Jesus' Return

[William]

If there is one belief that seems to thread throughout Christian beliefs as commonly shared, it is that of the return of Jesus.

In pondering on this idea, I am left wondering as to the relevance of it as a belief to hold in today's day and age.

I can understand that up to the age of technology and especially this age of information [the information age] such a belief would not have been able to be easily regarded as overly questionable, but with our current knowledge of the universe we can understand that should the promised event happen, people would be more inclined to regard it as explainable in terms of our current knowledge.

What this means is that if an army of beings descended upon the planet, we would naturally understand these as being extraterrestrial.

In regard to that, we would also be less likely to believe any claims that they were our creators in the sense of having to proclaim them as 'gods' and their leader as 'god' or the representative thereof. In this case, Jesus.

If indeed these beings then got about 'cleaning up the world' of the corrupt war-mongering humans in positions of power, and set up a workable system in which parity becomes the normal, and gave peace a chance, there would still be no reason to worship these beings, (or the single leader) as if they were gods.

If we look at it another way - say humans were the ET and did this to another planetary species - would we not simply consider this to be something we decided we ought to do, and discourage the planets people from worshiping us?

Sure, we would not scorn their respect, and their gratefulness for us using our superior technology and power to overcome those who suppressed them and kept them engaged in systems of disparity, but there would be no reason for us to condone, let alone make it a stipulation that they ought worship us as gods.

Yet the belief through Christian doctrine clearly tells us that this is a stipulation, and those who do not agree to it will be separated from those who do.

It seems to me that there would be a problem with today's current population accepting such stipulation on the grounds that the opportunity afforded by the ET allow for the ability to build a system of parity doesn't and shouldn't require any of us worship the ET as gods. If it did, then the only reason they 'saved' us was so that they could become our new masters, and blackmail us with either accepting their terms or going without.

Q: In relation to the above, how would you respond to ET demanding you worship them as gods, and why?

[William]

[Replying to post 53 by Tammy]

Response to part 1

I mentioned no hearsay as a basis for my faith.

You said this Tammy;

My faith in that is based upon evidence; upon what is heard; and also supported by what is written.

What is written and what is heard is hearsay. Therefore you conflate evidence with hearsay.

I still do not see what prompted your comment. Did I not quote from the bible to show you that angels (who serve Christ and God) do not demand worship of themselves and in fact would not accept it?

Are you simply playing games Tammy? In post #2 you said this;

And I am John, the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had shown me these things. But he said to me, “Do not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God!�

So if you were not quoting the bible, what were you quoting?

It is true that I have read about it in the bible, though I tend to take what is written with a grain of salt until or unless my Lord confirms the truth of the matter. But my Lord is alive and as a living being, He also speaks. So yes, He has also spoken of His return.

My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. John 10:27

I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. John 10:16


As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit--just as it has taught you, remain in him. 1John 2:27

I do not believe these things because they are written in a book; I believe them because a) I believe Christ and b) because I too hear the voice of my Lord, as one of His sheep.

And of course there are examples of others having testified to Him speaking to them (as the Spirit) in what is written as well:

The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it." Acts 8:29

**

In Damascus, there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision,

"Ananias!"

"Yes Lord," he answered.

The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight." (Acts 9:10,11... and it continues)

**

There is Peter's vision telling him that he should eat foods that he considered unclean, and then after his vision:

While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit (Christ) said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them." (Acts 10: 9-20)

**

There are of course multiple examples from Paul. The entire book of Revelation is from Christ to John. There is a warning against hardening our hearts if we hear His voice.

As has just been said: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion." Hebrews 3:15

Then of course there are the examples of Abraham, who heard, Noah, who heard, the prophets, who heard, Joseph, who heard, Daniel, who heard, etc, etc. Their faith is based upon the evidence of what they heard.

So all that is from the bible. You are quoting from the bible. You are quoting hearsay.

I asked you "And what is it that makes you believe Christ said anything about his return? Where did you get this information? Did Jesus visit you and tell you? Or,like the rest of us, did you get it from the bible?" this was because you were claiming that you have some kind of extra access to your 'Lord', but when pressed to give details, you revert to the bible and give no extra-biblical details.

It is true that I have read about it in the bible, though I tend to take what is written with a grain of salt until or unless my Lord confirms the truth of the matter.

This is the crux of the matter Tammy. You are claiming by implication that 'your Lord' confirms for you 'the truth of the matter' so in what way does this happen? This is why I asked you;

"Did Jesus visit you and tell you? Or,like the rest of us, did you get it from the bible?"

But my Lord is alive and as a living being, He also speaks. So yes, He has also spoken of His return.

Apart from the bible and in relation to you specifically, how did your Lord speak to you that you know the details of his return?

Also the crux of the matter Tammy - how is it that all of those examples given from the bible stories are counted as true visitations from GOD, rather than from ET/IDEs. Do you see? That is the focus of the OP and the OPQ.

No, follow the logic. You agree that technology would had to have been created, therefore, the power to create technology would not have come FROM technology. The power to create would have been inherent.

Yes?

The logic I follow is this;

GOD is consciousness which has always existed. In this, one cannot say Consciousness is technology, as in "God is Technology."

Anything GOD creates can be seen to be technology.

Thus FORM is technology, even that it is biological or some other 'type' such as inter-dimensional beings. The 'beings' of course represent individual forms.

Technology enables. Without it, one is not able to DO. The forms are like spacesuits which are worn for a specific purpose.

William, go back to the source, the first... and answer these question in that light.

Tammy - my argument is not that The Source is technology but that what is created by The Source is technology.

Not true. We can procreate without the use of tools. Some life procreates asexually. So we can indeed understand creation without the use of tools.

The form is a mechanism Tammy. The human form necessitate two types of form in order to procreate. The human form certainly shouldn't be regarded as NON-technological especially if one is to claim it was created. Indeed, even if one believes in evolution as a mindful creative process, the act of creation is technique. Technology is related to technique and use of tools.
One can see how the human form acts as a tool, a device for further creativity.

That makes no sense William. If technology was created, then it did not need to be developed before creation could occur. Are you saying God could bring 'tools' into being without the use of tools, but not creation?

You are believing that GOD created this universe first? Of course you are not. The tools a GOD used were those things which enabled a GOD to create this universe. A GOD = ET/IDEs - beings who's forms were created.

We can understand GOD as being in a state where creation did not exist.

The creation, sure.

All creation. Not a creation or the creation. All creation.

The bible does not say anything about devices and technology being needed to use the stuff of the universe to create things through. The bible does state that all things came from God through Christ (the Light).

Not so. The story of creation in the bible specifically notes the devices used. "The dust of the earth" was used to create the FORMs. The forms themselves are complex technology. Biological machines. Designed for purpose.

"The light" is a reaction and cannot be seen to exist without "the dark". Light is information and can become knowledge when interpreted correctly.

If you want to push this ET/IDE advanced being - advanced technology theory, why are you trying and use Christ to do so?

That has already been explained to you. If the promised return was to happen, the general consensus as to who these beings are, would be ET/IDE. Our understanding of technology won't allow us to interpret the event as anything magical anymore. Such an event would only be understood as magical by humans who are still to be exposed to the realities of technology.

This is the whole point of the OP and the OPQ Tammy. Humans are no longer in the position to believe in magical events happening from the skies above, Tammy. Those days are gone. The opportunity has passed for any species ET/IDE to show themselves magically and proclaim to be GOD. Sure YOU may simply accept such an explanation, and say WHY you would, but all you are doing is signifying you are willfully accepting something on faith and in that, ready also to worship an image of GOD on a throne.

[Replying to post 50 by Tammy]

Response to part 2

As a seat of authority; rulership.

That can only be analogy, never literal.

As soon as an aspect of GOD-consciousness is portrayed within form, problems naturally enough arise. The idea that any true GOD would demand worship is what is under question.

That is what CHRIST said.

Christ said what?

As mentioned earlier, you are using Christ to prop up your theory/theology, and yet at the same time you are expecting people to discard much of what He said and taught.

It is called sorting the chaff from the wheat which is essentially what this thread topic is about.
Did Jesus actually say we should worship him as a GOD and did Jesus actually say he would return and - after removing the problem - set himself on a throne to be worshiped by humanity?

This might be why you don't get as much of a response from Christians as you would like.

When Christians are unwilling to answer my questions - even that those questions insist on them examining their own beliefs - and insinuate the silent treatment in relation to me, all they are doing is verifying that I am correct. I resist their inadequate theologies as being unable to hold water, and they flee.

and what do humans normally do when someone on a throne is involved? The worship that person on the throne.

Do they?

Yes they do.

Trump "sits on a throne" (and while an argument could be made - perhaps more tongue in cheek - that some of his supporters worship him, most do not.)

Trump holds a position. Presently he is not claiming to represent GOD or demand worship as proxy to a GOD. Creatively many of his supporters insist that he is representative of a GOD, and yes - there are those who do worship him.

But even disregarding human politics and royal institutions, the OP topic is not about humans claiming to be other humans creators and demanding worship. The absurdity of any GOD demanding or otherwise expecting worship is under question.

You have inferred that you would worship a non-human being sitting on a throne claiming to be Jesus. You have also stated why you would do so. What is now under question is your reason for doing so, which you say is because Jesus 'told' you to do so and you have faith in that. Furthermore you claim that it is not 'because the bible told you this' but specifically that Jesus - your Lord and slave-master - told you so.

But who says God CANNOT or DOES NOT own anything?

As long as one doesn't conflate ME with being a 'thing' it doesn't matter. The point I was making is that there is no reason why GOD would expect worship, or want to own individuate consciousness. Individuals who want to be owned by such a being...their reasons/motives are questionable.

