my own revelation

[logicpolice]

Having read through the discussions on this board I am inspired too throw in some of my own thoughts on the validity of religious prophesy.


I should first point out that I am a firm believer that the world is 4.5 billion years old and that evolution is a reality. I should also point out that I firmly believe all life that has evolved on this planet has done so out of a preexisting pattern that is congruent through out this universe. That is to say that just like an apple seed can be said to have a predestined future to become an apple tree, so it is that this planet has a naturally occurring predestiny to sprout life that culminates into intelligent life


When I look at a road map of the United States I don’t see a scare on Gods green earth caused by humans, rather I see the planet wide development of a neural network. Capable of giving the planet a form of self-awareness. Within it is the capacity to understand, catalog and even manipulate all of its life sustaining systems, biology, geology and all the symbiotic relationships therein.


Uniquely sentient life gives the planet a chance for its life to escape the confines of its thin atmosphere and spread to other places within the solar system or even its galaxy. After all the one thing that can be said about life is its persistence to spread. While this may seem to be an over simplification of why we are here, it lends itself to the notion that all of the things we have experienced in history (stone age, iron age, industrial age, nuclear age, computer age) may very well be parts of a very recognizable pattern that occurs consistently through out the cosmos.

The challenge for the believer in this is to put aside any of the usual dogma of seven day creation or a 6000 year old world and acknowledge that science might be a reality. Like wise the challenge for the scientist is to put aside the dogma that religious text are bogus and lack any true relevance in defining the future. My approach to this is to lend credence to this ancient text by exposing what might be simple pattern recognition of the development of sentient life on this planet.

The book of Revelations is 22 chapters long and for those of you who don’t know, the first chapters are simply letters that John wrote to various churches in his part of the world (describing their faults). The real meat of the story actually starts in chapter 6 with John having been whisked away to a place were Jesus himself is about to reveal what you all know as the seven seals. The seventh of which is actually further divided into seven more parts known as the seven trumpets. These seals and trumpets take up all of chapters 6-11 and because I believe they encompass an entire overview of history from beginning to end, they are all that I will be dealing with in this exercise. The subsequent chapters I believe are more detailed examinations of the things that will come about within that overview.

We begin with the infamous four horsemen, which are reveled as the first four seals are broken on the scroll. The first is a white horse its rider has a crown and a bow and is sent forth conquering and to conquer, the second is a red horse its rider has a great sword and he goes forth taking peace from the earth that they should kill one another. The third is a black horse its rider has a set of scales and he sells wheat and barley but hordes the oil and wine. The fourth horse is a pale horse and his rider is called death. Him and his followers go forth killing with sword, famine, pestilence and the beast of the earth.

Now there have been many interpretations of these symbols the most common of course is that they stand for the false prophet, war, greed, and death and it is assumed that they are all things that shall appear in the “end times”. I however have come to see them a different way. I propose that they could represent a model of development that starts in the past, and highlights the things that might be common to an emerging sentient life form. In short it is a time line.

The white horse with his crown and bow represent the innocent beginnings of hominids. Blessed with his crown of intelligence and his ability to make complex tools like the bow. He then begins to have an edge on conquering his environment. With newfound abilities of hunting, shelter and controlling fire he is able to spread across continents and explode in population.

Enter the red horse and his great weapon of intelligence. He may bring us a couple million years down the road to a place in our history where Homo erectus finds himself pitted against Homo sapiens in a battle for limited resources and the rights to further populate the world. This is the time when his survival instincts are first focused not on his environment but on his fellow man, that they should kill one another.

Eventually we are lead to the dawning of civilization where a black horse represents a dark turning point in human nature. With all of our needs being easily met over abundance changes our survival instincts to pure greed. We begin to covet the finer things in life and cheating and stealing grow in proportion to the have’s and have not’s that will stay with us for the rest of our journey.

As this new greed builds empires the pale horse of death along with his followers begin to evolve the art of war itself. Man soon finds the powers to destroy crops, spread disease, and domesticate large numbers of animals. All for the sake of expanding his empires and his own glory.

Oddly the fifth seal seems to fall out of context with the rest of the seals and trumpets. But its significance is important to describing these things as a time line because it seems to be the marker for were John is within this time line. When this seal is opened John is shown the souls of all those that have died in the past for the word of God and when they cry out to know when judgment will be delivered they are told to rest yet awhile longer until all that will parish in the future should be fulfilled. It seems to have no other relevance other than time. (It did serve however as the thing that sparked my imagination to view this book in the way that I now do)

The sixth seal I believe brings us to what might be the most significant thing man has done thus far! While he begins by describing something that bears an incredible resemblance to carpet bombing (stars falling like figs from a shaken tree, shaking the ground and filling the sky with smoke) He ends it with a mushroom cloud (splitting the sky like a scroll) moving mountains and inlands out of there places. Causing humans to hide within caves and inside the rocks of mountains. The dawning of the nuclear age surely must be a pivotal moment in the history of any planets sentient life.


The SEVENTH SEAL is divided into seven more parts (the seven trumpets). The first four again grouped together, all have an ecological theme. The burning up of grass and trees. The poisoning of both sea and fresh water and air pollution.
The last three called the three woes may contain more detailed predictions of an impending global political view. The first seems to imply an ideology that is akin to our modern day U.N. peace keeping policies. I.E. keeping sovereign nations at arms length, trying to establish peace without imposing any kind of internal rules for human rights or organizational polices. When that fails the second woe brings on an era of mandatory polices possibly leading to an established one-world order. (pardon the pun)

[Demonskates]

I wonder. I am now a christian, but could not God have made evolution?
Mabey its the ways and means for life to form and work. he does things in his own time. evoloution makes sense to me, but i wonder if it was not implemeted by God to create and spred life.

