The unclean


romans8
 Share

Recommended Posts

Who are the unclean in this passage:

"Wherefore, if ye have sought to do wickedly in the days of your probation, then ye are found
unclean before the judgment-seat of God; and no unclean thing can dwell with God; wherefore, 
ye must be cast off forever
" (1 Nephi 10:21).

Is 'cast off' a designation for the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants?

Matteo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, romans8 said:

Who are the unclean in this passage:

"Wherefore, if ye have sought to do wickedly in the days of your probation, then ye are found
unclean before the judgment-seat of God; and no unclean thing can dwell with God; wherefore, 
ye must be cast off forever
" (1 Nephi 10:21).

Is 'cast off' a designation for the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants?

Matteo

I will attempt to make my understanding as clear as possible.  But to understand we need to understand a couple of terms.  Anciently the term righteous meant someone that made and kept covenants with G-d.  In contrast wickedness meant someone that refused to covenant with G-d or that broke their covenants.  Mostly we think of the result - that is that someone that covenants with G-d is a "good" person and does lots of kind things.  The point here is that good and kind things are not righteous unless someone does so because of their covenant with G-d.  Likewise we think of a wicked person as someone that does "evil" or lots of hateful and cruel stuff - but this is the most likely (inevitable) result of someone that rebels against the covenants of G-d.  One addition term of importance is the concept of becoming "one" with G-d.  Anciently the term in Hebrew for this oneness with G-d was the Hebrew term "ehad" and implied that we become one by covenant.

Thus it is that we dwell with G-d by becoming one with him by covenant.  LDS teachings are that only by becoming one with G-d the Father by covenant through Christ do we "dwell" with G-d at his level.  This is only possible with Celestial covenants.  Those that do not covenant under Celestial law cannot abide as a divine being in the presents (and likeness) of G-d.  

I personally do not understand why so many other religions refuse to covenant to become like G-d - which is the covenant and Law by which G-d lives in the glory of his Kingdom.  I believe the "cast off" in essence means that we choose to cast ourselves away from G-d and being a G-dly being.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, romans8 said:

Who are the unclean in this passage:

"Wherefore, if ye have sought to do wickedly in the days of your probation, then ye are found
unclean before the judgment-seat of God; and no unclean thing can dwell with God; wherefore, 
ye must be cast off forever
" (1 Nephi 10:21).

Is 'cast off' a designation for the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants?

Matteo

I believe the scripture quoted answers this question already. The unclean equal, in this verse, those who "sought to do wickedly in the days of [their] probation." I would then recognize the more important question is what does it mean to seek after wickedness?

Cast off would mean anyone who is not able to remain in God's presence in the next life. This then would include those who are in the Telestial and Terrestrial kingdoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, romans8 said:

Who are the unclean in this passage:

"Wherefore, if ye have sought to do wickedly in the days of your probation, then ye are found
unclean before the judgment-seat of God; and no unclean thing can dwell with God; wherefore, 
ye must be cast off forever
" (1 Nephi 10:21).

Is 'cast off' a designation for the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants?

Matteo

The unclean are those who, are not those in verse 19 (see below). They are quickened in the resurrection according to the lesser glory  and are judged by Christ accordingly, and these would be the lesser kingdoms. "Judge" also means "rule" and Christ rules over all kingdoms through various ministrations (See D&C 76).

19 For he that diligently aseeketh shall find; and the bmysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the cHoly Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the dcourse of the Lord is one eternal round.

