The Limitation of science in dealing with Reality
-
As Beings, the conventional mind only sees interpretations of Reality.
Why is this so? This is because, firstly Sensory data are interpretations(manifested form) of reality. Why are they interpretations and are not the direct experiencing of it (Reality)? To illustrate this point...lets consider the perception of 2 person: a color-blind person and one with normal vision. The color-blind person may sees images differently from one who is not. So... who is seeing the truth?...none. Both are seeing interpretations(manifested form) of the Truth. Likewise animals may see and sense things differently from humans.
Sensory datas that are being percieved are in turn cognated by the conventional mind. Again, the conventional mind sees interpretations collected by sensory perception. From the sensory datas, the conventional mind conceive the informations into things, environments and people... A simplified example is that by differentiating the changes in colours on the vision sight, the conventional mind cognate edges... with the edges connected... the enclosed area become percieved as objects, things, entities...
The conventional mind can only theorizes from its interpretations. Science is based on the theory and concepts derived from the conventional mind.
Science is just that... conceptual framework for understanding the dynamics of Reality... But it can only theorizes using concepts.
To truly experience Reality...one must go beyond thinking (which is theorising) about Reality. We must experience it directly.
PS: From the way that I have written... some people might have the misconceptions that the Source(Reality) is separated from us. This is clearly not so. It is the conventional discriminating mind that think in terms of separation and duality. Howver, the conventional discriminating mind itself is not an entity, but is just the dualistic function of cognition. -
then how to experience reality directly?
-
x2Originally posted by Cenarious:then how to experience reality directly? -
Wah... You find me hereOriginally posted by Cenarious:then how to experience reality directly?
I think mindfulness practices can achieve the effect. It is like step by step peeling away of layers of concepts...
Alternatively, it can be experienced through intense feeling of suffering... that eventually crack through the conceptual layer. I experienced it through this route.
From my experience, when the discriminating conventional mind finally 'discovers' its conceptualisation and drops it...a joyful and sometimes vitalising deep rest is experienced. -
How about seeing into the subject's future affinity with oneself , like looking into the mirror and seeing fragments of the future?
meaning , ability to see , yet not the ability to change it?
-
simi ish reality?
-
brb
-
LL lorOriginally posted by NotFromVenus:How about seeing into the subject's future affinity with oneself , like looking into the mirror and seeing fragments of the future?
meaning , ability to see , yet not the ability to change it? 
-
Sorry... what is brb?Originally posted by solomon1983:brb -
brb=be right backOriginally posted by longchen:Sorry... what is brb?
hmmm...regarding my perception of reality....
Sleepy mind as i am now,but still curious of your perspective on ' flawed physical realm?'
Would you mind to share? -
Originally posted by solomon1983:brb=be right back
hmmm...regarding my perception of reality....
Sleepy mind as i am now,but still curious of your perspective on ' flawed physical realm?'
Would you mind to share?
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:20-21
Pls read this with discernment. This is just my take according to my understanding. Thanks.
"The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation"... means that Reality( or God) cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind.
Reality( or God) is totally unbounded... Therefore it cannot be said to be here it is... There it is.
This sense of being here... that you are at a particular location on this planet... is a sensation. All we have is sensation... That is... we are 'not here'... we are having a sensation of being here. For in truth, even right now... we are totally unbounded... It is just that, almost everyone is caught up in the cosmic illusion. To be absorbed into words, thoughts IS part of being in this illusion. That is why Reality can never be experienced by using words. Any literal translation or interpretation can never be IT.
Likewise, we think that we are the doer of actions... again it is perceptual illusion of a 'you' doing things. Minus the 'you' and 'I', there is the doing only. ... which is the truth. The 'self' is the illusion of a person perceiving the environment. Thinking thinks that it is a thinker... but thinking is just thinking. -
Is it on your 29th birthday you woke up in the middle of the night with absolute dread and thought ‘Am I one or two? If I cannot live with myself, there must be two of me: the ‘I’ and the ‘self’ that ‘I’ cannot live with.’ ‘Maybe,’ I thought, ‘only one of them is real.’?Originally posted by longchen:Alternatively, it can be experienced through intense feeling of suffering... that eventually crack through the conceptual layer. I experienced it through this route. -
Originally posted by longchen:
..................