[logicpolice]

I wonder. I am now a christian, but could not God have made evolution?
Mabey its the ways and means for life to form and work. he does things in his own time. evoloution makes sense to me, but i wonder if it was not implemeted by God to create and spred life.

I'd say you were on the right track. Life is what it is and I think that trying to denigh that we can learn about our reality is futile. As a pantheist our views on what God really is may differ alot, but I just chalk that up to an individuals need to define his own concepts of life.:2thumbs:

what do you think of my metaphor?

[UVsaturated]

I wonder. I am now a christian, but could not God have made evolution?
Mabey its the ways and means for life to form and work. he does things in his own time. evoloution makes sense to me, but i wonder if it was not implemeted by God to create and spred life.

Certainly creation could include evolution and it can also include a creation that only exists the moment we are conscious of our existence. In other words, evolution based on natural laws could also just be an illusion - a clever trick to make us think we've been around a while.

Like Jesus used to say, that Sabbath is made for man, not man made for the Sabbath. What this can be interpreted as is that he was saying that man is the master of the law, not the law to be a master of man. IMHO, if I honor and give credence to the theory of evolution (or any law), I am making it my master. I am saying that I am subjugate to the law, where Jesus states that the law (Sabbath) was made for man.

Therefore, I feel that the concept of human history, despite plenty of scientific evidence, can also be explained by the idea that we are living in a 3D hologram, a matrix, a kick-ass version of the Sims, (otherwise known as the false prophet who deceives the world with lying signs and wonders).
:grin

[logicpolice]

a clever trick to make us think we've been around a while.
what would be the point of this clever trick? why would you need to create a matrix to live in to shelter yourself from science? what is it you are trying to preserve by doing so?

if I honor and give credence to the theory of evolution (or any law), I am making it my master. If natural law says you can't run through cement walls (I,m guessing that you can't) how is that not your master?
Even the matrix had a reality outside the matrix.

Dose'nt it make more cense to modify our understanding of what God has said as we learn ever more about the reality he has given us ? Take a look at this.

1~In the beginning God created space and matter
2~Matter was formless, void and dark, and expanding outward into space.
3~Then God said let there be light and photons appeared and the universe lit up.
4~And God saw that light was good and separated matter from dark matter.
5~And God called the matter light and the dark matter he called night and there was lightness and darkness day one.

6~Then God said let the expanse separate into clumps of matter.
7~ And God made the expanse and separated galaxy from galaxy
8~And God called the expanse the universe and there was lightness and darkness day two.

9~Then God said let the matter be gathered together to form planets and stars and it was so.
10~And God called the dry land earth and the waters he call seas and God saw that it was good.
11~Then God said let the earth sprout amino acids and let them form Chains and become self-replicating RNA, and it was so.
12~and the earth brought forth RNA replicating after it’s kind And DNA after it’s kind and bacteria and algae’s after their kind, And God saw that it was good.
13~and there was lightness and there was darkness day three.

14~Then God said let there be comets and asteroids in the heavens, And let them impact the earth to form signs in the heavens for years, Decades and eons.
15~and they brought forth the moon in the heavens to shine it’s light on the earth. And it was so.
16~And God had made the two great lights, the greater to rule the day
And the lesser to rule the night, and the stars shone through the dust.
17~ And God had placed them in heaven to give the light of life on earth
18~And to govern the night and day of the earth and God saw that it was good.
19~and there was lightness and darkness day four.

20~Then God said let the waters swarm with living creatures and let them leave the waters into the open air.
21~and God created the great sea monsters and dinosaurs and every living creature that moves from which the waters swarmed, everything after its kind and God saw that it was good.
22~ and God blessed them all and said be fruitful and multiply in the seas and across the earth.
23~ and there was lightness and darkness day five.

24~Then God said let the earth bring forth mammals and insects and all the beast of the earth, each after it’s kind, and it was so.
25 And God had made the mammals after their king and everything that creeps on the ground after it’s kind and God saw that it was good.
26~Then God said let Us make man in Our image according to Our likeness and let them rule over all the fish, mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, micro organisms and all beast over the earth.
27~And God created man in his image, male and female he created them
28~And God blessed them and said to them be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and rule over all that moves on the earth.
29~then God said behold I have given you every plant and tree that yields it’s seed for your food.
30~And to every beast and bird and everything that has life I have given green plants for food an it was so.
31~And God saw that it was good and there was lightness and darkness day six
day seven-vacation

[Beatnik Bob]

When I look at a road map of the United States I don’t see a scare on Gods green earth caused by humans, rather I see the planet wide development of a neural network. Capable of giving the planet a form of self-awareness. Within it is the capacity to understand, catalog and even manipulate all of its life sustaining systems, biology, geology and all the symbiotic relationships therein.

I like your idea about humans being nuerons and all that collective symbiotic stuff, logicpolice, I really do. But it is a theory that is really easy to dislike, as in people dont want to be a cell in a huge body, especially people with slightly antisocial tendancies who just want to be left alone, myself among them. And it seems strange because unlike a human brain, the earths humans dont all think and act equally. This is to say that in a brain all the nuerons are capable of prossessing the same kind of things, and have the same kind of capacities and are all fairly equal in their power. But unlike this, the earths humans, or nuerons so to speak, dont all use their brains in the same efficiency. Some people like Einstien want to learn the secrets behind light, MOST nuerons would prefer to spend their days doing stupid superficial tasks like working in a factory of some sort. So as you can see, the earths nuerons are not all equal, and in actuality, there are a small few that actually strive to learn.

