imanuelga
-
Posts
52 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by imanuelga
-
-
Why Samson and not Isaac?
Isaac also but it is an other story.
And where do we see that Samson's mother was filled with the Holy Ghost?The mother of Samson was more cleaver than is husband. She explained why they have not to fear.
He was a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death->
Christ wasn't.
You mean that Jesus wasn't consacred to his father ? Nazarite is an other symbol... Litteral symbol of spiritual.
AJesus wasn't reknowned for his physical strength.There is a parallele between the physical strengh Samson and the spiritual of Christ.
No one will never been more spiritual than Christ and no one will never been more strengfull than Samson
Wow, that covers about 2/3rds of the book of Judges, are they all Jesus, even Deborah?Not sure yet, but I I shall tend to say yes.
Again, happened to dozens of people.compare
Luc 2:40 *And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.
and
Juges 13:24 *¶And the woman bare a son, and called his name Samson: and the child grew, and the LORD blessed him.
By the way Samson means "Sun" and the Jesus is the Light
He wanted to find a spouse from Israel ennemy.->Where did Jesus do so?In the scriptures, The lord husband and the chirch his futur wife.
Apocalypse 21:2 *And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Find me one set of parents that understood their children %100 of the time. Besides, the two situations are extremely different, Samson, for instance, has no understanding of why he is being inspired to wed that Philistine, whereas Jesus knew exactly what he was doing. Jesus also obeyed his parents, Samson didn't.
Both were Misunderstood in their mission. It can be say that Samson disobey his parent, (because the story can't be exactly exactly a similitud with Christ life..) but the autor write clearly, "that it was of the LORD"
You know even having 20years old I did disobey my parent to enter in the church of LDS.
You mean Samson posed a riddle before the Philistine guests which they had no way of answering, in order to win a wager. Yes, this is exactly like Christ using allegories and parabolic tales in order to impart different levels of meaning to those spiritually prepared to derive benefit from them.
He was honest : he asked if they accept a riddle, and they did accept. What is bad in that?
Weddings usually involve guests.
but not your ennemies Usually
Inquiring of their were dressed. ->
?? Would you mind rephrasing that.
Of course, Compare :
Matthieu 22:12 *And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
In both marriage, they focus on the dress on wedding.
You mean "and was an adultress." Where do we read that Christ was married, let alone that his first wife was given to other.
Jeremy 3:8 *And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.
9 *And it came to pass through the lightness of her whoredom, that she defiled the land, and committed adultery with stones and with stocks.
Osée 3:1 *¶Then said the LORD unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the LORD toward the children of Israel, who look to other gods, and love flagons of wine.
Finaly his ennemy killed his first wife. ->
Where do we see that in relation to Christ?
Actes 7:59 *And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
60 *And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
So he smote them and retire from them.
70 After Christ.
But his ennemy wanted to take vengeance against his people.
compare with
Exode 5:22 *And Moses returned unto the LORD, and said, Lord, wherefore hast thou so evil entreated this people? why is it that thou hast sent me?
And He paid for us all...
and Esaïe 53:6 *All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
(dalila is an Ebrew name).
Actually, we don't know that. It is just as likely to be Canaanite, or a professional name.
Dalila is the only woman name mentionned and it means something like weak or Pretty.
This man that is more defigured as anyone? Isaie 53 ?
defigured = Misunderstood person in a symbolic sense.
I will answer more questions of course !
-
The eternal life is to know God and Jesus Intimely as you say.Please explain why a verse with a literal and figurative and mystical meaning which has nothing whatsoever to do with mere intellectual comprehension, but has everything to do with an intimate relationship and even unio mystica should be read the way you do.
No more than that.
But If reading the scripture in a litteral sense, without looking for the real teaching there is in it, I not sure it helps to know God.
What more can I say?
There is of course many way of interpret the scripture, mine or those of Swedenborg are not the only one.
Can I give mine here of some ?
For example Samson ?
-
Yes, I would take it literally, and yes, it is true, literally. This is a classic example of how not knowing (indeed, disregarding) the original cultural and historical contexts leads to artificial interpretations.
Ok, it is true "litteraly", but what is the lesson for us? what does it teach to us if you take just this scriputure in this sense ?
Do you believe that the lord (David is a representation of the Lord, LDS church admit it) hates really the blind(physicaly) and the lame?
I don't believe so and that is why I said It wasn't true litteraly (in fact half spiritualy half litteraly if you want)
Again, what is the spiritual lesson there is in this scripture? What did the profets want us to understand?