When He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp, and they were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song: “Worthy are You to take the scroll and open its seals, because You were slain, and with Your blood You purchased for God those from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. You have made them into a kingdom, priests to serve our God, and they will reign upon the earth.� Rev 5:9

For someone who says she 'does not put much stock on the bible' you sure do quote it a lot in an effort to support your faith in the hearsay.
Do you believe that you - slave of Jesus - are going to be a priestly ruler of others on earth because you have been purchased and are thus owned by Jesus?

Or are you just hoping that will become the case?

The bride reigns (and is not worshiped) with Christ in His Kingdom, but not as rulers in this world rule (by lording themselves above others). But by serving.

In what capacity do you envision this service will be expressed? Also, why do you have to be owned and married in order to perform such service?

Would you still consider it proxy if the Bride is permitted to come before the Father, Himself (through Christ and with His permission)?

Are you now arguing that the 'father' is also a being with form? Since when does GOD - The First Source, have form?

But tell me this, why is it you believe that Christ is going to be represented by a being on a throne?

The question does not make sense to me.

Christ is not represented by a being on a throne. He IS a being on a throne.

I understand WHY the question makes no sense to you. You are content in your faith in the hearsay that any being ET/IDE who - along with his species defeats the present rulers of humanity and replaces them, will be on a throne and requiring worship (for some reason) and calling himself Jesus (for whom else could it be in your estimate?) and that is good enough for you to happily comply.

Because 'faith'.

In relation to analogy, one could say then, that the Christ is within the individual,

This part of your paragraph is true - of both Christ and God. Christ and God are in a person by means of holy spirit (the breath, blood, seed of God - the water of life that Christ pours out from His innermost parts, as His Father has given to Him without end)


The rest of your paragraph is nonsensical to me:

and enthroning that as an internal recognition - a building of the inner empire - so to speak - through deep genuine honest introspection which has no need of an outward being on a throne declaring to be 'the voice of GOD' in literal fashion, which is what the OP is about examining and questioning.

**

My information tells me that Jesus informed his followers that the Kingdom of GOD is within. My information also tells me that Jesus expects his followers to externalize that kingdom through their building it on the planet in their very behaviour. There would be what point in being told to do that, if Jesus was going to come and do it for us?

No point at all.

Thus, stories which tell us this is going to be the case, are - and should be - highly suspect. The could well most likely be fabrications after the fact, designed to dis empower folk by getting them to expect a savior/slave-master will return 'someday' and fix a problem Jesus appears to have thought humans were capably of fixing for themselves. Meantime, guess what? The leaders of humanity continue - century after century, lording it over those hopeful but dis-empowered masses.

I went back and found the following from you:

- bow down to the demands
- bowing down and acknowledging Christ as Lord
- Generically, getting on ones knees is a signature of worshiping
- immediate and total submission (post 41)

Basically bowing down is what you have stated.

I am curious where you see that anyone is forced to do these things? Rather than compelled by the truth and/or by love (or in some other cases by fear or self-interest)?

No one is forced to worship and nor is that the focus of the OPQ. What was said was that there might be consequence for not doing so.

That was not a response to the OPQ. This was me responding to 'would I worship my Lord'.

Well what is your response to the OPQ? After all, you are indulging in the thread, so wouldn't it be pertinent for you to address the OPQ?

I would be immensely grateful to receive eternal life, to be loved, to enter into the Kingdom as either king-priest OR subject.

What if I informed you that you are already and always have been eternal and that it is a religious lie which tells you otherwise?

Indeed, what if you just contemplated the possibility that is the truth of the matter. Would you still feel you need to be grateful?

Indeed, what if - when your body finally dies - you enter another reality and are informed that you are - an aspect of GOD consciousness and have never really ever not being, in one form or another and that your beliefs otherwise were wrong?

Christ (not "Jesus" since that was never His name).

No need for semantics Tammy. We know what we are referring to. Apparently his name was Yeshua according to some traditions, but 'Christ' is a Greek word, from another culture. As one wandering around Palestine, it is highly unlikely Yeshua referred to himself as 'Christ'.

[Replying to post 55 by Tammy]

Response to Part 3

We can say that the truth might be anything we want. I would need a reason and evidence to accept the claim.

Well I can give you a reason, but what would you accept as evidence?

I tend not to base my faith and understanding on 'if'.

So has been your claim. You have yet to verify this though Tammy.

Also, what do you mean by 'aspect' of God?

GOD=Consciousness. All consciousness = GOD. Aspects of GOD-consciousness are within form.

Form is what gives the illusion of separateness, but the illusion is often solidified through the doctrines of various organised religions which teach such a thing.

Remove the belief in the illusion and one understands one can never be separate from GOD, regardless of the form one occupies.

God created out of LOVE. Worship of Him comes also from LOVE (and truth).

Sure, humans have a tendency to worship things they love, but we are not things, and nor is GOD a thing.

All of your religions teach the worship of a deity and a doctrine of human salvation. It is the underlying kinship of your planet’s religions. However, I am not the deity that your worship falls upon, nor am I the creator of your doctrines of human salvation. Worship of me in coin or moral consideration is unnecessary. Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.
This is the feeling that you should seek to preserve in the face of life’s distractions. This is the revelation of my heart to your heart. Live in clarity. Live in purpose. Live in the knowledge that you are in me and I am in you, and that there is no place separate from our heart.~Excerpt from Chamber 23—One of three written elements from the body of work known as the WingMakers, ascribed to First Source.

You appear to be arguing the same thing as in the above quote. It is not about the worshiping of anything or anyone as a non-equal but in the knowledge that we are all Aspects of GOD, and that GOD does not require vainglorious human worship (such as the case with worshiping a being in form, sitting on a throne.) Those who would do so are simply broadcasting the fact that if THEY were in such a position, then that is what THEY would expect from 'things they own'. GOD-consciousness cannot be owned, unless of course it does not realize that it is in fact GOD-consciousness. As appears to be the case with you, Tammy.

However, one can understand the idea that species (A) could put another species (B) into a situation where (B) was unaware they had always existed, and then (A) could pretend to be the creator of (B). This is a possibility which the OP is investigating.

If (A) were genuine and wanted (B) to learn the true nature of self but had to do so in a manner which forced (A) to manifest before (B), then one would expect (A) NOT to play the role of creator in relation to GOD.

Rather (A) would tell (B) that they were not created and that (A) had only created the universe and the human forms, but (A) did not create the consciousness which (B) is.

I understand the details of your scenario. But this scenario is all based upon many 'ifs'... and none seem to be based upon what Christ said. Since the OP is about HIS return, should it not at least be based in the things He said about His return? If not, then why use Him in some 'et' return scenario at all?

I agree the whole story is based upon IF Tammy. You seem to believe otherwise. "What Christ said" as you put it, has not been shown to be the case. The truth of the matter is that one has to say "IF that is what Christ said."

Many words are attributed to Yeshua. But we do not know IF he actually said those words or IF he did not.

You implied that he has said them to you, but you have yet to say how this happened, that we might understand your claim may be true.

IF you get around to answering that question, it MIGHT enlighten us - we do not know until you provide the evidence. IF you do not, then one can say for certain that the whole story is based upon IF, and nothing more that that. You simple believe on faith that IF the story is truth, THEN your faith will be rewarded.

Who are you referring to as 'these beings'?

The OP clearly states what I am referring to.

And what is the danger that you are referring to, that you see?

The OP and subsequent posts I have made clearly outlines the danger. Succinctly, the danger is in believing something is truth when it might be deception, re the OP subject.

I will be expanding on the idea of the weakness in the plan re the supposed second coming - the weakness which I mentioned in post #28 when I wrote;

One weakness in the story I identify is that apparently the Antichrist has to show himself and deceive everyone but the believers and rule for a period of time, over the affairs of mankind.

Thus, all such an individual has to do is to remain hidden from sight and manipulate said affairs of mankind from that position and Jesus can never return as predicted.

I did not mention evidence 'seen', and no that voice is not 'the bible'. I answered that in part one.

It would be helpful if you would quote where this is mentioned.

Obviously a false god can lie. But you did not answer my question.

The OP is about being able to tell the difference between what is true and what is false. A false GOD can lie about being The One True GOD, or representative of TOTG.

That is the point of the OP Tammy. You believe you are the "slave of a Christ" which you think is the Christ and you would worship him when he returns. Your question is irrelevant to the thread topic. The Tread topic is investigating what is true in relation to the promised return of Jesus, and why one thinks it to be the case.

Why would you think I do not get that? That does not dispute what I said. As well, the point was that we do not worship angels by proxy just because we worship God. See again, the warning not to bow down and worship the angel in revelation.

Actually, would you agree that the warning is not just about angels, but about bowing and worshiping ANY form?

Oh, sorry, I am not referring to how you would react if anyone demanded you worship 'them' or even God. I was simply asking about if you were confronted with the knowledge that you do indeed have a Creator.

Nevertheless, I answered the OPQ in that. I have been confronted with the claim that I have a creator. I once believe this to be the case, until I began to question those beliefs.

I now have the knowledge that I am not created. The knowledge is helpful.

Things may be negotiable, requests may be made, etc.

But truth is not negotiable.

(thank you for taking the time to write that out though and explain your position)

That is fine Tammy. No point in asking the OPQ if I am unwilling to answer it myself yes?

How about you clarify your claim as to how your Lord communicates his words to you, which you have implied often, are not sourced in biblical writ.

I would acknowledge my wrong and seek to learn what is true and align myself with that.

What if the ET/IDEs come before your body dies and you commit yourself to their King being your creator and in that forfeit your access to the true knowledge?

I would not rely upon my own understanding (but I do not rely upon my own understanding even now; that would be foolish of me, for what do I know?)

Here is what is foolish Tammy. If you do not rely on your own intelligence to question what you have been told and examine that information thoroughly, you are not using your ability to understand and have accepted the belief that you should not rely upon your own intelligence and ability to examine claims, but rather you rely upon what you are told to accept on FAITH.

