JOYFUL VIDEOS [773e]

Two favourite songs.

Advertisements

ARE WE ALREADY LIKE GOD? [783a]

EXPLORATORY THEOLOGY

Regardless of attempts to understand the exact process of sin ‘retribution’ that was occurring in Jesus’ body, having come to understand that God through Jesus suffered that which comes against and assails his very nature which is love, and that it is said that we will suffer with him; does this not mean then that we have his nature, if we are finding ourselves to be in this self same described condition?

What is the balance if any, between suffering and rejoicing? If we are indeed “partakers of the divine nature”, this would seemingly indicate that we are like him because we suffer, and also like him because we rejoice?

Rejoicing is not a problem, but SUFFERING is. In any form of life, isn’t it SUFFERING that causes all of the trouble of trying to cope, of “bearing up” under the “strain” of it?

So if we are, must, SUFFER, then is the completed picture a matter of ‘learning’ how to cope with, how to OVERCOME SUFFERING?

And what is the nature of this suffering? Is it that we “suffer as a Christian” OR is it that we suffer because we do not understand the nature of suffering and suffering in its various guises.

In other words, everyone experiences some kind of suffering, it may be suffering because of fear for the condition of loved ones, which is an empathetic suffering, which Jesus appeared to do. It may be all kinds of emotional stress. It may be the natural state of being separated from God kind of suffering.

But perhaps the point of it is, are we DEFEATED by this suffering? Are we held in this condition as a counter point of rejoicing? And is it important as to whether or not, and at what stage, we can ‘again’ rejoice?

So, is the objective then, to be OVERCOMERS OF SUFFERING? by being able to bring it ‘through’ to rejoicing. ??

So if we already have the suffering, our aim (“make love your aim”) should be to submit to his love to where we come through to rejoicing?  What exactly then, is the true nature of VICTORY?  [And how it is obtained].

HOPEFULLY TO BE CONTINUED.

[Is the difference between God and us, the ability to cope with or to have already coped with, suffering? [JESUS?]

Csuffering

ARE WE ALREADY LIKE GOD? [783]

EXPLORATORY THEOLOGY

Regardless of attempts to understand the exact process of sin ‘retribution’ that was occurring in Jesus’ body, having come to understand that God through Jesus suffered that which comes against and assails his very nature which is love, and that it is said that we will suffer with him; does this not mean then that we have his nature, if we are finding ourselves to be in this self same described condition?

What is the balance if any, between suffering and rejoicing? If we are indeed “partakers of the divine nature”, this would seemingly indicate that we are like him because we suffer, and also like him because we rejoice?

Rejoicing is not a problem, but SUFFERING is. In any form of life, isn’t it SUFFERING that causes all of the trouble of trying to cope, of “bearing up” under the “strain” of it?

So if we are, must, SUFFER, then is the completed picture a matter of ‘learning’ how to cope with, how to OVERCOME SUFFERING?

And what is the nature of this suffering? Is it that we “suffer as a Christian” OR is it that we suffer because we do not understand the nature of suffering and suffering in its various guises.

In other words, everyone experiences some kind of suffering, it may be suffering because of fear for the condition of loved ones, which is an empathetic suffering, which Jesus appeared to do. It may be all kinds of emotional stress. It may be the natural state of being separated from God kind of suffering.

But perhaps the point of it is, are we DEFEATED by this suffering? Are we held in this condition as a counter point of rejoicing? And is it important as to whether or not, and at what stage, we can ‘again’ rejoice?

So, is the objective then, to be OVERCOMERS OF SUFFERING? by being able to bring it ‘through’ to rejoicing. ??

So if we already have the suffering, our aim (“make love your aim”) should be to submit to his love to where we come through to rejoicing?  What exactly then, is the true nature of VICTORY?  [And how it is obtained].

HOPEFULLY TO BE CONTINUED.

[Is the difference between God and us, the ability to cope with or to have already coped with, suffering? [JESUS?]

Csuffering

Living Life One Pause at a Time REBLOG [782]

REBLOGGED An interesting psychological article.

MakeItUltra™

By Dr. Perry, PhD


“There is only one world, the world pressing against you at this minute. There is only one minute in which you are alive, this minute here and now. The only way to live is by accepting each minute as an unrepeatable miracle.” ~Anonymous

What if all we are is a fleeting and fragile physical manifestation of our thoughts; unconnected floating ideas that bind together to form the physical representation of your self and the world you live in?

