Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13

Thread: The Demiurge

  1. #11
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default The Allegorical Torah/Law - The higher purpose of the law


    The Allegorical Torah/Law
    The higher purpose of the law

    The higher purpose of the law: Unlike the Gentiles who proclaimed an allegiance to a philosophy that redeemed them from their own sinful ways, and then continued to live in the same manner as everyone else, the Hebrew holy men went to the heart of the matter in their quest to bridge the gap between this world and the Kingdom within (Luke 17:20-21). Because the masses of people -- being of a carnal mindset -- cannot embrace the revelation of higher knowledge, what the Hebrews created was a religious culture -- a way of life -- that brought man and God together in every aspect of the people’s lives.

    The objective of the Hebrew holy men was to shift the perception of the common people beyond the physical, and develop them to the point where they were better able to overcome their very carnal nature that banished man from his true place of origination. What they accomplished was to devise a practical means to fulfill the objective, which was contained in the words: I "...bridle the whole body" (James 3:2 KJV); or "...beat my body and make it my slave..." (1 Cor 9:27 NIV); "Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature" (Col 3:5 NIV) -- Which spiritual concepts can be realized in the requirement set forth by the Apostle Paul when he said that all Christians should "...take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ" (2 Cor 10:5 NIV)? How solemnly this requirement was set forth can be seen in the words of Jesus where he warned: "But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment" (Matt 12:36 KJV).

    From the perspective of the people of the Nations, these biblical statements embody rigid extremism in its ultimate form. How can man bridle his body -- beat it to make it his slave -- put to death his earthly nature -- and "...take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ"? How can we be judged for every idle word that we speak?

    Yet, these verses of scripture represent core spiritual concepts that are absent from religiously based philosophy -- and in these statements is confirmed the words found in the Imitation of Christ where it is written: "‘If any love Me, he will keep My words, and We will come unto him, and will make our abode with him’. Give therefore, admittance unto Christ, and deny entrance to all others... Blessed are they who long to give their time to God, and who cut themselves off from the hindrances of the world. Consider these things, my soul, and close the door of your senses, so that you can hear what the Lord your God speaks within you."

    Are These Teachings Extreme? Is the original New Covenant teachings the embodiment of extremism, as our liberal thinkers would reason today? Yes it is extreme -- until we truly become cognizant of the fact that we dwell in a prison -- i.e., our true self exists in a twelve dimensional reality that is beyond even our imagination and ability to contemplate -- and because our true (soul) presence is so reduced by the three dimensions of this very incomplete realm, our intelligence and power of mind has been diminished to a mere fraction of our potential. In the same way that we would question the wisdom of a parent who keeps their child locked in a room and separated from the outside world, it is not until we comprehend that the term extremism is only applicable to the poverty in which we presently dwell, can we begin to walk the path that the men and women of wisdom have called The Way.

    The Purpose of The Law Is Not Understood: The essence of living in accordance with the Law is not constrainment, but to bring God-awareness into every experience of life -- thereby creating the foundational mindset that enables ones vital energies to be channeled back into one’s inner Source, rather than out into the world. If the heathen is to become the Jew -- and the Jew is to be transformed into Israel -- there is no other means to bring this about. From a biblical perspective, what one’s subjectivity to the Law of God accomplishes, is to start the process where man’s innate spiritual nature begins to become more manifest in the life of the people.

    The Esoteric Application of The Law: In many respects the soul is as a conductor of this observable power, with the ultimate source of this energy being God. In the same way that all energy is moved because of a difference of potential -- a negative and positive polarity -- the bio-energy upon which our thoughts, consciousness and life-force ride upon and manifest our soul in this world as living beings, can be moved between the polarities either external to us through nature, or internal -- thus we have the foundational principle of the teachings of the Two Ways.

    When Moses said to the people: "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live" (Deut 30:19 KJV); in the world of religious philosophies, this is known as the Two Ways. Throughout the New Testament Jesus taught about the Two Ways -- especially as seen in his words: "Enter through the narrow gate; For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it" (Matt 7:13-14 NIV).

    When we permit our bio-energy to be bled off into the world, this is indicative of the biblical condition known as carnal -- which is represented in the scriptures as the "broad way" that leads to destruction. The result of this lifestyle is that we become sense bound -- resulting in the condition where our inner resources of higher mind never develops, and the presence of our soul and our spiritual nature remains dormant. On the other hand, we enter through the narrow gate when we begin to channel our bio-energy within us, rather than squander it in the world. It is as water flowing through a leak in a dike. In the beginning its just a trickle -- but as the water continues to flow, the opening becomes larger and larger.