That David don't like them? litteraly?
you asked me also why you should believe my view?
Well you don't have to !
One reason, the word is "hidden", I believe, is so that those who want to believe in a spiritual sense can and those who don't can also.
So, if you find instructive for your knowledge of God to believe that David don't like the the blind and the lame, it is fine with me.
Personaly, I prefer to understand that when we are blind and lame (spiritualy) we can reject the Christ. But one day the lord will Cure and he also will bring them :,
Jérémie 31:8 *Behold, I will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the coasts of the earth, and with them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and her that travaileth with child together: a great company shall return thither.
-
Samson and Delilah
Judges 13-16
In Judges 13, we find Israel falling into sin again. This time the Philistines conquered Israel. The Philistines were a Sea People related to the Phoenicians. They originally came from the Greek Isles, and were known for their pottery and art of the period. They were culturally and aesthetically more advanced than Israel. Samson would prove to be a bigger “philistine” than the Philistines.
Manoah’s barren wife was told by an angel that she would bare a son to be a judge in Israel. This son would be a Nazarite: one set apart to God’s service, who was not to drink alcohol, eat unclean things, cut his hair, or touch the dead. Samson would disobey virtually all the Ten Commandments of God. As mentioned before, God used what was available in Israel to deliver Israel. Samson was the best available, but was not that great.
For Samson, his purpose was not to serve God, but was to fight the Philistines because they annoyed him. He sought to marry a Philistine woman. When riddles and bets with the Philistines were rigged, he destroyed their crops by sending hundreds of foxes with firebrands tied to their tails through the land. An army of Philistines attempt to stop Samson, and he slew them with the jawbone (Lehi) of an ass.
He slew a lion, and later found in the dead lion (unclean and dead) that bees made a honeycomb within it. Instead of avoid the dead, he ate of the honeycomb and took some home to his parents.
As with Israel, so it was with Samson. Things went well for them, and they fell into sin. Samson met Delilah, a beautiful Philistine woman. Once again, Samson was engaged with women outside of Israel. And the woman became his downfall. She continually went from enticing him to be with her, to enticing him to reveal the secret of his strength. Eventually, he revealed his secret, and lost the power of his great strength. As the Philistines blinded him, and made him work as an ox grinding the grain in the prison house.
At length, his hair grew back. The Philistines were celebrating a great festival of one of their gods, and wanted to bring in Samson to mock as a display of Israel’s failure. Samson now had his power restored, or part of it. In grasping two pillars to bring down the building and slay the princes of Philistia, he did not have God’s work in mind: “O Lord God, remember me, I pray thee, and strengthen me, I pray thee, only this once, O God, that I may be at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes” (16:28). Samson doesn’t want to rescue Israel, he wants revenge for being blind. Of all the sloppy and poor judges of Israel, he was the worst. Samson probably had the greatest ability to free Israel, but wasted his great strength on his own lusts instead.
I don't agree but at all at this vision of Samson.
May it be allowed to explain Who is Samson?
Maybe you can guess ...
An angel anounce is birth.
He was a Nazarite to God from the womb to the day of his death
"His mother" shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and she shall be filled with the Holy Ghost.
No other man had his strengh
His mission was to deliver Israel (who was under domination ... and who was doing bad before God)
When he was Growing, God blessed Him and The spirit was upon him
He wanted to find a spouse from Israel ennemy.
His parents didn't understand him in one occasion : "wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?"
He spoke as with enigms for that "Philistin" couldn't understand
He Invited them to his marriage ! Inquiring of their were dressed.
But they just try to catch him and were not honest.
So he gave them the salaries.
His first wife was given to an other... and was adultery.
Finaly his ennemy killed his first wife.
So he smote them and retire from them.
But his ennemy wanted to take vengeance against his people.
So he asked his people to bind him and be livered to their enemy.
He had again a big victory.
And as Moses, he asked for water from a rock.
He enter to the House of a other women who was a prostitute at Gaza (strong place. Well do you know also a strong place from noone had escape before him ?) At midnight (In the darkness), his ennemy tried again to catch him. But he leaves with the door of the town on his shoulder to Ebron.
After that he really felt in love (dalila is an Ebrew name). But He was betrayed by those that he loved for money...
3 Times he resisted to temptation. And He get so profoundly sad unto death.
But because of his love for her, he accept to fall under his ennemies.
So She shave off the seven locks of his head.
So he was let alone not understanding why !
His ennemy tortured him, and brougth him to Gaza (strong place...)