The moment of complete awareness of the self is a sacred one that should not be wasted in anguish and confusion. Every moment is an opportunity to be fully aware and reconnect with your living force. One can create these moments of reconnection by pausing for any amount of time during the day and fully engaging in your self. Rushing through your days in a caffeinated trance will…

View original post 711 more words

THE CROSS CONTRADICTION [220g]

God reveals his love by releasing his wrath on Jesus. This is an outstanding contradiction if taken at face value. Yet it reveals one of the greatest truths that we can apprehend.

Firstly, it appears to be not that God was releasing the wrath, but that “the wrath” was present in Jesus’ body, regardless, because the symbolism is that “God withdrew himself”, as shown by the darkness that overtook the scene. [God cannot look upon sin].

So  the “God” who was causing the “wrath” was the God in Jesus, was his Spirit who had never sinned, He who was the SON of God. The SUBJECT of the wrath was his flesh, or that which was of the Adamic, and therefore our, nature.

The nature of the “wrath” itself, was the conflict between the two opposing natures. Putting this in explanatory terms, God was dealing with that which was ungodly.

Because those two natures existed in the one entity, the wrath, the suffering, was common to both. In like manner, the pain of sin and its effects are felt by both the righteous and the unrighteous. The God who created this world, was to suffer the fate of his “Adamic” children, yet in a sense, God is “Post Adamic”, as Christians are also. Therefore both the “First Adamic” children suffer along with the “Second Adamic” children, but for opposite reasons, though from the same cause.

Where there is resistance or opposition to God, there will be HEAT, otherwise known as WRATH. [hell]. In the world of electricity, this principle is put to good use in such appliances as heaters, toasters, irons, etc. The analogy is that God being the FORCE for good, is applied to the “object” in a controlled way, some of that control being the degree of opposition or RESISTANCE to the flow of God’s SPIRIT.

Where controlled, the heat generated may be used to burn away that opposition [sin] as we may see happening in Christians as they submit to the leading of the Spirit. (There could initially be  large lumps of sin burnt away).[theologically there is a shift from death to life].  Where the force is not moderated in some way, it could result in overheating and destruction of the “object”. If  people are the object of this clash between God and sin, righteousness and unrighteousness, and there is no “moderation” of the event, total destruction [“by burning”] may result.

“Our God is a consuming fire”. This explains “hell on earth” and the suffering that various forms of sin causes.

The absence of LOVE causes a gap or stressor between love and non-love. Where there is sin, or non-love, the LOVE attempts to reveal itself, and this causes stress. This stress is what we call wrath.

Christians are those in possession of the free GIFT of righteousness. They will suffer, as Jesus did, from the stresses of being in the righteous position, as they are subjected to the unrighteousness attempts of their inner self, [overcome by faith] and of the world.

“SINNERS”, are those in the opposite position, who are unrighteous, and are subjected to the opposition of the SPIRIT. [albeit via law]

“My Spirit will not always strive with man….”

There are various ways to look at heat and fire, we talk about our hearts being “warmed”, and it says “did not our hearts burn within us”.

When the SPIRIT comes upon the world, HE will consume all that is not of Himself. [even as He has already come and is destroying sin for those willing]. That which is of Himself, will join with Him. That which is not of Himself, will be “utterly consumed”.

SACRIFICE NOT ACTUALLY A BLOOD SACRIFICE [781a]

Christianity is accused of blood sacrifice because this is how Christ is presented to us. But it is not a blood sacrifice in terms of an “eye for an eye” or in the sense of it being acceptable to God because he demands an “atonement” or “offering” for sin, contrary to popular opinion. God is not wrathfully demanding that a penalty for sin be enacted through the body of his Son.

Yet in another way, that is exactly what it appears to be saying, even though it is not.*

The sacrifice was of the same nature as that of a mother for her children, that she might go to extreme lengths to protect them, even to the point of dying for them if necessary. The circumstances surrounding the death of Jesus on a cross may have been divinely guided or planned or foreseen; but it was the evil of man, not the evil of God that brought this about in the way it unfolded.

Jesus came to earth to bring the message of the goodness of God and his plan for his creation, which is us. He only did good, nothing bad, but bad men killed him, mainly because they could not stand his goodness, it made them look bad. [revealed them to be bad].

The sacrifice was by nature, love in action, just as everything that the Father and Son did was good in action, because it was LOVE in action. Like the good mother, the nature of love is to protect and nurture, and LOVE is prepared to SUFFER in this process of LOVING. Why was the suffering necessary? Again, it was evil that caused it, that brought it about and put him to death. That the nature of this death being so cruel, was a factor of the times of cruel people (Romans).

