Decoding the Bible

a reply to: Itisnowagain

That may well be the case that the "Tao Te Ching" alluded to such.

But take away the warning labels Itisnowagain and watch the real fun begin.

Through the act of naming we "identify, symbolize, refer, describe, simplify, organize and, most importantly, tame".

a reply to: andy06shake
Are you a name?
Are you a symbol?

What are you?

a reply to: andy06shake

Through the act of naming we "identify, symbolize, refer, describe, simplify, organize and, most importantly, tame".

And here is the link to what you found online and posted:
brandsbyovo.com...#

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I'm just an Andy.

I think therefore i am.

Simple really.

See i know what time it is, and i also understand that things are for all intents and purpose separate.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Are you trying to sell me a T-shirt. LoL

You may wish to use Google again because you have found something else.

I was quoting an old English teacher, a Mr Kerenduff that alluded to such many moons ago in secondary school.

a reply to: andy06shake

I think therefore i am.

Who is thinking?

Do not be mistaken by the ego’s claim to be the creator of your thoughts. Thoughts are not ‘yours', you only perceive them. There is nothing ‘you’ have done to bring them (or anything else for that matter) into being. They are not your personal creation.

There is no thinker.

The thinker is an illusion, there is only the thinking itself
www.zenthinking.net...

The thinker is an illusion—in truth, there is only the thinking. There is only its perceiving. There is only its knowing, and you are that knowing presence in which all such apparent happenings appear.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

A material receiver, Lit by a divine spark?

originally posted by: GUGLiL
a reply to: Itisnowagain

A material receiver, Lit by a divine spark?

Is there anything other than what is appearing presently? Ever?

With reference to God's image, I have indeed struggled with the term until now. As far as I can make out, it is a bit like what Patrick Swayze said in Point Break. Everything comes in cycles.

Basically, that every person, despite illness, age or disability, will at some stage start to do things without realising what they are, and then remember as they are doing them.

It is more of what God's image for us is. That our sub-concious becomes a preparation machine for us, without it telling us directly what it's up to. Our body does learn to do things at the right time, and place is not so important. I have often started walking somewhere before telling myself, where am I going! But it was always okay, I remembered then. This is God's image.

a reply to: andy06shake
Wow you must have some memory

Who needs Google eh

a reply to: GUGLiL
Who want to know what??

originally posted by: Lazarus Short

Jesus the Christ was NOT a Gnostic.

As for the Creation, Genesis 1:1 can be redone like this: "In the beginning (TIME), God (SPIRIT) created (ENERGY) the heavens (SPACE) and the earth (MATTER). There it is, all the elements of cosmology.

I agree, but matter is feminine. Any vessel for that matter is also feminine (cars, boats, etc). We are called the daughters of Zion because we are the vessels for God's Spirit.

The church is the bride of Christ. We were empty material vessels until we were invigorated by the hope and power of the Spirit

Babylon is the whore step mother when the children of Israel adore the material luxuries of this world instead of God's Spirit.

a reply to: GUGLiL


coded bible... yes, but the bible was created before it was ever written by 'inspired-by-God' pious authors...

mankind created in image of God... not in the anthropology or even a moral/spiritual sense... but in the 'Creator' sense

man is intended to become a 'step-above-Angels' - - but that happens in stages, starting when God raises up long ago Saints to a place in the Millennial Kingdom Hierarchy (for that 1000 year reign)

all other men/women must wait until the Judgement Day until being transformed


the 2 points: bible and image need a 5000 word presentation to cover each topic for the reader to comprehend rightly so this post ends here

a reply to: Itisnowagain

So you are talking to yourself?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Itisnowagain

So you are talking to yourself?

Where did that assumption come from?

Please supply a quote from the post that prompted the reply.

a reply to: GUGLiL

Google was not around when i was a lad or even at school GUGLiL.

We had to manage with the likes of encyclopaedias and Yellow pages.

As to "some memory", in some areas i suppose, in others not so much.

Memory is a fickle beast, at their core our memories are stored as electrical and chemical signals in our brain.

A multitude of different things can trigger our memories, from the simple smell of a cooking meal to a poem you happen upon in an old book.

Put it this way, further study is most definitely required as to how our brain manages to store and recall information at will.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Well if nothing is separate, everything is happening now, and the thinker is illusory, that just leaves you far as i can establish.

Which means me and everything else in the world must also only be in your head.

Hence you would indeed be talking to yourself.

Just to add i certainly don't assume that reality, or the reality we think we experience, transpires in such a manner.

a reply to: andy06shake

Well if nothing is separate, everything is happening now, and the thinker is illusory, that just leaves you far as i can establish.

Well if nothing is separate.......there is no me or you.

There is just what appears to be happening.

The Bible could just be a codex of dead languages or whatever remanants of through the ages, with each book supposedly have a chronological order. Where the root meanings an origins mean something else depending on the context used or needed?

Jesus using Camel could of meant a rope instead of the animal, or Jehovah actually starts with an I instead of a J qn is punishable by Hebrew law!?!

Almost like a giant time machine of sorts

a reply to: Itisnowagain

If there is "no me or you" who are you talking to?

What appears to be happening for you, or me, is not the same for everyone else, hence things are indeed separate.

Perspective is a very personal experience, simple as that really.