You have been led to believe you should doubt yourself and replace that with not doubting those who tell you that you should doubt yourself. How is that a good thing?

God sent us His Son - Wisdom - to teach us and to guide us into all truth (and into life). I rely upon Him.

So you claim Tammy. But you have yet to share HOW this is being done with you, other than through the Bible.

You say you mentioned it in part one. I obviously missed that. It is not untoward of me to expect greater detail as to the process involved in what you are claiming. Something which couldn't possibly be missed whatsoever.

[tam]

[Replying to post 61 by William]

Before you continue, William (and I only read the first part of your response), you have misread something I wrote:

I still do not see what prompted your comment. Did I not quote from the bible to show you that angels (who serve Christ and God) do not demand worship of themselves and in fact would not accept it?

Are you simply playing games Tammy? In post #2 you said this;

And I am John, the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had shown me these things. But he said to me, “Do not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God!�

So if you were not quoting the bible, what were you quoting?

I asked (in the bold),

"Did I not quote from...?"


I did not say,


"I did not quote from..."


I'm not sure if that misunderstanding affects the rest of your post or not. Just thought I'd try and catch you before you continued.



I will read the rest of your post now...



Peace again to you!

[tam]

Peace to you William,

[Replying to post 53 by Tammy]

Response to part 1

I mentioned no hearsay as a basis for my faith.

You said this Tammy;

My faith in that is based upon evidence; upon what is heard; and also supported by what is written.

What is written and what is heard is hearsay. Therefore you conflate evidence with hearsay.

What is written is hearsay if it did not come from the actual person speaking. What is heard is hearsay if it is passed on from a second (or third, etc) party. If one hears from the actual person speaking, then what is heard is not hearsay.

As has just been said: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion."


I asked you "And what is it that makes you believe Christ said anything about his return? Where did you get this information? Did Jesus visit you and tell you? Or,like the rest of us, did you get it from the bible?" this was because you were claiming that you have some kind of extra access to your 'Lord', but when pressed to give details, you revert to the bible and give no extra-biblical details.

I gave you those quotes because they show that Christ said He would speak and His sheep would hear His voice, and they also show how He speaks.


He speaks as the Spirit, in words, in dreams, in visions, in reminders (such as the holy spirit He has given us - the anointing of holy spirit - reminding us of things He has said. Sometimes bringing scripture to mind, sometimes bringing past events to mind, or past words or understanding that He has given us to mind). He opens the scriptures to us so that we can understand them, including where they are referring to Him.

He speaks to everyone. Not everyone discerns Him or knows/recognized His voice.

No, follow the logic. You agree that technology would had to have been created, therefore, the power to create technology would not have come FROM technology. The power to create would have been inherent.

Yes?

The logic I follow is this;

GOD is consciousness which has always existed. In this, one cannot say Consciousness is technology, as in "God is Technology."

Anything GOD creates can be seen to be technology.

Thus FORM is technology, even that it is biological or some other 'type' such as inter-dimensional beings. The 'beings' of course represent individual forms.

Technology enables. Without it, one is not able to DO. The forms are like spacesuits which are worn for a specific purpose.

So you are using 'technology' in an uncommon way. Perhaps you should have defined that in your OP.

Regardless, God still had to create, so what did He use to create from the start? It could not have been technology (however defined), because you said technology had to be created.

William, go back to the source, the first... and answer these question in that light.

Tammy - my argument is not that The Source is technology but that what is created by The Source is technology.

Created how and with what?

I said the power TO create was inherent and I believe you disagreed. Why?

If you want to push this ET/IDE advanced being - advanced technology theory, why are you trying and use Christ to do so?

That has already been explained to you. If the promised return was to happen, the general consensus as to who these beings are, would be ET/IDE.

I thought we had established that while some may believe that, others will not.

[Replying to post 50 by Tammy]

Response to part 2

As a seat of authority; rulership.

That can only be analogy, never literal.

So you claim, William.

That is what CHRIST said.

Christ said what?

That He sits on a throne.

He said it to John in the Revelation given to John, He said it in the parable of the sheep and the goats...

As mentioned earlier, you are using Christ to prop up your theory/theology, and yet at the same time you are expecting people to discard much of what He said and taught.

It is called sorting the chaff from the wheat which is essentially what this thread topic is about.

And how are you sorting the chaff from the wheat, William? You are not going by what Christ says (or you would not need anyone to tell you that He speaks). You are not going by what He is written to have said.

Did Jesus actually say we should worship him as a GOD

Christ never said that and I never claimed that He did.

and did Jesus actually say he would return and - after removing the problem - set himself on a throne to be worshiped by humanity?

He said that He would return. He said that He would sit on His throne (and that others who belonged to Him would sit on thrones in the Kingdom with Him).


You seem to be suggesting that people just 'made up' His words (well, the ones that disagree with your position at least).

and what do humans normally do when someone on a throne is involved? The worship that person on the throne.

Do they?

Yes they do.

So you are suggesting then that every world leader, government, president, etc, is worshiped?

Trump "sits on a throne" (and while an argument could be made - perhaps more tongue in cheek - that some of his supporters worship him, most do not.)

Trump holds a position. Presently he is not claiming to represent GOD or demand worship as proxy to a GOD. Creatively many of his supporters insist that he is representative of a GOD, and yes - there are those who do worship him.

But even disregarding human politics and royal institutions, the OP topic is not about humans claiming to be other humans creators and demanding worship.

And I was pointing out that sitting on a throne does not mean that the person sitting on the throne must be worshiped.

You have inferred that you would worship a non-human being sitting on a throne claiming to be Jesus.

You have inferred that.

I said I would kneel before Christ, praise Him, love Him, obey Him (I do these things already, mind you).

You have also stated why you would do so.

Yes.

What is now under question is your reason for doing so, which you say is because Jesus 'told' you to do so and you have faith in that.

I did not say that, William.

I said this:

If you mean love, praise, kneel before, obey... then yes. Why? BECAUSE of love; because I love Him, because He loves me and acts/teaches for my/our good, because He deserves these things (He gave His life - twice - the first time at the creation of the world, and the second time to redeem us from death); because He has more than proven His love - for His Father, for His bride, and for creation. And because He is the RIGHTFUL heir of all things; God created all things FOR HIS SON.

My information also tells me that Jesus expects his followers to externalize that kingdom through their building it on the planet in their very behaviour. There would be what point in being told to do that, if Jesus was going to come and do it for us?

Your 'information' seems to ignore every word Christ said about His return, and discard His words that the world would reject those who belong to Him (just as it rejected Him) and hate those who belong to Him (just as it hated Him).

That was not a response to the OPQ. This was me responding to 'would I worship my Lord'.

Well what is your response to the OPQ? After all, you are indulging in the thread, so wouldn't it be pertinent for you to address the OPQ?

If ET's came and demanded I worship them, I would know that they are not from my Lord, and I would not worship them. Hence I gave the quote from Revelation, where angels (who serve Christ and God) would not demand or even permit worship of themselves.

That was apparently not a good enough answer for you. You stated that to worship God would mean worshiping those beings that serve Him as well. I disagreed. But it seems you are not going to be satisfied with anything other than someone saying they would NOT worship God.

I am never going to give you that answer William.

That is a deception (and the voice of a stranger), and I am able to avoid it because I belong to Christ and listen to Him. He is the Truth. He is the One to whom God led me and the One to whom God told me to listen. He has never led me wrong. He has never lied to me.

Your "information" is in contradiction to my Lord (and so it is in contradiction to the Truth and also to my God), and so I know to reject your information as false. Indeed, it seems to be just one more tactic designed to get people to stop worshiping God; even to deny God (the Father of Christ).


Not gonna happen.

I would be immensely grateful to receive eternal life, to be loved, to enter into the Kingdom as either king-priest OR subject.

What if I informed you that you are already and always have been eternal and that it is a religious lie which tells you otherwise?

I would inform you that you have been misinformed. (I answered the rest of your questions already at the end of part 3).

Christ (not "Jesus" since that was never His name).

No need for semantics Tammy. We know what we are referring to. Apparently his name was Yeshua according to some traditions, but 'Christ' is a Greek word, from another culture. As one wandering around Palestine, it is highly unlikely Yeshua referred to himself as 'Christ'.

Christ means 'anointed one' and so it is accurate. Messiah is accurate as well.

"Jesus" is not accurate, not true.

Truth is important.

You appear to be arguing the same thing as in the above quote.

I am certainly not arguing the same thing as your 'first source' quotes.

And what is the danger that you are referring to, that you see?

The OP and subsequent posts I have made clearly outlines the danger. Succinctly, the danger is in believing something is truth when it might be deception, re the OP subject.

Yes, I know the danger in believing something is true when it is deception. Hence, we are to test all things against the TRUTH (Christ), hold things up against the Light (also Christ). Testing also against love (because God is love, and nothing that comes from Him will be against love, including the law).

I do not know what YOU see as the danger though. Unless I have misunderstood your stance, you seem to think that we all get what we think is true when we die, so where would the danger be in your theology for anyone believing a lie?

I would not rely upon my own understanding (but I do not rely upon my own understanding even now; that would be foolish of me, for what do I know?)

Here is what is foolish Tammy. If you do not rely on your own intelligence to question what you have been told and examine that information thoroughly, you are not using your ability to understand and have accepted the belief that you should not rely upon your own intelligence and ability to examine claims, but rather you rely upon what you are told to accept on FAITH.

You have been led to believe you should doubt yourself and replace that with not doubting those who tell you that you should doubt yourself. How is that a good thing?

So you rely upon yourself for knowledge? But you have already admitted that you were once wrong in what you believed; so how do you know that you are not wrong now?

I have also made mistakes and been wrong relying upon my own 'wisdom' (which is no wisdom at all), so it would not be wise of me to rely upon myself for truth. I am not the Truth. Christ is the Truth.