    In comprehending these great truths, we can also understand why those teachings which were referred to as the Mysteries of God could not be understood by the carnal minded believers. Because they were only using a mere fraction of their potential of mind, they simply did not possess the tools to even begin to contemplate the true essence of the sacred teachings. These great truths cannot be taught, in the manner that we teach today -- they can only be learned through man’s direct spiritual interaction and experience with the Divine. Holy men could act as guides -- and direct the disciples quest in a more pure direction -- but in view of the fact that man’s true quest is one of self-discovery, the path of Life must be explored by each of us in pursuit of our destiny.

    One of the major problems that confront man today is that it is very difficult to accomplish these spiritual milestones alone. Something that is beyond our present-day understanding is the effect of another person’s presence within the close proximity of each other. Because we are all connected at the essence of our being with the One True Source of Life -- and it is the same vital force moving out into creation upon which each of our own individual consciousness dwells -- the presence of other people actually invokes the vibration that they represent within our own mind and being.

    What this means is that when we are in the presence of a true holy man, his entrance into our outer domain draws our consciousness towards the vibration that he represents within us -- with the result being that we are drawn closer to God. In like manner, when we are in the presence of an evil man -- one who is spiritually unclean -- one who lives a sinful life -- their proximity to our domain can draw us into their vibration. Thus, it is for this reason that the Bible places such strong emphasis on the necessity of marriage, family and community, as part of the foundation of genuine religion. Moreover, because Paul understood the dynamics of how others influence us, it was for this reason that the Apostle confirmed the need for Christians to live separate and apart from the unbelievers: "Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you" (2 Cor 6:17 NIV). What the Apostle is stating is a fundamental Bible truth that to our own detriment we ignorantly ignore. That in our present-day philosophical perception of the Word we have violated this great truth, has only contributed to our own spiritual defilement. -- but the impact upon our children can be spiritually devastating.

    The Holy men did not need to teach in our sense of the word. His very presence invoked a higher mindset -- and even without words, he had the power to draw the disciple closer to God. In the case of Jesus, he had the power to take his disciples beyond the barrier of this world, and open the door to spiritual realms. On the other hand, his presence caused the violent nature of the spiritual impostors to erupt in his condemnation. Why? Because those who dwell in darkness, fear the Light.

    In the same way that the true spiritual depth was lost when sacred writings such as these were translated into the Hebrew of the masses, the translation into Greek made it at best, mealy a revelation of the lesser mysteries. Moreover, when the Greek texts are then translated into a language such as English, they retain little more than a moral code by which the multitude of believers can use to shape their lives. The result is that the scriptures, being devoid of their multidimensional essence, have lost their power to invoke the inner dimensions of man’s spiritual nature.

  2. #12
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default The Demiurge - Christianity - The Counterfeit Philosophy:


    Christianity - The Counterfeit Philosophy

    Even today, though our biblical scholars do not possess the spiritual depth to comprehend the far reaching implications of the true New Covenant, what they saw in the caves of Qumran came as no surprise to informed people. "Biblical scholars", said the late A. Powell Davies, "were not disturbed by what they found in the Dead Sea Scrolls because they had known all along that the origin of Christianity was not what was commonly supposed to have been" (quoted by Millar Burrows in More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls). They knew all along that Jesus was part of a movement -- a movement whose quest was to be God’s "kingdom of priests, and an holy nation" (Ex 19:6). Didn’t Jesus himself tell us: "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews" (John 4:22 KJV).

    One of the great problems that confront us today is that the essence of New Covenant thought is so foreign to our modern culture, that we cannot even envision what is revealed in the scrolls. In many respects, the Dead Sea Scrolls have given birth to still another form of error, as seen in the words of Edmund Wilson, an expert who worked on the scrolls, in his book The Scrolls From The Dead Sea who raises the question as to what difference it makes if "Jesus... had been trained in the discipline and imbued with the thought of a certain Jewish sect, and that he had learned from it the role that he afterwards lived..."? Thus, the problem is that carnal man is incapable of comprehending the true place of Jesus in the history of mankind.