But there, He prayed the lord and them he get his strengh back
So in his death, he distroyed his ennemy in a great great great vitory ! Greater than never before pushing the two middle pillars that are death and sin.
So his family took him and brought him back to his father house.
So who is he?
This man that is more defigured as anyone? Isaie 53 ?
I really hope you will find !
-
How much do you think morality and being valiant depends on consciousness versus comprehension?
Does 'consciousness' come from the physical wiring of the neurons in your brain or from the influences of your spiritual self?
If I am understanding you, you speak of our consciousness as the LDS church call the light of Christ, that mean the hability of distinguish the good from the bad.
Ok, well... Even if it is not so clear for those who have been instructed wrongly for who have lived in very horrible conditions as child.
When I say that our conscience change and grow also with our understanding, I didn't feel I was blaspheming... For example, somebody who never heard about the word of wisdom of lds... Can he feel guilty because he drink a glass of wine when eating?
But for a LDS Member, his couscience will speak to him differently.
We will be also judge (if we are judge... because may be it will just be us that we will choose where we want to go) by our sincerity to look for the truth. Or if we prefer to stay in error. Why people prefer to stay in error?Luckily, we are not judged by a certain level of comprehension but the manner in which we deal with what we are given, in other words, what is in our hearts, whether we are faithful servants or not.
There is 2 possibilities : they lies or they are blind themself. Because I can tell you that, for example, for Samson they miss the most important of this story, and even more ! They bear false testimony ! And in their ignorance, they judge the Christ ! You can read that the church say of him.. How can inspired men miss that ? And there is so many more !If the scriptures drive us to be more faithful and valiant that is all that matters, we do not have to comprehend the exact or historical or literal meaning of them. We have leaders directed by Christ to make sure that they are interpreted correctly, whether we have faith in that system, Christ's church or not is up to you. Comprehension on an individual level is not required.
But I don't want to attack people, just the error.
That is wrong about Swedenborg ! He never said that his comprehension came from himself : That we know don't come from ourself, the spiritual comprehension as for every one who have faith, from God. As I quoted before :To say that comprehension is a key part of salvation would be to promote ones own self attained knowledge, to trust in one's own knowledge over Christ. Swedenburg promoted just that, to be self instructed, just like Satan's plan, 'I can do it by myself' ... 'I don't need a God directed church and I don't need a savior', is how I see his teachings.
Hebrew 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
And also, "To say that comprehension is a key part of salvation would be to promote ones"..., well
Russell T. Osguthorpe General conferance October 2009 answer for me :
"Learning and teaching are not optional activities in the kingdom of God. They are the very means by which the gospel has been restored to the earth and by which we will gain eternal life. They provide the pathway to personal testimony. No one can be “saved in ignorance” (D&C 131:6)."
I feel sad because it looks as I make you feel bad... But I just say what I believe is true and I will continue because I do believe it is right !
Sincerely yours
-
Wow, you missed the meaning entirely. What happened here is that the Jebusites decided to scare David and his army by an object lesson of sorts. In the ancient Near East, blindness and lameness were considered punishment by a god. What the Jebusites hoped to acheive by placing the blind and lame upon the walls was scaring David's men into believing that the Jebusite god would curse them as he did the blind and lame.
Hello,
your interpretation of the litteral sense may be true but what about the : "Wherefore they said, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house." ? Who is in the spiritual ? and why are they called David ennemy's ?
As this post try to explain, there is different level of reading the scripture. And the litteral is with the less interest (in my humble opinion...)
The spiritual is that when we are blind, and lamb (spiritualy) we reject Christ. Of course, he can deliver us ! As it is written :
Jérémie 31:8 *Behold, I will bring them from the north country, and gather them from the coasts of the earth, and with them the blind and the lame, the woman with child and her that travaileth with child together: a great company shall return thither.
Concerning John 3:17: I agree with you and in what the church of LDS explains....
But reading the scripture only in a litteral sense will not help !
Thanks for your message.
-
Faith is much more important than comprehension. Comprehension comes after faith.
That is true !
But what is faith?
Hebreux 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
I Believe and I have Faith that if I am looking for my lord with all my heart, mind and strength (Matthiew 22:37 *Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.) Then he will recompense me with comprehension.
The goal of religion, therefore, is not to fully understand all of God's ways and purposes in this life but to develop faith in His ways. I think that is the premise that you are tripping over.
1st questions :
So can you explain what do you pray for ? To keep the commendment? so you will be awarded in the next life?
