth,
you (=beliefsystem). that is truth hiding himself in an untruth. why is it untruth ? it is when it does't reflect truth of being one truth. If truth is really divided it never can be part of an absolute truth, which gives a problem. If truth only looks divided, it comes together in an absolute truth. Two opposite truths that are both true always come together in the truth, which is one. Even when truths parts look divided.

these are words, it's always hidden between,behind the words.






[edit on 1-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]

Originally posted by theyreadmymind
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

No, I can't tell honestly, seeing is that I see symbolism/metaphor in things that most people take literally. I find it very difficult to distinguish between what is literal and what is metaphorical.

O daughter Babylon! Blessed is who takes your child. . .

Is this a literal person? No, so it is a metaphor. Is it a literal child? No, so what is it? The daughter is the people of the civilization, and the child, the precious thing, is their creation, as in the literal structures of the city. The Greek word for the "dashing" is a word normally meant to describe the razing of buildings. The word for Rocks is one normally used to describe like a stone pavement. So, instead of an actual person having there kid snatched and smashed against the rocks, you understand the analogy, which is: The civilization known as Babylon, prosperous will be those who supplant you and leave your cherished city structure as if it had been taken down to use the rubble of it to fill a hole, where there is not even a pile remaining, but a paved level surface.
This is an example from one I had to do recently, to illustrate how much meaning you can sometimes get from a sentence that at first glance seems to be saying something completely different. There are a few others I have done with equally interesting results.

[edit on 1-10-2009 by jmdewey60]

This is odd. I recently posted on this thread, then this morning at my office I pulled a book off a shelf, and a piece of paper fell out which was in my handwriting, with the following notes:

"Evil lives off the good. It cannot exist on it's own."
Augustine 430 AD


and this:

"The Belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary. Men alone are capable of every wickedness".
Joseph Conrad

reply to post by jmdewey60


I'm more likely to see things as metaphors that others see as literal. True, I can also see them as literal. So I am blind as to the true intent.

However, I'm sure there are others who are more likely to see things as literal than metaphors. You can't expect everyone to process information the same way as you. You aren't there to teach every person as to the right way to read scriptures. Are you in doubt that anyone has ever done evil by misinterpreting the bible?

Surely if God is all-knowing he would know it would be read a certain way.

I would like to know how you could definitively tell literal from symbolic. Let's say you were a computer or were writing a computer program. What method would you use to test for literal or a metaphor?

[edit on 1-10-2009 by theyreadmymind]

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
This is odd. I recently posted on this thread, then this morning at my office I pulled a book off a shelf, and a piece of paper fell out which was in my handwriting, with the following notes:

"Evil lives off the good. It cannot exist on it's own."
Augustine 430 AD

The way I look at that is evil can't do evil to evil. It would be seen as justice. I'm not sure I agree with it though. Surely there are things that even an evil person would not deserve.

and this:

"The Belief in a supernatural source of evil is not necessary. Men alone are capable of every wickedness".
Joseph Conrad

It's probably not necessary. The question is, was it?

This is what some people call synchronicity and others call confirmation bias. I'm not saying what it is one way or the other, but too much of it will drive you crazy.

reply to post by theyreadmymind
The Book of Revelation discuses things in a figurative way, but in another sense, it is literal because it is talking about real events that really happen or will really happen, but not in a strictly literal way.
So maybe metaphor is not the most precise term to explain it. Like the parables of Jesus, they describe real spiritual concepts, but described by perhaps fictional stories. those could be called similes because Jesus would say, the kingdom of God is like. . .
A simile is not a metaphor but some places like I was trying to use as an example, Psalms 137:8, 9, about Babylon, are like a simile, except it does not include the word like, making it a metaphor.
How you would know it is a metaphor would be how I was trying to explain earlier, that there is no one person named, Babylon.

reply to post by jmdewey60


On page 2 Pasttheclouds said a demon is a lie. Was he speaking literally or figuratively?

beliefs can have 2 sides,
for people growing towards one,
a belief can enlarge their oneness,
or go opposite.

growth is driven by messengers (both people, as things as visions as logic)=
angels, even when they are still uncomplete

in the same way demons work but with a 'lie' function, keeping you away from the angels. or hiding as angels = for example the bible stories goes in evolution,
first you had moses, then jesus. Jesus included moses, but if moses would have been teaching the same way as before, his thinking wouldn't be an angel anymore. Same for Elijah, in his RIGHT TIME his thinking was an angel, after it keeping the same way is making it a demon. EVOLUTION in all the bible everywhere, don't look back to sodom.
Truth evolved. = paradox shaping.

gabriel is the symbolic name for wisdom and truth
michael is the symbolic name for son (means repenting, forgiving, growing unto salvation = eagel-vulture = eating dead carcass = eating the lies)
Uriel is the symbolic name for repenting (which bring sometimes war)
Raphael = healing = giving love = giving acceptance = giving understanding

Clockwise remember, they used to be symbolised in visions as persons as angels,
but that were visions, in a god perfectly possible, now they work from our logic. To get an age were logic could rule, you first needed an age were logic seemed far away
and the human mind in his growth could believe logic to exsist, only after going away from it.