But I like your post, I really do. You choose to use the 3 pound thing in your skull, and I respect that.


The white horse with his crown and bow represent the innocent beginnings of hominids. Blessed with his crown of intelligence and his ability to make complex tools like the bow. He then begins to have an edge on conquering his environment. With newfound abilities of hunting...

Or it could simply mean HUMANS were, in our beginning years, blessed with intelligence. Because also the bow part seems a bit strange, because when that book was writen/spoken, bows weren't primitive, because people still used them, so I dont think theyd use a bow to symbolize primitive tools, because in those days bows were modern. If they wanted to portray something primitive and inefficient, they might show a fist.
I also note that bows were invented for the sole sake of hunting and gathering food, or fighting maybe. So I wouldnt consider hunting a newfound edge on a mans environment.
Basically, the first seal doesnt have to be about hominids, and makes more sense when its not.

And yes, its all conjecture anyway, so we might as well sit around and discuss it.

[logicpolice]

First off thank you Beatnik for the respect. I can already tell that it will be mutual.

Of course humans as neurons is just an analogy and I wouldn’t really expect them to behave in the same manner. I do understand your point however and the current discontinuity among humans seems hopeless at times. Maybe the best way for me to explain is with another analogy. While every wildebeest may have his own quirky personality the overall herd mentality’s need for survival will force him to migrate with the rest across the Serengeti every year. I believe that our own free will is limited to some degree. Even as man was being created he was destined to build cities, form governments, advance technologies and even one day formulate that infamous one world system.

As for the bow thing I think that “primitive” wasn’t really the issue. Just the fact that he could make tools and control fire and make clothing. The bow in reality might not have even appeared till some where between the red and black horses.

[UVsaturated]

what would be the point of this clever trick? why would you need to create a matrix to live in to shelter yourself from science? what is it you are trying to preserve by doing so?


The purpose of the matrix serves as a testimony to the world of the validity of the second coming. Have you ever wondered why Jesus just died and promised to return at a later time to finish what he started? Why did he not just wrap everything up 2000 years ago? The reason is he has left his agenda to be completed by the 144,000 mentioned in Revelations. They are in the world and rely on faith as their covenant with God, yet they must be a part of the world and endure the human experience with all its lies and pitfalls in order to be judged righteously as sons of God. The purpose of the matrix is necessary also as a medium to work with for all time. Think of it as God's canvas or stage.



If natural law says you can't run through cement walls (I,m guessing that you can't) how is that not your master?
Even the matrix had a reality outside the matrix.

I did not say that we are always free from being under the law. There is a time in infinity called the creation where it is allowable for man to be under the law in order that all things be complete. This is where all the manifestations of evil must and will occur as an expression of any and all possibilities. This is where God creates a boulder that he cannot lift.

The reality outside of the matrix exists, but without the matrix it is pointless such as a bunch of people in Heaven praising God in hymns and songs for eternity. The praise comes from those outside the matrix making the matrix into heaven on earth. That is the true worship about to be revealed. Jesus cut his task short in order to give the joy to others, for he even believed that to be the greatest one must be the servant to others. Likewise, the 144,000 will not keep the world for their inheritance, but give it back to the world. The only change will be that they will have the power to alter the matrix into anything the heart desires in purity.



Dose'nt it make more cense to modify our understanding of what God has said as we learn ever more about the reality he has given us ? Take a look at this.

1~In the beginning God created space and matter
2~Matter was formless, void and dark, and expanding outward into space.
3~Then God said let there be light and photons appeared and the universe lit up.
4~And God saw that light was good and separated matter from dark matter.
5~And God called the matter light and the dark matter he called night and there was lightness and darkness day one.

6~Then God said let the expanse separate into clumps of matter.
7~ And God made the expanse and separated galaxy from galaxy
8~And God called the expanse the universe and there was lightness and darkness day two.

9~Then God said let the matter be gathered together to form planets and stars and it was so.
10~And God called the dry land earth and the waters he call seas and God saw that it was good.
11~Then God said let the earth sprout amino acids and let them form Chains and become self-replicating RNA, and it was so.
12~and the earth brought forth RNA replicating after it’s kind And DNA after it’s kind and bacteria and algae’s after their kind, And God saw that it was good.
13~and there was lightness and there was darkness day three.

14~Then God said let there be comets and asteroids in the heavens, And let them impact the earth to form signs in the heavens for years, Decades and eons.
15~and they brought forth the moon in the heavens to shine it’s light on the earth. And it was so.
16~And God had made the two great lights, the greater to rule the day
And the lesser to rule the night, and the stars shone through the dust.
17~ And God had placed them in heaven to give the light of life on earth
18~And to govern the night and day of the earth and God saw that it was good.
19~and there was lightness and darkness day four.

20~Then God said let the waters swarm with living creatures and let them leave the waters into the open air.
21~and God created the great sea monsters and dinosaurs and every living creature that moves from which the waters swarmed, everything after its kind and God saw that it was good.
22~ and God blessed them all and said be fruitful and multiply in the seas and across the earth.
23~ and there was lightness and darkness day five.

