Make your own free website on Tripod.com



Monique Gaudry wrote:


The Bible is the history of the human race. Man, created male and female, had to pass through all stages, to fight - in all described struggles - against himself in order to recover his divinity.

Revelation, the last book of the Bible, depicts the final battle facing divinity. To reach it, each must pass through the knowledge of the past, as describes by the woman and the stars and her child, fruit of her labor. This woman is the Memory that reveals the past and return us toward our divine origins. To remember is, in part, the price to pay to reach immortality.

Monique

"The ideas contained in the Bible are eternal and truthful. It is the explanation that one (the theologians, bible's specialists and other "scientists") gives to some that lets to want, from a spiritual viewpoint."

When the theologians attempt to analyze an eternal idea, they forget that the ideas address to the spirit, not to the mental. Their explanations are necessarily distorted by the mental judgment.

Pierre

Hello Pierrot,

Hello you all!

Pierre you write: "The ideas contained in the Bible are eternal and truthful. You also say that it is the explanation that one (the theologians, exegetes and other "scientists") gives to some that lets to want, from a spiritual viewpoint."

I ask you all: did you read the Bible? Do you agree unconditionally with all that it contains? Didn't you ever see something of anti New Testament? Something of anti Christ? Do you believe that God can want, among others atrocities, the DEATH by lapidation of the adulterous woman, as this writing specify it?

I wish, dear Pierre, that you can be right on the spiritual character of the thing!

For my part, I find the Bible "HORRIBLE" on the merely human plan.

The New Testament is a lot more evolved, more spiritual, "more analyzable", the notions of forgiveness, of abnegation are developed there, what is not obviously the case in the Bible.

What is your opinion?

In a friendly way

David

> Hello Pierre,

> So that a work is theological, there are two criterias: 1 - the ideas owe being in conformity with the Bible. 2 - the ideas owe being in conformity with the church.

> Personally, I don't have a problem with the first criteria. For the second, my teachers blame me regularly for diverting from the Christian Tradition, to contradict the magistery. Because of it, I lose points.

> But! If I don't agree with the church, I must say it and explain why. If my writings are strong, they will be accepted. What I ignore, is what occurs when I am not okay with an idea contained in the Bible. I experiment this thing in my text.

> @ + Stephan

Dear Stephan!

You say:

>> > The rebirth of the theology of today consists in interpreting the Bible according to our place in the society, of our culture.

Whatever is our culture, whatever is the time, the Bible remains actuality!

Except its quoted squalid, it relates a way to be and to live, it denounces some feelings adaptable to every TIME! And it is there the tour de force of this sacrosanct writing: To be more than two thousand years and to be, in spite of its age, "up to date."

The Bible is not man's history! it is the history of its behavior!

In a friendly way,

Dutch

Hello Dutch

Yes, I read the Bible. As everybody, first with my mind. I didn't understand much of it. Then, of the years later, I took reading it gain, with the eyes of the spirit. There, I read another story.

The Bible is the path that all human should follow to succeed in defeating his/her human moods if s/he wants to manage to recognize that s/he is a divine and spiritual being. Don't see a human and physical "reality" there. Symbols, Dutch, symbols. All there is symbolic.

> Do you believe that God can want, among others atrocities, does the adulterous woman's DEATH by lapidation, as well as this writing specifies it?

Who is the adulterous woman? The adulterous woman, my friend, is merely the human thought that manipulates the spiritual LAW, that denies it, that tempts to understand it only by the interpreter of the mental. You will never manage to understand the Bible with your mental. To understand, you will have need to know the spiritual things, the esoteric teachings.

The Bible read with the mental will give you a very mediocre exoteric teaching, that only explains a certain human behavior.

> I wish, Dear Pierre, that you can be right on the spiritual character of the thing! For my part I find the Bible "HORRIBLE" on the merely human plan.

Abraham's law. As with Muhamad and the Qu'ran, the patriarch wanted to give to the Jewish people a code of conduct and a certain history: the Bible.

But, what did men do with it? Their ignorance of the spiritual values led them until today, to not to understand anything of the book and the goals that it pursues. The mistake comes back mainly to the priests who kept for them the deep - esoteric - knowledge. Then, during past ages, this knowledge got lost.

It is only since about 100 to 150 years that we recover the true values... thanks to our dreams, our intuitions.

> The New Testament is a lot more evolved, more spiritual, "more analyzable", the notions of forgiveness, of abnegation are developed there, that that is not obviously the case in the Bible.

The New Testament is more readable because it dates of less than 2000 years. A new religion has been founded on Jesus' words.

But saint Paul, the first theologian, didn't know anything again, as to the esoteric teachings. It was a Jewish Roman. He took what he heard from the first apostles and composed a doctrine to the flavor of the time. Human, Greco-Roman and mental.

The fathers of the church chose the texts that were going to be included in the New Testament, 300 years after Jesus' disappearance. They left aside several texts that, it seemed to them, didn't correspond to the new ethics. Because they didn't know anything about the esoteric values.

Take, for example, Thomas' gospel. Everything that in this gospel concerns reincarnation. Why is it not in the New Testament? Because the fathers of the church didn't know better.

The Bible is the history of the behavior that the human should take when he takes the path of the spirituality. It is the history of all fights - interior - that he will meet on his road, fight to which he should cope.

Take Jacob's case. His name first. Jacob means, in Aramaean, "the one that holds his brother by the ankle". Indeed, Jacob, twin brother of ╔saŘ, held his brother by the ankle when he was born.

In spiritual value - esoteric -, Jacob means "the one that holds God by the hand."


Do you see the different values? According to the level of which we read the Bible, we will see human or spiritual values there.

Stephan, you say that today's theology consists in interpreting the Bible according to our place in the society, of our culture.

This is not theology anymore. It is sociology.


Don't be mistaken. The Bible is the human's path on the path of spiritualization.


Pierre

Dear Pierre,

I read your question: "What is the adulterous woman"? Hey well! Believe it or no, when I read your question, my eyes opened on the goal of this writing... Instantly I understood the content of what you say. Taken in this sense the Bible explains itself! It is understandable!


Thank you Pierre, this time it is by a question that you asked and not by an answer that you gave to me that I could see what must be seen.

@ +

Dutch

========================

JONAS' SUICIDE

One only understands too much the distress of the prophet Jonas. His life was nothing else that a nothingness deprived of sense :

1. After having asked him to proclaim a threat against the spitefulness of the inhabitants of Ninive (Jonas 1, 2), God accomplished not his threat (3, 10).

2. After having made Jonas die in this crisp sea (2, 3-4), God accomplished not his death and made him relive (2, 11).

3. After Jonas had converted the inhabitants of the city of Ninive (3, 5), God withdrew all hiss mercy for the city (4, 11).

4. After having made a plant grow that made Jonas happy (4, 6), God destroyed the plant and Jonas sank in the misfortune (4, 7 - 9).

What is this God! How can he mock to this point human life! I am annoyed, I want to die. But before, I will make a research on him and Jonas for my course of prophetic literature. Maybe he will succeed in projecting his light to my objections.

---

Please, don't take me seriously in what I have just written. There is a note of footing that says :

"Forgive me this introduction." It is not necessary to take me seriously when I say " I want to die." This catastrophic introduction takes the liberty to explore some measurements rather uncharted of Jonas' narration. For example: the prophet's rage; the principle of rejuvenation; what motivates God's actions in the narration, of same that those of the prophet; the theme of the conversion; the one of the intimate communication between God and the man; the responsibility of the men and God's responsibility; the matrixes; and other."

I already wrote a lot of ideas as for the interpretation of Jonas' narration. While developing the theme of the death/birth/death/birth, I fear, my friends, to succeed to a narration that speaks of reincarnation :-)

What do you think of it, can Jonas' narration evoke reincarnation?

@ + Stephan

Hello Stephan, Dutch, Val and the others.

There is absolutely no question of reincarnation in this narration. Jonas was a prophet because he spoke with God.

But the men of the time imagined God was as them. As the Greeks made it with the gods, the Jewish of the time belittled God to the man's picture. They gave Him a human dimension.

God doesn't ridicule human life. He lets that to men who belittled God to their picture.

1) God doesn't rage against the inhabitants of Ninive because these made an honourable amend. He makes it because they repented. To repent, it to reconsider an action, to rethink it.

2) Jonas didn't die in the whale, because he repented.

3) God withdrew his mercy of Ninive. God didn't worry anymore of this city, because the inhabitants don't know how to make the difference between the good and the pain. They only repent when they are threatened with destruction. They only become attached to the appearances.

4) A plant grows and Jonas is happy. A plant dies and Jonas sinks in the misfortune. Why? Why does he let himself be so much influenced by outside appearances?

God is the master of life. If the human does what he must (spiritualise his human nature), he will live.

Why does Jonas want death? Because he doesn't understand the sense of his life. He is distressed for the things that he doesn't understand and on which he doesn't have any control.

A prophet, he discusses and refuse his role. Consequence of his refusal: some misfortunes occur in his life.

Does he obey? He sees happy things then are occurring. Then, these things disappear (the tree dies). Jonas is distressed of what the nature makes (a worm) whereas he should not take care of that for which God asks.

Do you understand? The only and real liberty consists in the total obedience to God.

Pierre

Stephan, you wrote :

> The rebirth of the theology of today consists in interpreting the Bible according to our place in the society, of our culture - the inculturation! One is out of touch, it seems!

Thus, for the theologians, the theology is a survey of the human behavior?

Bizarre! Especially as Jesus doesn't recommend a mode of behavior, but a new quality of being! Herbert Puryear, director of research in Virginia Beach said, during a conference:

"During 2000 years, we tempted to make Jesus' an ordinary man whereas his mission was to make gods of us."

Therefore, today's theology follows the wrong path.

Pierre

Pierre wrote: "Thus, for the theologians, the theology is a survey of the human behavior?"

Eric answered: There is the problem: In theology, there are two types of revelations: one is natural and accessible to all by the reason; the other is supernatural and concern the history of the Jews (Jesus also), accessible by the faith.

The Jews really began to be a people when they came out of Egypt to get settled on the promised land. When they came out of Egypt, they perceived that God had guided them. The first picture that the Jews had of God: a socio-politic liberator. From all others books of the First Testament derive God's conception.

1 - Reason

2 - Society

3 - Politics

This is today's theology.

You know, it is only after having understood that God had freed them from Egypt that the Jews began to write books. After the God "savior", the Jews invented the conception of the "Creative" God in the book of the Genesis. Etc...

In the Jewish mentality, God is a being of reason and a politician. There are, of the thousand men in the Jewish history, many like Sharon. In short, with this people with such a stiff neck, one doesn't need such conception of spirituality in God

> Bizarre! Especially as Jesus doesn't recommend a mode of behavior, but a new quality of being!

It is prohibited for the Jews from recommending a new quality of being, because everything that concerns the "I am" belongs to God. Only God can introduce a new quality of being. For them, humans don't have the right to initiate it. Absolutely forbidden to say "I am", that is to say YHWH. In it, Jesus is a layman and a scholar! You see all mentalities...

It is normal that in theology, one studies politics, psychology, society, philosophy since God made himself known by one political revolution (liberation of Egypt).

To this moment, it becomes very difficult to propose a spiritual dimension since the exodus clearly shows God like a social and political liberator.

Solution?

@ + Stephan

Dear friend,

It becomes extremely clear that the studies in theology, the professors, as well as the whole theory distorts your judgment, but then, completely.

Theology do you say? It is therefore, in my vocabulary, to proscribe absolutely. I don't find, in what you write on theology, any spirituality. There is only the mental.

It is sad.

Corrections. The Jewish began to be a people with Jacob/Israel. God guided Jacob through his dreams, as He had guided Isaac before him and guided Abraham, the father of Isaac.

It is certain that, in the beginning of their history, the Jewish needed a code of conduct. But this code, Stephan, was more attached to spirituality than to sociology! The mistake of the people and the exegetes were to take the Laws exclusively like a rational and political code of conduct whereas it is spiritual. The being's dimension is absolutely not discerned by the mental. And this is that one that you study? The mental version? Not astonishing that there is so much ignorance in the world.

"In the Jewish mentality, God it is a being of reason and a politician."

It is well in mentality. Mental. But what of spirituality then ?

Solution? To stop seeing the writings as things that arrive on the political and social levels To begin to watch with the spirit. It is only with this faculty that one will understand.

Jean: 15,13: "No one has bigger love that the one that gives his/her life for his/her friends." The sacrifice - to give his/her life - must be internalized. It belongs to the psychic life - thoughts, spiritual - and is equivalent to the destruction of the mental and the extinction of the "me".

The Bible is the path by which all person must pass to manage to spiritualize his/her matter (body), mental (ideas) and life.

As long as theology will not study this, it will follow the wrong path and will wrongly lead people. Ignorance will rule.

Pierre

-------------------------

Hello Pierre, hello you all and all

Pierre you say: "The only and real liberty consists in the total obedience to God.

A liberty... the total obedience to God! Well evidently that it is a Liberty!

We are God! While obeying God, that is to say: ourselves, to our "US" but to our EGO, to our INTUITION, we don't free ourselves of our MENTAL!

And that! To free oneself of the MENTAL, of the "EGO"... it is not "A" liberty, it is THE LIBERTY!

Sincere regards

Dutch.

Pierre says: there are a lot of beliefs and of sects. For my part, I don't believe, I don't believe anymore. I merely say what I know. Most things that I know, I received them in dreams.

You rejected, Marisa, the Bible because you saw the violence in it. You rejected the Bible because you read it with the eyes of the mental. Take it and reread it with the eyes of the spirit. Know that men were mistaken. They didn't look at the symbols. They took the writings of the Bible literally. They have the letter, not the spirit.

Coarse mistake. The Bible is the path that all person should take to manage to understand and to live the spirituality.

The violence contained in the Bible is symbolic. We must bring this violence into ourselves in order to defeat our human instincts.

Look at this example: Abraham, according to God's demand, must kill his son. But, at the time of putting the gesture, an angel stops his arm.

What does that mean? Did God really ask Abraham to kill his son?

No, Marisa, it is not that that God asked. Abraham understood that God asked him to kill his materialistic ideas (son). The angel who stopped Abraham's arm is a strength, an intuition, a knowledge that Abraham had.

It would have been necessary that the rabies, the priests and the exegetes understand the symbolic range of the texts and adventures related in the Bible.

Thus, Marisa, the violence related in the Bible is relative. It is to ourselves, each personally, that we must make violence to defeat our instincts and our desires in order to become again that that we were at the time of the awakening of Conscience: ONE.

You can reject all religions of the world that you want. I myself do not practice any. Anyway, there is only one true religion, if I can call it that, and that is the search for God.

While you are in a search of God, you discover yourself. While discovering yourself, you discover God.

The shroud. You saw it and while looking at it, you cried. Why? Possibility: you were there, as and/or with the women who found the shroud, in Jesus' tomb, after his resurrection.

My friend, the dream did not come back in your mind and you didn't dream about John for nothing. Several years ago, the spirit waived at you. Welcome in our family.

When you read "Intimate Conversation with Consciousness", carry a particular attention to chapter 23, on the symbols of the Bible and to chapter 24, on the symbols and words of the Revelation.

Pierre

Marisa wrote: About the interpretation of the Bible, you are right, because at home there is a contradiction; I can be of a very mystical temperament and at the same time be very matter-of-fact. It is always necessary that my mental pass everything that goes in my mind to the sieve. The explanation that you give some satisfies me.

Although all my family is atheistic, since my childhood, I always believed in the spiritual world, but I never felt attached to any religion and I didn't change. On the other hand, I have had some visions in state of awakening, visions enough extraordinary and some dreams that marked me.

I was never part of any esoteric, nor practiced group of psychic exercises or other. Although I don't understand all, I feel privileges in relation to most human. I received the proofs that Light exists and also its opposite, however, I feel the need to look always farther.

For what is the Holy Shroud: It revealed to me the picture that I always had in my mind. At the time of my dreams, I was always accompanied by a silent being. With him I visited desert and cavernous places. I was not afraid, but I didn't understand what was the goal of it. That to be, I won't know how to say if it is what some call the One divine, but when I saw his face it looked like the one that is shown on the Holy Shroud. In my dreams, I didn't see it with his face of suffering, but soft and serious. He spoke to me, unfortunately, I didn't remember what he told to me. He had light brown hair that fell on the nape and grey brown eyes.

Why did I cry so much when I saw it? I think that your intuition is just. I don't know if I was there at the time of the levee of the Christ's body, on the other hand, I have the impression at times to have been this Marie, Martha's sister, but it is only a vague impression. Another picture of the New Testament that hit me is the one of this woman that is in the crowd at the time of Jesus' rise to the martyrdom with his crown of thorns and his cross, and that wipes him the face. The horrible stages of the first Christian martyrdoms in the Roman theaters always froze my blood, the hardest for me is the death by fire, it is as if I lived these stages physically.

You say that St.-John the evangelist incarnated in Quebec. How old would he currently be?

A few months ago (3 to 4), I had a dream that marked me. I saw a lit candle whose flame was weak enough. Around this candle there were other extinct candles. I took the lit candle and I have them all lit.

Thank you,

Well in a friendly way,

Marie

Hello Marisa,

John addressed you because he has known you for many centuries. Since you were in Jesus' setting, John and you know each other. And so during the ages. The beings previously known always meet again.

The lily as personal symbol. The lily is originally the symbol of the kings of France. In the time of Jeanne D'Arc, after the battle of Orleans, Charles VII gave to the family of D'Arc the permission, after having ennobled it, to carry the lily.

In your dream, John plays the cards... the cards represent lives. John gives you a lily. John, in fact, gave you the memory of one of your lives. Because of the lily, you probably knew Charles VII and/or the family D'Arc.

Stephan's interpretation is not only good as a symbol for a spiritual group, but as an "archetypal" symbol for a certain number of people of which you seem to be a part, would not be that that because of your dream. John addresses, in dreams, all the people that he knew.

The rest of my commentaries, in the text.

> ... I received the proofs that Light exists and also its opposite, however, I feel the need to look for it always farther.

Marisa, there is only Light. There is not an opposite to Light. What people call the opposite is only ignorance. All is Light since all is God. But most people don't know it or, worse, deny it.

> For what is the Holy Shroud: [ů]

The silent being is Jesus. Your description of Him looks like the one that I know. 2000 years ago, Jesus had a redhead hair and blue eyes. It is again as well as He appears to me.

> Another picture of the New Testament that hit me is the one of this woman that is

in the crowd at the time of Jesus' rise to the martyrdom with his crown of thorns and his cross, and that wipe his the face.

I felt this picture when I answered you this morning. You are this woman or you were with her, and were very close to her at the time of these events.

> The stages horrible of the first Christian martyrdom in the Roman theatres always froze my blood, the hardest for me is the death by fire, it is as if I lived these stages physically.

You were probably one of these martyr.

> You say that St.-John the evangelist was incarnated in Quebec. How old would he be currently?

It seems that you didn't understand who is John today. Or am I mistaken?

I am John.

> A few months ago (3 to 4), I had a dream that marked me. I saw a lit candle which flame was weak enough. Around this candle there were other extinct candles. I took the lit candle and I have them all lit.

The lit flame is yours. You are this flame. And you can, as in the dream, light (illuminate) other people.

Pierre



| The Tower of Babel |


Pierre



free hit counter




Page correction: May 20, 2017



 

;