    The obstacle that confronts us is that until we begin to embrace a more clear understanding of the true nature of Yeshua in relation to ourselves and the purpose of Creation, we will remain spiritually stagnant, and the gates to the Kingdom will continue to be obscured from our perception. Who was Yeshua in the eyes of those who lived with him, spoke to him, and was taught by him? Their perception of Jesus is captured by Gibbon where he wrote concerning the Hebrew followers of Jesus: "They revered Jesus as the greatest of the prophets, endowed with supernatural virtue and power. They ascribed to his person and to his future reign all the predictions of the Hebrew oracles which relate to the spiritual and everlasting kingdom of the promised Messiah" (Gibbon; Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.2, P.222).

    Writing about the beliefs of the very first followers of Yeshua, as demonstrated in the doctrines ascribed to the Jewish Messianic believers known as the Ebionites which were held in common with the man Cerinthus, who was himself a Jewish Messianic leader, the second century writer Irenaeus states that they: "represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles" (Irenaeus, Bk 1, Ch 26, doctrines of Cerinthus).

    What the first followers of Yeshua believed was exactly what I have previously demonstrated was written in each of the New Testament Gospels, and is still noted in the footnote of the Revised Standard Version that many of the more ancient manuscripts read: "Today I have begotten thee", instead of the "In thee I am well pleased" at Luke 3:22. Thus, we can alter our scriptures to say anything we please, but the disciples of Yeshua believed what he taught them when he explained that when the Anointing came upon him when he was baptized in the Jordan, it was at that time that he became the Messiah/Christ, as seen in the words: "Today I have begotten thee".

    Yeshua taught his disciples that they were all the prodigal sons of the Father -- that being lost in this, the far country, they were all dead -- and he, being the first among his brothers to completely fulfill the Law of God, was the first to return to the Kingdom. This, then, is the perspective of the words where it is written: "And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead" (Rev 1:5 KJV).

    From a biblical perspective, being reborn from the dead is the exact same destiny of all of mankind as seen in the words of the Apostle: "God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" (Acts 13:33 KJV). Yet, the Gentile world which lacked the God-centered foundation of the Jews, simply refused to believe what Jesus taught, and what the Apostles witnessed to, as can be seen in the words of Barnes’ Notes on Acts 13:33 with respect to the words Have I begotten thee: "This evidently cannot be understood in a literal sense. It literally refers to the relation of an earthly father to his children; but in no such sense can it be applied to the relation of God the Father to the Son. It must, therefore, be figurative".

    The Book of Acts tells us that after Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit -- not partially -- or merely inspired -- but speaking with the perception of an Anointed Mind, he proclaimed before the people: "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know" (Acts 2:22 KJV). Thus, Peter confirms the first century doctrine that Yeshua was a man -- a man who was approved by God -- and it was God who performed the "miracles and wonders and signs" through him.

    From a biblical perspective, there is nothing in the Old Testament that implies or predicts that the Eternal God will come in the form of man. The prediction was that God would raise up a prophet from among the Jews, like Moses, as seen where it is written: "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him" (Deut 18:15 NIV). When Peter spoke before the Jews, he stated that this prediction applied to Yeshua -- and in so doing, himself called Yeshua a prophet: "Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet from your brethren as he raised me up. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you... This is the Moses who said to the Israelites, ‘God will raise up for you a prophet from your brethren as he raised me up’" (Acts 3:22;7:37 RSV).

    Perhaps more importantly is the fact that Yeshua referred to himself as a prophet, as seen in the words: "But Jesus said to them, ‘A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house’" (Matt 13:57 RSV). When conversing about his crucifixion, Yeshua again spoke of himself as a prophet, as seen where it is written: "Yes, today, tomorrow, and the next day I must proceed on my way. For it wouldn’t do for a prophet of God to be killed except in Jerusalem!" (Luke 13:33 NLT). Thus, Yeshua told his disciples and followers that he was a prophet.

    In Yeshua's prayer to the Father prior to his crucifixion it is written: "And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt" (Matt 26:39 KJV). If Jesus was God, and the Father and the Son were not separate and distinct individuals, such a prayer would have been meaningless. In these many such instances where Jesus prays to God -- or the Father -- if they were one and the same, Jesus would have been praying to himself -- and his will, would of necessity have been the Father’s will. Moreover, neither could God call his disciples his brothers, and make the statement: "Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God’" (John 20:17 NIV).