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:20-21
Pls read with discernment. Thanks.
"The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation"... means that Reality( or God) cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind.
Reality( or God) is totally unbounded... Therefore it cannot be said to be here it is... There it is.
This sense of being here... that you are at a particular location on this planet... is a sensation. All we have is sensation... That is... we are 'not here'... we are having a [b]sensation of being here.
Likewise, we think that we are the doer of actions... again it is perceptual illusion of a 'you' doing things. Minus the 'you' and 'I', there is the doing only. ... which is the truth. The 'self' is the illusion of a person perceiving the environment. Thinking thinks that it is a thinker... but thinking is just thinking.
[/b]
The first portion of the discourse is a response to the Pharisees. They want to know when the kingdom of God is coming (on the kingdom, see discussion of 9:57-62). Jesus explains that the kingdom does not come "with signs to be observed, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God is in your midst." My rendering here sticks close to the Greek, for reasons I will make clear.
The reply has caused no lack of discussion, because it suggests the immediacy of the kingdom's presence. The question is very practical: When will God manifest his rule and consummate his plan? Though Judaism did not have a unified picture of the expected Messiah's coming, in most conceptions it was a powerful and glorious arrival (Frerichs, Green and Neusner 1987; Charlesworth 1992). A famous example of Jewish expectation is Psalms of Solomon 17--18, where a powerful Messiah rules in Israel and rescues it from the nations. According to Jewish teaching, the arrival of Messiah would be clear and obvious to all. The question's implication may well be that whatever Jesus' ministry is, it does not reflect the anticipated glory. So his ministry cannot reflect the kingdom's presence.
But Jesus challenges the premise. The kingdom does not come "with observation." This phrase's meaning is disputed (Marshall 1978:654; Fitzmyer 1985:1160; Nolland 1993:852). Does it mean through legal observation, so Jesus denies that faithfulness to the law is required before he returns? Does it mean the kingdom comes mysteriously? Or--most likely--is it an allusion to the apocalyptic signs that are supposed to accompany the kingdom's coming? Jesus argues that the kingdom's coming does not require apocalyptic observation, since that was the normal expectation. The initial phase of the kingdom does not come that way.
Why? Because "the kingdom of God is in your midst." This phrase is one of the most discussed in Luke's Gospel. It is one of the few statements of Jesus that puts the kingdom in the present. In fact, so unprecedented is this statement that some argue the idea is really futuristic. The idea is, The kingdom is as good as present, since I am here. You need not miss it when it comes (Nolland 1993:853-54; Mattill 1979:198-201).
But a futuristic meaning is unlikely here. The verb that normally takes a futuristic present is erchomai, not eimi, which is the verb in verse 21. Thus Luke's shift of verbs in this context is significant, as is his shift of tenses. Moreover, the verb is placed in an emphatic position in the Greek text. More important, the remark about signs in verses 20-21 is specifically denied if a future sense exists, for Jesus appears to go on and enumerate the signs! It is better to interpret this phrase as referring to the initial coming now with a consummation to come later. Then Jesus' reply is, "You do not need to look for the kingdom in signs, because its King (and so its presence) is right before you. But its display in comprehensive power will come visibly to all one day. You will not need to hunt to find it then."
When Jesus says it is "in your midst," he does not mean in one's heart (but so NIV: the kingdom of God is within you). Jesus is speaking to Pharisees who have rejected him. They do not have the kingdom in their heart. And nowhere else in the New Testament is the kingdom described as an internal entity. He must mean something else here.
Two senses are possible. Jesus could mean "in your grasp or power." The kingdom's presence is related to one's ability to repent (Beasley-Murray 1986:102-3). The view depends on substantiating the presence of an idiom claimed also to be found in various Greek papyri, but that reading of the papyri is challenged (Riesenfeld 1949:11-12; Wikgren 1950:27-2
. Also against this view is that it appears to be a nonanswer. To say the kingdom is within your grasp is not to say where it is or how you can get it--at least not very explicitly. In contrast to such vagueness, the second possible sense is that the kingdom is "in your midst"--that is, "in your presence." It is present in Jesus, so he and it stand before you. You do not have to look for it, because it is right before your face! This answer is very much like 7:22-23 and 11:20. It also fits the time perspective of 7:28 and 16:16, as well as the explicit declarations of current fulfillment in 4:16-23.