If the goal of life is the trial of your faith, you should ask for this, shouldn't you ?
Also if comprehension is not so important..
2nd question :
Why has the bible so many pages, if not to be understood or for our profit ?
Because if I follow you I think we should burn nearly the all Bible !!
I will give you mine answers to these questions still I will wait for your answer:
When I pray, I pray for wisdom, and understanding. I pray not for the rich things of the earth but for those in heaven. Because there is riches who are uncorruptible (as in Genèse 2:11 *The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;
12 *And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. That is already a symbol)
And I pray for my children that they do get this riches too and also to mine "ennemies" that they get them to.
Because I have the weakness to think that I understand (a little) this scripture :
1 Corinthiens 1:5 *That in every thing ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge;
Of course, and this is to answer the 2nd question, I will never understand all things.. Of course not because God is infinit and I am not. Because He is without comparaison any with me. Because I am nothing !
But I will always be Thirsty and hungry!
May it be the same for you !
Respectuously !
-
Sometimes those intellectual pursuits obscure the 'right eye', and Jesus said it is better to cut it out then let it take you down.
Do you mean my physical body eyes ?
I can testify to you that this life is not a test of comprehension. This would be a horrible way to test comprehension, to place someone in a fallen body with a vail obscuring the past. This life is a test of faith. I believe we knew more before this life than we do now.
Men will be judge depending on or conscience not only our comprehesion. But our conscience depend also of our comprehension : Romains 2
Concerning the eye and faith, let me share this scripture also :
2 Samuël 5:6 *¶And the king and his men went to Jerusalem unto the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land: which spake unto David, saying, Except thou take away the blind and the lame, thou shalt not come in hither: thinking, David cannot come in hither.
7 *Nevertheless David took the strong hold of Zion: the same is the city of David.
8 *And David said on that day, Whosoever getteth up to the gutter, and smiteth the Jebusites, and the lame and the blind, that are hated of David's soul, he shall be chief and captain. Wherefore they said, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house.
Is It not amazing how David (the lord) seems to reject the blind and the lame?
Would you take it literally?
Is it true literally?
Of course not ! But Let me say that I will prefer to be blind in the flesh than blind spiritually !!
Still people are blind, not only they don't see God but even they reject him !
When it is wrotten that he came to give sight to the blind, he spoke mainly spiritually.
You surely know the scripture who say in John 17:3 "The eternal life is to Know you and this one you send, ie Jesus"
Of course, comprehension is not enough. It is just a part of the faith. Swedenborg said that 12 represent the holy of faith (as the 12 sons of Israel, whom the first is Ruben - he saw- and the second the ear Simeon - he eard-)
But It is the beginning. How can you say : I have enough?
I don't believe you.
God bless you.
-
You know pretty much than I do !
That is exactly what I was saying, 'a battle within ourselves' (a battle between body and spirit) that you rejected, now you are saying that you like that way of interpreting the scriptures?
It's not a battle between body and spirit...
It's a battle agains error, false and bad. To became a new man.
Swedenborg is not against the body !
But He believe that god put in men that he called "remains" or "reliquae", that is the good in Him.He did not believe that we existed before as spirits.
It is more or less the equivalent of saying that we did good choise before coming on earth (that we are good enough to come on earth and take a body). The differents is that Swedenborg says that this is from God and LDs doctrine from our choice. Personnaly I found more easy to love that is divine in man this way.
Yes he didn't.He did not believe in a resurrected body.
Satan would love for people to say that they have no need for a church and therefore reject saving ordinances and being a covenant people. I would never want to promote such thinking.
Well, in the beginning of this post I had been warned to be respectuous with other believes.
May be we are as passionate as the other one.
Therefore I will answer you, I hope, with all respect each of us deserv as a child of God:
Satan surely don't like also a person who teach that we don't have to believe and accept what we don't agree or understand. I would like to point out that you are forced to "flatten" your thoughts if your conclusions about the deity does not correspond with the leaders ones.
Concerning the priestood.
Swedenborg said that what make a person great in even is his will of humiliate himself and serve the other.
The priestood, he said, is the celestial love. That is the real power and the joy and that is make us Great, and this come from God. That church is within us (temple).
Well, LDS doctrine teach that priesthood without the justice doesn't count also.
But the justice without priesthood ? This doesn't count neither ? Because I heard a lot of men who died for justice without the priestood. Who would have autority?
I do prefer justice without priesthood than the oposite.
You may say both... because It is impossible to get full justice without priesthood ... So explain me what is full justice.