    What Yeshua taught his disciples was that he and the Father were One -- but this same Oneness was also applied to his disciples, as seen in the words: "That they may all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us; that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me. And the glory which Thou hast given Me I have given to them; that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, that the world may know that Thou didst send Me, and didst love them, even as Thou didst love Me" (John 17:21-23 NAS). The problem is that we cannot even begin to understand the essence and meaning of this spiritual concept, until we are first able to comprehend our own divided nature -- the reality of our pre-existent soul -- and our vision has been opened to where we are able to see beyond the natural barriers of this world. What Yeshua is saying, though, is that in the same way that he and the Father are One, they too are One.

    If Yeshua was God -- or even coequal with God as in the foundation of the doctrine of the Trinity -- Yeshua could never have said to his disciples: "You heard me say, I am going away and I am coming back to you. If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I. I have told you now before it happens, so that when it does happen you will believe. I will not speak with you much longer, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold on me, but the world must learn that I love the Father and that I do exactly what my Father has commanded me" (John 14:28-31 NIV). How could a coequal God say that God was greater than he was? Moreover, if they were one and the same personage, how could Jesus say that he must do "exactly what my Father has commanded me".

    It is a widely accepted doctrine among Christians today that the disciples and Messianic followers did not comprehend the true nature of Yeshua, because they did not proclaim that he was God -- as did the Pagan Gentile converts. What Yeshua taught his disciple with regard to who he was, is exactly what was stated by Peter after he was totally enlightened by the Holy Spirit: "Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know" (Acts 2:22 NIV). Where did Peter get the notion that Jesus was a man -- a man that God performed miracles, wonders and signs through? Didn’t Jesus himself say that "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself..." (John 5:19 NAS); "The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works" (John 14:10 NKJ); "I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me" (John 5:30 NKJ); "...I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him" (John 8:28-29 NIV); "for the works which the Father has given Me to finish -- the very works that I do -- bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me" (John 5:36 NKJ); "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You" (John 17:6-7 NKJ).

    How could God give God works to finish? How could God know nothing except what God taught him? Moreover, why would God -- a Being that cannot be defiled -- consecrate himself as seen in the words: "They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth. As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth" (John 17:16-19 RSV).

    Are these just words -- or did Yeshua truly mean that his disciples were not of this world? When Yeshua states that he is At-One with God, does that mean that he is God? And when Jesus states that his disciples are at-one with both him and God, does that make them God? These are question that carnal man is incapable of answering – incapable, until they have themselves attained this level of oneness. Perhaps, then, before we attempt to explain them away with carnal perceptions and traditions in the manner of the Sadducees and Pharisees, we had better do as Jesus said, walk in The Way, and find out the Truth of the matter for ourselves.

    In view of what Yeshua taught his disciples and followers, again let us review the direct witness of the Apostle Peter as found in the Clementine Holily number sixteen, Chapter fifteen, where he opposed Simon Magus and states: "Our Lord neither asserted that there were gods except the Creator of all, nor did He proclaim Himself to be God".

    It is a well recorded fact of history that the disciples of Yeshua, his brother James, and the Messianic Jewish believers who were his friends, brothers and followers, did not believe that Yeshua was God. Those people who spoke to him -- ate with him -- traveled with him -- and were taught by him -- and was even his brother -- believed exactly as it is written in the scriptures: "But when the multitudes saw it, they marveled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men" (Matt 9:8 KJV).

    Fundamentally, every person who was taught directly by Jesus held a common belief of a "supernatural union of a man and a God; and this mystic doctrine was adopted with many fanciful improvements by Carpocrates, Basilides, and Valentine... In their eyes, Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary: but he was the best and wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was baptized in the Jordan, the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry" (Gibbon; The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.4, P.366).

    This belief -- that "the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry", is simply not understood by the carnal mind of natural man -- as is very clearly stated in the Bible itself. We can only start to comprehend this belief that was held commonly by ALL the faithful believers who were taught directly by Yeshua himself, as well as those who were closest to him in the first century, when we begin to apply what the Apostle Paul put forth in the first chapter of Romans, and explore the belief in relation to our own entrance into this world.

    We came into being by virtue of the Powers of Creation coming together -- male and female -- and a part of our parent’s essence -- a divided part -- was merged into a single core unit. This unit, then, did not suddenly spring forth into a body -- but rather, it began the process of expansion and growth by dividing itself. It becomes a person because of a genetic code -- a code that we can liken to a set of predetermined laws that totally controls its formation and growth.