24~Then God said let the earth bring forth mammals and insects and all the beast of the earth, each after it’s kind, and it was so.
25 And God had made the mammals after their king and everything that creeps on the ground after it’s kind and God saw that it was good.
26~Then God said let Us make man in Our image according to Our likeness and let them rule over all the fish, mammals, birds, amphibians, reptiles, micro organisms and all beast over the earth.
27~And God created man in his image, male and female he created them
28~And God blessed them and said to them be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and rule over all that moves on the earth.
29~then God said behold I have given you every plant and tree that yields it’s seed for your food.
30~And to every beast and bird and everything that has life I have given green plants for food an it was so.
31~And God saw that it was good and there was lightness and darkness day six
day seven-vacation

It is certainly possible for evolution to have occurred. But it isn't necessary to believe in an historical certainty to have faith today. In fact, it does not prove anything about what Jesus taught to know either way if we existed for eons or a short time. But I'd like to think that this scripture supports the concept of the time we live in as the only time that actually does exist (now):

The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, now is not, and yet will come. This calls for a mind with wisdom.

Notice it is talking of the last days kingdom described as the beast as something that existed once, isn't now, and is still yet to come. How can a kingdom fulfill this sentence, for it already happened, and will never happen in the future because it is always now, and it certainly doesn't seem to be happening now or is it?

This tricky statement is describing time as not being linear. This is why it states it calls for a mind with wisdom. Jesus said the same thing about our condition that the past cannot be changed, the future is not yet so why worry? We live as always in the now which is part of eternity. The illusion is time and the matrix.

I don't mean to offend you or debate, but this is just my understanding.

[logicpolice]

I don't mean to offend you or debate, but this is just my understanding. Well thank you for your perspective and understanding.
It is weird though, I have always considered myself to be number 143,999 and its my job to find some one to fill that last spot. But seriously I guess even though we may be on roads miles apart we both seem to be headed north and when we get there we'll both probably be in shock and awe.:doh:

[UVsaturated]

Well thank you for your perspective and understanding.
It is weird though, I have always considered myself to be number 143,999 and its my job to find some one to fill that last spot. But seriously I guess even though we may be on roads miles apart we both seem to be headed north and when we get there we'll both probably be in shock and awe.:doh:

I think we are all headed in the same direction. But, for the reuniting back to God, there must be division first. It should be no surprise that the entire world will be at odds with itself up until the edge of destruction, then we will all know something for sure!

[lazserus]

First off, I think this is a great thread with some very intuitive associations and links between evolution and Genesis.


Certainly creation could include evolution and it can also include a creation that only exists the moment we are conscious of our existence. In other words, evolution based on natural laws could also just be an illusion - a clever trick to make us think we've been around a while.
And for what purpose? Aside from the absolute lack in scientific comprehension Creationists use broken logic to promote their beliefs. The list could probably fill paper over a mile long. I won't get into all of the devastated fundamentalist logic, but will observe a few items.

Creationists tend withdraw to God making things illusions when all else fails. For 150 years the geological, radioactive, and biological evidence has shoved Creationists' desperate attempts over the edge. Because ALL evidence supports evolution, the Creationists have to say God is just lying to us; he is making things look older than they really are. Why bother? Why would a benevolent deity deceive man in such a way? If He is deceiving man in such way then he isn't benevolent or forgiving, he is more like a 9 year old boy with a magnifying glass and a slingshot. Torment. If you use all of the Creationist logic and put it on bread, it equals torment. We are a practical joke.

There is absolutely NO need for an "illusion" to make things look older than they are. That would be quite an elaborate ploy. What's so hard about accepting that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old and life on this rock evolved? You have to understand that all Creationist arguments come down to one thing: Man was the reason the ENTIRE universe and everything was created. Egotism is one thing, but egotistical anthropocentrism? Shame on anyone that thinks that way.

Every single bit of scientific data from the past 200 years supports an old earth and biological evolution. What people just can NOT grasp is that a 13.7 billion year old universe and biological evolution on this planet can reasonably coincide with Christian worship. Christian fundamentalists that challenge and old earth and evolution are basically saying God is too impotent and incompetent to make things work natutally without cheating. Fundamentalism is an absolute disgrace to the concept of an intelligent deity. And if the Old Testament god was around today, he'd obliterate the Homo sapiens sapiens species for such.

[UVsaturated]

You bring up a lot of good points Lazserus. Of course the athiests are correct in their reasoning about fundamentalists who cling to the young earth/7 day creation as lying to themselves in order to believe in God. That is probably 99% of the reason fundies believe in a creation, because to deny it tears down one of their foundations of their belief system.

This is why I said that evolution is possible. Genesis accounts for other people being around at the time of Adam and Eve, so obviously the Genesis account is not to be taken literally. It must use figurative language or a spiritual language to take into account certain things. For example, it describes in two separate passages, two creation accounts that contradict each other with no explanation why they are different. This is just one example. A female being made from a man is another. There are many conclusions as to what is actually meant by the writers of Genesis, but my personal belief is that it is the alpha-omega story and we are actual living in the creation where the man is asleep about to give birth to the woman (spiritually speaking of course).

My reasoning that the past is an illusion is based on a few concepts. One is the debate of when the beginning of life actually occurs. This is the abortion/pro life debate. Some say at conception. Some say after a tri-mester, etc. From my own experience, I cannot remember before I was 3 years old, so to me life began when I became conscious of me, not September 10, 1969.

Second, the Genesis story of the other people around at the time of Genesis tells me that at some point in time, beings which looked and acted human were not called man and woman. Man and woman in a spiritual sense means something entirely different than if you have a sausage between your legs or not. I tend to think that humans before Adam and Eve could have been classified as animals by God even though they looked human. Who knows? According to the order of creation, the animals came before man. Jesus calls his self the lamb of God, which tells me that man had yet to arrive. I sincerely believe the creation story is actually the end days story.