God sent us His Son - Wisdom - to teach us and to guide us into all truth (and into life). I rely upon Him.

So you claim Tammy. But you have yet to share HOW this is being done with you, other than through the Bible.

I have since shared it.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Clownboat]

Q: In relation to the above, how would you respond to ET demanding you worship them as gods, and why?

I'd worship the ET as gods to save my skin if need be or if there was some obvious benefit in doing so. The gods we have created are not like these ETs. Unlike a lot of people, I see no need to worship any of the gods people believe in. I see no reason to fear these supposed gods and see no benefit in worshiping them. If these gods were real, then they would have no need for us to worship them either. They're gods, after all! Gods don't need anything from us puny little mortals.

"Puny little mortals," on the other hand, do need things from other puny little mortals like money, sex, and power. The Bible god demands that those who supposedly speak for him be given these things. So guess what? In case you haven't figured it out already, puny little mortals masquerade as the mouthpieces of this god to bamboozle people into giving them money, sex, and power.

Crazy idea!
If this were true, then we should see religions all throughout this planet to exploit this.

Oh wait.

[William]

[Replying to post 63 by tam]

What is written is hearsay if it did not come from the actual person speaking.

How are we to know that the actual person who wrote the words was being truthful about events and situations or was making things up?

I gave you those quotes because they show that Christ said He would speak and His sheep would hear His voice, and they also show how He speaks.

Okay...

He speaks as the Spirit, in words, in dreams, in visions, in reminders (such as the holy spirit He has given us - the anointing of holy spirit - reminding us of things He has said. Sometimes bringing scripture to mind, sometimes bringing past events to mind, or past words or understanding that He has given us to mind).

I recently created a thread about NDEs and OOBEs and asked Christians for their input and opinion on these natural experiences. I notice you have not contributed to that thread.
The reason I bring it up is because a Christian argued in that thread, that people experiencing meeting Jesus whilst having such experiences are most likely being deceived by demons. She claimed that demons have the power to pretend to be the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

So in light of what you say above, how do you know that what your hearing, dreaming, having visions and reminders etc, is from Jesus? What is it about his 'voice' which 'his sheep recognize?

In relation to the OP subject, will you be relying on that 'voice' to help you decide whether it is genuinely Jesus when the return event manifests?

He speaks to everyone. Not everyone discerns Him or knows/recognized His voice.

What if I am hearing his voice and passing on what I hear in relation to not worshiping ANY being in form, even if the being claims to be Jesus?

So you are using 'technology' in an uncommon way. Perhaps you should have defined that in your OP.

It matters not, because it is not the central issue. It has only come up because it is relative to the central issue, as a way of explaining...

Regardless, God still had to create, so what did He use to create from the start? It could not have been technology (however defined), because you said technology had to be created.

Correct. GOD (The First Source) used Its MIND. Indeed, even all of creation is within GODs mind.

Created how and with what?

Created through thought. Created with the mind.

I said the power TO create was inherent and I believe you disagreed. Why?

Because you believe you are created.

You have the power to create and that is inherent because you are an aspect of GOD-consciousness AND you also have a particular form which is very useful for doing so, in this particular universe. You also have the ability to rationally reason and logically apply intelligence. If Jesus called his followers 'sheep' it is unlikely to have been for purposes of discarding those inherent qualities. Indeed it appears he often admonished folk to set aside their old understandings of 'what GOD is' which they had been taught by organised religions to believe in.

I thought we had established that while some may believe that, others will not.

You reminded me that those who will not believe it, will be those who have been exposed to technology but will refuse to question the beings which have used their powers to disable the human leaders and their war machines. (Technology)

The main focus in that, begs the question WHY you and others 'who may not believe that' would have a problem with the idea that the beings use superior technology to do so.
Would it prevent you from worshiping the King of the beings, whom you would believe is Jesus returned, if you knew that they used technology to do the job?

That can only be analogy, never literal.

So you claim, William.

Well Tammy, truth is, it is assertion based upon my understanding that NO being which demanded worship would be representative of First Source.
I would have no more hesitation saying that to any such being, any more than I do saying it to you, or the reader in general.

Christ said what?

That He sits on a throne.

He said it to John in the Revelation given to John, He said it in the parable of the sheep and the goats...

Ah - again the bible. But did he also say so to you in the spirit and dreams and in visions? I did explain why I think people who believe in this kind of thing...it is because they project themselves and see no problem with being worshiped as GOD on a throne, if they were in the same position. This is simply a case of self aggrandizement and vainglorious thinking.

My understanding is that Rome was into this kind of thinking and when Rome became the voice of Christianity, such stories were then told.

And how are you sorting the chaff from the wheat, William? You are not going by what Christ says (or you would not need anyone to tell you that He speaks). You are not going by what He is written to have said.

That is because what is written is highly suspect. I could argue that Christ told me that through my own intellect and experience but what would be the point, if it conflicted with your own 'Christ-Voice'.

How do we reconcile the differences then Tammy? We cannot even use the bible as a medium due to the differing interpretations we will each have. This is indeed the problem oft pointed out by hard atheists in relation to Christians not being on the same page, let alone a Christian and a Panentheist.

What would Jesus advise us to do in our situation? BElieve the bible is 'the word of GOD'?

Did Jesus actually say we should worship him as a GOD

Christ never said that and I never claimed that He did.

Well what then? The OP clearly states that the beings returning make that activity a condition. There is biblical reference to such activity being required by humans. You do say that you are a sheep-slave of an image of Christ and as such worship that. You did imply that he is on a throne and as such should be worshiped as representative of GOD. You even claimed The Father sat on a throne.

It is the throne itself which is the technological prop which provides the implication that he who sits on it requires worship.

He said that He would return. He said that He would sit on His throne (and that others who belonged to Him would sit on thrones in the Kingdom with Him).

You seem to be suggesting that people just 'made up' His words (well, the ones that disagree with your position at least).

I am suggesting that this is the most likely case and said exactly why I think so.

I also suggested that such things were metaphor and not to be believed literally but rather, have everything to do with "The Kingdom Within" and that I did not think Jesus was actually going to return because his task was to inject the information into our data stream reality and from that WE humans would do the 'kingdom building' rather than some superior species coming and doing it for us.

That of course is another subject for another thread. This thread is focusing on the belief that tends toward dis-empowering Christians in order that they serve their human masters while believing they do so on GODs orders, which of course the bible speaks to as commanded.

So you are suggesting then that every world leader, government, president, etc, is worshiped?

Clearly that is not the point of the thread topic. It is not directly about that Tammy. The focus is on these kinds of images already worshiped in anticipation of a promise believed to come from and belong to 'The Christ'. The current world leaders are going to be toppled and this Christ being is going to replace them.

And I was pointing out that sitting on a throne does not mean that the person sitting on the throne must be worshiped.

The OP clearly states that this is under question. Are you going to say outright that you would not worship the being on the throne claiming to be Jesus returned, NOT because he sits on a throne, but only if the being demands to be worshiped?

You have inferred that.

I said I would kneel before Christ, praise Him, love Him, obey Him (I do these things already, mind you).

And what is that but worship Tammy? Are you going to use this as a squiggly manoeuvre to claim such is NOT 'worship' or perhaps to claim that such is TRUE worship? Either way, you will be worshiping an image - it matters not that the image is a living being.

Would you not expect such a being to tell you to get up and stop that behavior? Indeed, what would the being think about such people who practice such activity?

Would you say "Oops sorry! You were sitting on a throne, and well - I have always practiced this type of worshiping of you in my minds eye and have always thought the voice I was hearing was yours and that you were super OK with such practice!"

Do you not see Tammy, that you are preparing yourself based upon expectations which you have allowed yourself to be taught and the 'voice' you hear which you assign to your 'Lord' is simply an artifact of that process?

What is now under question is your reason for doing so, which you say is because Jesus 'told' you to do so and you have faith in that.

I did not say that, William.

I said this:

If you mean love, praise, kneel before, obey... then yes. Why? BECAUSE of love; because I love Him, because He loves me and acts/teaches for my/our good, because He deserves these things (He gave His life - twice - the first time at the creation of the world, and the second time to redeem us from death); because He has more than proven His love - for His Father, for His bride, and for creation. And because He is the RIGHTFUL heir of all things; God created all things FOR HIS SON.

So if you are now saying that Jesus never told you the above, who did? Obviously you believe the above somehow requires you to worship the image you think of as your master - and 'the Christ' is somehow owed this response of worship from you as his slave.
Have you decided on your own understanding that this is what you think you should do. Not because you are told to do so?

Your 'information' seems to ignore every word Christ said about His return, and discard His words that the world would reject those who belong to Him (just as it rejected Him) and hate those who belong to Him (just as it hated Him).

How convenient it is to have a doctrine which - when the questions get tough - one can simply accuse the one questioning the validity of ones beliefs of being a 'hater'.
That is of course, a well established ploy of Christendom Tammy. It is understood in today's language as projection and used as a device to distract from the relevant focus.

I am saying that my understanding of what Jesus said definitely points toward individual responsibility to connect with 'The Kingdom Within' and be shaped by that internal introspection and learn to believe in ones self, based upon that process, and then project that into the world as the means of building said kingdom into the external.
You deny that by claiming -'The Christ' - 'spoke of his return' and that worship of him on a throne is an acceptable bi-product of the imagery set in the minds eye of those who choose to believe that 'the Christ' is going to return and do for humans what humans have refused to do for themselves.

There is no requirement to worship any image or any person claiming to be representative of GOD.

If ET's came and demanded I worship them, I would know that they are not from my Lord, and I would not worship them. Hence I gave the quote from Revelation, where angels (who serve Christ and God) would not demand or even permit worship of themselves.