Also, of course, it is written that every body will confess that God is the Lord(all knees will...) but it is more of by ourself that because God will compel us by force ! And I don't think also that the lord want us to sumit us in this way neither ! That is what Swedenborg believe. It would be rather strange that we teach this to a children concerning the laws (that we have to fight and vote against bad laws or dicators ) but accept this because it is from God !
It is true we have to humiliate before God but I don't believe it is in this way. That is what Swedenborg teach.
You may say also that the priesthood is to bring the truth and salvation to men (LDS doctrine teach that is the power of God to serve others), and that because of Priestood there is revelation from eaven.
however ,To come back to the theme of this post : I wrote a letter to my bishop (and I gave him, he said it was very respectuous ) who gave it to the stake president who give to... Because I disagree absolutly what the church teach about Samson, this put me off or sad!.. Because It'is unbeliveble that the church who name with the name of the savior is unable to find him in this scriptures when he is so evident ! As blind ! And more without shame, judging the lord himself !
This is amaizing to me !
So I am waiting for my jugement ! Because I will not sustain leaders who bring false accusation against some one they don't understand!
But I will wait the answer patiently !
I don't want to argue with anyone, but I am looking for the truth (wherever it is) and I will also defend it (with a sword if necessary
)With respect for you but not for the wrong and error.
-
if I don't believe that the bible is true, and that all of the religions are just made up, then why should I believe in god? Where is the proof that there is a god?
Because could you love some one just believing this has no sense ?
If you believe that love is just the result of evolution to allow live to reproduce, That the feeling of love is an misleading of the nature, I dare you to tell your girlfriend!
I think this the profound aspiration of human is love. This come from God and trying to destroy this, is a "crime".
Yours,
-
Hello,
You are quoting Swedenborg over Brigham Young and Elder Widtsoe?
Yes I do :).
Swedenborg is the guy who believed that there is no Heavenly Father or Holy Ghost, just Jesus
Well, I am not reading him for enough time, to know exactly what he believes (It's hard to understand !!), but this resum is not exact : He believe it is the same persone but not the same function.
He also believed the final judgment has already taken place in 1757.
I am not sure of what he said in this so i will prefer defer my answer.
Since Swedenborg is male according to his own theories then, his views are purely rational?
This must be wrong, because the good and the intellect must be present in every one.
I think it's represents our believes that is different of our charitys. The battle in scriptures, represents the battle of the lord and within ourselfs to become what he called "regenerated"(other would say born again... Saints...). I like this way of interpret the scriptures.
When I said that in some scriptures as I quoted, Its is written to kill the males, that means in was about the truth. (It is intresting if you think of pharaon who want's to kill the males of Israel but keep whe female alives -Egypt represent the Science-)
especially as he was never married
It must have been a enormous dram for him because I always explain that this was the most marvelous thing. He could have married but he refused because she didn't love him (the father wanted her to marry him).
In those days, this tell much of his personality.
He had never been known as a bitter man as far as I read but much Honest and honored. The trials of live aren't they to make us better persons?Makes him come across as a bitter bachelor
Again, interesting theories, but fortunately we have modern revelation.
To say what I think, I don't know if every think he said was true, but I think he interprets the scriptures with much respect and profound view as anyone.
This is an adress where a member of the church compare Swedenborg doctrine and Joseph Smith. There is a lot of in common :
I have been a member for 20 years, because I found teaching that were near what I thought (I did serve a mission), but If I had known Swedenborg before, It is to Him that I would have turn me.
With much respect,
-
1. Evolution is a theory, but I wouldn't call it just a theory. To me, it is the way I view life and the world around me. It is not just a simple fact I can ramble on about, it is a way to explain how things are and gives me comfort knowing that I am not wrong in my leaving the church. To me, if evolution were to be broken down and proven to be false, then I wouldn't know what to believe, unless there was some other supported theory. I defend evolution just as strong as some would defend religion, and to me, it's not just means to the end, but a search for truth.
Do you know Hubert Reeves? An astrophysicien who also believe in evolution.
He wrote many books, but he never exclude religion.
Science answers "How", Religion "Why".
Evolutionism as some time been used to justify way of thinking very selfish : "the strong live, the week die".
Even, if Darwin explain that social comportement help to survive and honesty could be a result of evolution.
But believing or not it come to god , depends of a free agency. And the meaning we want to give to our lives.
Book of Victor frankel "Man search for meaning"
-
Also, his career isn't religion, or even anti-religion. It's evolution. And trust me, that makes him very, very happy.