But the main impact of the suffering of our sins by Him lies in the fact of Him suffering from the effects of our own very nature, that nature which is estranged from God, from the Father. Certainly He is depicted as suffering as a criminal, but that means that it is we who should be suffering, not him. We are the guilty ones, even if we don’t want to admit to it. Having lived faultlessly, he was now to take on our identity of human nature by confronting this “sin in the flesh” nature and changing, converting and consequently rearranging its nature so the bad stuff is eliminated. He “healed” his own body, but the suffering involved was immense because he took on himself the very nature of sin, even though it was part of his own flesh nature. He encountered and confronted the result of separation and isolation from God, from his own Father, and we see this when he says “My God…Why have you ABANDONED ME?

The Darkness portrayed as having fallen over the land was showing his darkness of “soul” as he entered into the sin condition, which in effect in its reality is what we call “hell”. He encountered his own “Armageddon” in which his body was changed to a perfect state and one where immortality was the “natural” outcome. All the fear and guilt that we sense was sensed and experienced by him. All of the mental torment and anxiety and stress  is the result of unrighteous sin experiencing the righteous presence of God in the same body, because Jesus never sinned, but he was in a body that was imperfect and corrupted by its ability to invent and carry out the “work” of sin.

Jesus followed the path of love, of His Father, and suffered because of it. Together they mutually assumed the responsibility for the corrective process necessary to get the creation “on track”. The assuming of this responsibility resulted in the common love of Father and Son being assaulted by the forces of “evil”, it was a union in which both parties experienced the pain and trauma of the results of the outcome of the sin condition. The Father suffered what the Son was feeling, and vice versa. So they both took upon themselves the painful consequences of man’s sin, because that is what love does.

Love having suffered the collateral damage of the creation, and having been obviously displayed in this form on the cross, demonstrated to man the lengths that the nature of God would go to, to restore the damage done to His creation, His world, His kingdom, his human children.

So it is not the blood, not the “sacrifice” of a man for other men in that sense, but it is put this way for simplistic understanding, and is the way it is meant to be taken, so that it instantly references our sin condition and the empathy evoked/invoked by both God and man, or in man. It was the impact on LOVE that was the sacrifice, and continues to be so wherever love is in action, although it is said that Jesus sacrifice was “once for all”, we continue to see both love in action from God and from believing men who suffer the continuing consequences of acting righteously.

God and His son, through his Son, have borne the consequences of our sin, both the suffering and the death, so that we might recognise this and then leave the sin condition and cleave to the righteousness that it freely offers us, having removed and continuing to remove all that is working against the nature of God.

NOTHING can prevent us from accepting his free nature of righteousness which has been made available through the Son of his love. EVERYTHING that we have ever done wrong or ever will do wrong has been taken up into his love and consumed by it, by Him who wants nothing other than the liberty from sin and death for us that he has achieved. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS other than believing it to be true, and thereby believing HIM to be true, and his nature to be that of LOVE always and forever.

BELIEVING that he has taken our sin upon himself and thereby relieved us of the burden of it, enables us to leave our sin condition and the power to condemn us by which it held us ensnared and imprisoned, and instead, to cleave to Him and the life he offers freely to us, we just have to say YES to Him and NO to ourselves, or at least to that of ourselves which has now effectively been put to death through Him. We are TRANSFERRED from death to life, from the kingdom of death to his kingdom of life, we have been “resurrected” with Him, and are now “seated with Him in the heavenlies”.

*[Romans 3-25 “…whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. ..” and Eph. 1-7  …redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses,…]

GOD DEMANDS YOUR CONSCIENCE BE CLEANSED BY WHAT HE HAS DONE [780a]

He sacrificed His Son for this very purpose. Hebrews 9-14.  “…how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

[Heb. 10-29 “How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the spirit of grace?]

[Heb.10-10 “By this will, we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”   Heb. 10-12 “…but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God…”] 

[Heb. 10-14 “For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.”]

SACRIFICE NOT ACTUALLY A BLOOD SACRIFICE [781]

Christianity is accused of blood sacrifice because this is how Christ is presented to us. But it is not a blood sacrifice in terms of an “eye for an eye” or in the sense of it being acceptable to God because he demands an “atonement” or “offering” for sin, contrary to popular opinion. God is not wrathfully demanding that a penalty for sin be enacted through the body of his Son.

Yet in another way, that is exactly what it appears to be saying, even though it is not.*

The sacrifice was of the same nature as that of a mother for her children, that she might go to extreme lengths to protect them, even to the point of dying for them if necessary. The circumstances surrounding the death of Jesus on a cross may have been divinely guided or planned or foreseen; but it was the evil of man, not the evil of God that brought this about in the way it unfolded.

Jesus came to earth to bring the message of the goodness of God and his plan for his creation, which is us. He only did good, nothing bad, but bad men killed him, mainly because they could not stand his goodness, it made them look bad. [revealed them to be bad].

The sacrifice was by nature, love in action, just as everything that the Father and Son did was good in action, because it was LOVE in action. Like the good mother, the nature of love is to protect and nurture, and LOVE is prepared to SUFFER in this process of LOVING. Why was the suffering necessary? Again, it was evil that caused it, that brought it about and put him to death. That the nature of this death being so cruel, was a factor of the times of cruel people (Romans).

But the main impact of the suffering of our sins by Him lies in the fact of Him suffering from the effects of our own very nature, that nature which is estranged from God, from the Father. Certainly He is depicted as suffering as a criminal, but that means that it is we who should be suffering, not him. We are the guilty ones, even if we don’t want to admit to it. Having lived faultlessly, he was now to take on our identity of human nature by confronting this “sin in the flesh” nature and changing, converting and consequently rearranging its nature so the bad stuff is eliminated. He “healed” his own body, but the suffering involved was immense because he took on himself the very nature of sin, even though it was part of his own flesh nature. He encountered and confronted the result of separation and isolation from God, from his own Father, and we see this when he says “My God…Why have you ABANDONED ME?

The Darkness portrayed as having fallen over the land was showing his darkness of “soul” as he entered into the sin condition, which in effect in its reality is what we call “hell”. He encountered his own “Armageddon” in which his body was changed to a perfect state and one where immortality was the “natural” outcome. All the fear and guilt that we sense was sensed and experienced by him. All of the mental torment and anxiety and stress  is the result of unrighteous sin experiencing the righteous presence of God in the same body, because Jesus never sinned, but he was in a body that was imperfect and corrupted by its ability to invent and carry out the “work” of sin.

Jesus followed the path of love, of His Father, and suffered because of it. Together they mutually assumed the responsibility for the corrective process necessary to get the creation “on track”. The assuming of this responsibility resulted in the common love of Father and Son being assaulted by the forces of “evil”, it was a union in which both parties experienced the pain and trauma of the results of the outcome of the sin condition. The Father suffered what the Son was feeling, and vice versa. So they both took upon themselves the painful consequences of man’s sin, because that is what love does.

Love having suffered the collateral damage of the creation, and having been obviously displayed in this form on the cross, demonstrated to man the lengths that the nature of God would go to, to restore the damage done to His creation, His world, His kingdom, his human children.

So it is not the blood, not the “sacrifice” of a man for other men in that sense, but it is put this way for simplistic understanding, and is the way it is meant to be taken, so that it instantly references our sin condition and the empathy evoked/invoked by both God and man, or in man. It was the impact on LOVE that was the sacrifice, and continues to be so wherever love is in action, although it is said that Jesus sacrifice was “once for all”, we continue to see both love in action from God and from believing men who suffer the continuing consequences of acting righteously.

God and His son, through his Son, have borne the consequences of our sin, both the suffering and the death, so that we might recognise this and then leave the sin condition and cleave to the righteousness that it freely offers us, having removed and continuing to remove all that is working against the nature of God.

NOTHING can prevent us from accepting his free nature of righteousness which has been made available through the Son of his love. EVERYTHING that we have ever done wrong or ever will do wrong has been taken up into his love and consumed by it, by Him who wants nothing other than the liberty from sin and death for us that he has achieved. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS other than believing it to be true, and thereby believing HIM to be true, and his nature to be that of LOVE always and forever.

BELIEVING that he has taken our sin upon himself and thereby relieved us of the burden of it, enables us to leave our sin condition and the power to condemn us by which it held us ensnared and imprisoned, and instead, to cleave to Him and the life he offers freely to us, we just have to say YES to Him and NO to ourselves, or at least to that of ourselves which has now effectively been put to death through Him. We are TRANSFERRED from death to life, from the kingdom of death to his kingdom of life, we have been “resurrected” with Him, and are now “seated with Him in the heavenlies”.

*[Romans 3-25 “…whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. ..” and Eph. 1-7  …redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses,…]