20 Therefore remember, O man, for all thy doings thou shalt be brought into ajudgment.

21 Wherefore, if ye have sought to do awickedly in the days of your bprobation, then ye are found cunclean before the judgment-seat of God; and no unclean thing can dwell with God; wherefore, ye must be cast off forever.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2021 at 1:20 PM, Traveler said:

I personally do not understand why so many other religions refuse to covenant to become like G-d

I see the covenants as a means to becoming more Christ-like but not into becoming a God and then being 
worshipped on worlds that I populate with my spirit children (as like what happened with Heavenly Father
of our Earth who supposedly was a man become God).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nephi is talking to Laman and Lemuel as 6th Century BC Israelites.  I’m not convinced that everyday 6th Century BC Israelites had any concept of the degrees of glory, not convinced that Nephi would have passed such knowledge on to his brothers even if he himself understood it himself, and this not convinced that a degrees-of-glory paradigm can be easily overlaid into this portion of the Book of Mormon.  Nephi is talking to his brothers in the language they would have been used to:  an all-or-nothing view of salvation.  

The full truth, of course, is more nuanced—some measure of postmortem repentance is possible and yields a *degree* of salvation, but not a fullness of the Father’s glory.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/25/2021 at 1:52 PM, romans8 said:

I see the covenants as a means to becoming more Christ-like but not into becoming a God and then being 
worshipped on worlds that I populate with my spirit children (as like what happened with Heavenly Father
of our Earth who supposedly was a man become God).

I am convinced that this topic needs to be better addressed.  I will not do so much to convince you with an argument but by explanation show you that the idea of man becoming a G-d is not only viable and a possible understanding of scripture and logic but is the most probable explanation.

Before we dive into the witness provided by scripture – I would begin with what is often called the LDS couplet description of G-dliness as follows:  “As man is, G-d once was and as G-d is man may become.”

The only “example” of G-d that is available to mankind (according to the belief, understanding and doctrine of Christianity) is “Jesus Christ”.  Does the couplet describe accurately what we can understand concerning Christ?  Was Jesus once a man that walked among us and died?  Is Jesus today not G-d:  I am quite sure it is all true and does apply.  First that Jesus was born, as a man child into this earth.  In every way possible there was a “man” that was Jesus Christ.  But most importantly we need to understand that the man (just like every other man to live) Jesus was capable of dying because of sin.

Specific to this discussion is that Jesus proved that it is possible for a man (such as he was and as we all should be) to become a “G-d”.  Even some of the most outspoken critics of this unique relationship between G-d and man have coined the phrase that Jesus was wholly a man and also wholly a G-d.  How can this be true if a man cannot become a G-d?  If you do not or cannot believe such is possible with G-d – I would very much be interested in why you think so?  If you are willing I would discuss this in depth and detail.

Let us now turn to the witness of divine scripture.  I believe that we can conclude that of all that could speak concerning this matter that there is none more expert that Jesus Christ.  But the problem is that we do not have anything recorded in scripture by Jesus.  But we do have the witness of a man that was closer to Jesus than any other that has ever written of him.  That man was the Apostle John in book of Christ has his first hand witness to what Jesus said – because John was there when Jesus spoke.  Let us turn to the Gospel of John Chapter 10:

Beginning with verse 22.  It is winter (December) and the time of the Feast of Dedication (also called Hanukkah).  This is a celebration of the Maccabeus (the rise of the Pharisees).  Jesus is in the outer courts of the temple complex at what was called the porch of Solomon.   There Jesus is approached by the Jews (leaders – likely included the Pharisees) as asked to speak directly to the question if Jesus is the Messiah.  Jesus says that he has already told them and they refused to believe him.  Then he says something quite remarkable – he says that he and the Father (G-d) are one.

There are two important points here.  First Jesus is answering the question directly by saying he and the Father are one.  The Jews are very upset with this answer and intend to stone Jesus right there at the temple complex.  But Jesus stops them with a question – of which of his works are they killing him.  They say it is not for any of his works but “for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself G-d”  The second point is that the Jews understood that to be one with G-d that such would also be a g-d.  It is important to note that Jesus did not disagree at all concerning this second point - but lets see what he did say and witness to.

Now in verse 34 see how Jesus answers, “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are g-ds?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

 

Again – these are not my words or ideas but the witness of Jesus through the Apostle John.  My question is why does someone that claims to believe the words of Jesus Christ not believe what he said and taught?  If there is a better source or witness – I would listen but then wonder why such a witness would disagree with Jesus?