    In this respect, our whole existence as the offspring of God is controlled in this same fashion. In the same way that an embryo has a genetic destiny that is predetermined by a set of laws, we are as an embryo that has been planted within the Being of God -- i.e., "in him we live, and move, and have our being" (Acts 17:28 KJV) -- because all of Creation has sprang forth from God, and at one level, remains connected to its Source of Being. "They revered Jesus as the greatest of the prophets, endowed with supernatural virtue and power. They ascribed to his person and to his future reign all the predictions of the Hebrew oracles which relate to the spiritual and everlasting kingdom of the promised Messiah" (Gibbon; Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.2, P.222).

    When we say that the prodigal son returns to his father -- or that we must "be converted, and become as little children" (Matt 18:3 KJV), which I have already demonstrated means to "turn about", or reverse ones direction -- what we are in fact saying is that we must return to our Source of Being.

    Man is plagued by a less than ten percent limitation on his mind because his consciousness is focused on the outer world. For the prodigal son to turn about, he must reverse the attention of his consciousness away from this world, and become aware of the inner source of his being. Most religions the world depict this as following a river to its source -- returning to Mecca or Jerusalem -- of which the Apostle writes: "Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all" (Gal 4:24-26 KJV).

    Following a physical river -- or traveling to the Jerusalem or Mecca of this world -- will do little for your spiritual growth. On the other hand, traveling to the spiritual Jerusalem by following the stream of consciousness via that flow of vital life-force into the essence of our being, will bring you before the throne of the Eternal God. Regardless of the fact that such religious concepts have become foreign to the Christian world today, we have no other means to explain the many biblical teachings that the Kingdom is within us (Luke 17:20-21), and that we are the Temple of God (1 Cor 3:16)! If we believe that the Bible is true, and the Kingdom is indeed within us, then we must accept the fact that we have the ability to go there -- i.e., the prodigal son turns about, and returns to his Source of Being.

    When we do this, we begin to be able to use a greater amount of our inherent potential of mind. With each step up-stream in consciousness towards the Source of our Being, we begin to see things from both a wider and clearer perception. As our vision becomes more spiritual through the process of moving closer to our soul and spirit, we begin to understand why Jesus condemned both the Sadducees and Pharisees, as well as the religions of the Nations -- i.e., because their illegitimate priests and pseudo-wise men created doctrines which attempted to explain Creation from a carnal perspective -- a perspective which was founded upon a less than ten percent of their potential of mind -- and a perspective that was established upon a very limited vision of a three-dimensional world.

    We have no other means to explain the many biblical verses that require us to "...bridle the whole body" (James 3:2 KJV) -- or "...beat my body and make it my slave..." (1 Cor 9:27 NIV) -- or "Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature" (Col 3:5 NIV) -- Which spiritual concepts can be realized in the requirement set forth by the Apostle Paul when he said that all Christians should "...take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ" (2 Cor 10:5 NIV) -- or why Jesus warned that "every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment" (Matt 12:36 KJV). Why would such extreme acts of religious discipline be required if all we had to do was have faith and believe? What these concepts speak to us about is the process of transformation from physical to spiritual as we lessen the influence of this world upon us, in the endeavor to find and move into harmony with our inner Source of Being.

    In this respect, we can refute the words of Gibbon when he described the beliefs of the first Christians as being in error, because they are allegorical! When Gibbon wrote that "the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry" -- what actually happened was that Yeshua -- the first of the prodigal sons to return -- had become so Godly, that he opened the door to the very Source of his being -- the Alpha Cell, which is the very first cell in the order of Creation that is derived from the essence given to each of us by our Mother-Father God -- the original cell that divided itself in the manner of an embryo, until we were brought into being in the manifestation of the people we have come to be throughout all of time as we know it.

    All the scriptural references to the Temple and its inner chambers are not indicative of a building perceptible to the human eyes -- i.e., "God... dwelleth not in temples made with hands" (Acts 17:24 KJV) -- and all the many biblical testimonials regarding the temple throughout the scriptures are all allegorical references to the Spiritual Temple within our own minds where the presence of God dwells -- "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" (1 Cor 3:16 KJV). As we walk in The Way, and travel along the streams of inner consciousness, we are no longer sense bound and controlled by the god and powers of this physical realm. With every reverse step towards the source of our consciousness -- which can be likened to our entering and moving within the Temple where the Bible states God dwells -- our mind begins to be drawn closer to its true inner source of being. The more it grows nearer to God, the greater its perception and power.