Yes Tammy. But the question is focused upon the ETs/IDEs leader being the focus of worship. These beings might well rebuke you for worshiping them, but not from worshiping their leader. Their King. That being on the throne Tammy.

Essentially it is not about who you should or should not worship, but that you should not worship any being sitting on a throne as the King of any species claiming to be your creator.

That was apparently not a good enough answer for you. You stated that to worship God would mean worshiping those beings that serve Him as well. I disagreed. But it seems you are not going to be satisfied with anything other than someone saying they would NOT worship God.

I am never going to give you that answer William.

Are you twisting my words Tammy, or simply not able to yet come to an understanding of what I am saying here?

The outward worship of a being claiming to be GOD is not required. You claim otherwise, because you are a slave to the image of 'the Christ' you have in your mind, and see nothing wrong in that, even if that being materialized as per the OP blurb. It is simply an externalized image of an internal image you already worship.

A true GOD truly cannot be worshiped as an object in the form of a being.

That is a deception (and the voice of a stranger), and I am able to avoid it because I belong to Christ and listen to Him. He is the Truth. He is the One to whom God led me and the One to whom God told me to listen. He has never led me wrong. He has never lied to me.

GOD would never tell you to do such a thing Tammy. Any being claiming to be GOD who tells you to do such a thing, is that which deceives you Tammy. It is not GOD who told you to do such a thing. You currently worship the image of a being which is NOT GOD.

Your "information" is in contradiction to my Lord (and so it is in contradiction to the Truth and also to my God), and so I know to reject your information as false. Indeed, it seems to be just one more tactic designed to get people to stop worshiping God; even to deny God (the Father of Christ).


Not gonna happen.

I do not want you to deny The First Source Tammy! I want you to think about your beliefs and where they actually originate from and question that by examining what you have been led to believe is 'the truth' and see therein the possibility it is YOU who has been lead astray.

What if I informed you that you are already and always have been eternal and that it is a religious lie which tells you otherwise?

I would inform you that you have been misinformed.

♦ The Dangers of Separating Human Consciousness From Any Idea of GOD

What is 'The Soul' and is it Immortal?

Having a GOD separate from its creation begs the question, "Where did GOD source the consciousness which is in the creation?"

I am certainly not arguing the same thing as your 'first source' quotes.

Well perhaps this is because you do not follow Yeshua but you follow 'The Christ' and in that you follow an image created by humans specifically employed to lead you down their garden path. Yeshua did warn that multitudes would be deceived 'in his name'.

What specifically does the First Source quote say which contradicts Yeshuas teaching?

Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.
This is the feeling that you should seek to preserve in the face of life’s distractions. This is the revelation of my heart to your heart. Live in clarity. Live in purpose. Live in the knowledge that you are in me and I am in you, and that there is no place separate from our heart. ~ Excerpt from Chamber 23—One of three written elements from the body of work known as the WingMakers, ascribed to First Source.

Yes, I know the danger in believing something is true when it is deception. Hence, we are to test all things against the TRUTH (Christ), hold things up against the Light (also Christ). Testing also against love (because God is love, and nothing that comes from Him will be against love, including the law).

You have an image of Christ which you worship Tammy. I explained the danger in the belief Christians have about the expected return of Jesus. Address that.
There is no point in testing all things against a truth, if one has not tested the very thing which is claimed to be truth.

I do not know what YOU see as the danger though. Unless I have misunderstood your stance, you seem to think that we all get what we think is true when we die, so where would the danger be in your theology for anyone believing a lie?

That is specific to the afterlife Tammy. There is no danger therein other than having to go through processes which one could easily have avoided if one had paid attention to what it was they were being led to believe in as 'the truth'.

It just means that there will be extra work involved in convincing individuals to leave the situations their beliefs created for them. It is no biggy in the grand scheme of things.

The danger this side of that is in the belief that Jesus will return to fix our problems when we could have done all that together by doing what he said needed to be done within ourselves first and then externalized into the world.

The problem is that his words have been tampered with to the point where the message has now become one in which hope in a messiah saving the world which Christians and indeed the abrahamic religions couldn't resist because they were dis-empowered by another message which was more appealing to them.

I can concede that this isn't much of a 'danger' unless the consequence of worshiping false GODs captures the worshipers in such a way as it becomes a significant problem for those worshipers. Obviously those who participate in such will miss out on the reality they would experience if not for that...until they learn to understand - one by one - that they stuffed up badly and brought it upon themselves.

So you rely upon yourself for knowledge?

No. I rely on my intelligence and ability to discern and the free access to all available knowledge we each have and how that knowledge fits together to give me a more likely picture of what is going on.

But you have already admitted that you were once wrong in what you believed; so how do you know that you are not wrong now?

I was once wrong because I did not take into account all the available knowledge Tammy. Only that which I was told and what I accepted as the only knowledge I should believe in as truth.

As for that knowledge, I put it to the test and found for myself through experience what was true and what was not true about it.

I have also made mistakes and been wrong relying upon my own 'wisdom' (which is no wisdom at all), so it would not be wise of me to rely upon myself for truth. I am not the Truth. Christ is the Truth.

What good is any thing calling itself truth if one cannot rely on one's own intelligence to discern and to learn? Denying that of oneself in favor of been breastfeed by others whom you have chosen to be your intelligence for you, is not going to excuse anyone. "But the bible told me so" is not going to be any defense for getting things wrong because you were afraid to use your own intelligence and believed in the voices who told you that couldn't trust yourself.

[tam]

Peace to you William,


I think I responded to most of your points in previous posts; points that may be getting lost in the length. So I am not going to respond to much more when it comes to the question of 'worship', especially since your comments seem to be based more on your own ideas than upon my words. I am just going to address some of your points and if there is something pertinent that I have missed which has to do with the OP, then please just ask me the direct question and I will do my best to give a direct answer.

He speaks to everyone. Not everyone discerns Him or knows/recognized His voice.

What if I am hearing his voice and passing on what I hear in relation to not worshiping ANY being in form, even if the being claims to be Jesus?

If you were hearing His voice then I do not expect that I should have had to explain that Christ (not "Jesus" - as this was never His name) lives and speaks and teaches us even now.

But if you had made that claim (and you did not), then we could (and should) test the inspired expression, because not all spirits (or inspired expressions) come from God. We can (and should if indeed we do hear His voice) test the inspired expression against Christ (we can ask Him; since He is the Truth and nothing in contradiction to Him can then be true); we can test it against love (since God is love and truth comes from love), and we can also test the inspired expression against what is written (beginning of course with what Christ said in what is written).


In response to the Adversary who demanded worship of himself, Christ repelled him by speaking the truth,

"Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship [the Lord] your God, and serve him only.'" Matthew 4:10


And of course the angel sent BY Christ to John also stated this twice: not to worship him (the angel), but to worship God.

AND you also have a particular form which is very useful for doing so, in this particular universe. You also have the ability to rationally reason and logically apply intelligence. If Jesus called his followers 'sheep' it is unlikely to have been for purposes of discarding those inherent qualities. Indeed it appears he often admonished folk to set aside their old understandings of 'what GOD is' which they had been taught by organised religions to believe in.

I can give you examples of my Lord correcting people on what God WANTS (and you will often find evidence to support this from the prophets as well). For instance,

Go and learn what this means, "I desire mercy, not sacrifice." Matthew 9:13 (supported also by Hosea 6:6)


What examples do you have of Christ correcting people on what God IS?

That can only be analogy, never literal.

So you claim, William.

Well Tammy, truth is, it is assertion based upon my understanding that NO being which demanded worship would be representative of First Source.
I would have no more hesitation saying that to any such being, any more than I do saying it to you, or the reader in general.

Lets follow this back, shall we?

The thing that you said can 'only be analogy, never literal' is that God (and/or His Son) sits on a throne ... which throne I equated to a seat of authority; to rulership.

You then claimed (an assertion is still a claim that you make) that this can only be analogy, and you offer no evidence to support your assertion. So how is it anything more than an opinion?

Christ said what?

That He sits on a throne.

He said it to John in the Revelation given to John, He said it in the parable of the sheep and the goats...

Ah - again the bible. But did he also say so to you in the spirit and dreams and in visions?

My Lord has revealed to me the meaning of some things written in Revelation as well as the meaning of the sheep and the goats. He spoke of them both. So yes, I can know that these are true and from Him.

I did explain why I think people who believe in this kind of thing...it is because they project themselves and see no problem with being worshiped as GOD on a throne, if they were in the same position. This is simply a case of self aggrandizement and vainglorious thinking.

Well I don't think like that William. I don't think like that at all.

**

Do you think perhaps that you are projecting yourself onto this "first source" and so it wants what you want, what you think is right?

My understanding is that Rome was into this kind of thinking and when Rome became the voice of Christianity, such stories were then told.

Are you suggesting that the gospels and also the book of Revelation were not written until after Rome adopted "Christianity"?

You have inferred that.

I said I would kneel before Christ, praise Him, love Him, obey Him (I do these things already, mind you).

[strike]And what is that but worship Tammy? Are you going to use this as a squiggly manoeuvre to claim such is NOT 'worship' or perhaps to claim that such is TRUE worship? Either way, you will be worshiping an image - it matters not that the image is a living being. [/strike]

Would you not expect such a being to tell you to get up and stop that behavior? Indeed, what would the being think about such people who practice such activity?

My Lord would think that I love Him.

"The one who has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. And the one who loves me will be loved by my Father. I also will love him and will reveal myself to him."



Same with kneeling, praising, thanking.

Your 'information' seems to ignore every word Christ said about His return, and discard His words that the world would reject those who belong to Him (just as it rejected Him) and hate those who belong to Him (just as it hated Him).

How convenient it is to have a doctrine which - when the questions get tough - one can simply accuse the one questioning the validity of ones beliefs of being a 'hater'.
That is of course, a well established ploy of Christendom Tammy. It is understood in today's language as projection and used as a device to distract from the relevant focus.

You misunderstand.

You said this:

My information also tells me that Jesus expects his followers to externalize that kingdom through their building it on the planet in their very behaviour. There would be what point in being told to do that, if Jesus was going to come and do it for us?


But you overlook the words that Christ said about the world hating us if the world hated Him. So even if we who belong to Him do just as He has taught us to do, how do you suppose the world (that hates him and so also us) will permit that Kingdom to encompass the earth?

That is a deception (and the voice of a stranger), and I am able to avoid it because I belong to Christ and listen to Him. He is the Truth. He is the One to whom God led me and the One to whom God told me to listen. He has never led me wrong. He has never lied to me.

GOD would never tell you to do such a thing Tammy. Any being claiming to be GOD who tells you to do such a thing, is that which deceives you Tammy. It is not GOD who told you to do such a thing. You currently worship the image of a being which is NOT GOD.

My Lord is not a liar William. He has never lied to me or led me wrong.


And I worship the God and Father of Christ.



I will agree that this is not the same god that you seem to be promoting, but for some reason you want to use Christ (or "Jesus") to push the idea of a god that He did not teach or reveal. That is nonsensical to me.


Your words here also contradict your own 'first source' quote, below.

I am certainly not arguing the same thing as your 'first source' quotes.

Well perhaps this is because you do not follow Yeshua but you follow 'The Christ' and in that you follow an image created by humans specifically employed to lead you down their garden path. Yeshua did warn that multitudes would be deceived 'in his name'.

Many people do try and use Him to prop up their own religions or ideas.

I do want to mention that earlier you said it was semantics when I pointed out that "Jesus" was not the name of my Lord. Now here you seem to be doing the same thing with "Christ".

Christ means Anointed One (which is true of my Lord). I am simply referring to His title when I use "Christ", instead of His name.

What specifically does the First Source quote say which contradicts Yeshuas teaching?

Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.

Perhaps you should reexamine your own beliefs, William? Because this particular quote does not say that one should not worship. This quote defines how one should worship.





Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[William]

[Replying to post 66 by tam]

So I am not going to respond to much more when it comes to the question of 'worship', especially since your comments seem to be based more on your own ideas than upon my words.

Well Tammy, the question of worshiping a being/beings is central to the OP subject.
Yes, you have explained that you are a 'slave to Christ' and that it is "BECAUSE of love; because I love Him, because He loves me and acts/teaches for my/our good, because He deserves these things..." as you wrote in post #49. You words are plain enough and I have already said why they are not reasonable excuses for worshiping another individual in the way the OP mentions.

I also mentioned that it all has to do with an inner process of deep meaningful introspection and that the kingdom is within, and the idea of that is specific to the individual then bringing the internal into the external, but you apparently rejected that understanding.

I also mentioned that worship was not about kneeling before any being claiming to be GOD or the closest representative thereof, as this is not an acceptable practice in relation to how one's love and praise is transformed into worship in spirit and in truth.

Furthermore I gave an example which I think Jesus would agree with regarding worship of The First Source, which you also rejected.

The problem with loving an image of GOD Tammy, is that GOD has no form or image so one opens themselves up to being led astray by such images, just on account of that.

So no, it is not simply that my comments seem to be based more on my own ideas than upon your words, but rather your words themselves are portraying the false images and I am obliged to reject them because of that.

What if I am hearing his voice and passing on what I hear in relation to not worshiping ANY being in form, even if the being claims to be Jesus?

If you were hearing His voice then I do not expect that I should have had to explain that Christ (not "Jesus" - as this was never His name) lives and speaks and teaches us even now.

Are we not speaking about the same character, whatever? You seem to be saying that anyone who calls the character 'Jesus' is showing that they are ignorant of the idea of Christ and have mixed up the two different things to produce an incorrect image.

I will re frame the question then;

"What if I am hearing his voice and passing on what I hear in relation to not worshiping ANY being in form, even if the being claims to be Christ?"

But if you had made that claim (and you did not), then we could (and should) test the inspired expression, because not all spirits (or inspired expressions) come from God. We can (and should if indeed we do hear His voice) test the inspired expression against Christ (we can ask Him; since He is the Truth and nothing in contradiction to Him can then be true); we can test it against love (since God is love and truth comes from love), and we can also test the inspired expression against what is written (beginning of course with what Christ said in what is written).

Yes Tammy. How do we test the false from the real? I have been trying to point that out to you so that you might understand. One does not have to make any claim that they are inspired by 'this' or by 'that' in order to be speaking truth Tammy. The truth itself should be adequate enough to inspire the individual seeking it.

In response to the Adversary who demanded worship of himself, Christ repelled him by speaking the truth,

"Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship [the Lord] your God, and serve him only.'" Matthew 4:10

Precisely Tammy! This is exactly what I have been saying! The Christ never said for anyone to worship him, or that he would sit on a throne and represent the image of GOD in the form of the Christ and expect or otherwise demand worship from everyone, or 'those who truly love him' or whatever.

GOD is simply NOT of FORM Tammy! This means that 'worship and service' is not expected through idolization of imagery. This is why I used that quote, because I feel it expresses the idea of worshiping the One True GOD - First Source - in the only true manner possible...let me remind you and the readers;

[font=Comic Sans MS]Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.[/font]

Well Tammy, truth is, it is assertion based upon my understanding that NO being which demanded worship would be representative of First Source.
I would have no more hesitation saying that to any such being, any more than I do saying it to you, or the reader in general.

Lets follow this back, shall we?

The thing that you said can 'only be analogy, never literal' is that God (and/or His Son) sits on a throne ... which throne I equated to a seat of authority; to rulership.

You then claimed (an assertion is still a claim that you make) that this can only be analogy, and you offer no evidence to support your assertion. So how is it anything more than an opinion?

I certainly offered something which I thought you might respond favorable to Tammy. I mentioned how someone said "The Kingdom of GOD is within" and that in understanding the idea as analogy one could 'strengthen the inner empire' in order to then be able to use this internal transformation as a positive expression into the external world.

Being literal about it only sets one up to the temptation of worshiping idols/images, all of which are false Tammy. None are TRUE. Not even the ones which portray that image of 'the Christ' on a throne.

The Christ did not repel the adversary by saying;

"Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship [the Lord] your Christ, and serve him only.'"

The Christ imagery re that was injected later, and one could say it was the adversary which did so. Point being, reject anything - no matter what it calls itself which is set up in imagery, whether in art-form or in any other form.

What examples do you have of Christ correcting people on what God IS?

See above in relation to correcting individuals on what GOD isn't.

My Lord has revealed to me the meaning of some things written in Revelation as well as the meaning of the sheep and the goats. He spoke of them both. So yes, I can know that these are true and from Him.

Your assertions are without anything to back them up Tammy, and what your assertions amount to is the same as with anyone else. They are your interpretations and opinions. Claiming The Christ personally revealed the meaning of some things written does not in itself qualify as anything remarkable or out of the box. Indeed, there is a rule on this forum specifically about this activity;

5: Do not persist in making a claim without supporting it. All unsupported claims can be challenged for supporting evidence. Opinions require no support, but they should not be considered as valid to any argument, nor will they be considered as legitimate support for any claim.

You are asked repeatedly to support your claims re this Tammy, and you have yet to clearly do so.
If what you are saying is simply your opinion, then say so.

I did explain why I think people who believe in this kind of thing...it is because they project themselves and see no problem with being worshiped as GOD on a throne, if they were in the same position. This is simply a case of self aggrandizement and vainglorious thinking.

Well I don't think like that William. I don't think like that at all.

Clearly you do Tammy. Although I can allow for the possibility that you are unaware of this because it is a subconscious expression which finds its way into the conscious where it is not challenged by the slave-woman dominant personality, but simply accepted as 'from Christ'. This is why I have been encouraging you to examine your beliefs because they might not be where you think they are coming from.

Do you think perhaps that you are projecting yourself onto this "first source" and so it wants what you want, what you think is right?

It is possible Tammy. Like attracts like. Logic tells me that If I were the GOD whom created this universe, I would not be wanting to be figuratively on a throne and worshiped in that way. I would see that as something which distracts those who do it, from doing the right thing. They are worshiping a false image of me and expecting me to return and put everything right, which is nonsense as I have given them everything they need to do that job for themselves, and they waste that on idolatry, belief in false promises and conflating truth with lies.

Would you not expect such a being to tell you to get up and stop that behavior? Indeed, what would the being think about such people who practice such activity?

My Lord would think that I love Him.

"The one who has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. And the one who loves me will be loved by my Father. I also will love him and will reveal myself to him."

Yes and your claim here is that this one called the 'Christ' is your Lord and master and that he commands you to worship him as an object, on a throne, representing GOD.

This is what is in dispute. Even the story of Jesus, (whom you refer to as the Christ) when tempted by the adversary, spoke of not worshiping beings. Furthermore, GOD is worshiped in spirit and in truth, which is all I am referring to. One cannot do both, for one is vainglorious misplaced loyalty and the other is simply living as one would expect an aspect of GOD-consciousness (aka 'child of GOD') to behave. Bring the genuine internal kingdom out into the external world.

Your Lord may not be in fact whom you believe that he is. You may be in love with an image which does not even represent him. Or...perhaps you would settle for nothing else and - as already said - you are simply projecting and serve an impostor willingly.

I understand that most of Christendom does this very thing, and do gladly bow down and worship anyone who looks the part and speaks the words they believe they should hear and expect a savior to do for them that which they refuse to do for themselves and one another.

My information also tells me that Jesus expects his followers to externalize that kingdom through their building it on the planet in their very behaviour. There would be what point in being told to do that, if Jesus was going to come and do it for us?