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/30/2021 at 11:23 PM, Traveler said:

Now in verse 34 see how Jesus answers, “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are g-ds?

35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Going back to verses 1 and 2 for context, who are the gods who judge unjustly and accept the persons of
the wicked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2022 at 7:31 AM, romans8 said:

Going back to verses 1 and 2 for context, who are the gods who judge unjustly and accept the persons of
the wicked?

Your question is interesting but I am not sure how it applies.  I like the King James Version of the Bible because of certain aids in reading and understanding sacred scripture.  But these aids are dependent on the version one is using of the King James Version.  You have some advantage over me because you are likely fluent multi lingo.   I am not versed in non-English versions.  One of the aids in the King James Version of the Bible that can assist with proper context of a particular scripture is a stylized paragraph mark designating a beginning of a textual structure from ancient scripture text.  Keep in mind that the Bible was not written with modern chapters and verses.  Lets now look at a King James version with applicable marks:

Quote

1 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

2 But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.

Note that there are no marks in these verses.  However, if we go back to chapter 9:

Quote

39  And Jesus said, For  judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?

41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

At the beginning of verse 39 we see a structure mark that I was talking about.

 

When I made my comments to you I started with verse 22.  This is because this verse sets the structure and context for the rest of what Jesus says in direct context to a man becoming a g-d.  Here is the beginning of verse 22:

Quote

22  And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter.

23 And Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon’s porch.

24 Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.

Because of this mark we know something important is being referenced and has a "context" beyond our modern version or translations and is intended to have its own context.

I hope this helps you in your spiritual quest to understand scripture that was written so long ago in a different time, culture and language.   Obviously I am not a expert in such things but rather a devoted student.  We are talking about "possible" literal clues to something very spiritual - especially because we are looking into something written by an ordained Apostle that was with Christ when he spoke these words.  Jesus tells us that his teaching are spiritual and can only be understood by those that have eyes to see and ears to hear (See the versed quoted above from Chapter 9).

 

As we have had this discussion I am honestly a little bothered in your references to the primary character of G-d which is in the creation of a planet world and placing mortal intelligent creatures with some semblance of such a g-d for the only purpose of having something worshiping that g-d.  I am troubled because I do not fine that such has much in context of the G-d I worship - so it is hard for me to honestly respond to your initial question in this discussion we are having.   I flat out do not find any benefit in believing in a G-d with such narcissistic tendencies to create intelligent beings just so he can be worshiped.  I am of the mind that we are commanded to worship G-d exclusively for our benefit and that in reality G-d achieves nothing for himself by our worship of him.  I also believe that should someone worship us for any reason it should only be for their benefit and not for any benefit of ours.  I think we likely  worship a "Different" G-d.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 1/3/2022 at 11:28 AM, Traveler said:

When I made my comments to you I started with verse 22.  This is because this verse sets the structure and context for the rest of what Jesus says in direct context to a man becoming a g-d.  Here is the beginning of verse 22:

I came across this rather lengthy article. 
https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/psalm-82-in-contemporary-latter-day-saint-tradition/

But I wonder if "ye are gods" means the same thing as "ye shall become gods"?

Do you believe the Psalm 82 talks about one group of people in verses verses 1-2 and then
another group in verses 6-7?

Edited by romans8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, romans8 said:

I came across this rather lengthy article. 
https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/psalm-82-in-contemporary-latter-day-saint-tradition/

But I wonder if "ye are gods" means the same thing as "ye shall become gods"?

Do you believe the Psalm 82 talks about one group of people in verses verses 1-2 and then
another group in verses 6-7?

As I understand ancient text - the term "G-d" is a title rather than a designation.  That may sound a bit confusing but I believe the confusion comes from modern interpretations.  And since we are following this idea - I will open another can of worms for you.  The modern designation of "Paganism" is very broad and refers to just about ever other religion other than the ancient Israelites.  Reality is that there were a lot of ancient religions that we know very little of.  For example Moses was introduced to "The True G-d" and the "True Religion" through his non Israelite (non-Hebrew) father-in-law Jethro.   As we look into our Biblical scriptures we have a short description  of divine beings that in our modern time is interrupted as one being.  The designation of these beings in the ancient Hebrew is berried somewhere in my file of notes.  There is no modern translation of this ancient Hebrew term so in most translated scripture the ancient Greek term is used - the term is "cherubim".