I believe also in evolution, but I still believe in God.
Sciences and religion have to be separated. The problem had always been than one try to influance, dominate, the other :remember the Catholic with Galileo and now some evolutionist (Darwin and ...) who try to demonstrate that the historical acount of the creation is false so the bible also...
But I believe the bible is more symbolicly true than Historicly (in this part ..). So personaly I don't care.
The spiritual truths are to be understood not only with our rational.
The followings scriptures must apply to us and I believe answer your question :
Matthieu 15:11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
and also :
Matthieu 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
And also :
James 3:11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?
12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
13 ¶Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.
14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.
17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.
This wisdom is more valuable than the scientific even if we can love and apreciate this one also (and have joy in it :-) ).
Personally, I am still a Christian even if I consider myself no more as a mormon.
Good continuation,
Sorry for my English, I am french..
-
If we understand the scriptures spiritually then we understand that the epoch of Sampson is not just a story of a prophet long ago but a story of our struggles with the powers given us from on high against the powers and influences of the world. (See Eccl 1:9)
Hello,
Who is Samson for you ?
-
Those are interesting theories but they do not come from the gospel of Jesus Christ that I know. I think Brigham Young and Elder Bednar and Elder Widtsoe (who had a biochemistry degree from Harvard as well) explain those two poles a little more clearly
The rational pole (male) and the other pole will (female) - the truth and the good if positive, the falsities and the bad if negative - are not similar with the spirit and the body.
So it is why in others scriptures, the hebrews had to kill all ! Even the suns and daugthers..
Deutéronome 20:16 *But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
17 *But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:
18 *That they teach you not to do after all their abominations, which they have done unto their gods; so should ye sin against the LORD your God.
Well I hope I express correctly the idea of Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772)
Friendly,
-
I think I would use the words 'spiritually minded' and 'carnally minded' as opposed to spiritual versus literal.
Hello,
not exactly. I think (now) it is not enough to thing of a the spiritual state of a man using 'spiritual' an 'carnal'. There is in man 2 pôles : his rational, and his will.
may be some time his will is well oriented but his rational is in error. In the church, this is a little mentionned in D&C when it is spoken of those who search for the true but don't know where to find it.
To produce Good, the rational and the will of a person must be in the truth and in the Good.
So It can be said of this person :"He is spiritual".
Concerning the scriptures, of course we can find good in the litteral : for example when Abraham leaved his contry to obey God, or when he advocated for residents of Sodom and Gomorre.
So in the litteral sense there is Good too.
But I believe, the most important of the teaching is on the symbolic sense (that one called the internal)
If we stay on the litteral, we miss the essential and we will not be able to be in the good and enjoy of it.
For exemple in the scripture of Deutéronome 20:13 *And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
14 *But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
It is about the conquest of the promise land (our promised land...) and it is intersted that it is the lord who delivered it into us but still we have to conquer it. In this land (ourself), there is people. Some are male other female, some are from the rational(male) and here represent the falsities, and other from the will(female), here the good.
So it seems to me that this scripture means that we have to fight with the 'sword' (of the truth) against the falsities but preserve the good of the will.
So that we can enjoy etc...
So it is also the error we have to fight against and not person.
This is not a black and white issue, we are all, always to some degree carnally minded and to some degree spiritually minded.
Our intellect and our will (male and female) must married and progress together.
-
To answer your question we can look at Isaiah talking before king Ahaz. The Hebrew is “im lo ta aminu ki lo tea menu”. The translation does not come out right until one realizes that Isaiah is using a play on words and is being sarcastic. In essence Isaiah is saying - “If you do not believe me (what I am telling you) it is because you are not loyal to G-d”.
Thus Jesus used this concept in saying - those that have eyes to see and ears to hear. This has no meaning without spiritual worthiness.
The Traveler
Thank you for this exemple of Isiah and king Ahaz : hat Isaiah is using a play on words and is being sarcastic. In essence Isaiah is saying - “If you do not believe me (what I am telling you) it is because you are not loyal to God”
This symbol with eyes is often used in the scripture even before Christ.
For exemple :
1 Samuël 14:27 But Jonathan heard not when his father charged the people with the oath: wherefore he put forth the end of the rod that was in his hand, and dipped it in an honeycomb, and put his hand to his mouth; and his eyes were enlightened.
Psaumes 69:3 I am weary of my crying: my throat is dried: mine eyes fail while I wait for my God.