[edit on 2-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]

reply to post by pasttheclouds


Good thing you're still here or I might have tarried here forever in limbo.

Tell me, I've been looking over this engine of yours. One thing I can't figure out is when someone has this truth and untruth at the same time inside of them, what determines whether they see the truth or the untruth?

If they see the untruth, are they still One with God?

If they act on the untruth, are they still one with God?

If they act on the untruth unknowingly, are they still one with God, or is that even possible?

If they are separate from God, are they capable of seeing the truth?

If they are separate from God, are they capable of acting on the truth?

If they are a part of God (included), are they capable of not seeing the truth?

What exactly does someone have to do to pick up their cross (this life)?

[edit on 2-10-2009 by theyreadmymind]

Patterns and rythm.
Repenting means being lost first.

So you get negative - positive.
that's a motor, that's growth.

Before you see like god, you can ONLY grow towards it or be in a certain rest (ignorance).

2 sides of a coin.
Someone talks from God if he talks for growing towards ONE=
But someone else can improve that truth, and make things even more for ONE,
in less generalisation.

they are steps up, a higher step can tell the lower step, he is in a certain ignorance,
but that lower step can do the same to an even lower step...so that middel step can be both angel as demon.... it all depends on how hard those steps want to grow.

That's the individual side of the coin,
the other side is, truth is always there,
and everything in truth is functional,
even when the step is in ignorance
the whole stairs are functional as one in god.

a human can do 0 or 1 = rest or growth = human perspective
but the outcome of both options will always be a 1
from god points of view, in life it will always be functional.
If it wouldn't God would not be in peace with himself.

2 sides of a coin.

god is free of sin, because he is one, a human is not free because he is not one yet, to become free, he first has to become one, by growing towards it. That is taking cross.
because many negatives to clear as positives, many parts of you (other people) to help.

religion thinks repenting is only saying sorry, no, repenting is growing understanding, not everyone can do the same job. Everyone focus on different 'ways' but the way of understanding is sharing in the 'way' for humanity as a whole.
Until the paradox is full.

[edit on 2-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]

Originally posted by pasttheclouds
Patterns and rythm.
Repenting means being lost first.

So you get negative - positive.
that's a motor, that's growth.

Before you see like god, you can ONLY grow towards it or be in a certain rest (ignorance).

2 sides of a coin.
Someone talks from God if he talks for growing towards ONE=
But someone else can improve that truth, and make things even more for ONE,
in less generalisation.

So that's what you mean when you say all this is from the Holy Spirit? If you work towards unity and elevation of One you are speaking from the Holy Spirit, and if you do not then you aren't?

they are steps up, a higher step can tell the lower step, he is in a certain ignorance,
but that lower step can do the same to an even lower step...so that middel step can be both angel as demon.... it all depends on how hard those steps want to grow.

So it is a pecking order? How do you identify a higher step, I suppose if the better they are at working towards unity and elevation of One?

God wasn't one of confusion right ?

It's simple, yes, God is one, truth is one,
so both religion and logic agree, something is there being one

so why wouln't it be that simple ?

does the spirit talk against its own essence ?

Talking for one means a lot effort eh,
how do we forgive life (god) when we see all
those 'bad' things around us,
how do we forgive life, when stress comes up,
we live peacefull now,
but hurricanes are part of the patterns.

Someone who does his best,
reflects and grows is growing towards
salvation, and that is what the bible says.

Religion thinks god and truth are not the same thing.
since when ? (generalising)

you recognise a higher step by recognising the previous one,
if you build understanding, you just forgave more of god or truth.
if you build understanding for peoples behaviour, you grow
towards more forgiveness for god. more towards one.


[edit on 2-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]

reply to post by theyreadmymind


no, growth is relative
many people who believe in one,
sometimes do nothing, while a dogmatic christian
or a dogmatic muslim will maybe condem still a lot more
but will do their best effort to 'save' you...

options are decided by god, the choice is for a human

all people have different ways.
how could life build beliefs, paradox, logic,
when there wouldn't be contrast.

relatives, before being with god there are only relatives.
A relative can be seen after an absolute was tested out.
Forgiveness is mostly after condemning.
A human can be angry that there is injustice,
that will make him look for justice.
Ignorance doesn't see injustice.


[edit on 2-10-2009 by pasttheclouds]