There are two important notions concerning this term and I do not see any thing significant in the order.  First the term is a designation of a g-d not an angel and yet a cherub or cherubim are considered angels and not g-ds by most modern Christian sects.  The second is that all biblical references to these divine beings are plural.  I could write a small book about cherubim and their significances in the ancient scriptures and revelations of the "Restoration".  But my point for this thread is just bring forward the notion of many (plural) g-ds.  As well as one very important designation of cherubim in relation to the "Mercy Seat" and "Ark of the Covenant". 

Keep in mind that the ancient term for "wings" was symbolic of "Powers".  It is also interesting to me that the symbolic representation of the Judgment seat of G-d has such strong reference to mercy that we think of the judgment seat  as the mercy seat.  But there is something else because at the mercy seat there are two cherubim.  One at the right hand of G-d and one at the left hand of G-d.  When the disciple of Christ (Steven) was stoned he saw Jesus sitting on the right hand of G-d that is the designated place of one of the mercy (judgment) cherub.  Generally it is believed that Satan and his angles (followers) rightful place is at the left hand of G-d.  Satan is also referenced in the New Testament as the "g-d of this world". 

Many think the reference in Psalm 82 is a description of someone with power to make judgments towards mankind.   This notion is stronger than many think.  Even in our official courts of Law, the judge wears a robe that comes from the ancient designation of a g-d.

I have speculated that the divine meaning of g-d is someone with the power to make judgments.  Obviously one can make righteous (conventional) judgments (this is also termed as a "Proctor") - or one can make a wicked judgment that is contrary to covenant or without a covenant.  I tend to believe a g-d is a being capable of covenant (law) and judgment of covenant (application of covenant).  I have encountered only one modern church that teaches covenant by ordinance (as was taught by Christ) and power to judge covenant (law) obedience or rebellion and that covenant obedience leads to G-dlyness and living as one with G-d as a g-d.  That Jesus was 100% accurate and logical - we are g-ds.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2022 at 1:00 PM, Traveler said:

Keep in mind that the ancient term for "wings" was symbolic of "Powers".  It is also interesting to me that the symbolic representation of the Judgment seat of G-d has such strong reference to mercy that we think of the judgment seat  as the mercy seat.  But there is something else because at the mercy seat there are two cherubim.  One at the right hand of G-d and one at the left hand of G-d.  When the disciple of Christ (Steven) was stoned he saw Jesus sitting on the right hand of G-d that is the designated place of one of the mercy (judgment) cherub.  Generally it is believed that Satan and his angles (followers) rightful place is at the left hand of G-d.  Satan is also referenced in the New Testament as the "g-d of this world".

When I look at pictures that could represent the mercy seat, it is in the shape of a rectangle. So the angel
on the left could really be the angel on the right depending on which side you are viewing things from. 
Instead of changing your position, you instead rotate the mercy seat and the identity of the cherub changes
again.

Exodus 25:20 refers to the wings and faces of the cherubim.  What are their faces symbolic of?

The cherubs were made of gold. Are you saying gold symbolizes those associated with God and those
associated with Satan, or Jesus and Satan are the gods above the mercy seat, or both of these?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2021 at 7:07 AM, romans8 said:

Who are the unclean in this passage:

"Wherefore, if ye have sought to do wickedly in the days of your probation, then ye are found
unclean before the judgment-seat of God; and no unclean thing can dwell with God; wherefore, 
ye must be cast off forever
" (1 Nephi 10:21).

Is 'cast off' a designation for the terrestrial and telestial inhabitants?

Matteo

This can't be good--to be cast away from God's presence forever. I know that the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms are not what God-seekers pursue, but the passage sounds like a punishment--a condemnation even. Is it true that there will be no godly presence at all in the lower kingdoms?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, prisonchaplain said:

This can't be good--to be cast away from God's presence forever. I know that the terrestrial and telestial kingdoms are not what God-seekers pursue, but the passage sounds like a punishment--a condemnation even. Is it true that there will be no godly presence at all in the lower kingdoms?

Per LDS teaching, that is not accurate; the Terrestrial enjoy the ministerings of the Son and the Telestial of the Holy Spirit (D&C 76:77, 86).

I have heard it theorized (though this obviously isn’t doctrinal) that it is the Light of Christ that holds matter together at the subatomic level; and that to completely isolate oneself from Christ through eternally unyielding impenitence would eventually result in one’s own literal destruction—the undoing of the physical and the spiritual body as one digs ever more deeply into one’s own nature to root out any hint of divine power and authority and love, the end of which is that the rebellious individual essentially blasts himself back into the primordial state of “intelligence” that he was in before God ever took took pity upon him and formed him into a spirit. Again—not doctrine; but to me the notion has a certain appealing symmetry to it.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My memory was right then...which leads me to believe that the passage in the OP might refer to the outer darkness rather than one of the lesser kingdoms. @Just_A_Guy seems to suggest possible annihilation. Is there no official understanding (I know that there are many questions we do not have conclusive answers to)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

My memory was right then...which leads me to believe that the passage in the OP might refer to the outer darkness rather than one of the lesser kingdoms. @Just_A_Guy seems to suggest possible annihilation. Is there no official understanding (I know that there are many questions we do not have conclusive answers to)?

Nothing official.  I think there are occasional warnings in the D&C about possible “destruction”, but D&C 76 seems fairly straightforward that no one will fully understand the torments of the “sons of perdition” except those who are consigned to that fate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2022 at 7:49 AM, romans8 said:

When I look at pictures that could represent the mercy seat, it is in the shape of a rectangle. So the angel
on the left could really be the angel on the right depending on which side you are viewing things from. 
Instead of changing your position, you instead rotate the mercy seat and the identity of the cherub changes
again.

Exodus 25:20 refers to the wings and faces of the cherubim.  What are their faces symbolic of?

The cherubs were made of gold. Are you saying gold symbolizes those associated with God and those
associated with Satan, or Jesus and Satan are the gods above the mercy seat, or both of these?

There are a few things and not just one symbolism we are dealing with concerning the Ark of the Covenant and the "Mercy Seat" or as often thought in modern times - the "FINAL" judgment of G-d.  I think the first symbol reference anciently compared to modern times is the emphasis anciently in the primary element of last judgment of G-d is mercy.  It seems to me that the primary element thought of in modern religions is condemnation and not mercy.  I am impressed that the scriptures on this matter are speaking to us about us rather than speaking to us about others.  The Ark of the Covenant (to me) is about G-d and his COVENANT and not about our "personal" relationship with G-d - that is unless our personal relationship with G-d is completely defined by keeping G-d's covenant.  

It is my understanding that the mercy seat is symbolic of G-d at his throne.  So as we envision the mercy seat and the cherubim we are to imagine ourselves standing before G-d at the final judgment of G-d.  @prisonchaplain made a brief reference above.  But here we stand having completed what the scriptures call the days of our probation.  I see this much like our current courts of Law.  The judge is before us.  On his (not ours) right hand is our Cherub advocate.  On the left hand of the judge is our accuser. Note that a title of Christ is the advocate and one of the classic titles of Satan is the accuser.  These things are symbolic of the mercy seat in relationship to how G-d sits before us at the final judgment.  I believe also that the ancient temple was designed to teach the children of Israel about the probation and preparation (covenants) for our standing before G-d.

It is interesting to me that you quote from Exodus chapter 25 and in particular verse 20.  You asked about the symbolism of faces.  I believe this is similar to the symbolism of meeting someone face to face.  Thus I believe the faces of the cherubim are symbolic of a confrontation between your advocate and your accuser.  But there is something else in this verse.  In a personal conversation with a Jewish Rabbi I was told that an alternate reading (alternate reading means a possible valid translation of the ancient Hebrew) that the translation of “and their faces shall look one to another” could read “the two brothers shall face each other”.  Another reference on this matter see Hebrews chapter 9 - make particular note of verse 5.

The reason I bring this up is because many religious critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are concerned that if G-d is the Father of our spirits that such would make Christ and Satan brothers.  So I think that the answer to your question about the symbolism of faces is that of meeting someone face to face and not so much the characters of a face.  I am of the impression that gold is symbolic of divine power and appointment and follows the symbolism that the streets of Heaven and the gates of Heaven are gold – also when Jesus was born one of the gifts presented was gold.

 

One last point about @prisonchaplain’s note about the unclean.  I am of the impression that such things are not so we can know the class of those that will not make it to heaven but rather a warning to should take individually to heart to insure that when we finish our probation we are clean and pure – able to be in the presents of G-d and not cast off forever because even after being washed clean by the Atonement of Christ we choose to be unclean and in some way not one with G-d in the same manner that Christ is one with the Father.  In other words we choose not to be a G-d of love, compassion, light, truth and power in the likeness of the Father or as the Pharisees did not want to be “Christ like”.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

My memory was right then...which leads me to believe that the passage in the OP might refer to the outer darkness rather than one of the lesser kingdoms. @Just_A_Guy seems to suggest possible annihilation. Is there no official understanding (I know that there are many questions we do not have conclusive answers to)?

It is good to hear from you - Hope all is well with you and your family.  I believe the particular OP and question deals with those that fail to make and keep covenants with G-d.  In our current state we are cast out of G-d presents.  That is the meaning of the fall.  We are not in outer darkness but we are subject to the powers and darkness of Satan.  I believe this exposure allows us to exercise  "Agency" of light or darkness.  This is a time of probation where we learn before we stand before G-d to declare our Agency.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Traveler said:

One last point about @prisonchaplain’s note about the unclean.  I am of the impression that such things are not so we can know the class of those that will not make it to heaven but rather a warning to should take individually to heart to insure that when we finish our probation we are clean and pure – able to be in the presents of G-d and not cast off forever because even after being washed clean by the Atonement of Christ we choose to be unclean and in some way not one with G-d in the same manner that Christ is one with the Father.  In other words we choose not to be a G-d of love, compassion, light, truth and power in the likeness of the Father or as the Pharisees did not want to be “Christ like”.

 

The Traveler

Great redirection @Traveler!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2022 at 7:50 PM, prisonchaplain said:

Is it true that there will be no godly presence at all in the lower kingdoms?

My viewpoint differs from LDS theology.  I believe there will be only 2 destinations.  The Kingdom of
God and the realm where God is not present (i.e. outer darkness - Matthew 8:12; 13:42; 13:50; and
25:23).

"In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place
for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where
I am, there ye may be als
o".

I believe "where Christ is" is the Kingdom of God, not a kingdom made up of 3 heavens or degrees and
two others (called Terrestrial and Telestial).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2022 at 4:42 PM, Traveler said:

The reason I bring this up is because many religious critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are concerned that if G-d is the Father of our spirits that such would make Christ and Satan brothers

If God is the father of both Christ and Satan through procreation with a heavenly mother, then
there should be no cause for concern for they would indeed be spirit brothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2022 at 4:42 PM, Traveler said:

It is my understanding that the mercy seat is symbolic of G-d at his throne.  So as we envision the mercy seat and the cherubim we are to imagine ourselves standing before G-d at the final judgment of G-d.  @prisonchaplain made a brief reference above.  But here we stand having completed what the scriptures call the days of our probation.  I see this much like our current courts of Law.  The judge is before us.  On his (not ours) right hand is our Cherub advocate.  On the left hand of the judge is our accuser. Note that a title of Christ is the advocate and one of the classic titles of Satan is the accuser.  These things are symbolic of the mercy seat in relationship to how G-d sits before us at the final judgment.  I believe also that the ancient temple was designed to teach the children of Israel about the probation and preparation (covenants) for our standing before G-d.