Also, Jesus instruction was to separate spiritual teaching away from worldly teaching. They simply do not mix and cannot be used to prove the other. I do not see evolution proving or disproving God, yet trying to take the Genesis story and apply scientific reasoning to it does not work either. Jesus said, give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's. He could have just as easily said, give to science what is scientific. It would have had essentially the same underlying meaning. Logic and reasoning belong to science, not to faith in God and with good reason. God's plan is to create a hybrid of sorts - a man/God. The right to rule as such cannot righteously be given to a created being without that being experiencing the weakness of being a physical being. Part of that experience is to not know God, having no proof. In this way, when they do become God's again and walk among the people, no one can logically say (not even an athiest) that they have no right to be subject to them. It would be like hiring a pedophile to babysit your children otherwise.

The debate of evolution/creationism detracts from knowing God how Jesus recommended we should - through faith (believing in what we cannot see). Believers who build their faith in God on worldly principles lie to themselves and have not seriously questioned the basis for the same. They are not accepting God as a child would, but are making acceptance of God conditional of proof, which defies the very nature of what they profess they are believing in.

About science supporting the old earth and evolution, so be it. A matrix would could reproduce the same. It would be like saying the illusion supports the illusion. Well go figure!

Besides, part of the false prophets lying signs and wonders are showing us that the matrix is actually the reality of the physical world. When the physical world can manifest virtual realities, whether they be on computers, television, and cinema, that tells me spiritually that the higher reality is very much the same.

[logicpolice]

Thank you very much for your vote of confidence Lazserus.

I think you are the first Reverend that hasn’t looked at me a little cockeyed :blink: when I’m spouting my personal rhetoric. As a reverend and someone who would know these books better than most, I would be very very interested in getting your opinions on a few things.

First, in the Genesis story God seems to be a singularity from day one through six until he first contemplates making man, then he becomes an us. i.e. let us make man in our image. What do you make of this?
And secondly have you ever encountered any ware the idea that the horsemen might represent the past?


http://home.earthlink.net/~hurfordlh1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ava.jpg
The world is alive and it owens you

[logicpolice]

UVSATURATED I think you've been getting too much son.
(Sorry I couldn’t resist that one)
I'm trying to understand this but it appears that your saying, everything that looks like reality is really a forgery and that when you become a God and walk among the people in the forgery they will be subject to you for knowing its a illusion?

http://home.earthlink.net/~hurfordlh1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ava.jpg
The world is alive and it owns you

[Raptor Witness]

Logic Policeman,

Those are interesting concepts, and up until the Book of Revelation, I agreed with most of them. Regarding the meaning of the four horsemen and this and that, I disagree with your concept of what actually amounts to divine punishment. You seem to have missed the whole point of the book. The Book of Revelation isn't a synopsis of human existence. The Book of Revelation is the book of the end of mankind as we know it. The scroll which no one could open but Jesus Christ, is the title deed to the earth. Jesus didn't just win us on the cross, he won the earth as well. Once he takes title to the earth, He begins to take it back from the one who now has it in his possession, and it's going to get so ugly that there won't be any flesh saved alive unless that battle is ended. The Devil isn't going easy. Have you forgotten the meeting in the desert, where the Devil offered the very thing which God the Father gives Jesus via that little scroll in His hand? That's what the Book of Revelation is all about. This is a war over the earth and its dominion. This is a war over who's going to be in charge. We were given the earth to rule as we saw fit, and with the Devil's help, we are well on our way to destroying it. Would you argue that we can save ourselves?

[lazserus]

My reasoning that the past is an illusion is based on a few concepts. One is the debate of when the beginning of life actually occurs. This is the abortion/pro life debate. Some say at conception. Some say after a tri-mester, etc. From my own experience, I cannot remember before I was 3 years old, so to me life began when I became conscious of me, not September 10, 1969.
Well put, but irrelevant. You're mixing two fights into one. The issue of abortion has absolutely NO relevance to the beginning of life on this planet, unless you're arguing about consciousness and cognition. This is not the thread for debating the abortion issue, but I'll have you know I'm fairly strict on it.

The beginning of life on this planet is theorized to have been roughly 3.5 billion years ago. At least that is the age most accepted, while there are more that think as far back as 4 billion years, just 500 million after the planet's formation. It matters not for this debate, I don't think, unless we're arguing the young/old earth.


Second, the Genesis story of the other people around at the time of Genesis tells me that at some point in time, beings which looked and acted human were not called man and woman...
Forgive me for saying, but this is breaching arrogance. The story of Genesis within Christianity has been altered constantly to fit the times, as recently as the 19th century when the Mormon denomination birthed. You have to take it with a grain of saltHowever, Genesis is probably one of the least edited in the Bible, but it was edited. To get to the point, why should Christianity's Genesis tell the true tale? Why can it not be Islam's? Or the pagans before Judaism? The very fact that you would shut yourself off from other possibilities is arrogance, and ignores the faiths outside Christianity.


Also, Jesus instruction was to separate spiritual teaching away from worldly teaching.
You may have a hard time accepting this, but Jesus was traditionally agnostic and expressed worldly knowledge. He meant to separate the Jews from the confines of contemporary Judaism.


Jesus said, give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's. He could have just as easily said, give to science what is scientific. It would have had essentially the same underlying meaning.
Perhaps it's all within interpretation. There are also historical factors to keep in mind before interpreting from text alone. Rome controlled the Middle East during the time of Christ, and Caesar had been dead for some 40+ years. It's likely that the comment (though not a real quote) was meant for the Romans to have their faith and for the Jews and Christ's disciples to have their own. The Romans were notorious for enslaving Jews for labor, but they never forced their religion on them, just as the Persian Empire never forced theirs on those they conquered before.