But you overlook the words that Christ said about the world hating us if the world hated Him. So even if we who belong to Him do just as He has taught us to do, how do you suppose the world (that hates him and so also us) will permit that Kingdom to encompass the earth?

One could understand that in the time and place that this was spoken of Tammy. Back then it didn't stop his followers from trying. Rome certainly invested a lot of resource into preventing it from becoming popular.
This is why Rome eventually decided on a new strategy and infiltrated the movement in order to turn it into something which could be worshiped as an idol - and thus 'the Christ' - whom you are a slave of and gladly worship the image created of him by Rome, even if that image is only in your head and heart for now.

But seriously Tammy, your protestations only serve to show that you are no slave of that Christ you quoted. What does it matter what the world would think or do, or if the world will permit Christians to build the Kingdom of GOD without the need of another species coming and doing it for them? Your job is not to concern yourself with that, is it? You do not even know what lies Rome created in relation to this story and what 'Christ' is presumed or it is otherwise claimed to have said.

You are a slave to the Christ which Rome created, and a hopelessly trying to conflate one with the other and failing on account of that.

Really what I see is a world which is ripe for the opportunity of millions and millions of Christians worldwide to change their ways and transform within, who could then help bring this about. Yet they choose to believe that the world is evil and unworthy and Christ will sort it out for them...meantime the Christians still support the kingdoms of disparity and cannot tell the difference between truth and lies, or what should and shouldn't be worshiped and even what true worship is.

What specifically does the First Source quote say which contradicts Yeshuas teaching?

[font=Comic Sans MS]Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.[/font]

Perhaps you should reexamine your own beliefs, William? Because this particular quote does not say that one should not worship. This quote defines how one should worship.

In relation to The First Source, Tammy. Were this is underscored, is in the idea of 'in spirit and in truth' which is not about the worshiping of so-called images of GOD or singular representatives of First Source.

I am satisfied your Lord is an impostor and that you are a slave to that image Tammy. I appreciate that you made an effort at least to answer the OP blurb and question, which is more than most of your Christian kin could be bothered with doing. I tried to reach past that slave-woman spectacle and connect with the essence of who you really are beneath that Tammy. Perhaps some connection was made which will have its good effect in the future? For now, I don't think there is anything else we can discuss.

Eventually you will come to the understanding that you and GOD are of the same First Source Consciousness, that you were never created, and that you are no one's slave, as surely as First Source is no one's slave.

[tam]

Peace to you William,

[Replying to post 66 by tam]

So I am not going to respond to much more when it comes to the question of 'worship', especially since your comments seem to be based more on your own ideas than upon my words.

Well Tammy, the question of worshiping a being/beings is central to the OP subject.

Yes, but you keep going beyond what I have said.

I also mentioned that it all has to do with an inner process of deep meaningful introspection and that the kingdom is within,

I have no problem at all with the kingdom being within us, or of worshiping in spirit and in truth. But I suspect you have gone beyond what these things mean as well.

and the idea of that is specific to the individual then bringing the internal into the external, but you apparently rejected that understanding.

The idea that is specific to the individual? What does that even mean, William?

What idea are you referring to and how is it specific to the individual?

I also mentioned that worship was not about kneeling before any being claiming to be GOD or the closest representative thereof, as this is not an acceptable practice in relation to how one's love and praise is transformed into worship in spirit and in truth.

I never said one should worship any being that claims to be God.

The problem with loving an image of GOD Tammy, is that GOD has no form or image so one opens themselves up to being led astray by such images, just on account of that.

You state something like this... and you think you have a leg to stand on when it comes to quoting rule 5 at me?


Where is your backing for this 'assertion' William? Where is the support for any of your claims?

What if I am hearing his voice and passing on what I hear in relation to not worshiping ANY being in form, even if the being claims to be Jesus?

If you were hearing His voice then I do not expect that I should have had to explain that Christ (not "Jesus" - as this was never His name) lives and speaks and teaches us even now.

Are we not speaking about the same character, whatever? You seem to be saying that anyone who calls the character 'Jesus' is showing that they are ignorant of the idea of Christ and have mixed up the two different things to produce an incorrect image.

I will re frame the question then;

"What if I am hearing his voice and passing on what I hear in relation to not worshiping ANY being in form, even if the being claims to be Christ?"

Then my answer is the same. If you were hearing His voice, then I do not expect that I should have had to explain to you that Christ lives and speaks and teaches us even now. That comment would then be followed by the comment on how we are to test the things that we (or others) hear:


But if you had made that claim (and you did not), then we could (and should) test the inspired expression, because not all spirits (or inspired expressions) come from God. We can (and should if indeed we do hear His voice) test the inspired expression against Christ (we can ask Him; since He is the Truth and nothing in contradiction to Him can then be true); we can test it against love (since God is love and truth comes from love), and we can also test the inspired expression against what is written (beginning of course with what Christ said in what is written).

In response to the Adversary who demanded worship of himself, Christ repelled him by speaking the truth,

"Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship [the Lord] your God, and serve him only.'" Matthew 4:10

Precisely Tammy! This is exactly what I have been saying!

No this is not what you have been saying. Please note that my Lord says TO worship God (the Most Holy One of Israel, the God and Father of Christ).


You said:

My outlook is that any true GOD would never demand worship or claim to be my creator.


I also said this in response to your OP (and I have NO idea why you would object to it except for the reason I state in this post):

If ET's came and demanded I worship them, I would know that they are not from my Lord, and I would not worship them. Hence I gave the quote from Revelation, where angels (who serve Christ and God) would not demand or even permit worship of themselves.

That was apparently not a good enough answer for you. You stated that to worship God would mean worshiping those beings that serve Him as well. I disagreed. But it seems you are not going to be satisfied with anything other than someone saying they would NOT worship God.

I am never going to give you that answer William.

That is a deception (and the voice of a stranger), and I am able to avoid it because I belong to Christ and listen to Him. He is the Truth. He is the One to whom God led me and the One to whom God told me to listen. He has never led me wrong. He has never lied to me.... tammy

AND YOU THEN SAID:

GOD would never tell you to do such a thing Tammy.

(you said more than that, but I will not repeat it)

God would never tell me to do WHAT, William? What exactly in my quote above are you suggesting that would God never tell me to do?

The Christ never said for anyone to worship him,

I never said He did.

or that he would sit on a throne

What evidence do you have to support this statement?

Because the evidence we DO have testifies that He DID say He would sit on a throne.

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne..."

and represent the image of GOD

He does not represent the image of God. He IS the image of God. A living image of a living God. That is the reason no image was permitted to be made of God. All of those images would be of dead things (dead trees for instance). The living God has a living image and so He can never be represented in truth by a 'dead' thing.

Christ also said that if we have seen Him, then we have seen His Father as well. If we know Him we know His Father as well.

“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. If you had known Me, you would know My Father as well. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.�

in the form of the Christ and expect or otherwise demand worship from everyone, or 'those who truly love him' or whatever.

He said that if we truly love Him, then we will keep His command and remain in His word.

I truly love Him.

He also said:

Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father’s who sent me.

GOD is simply NOT of FORM Tammy!

You know this how? Shall I repeat rule 5 for you as you have done with me? May I remind you of your earlier words in this thread:

I am ignorant because I do not know and do not assume.

Are you not assuming here? Or if you are not assuming, then are you not claiming to know? And if neither, then are you not stating an opinion? And if you are stating an opinion, how can you demand that I provide evidence for claims I have made (which are personal testimonies, not opinions), without providing evidence for claims you are making, without acting hypocritically?

This means that 'worship and service' is not expected through idolization of imagery. This is why I used that quote, because I feel it expresses the idea of worshiping the One True GOD - First Source - in the only true manner possible...let me remind you and the readers;

You are entitled to your feelings and your opinions, William.

When you bring Christ into the matter, I think it fair for me to respond according to His word.


To be clear, you are stating that worship of God is acceptable, yes?

What examples do you have of Christ correcting people on what God IS?

See above in relation to correcting individuals on what GOD isn't.

That is not the question that I asked. The reason I asked the question I did, is because you were making a claim about something Christ did, and I wanted you to support your claim.

I supported mine with an example, I asked only that you do the same.

My Lord has revealed to me the meaning of some things written in Revelation as well as the meaning of the sheep and the goats. He spoke of them both. So yes, I can know that these are true and from Him.

Your assertions are without anything to back them up Tammy, and what your assertions amount to is the same as with anyone else. They are your interpretations and opinions. Claiming The Christ personally revealed the meaning of some things written does not in itself qualify as anything remarkable or out of the box. Indeed, there is a rule on this forum specifically about this activity;

5: Do not persist in making a claim without supporting it. All unsupported claims can be challenged for supporting evidence. Opinions require no support, but they should not be considered as valid to any argument, nor will they be considered as legitimate support for any claim.

You are asked repeatedly to support your claims re this Tammy, and you have yet to clearly do so.
If what you are saying is simply your opinion, then say so.

Oh, I simply answered your question William.

Not opinion, but personal testimony (which testimony is corroborated - aka supported - in what is written from the words Christ spoke as well as in the experiences that others reported).

I did explain why I think people who believe in this kind of thing...it is because they project themselves and see no problem with being worshiped as GOD on a throne, if they were in the same position. This is simply a case of self aggrandizement and vainglorious thinking.

Well I don't think like that William. I don't think like that at all.

Clearly you do Tammy.

I see. So you will now tell me what I think? You somehow know what I think better than I know what I think? Is that it?

Or is it just that I disprove your theory so you refuse to accept what I say about myself?

This is why I have been encouraging you to examine your beliefs because they might not be where you think they are coming from.

Oh William, how about you let me worry about me, yeah? You might not know where my faith comes from (or you might be unwilling to accept it), but I DO know.

And what in the world makes you think I have never examined my faith or beliefs? Simply because I disagree with you?

Do you think perhaps that you are projecting yourself onto this "first source" and so it wants what you want, what you think is right?