Exodus 25:20 says "The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with
their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be
".

What do wings and faces symbolize?  Why do both cherubs look towards [supposedly the middle of] the
mercy seat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, romans8 said:

Exodus 25:20 says "The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with
their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be
".

What do wings and faces symbolize?  Why do both cherubs look towards [supposedly the middle of] the
mercy seat?

If you look at previous post (dated Sunday) you will realize that these questions have already been answered.  But here again are answers.  Wings symbolize powers.  Faces symbolize direct involvement.  For example in the sport of hockey; a player from each team will meet in a "face off" to begin the game.  We also have expressions like face to face - all which is symbolic of direct acts in opposition between two entities.  From the previous post there is a variant reading of Exodus 25:20 about the two brother that face each other.  This is to symbolize their opposition.  As I pointed out - a title of Christ is advocate and a corresponding  title of Satan is accuser. 

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2022 at 11:04 AM, Traveler said:

If you look at previous post (dated Sunday) you will realize that these questions have already been answered.  But here again are answers.  Wings symbolize powers.  Faces symbolize direct involvement.  For example in the sport of hockey; a player from each team will meet in a "face off" to begin the game.  We also have expressions like face to face - all which is symbolic of direct acts in opposition between two entities.  From the previous post there is a variant reading of Exodus 25:20 about the two brother that face each other.  This is to symbolize their opposition.  As I pointed out - a title of Christ is advocate and a corresponding  title of Satan is accuser. 

I do not get any indication that the cherubs on the mercy seat are in direct opposition or in a game to
defeat the other.

How does the power and direct involvement of the accuser cherub on the mercy-seat represent mercy?

Edited by romans8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, romans8 said:

I do not get any indication that the cherubs on the mercy seat are in direct opposition or in a game to
defeat the other.

 

As I stated previously the symbolism of their opposition is that they "face" each other or in other words they meet face to face.   There would be absolutely no reason for two if they were both of the same stripe.   Do you have any other logic as to why there are two.  I would point out that in the long standing traditions of all three Abrahamic religious theologies is that Satan and the wicked are at the left hand of G-d the "righteous" (or those under protected covenant of G-d) are on his right side.  Where and why do you think there is such agreement on this particular concept.  Where else from scripture or revelation could this notion come from.  If you have any other possible meaning for two cherubim I would gladly consider both your understand but more so the logic and reasoning that you see no logic or possibility that they are in opposition.

 

Quote

How does the power and direct involvement of the accuser cherub on the mercy-seat represent mercy?

There is no mercy without accusation.   Without guilt, mercy has no purpose - without a witness given in accusation the law has no claim of malediction and mercy is meaningless.  

 

I would point out that one of the ancient teaching concerning scripture and the revelations (visions, dreams and other means of bringing of divine light) is that there are "hidden" meanings.  Jesus used parables to teach his disciples and explained that without divine assistance understanding is not complete.  I would suggest that though I have offered some "insights" that there is much more to be understood.  That additional understanding I cannot provide - you must learn for yourself from G-d through whatever means you have or utilize to learn and receive personal revelation.  I can only offer a small part of what I have learned.  

As a scientist I am well aware that with all our advances we have come to the conclusion that we can only explain about 5% of our universe from the perceptions through which we look out into the universe.  Likewise I am impressed that at best we understand so little of spiritual things.  Jesus expressed this notion the the Pharisees (the scripture experts of his day) with eyes that see not and ears that hear not. 

It seams to me that our conversations are very one sided.  Perhaps you are completely in a searching phase and yet you say, "I do not get any indication that the cherubs on the mercy seat are in direct opposition" but you offer no other explanations or anything that relates to your understanding (indications) or how you came to whatever conclusion you have obtained.    Why is that?

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share