Psaumes 69:23 Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not; and make their loins continually to shake.
The first son of Jacob is Ruben (he sees), and the second Simeon(he hears)
It is a constant in scriptures.
-
[ We see this in the punishment given to Sampson when his eyes were gouged and burned - making him blind. This was a very common practice for subversive elements. As punishment blindness and deathness (destroying ears) was very common. Thus Jesus used this concept in saying - those that have eyes to see and ears to hear. This has no meaning without spiritual worthiness. (...)
Without spiritual worthiness - it just will not work. Without the spirit one cannot teach - cannot even learn. This is also very evident in the great debate concerning works verses grace. Unless a person is spiritually worthy they cannot understand the scriptures concerning the grace of G-d - thus it does not matter which side of the issue the spiritual unworthy argue - they are wrong.
The Traveler
Well I would prefer to avoid any discussion about "grace against works" cowerdly but not on Samson !!
And after all, I think you are right and the church too when it's taught that we will not be saved only because our believe in Christ.
Believing that we are saved only because of what we believe (even if it is in christ) and that we can do what we want regardless if it is good or bad is a blasphem !
But also believing we are doing the good by keep the commandement is being shortsighted (my opinion).
The good is to love our eavenly father with all our hart, mind and strength ! And our neighbours as ourself !
But how to love? Who know to love? If not the lord himself?
As it is written in the book of mormon, moroni 7:10-26 :
A bad man can't do that is good. And It is not only the work that count but the hart...
Some may also say: it is by the doing that we will become...
I think rather that the commandement are the external expression of what is interior, but what we do (the external) have also a consequense in our interior as you wrote.
We are not naturally spiritual (Mosiah 3:19)! It's God who changes us to became spiritual.
Any way, I'd rather talk about samson !! :-) because it is more the theme of this post because 'I think' Samson is misunderstood because the sense is taken only litteraly.
Friendly yours,
-
Our test is to see what our soul delights in more, things that are carnal or things that are spiritual. If we don't actively seek out spiritual passions the default is to become carnal in nature. So, we are constantly fighting that battle to not slip into that carnal state. Those words remind us of that constant battle, to endure to the end.
So you think that because we keep the commandements we are spiritual (so we can understand the scriptures ) and when we do not, we are not?
Do you really believe this is so ?
I can understand it because I did too!
Well, if this was true nobody could undestand the scriptures because nobody keep the commandements.... (unless myself of course
) But I will stop here because I can hear coming soon the horses of the batle between grace and works... And I don't want it ! I beat a retreat cowardly ! I reconized I am not armed.Can I propose you some scriptures this time according to my very figting temperament
Deutéronome 20:13 *And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword:
14 *But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee.
Can you undestand what it is spiritualy expressed here?
Ps :
I have to say to be honest that, even if I did believe for a long time that the scriptures have a spiritual sense that the literal just represent, but I am not the first one ! And particulary one of whom now I am spoiling him shamelessly.
-
And Google has a sense of humor, too!
Yes
-
Not sure I follow your line of thinking. .......
God has not hidden anything from us in the scriptures it is the method of viewing and interpreting we choose that puts the blinders on keeps them off.
Thanks for your answer. I respect it.
And you point really well on what we disagree! That is nice!
Effectively, the sense of the scripture is not hidden for this who is spiritual.
But we are men, human, and natural.
And the two men have a different "perception".
When a natural man hears the word "blind", he thinks on the natural eyes. When a spiritual man hears the same word he thinks in the state of a soul who can't see the spiritual (who is in incredulity etc).
For exemple, in the book of mormon, when we read the travell of Lehi and his family in the desert and the use of the liahona....(I take an exemple in the book of mormon respectuously ) At first, it could be read as an historical account...
But even Alma in Alma:36 or 37, said that this never end to have a symbolical meaning.
And explain that it represent our live in the desert driven by our faith depending on our diligence...
So the natural see only historical, natural account.... But I believe there is much more in the word of God.
I Believe there is no single natural word that have not a spiritual correspondance (who is not a symbol of this spiritual).
To have acces to this sense, we have to pray, to ask ("ask and you shall receive") be humble etc...
So it is the reason the thruth is "hidden" as I have already mentionned:
Proverbes 25:2 *¶It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.
respectly yours,
-
Scriptures are to be understood and interperted spiritually - which has a very different requirement from literal of symbolic.
The Traveler
I am not sure to undestand that you mean.
My post wanted to point out that there is more in the scripture than the literal sense.