    Because by nature, carnal man is imbued with a Darwinist mindset -- i.e., the Christian’s greatest obstacle and stumbling block that causes him difficulty in perceiving spiritual truths -- and only when the Christian begins to look beyond the limitations of the Darwinist mindset, can the believer come to terms with the difference between Jesus, the believer, and the common people that he sees in his life. Because carnal man’s very limited vision of reality does not permit him to understand the process by which Jesus became first the Messiah, and then the Son of God, carnal man views souls such as Jesus as being different than themselves. Yes, it is true, that Yeshua was born very different than the people the Apostle calls the natural man who is incapable of perceiving the things of the spirit (1 Cor 2:14 NKJ), but that is because carnal man has yet to walk the walk that leads along The Way!

  3. #13
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    56
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: The Demiurge


    Is the Law of Moses (Torah) Still Binding?



    Never has there been a period in my lifetime when there is as much doctrinal confusion in the body of Christ as there is at this time. Some of the most fundamental issues of biblical truth are being challenged.
    One of the curious oddities that has made its appearance is the notion that the Torah (the law of Moses) was not abolished by Jesus’ death upon the cross. Rather, it continues on, its commands (at least some of them) being bound upon the church, and its obligatory force continuing until the return of Christ. A young professor in a Christian university has expressed the following thoughts.

    If Jesus’ death on the cross really did do away with the Torah altogether, why does he affirm it so strongly in Matthew 5, and even enjoin those in his kingdom to fulfill its commands? Don’t forget how Jesus closes his teaching on the Law. He says: “Whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven! But whoever keeps them and teaches others to do the same will be great in the kingdom of heaven.” Is the Kingdom of Heaven now? Are Jesus’ words for us? I strive to keep and teach the Torah because I want to be considered great in the Kingdom of Heaven. But I want you to know something. Unlike Israel of the OT, I study, keep, and teach a fulfilled Torah; a Torah redefined by Christ and his death. Many of the types and shadows of the Torah have been replaced by the realities to which they point in Christ. This fact, however, does not nullify the Torah; rather it makes the Torah even more beautiful and meaningful (emphasis original).

    The error in this affirmation is egregious, not to mention contradictory. It concedes the Torah has been fulfilled, and yet contends it must be “kept” today—even the least of its obligations. This stands in sharp contrast to the teaching of Christ, as well as the writers of the New Testament. It really is most amazing that any mature Christian would advocate it—much less one who is in a position of responsibility, and exercises considerable influence over impressionable youth.


    A Transitional Period

    One must understand that the commencement of the New Testament record begins with what might be designated as a “transitional” period. In this era, instruction was given first by John the Baptizer; then by Jesus himself, which would accommodate a seamless passage from the old Mosaic regime to the glorious kingdom of Christ.

    This is the very point the Lord had in mind when he declared: “The law and the prophets were until John: from that time the gospel of the kingdom of God is preached” (Luke 16:16). In a manner of speaking, John’s ministry was a “bridge” between the old covenant era and the beginning of the reign of Christ.

    Though the law of Moses was still operative until the death of Christ (and its civil aspects until the fall of the nation in A.D. 70), Jesus nonetheless taught many “kingdom” principles during his personal ministry. He did this, for example, in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7; cf. also Matthew 18:15-17), frequently highlighting some of the differences between the two covenants, especially in terms of the contrasting motivations that were internal to the respective systems.


    What about Matthew 5:17-20?

    One of the problems the Lord would encounter was a reaction from the Pharisees, who would charge that this Jesus of Nazareth was a revolutionary who had designs on “destroying” the Mosaic economy that had held sway over the Hebrew nation for fifteen centuries. It was imperative that this distortion be addressed and corrected. Hence, the Lord announced:

    Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-20).

    The term “destroy” is a word that can connote the idea of some violence. It derives from the compound Greek term kataluo (17 times in the New Testament), literally to “loose down.” Christ employed the word prophetically concerning the destruction of the Jewish temple by the Romans in A.D. 70 (Matthew 24:2; Luke 21:6; cf. also Matthew 26:61; 27:40, etc.). It also is applied to the commencing corruption of the human body at the point of death (2 Corinthians 5:1).

    In the context cited above, therefore, the Lord was contending that he did not come to violently “tear down” the law, as though he were its enemy. Never! Rather, he came to “fulfill” it. These terms stand in perfect contrasting balance.
    The Savior fulfilled the messianic prophecies (more than 300) of the law that heralded his coming (Luke 24:44). He fulfilled the demand of the law for perfect obedience—by his sinless life (Galatians 3:10; John 8:29, 46; 1 Peter 2:22). He fulfilled the purpose of the law, being the very object of its glorious, preparatory design (Galatians 3:24-25).

    The Mosaic regime was never intended to be a permanent institution. The notion that the Torah would continue in effect until the Second Coming of Christ—as some have alleged—is utterly without biblical support. The beneficial effects of the law, as designed by the Creator, will abide through the age; but not the law itself.

    But one might wonder: “Does not the passage affirm that the law would continue ‘until heaven and earth pass away’?” It absolutely does not. The text simply announces that the law would remain intact until such a time as it is fulfilled.
    This fulfillment is the very thing Jesus declared he came to accomplish! If he did not fulfill the law, then the Savior did not do what he came to do, hence, failed in his mission. If he did do what he came to do, the law was fulfilled, hence, does not remain an obligatory system today.

    Compare Luke’s parallel: “But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tittle of the law to fall” (Luke 16:17). When the Son of God “fulfilled” the law, it had not failed, fallen, or been destroyed; it had been completed. Thus it no longer was a law to which the Jews, or anyone else, were obligated to obey as a legal system. To fail to recognize this truth is to overlook one of the most fundamental propositions of biblical literature.

    But what should be said about the connection of verses 19 and 20, to verses 27 and 18? Does this suggest that the commandments of the law would be binding upon those in the kingdom of Christ? This was the position argued by the young gentleman cited earlier. It absolutely does not. Such an interpretation would stand in radical contradiction to scores of passages in the New Testament letters. J.W. McGarvey explained the connection nicely:

    The man who would break what he considered the small commandments of God, under one dispensation, would be proportionately disobedient under a better dispensation; for habits of disobedience once formed are not easily laid aside. For this reason obedience or disobedience while under the law was an index to what a man would be under Christ. The text shows that the relative greatness of persons in the kingdom of heaven is measured by their conscientiousness in reference to the least commandments. To the great commandments, as men classify them, even very small Christians may be obedient; but it requires the most tender conscience to be always scrupulous about the least commandments (53).

    The text most definitely is not teaching that the Torah will be a binding law throughout the Christian administration. In fact, in his “marriage” metaphor, designed to emphasize the changing of laws, Paul wrote:

    For the woman who has a husband, is bound by law to the husband while he is living; but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband. So if then, while the husband lives, if she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man. Wherefore, my brothers, you also are made dead to the law [Torah] through the body of Christ; that you should be joined to another, even to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto God (Romans 7:2-4).

    If Christians are equally obligated to the Torah and the law of Christ, they are in a state of spiritual adultery! This is a most unenviable consequence of the doctrine under review.
    In an excellent discussion of this untenable theory, so common with various theologians, the scholarly R.C. Foster wrote: “The view that He [Christ] merely deepened and emphasized the law in the Sermon on the Mount will not bear investigation” (469). I would encourage those who have access to Foster’s tremendous work, Studies in the Life of Christ, to carefully study the material on the “Sermon on the Mount” (462-487).

    In concluding this section of our article, we are compelled to make this observation. Jesus emphatically affirmed that neither a “jot” nor a “tittle” (terms used to represent the minutest portions of the documents) would “pass away from the law” until “all things be accomplished” (v. 18b). If Christ did not fulfill the law, and it will remain until “heaven and earth pass away,” then all of the Torah—every jot and tittle—remains! Or, to say it in another way—all the commands, from the greatest to the least, still are in force.


    Garbled Language

    It will not do to filter “the law,” so to speak, separating the “ceremonial” from the “moral,” rejecting the former while claiming to retain the latter—as attempted by the Seventh-day Adventists (though they cling to the Sabbath and the abstention from pork idea, both of which were in the “ceremonial” category). This is a false distinction.

    Nor will it work to claim that by practicing the teaching of Jesus we are “keeping the Torah.” For example when the Christian honors Christ as his “Passover” (1 Corinthians 5:7), or when one submits to the covenant of “circumcision” (in baptism – Colossians 2:11-12), he is not obeying the commandments of the Torah. The Old and New are two different systems. The “types” of the Old Testament foreshadowed the “anti-types” of the New, but one cannot claim he is “keeping the law of Moses” when he yields to New Testament ordinances. This is an irresponsible confusion of the two covenants, and a garbled use of language.