It is possible Tammy. Like attracts like. Logic tells me that If I were the GOD whom created this universe, I would not be wanting to be figuratively on a throne and worshiped in that way. I would see that as something which distracts those who do it, from doing the right thing. They are worshiping a false image of me and expecting me to return and put everything right, which is nonsense as I have given them everything they need to do that job for themselves, and they waste that on idolatry, belief in false promises and conflating truth with lies.

Yep, sounds like projection to me.

Would you not expect such a being to tell you to get up and stop that behavior? Indeed, what would the being think about such people who practice such activity?

My Lord would think that I love Him.

"The one who has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. And the one who loves me will be loved by my Father. I also will love him and will reveal myself to him."

Yes and your claim here is that this one called the 'Christ' is your Lord and master

Yes.

and that he commands you to worship him as an object, on a throne, representing GOD.

I have never said that. This is something YOU add to my words, adding also your own spins and definitions.

Even the story of Jesus, (whom you refer to as the Christ) when tempted by the adversary, spoke of not worshiping beings.

No. You are adding your own spin to His words; making them mean what YOU want, what YOU interpret; what fits YOUR personal theology. This is one reason we have so many false teachings out there. People adding to or taking away from His words.

Christ said to worship God (and if quoting the scripture, then He also gave a name to His God.)

You are adding to His words by ASSUMING that God is not a being... you add your assumption into the meaning of His words, then claim He said something that He never actually said.

Furthermore, GOD is worshiped in spirit and in truth, which is all I am referring to.

Yes, in spirit (since God is spirit)... and in truth (and so in and through Christ).

As OPPOSED to worshiping 'on this mountain or that mountain'... or... 'in this religion or that one'.

“Sir,� the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.�

“Woman,� [Jesus] replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth.�


God sent us His Son (the Truth), through whom we may come to and know Him (God).

What does it matter what the world would think or do, or if the world will permit Christians to build the Kingdom of GOD without the need of another species coming and doing it for them? Your job is not to concern yourself with that, is it?

Correct. My job is to listen to my Lord, to bear witness to Him. To remain in His word.


So I believe Him when He said that the world will not accept (and will even hate) us if it hated Him. That does not mean that I do nothing. It also means that I believe Him when He says that He will return and establish His Kingdom upon the earth.

You do not even know what lies Rome created in relation to this story and what 'Christ' is presumed or it is otherwise claimed to have said.

You do not know what lies Rome created.

I do not care about Rome or what they did or did not do.

I will simply listen to my Lord.

You are a slave to the Christ which Rome created,

I am not and you have again offered no shred of evidence to support this.

What specifically does the First Source quote say which contradicts Yeshuas teaching?

[font=Comic Sans MS]Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.[/font]

Perhaps you should reexamine your own beliefs, William? Because this particular quote does not say that one should not worship. This quote defines how one should worship.

In relation to The First Source, Tammy. Were this is underscored, is in the idea of 'in spirit and in truth' which is not about the worshiping of so-called images of GOD or singular representatives of First Source.

See above for some context of the worshiping in spirit and in truth.

I am going to point out that once again you take my some of my Lord's words, 'worship in spirit and truth', apply your own meaning to them... and at the same time turn around and discard most everything else that He said and taught as being an 'invention of rome' or highly suspect.

How do you pick and choose what you consider to be trustworthy?

Eventually you will come to the understanding that you and GOD are of the same First Source Consciousness, that you were never created, and that you are no one's slave, as surely as First Source is no one's slave.

Assumption? Claiming to know? Opinion?

Evidence or support for this?


**


We do not have to continue; I am just fine with that.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[William]

[Replying to post 68 by tam]

GOD is simply NOT of FORM Tammy!

You know this how?

Form is created Tammy. Unless you are arguing the the First Source was created, then that is the premise.

As to knowing it, it gets down to simple deduction re the philosophy of metaphysical concepts. In relation to the OP blurb, no creature of form claiming to be GOD would demand that type of worship.

May I remind you of your earlier words in this thread:

I am ignorant because I do not know and do not assume.

Are you not assuming here? Or if you are not assuming, then are you not claiming to know?

I am saying I cannot have it both ways Tammy. God is either not created or is created. I accept one idea as logical and reject the other as false, because both cannot be correct.

And if neither, then are you not stating an opinion?

An informed opinion is what I am stating, based on the premise that GOD is not created and that form is created.

And if you are stating an opinion, how can you demand that I provide evidence for claims I have made (which are personal testimonies, not opinions), without providing evidence for claims you are making, without acting hypocritically?

Perhaps you should think about reigning in your emotions here Tammy. You believe that those who disagree with your personal beliefs are therefore 'hating' on you for that, when clearly what is happening is that your beliefs are being challenged as obviously wrong when examined.

You are still conflating the 'personal testimonies' of others which you believe as true, as being 'not opinion' or hearsay, which clearly they are.

You are entitled to your feelings and your opinions, William.

When you bring Christ into the matter, I think it fair for me to respond according to His word.

Let's see now Tammy. Would 'according to his word' be, in your opinion, what is written in the bible? If so, then I have already dealt with that assumption. If not, then you have yet to say what 'his word' is in relation to your claim that 'he told you' what you believe is truth.

To be clear, you are stating that worship of God is acceptable, yes?

Not the vainglorious type of worship you appear to be condoning Tammy. The reader can easily see that this;

[font=Comic Sans MS]Simply express your authentic feelings of appreciation to my inmost presence within you and others, and you broadcast your worship unfailingly into my realm.
This is the feeling that you should seek to preserve in the face of life’s distractions. This is the revelation of my heart to your heart. Live in clarity. Live in purpose. Live in the knowledge that you are in me and I am in you, and that there is no place separate from our heart.[/font]

is something else entirely. It is also something which you clearly claimed didn't belong in the mouth of your master, and he would never agree with or utter such words.

Yet, really it is just another adaptation of 'the golden rule' which - when applied, treats others as if they were aspects of ones self.

In broader terms, it recognizes and honors that which we all - at our very core - ARE, and in that there is no place separate from our heart.

That is not the question that I asked.

There is no difference Tammy. Correcting people on what GOD is, is the same as correcting people of what GOD isn't.

The bottom line is that GOD is not form Tammy. In regard to your Christ, GOD is not represented as any particular form either, whatever image or voice you have in you head about that, makes no difference.

I see. So you will now tell me what I think? You somehow know what I think better than I know what I think? Is that it?

I base my observations on your arguments Tammy. In that, as I said in my last post;

I am satisfied your Lord is an impostor and that you are a slave to that image Tammy. I appreciate that you made an effort at least to answer the OP blurb and question, which is more than most of your Christian kin could be bothered with doing. I tried to reach past that slave-woman spectacle and connect with the essence of who you really are beneath that Tammy. Perhaps some connection was made which will have its good effect in the future? For now, I don't think there is anything else we can discuss.

I did not reach that conclusion by assuming anything about you Tammy, but by examining at face value, what you wrote.

Or is it just that I disprove your theory so you refuse to accept what I say about myself?

You have not disproved anything Tammy. What you say about yourself I have accepted as something you yourself have proclaimed no one is going to change. This doesn't mean that what I have said is untrue or irrelevant. It simply means that your mind belongs to the imagery you gave it over to, and the results of such an act speaks clearly enough to those with eyes wide open.

And what in the world makes you think I have never examined my faith or beliefs? Simply because I disagree with you?

Partly, but moreso because you have not explained the process or shared that with the reader in any way. All you have done is take the opportunity to preach your beliefs as if they were truth, and should be accepted as The Truth.

And mostly because I have been through the process myself, and so I know the exact requirements to this process which can free the slave from their willful servitude to imagery which they have come to adore as their truth...even that they overstep the line in proclaiming such as "The Truth."

and that he commands you to worship him as an object, on a throne, representing GOD.

I have never said that. This is something YOU add to my words, adding also your own spins and definitions.

Well rather than me going back through your posts in this thread to quote where you have most definitely inferred this as something you would do Tammy, why not just tell the reader what it is you think is acceptable in the way of worship? After all, we did not get to this place in our discussion because I was arguing that a being on a throne claiming to be 'The Christ' and demanding to be worshiped, should be worshiped, and that I would do this as a show of my respect and love and admiration and gratitude toward the being on the throne.

That was not MY argument Tammy. I was saying otherwise. Indeed I said that MY reaction would be to negotiate against having to bow down to such a demand. [see post #52]

Face it Tammy, we would not be having this continuing debate if you had agreed with me that my reaction would be the best to adopt, right?

No Tammy. We would not. So obviously you had something to say on the matter, re your being the slave woman to the Christ image and it is a bit late in the game to be complaining that I somehow 'am getting you wrong' or 'putting words in your mouth' or 'adding to your words and putting a spin on those.'

Feel free to correct me any time on that Tammy, but steer clear of making the accusation without showing the reader exactly WHERE I am supposedly doing this, if for no other reason that to honor truthfulness...and respect me as a fellow aspect of GOD-consciousness within human form.

[tam]

Peace to you William.


I am not going to go through the same kind of post all over again. I am content to let my previous post stand as it is.


I am, however, going to give you an example of how you absolutely do misrepresent me and my words:

Perhaps you should think about reigning in your emotions here Tammy. You believe that those who disagree with your personal beliefs are therefore 'hating' on you for that, when clearly what is happening is that your beliefs are being challenged as obviously wrong when examined.

Ignoring the condescending comment about 'my emotions', I do not believe that someone who disagrees with my personal beliefs is 'hating' on me. That is ridiculous. I have never said that and I do not believe that.


Nor is it it up to me to go back and prove how you are misrepresenting me. The simple fact is that I have not said this. If you are going to claim that this is something that I believe, then you are the one who needs to go back and find where I said it, then present your evidence.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy