High as experiencing God?

[MusicLover123]

I suggest you start guessing lottery numbers  :banana:

Is it... the banana phone number?  :banana:

That's a blurred line. I think I can safely assume we agree if I say that troughout time there have always been Jewish individuals ranging from good-bad. We see the same on tribal scale and even on whole Israel scale. When God exiled a whole nation most likely some Jews were still doing quite ok.

Not being dogmatic about this because it's rather complex and difficult to group the many shades of grey.
- People will never end up in classic hell. But I do in (severe) timelimited correction. Lake of Fire. Or Lake of Life as I call it on my website
- Saved means you do avoid LoL
- The elect are the actual bride. The ones that rule a 1000 year with Christ. The ones that judge in the name of Christ.
- The body is the church. Church = wedding guests. They stay dead during the millenium.
- The bride is hidden inside the churc. The bride is the veiled mystery. Revelation means unveiling the bride. Bride = elect

Good insights here. If I recall, you mentioned on a much older post that there are 4 meanings to every verse?

Hold on... Here it is! From here

Kept it safe in my notes for you, since I thought it was helpful. I even fixed your spelling mistakes, so you don't have to! :bigGrin:

" 2 things are absolutely required to start with. A good translation and understanding of the cultural background. The cultural background is the anchor point.
It's also level 1. Literal understanding. But, obviously the Bible also spiritual. Most Christian think the Bible has 2 levels. Literal and Spiritual. That's the Greek mindset. Jews believe the Bible has 4 levels.

1. pshat=simple/direct
2. remez=hinting
3. darash=comparison/commentary
4. sod=deep, hidden

I tend to believe Jewish view. I enclose a picture of something that's work in progress. It shows 4 is a returning number.
BTW Satan has a similar table. But it is obviously all negative. Just like you.

"Sola Scriptura" is meaningless to me, because so many deceived people trumpet it like a mantra of self justification for their shallow understandings, lazy scholarship, and spiritual indifference- based in presumptions they received from their mentors who were also shouting out "SOLA SCRIPTURA!" as they paraded their errors and traditions, as if they were the very "Sword of the Spirit"."

For me personally the following is a fact: If someone only sees one meaning then that person is missing several more hidden meanings.

Don't you mean 3 more meanings, as your paradigm you mention above?

No because drugs destroy people. Click here for very graphic pictures. For those who don't like horror movies some stuff makes heroin look like childplay.

Ah, that drug, eh? I remember my Parents showing me the effects of that drug online a while back. Definitely did not leave a good impression on my younger self.

[WhiteWings]

Three is several too :-)


A little extra clarification of Sola Scriptura. I believe in that. The problem is that to understand the full meaning of words you need to know how people back then understood those words. If the translation is wrong then the on itself good Sola Scriptura is wrong.

Jesus was the Lamb of God. That's very strange because He was no animal. The true meaning can be found in context and much older books.
Sometimes context isn't enough and we need some backup from cultural understandings.
Think about Matthew 5:38-42. Why is it so important to mention the right cheek? Doesn't right and left hurts equally much?

Why are do Christians always view goats as evil? Is it because all those drawings in which the devil has hooves? Is it because of the sheep goat judgement? If goats are symbolic for the impure, why does God accept goats as an legit sacrifice?

[MusicLover123]

I gotcha regarding Sola Scriptura. So basically, a more accurate mantra would be "Sola Scriptura et Culturetta?" (I do not know much Latin :bigGrin:) Would you also say that only the original manuscripts are inspired and that is where you would apply this saying? That is what I would probably do myself. Even if your translation was 100% accurate in English, you still were not inspired to write them. Maybe inspired by the Spirit though to deeply understand the meaning of the Word.

Could you provide some cultural background in regards to Matthew 5:38-41, and enlighten me with your perfected wisdom? Maybe even on some other things too, like that sheep and goat dichotomy?

Lastly, did you like the way I perfected your old quote above? I find you have really good things to say, but suffer from some pitiful spelling and grammar mistakes. I would be prepared to do that for other things you have said in the past; to resurrect old knowledge, if you will.

[WhiteWings]

So basically, a more accurate mantra would be "Sola Scriptura et Culturetta?" (I do not know much Latin :bigGrin:) Would you also say that only the original manuscripts are inspired and that is where you would apply this saying?

I would add the word "can".
Even the most perfect/accurate Scripture stands or falls by how it's understood. So let's assume the very original Scripture personally written down by Moses was found. That surely would be a great start. But if translators just translate it as they think it should read because of for example their doctrine, or because they really don't know, then a perfect manuscript is turned into a not so perfect translation.
Personally I think it's impossible to translate between languages. Sure it's possible to add Chinese subtitles to an American horror movie. But I can say from personal experience that things get more difficult with comedies that use word games. Those double meanings don't have a counterpart in other languages. To make it even worse imagine all law books are translated into Chinese because the Supreme court has new judge from China. That judge is the smartest and most honest judge that has ever lived. But he doesn't speak a single word English and doesn't know anything about the American culture. Do you think a team of the best translators ever can translate the books of law so the Chinese judge can really understand what they say? Including the ultra fine print?

Could you provide some cultural background in regards to Matthew 5:38-41, and enlighten me with your perfected wisdom?

Only the Big Three have perfected wisdom.
Like always there are disagreements. The left hand was used for not so honorable things like wiping your b***. To slap on the right cheek the left hand was used. Some say Jesus turning the other cheek wasn't an act of pacifism but a challenge to use the right hand.

Maybe even on some other things too, like that sheep and goat dichotomy?

Well, in the OT we read goats were sacrificial animals, unlike for example swine. So in God's eyes they are pure.
In the Bible we often read about a sparrow. That's just an assumption. It reads 'small bird' which has a good possibility being a sparrow but Scripture doesn't say so.

Likewise with the sheep and goats.
A rather weak, but interesting, study is, that goat can be understood as a young sheep. A sheep that needs training. Training = correction.

A little more about goats:

I wonder part of the answer is in the Greek words for goat and sheep (mat 25:33)

GOAT
eriphion
Thayer Definition:
1) a kid, a young goat

SHEEP
probaton
Thayer Definition:
1) any four footed, tame animal accustomed to graze, small cattle
1a) a sheep, and so always in the NT


While the translator very likely had a reason to translate as they did, lets explore another translations.

Sheep can just as well be translated as goat which is small cattle.
Goat can be translated as a kid. A  kid of what? kid sheep, kid goat.
So legitimate translations would be:
- Sheep and young sheep. -> Old sheep and young sheep.
- Goats and young goats. -> Old goats and young goats.

Old isn't about age but maturity in Christ. A babe in Christ is new Christian that can be 8 years old but just as well 88 years old.

So young points to the level of growth/education into Christ. The young ones/goats need more education.


Seems like the verse is about young and old (in Christ's teachings)
Matthew 25:33 And he will set, the sheep, indeed, on his right hand, but, the goats, on the left.



πρόβατον
probaton/sheep
Thayer Definition:
1) any four footed, tame animal accustomed to graze, small cattle
1a) a sheep, and so always in the NT  <==== Is that a fact or doctrine?
Part of Speech: noun neuter
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: probably from a presumed. derivative of G4260
Citing in TDNT: 6:689, 936πρόβατον
próbaton/sheep; gen. probátou, neut. noun from probaínō (G4260), to go before, walk ahead. Whatever walks forward. In the Ionic and Doric usages it was spoken of quadrupeds (in distinction from bipeds, and things flying, creeping, or swimming).
Generally, tá próbata were animals, but especially smaller animals such as sheep and goats (Mat 7:15, "in the dress of sheep" [a.t.]; Mat 9:36; Mat 10:16; Mat 12:11-12; Mat 18:12; Mar 6:34; Luk 15:4, Luk 15:6; Joh 2:14-15; Joh 10:1-4, Joh 10:12-13; Act 8:32; Rom 8:36; 1Pe 2:25; Rev 18:13; Sept.: Gen 12:16; Gen 13:5; Exo 12:3 ff.). In Attic and NT usage sheep are distinguished from goats (Mat 25:32-33). Figuratively of those under the care and watch of someone as sheep under a shepherd (Mat 10:6; Mat 15:24; Mat 26:31; Mar 14:27; Joh 10:7-8, Joh 10:11, Joh 10:15-16; Joh 21:16-17; Heb 13:20).
In some texts as in Joh 21:16-17 the word is found in its diminutive form, probátion, little sheep. This is to be distinguished from arníon (G721), lamb. Probátion was used as a term of endearment. Sheep, on account of their simplicity, mildness, inoffensiveness, patience and obedience, are used as emblems of believers in Christ (Joh 10:15-16, Joh 10:26-27 [cf. Mat 25:32-33; Heb 13:20]). Lost or straying sheep represent unconverted persons wandering in sin and error (Mat 10:6; Mat 15:24; Joh 10:26-27; 1Pe 2:25 [cf. Mat 9:36; Mar 6:34]).
Deriv.: probatikós (G4262), pertaining to sheep.
Ant.: ériphos (G2056), a goat; eríphion (G2055), a kid, small goat; trágos (G5131), he-goat.ἐρίφιον
eriphion/goat
Thayer Definition:
1) a kid, a young goat
Part of Speech: noun neuter
A Related Word by Thayer's/Strong's Number: from G2056ἐρίφιον
eríphion/goat; gen. eriphíou, neut. noun, a diminutive of ériphos (G2056), a goat. A kid, young goat (Mat 25:33). The words ériphos, a young goat, and the diminutive eríphion, appear in the picture of the last judgment where they are contrasted with sheep (próbata [G4263]). The point of contrast lies in the color rather than the character of the animals, the sheep being pure white while the goats are mostly covered with long black hair. In Son 4:1, the locks of the beloved are compared to "a flock of goats, that appear from Mount Gilead." The Son of Man shall separate all the nations "as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats" (Mat 25:32), which simile is quite true to pastoral life. Sheep and goats pasture together, but never trespass on each other's domains; they are kept together but they do not mix; they may be seen to enter the fold in company, but once inside they are kept separate.

Lastly, did you like the way I perfected your old quote above? I find you have really good things to say, but suffer from some pitiful spelling and grammar mistakes.

Well, thanks, I think  :Chinscratch:

[WhiteWings]

Yeah, I understand you. I grew up with a more Arminian background, though even then we did not really talk in depth about theological things. Then, about 2-3 years ago, I found out about that, and then became a zombie toward unbelievers after much(little?) thought, converted to "Calvinism." Honestly, at the time, I did not do it mainly because of my own studies, but more so because of other man's doctrines and opinions that are often spouted. Though, I think God brought me through that movement, to give me more of an understanding of some key subjects. Like Election, God's will vs man's, the Sovereignty of God, and other things. Personally, I also think Calvinists would have an easier time jumping to Universalism than Arminians would. Mainly because of they already believe in the Sovereignty of God, but just do not usually make that jump between saving a few and saving all. Or that God loves everyone.

I think both are equally right/wrong. Or more exact, incomplete.
The Armenians are right that salvation is open for everyone and not just a small percentage. But they ignore Scripture truly speaks about elect.
Calvinists are right there is an elect. But they don't understand what election really is.

I think UR largely blends those believes and adds a little.

Armenians believe salvation is open for 100% of humanity if they accept Jesus. The final score could be anything between 0-100%
Calvinists believe only those elected by God are saved, no matter how hard the non elect try. The final score is something like 5-10%.

UR aligns with Armenian teaching but firmly sets the score at 100%.
The Calvinist part of UR isn't as outspoken. At least not what I've read. Anyway as I wrote earlier I believe the elect are part of the 100% group.
For some/many that may feel wrong because believing is believing, saved is saved. No underdogs in His glorious Kingdom. But still Jesus used words like "the least in heaven". We see people being resurrected at His return and they get the privilege to rule with Him; while the sheep and goats are resurrected 1000 years later, not having the privilege of  ruling. That clearly shows some sort of difference.
So elect (also) are those who have the privilege of having an active role in the millennium reign.

Not claiming perfection in my theory. Likely it needs some fine tuning. But if you forgive me small flaws you will see my theory embraces all Scripture and doesn't ignore parts of it.
I believe in 100% salvation. I believe in extra glory for the elect. I believe the church is the body of Christ. I believe Christ has a bride. I believe God can and will stomp out sin; depending on how cooperative the person is that can range from a slap on the wrist to the use of His size 20 army boots. I do believe the Lake of Fire is real but it looks far different from what the vast majority thinks it looks like.

Once again, I'm not claiming perfection of my view, but I do claim that the view that has to explain away least Scripture is likely closest to the full truth.

[jugghead]

Good questions ML and I see so much of myself in the asking of questions...  and also ... in the understandings of Whitewings

In what I have come to understand, ..... the greatest outcome, whether it be 100% or "all in all" which are both the same truth seen in different ways (as a number or words) ..... the greatest outcome has to become the foundation upon which everything else has to line up with (be built), and when we "have faith" (being convinced) IN that greatest outcome, God then begins to align everything else in Scripture to that lofty outcome from that firm foundation in believing that outcome through faith ... constantly being reassured BY (that aligning of) Scripture THROUGH His Spirit which results in a "greater faith".

Our beginning of understanding (in the physical) and our end of understanding (in the Spiritual) always remains the same; remains constant, and when all Scripture lines up between these two points it becomes a perfectly straight line (path) and when all is said and done and "the mark" of "all in all" has been reached through God's works (work-man-ships/us), we can't even imagine what God has in store for us after that

This is just part of what I see in Day One of Genesis with the two terms "to be lofty" (translated as Heaven) and "to be firm" (translated as earth) ..... "all in all" is "to be lofty" (our Heaven) ... lofty being the greatest outcome

AND

"all in all" is also "to be firm" (our earth), our foundation .... firm (foundation) also being the greatest outcome .....

The words translated as Heaven and earth are a starting point of understanding, because everything God says is "lofty" and is also "firm" and everything He does is "lofty" and is also "firm" in which when we move into Day Two we can easily discern what is from above and what is from below and then when we move into Day Three "the dry appears" and what I see in that is "a dry understanding of death" ...... a dry understanding of death is seeing it only as an end, but by the renewing of the mind, death is no longer an end ... it becomes just a point of transference into Life .... it no longer has a sting

my  :2c:

[sheila]

 :2c:goat...Azazel'sgoat...a demon .a goatcanbe flesh..the Lord'sgoat[lot] accepted onHis alter...man's flesh consumed..andhisspirit

rising into heaven[just aswhenJesus become flesh/appearance of sin....andAzazels flesh/goat...a spirit hath not fleshandblood as ye

behold I have. scapegoats inthe at-one-ment of God...provide excuses for men's sin....decieved the entire inhabited earth.....

spiritual/perception blindness.how every one ends up in the ditch.[Father forgive them they knownot what they do]


  goat shaped demons in the wilderness/wicked generation that perished in the wilderness of  Sin..during the great exodus/deliverance

intothe promisedLand[heavenlyinheritance.]Baalworsip/goldcalf/doctrines ofdemons/flesh ofbirds[unclean spirits/cage ofunclean

birds/Babylon]eaten...vessels for clean and unclean purposes[flesh/goats]by lot.andGod's lot must be delivered before sodomburns.

Isaac's birth contempary with  God coming down in man's flesh to see ifwhat was being reported was true.Sarah/Jerusalem Above.


Judas goats lead sheep toslaughter/satan entered Judas/as well as off spring of viper class of religious leaders in his day.

spirit in man is sheep...[good] evil spirit in man'sflesh is a Judas goat leading him to death.[he sits inthe templeofGod[your

body]andshows himself that heisgod]he who destroys God's temple,God will destroy.because man spirit is teachable/sheep..itcan

be mislead/decieved/have it's hoofs torn off and skinned/andbecome lost/wander...especiallyby falseshepherds who manifest

as messengers of light[satan transforms himself as a messenger oflight]therefore a little d-evil[liar] can spoil much good.


look!  a two horned like a lamb that spake as a dragon[power and principality inhigh place]


Zealforthe Lord's House consumed Jesus..and in the consummation He throws out other robber and thief spirits..that come tokill/rob

anddestroy in the household of God.[all that camebefore mewere robbers andthieves.]

atonement...twolot's..the Lord's and Azazels..one vessel for clean use and one vessel [flesh]for unclean use..

  from now on call no man unclean...or having a portion inthe LOF..for the Lord will seperate the sheepfrom the goats.

[MusicLover123]

I think both are equally right/wrong. Or more exact, incomplete.
The Armenians are right that salvation is open for everyone and not just a small percentage. But they ignore Scripture truly speaks about elect.
Calvinists are right there is an elect. But they don't understand what election really is.

I think UR largely blends those believes and adds a little.

Armenians believe salvation is open for 100% of humanity if they accept Jesus. The final score could be anything between 0-100%
Calvinists believe only those elected by God are saved, no matter how hard the non elect try. The final score is something like 5-10%.

UR aligns with Armenian teaching but firmly sets the score at 100%.

What I have come to realize is, is that The True Gospel uses what already has been given to us. It is not a matter of adding to what is there, subtracting or changing what is already present. Of course, then comes the matter of interpreting what is there. :)

Only the Big Three have perfected wisdom.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Or the big 3 here at TM?

Old isn't about age but maturity in Christ. A babe in Christ is new Christian that can be 8 years old but just as well 88 years old.

Right. Like, I bet there are 9 month old's that are more wise than you!  :laughing7:

Jugghead's quote comes to mind here:
"Wisdom is not measured by time, it is measured by understanding"

In the same manner, I would like to add...
"Knowledge is not measured by moments of time, but moments of efficiency."

Good analyses as well. I think the modern usage of sheep and goats is one big caricature, and not just pertaining to Church usage, but internet culture as well.

[marie glen]

...sheep are docile..? And goats butt..? Mentioning "internet" made me think of that! And a conclusion I've come to is usually the 'debater' with less leg to stand on is usually the more bullying.. Or this would be one reason anyway..

:Chinscratch: And sheep and goats as Jesus referred to them, concerns 'latter days' when He returns, He separates them..

It's great to be able to go on the world wide web and discuss all manner of doctrine with many others of the household of God.

But when He comes, will He find us teaching "believe in Jesus" or will He find us beating one another? Will He find faith on the Earth?

The most insidious thread having weaved its way into the fray, is the thought that if one disagrees with another's doctrine, they are not part of the household of the Lord. (Christian Universalism is labeled as heretic and dangerous. :sigh: I'm so happy to know the 'end' of the story! :HeartThrob: :cloud9: )

When Jesus, prayed - let them be one as the Father and He are one. And the scripture says the fruit of the flesh (imperfect carnal character) includes such things as sects, party sentiment, factions.

We all should always remember to rightly divide our zeal for Truth, and the spirit of competition, which of course, competition, is of that lower flawed and carnal character. Truth needs no one's defense. Our attitude should be, say it and shake the dust..

Whenever we spy an insidious thread slithering its way amongst us we should immediately pierce it in its tracks with the sharp double edged sWord of Truth. (Pierce it with love.)

"Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love" - as we know, said by the Apostle John (1 Jn 4:7,8).

Such words will likely not convince one who does not love, but perhaps such words may prevent one who does love from falling into the same snare!

There is definitely a lot of butting aside and pushing around out there on the www! And I'm talking about in Christian circles :faint: As Paul said "brethren! it ought not to be!"

Lesson? better to be a sheep than a goat.. goat like behavior may get someone somewhere now.. but that's very temporary.. Newsflash to some brethren on the www? Bullying does not make something untrue to be any more true. If someone is quoting scripture, especially NT, I think it's likely safe to assume they are a genuine believer.. Not to say there are no wolves in sheep's clothing :doh:

[MusicLover123]

Alright, I finally have a better word to use, so maybe this will describe my question better:

Is ecstasy a way of experiencing God? Not just drug caused either. I've heard that some take drugs, and feel as much profound feelings as those who have Spiritual experiences, but only the first time. And their life falls apart as a result.

[marie glen]

I think I read a book about a monastic person, a woman, who used to talk about "ecstasy".. Teresa..? of Avila? Idk. Her story was very interesting. I think as believers we can feel a lot of joy. Which to me seems to come from peace.. maybe that peace that passeth understanding.. And Jesus said something about "that your joy may be full" the things He was telling them (and us/all) so their joy would be full.. (Jn.15:11; Jn.14-17?) ...As our guide into all truth, I think the Holy Spirit Of God imparts joy with that truth..  :dontknow: :gsmile: Truth makes me happy! His truth seems very profound to me.. and joyful like ripples in a pond.. like laughter..

I think it's He Himself that is joy! Great joy. Yes, I think great joy is ours! :thumbsup:

But! I think the adversary and world have counterfeits.. which you even mentioned some of.. I've heard of "ecstasy" in 'voodoo' ..but obviously the fruit would be far different..