The real sense is hidden. And it is spiritualy than we can reach this sense. As it is written :
1 Corinthiens 2:14 *But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 *But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
So I would like to draw attention to the fact that stay only in the litteral is an error.
Why the word is Hidden?
Of course I have my idea.
I think it is to help us to humiliate ourself and to make effort to know our god.
If we are "poor" and reconize we are poor, we can ask for the lord help. If we are rich (or we believe we are), not :
Proverbes 28:11 *¶The rich man is wise in his own conceit; but the poor that hath understanding searcheth him out.
Apocalypse 3:17 *Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
And in this scriptures, the words "miserable", "poor", "blind", "naked", are they to be understood litteraly ? or do they represent symbolicly a state of a soul?
Of course they are symbolic.
Friendly yours,
-
Uh, guys? The OP's location is France. Perhaps we're being a bit harsh in response to what may simply be a translation issue?
Thank you.
It is true I am french and the English is not easy for me and it is true too : I use also google traductions !
But any way :
I believe the scripture have a symbolic meaning.
For example : the term sword is often used in scripture, even the lord use it saying that :
Apocalypse 1:16 *And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.
If we just say that the explain that the true believer will have not an easy life is not in the symbolic meaning. This is litteral. Even, if this litteral is also true. But I beleave it is more a consequence of the spiritual meaning.
Some where even in church teachings, it is explain that the sword represent the word of god who can separate the thuth from the false.
The word sword in Matthieu 10:34 is still in this sense in my opinion.
But I agree I should not have used it in this contexte to argue with anyone. So I apologize if I heart anyone.
But these words of the lord are in my opinion near in the sense with these ones :
Matthieu 10:39 *He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
Luc 18:25 *For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
Of course, may be these scripture are true in the literal sense... but they are true because they are true in the symbolic too.
What is the symbolic sense?
of what kind of richness was he rich ? Just material?
You know: I believe we work more or less as in science : we do not go forward because of the truth we have, but because of the falsities we unterstand to be wrong.
If I am here in this forum is because I have been a member for more than 20 years, and I love the members, but it is also true, I don't beleave any more that the leader always says true doctrines, even Joseph Smith.... But I don't want to speak of what separate us.
I want to share and listen what are those symbolic sense.
If people wants to speak only of the literal, I am not interested.
Humbly yours,
-
Then why should we give any opinions since you already have your conclusion that you deem the only correct answer and the tone gives the impression that you are not here for a give and take discussion, but to shout down those who dare to have an opposing view?
conclusions was not the good term : better may be I should have used : "thoughts"
Your are right and you are wrong : I don't want to shoot anybody. But It is true I do not affraid to have my own opinions even if they are not the standart ones.
Is it possible to express them here, if with courtesy ?
If you think I am in a fighting spirit, may be you can explain me what these words of the lord mean :
Matthieu 10:34 *Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
Lesson #19 - Reign of the Judges
in Old Testament
Posted · Edited by imanuelga
To understand who are the Philistine in a spiritual sense (and not litteral), it is usefull to see them when they appeared first : With Abraham in Guerar and latter with Isaac.
The point was about the well of water.
Genèse 21:25 *And Abraham reproved Abimelech because of a well of water, which Abimelech's servants had violently taken away.
All during the history of men, some will pretend have the truth but they prevent the other to get this water. Phariseans were of that kind :
Matthieu 23:13 *¶But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
People (Israel spiritualy) believe them : so in a way this good people were under their domination (spiritualy)
Samson tell us how the lord did to deliver from them.
For exemple when it is said :
Juges 15:3 *And Samson said concerning them, Now shall I be more blameless than the Philistines, though I do them a displeasure.
That means that It is difficult to explain the truth to people who don't want to hear it.
It is like cause them a displeasure. But the lord wanted to at all cost... Because he loved them.
So he was looking for every ocasion to "dispute" but in reallity to explain them and make him know by them.
When it is said he was Angry (it is often said of the lord even if Joseph Smith said it was a bad traduction, in reality not), that mean by contrary that he had a lot of compassion.
Yea it is not evident but it is However very true !
Exemple Exode 4:14 *And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart.
That means he did have much compassion in fact.
How could you explain that Samson did so many extrahordinary things if he was so unworthy?
No where in this scriptures, you will find that he did commit adultary.
Even with Dalila, the men where hidden in the room. (So Samson was Known to be respectuous of the chastity low).
In the case of the prostitute, remember the spies of josue who stay in that kind of hotel...
The autor speaks well of him why didn' you?