The debate of evolution/creationism detracts from knowing God how Jesus recommended we should - through faith (believing in what we cannot see).
I disagree. Jesus was an agnostic by nature, a teacher. He challenged his followers to think outside the oppressive rule of their local faiths and masters. Thus Jesus would embrace evolution as long as it was not shroud in dogmatic static. Jesus taught people to think outside the box. He allowed interpretation to be left to the individual, like a true agnostic. I don't believe Jesus created Christianity, but his followers did through their own interpretation of his teachings. Naturally this is all conjecture at best considering there are no relics to even support Jesus's existence, only indirect conclusions.


Thank you very much for your vote of confidence Lazserus.

I think you are the first Reverend that hasn’t looked at me a little cockeyed :blink: when I’m spouting my personal rhetoric. As a reverend and someone who would know these books better than most, I would be very very interested in getting your opinions on a few things.
I appreciate it, but don't let the title fool you. I'm no theologian and I'm not an ordained minister of any Christian church. I was raised in a Christian environment and I study the faith intently, but I'm no authority. I'll at least try to answer your questions.


First, in the Genesis story God seems to be a singularity from day one through six until he first contemplates making man, then he becomes an us. i.e. let us make man in our image. What do you make of this?
The Christian Bible is classified as literature, not non-fiction. You can look that up anywhere and any authority, religious or not, will tell you it's literature. With that done with, I would say that man requires an understanding of God, thus he needs to make God more like himself. You can't understand something you don't understand. I know that seems ridiculous, but can you understand a beetle? Can you understand a flounder? Ultimately the answer would be "no". We can study them over time and deduce behavior and so forth, but we can never truly understand them without associating them with ourselves.

Christianity is relevant here because in order for it to flourish it must be related to things we can understand. When the Bible says God created us in his image, I personally believe we created God in our image...I mean the concept we value. Therefore the object of God becomes "us" or a "He" because it is how mankind understands it.


And secondly have you ever encountered any ware the idea that the horsemen might represent the past?
The book of Revelations is a very sinister part of the Bible. It is wrought with tales of horror and destruction. Revelations is probably the most revealing part of the Bible because it is very significant and true. You have to remember that Revelations was not written by the same people of the ither gospels. It was written by a man tormented by Rome and a man who may have possibly be consumed by insanity. The latter is probably untrue, but if you look at the time period and match it with the man who wrote the gospel then things may fall into place. Much of Revelations is associated with the Roman Empire, around the time of Nero.

[logicpolice]

Would you argue that we can save ourselves?
No, not at all, much like you I think it indicates an impending war that is cut short at the sounding of the seventh trumpet. Outside help is on the way!

http://home.earthlink.net/~hurfordlh1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ava.jpg
The world is alive and it owns you

[UVsaturated]

UVSATURATED I think you've been getting too much son.
(Sorry I couldn’t resist that one)

Well, it is a lofty concept, and I have been contemplating God for at least 30+ years independent of traditional teaching so it is hard to swallow.



I'm trying to understand this but it appears that your saying, everything that looks like reality is really a forgery and that when you become a God and walk among the people in the forgery they will be subject to you for knowing its a illusion?

Only half correct. The lesser is not subject to the greater because the greater knows more than the lesser, but because the will of God has predestined for a some to be the lesser and a some to be the greater. Your personal effort makes no difference on what your position will be in the pecking order. I have thought about this quite a bit too. I humbly say that I feel honored to believe that I know something that is hidden to a lot of other people, but like Paul? or John? - I don't remember which wrote about it - there is no way to know until the moment it happens who are the chosen ones and who is not. One should not say, I will ascend to heaven or you will descend to the abyss, for like Christ stated at the crucifixtion, it is up to the Father who sits at the right or left of the throne. Until the chosen ones actually have their God-hood returned to them, no one (myself included) can say who they are no matter how much we would like to believe that we feel worthy of being one of them just because we have been given the gift of prophecy, which is the spirit of Christ.

About reality. The spiritual world is infinite, unlimited with anything possible. The very nature of it means there are no rules or laws in the spiritual world. The only way to limit the spiritual world with rules is to create a subordinate world that is predefined. The physical world exists within the spiritual world by a veil. What we call a reality is not really fake, but just an altered reality of what the true nature of reality is. Calling it fake is like saying that Disney World is fake. It may not represent what we know to be true, but most people for the time they are there forget where they came from and always hate to leave.

The reason the world will be subject to a God who lives among them is plainly because that is how it is created. It is God's intention to share in being God, for actually God is a servant, not a master. Because of this, God divided into equally powerful divisions, yet each one would have been the same in thought. The creation was conceived so that each division could experience being God apart from the other divisions as unique experiences. This is why the disciples taught about the body of Christ being one body with many parts, some for glorious uses and some for hidden uses. He was making an analogy of the division of God.

Another aspect of this is that whether people want to be subject to God or not is really not up to them. Most people would scoff at this because they have been so long taught the concept of free will, which I too found to be a stumbling block to true faith. Most people are also trained to believe that everything is done in the external world. The sons of God will be able to exist without the void between the physical and spiritual planes, meaning that they can manipulate the physical from the spiritual side and also conjoin with the souls without them knowing to make them think and do anything they desire. The only true illusion will be the one of experiencing life in a very limitless environment that still for all appearances has the attributes of this world, when in fact it will be highly controlled to offer Heaven on Earth. After the end of days is when this transition takes place.

[Raptor Witness]

No, not at all, much like you I think it indicates an impending war that is cut short at the sounding of the seventh trumpet. Outside help is on the way!

http://home.earthlink.net/~hurfordlh1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ava.jpg
The world is alive and it owns you
I like your arguments generally, and we need some good thinkers like you, here. You should easily be able to sway a few pagans with your humanistic approach to God's wrath. :doh:

I used to compromise on humanism too until I realized, after hurricane Katrina, that God isn't going to put up with our crap much longer. The cup of wrath is being passed as we speak, and the Beast and the False Prophet are coming out of the shadows.

[UVsaturated]

Well put, but irrelevant. You're mixing two fights into one. The issue of abortion has absolutely NO relevance to the beginning of life on this planet, unless you're arguing about consciousness and cognition. This is not the thread for debating the abortion issue, but I'll have you know I'm fairly strict on it.

I did not bring up abortion as a debate here because I want to debate it, but rather to support the reasons I believe historical evidences of proof is meaningless to me. As for the rest of your post, I have to take some time to respond as there is a lot there. I just wanted to single out this point to so you would take no offense in that matter.

[UVsaturated]

To get to the point, why should Christianity's Genesis tell the true tale? Why can it not be Islam's? Or the pagans before Judaism? The very fact that you would shut yourself off from other possibilities is arrogance, and ignores the faiths outside Christianity.

I am actually shutting myself off from the Christian version altogether. I care not about the order and length of creation because no two versions can be correct. I choose to believe we are living in that story. I do not look at is as past tense but in the now. In this way I am not caught up in the controversy of having to prove how it all actually went down to support my belief in God. It saves a lot of time and effort that could be spent on God's work: love God and thy neighbor.



You may have a hard time accepting this, but Jesus was traditionally agnostic and expressed worldly knowledge. He meant to separate the Jews from the confines of contemporary Judaism.

That is intriguing to me. I had not considered that aspect of the Christ, but I have doubts that he was entirely agnostic. He had to be in part, but not entirely. If he were entirely an agnostic he would not have known he was the Son of God, for he would not have any basis of knowing that. I think when you say "traditionally", I would think IMO that most people might believe that. I do not. I think he had a lot of confidence in what he believed. As for the worldly knowledge, he often spoke in parables using things comprehended as common which have significant spiritual meaning behind them. The actual connotations would have meant one thing to the average listener, and the true message to the true Jew.



Perhaps it's all within interpretation. There are also historical factors to keep in mind before interpreting from text alone. Rome controlled the Middle East during the time of Christ, and Caesar had been dead for some 40+ years. It's likely that the comment (though not a real quote) was meant for the Romans to have their faith and for the Jews and Christ's disciples to have their own. The Romans were notorious for enslaving Jews for labor, but they never forced their religion on them, just as the Persian Empire never forced theirs on those they conquered before.

So it was then and still today, don't you think?



I disagree. Jesus was an agnostic by nature, a teacher. He challenged his followers to think outside the oppressive rule of their local faiths and masters. Thus Jesus would embrace evolution as long as it was not shroud in dogmatic static. Jesus taught people to think outside the box. He allowed interpretation to be left to the individual, like a true agnostic. I don't believe Jesus created Christianity, but his followers did through their own interpretation of his teachings. Naturally this is all conjecture at best considering there are no relics to even support Jesus's existence, only indirect conclusions.

Again, being agnostic does not support the fact that he claimed to be the Son of God. If he did not know the will of God on some point fully, then he could not faithfully make that specific claim, but would have to say "I am not sure on that, for I am human - even if in part". It took a great leap of faith to claim what he did and die for it when he had opportunity to back out if he felt he was agnostic. He even claims that it was God's will that he had to die and that if it didn't happen the rocks would cry out. How is that for not being agnostic and being subjective to doubts of worldly knowledge? You may believe what you wish, but I have a hard time making the written statements agree with an agnostic point of view.

[lazserus]

I am actually shutting myself off from the Christian version altogether. I care not about the order and length of creation because no two versions can be correct. I choose to believe we are living in that story. I do not look at is as past tense but in the now. In this way I am not caught up in the controversy of having to prove how it all actually went down to support my belief in God. It saves a lot of time and effort that could be spent on God's work: love God and thy neighbor.
I applaud you for this. Most are too concerned with literal interpretations to consider the meaning behind the teachings. The big problem is that people tend not to think for themselves, but act as sheep. Therefore they tend to interpret through the easiest means: The literal path.


That is intriguing to me. I had not considered that aspect of the Christ, but I have doubts that he was entirely agnostic. He had to be in part, but not entirely. If he were entirely an agnostic he would not have known he was the Son of God, for he would not have any basis of knowing that. I think when you say "traditionally", I would think IMO that most people might believe that. I do not. I think he had a lot of confidence in what he believed. As for the worldly knowledge, he often spoke in parables using things comprehended as common which have significant spiritual meaning behind them. The actual connotations would have meant one thing to the average listener, and the true message to the true Jew.
I think if you understood the original meaning behind agnosticism you would not find this so hard to believe. Modern agnosticism is not the same as the original concept. Agnosticism today is practiced incorrectly and, in my opinion, actually spits on the beauty of the ideal. Agnosticism is based around teaching and learning. It's a student/teacher relationship within one's self. The teacher is the student and the student the teacher. It's very similar to Eastern philosophies. In the case of Christ, he would be challenging the institutionalism of Judaism of his time, but not as an anarchist. He approached it as a philosopher. A Buddha, if you will.


Again, being agnostic does not support the fact that he claimed to be the Son of God. If he did not know the will of God on some point fully, then he could not faithfully make that specific claim, but would have to say "I am not sure on that, for I am human - even if in part". It took a great leap of faith to claim what he did and die for it when he had opportunity to back out if he felt he was agnostic. He even claims that it was God's will that he had to die and that if it didn't happen the rocks would cry out. How is that for not being agnostic and being subjective to doubts of worldly knowledge? You may believe what you wish, but I have a hard time making the written statements agree with an agnostic point of view.
You said, "I am actually shutting myself off from the Christian version altogether." But you're still thinking like a Christian here. Has it ever occurred to you that Christ might never have admitted or accepted that he was the son of a great deity? Have you considered the possibility that he was immortalized after his death by his followers? Much like Hercules has been immortalized, or Achilles. The only flaw that you keep dwelling on so far is Jesus acknowledging that he is the son of God. Make note that any version of the bible has no gospels of Jesus, but only gospels of those that followed his teachings, most of which came long after his death.

I'm not intending to warp your beliefs, but merely help expand them by offering different perspectives. If you're shutting off Christianity then you may want to consider ceasing to think like a Christian. Ultimately you must think for youself and let no one taint your beliefs. However, you must also keep your mind open to accept possibilities. Faith and philosophy are not the same things.

[Cartesiantheater]

I should first point out that I am a firm believer that the world is 4.5 billion years old and that evolution is a reality. I should also point out that I firmly believe all life that has evolved on this planet has done so out of a preexisting pattern that is congruent through out this universe. That is to say that just like an apple seed can be said to have a predestined future to become an apple tree, so it is that this planet has a naturally occurring predestiny to sprout life that culminates into intelligent life



You know, I believe something very similar to this, although in my mind the driving force is natural selection and the laws of physics. (that is, life is garaunteed to crop up somewhere, but more often then not there will be no life- niether is better than the other, although life may hold the key to extending the life of the cosmos as we know it [through technology, perhaps]... but why?])

I often say that the laws of physics go about their business as if they intend to.


I REALLY liked your Genisis bit. That is genius.

[MagnetMan]

When I look at a road map of the United States I don’t see a scare on Gods green earth caused by humans, rather I see the planet wide development of a neural network. Capable of giving the planet a form of self-awareness. Within it is the capacity to understand, catalog and even manipulate all of its life sustaining systems, biology, geology and all the symbiotic relationships therein.
Totally on point! Agrees with de Chardin's Omega theory as well. It also under-scores my own theory in Psyche-Genetics.


Uniquely sentient life gives the planet a chance for its life to escape the confines of its thin atmosphere and spread to other places within the solar system or even its galaxy.

Agreed again!. Our evolution of consciousnsess is an on-going process that has yet to complete its full cycle. We are moving from the naive infancy of our Stone Age to an Age of Cosmic sagehood yet to happen. We are still in our rebellious teens; declaring independence and self-determination; protesting the idea of an authoritarian Godhead; gambling with stocks and bonds on the temple floor of the global estate; playing daring games of Russian roulette with nuclear guns.

If we survive the Armaggeddon of a thermo-nuclear war, I believe we will enter a Nuclear Age of true parenthood and responsibible planet mamagement. Then we will enter a masterful Age as Solar terra formers. After that - sagehood where no more children will be born and our consciousness will become transcendent, and earthly cycle will end, allowing us to spawn out into the universe and unite with the source Being..

[logicpolice]

I often say that the laws of physics go about their business as if they intend to. This is exactly the reason I have come to believe that mans manifestation of God is a metaphor for these same laws of physics. As for the real genius of the Genesis bit if the similarities between the metaphor in the book and the realities we have come to know are indeed purposeful them the credit for it would have to go to the mind or minds that put them there in the first place.

I have always felt that if the religions of the world truly did have validity beyond just social order then they really should reflect the reality we see around us (concerning their analogies of the past and the future). Although I don’t think I’m alone in this there are some obvious logical barriers that would have to be overcome with further explanation.
I think that it is for this reason that not to many would step forward and take it on.

http://home.earthlink.net/~hurfordlh1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ava.jpg

[logicpolice]

Totally on point! Agrees with de Chardin's Omega theory as well. It also under-scores my own theory in Psyche-Genetics.Yes I think it does.


Agreed again!. Our evolution of consciousnsess is an on-going process that has yet to complete its full cycle. We are moving from the naive infancy of our Stone Age to an Age of Cosmic sagehood yet to happen. We are still in our rebellious teens; declaring independence and self-determination; protesting the idea of an authoritarian Godhead; gambling with stocks and bonds on the temple floor of the global estate; playing daring games of Russian roulette with nuclear guns.

If we survive the Armaggeddon of a thermo-nuclear war, I believe we will enter a Nuclear Age of true parenthood and responsibible planet mamagement. Then we will enter a masterful Age as Solar terra formers. After that - sagehood where no more children will be born and our consciousness will become transcendent, and earthly cycle will end, allowing us to spawn out into the universe and unite with the source Being..My brother I was hanging right there with ya till we got to the part about, “ becoming transcendent, and spawning out into the universe to unite with the source Being.”
Could you elaborate on this a little, laymen’s terms please.

http://home.earthlink.net/~hurfordlh1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ava.jpg

[MagnetMan]

Yes I think it does.

My brother I was hanging right there with ya till we got to the part about, “ becoming transcendent, and spawning out into the universe to unite with the source Being.”
Could you elaborate on this a little, laymen’s terms please.

Translocation. Consciousness at least, maybe body too. There is no other way we can beat the speed of light and taste the universe first hand. Can't believe, after the massive investement in our development, we will be left here twiddling our thumbs on the edge of the galaxy for eternity. I want my seat at the center of Galactic Command.