Now some in challenging this reading argue that Jesus is saying he is present but the kingdom is not. But that approach makes no sense here. Why would Jesus mention his personal presence in distinction from the kingdom's and then use an expression that mentions the kingdom? The whole point is to discuss the kingdom, not just him. The Pharisees know Jesus is present, and they know he claims to bring the time of fulfillment, so they are asking where the kingdom is. Jesus' reply is that the kingdom program comes with him, even in the present.
The program of God's reclamation of creation starts and stops with Jesus. Signs are not necessary because Jesus is the sign. As the entire discourse shows, the kingdom has an "already-not yet" character (Bock 1994d:193-97, 116-17). Luke 1:67-79, Acts 2:25-36, Romans 1:2-4 with 16:25-27, 1 Corinthians 15:25, Ephesians 1:18-23, Colossians 1:12-14, Hebrews 1:5-13, 1 Peter 2:4-10 and Revelation 1:6-8 share this two-phased kingdom perspective. Efforts to tie the presence-of-the-kingdom language of the New Testament to the ongoing presence of God's universal kingdom fail, since the context of these kingdom texts is an announcement of the arrival of something that previously was missing. In addition, efforts to argue that Jesus rules over a spiritual kingdom now that is distinct from the promised rule of the Old Testament also fail to note the declarations of explicit fulfillment in the contexts in which the statements are made (for example, Lk 4:16-23; 7:22-23; 24:43-49; Acts 13:16-41; Rom 1:1-7; Heb 1:1-2). Finally, attempts to argue that the kingdom is present but rule is not ignore the fact that when Jesus saves he exercises regal, executive authority as the promised Christ (Acts 2:16-41). Since Christ is a regal title, and since authority is a function of person and office, an expression of rule is present, though the full coercive rule of Jesus the King over all the creation will come in the future.
If the Pharisees had read the sign of the present time correctly, the question would not even be asked (12:54-56). Jesus has declared that the process of kingdom growth has started, so they should not assume it is absent, though it has made such a humble start (13:18-20). They need to respond to the King.
At this point Jesus turns to his disciples and elaborates on the ultimate answer to the Pharisees' question, the kingdom's future nature. That our attention turns to the future is clear by the words "days are coming," a phrase that can indicate the approach of decisive judgment (Is 39:6; Jer 7:32; 16:14; Ezek 7:10-12; Amos 4:2; Zech 14:1). The NIV renders this in the idiomatic the time is coming. Ultimately the kingdom's manifestation will include its powerful and coercive establishment on the earth, with total authority over all of humanity. That period could be described as one of the days of the Son of Man. When the Son of Man returns with authority to vindicate the saints and exercise power on their behalf, it will be a grand day of judgment (Dan 7). For a time, disciples will long to see it, but it will not come. That day does not come immediately. People will claim that it has come, but Jesus warns that the disciples should not go to check for his arrival. Those claims are not the real thing. When it comes, it will be sudden and visible like the lightning across the sky.
..................... -
why do i want to experience reality if i cant do anything with it?
-
Who say this, ha? Is it Eckhart Tolle?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Is it on your 29th birthday you woke up in the middle of the night with absolute dread and thought ‘Am I one or two? If I cannot live with myself, there must be two of me: the ‘I’ and the ‘self’ that ‘I’ cannot live with.’ ‘Maybe,’ I thought, ‘only one of them is real.’? -
There is joyfulness in the experience... This joyfulness is vitalising and extra-ordinary.Originally posted by Cenarious:why do i want to experience reality if i cant do anything with it?
Certainly there is no right or wrong. But having such an understanding (of Reality) is clearly beneficial and advantageous. -
Yup..Originally posted by longchen:Who say this, ha? Is it Eckhart Tolle? -
originally posted by The return:
The first portion of the discourse is a response to the Pharisees. They want to know when the kingdom of God is coming (on the kingdom, see discussion of 9:57-62). Jesus explains that the kingdom does not come "with signs to be observed, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God is in your midst." My rendering here sticks close to the Greek, for reasons I will make clear.
The reply has caused no lack of discussion, because it suggests the immediacy of the kingdom's presence. The question is very practical: When will God manifest his rule and consummate his plan? Though Judaism did not have a unified picture of the expected Messiah's coming, in most conceptions it was a powerful and glorious arrival (Frerichs, Green and Neusner 1987; Charlesworth 1992). A famous example of Jewish expectation is Psalms of Solomon 17--18, where a powerful Messiah rules in Israel and rescues it from the nations. According to Jewish teaching, the arrival of Messiah would be clear and obvious to all. The question's implication may well be that whatever Jesus' ministry is, it does not reflect the anticipated glory. So his ministry cannot reflect the kingdom's presence.
But Jesus challenges the premise. The kingdom does not come "with observation."; This phrase's meaning is disputed (Marshall 1978:654; Fitzmyer 1985:1160; Nolland 1993:852). Does it mean through legal observation, so Jesus denies that faithfulness to the law is required before he returns? Does it mean the kingdom comes mysteriously? Or--most likely--is it an allusion to the apocalyptic signs that are supposed to accompany the kingdom's coming? Jesus argues that the kingdom's coming does not require apocalyptic observation, since that was the normal expectation. The initial phase of the kingdom does not come that way.
Why? Because "the kingdom of God is in your midst." This phrase is one of the most discussed in Luke's Gospel. It is one of the few statements of Jesus that puts the kingdom in the present. In fact, so unprecedented is this statement that some argue the idea is really futuristic. The idea is, The kingdom is as good as present, since I am here. You need not miss it when it comes (Nolland 1993:853-54; Mattill 1979:198-201).
But a futuristic meaning is unlikely here. The verb that normally takes a futuristic present is erchomai, not eimi, which is the verb in verse 21. Thus Luke's shift of verbs in this context is significant, as is his shift of tenses. Moreover, the verb is placed in an emphatic position in the Greek text. More important, the remark about signs in verses 20-21 is specifically denied if a future sense exists, for Jesus appears to go on and enumerate the signs! It is better to interpret this phrase as referring to the initial coming now with a consummation to come later. Then Jesus' reply is, "You do not need to look for the kingdom in signs, because its King (and so its presence) is right before you. But its display in comprehensive power will come visibly to all one day. You will not need to hunt to find it then."
When Jesus says it is "in your midst," he does not mean in one's heart (but so NIV: the kingdom of God is within you). Jesus is speaking to Pharisees who have rejected him. They do not have the kingdom in their heart. And nowhere else in the New Testament is the kingdom described as an internal entity. He must mean something else here.
Two senses are possible. Jesus could mean "in your grasp or power." The kingdom's presence is related to one's ability to repent (Beasley-Murray 1986:102-3). The view depends on substantiating the presence of an idiom claimed also to be found in various Greek papyri, but that reading of the papyri is challenged (Riesenfeld 1949:11-12; Wikgren 1950:27-2. Also against this view is that it appears to be a nonanswer. To say the kingdom is within your grasp is not to say where it is or how you can get it--at least not very explicitly. In contrast to such vagueness, the second possible sense is that the kingdom is "in your midst"--that is, "in your presence." It is present in Jesus, so he and it stand before you. You do not have to look for it, because it is right before your face! This answer is very much like 7:22-23 and 11:20. It also fits the time perspective of 7:28 and 16:16, as well as the explicit declarations of current fulfillment in 4:16-23.
Now some in challenging this reading argue that Jesus is saying he is present but the kingdom is not. But that approach makes no sense here. Why would Jesus mention his personal presence in distinction from the kingdom's and then use an expression that mentions the kingdom? The whole point is to discuss the kingdom, not just him. The Pharisees know Jesus is present, and they know he claims to bring the time of fulfillment, so they are asking where the kingdom is. Jesus' reply is that the kingdom program comes with him, even in the present.
The program of God's reclamation of creation starts and stops with Jesus. Signs are not necessary because Jesus is the sign. As the entire discourse shows, the kingdom has an "already-not yet" character (Bock 1994d:193-97, 116-17). Luke 1:67-79, Acts 2:25-36, Romans 1:2-4 with 16:25-27, 1 Corinthians 15:25, Ephesians 1:18-23, Colossians 1:12-14, Hebrews 1:5-13, 1 Peter 2:4-10 and Revelation 1:6-8 share this two-phased kingdom perspective. Efforts to tie the presence-of-the-kingdom language of the New Testament to the ongoing presence of God's universal kingdom fail, since the context of these kingdom texts is an announcement of the arrival of something that previously was missing. In addition, efforts to argue that Jesus rules over a spiritual kingdom now that is distinct from the promised rule of the Old Testament also fail to note the declarations of explicit fulfillment in the contexts in which the statements are made (for example, Lk 4:16-23; 7:22-23; 24:43-49; Acts 13:16-41; Rom 1:1-7; Heb 1:1-2). Finally, attempts to argue that the kingdom is present but rule is not ignore the fact that when Jesus saves he exercises regal, executive authority as the promised Christ (Acts 2:16-41). Since Christ is a regal title, and since authority is a function of person and office, an expression of rule is present, though the full coercive rule of Jesus the King over all the creation will come in the future.
If the Pharisees had read the sign of the present time correctly, the question would not even be asked (12:54-56). Jesus has declared that the process of kingdom growth has started, so they should not assume it is absent, though it has made such a humble start (13:18-20). They need to respond to the King.
At this point Jesus turns to his disciples and elaborates on the ultimate answer to the Pharisees' question, the kingdom's future nature. That our attention turns to the future is clear by the words "days are coming," a phrase that can indicate the approach of decisive judgment (Is 39:6; Jer 7:32; 16:14; Ezek 7:10-12; Amos 4:2; Zech 14:1). The NIV renders this in the idiomatic the time is coming. Ultimately the kingdom's manifestation will include its powerful and coercive establishment on the earth, with total authority over all of humanity. That period could be described as one of the days of the Son of Man. When the Son of Man returns with authority to vindicate the saints and exercise power on their behalf, it will be a grand day of judgment (Dan 7). For a time, disciples will long to see it, but it will not come. That day does not come immediately. People will claim that it has come, but Jesus warns that the disciples should not go to check for his arrival. Those claims are not the real thing. When it comes, it will be sudden and visible like the lightning across the sky.
Interesting...Greek bible...hmmm...which version?
Let me read again.. -
Originally posted by longchen:
Once, having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say, `Here it is,' or `There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:20-21
Pls read this with discernment. This is just my take according to my understanding. Thanks.
"The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation"... means that Reality( or God) cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind.
Reality( or God) is totally unbounded... Therefore it cannot be said to be here it is... There it is.
This sense of being here... that you are at a particular location on this planet... is a sensation. All we have is sensation... That is... we are 'not here'... we are having a [b]sensation of being here. For in truth, even right now... we are totally unbounded... It is just that, almost everyone is caught up in the cosmic illusion. To be absorbed into words, thoughts IS part of being in this illusion. That is why Reality can never be experienced by using words. Any literal translation or interpretation can never be IT.
Likewise, we think that we are the doer of actions... again it is perceptual illusion of a 'you' doing things. Minus the 'you' and 'I', there is the doing only. ... which is the truth. The 'self' is the illusion of a person perceiving the environment. Thinking thinks that it is a thinker... but thinking is just thinking.
[/b]"The kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation"... means that Reality( or God) cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind.
Careful observation means practise mindfuI or awareness of inner self!
Cather or gnostic do not believe in 'God creator'...simplicity...return to the source...'perfect paradise' which is created by Lord jesus..
For our knowledges...there ARE perfect realm out of these flawed 'matter of consciousness realms or form realms'... physical realm...
Buddhism mentioned Amitabha and Pure Land...right!..similary,henceforth goes to Lord jesus' savation plan for ye elect christiansThis sense of being here... that you are at a particular location on this planet... is a sensation. All we have is sensation... That is... we are 'not here'... we are having a sensation of being here. For in truth, even right now... we are totally unbounded... It is just that, almost everyone is caught up in the cosmic illusion. To be absorbed into words, thoughts IS part of being in this illusion. That is why Reality can never be experienced by using words. Any literal translation or interpretation can never be IT.
For in truth,we are here becoz of sins(ignorance)...question is how did 'beginning beget' (pls dun quote me buddhism's beginningless theory)...
As i'd mentioned b4....there are many 'ways' for salvation plans for many races on earth...even mentioned in your buddhism's scriptures contain such big plan for 'Amitabha and Pure Land group'...
Amitabha group chant for Amitabha buddha when death is near..... sound familiar to you as only using diff 'way' ...
If there is only one true teacher,one true savation plan in one place on earth...the so called time of karma or place of karma..then it is really worthless for quest seekerS to wander ard for ye truth
Taoism's I ching's mathematics...highly acknowledge,accepted by many famous mathematicans...proven an impermanent of ' Good karma n time karma for each salvation plan took places...
Buddhism is the only True religion on earth(does it sound like an ancient christians or catholic behaviours 'in those days'...)do you feel that...
'In the beginning' cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind. but through special 'way' help... -
btw,an important thread to input...Lord Jesus is not Bodhisattva or arahat incarnate... as mentioned in somewhere...there...lo there..
-
Originally posted by solomon1983:
I apologise if the post is not correct..
For in truth,we are here becoz of sins(ignorance)...question is how did 'beginning beget' (pls dun quote me buddhism's beginningless theory)...
As i'd mentioned b4....there are many 'ways' for salvation plans for many races on earth...even mentioned in your buddhism's scriptures contain such big plan for 'Amitabha and Pure Land group'...
Amitabha group chant for Amitabha buddha when death is near..... sound familiar to you as only using diff 'way' ...
If there is only one true teacher,one true savation plan in one place on earth...the so called time of karma or place of karma..then it is really worthless for quest seekerS to wander ard for ye truth
Taoism's I ching's mathematics...highly acknowledge,accepted by many famous mathematicans...proven an impermanent of ' Good karma n time karma for each salvation plan took places...
[b]Buddhism is the only True religion on earth(does it sound like an ancient christians or catholic behaviours 'in those days'...)do you feel that...
'In the beginning' cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind. but through special 'way' help...
[/b]
However will like to point out certain things.
I am not a Buddhist. I do have contact with people from the Western mystical traditions...like Rosicrucians. In fact, I have learn alot from highly enlightened persons from this group.
Prior to this life, I was a European who was involved in Western Mysticism. Before that, I was a Tibetan monk.
I can see great similarities amongst all authentic traditions.
I think it is good not to believe in anything too easily...but maintain a rigorousness in the search for spiritual understanding. -
Originally posted by solomon1983:
In the beginning does not mean in the beginning of time, but it means prior to time altogether. Therefore various traditions including zen, hinduism, and other mystical traditions like to ask the question 'Who am I', 'Who am I before I was born', 'Who am I before the universe'. The answers comes from within, but not from the mind but beyond it, from the timeless realm itself. I Am That I Am.
[b]'In the beginning' cannot be understood through beliefs, concepts and thinking of the conventional mind. but through special 'way' help...
[/b]
John 8:58-59 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
Which is why Jesus said in the Gospel of Thomas,18 The disciples said to Jesus, "Tell us, how will our end come?"
Kingdom of Heaven is a timeless realm and we cannot comprehend it as 'lo here, lo there'. Not within the reaches of the conventional mind.
Jesus said, "Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is.
Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."1 And he said, "Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death."
If one abides in the timeless, deathless realm, one need not suffer and taste death.
2 Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]"
3 Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will understand that you are children of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."
The teachings of Jesus are full of parables and must be understood in terms of the inner dimension. It does not make sense on the mythical level. Only one who is truly awakened will understand those words of Jesus. Anyway Gnosticism is also full of mythical concepts that are parables.
Lastly the way Jesus taught is total submission and faith in God as the path to transcend the ego and union with God. I do not know Gnosticism, I think it is different but you can correct me. -
how do i see my past lives?
-
erm... wrong forum liao.Originally posted by Cenarious:how do i see my past lives? -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Indeed...the teaching of Jesus are full of parables....but with Holy spirits help loi....
The teachings of Jesus are full of parables and must be understood in terms of the inner dimension. It does not make sense on the mythical level. [b]Only one who is truly awakened will understand those words of Jesus. Anyway Gnosticism is also full of mythical concepts that are parables.
[b]
Who is truly awakened
...St john...thomas...Mary after Jesus had been crucified....and from which source help leh?