    Neither is it valid to contend that while the law’s “curse” expired, the law itself remains. Paul stated that “as many as are of the works of the law are under a curse” (Galatians 3:10). The law and the curse were joined. A law, with no penalty, is no law at all! The fact is, the entire law, together with its demands and curse, passed away. Only fifteen verses later the apostle declared that: “we are no longer under a tutor [the law]” (24-25). How can that point possibly be ignored? The former covenant was replaced with a “better covenant” (cf. Hebrews 8:6ff)—unless, of course, one wishes to rip the entire book of Hebrews from the Bible.

    Does this mean that the Old Testament is of no value today? Of course not; far from it! The legacy of that body of literature is vast, wonderful, and abiding (cf. Romans 15:4; 1 Corinthians 10:6, 11). There is a divine link between the Old and the New Testaments. But does that mean that the Christian is under the former regime in this age, with its body of law to which he is obligated? It does not. Should one be teaching that Christians ought to be observing the commandments of the Torah today—from the greatest to the least? To so argue is to leave a distinctly erroneous impression.

    Though we do not have the inclination at this time to review the full range of arguments being advanced in support of the notion that the law of Moses was not abrogated by the death of Christ, we do wish to address one further aspect of it.


    Nailed to the Cross

    In his letter to the Colossian saints, Paul reminded these Christians that prior to their conversion to the Lord, they were “dead through [their] trespasses.” But they were made “alive” together with Christ, who forgave all their sins. The apostle then contends that Christ “blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross” (Colossians 2:13-14).
    This would involve “the legal bond of ordinances to which the Jew had agreed and to which even the Gentile’s conscience had in some degree given assent (Romans 2:14, 15)” (Ashby, 1533; see also: Abbott, 255; Eadie, 163-164; Vincent, 908, and many additional scholars).

    It has become fashionable in some quarters, however, to allege that this text has no reference to the abolition of the law of Moses. Rather, it is supposed to refer to the “note” of sin-debt that stood against the Christian prior to his conversion. In response to this theory we offer the following considerations.


    The Context

    The immediate context argues otherwise. In the sentence that follows, Paul draws his conclusion: “Let no man, therefore, judge [condemn] you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath day: which are a shadow of the things to come, but the body is Christ’s” (v. 16).

    Especially note the “therefore,” which connects certain elements of the law (the parts standing for the whole) with that “nailed to the cross.” This is too obvious to miss. Thayer identified the “handwriting” as a metaphorical reference to “the Mosaic law” (668). See also Vaughan (11.201) and Lenski (114). Peake states: “It is generally agreed that the reference here is to the Law [of Moses] (cf. Ephesians 2:15)” (4.527).


    The Grammar

    Observe the double use of “was” (past tense verb) in verse 14, indicating that the system is operative no longer. A.T. Robertson commented that the verbal “has taken” is a perfect tense form which, “emphasizes the permanence of the removal of the bond” (which he identifies as “the Mosaic law”), “that has been paid and cancelled and cannot be presented again” (4.494).


    The Parallelism

    This text unquestionably is parallel in a number of aspects to Paul’s instruction to the Ephesians in chapter two of that letter (these two books have a number of striking parallels).

    For he [Christ] is our peace, who made both [Jew and Gentile] one, and brake down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; that he might create in himself of the two one new man, so making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body unto God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby (Ephesians 2:14-16).

    Noted Bible scholar, David J. Williams, says that Paul’s reference to “the Jewish law in Ephesians 2:15” is “decisive for the interpretation of Colossians 2:14” (189). Both refer to the same situation.
    R.C. Fosters states:

    A great need of the Christian world today is the clear recognition that we are not under the law, but the gospel; that the law was nailed to the cross and passed out of force when the new will was probated at Pentecost (469).

    He also pointed out that neither Catholicism nor Protestantism has entertained a clear perception regarding this matter.
    To dismiss the theme of the “law of Moses” from Colossians 2:14, because of a predisposition one entertains with reference to the perpetuity of the Torah, is both irresponsible and reprehensible.


    Conclusion

    There should be tremendous concern among the Lord’s people when a teaching this fundamental has become so terribly misconstrued, and is fed “intravenously” to sincere young men who are anxious to proclaim the gospel of Christ.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •