₦airaland Forum

Tobiatoo:
they set a camara in his room. all he did in privately they brought out for people to see. i have some of the pictures on my phone now. i can download for you to see. i say go to alimosho to ask. once you there they dont want you to go. it is a colt

@Tobiatoo
I fail to see the relevance of the above to the Grail Message. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the principles and teachings of the Grail message. The Grail message is a book, and if there is anything written in the book that you don't understand or that you have perceived to be false, bring it up and lets discuss it.

I don't know who you mean by "they" and "he" in your story above; but I am very sure that it is not the Grail Message or its writer.

Thanks .

Mad_Max:
In the Gospels, the Jews clearly knew people reincarnated and sent priests to ask John the Baptist if he was Moses or Elijah. Now Moses and Elijah were dead. John told them he wasn't Elijah. And yet Christ said 'That's Elijah'. Of course John the Baptist would have no memories of his life as Elijah.

noetic16:
Cos Jesus states clearly in the 4 gospel books that Elijah was John the baptist, and Madmax's analyses tends to make loads of sense.

I agree with m_nwankwo on the issue of John the baptist being Elijah. John the baptist is not Elijah; however people always point to the fact that the bible reported Jesus as saying that John the baptise was Elijah.

I believe that the solution to this bible verse lies in the correct understanding of the language, and the context in which the expression was made. (If Jesus actually said that).

One should consider that sometimes in every language a person's name is used to represent something, especially something that person was known for. For example I could say that my brother is a Maradona. Even a child can deduce that what I meant was that my brother is a good footballer or dribbler, not that he is actually maradona. Thus the name Maradona, in this context, represent a very good footballer.

It is my perception that the name Elijah in that biblical context represents a forerunner. Elijah was a forerunner; his life impacted the Jews so much that his name became synonymous with a forerunner, a person sent from God to warn or to awaken the people, a powerful and fiery prophet. 

Thus when Malachi wrote: "See, I am sending you Elijah the prophet before the day of the Lord comes, that great day, greatly to be feared."(Malachi 5:4)

This could mean: "I will send you an Elijah the prophet," Thus one who will come to warn and to prepere you for the day of the lord, just like Elijah did warn and prepare the people.

And consequently, when mathew reported Jesus as having said, "And if you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come."[New international Version 1984](Mathew 11:14)

I believe that here(If Jesus actually said that), He was comfirming that John the baptist was the forerunner which was promised to you, thus the forerunner which Malachi wrote about. Thus John the baptist was an Elijah; or the Elijah which Malachi wrote about. In other words, John the baptise came on a similar mission as Elijah did; to warn and prepare the people.

Elijah came to warn and prepare the people; he was a forerunner for the Truth. John the baptist also came to prepare the people for the message of Christ; thus he was a forerunner too.

In another translation of the bible we read, "If you are willing to accept their message, John is the Elijah who was to come." [Gods word Transaltion 1995](Mathew 11:14).
By putting "the" before the name Elijah, this translation confirms that the name Elijah was used as a figure of speech and not necessarily that John the baptist was Elijah.

I will give an example. If we receive a prophesy that a Maradona will be sent to Nigeria before the end of this century. This does not necessarily mean that that particular Argentine footballer called Maradona will be sent to Nigeria. In this context the name 'Maradona' is used as a figure of speech. Thus the prophesy simply means that a great footballer will be sent to Nigeria.

Consequently when a great footballer rises in Nigeria, a knowing one could say that this is the Maradona promised to us. This does not mean the knowing one meant that the great footballer is a reincarnate of the Argentine Maradona.

Another example: If one receives a prophesy that an Abacha will win the next presidential election in Nigeria. This prophesy does not mean that the next president will be the reincarnate of Abacha; rather it means that the next president will do the same thing that Abacha did.

This is my perception of the issue. I am sure that John the baptist was not Elijah reincarnated.

Thanks.

agi-tuedor:
I must confess, the Grail Message is a wonderful book. I have read up to the middle of vol. 3, but the problem is that I normally get confused, in that I cannot adequately visualise some of the later conceptions and bring them in unison with former ones (I think it is a personal problem). I have abandoned the book twice because of this. Although, I still feel a certain attraction to it. Reading through this thread has greatly enhanced this desire, in fact, I am getting the composite volume this sunday. Thanks to all who commented, either to criticise or clarify, your post has help many understand the true dimensions of the Message. Once again thank u all.

@agi-tuedor
I perceive honesty from your post; you come across as a very honest person and I respect you for that.  I am happy that this thread has re-ignited the fire for the Truth in you; and I wish you strength in your quest.

I, however have experienced the Grail Message to be one; nothing in the message contradicts the other. The knowledge mediated in the Grail Message is scattered across the lectures(Chapters). Thus you can find the key to something mentioned in one lecture in another lecture. This is why it is important to read the whole message. It is like a Chinese puzzle, which you painstakingly and earnestly have to put together before a picture can arise. I believe that the author wanted readers to have this earnestnesss; this earnestnes is necessary for one to fathom the message, and it is this earnestness that causes spiritual mobility. One whose spirit is dead will not be able to achieve this earnestness, and thus will not be able to grasp the message.

By earnestness, I do not mean childish enthusiasm, fanaticism, or childish zealousness. By earnestness I mean being able to weigh and examine everything you read carefully, and being driven by the urge to find the Truth; thus being objective.

You are welcome to shear with us the parts that you do not find in unison with the rest. I will offer my perceptions, and I am sure m_nwankwo will be happy to offer his too. You are free to ask any questions; we will definitely help as much as we can.

But keep in mind that it is impossible to exhaust all the knowledge in the Grail Message while still on earth. The message contains everything, but one can only see as much as his/her inner maturity allows him. Thus as you mature you see more. I have read the message many times and almost each time I read it I find something new, something I was not able to see earlier because of my state of maturity.

Thanks for your honesty, and remain blessed.

This is just a case of misunderstanding an English expression. The wording: 'Share your faith and belief in God or higher powers here.' does not denote or suggest that there is power higher than God.

Any power that is believed to be responsible for the creation of the universe could be termed as a 'higher power'; this is just an English expression.

If somebody says:
Tell me about UCLA or higher institutions in California.
This does not mean that the speaker is asking about institutions literally higher than UCLA. The speaker is simply asking about higher institutions, and UCLA happens to be one of them. Thus in this case, 'Higher institution' is just a term used to describe institutions above secondary school education.

Likewise 'higher powers' is a term used to describe the creator, Be it God, big bang, Krishna, oneness of infinity, or what ever power that one believes is responsible for the creation of the universe.

Another example; if someone says:
Mike has graduated from USC and he is now teaching at a higher institution.
This does not mean that Mike is teaching at an institution higher than USC. Mike could be teaching in a college(Not secondary school), or polytechnic. Eventhough USC is literally a higher institution than college or polytechnic; they are all grouped under the term 'higher institutions.'

But the moderator could put the word 'other' in the sentence to make it less confusion. The moderator could modify the sentence this way:

'Share your faith and belief in God or other higher powers here.'

Either way the sentence is correct and does not suggest that there are powers higher than God. The moderator is not to reproached on this issue, he has not done anything wrong.

Thanks

@m_nwankwo

Thanks for your clarification, I apologise for misconstruing your sentence. The problem was that I thought that you were saying that forms of our spiritual decisions carry a part of our spirit within them just like Jesus and the Holy spirit carried parts of God within them.

But you explained what you meant in your clarification by saying:

m_nwankwo:
and using an ability that resides in the spirit or that he can percieve as an illustration is in my view the correct thing.

And I agree with this, which puts the matter at rest. Your expressions 'parts of your spirit' and 'substance of your spirit' are what threw me off. But, once again, sorry for my misreading your words.

But just for the sake of further clarification, in-case another reader misconstrued your post just like I did, I wish to state further that:
Indeed the human spirit uses an ability which resides within the spirit to make decisions. He uses parts of his spirit to make this decision just like we use our brain(which is a part of our physical body) to think. But these earthly decisions and the forms resulting from them do not carry any particle of our brain, otherwise our brains will intime cease to exist as it losses a particle of with every thought that we produce. Like wise the spiritual decisions do not carry any particle of our spirit, otherwise our spirit will intime lose all it's particles and thus cease to exist.

The forms arising from our spiritual decisions(Volition's) are animated by animistic substance, i.e they carry animistic substance within them.

This I believe, does not go against your explanation.

Thanks

m_nwankwo:
You are seeing a division when there is none and that is the problem. I hope that you know that as a human spirit, all acts of your will are parts of your spirit, they are inside you and yet work in worlds far beyond this earth. Inspite of billions of spiritual decisions you have made in the course of you existence, your spirit has not yet vanished in spite of the fact that every spiritual decision uses a substance of your spirit. If you are able to see your spirit, you will find that it has not lost even one particle of its spiritual substance in-spite of using the spiritual substance for every spiritual decision of free will. At least you can sense that you the spirit wills every second and yet you have not been divided as a result of your mutifarious acts of will, some of them embodying joy, another love, another heroism, another humility and yet another anger. I am sure that in all this you do not percieve that your spirit has been divided into section for love, joy, heroism, humility and anger. Think you self deeply into this and maybe, just maybe, a glimpse of how it is possible for God the Father to have his Love and Will personified in Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

My perception is that compering Jesus and the Holy spirit with acts of will of a human spirit, may lead one into great errors.

Trinity is an ability that lies only in Divinity; the human spirit does not in any acts of its will perform this ability, or perform anything resembling this ability.

With all due respect to m_nwankwo, I do not think that the bold part(the part that I put in bold) in your above post is in accord with the Truth. Perhaps maybe I misunderstood your sentence; Please, if you will be kind enough as to explain, I will very much appreciate it.

I intend no disrespect or disccord; I am only making this post because I had said earlier that in this thread that I agree with your perception in this issue; but your latter posts(the part quoted above), I cannot honestly say that I agree with.


Thanks

My perception is that our great thinker, Deepsight has arrived at a stage in his seeking where no humanbeing can help him advance anymore. And this is only natural, it happened to me too. (Not that I am implying that I am more spiritually advanced than Deepsight)

The question here deals with the nature and abilities of God who is Divinity unsubstantiate; we humans are spiritual and hence can only experience and fully grasp, by our efforts, that which spiritual. Divinity lies far above spirituality and thus far above our ability to understand with our efforts.

Therefore no humanbeing by himself or by the help of another humanbeing can come to the recognition of trinity. Some people hear about it and just accept it because their religion teaches it, without actually coming to the recognition of it. Such faith is blind faith and leads people nowhere; this blind faith never leaves them alone, thus they try to fill the gaps in their blind faith with things fantastic things which have no bearing to the Truth.

I am happy that Deepsight is not one of those who accept things without fully coming to the recognition of it.  The Truth about the Trinity can only be revealed to one by God himself. It is recorded in the Bible that Jesus once asked his apostles "who do you say that I am." Thus who have you recognized me to be? At that point only Peter had come to the personal recognition of Jesus and His origin; thus only Peter could truly answer, "Thou art Christ, the son of the living God." And according to the biblical account Christ told him that nothing on earth or in heaven could have revealed that to him except His father in heaven.

Thus despite the fact the disciples have heard many times that Jesus was the son of God, they (except Peter) had not come to the recognition of it at that time. And Peter did not come to this recognition from what he heard from people but from God.

It is my perception that this particular account found in the Bible was correctly passed down.

My conviction on the trinity is based on personal experiences which I know I was allowed to have from above. I was stuck on this issue and would not blindly accept the explanations of others, until a prayer arose in me for the Truth. Then I was lead to experiences that convinced me that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are indeed parts of God the father.

I believe that Deepsight already has all the information that another humanbeing can give about the Trinity; at this point he should turn to God in genuine and humble prayer for help in this issue. The reciprocal effects of the prayer will bring him experiences that will convince him. Human words are never adequate to describe trinity which deals Divinity.

M_nwankwo has given a detailed and correct distribution of Trinity, as much as the human language can convey; I have nothing to add to what he had said, I agree with his perception on this issue. And I know that human words will never surface to convince Deepsight of this issue.

My advice to Deepsight is to seek further clarification from God, Oneness of infinity, or whatever you call HIM. But don’t expect that God should speak to you personally(one on one or face to face) because this is impossible; God will speak to you through the experiences that you will be lead to, which will be so touching that all doubts will be silenced.

Seek and ye shall find.

m_nwankwo:
My view is that it is the laws of God that determines whether or not sexual relationship is a sin or indeed a blessing. Humankind have tried to solve this problem by invoking the institution of marriage. But who is married and who is unmarried? It is God that decides who is married or not married, or to put it more correctly, it is the laws of God that decides who is married or not. How often do we class some people as unmarried and yet they are married in the site of God because they fufilled the fundamental conditions for genuine marriage; that is, genuine love. And yet we also class some people as married because they performed one religious or cultural ceremony and yet there is no love between them. Where there is no genuine and selfless love, then true marriage does not exist even if the couples were married by the pope. Thus for spiritually free human beings, sexual intercourse is simply an after effect of genuine love and spiritual harmony which occationally sets the physical body aglow and subsequent physical consumation. For normal human beings that are living in the sense of the laws of God, their is no need or requirement for a life of absitinence or celibacy. Abstinence will only become necessary in human beings who in former incarnations or in this incarnation became a slave to the sexual instinct, and thus they are abnormal. The threads of fate are now notted such that abstinence is required to restore them to normality. There is no basis for absistence for a normal human being who uses the sexual instinct as God ordained. But just like a radical surgery is required to remove a cancerous tumor in cancer patients but not in healthy individuals, so abstinence may be necessary to restore normality to human beings who are slave to the sexual instinct. Most people would if they are honest to themselves see whether they are a slave to the sexual instinct or a master to the sexual instinct. You can be recognised on earth as married and yet all sexual intercorse with your wife is immoral because it emanates from lust and not love. It is not uncommon to see some married couples who are always at each others throat and yet they engage in intimacy. Spiritually speaking there is no difference between a man who visits a love-peddler and a man who does not love his wife as God ordained and yet have intimacy with her. Thus we have to be careful of judging by appearances only. In this connection, two couples may not be married according to earthly or religious laws and yet there marriage is concecrated by God and hence sexual relationship between them is not only moral but a blessing. Forceful abstinence is dangerous for it accumulates and dispates an invincible energy required for the health of the physical body as well as disturbs the chain of radiations connecting the physical body to the bodies of the soul.

m_nwankwo has spoken very wisely on this issue. Those who really want to know the Truth about the matter at hand should read and re-read m_nwankwo's post above. What he wrote is in complete harmony with the Truth; I couldn't have said it better.

@ m_nwankwo
Thank you very much for your great contribution here.

Interesting topic. But which light and darkness are we talking about? It is physical light or the Primordial Light? Is it physical darkness or metaphorical darkness?

Here are some things that we must take into account. There are two types of darkness, the darkness that exists within creation and the darkness outside creation.

Here is what I mean: Before God said, "Let there be light," there was nothing but complete darkness. This darkness existed before creation and will continue to exist if creation ceases to exist. This darkness is nothing but void. It is nothingness. It is not relative to any light; thus it is complete darkness, or complete nothingness.

God is the primordial light that has always existed, but before creation came into being; before the words, "Let there be light," the light of God remained within the boundaries of the Divine plane, ie the Light of God remained with God. But with the words, "Let there be Light," God allowed His light to travel beyond His immediate vicinity and into the utter darkness or nothingness that existed outside of the boundary of the Devin plane. Creation has its origin in this Light; this is how creation came into being.

Thus within creation there is nothing like utter darkness. The darkness within creation is always relative to the light. This is a different darkness from the darkness that exists outside of creation. The closer a plane of creation is to the vicinity of God, the more it will be illumined; thus it will have more light. The further away a plane of creation is from God, the less will light be found on the plane. But there is light in all parts of creation, and no part of creation can ever be in utter darkness. The darkness in any part of creation is only relative to the amount of light there. Darkness is absence of light.

However creatures in creation, ie man can make himself unable to recognise light. To such a man, he is in a plane of utter darkness, ie in the dark regions like hell. However the man is actually not in utter darkness, if he exercises his spirit by doing good, he will gradually recognise that he is surrounded by light. Only the spirit can recognise light which only comes from God.

I am summarising a lot in-order to shorten my post. However, I can elaborate on any of the above if need be.

@InesQor
I think you are brilliant, but here are some things that I will like you to consider:

InesQor:
@Deep Sight:Whoa!! Steady! I see no such wholesale concession that darkness is self-existent, eternal or uncreated. In fact, that quoted paragraph of mine  says exactly the opposite of what you are insinuating.

The darkness that existed before God said, "Let there be light," can actually be considered as "self-existent, eternal or uncreated."

This darkness is nothing but void. It still exist today outside creation. Creation is not limitless; beyond the boundary of creation, outside creation, or below creation only nothingness, void or darkness exists.

However, man or any creature cannever experience this darkness because man and creatures have their origin in creation and cannever travel outside creation.

InesQor:
See,which means that darkness is defined relative to light. Since we cannot define "total darkness", then it is impossible that it once existed irrespective of total light. Darkness, I said, is a highly reduced amount of light, it thus CANNOT be self-existent or eternal or uncreated. It is existent with respect to light, it is only as time-definite as the moment it receded from the light and reduced light's intensity in its immediate position, and it was "created" by the principles of darkness i.e. a reduced influence of ambient light CREATES darkness. You can't say I said what I didn't.
I believe I have handled this in the above. Satan never "always existed". More on this in the next part of this post, where we will indeed go round in circles  .

Your explanation above about darkness is true to a certain extent only. Your explanation is only correct if attributed to the darkness within creation. My perception is that your explanation is wrong if attributed to the darkness outside creation. Thus you only explained darkness within creation, and not the darkness whitout or outside creation.

On Satan, you are also right only to a certain extent. Satan never "always existed," but Lucifer had always existed. Lucifer is not God, he is dependant on the power of God; but his origin lies far above creation. Therefore Lucifer can fall into the utter darkness outside creation, because Lucifer is not part of creation. Lucifer originated in the Divine plane, but not in God himself(Lucifer is not a part of God like Jesus). Lucifer was a powerful angel. When Lucifer strayed from the will of God by setting sneers for mankind, he became Satan. Thus Satan has not always existed; Lucifer became Satan when he disobeyed God. However, Lucifer is eternal, he is not a created being.

I know this may be hard to follow but I can throw in more explanation if need be.   

InesQor:
If you agree that God is the prime mover, then he is self-existent; so at the start, it was ALL LIGHT. But all light means "ALL" were "LIGHT" and thus indicates the principle of LIGHT: there is an equal ambience of luminosity when ALL agents / elements are on a par with the initial 100% light. That is the principle of light. But the principle of light exists in a duality: there can be no principle of light without a principle of darkness. What I mean is that the principle of light states that when ALL elements are on a par with the first cause, there is an equal luminosity in the elements, THEREFORE when NOT ALL elements are on a par with the first cause, THOSE anomalies (with respect to the first cause) would be operating in the principle of darkness, which would state that they are in an exclusion to the otherwise equal ambience of luminosity as found in the first cause. The collation of these elements operating in the principles of darkness would be termed "The Darkness", no matter how variant the elements are.

Here I disagree with you. My perception is that it is wrong to say that " there can be no principle of light without a principle of darkness."

Light and darkness do not represent the principle of duality which exist in creation. All That God created is good, and God also created duality. Both poles of duality are good; darkness need not come into it at all. Ie, man and woman is an expression of the principle of duality; man is active while woman is passive. But both man and woman are good, or can be good.  All dualities are found within goodness or within the light. The yin and yang does not represent good and evil, rather it represents the active and the passive. And both the active and the passive are good. They both wing in the will of God.

But darkness is something entirely different. Darkness cannever swing in the will of God. Darkness results in the absence of the will of God. Light is the will of God, or light results where the will of God is observed.  Therefore Light and darkness are not duality.

Actually darkness should not exist within creation. It is man who introduces darkness into creation by the wrong use of his free will. Darkness was not created by God, and darkness need not exist in creation.

But light has to exist, because where there is no light, there can be no life.  Life requires light(the primordial light of God, the will of God) to exist. But life can exist and actually functions better without darkness. Actaully creation cannot exsist without the Primodial Light, creation has its origin in the light(Let there be Light) of God. Creation can exsist without darkness.


Thanks and remain blessed.

^^^^^^^
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think Yaradua is sick not on vacation. There is a difference between sickleave and vacation. You don't fire people for being sick, and you don't impeach a president for being sick. As long a he has a doctor's note comfirming that he is sick and cannot return to work at the moment, you cannot fire(sack) such an individual. He can be replaced temporary, but his position remains; and as soon as he recovers, he has every right to resume his position.

This I know is the way it is in America. The law protects sick people from losing their jobs based on their sickness. But I don't know about the Nigerian constitution, so I could be wrong.

I think what the Senate did by swearing Goodluck in as the acting president is the best thing and the most lawful thing to do when the president is incapacitated. He will resume his position when he recovers.

But like I said, I don't know the Nigerian Constitution well.

m_nwankwo:
@Justcool

You can delete your email. I will send you a mail. Stay blessed.

Thanks

m_nwankwo:
@Justcool
Hi Justcool. How are you? Thanks for the kind words. Your explanations on the evolution of spirit germs to human spirits is in my sensing according to the Truth. Also your explanation on  John the Baptist is also in accordance with the Truth. Thus there is no point for me to repeat the same thing fundamentally, albeit in different words. Be assured that I am following the thread and if I spiritually percieve a genuine need of somebody on nairaland, not necessarily among those who are participating in this thread to know exactly what happened to Elijah and the soul path of Elijah then I will gladly offer my perception.

As always I admire your insight into spiritual things and may God continue to give you wisdom. Stay blessed.

@m_nwankwo
Thank you so much. Please can you share your perception on the what happened with Elijah and the soul path of Elijah, with me. If you are not comfortable sharing it here, then here is my e-mail add: XXXXXXXXXXXX

I will delete this e-mail address from this post as soon as you get it, so please let me know when you get.

I cannot overstate how much I admire your maturity and spiritual knowledge.
Remain blessed too.

@viaro

Your points are well taken. Thank you so much and

Cheers

@viaro

Thanks for your concerns. I will address them. The reason why I am continuing this discussion is not to convert you; it is because you accused me of forcing my opinions on Christians. Here is what you said:

Well, what could I say? I was reactive there in my response to justcool because my day has been hectic indeed. The one thing that irks me is a comment or post that tells the Christian how to believe in the ways of God when such a poster does not even subscribe to the Christian worldview. Ha! But I'd already hit the reply botton before I calmed down and felt I should've been a lil genial and gentle towards justcool

That's why I made it clear here that my view is not biblical neither do I in any tey to tell you how to beleive in the ways of God.

My purpose of joining Nairaland is not to convert people; actuality no human being have to the power to convert another person. People get converted when they hear a teaching that corresponds to their inner maturity; I already know that no amount of argument can make one convert another person.

But in the world of today it is important that people know what their neighbor is all about. All wars that has ever been fought on earth was due to the fear of the unknown. Muslims kill Christains because they have no idea what Christianity is all about; to Christians are people who want to destroy Allah. And some Christians fight Muslims because of the same reason. Take ogboni fraternity for example; from childhood we hear all sorts of things about them; these rumores are born out of fear. But it is unfair to regard them as evil until one sits down and examines their beliefs and practices. What the world need today is dialogue; not to convert but to educate.

I offer explanations in the light of the Grail Message so that you know what the Grail Message says and not to convert you. I also want hear your views to educate myself more about the Christian world view but necessarily to convert. The more I know about Christianity, the easier it becomes for me to co-exist with Christains.

Look at the quarrel on Nairaland alone. It is not funny because for you it may end on Nairaland; but some may take it deeper and actually go to harm others. I believe that if Mutalab have had to opportunity to actally know Christains and Americans, he would not have tried to blow them up. Ignorance and fear are the two major problems of the world, and I believe that peacefull dialogue can help in the eradication of ignorance and fear.

But if you feel that there is no need for us to continue; then you have all the right in the world to walk out. Either way you chose, I wish you well.


About Elijah. The Grail Message said nothing about Elijah; I have made it clear that Elijah is not John the baptise. I don't think that the actions of Elijah and Enoch are part of my spiritual life. Their actions are not part of my convictions as a crossbearer; therefore I leave them out of my argument. I know nothing about Elijah and Enuch.

Thanks.

@nuclearboy

Thanks for you kind words and reply. I don't think I have more maturity than you do, otherwise we wont be able share our views amicably as we do now. It takes two, so don't give me all the glory.

I think we have expressed our views in the issue of whether God can lie, steal or cheat. Therefore there is not need for me to say anything else on that regards. You have stated you beliefs on that issue, and if what you stated is truly your conviction then stay with it. 


On the issue of spirit germs this is what I have to say: The spirit germs were pure in the beginning when they were created by God, all that God created is pure. They could not become conscious in Paradise because they were spirit germs, IE seedlings. Also, the spirit germs were not the only things that God created in Paradise; along with the germs there were Angels, Primordial spirits and spirits, these were conscious from the time they were created.

Just as you have to plant a seed into ground or bury it on the earth for it to mature and grow, the spirit germs were planted into the world of matter. The world or matter carries the condition necessary for the spirit to germinate and grow, IE only experiencing the world of mater will awaken the spirit and consequently make grow and mature. It is true that the spirit can become impure in the world of matter but before it can return back to Paradise, it must become pure again.  You are right that nothing impure can exist in the vicinity of God; nothing impure can enter Paradise.
The spirit can only return back to Paradise when it is pure, but it can return as a conscious mature spirit or as a spirit germ. Spirits that are impure and therefore could not detach themselves from matter before the destruction of the worlds of matter, will be drawn into the process of destruction which will destroy the personality that the spirit have achieved and the spirit will return back to a pure spirit germ, and then this purity will allow it to float towards paradise. On the other hand living the true teachings of Jesus will make a spirit attain purity and also maturity and consciousness; such a spirit will be able to detach itself from matter before the destruction of matter. Such a spirit will return to Paradise as a mature, conscious, and pure spirit with a name and a personality.


The idea that John the baptise was a reincarnate of Elijah is wrong, John the baptise was not Elijah. John the baptise was one of the spirits that I mentioned earlier who were created in Paradise and have been conscious from the beginning. John the baptise is a primordial spiritual being who was sent to the earth to baptise Jesus,and prepare mankind for the message of Jesus. John the baptise did his work faithfully and returned back to Paradise after he was beheaded on earth.

I am a human spirit, I have been allowed to see potions of my past lives, especially the mistakes that I made. Those mistakes are why I am on earth today. I am not Elijah, neither am I John the baptise. John the baptise is a primordial spiritual being, and not a human spirit. He is in the primordial spiritual plane which is above the spiritual planes of human spirits, yet this plane is far below the Divine plane where Jesus came from.

I hope I have thrown light in your questions. I am happy that you mentioned m_nwankwo. m_nwankwo is mature, honest and also very knowledgeable in issues conserening the Grail Message. He perceptions will also be greatfully welcomed by me. So m_nwankwo, please offer your perceptions.


Thanks

Deep Sight:
Justcool maybe you can assist me in discussing the nature of God with Viaro. I am at odds that he imagines the laws of God are such that a physical body may dwell bodily in a spiritual realm. I have yet to summon the energy to deal exhaustively with tat presupposition of his. Thanks.

@ Deepsight
Thanks for your concerns, I believe that I addressed them in the last part of my reply to Nuclearboy.

About the nature of God. Being a human spirit, I can never know the nature of God. That is really beyond the ability of every created being. Not even the angels in the Divine realm nor the Primordial Spiritual beings at the summit of creation know the nature of God.

But a human spirit can sense the will of God because the spirit carries the ability to do so. The will of God is placed in the Laws of God and the laws of creation.

An alert spirit can easily sense from these laws that God is unchangeable. He is perfection from time immemorial and will forever remain perfection. And perfection precludes changeability.

Nothing physical can enter the spiritual ream. The physical cannot rise above the physical plane. Nothing physical can enter the Divine realm and the spiritual realm. No physical body can exist in the vicinity of God. The physical cannot withstand the enormous pressure of the light of God which exsist in the spiritual plane. It is like taking a candle wax to the surface of the sun. It will varnish before you get any close to the sun.

Thanks and remain blessed.

@nuclearboy
I am very happy about your replies and your questions; and I will offer my perceptions on the issues that you raised.

nuclearboy:
Hello Justcool:

Yes, I addressed the said quote to you. My problem here however, is that you have more or less stated that this thread and discussion is already settled in your mind - you've decided what you believe and nobody is going to change that. What then is the basis for this discourse and what are we continuing?

Your "source" remains the writings and understanding of "the grail message".

Very fair point. The basses for this continuing is (1) To clarify misconceptions that might have arisen from my earlier posts.
(2) To offer you the oppunity to see the issue from my perspective. (3) To allow myself the oppunity to see the issue from your perspective. (4) To offer ourselves the opportunity to know each other, not necessarily to convert. They say that to know somebody is to love that person. What the world today need is love; Christ also taught us to love everybody(even our enemies). If you take time to know somebodies views, you will end up respecting that person, even if you don't accept their views. I believe that the Muslims who mock Christians have not taken time to study Christianity, and likewise the Christains who mock Muslims have not taken time to study Islam. If we can sit down and examine each others views, this will help us understand each other and this will make life on earth more peaceful.

When it comes to spiritual things you don't force people but you are obliged to offer people the Truth when they ask of it. It is right to share your convictions with people but when they refuse it then you should let them continue with theirs. If you are convinced of your beliefs then you should not be afraid to have it examined or to hear other people out.

In the above and in this post, I use the word "you" as a figure of speech; I don't mean you(Nuclearboy) personally.

I make my explanations in the light of the teachings of the Grail Message. In this I am not trying to convert you to the Grail Message, I am only offering my perception pf the issue. It is left for you to examine it and compare it with your own beliefs. If you find it wanting, then discard it. This will make your own believes stronger.

The same thing is applicable to me. I compare the views of others with mine, then decide on what to do. Even if I don't accept theirs, at least I am now more informed and more educated about thee views.

My explanations stems from my experiencing of the Grail Message; however in this particular issues that you raised, I will invite some biblical quote since it is a book that you hold in great regards. I believe this will make it easier for you to understand me. You are also welcome to quote the Grail message for me, since it is a book that I hold in great regard.

nuclearboy:
Hello Justcool:
I believe in a father that I've entered into a relationship with who has stated that His inputs into my life will not stand against the Bible. That Bible does not support incarnation or that multiple physical deaths are a normal occurence. I agree that there are records of such in the Bible which were considered miraculous i.e. "not normal" by the Bible witnesses. And how many? Would you say that having 3 First class graduands from a University in its history means everyone actually gets 1st class degrees but don't just know it? But you say those miracles were actually not miracle but normal.

I see your point, and you are quite right here. The bible does not teach reincarnation. I have said this many a times. My source about reincarnation is not the Bible. It my view that those few accounts in the bible which you consider miraculous may not be miracles. Those may be normal occurrences. It is left for the individual to consider them miraculous or normal. You agree with the biblical explanation that call them miraculous happenings and that's okay. As long as that explanation fills your void, then stay with it.

nuclearboy:
Let me ask you a few questions -

Before my questions though, you said "There are things God cannot do. God cannot steal, lie, or cheat. God cannot lie. I believe that even the bible said this." In my opinion, you are wrong here - God can do ANYTHING He wants to do. Please note I have not said He steals; what I say is that He can do whatever He wants and because it comes from Him, it is God's and not good or bad or theft or whatever "words" you use to describe them. Look at your statement like this - God cannot lie MEANS God is "limited" to being truthful. God cannot steal MEANS God is "limited" to honesty. Noble Attributes in YOUR estimation but limiting to God. Anyway, if He stole, who would you report Him to? "The Potter has every right over the Clay and can make it an object of scorn or a thing of beauty or destroy it etc". Thats culled from the 45th chapter of Isaiah. His own definition/description of Himself to Moses when asked who He was is very interesting "I AM THAT I AM". Think about that. But then, you don't believe ALL of the Bible, do you?

Okay, this is not limmiting God in any way because in God the desire to lie or steal will never arise. Freedom and limitations is very relative to the desire. If you lock up a man inside a room, and that man has no desire to escape that room; even if you open the doors the man will not escape. Then that man is free, eventhough he is locked up in a room.
God will never desire to lie, steal or cheat. God does not even know how to lie, steal, or cheat because these things are against His nature which is Truthfulness. When I said that the fact that God cannot lie is mentioned in the Bible, I was not lying. Now here is the verses:


"So God has given both his promise and his oath. These two things are unchangeable because it is impossible for God to lie. Therefore, we who have fled to him for refuge can have great confidence as we hold to the hope that lies before us."
(Hebrews 6:18)New Living translation Bible.


"in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago,"
(Titus 1:12)

Please look up those two verses in your bible.

nuclearboy:
Now, life started with one man and one woman or is this not what the grail message teaches? Each of them re-incarnating would mean only two people being on earth till date and those would neccesarily come only after the first two were gone since multiple simultaneous instances of the same person is not a premise in re-incarnation. How come the human race is increasing population-wise. Would you then say Creation by the Creator is an on-going process and that the Bible lies when it says all creation stopped after man was created? So when does it stop or do we face an infinity of creation and re-incarnation? There are 6 Billion of earth now but in the last 6, 000 years, much more than 6 Billion have come and gone? What happened to the excess? If you believe re-incarnation is real, you must have some solid information on how it works so please tell me - Caligula the emperor - when did/does he come back and as what?  Using what criteria? Or a baby that died at birth? Or a Muslim in the 18th Century who was illiterate? Or an Atheist? And then my father who is late? What criteria is used to decide when he will come and as what? It would be nice we get an idea of the workings of these things from those of you who are sure of it all because sincerely, it all doesn't make sense to me and I do know claims are cheap. I need you to show some proof rather than make claims.

No that's not exactly what the Grail Message teaches. All Life started with God who is life Himself; only God can create life. We humans spirits were created as spirit germs in Paradise which is in the vicinity of God. As spirit germs we could not become conscious in Paradise due to the immense radiation of the Light of God there. But the desire to become concious(know good from evil in bibilical terms) filled these spirit germs; and the only way for the spirit germs to become conscious is by moving further away from the light, in the planes of matter which lie further way from the light than Paradies. Out of love, God allowed His servants to develop or form the world of matter in which the physcal world belongs. The earth also belong to the physical world. At a certain stage in the development of the earth, God allowed some of the spirit germs from paradise to incarnate on earth. Before they incarnated on earth, they had already journed down from paradise to the etherial ream; and when the earth was ready, they incarnated on earth. This is how man on earth was made, and this is how the human spirit was driven out of Paradise. All the spirit germs in Paradise could not incarnate on earth at once; so they incarnated over a long period of time until the earth passed the stage in its development where no new spirit germs from paradise can incarnate. There are so many spirit germs; so it was not only one man and one woman. After each earth life the spirit continues its existence in the beyond(ethereal realm) which is still part of the material world. After living on earth the spirit is trapped in the part of the ethereal realm which corresponds to its weight; thus theives will find themself in the same plane, killers will find themselves in the same plane, while noble ones will find themselves in a noble plane. The plane corresponds to the nature of the spirit; thus a plane where a killer finds himself will be a bad and ugly plane, a plane of suffering. A plane where a good person finds himself after physical death will be a good and beautiful plane. The spirit stays there until its time for it to incarnate on earth again. It is also possible that a spirit(soul) makes progress in the etherial world, ie- a killer in the etherial plane of killer changes and stops being a killer. This change will alos change its etherial environmemt; it will find itself in better etherial plane, a plane that correspond to its new state. But all these etherial planes still belong to the world of matter.  A spirit that lives according to the laws of God(the true teachings of Christ) will achieve enough maturity and purity that will allow it to be lifted beyond the worlds of matter. Such a spirit enters paradise as a mature and pure human spirit who will not have descend into matter again or incarnate on earth again. Therefore reincarnation is not ment to repeat forever.

The reason why we are in the world of mather is to mature and return back to Paradise which is our real home. This world(the worlds of matter, both here and the etherial) is not hom, rather it is a place lent to us for us to live in and mature. The worlds of matter can be divided into two -(1) Coarse, or gross matter, and (2) etherial matter. Each of these two still have many divisions and many planes. Ie the physical world belongs to the lowest part of the of the worlds of coarse matter.

There are always more spirits in the ethereal world than on earth. Everything that is matter passes through the four stages of birth, blossoming, ripeness,and decay(death). Our physical bodies go through this process, so does the earth and the whole material universe. Now that the whole world of matter entering the stage where destruction(decay) sets in, many human spirits who are in the beyond are rushing to incarnate on earth and pay their debts(purify themselves) and be lifted out of matter to paradise before the destruction of matter takes place. This is part of the reason why the earth is overpopulated today.

There comes a time when the worlds of matter enters the stage of decay, it decays; only to be reborn and the process continues. But a spirit that cannot free itself from matter will remain in matter while matter decays. Being drawn in the process of decomposition of matter will make the spirit lose conciousness, the spirit returns to being a spirit germ; and returns to paradise as a spirit germ. This is tantamount to the death of the spirit or more precisely the death of the acquired ago, or personality.


The law of reciprocal action demands that a spirit must redeem its guilt in the same plane where he committed the crime. IE a killer on earth must return back to the earth to pay for the crimes he/she committed on earth. Thus such a spirit must reincarnate to pay its debts. That's why we see people born blind, and people born with terminal illnesses and we wonder why God is so unjust to them. It is not injustice, it is the Karma that they incurred in their past lives on earth, which they must remeed on earth. This could also why some kids die at birth. But if one repents and does only good, a way will be shown to him/her through which he/she can pay for his/her karma without suffering. IE a Killer who repents might in his next earth life decide to be a doctor, by saving peoples lives as a doctor, he has payed for his karma. Therefore when a man truly repents, all sins will be forgiven him.

People dont usually remenber who they were in thier past lives. This is also a manifestation of the love of God. This makes the individual feel like he/she has been given a fresh start, the memory of the past would not deter it. Ie- if one learns that he was Nero in his past live, this may make him lose all hope of salvation. But in not remembering his past, he is given an oppunity to carry on do good deads.

I cannot tell you when each spirit will return to earth, the laws of God guide and direct all these things. It depends on the spirits developement, and its Karma. Some of the times, it is karma that forces the spirit to reincarnate on earth.

I will give an example: If you harm sombody on earth and the person refuses to forgive you. You are tied to this person with an invissible cord. As long as the unforginess remains, this cord remains, and you cannot enter paradise when you are tied to somebody like that.  This tie may force you to reincarnate on earth when that person reincarntes. You may reincarnate as his relative and in this incarnation you are given the oppotunity to earn his forgiveness. Ie a man who harms a girl might be forced to reincarnate as the girls son in his next life. By being a good son, he earns the girls love and forgiveness whithout actually knowing it; he is freed from this tie.

The same is applicable to the person who refuses to forgive. If you refuse to forgive, you are tied to the person you refused to forgive, and you cannever enter paradise untill you have severed this tie by genuinlely forgiving the person that offended. Even if the person is in hell and you are on earth, distances doesnt matter. This tie may force you to incarnate on earth in the vicinity of your offender. This is why forgiveness is very important.

There is a law that everything must return back to its origin. Thus our physical bodies which came from the earth( the physcal world) it must at the end return or remain in the physical world. No physical body(flesh and blood) can enter the ethereal realm, and likewise, no ethereal body can enter the spiritual realm. The physical body must be left in the physical world, and the ethereal body must left in the ethereal realm before the spirit enter the spiritual world(Paradise) with its spiritual body. Therefore the physical body with is corruptible can never enter the spiritual world which is incorruptible. It lacks the lightness and consistency of the spiritual. It is the spiritual world that is the kingdom of God.

Paul hinted this when he said:

"I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable" (hebrews 6:18)

What I wrote is a summery of a great and an immense process. I can go deeper into it. Let me know the areas that are confusing and I will elaborate.

nuclearboy:
Enjoy your evening

I am enjoying my weekend immensely; my kids and my wife are such joy to be around. At the moment I have a little cold, so they are pamparing me. I am making them think that my condition is worst than it is; you see what a bad boy I am.  If I tell them that I'm well, they will stop pampering me.

I hope you are enjoying yours too.

remain blessed.

viaro:
That's fine, and sorry about my tone earlier. Maybe another day and another thread then. Enjoy.

That's fine. You have done nothing wrong to ask forgiveness for. I was not offended, I have known you to be a gentleman.

So lets carry on here:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-390145.0.html#msg5416886

@arkinses

Please delete that post.

One person says God is impartial and thus CANNOT bring some back to life therefore it is wrong that men die once!

All this based on your own definition of impartiality, your attempt to put God into a box (where He cannot do some things you decide) and all because Jesus raised someone back to life! Could you please then discuss Elijah and Enoch? And let us know your own TRUE knowledge of what actually happened to them since they did not die according to the Bible and that would again make God 'partial"?

@nuclearboy
I believe that in the above you were referring to me. I think you completely misunderstood me. I never said that God should not raise the dead. Jesus actually raised the dead, and this is not against the laws of God.

My arguement is to show that perhaps that Scripture :"It is appointed on to man to die once and after death comes judgement,"  may have been interpreted wrongly.

That scripture is very right if the death that is being talked about is spiritual death. Remember there are two types of death: (1) Physical death, and (2) Spiritual death.
Once one dies spiritually, all hopes is lost for such a one. This is tantamount to the individuals name being erased from the book of life. This is the judgement he faces.

But physical death is different. people can die many times physically. So may be that scripture is talking about spiritual death.

But, honestly, I am not sure which death that particular scripture is talking about.

But I am not forcing my opinion on you, and I am not telling you how to interpret your Bible. What I wrote is my perception, you have every right to disagree.


I never said God is partial. My arguement is that God cannot be partial. God cannot lie, cheat or steal. God CANNOT be evil.

Thanks and remain blessed

First off, you'e forcing your ideas in here by not being consistent with the texts which modupe01 quoted. You asked a question based on the Bible - and if you want to answer based on the Bible, stay with the Bible. Otherwise, your comments actually sound like you are the one who wants to set bounds for God in the Bible and then dictate to Him what He should do and what He ought not to do. The Biblical answer to such an attitude is Isaiah 40:13 - "Has anyone told the LORD what He must do or given Him advice?" (CEV).

True, many people have come to this idea that God does not 'change' His rules to show mercy to people - but I verily doubt whether those making such statements actually know what the 'rules'  or 'mercy' of God are. Here is what the Bible teaches:


(a) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD mercies:
'Yet thou in thy manifold mercies forsookest them not in the wilderness' ~ Neh. 9:19

(b) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD wisdom:
'To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God' ~ Ephesians 3:10

(c) the Bible teaches that the ways of God are MANIFOLD:
'O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches. ' ~ Psalm 104:24

There are others; but these three examples of God's manifold mercies, manifold wisdom and manifold ways show us that God is not an automaton that could be boxed by man's dictates about what He could do and what He could not do! And if God in His manifold wisdom, mercies and ways shows His love in various manners to people, who are we to dictate HOW He should do so, of WHAT exactly He ought to or not to do?!?

First. I am not forcing my opinions on him. In my reply I told him that he has a right to his veiws.

I don't have any problems with the scriptures that you quoted. Yes the mercy of God in manifold. This does not mean that He changes His Laws. God is omnipotent and all the mercies in this world are contained in his laws. I know that God does not change. This is not boxing God in; it is only my peception of God.




I wrote
[Quote]
His rules issue out of Love and Justice which are His mercy.[/Quote]

Viaro replied
[Quote]
How did you arrive at that?[/Quote]

I arrived at this conclusion from my experiencing of life, and from my experiencing of the Grail Message. God is Love, Justice and Purity, so are everything that issue from Him, including His laws.


I wrote
[Quote]
Mercy is contained in His rules(laws), which need not be changed to show mercy.[/Quote]

Viaro replied

How did you come to that conclusion? [/Quote]

The same reason that I gave in the above. God is Love, Justice and Purity, so are everything that issue from Him, including His laws. Mercy is nothing but the effect of Love and Justice.

[quote]It were better that you say nothing at all where you don't know, than to make assertions that can't be sustained when closely examined.

I don't know what you mean by the above but I think I have sustained all me assertions.

It is not a matter of 'changing rules' - God is NOT an automaton. If your god is such an automaton that has nothing else to do than what you dictate to him, viaro has no qualms about that I would have zipped it and said nothing, for that would be your god. Yet, if you want to teach others that your god is partial, please be our guest and do so without trying to insinuate the same idea into the worldviews that you don't subscribe to.

It is wrong to perceive God as an automaton. That is not what I mean when I said that He changeth not. God is Live itself and He is in no way an automaton. I will give an example. If i know that Viaro never lies, then I can say that Yiaros answers will always be the Truth. Here I am not telling Viaro what to do, neither I'm I saying that Viaro is an automaton. I am only saying that I know Viaro's character which never lies. This is what i mean.

God has not led every generation in the same manner, law or rule. That much is clear from the Bible itself: for the Jews were given the Mosaic Law that pertains to Judaism - a very different thing from the belief systems of the Grail Message. If that were not true, why are you not practising Judaism to buttress your claim that God does not 'change' any rule when He leads His people? "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation. . ." (Psa. 147:19-20).

What you wrote above may be biblical but this is where my perception does not agree with the biblical perception. I believe that God deals equally with every tribe. But it depends on the people's level of maturity. A people that seeks God and approached Him, will receive more from God than others. It is not that God deals differently with them, rather it is the people that went and proved themselves worthy. I will give an example. The sun is there for everybody at the same distance. If a man climbs a tower, he will receive more sunshine that the man who went into a cave. It does not mean that the sun is partial, rather it lies with men to receive the gifts of the sun or not.

There are also circumstances where His Law was violated - such as when the Mosaic law in Judaism required that adulterers and adultresses be put to death where caught within Israel (Lev. 20:10). But when a woman was caught in the act in John 8, rather than put her to death, Jesus showed mercy without changing the Mosaic Law (). His word to the accusers was simple: 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her' (verse 7) - and if we carefully think of the weight of that statement, we would find that THEY ALL DESERVED TO BE STONED on the same basis of the legalism they applied to the Law, for none of them was without sin ("there is no man that sinneth not," - 1 Kings 8:46)! But rather than that, Jesus showed them mercy, because it is written: "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings" (Hos. 6:6).

Such are the manifold ways and mercies and wisdom of God - not that He applies His love to us whimsically, but that He is not tied down to any law, and because he is transcendent, He knows just how to show HIS OWN LOVE to those who stand in need of it.

The mosaic law is a diiferent kind of law. It is a law given to a particular people and adapted to the people. It is not a universal law of God like the law of gravity and etc. The Mosaic law is a law given to the Jews to aid them in their spiritual growth, as their growth changed, the law changed. This is not what I mean when I say the Laws of God. The mosaic is rather a set of rules given to man and made for man. It is different form the eternal laws of God.
I will give an example. We know the laws of mathematics: 10+10=20. I tell my six year old son to carry 20 pebbles, so that when he is asked 10+10=? to count two sets of 10 pebbles. But there will came a time when I will tell him to do away with his pebbles and count in his head. I changed the law that i gave him, the code of conduct, but the law of mathematics remained the same 10+10=20.

You seem to have done that already by setting limitations on God - as if to tell us what you can dictate Him to do or not to do. I don't see any other ways you can justify that excuse on strong statements like:
 ~ "There are no exceptions to the rules of God"
 ~ "God does not change His rules to show mercy to people"
. .  and even going so far as to tie everything up to the idea of partiality.

The one thing that amazes me is that when people try to dictate to others what they should believe, then make subscripts about not trying top force this and that. A nice discussion would do, rather than setting bounds about what God does or does not do.

I do not put limitations on God. When it is said that God can do anything, this is correct if one knows that the "anything" said means anything that is good. There are things God cannot do. God cannot steal, lie, or cheat. God cannot lie. I believe that even the bible said this.

Thanks and remain blessed

This thread is for us to continue the discussion that we started on another thread:
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-94905.32.html#msg5411957

But first there are issues I will like to clarify before we start.
1) I am a crossbearer, an adherent of the Grail Message. My views are not biblical, and I have never claimed that they are. I my views are born out of my knowledge of life, spirituality and God, as taught by the Grail message.

2) I am not here to convert anybody to my views. I only offer my views for you to consider. I expect you to give me your views too for me to consider, I do not see any room for fights and quareel in this. This should be a friendly exchange of views. I don't expect you to lie or swallow your feelings just to please me; because I would not do that. Where you find my views weird, feel free to say it. I should not be angry about your perception of my views.

3) I do not consider everything in the Bible to be false. Characters in the bible actally existed, only that my explanation of their actions and their words may be different from the biblical(christian explanation). IE I believe in Jesus as the son of God, but I do not believe in some of the things written about Him, and some of the explanation that people give to His words.

4) What I don't condone is ridcling other peoples heroes, IE making fun fun of Jesus, Mohamed, and etc. I also find it appalling when posters tell blatant lies and falsely accuse fellow posters just because their views are different. (I have been accused of being seeklove). If our discusion degrades to that level, I will just exit the discussion.
One of my principles in life is to avoid people and places that annoy me.

5) It is wrong to hate people just because of their religious orientation. So lets try to hear everybody out, and remove hate from the discussion. I believe we can all exist together. I come from a multireligiouse background- I am a crossbearer, my wife is not, my mother is a strong catholic, one of my best friends is a Catholic priest, but we all exist together. Actally discussions are more interesting when people have different views.

6) Everybody has a right to his/her perception of God. If I think that God is green, and you think that God is yellow, I should not be angry with you. You have a right to your own perception of God. God does not belong to me exclusively, neither does he belong to you exclusively. After all God gives rainfall, sunshine, and etc to both the righteous and unrighteous; we human should also allow everybody the right to have a perception of God. But it is wrong when people ridicule or make fun of their neighbors perception of God.

I have not seen you two(Viaro and nuclearboy) doing any of the bad things that why I am inviting you to this discussion. I wrote the above so that you can understand me and so that others will be able to join our discussion without bringing disturbances.

mama-gee:
I sleep in investments.

What do you mean. Please explain to me, I don't understand.

I thank you immensely for crating this Nairaland, which has helped me a lot. Below is a suggestion for you

Seun I think that the religion forum is conjested. You did a good thing by crating the Islam child forum. I think the religion forum will function better if you create another child forum for Christains, and another one for New Age movements, or spirituality. Or even, it will be nice if you open one child forum for adherents of the Grail Message.

I think this will reduce a lot of friction and insults among posters. I noticed that the friction between Muslims and Christians reduced when you opened the Islam child forum.

This is just my humble suggestion. What do you think?

viaro:
First off, you'e forcing your ideas in here by not being consistent with the texts which modupe01 quoted. You asked a question based on the Bible - and if you want to answer based on the Bible, stay with the Bible. Otherwise, your comments actually sound like you are the one who wants to set bounds for God in the Bible and then dictate to Him what He should do and what He ought not to do. The Biblical answer to such an attitude is Isaiah 40:13 - "Has anyone told the LORD what He must do or given Him advice?" (CEV).

True, many people have come to this idea that God does not 'change' His rules to show mercy to people - but I verily doubt whether those making such statements actually know what the 'rules' or 'mercy' of God are. Here is what the Bible teaches:

[list](a) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD mercies:
'Yet thou in thy manifold mercies forsookest them not in the wilderness' ~ Neh. 9:19

(b) the Bible teaches that God has MANIFOLD wisdom:
'To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God' ~ Ephesians 3:10

(c) the Bible teaches that the ways of God are MANIFOLD:
'O LORD, how manifold are thy works! in wisdom hast thou made them all: the earth is full of thy riches. ' ~ Psalm 104:24[/list]

There are others; but these three examples of God's manifold mercies, manifold wisdom and manifold ways show us that God is not an automaton that could be boxed by man's dictates about what He could do and what He could not do! And if God in His manifold wisdom, mercies and ways shows His love in various manners to people, who are we to dictate HOW He should do so, of WHAT exactly He ought to or not to do?!?
How did you come to that conclusion?
How did you arrive at that?
How did you come to that conclusion?

It were better that you say nothing at all where you don't know, than to make assertions that can't be sustained when closely examined.
It is not a matter of 'changing rules' - God is NOT an automaton. If your god is such an automaton that has nothing else to do than what you dictate to him, viaro has no qualms about that I would have zipped it and said nothing, for that would be your god. Yet, if you want to teach others that your god is partial, please be our guest and do so without trying to insinuate the same idea into the worldviews that you don't subscribe to.

God has not led every generation in the same manner, law or rule. That much is clear from the Bible itself: for the Jews were given the Mosaic Law that pertains to Judaism - a very different thing from the belief systems of the Grail Message. If that were not true, why are you not practising Judaism to buttress your claim that God does not 'change' any rule when He leads His people? "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation. . ." (Psa. 147:19-20).

There are also circumstances where His Law was violated - such as when the Mosaic law in Judaism required that adulterers and adultresses be put to death where caught within Israel (Lev. 20:10). But when a woman was caught in the act in John 8, rather than put her to death, Jesus showed mercy without changing the Mosaic Law (). His word to the accusers was simple: 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her' (verse 7) - and if we carefully think of the weight of that statement, we would find that THEY ALL DESERVED TO BE STONED on the same basis of the legalism they applied to the Law, for none of them was without sin ("there is no man that sinneth not," - 1 Kings 8:46)! But rather than that, Jesus showed them mercy, because it is written: "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings" (Hos. 6:6).

Such are the manifold ways and mercies and wisdom of God - not that He applies His love to us whimsically, but that He is not tied down to any law, and because he is transcendent, He knows just how to show HIS OWN LOVE to those who stand in need of it.

You seem to have done that already by setting limitations on God - as if to tell us what you can dictate Him to do or not to do. I don't see any other ways you can justify that excuse on strong statements like:
~ "There are no exceptions to the rules of God"
~ "God does not change His rules to show mercy to people"
. . and even going so far as to tie everything up to the idea of partiality.

The one thing that amazes me is that when people try to dictate to others what they should believe, then make subscripts about not trying top force this and that. A nice discussion would do, rather than setting bounds about what God does or does not do.

@Viaro
Thanks for your explanations but for the sake of cordiality, I don't want to reply. Your views are well appreciated, maybe sometimes in another thread we may be able to exchange more ideas. I hope you understand what I mean.

Mavenb0x:
viaro, thats the problem I often have with seeklove and his mentor justcool (i.e. If they are not even the same person!), they impose various limitations on their god, and then turn around and say that is the one and same Boundless God that adopted me as His Son. I only have problems with the 2nd part, I am not bothered about whoever other people worship.

@Mavenbox
I never said in any part of my post in the Nairaland that God adopted me as his son. I can speak for myself, I don't know if seeklove ever said that. You are free to believe whatever you want to believe about seeklove and me being the same person. I can see that you are bent on starting a fight with me; therefore I withdraw from this thread.

May God bless you.

modupe01:
There are exceptions to the rules. Divine interceptions where God shows mercy and gives another opportunity to complete their assignments and testimonies to these abound. But the Scripture is clear that after death is the Judgment. There is no second chance to be physically reborn to re-live one's life the second or third time as reincarnation teaches. It is either we are born once and die twice or born twice and die once. Being born twice and dying once does not mean to say reincarnation but the regeneration of one's spirit. If one is righteous at death their soul and spirit will go to heaven to await the resurrection of their bodies (2 Cor.5:8; Phil.1:21-24). The unbelieving sinners's spirit and soul will go to hell where they will await the resurrection of their bodies and experience the second death (Luke 16:19-31; Rev.20:11-15).

From the Scriptures we can see that there is nothing like reincarnation or purgatory or any such escape clause except the Lord has mercy and gives a second chance to come back to earth.

@modupe01

Thanks for your explanations but I don't agree with it. There are no exceptions to the rules of God. God does not change His rules to show mercy to people; His mercy lies in His rules. His rules issue out of Love and Justice which are His mercy. Mercy is contained in His rules(laws), which need not be changed to show mercy.

Changing rules for some people is nothing but partiality. God is impartial.

But you are entitled to your own opinion. If what you wrote above fills your void then stick to it. It is not my intention to force, coerce, or argue with you to accept my perception.

Thanks and remain blessed

@Krayola, mavenbox and viaro

Thanks for your posts. I am sorry that I could not provide links that you consider authentic. The issue remains on the individual. Everybody is entitled to his or her own opinion.

But I guess that I have shown that some historians believe that the early Christian sects believed in reincarnation, and that reincarnation was one of the issues dealt with in the council of Nicea.

It's up to you whether to consider these facts as authentic or not. My lecturer once told me that: History was written by the survivors.

About the Gnostic not being biblical. Please at the times the Gnostic existed, was there a book called the bible the way that we have it today? This is something to consider and research on.

Also I need to clarify that the teachings of the gnostic is not the same with the teachings of the Grail Message. I am well familiar with the Grail Message and I have read a little about the Gnostic; I am certain that the teachings are not the same.

There is no need going round and round on the issue of reincarnation. I think i have expressed all my perception on this issue. One is left to agree with me or not.

But thanks for a wonderful exchange of views. Remain blessed.

@Viaro

You said nothing about the link that I gave to Kreyola.
You don't find it authentic? Please what sources do you consider authentic. I don't know your regards on the authenticity of wikipedia but let me quote it for you:

The overwhelming majority of mainstream Christian denominations have rejected the notion of reincarnation and consider the idea to be incompatible with the teaching of Christ contained in the Bible. Certain[weasel words] churches indirectly address the subject through teachings about death (see Particular judgment). A few consider the matter open to individual interpretation due to the few biblical references which survived the purging of texts considered to be heretical in the founding years of Christianity as a church. Some Christians contend that reincarnation was taught by the early Christian church, but due to bias and mistranslations, these teachings were lost or obscured. Many of the philosophies associated with the theory of reincarnation focus on "working" or "learning" through various lifetimes to achieve some sort of higher understanding or state of "goodness" before salvation is granted or acquired. Basic to Traditional Christianity is the doctrine that humans can never achieve the perfection God requires and the only salvation is total and complete forgiveness accomplished through the sacrifice Jesus made on the cross wherein he took the sins of mankind. There seems to be evidence however that some of the earliest Christian sects such as the Sethians and followers of the Gnostic Church of Valentinus believed in reincarnation, and they were persecuted by the Romans for this.[27]

A number of Evangelical and (in the USA) Fundamentalist Christian maintain that any phenomena suggestive of it are deceptions of the devil. Although the Bible never mentions the word reincarnation, there are several passages through New Testament that reject reincarnation or the possibility of any return or contact with this world for the souls in Heaven or Hell (see Hebrews 9:27 and Luke 16:20-31)

The Bible contains passages in the New Testament that could be taken to allude to reincarnation. In Matthew 11:10-14and 17:10-13, John 1:21, the Jews ask John the Baptist if he is Elijah and John replies clearly that he is not, implying that Jesus' reference was meant in a figurative sense (which is what most Christians accept). It should be noted that Elijah never actually "died," but was "raptured" in a chariot of fire. Furthermore, the prophetic texts stated that God would send Elijah back to Earth, as a harbinger of Jesus Christ. As cousins they were born respectively to barren Elizabeth[28] and Zacharias;[29] Jesus, firstborn of Mary and Joseph,[30] was the first to rise from the dead visibly demonstrating his power over death.[31] It can also be taken to mean an apparition, not a reincarnation.

There are various contemporary attempts to entwine Christianity and reincarnation. Geddes Macgregor, wrote a book called Reincarnation in Christianity: A New Vision of Rebirth in Christian Thought, Rudolf Steiner wrote Christianity as Mystical Fact and Tommaso Palamidessi wrote Memory of Past Lives and Its Technique which contains several methods which are supposed to help in obtaining memories from previous lives.[32]

Several groups which consider themselves to be Christian and support reincarnation include the Christian Community, the Liberal Catholic Church, Unity Church, The Christian Spiritualist Movement, the Rosicrucian Fellowship and Lectorium Rosicrucianum. The Medieval sect known variously as the Cathars or Albigensians who flourished in the Languedoc believed in Reincarnation, seeing each soul as a fallen angel born again and again into the world of Matter created by Lucibel (Lucifer).

The American psychic Edgar Cayce, who considered himself to be Christian both in and out of trance, supported the idea of reincarnation. While in trance he would give "life readings" in which he would discuss the previous reincarnations of his subjects.[33]


There is historical evidence that some early Christian groups believed in reincarnation. This idea of reincarnation did not survive the council of Nicea. Actually some modern chatolic priests, who are very versed in theology do not deny this fact. It's funny that somebody here mentioned that he was told by a catholic priest.

If you are close to any(a well educated catholic priest), you might want request a dialog. If you were in California, I would have intited you to dialog with a catholic priest friend of mine. You d be supprised how knowledgeable these priests are.

But you have the right to disagree with me. I still respect you and your views.

Krayola:
@ Justcool. . . I'm trying to find some info about reincarnation being an issue that was discussed and voted on at the council of Nicea and can't find anything from any credible source. I also took a Christian history course where we dealt with this stuff and that never came up. I think that is just conspiracy theory stuff, but I could be wrong. I can find websites that echo what you say, but like I said they are just claims, not even arguments. . . I can't find any academic sources that agree with it. NONE!! And if there was truth to it I'm pretty confident scholars would be all over it. I may be looking in the wrong places though so maybe you can direct me to a source. thanks.

@Keryola
Thanks for your questions.
I guess you didn't read the thread that seeklove gave a link to, in which I gave a link to a document on the council of Nicea.

Here is the:http://kuriakon00.tripod.com/reincarnation/council.htm



And I quote from it:

"Nicea, nevertheless, marked the beginning of the end of the concepts of both preexistence, reincarnation, and salvation through union with God in Christian doctrine. It took another two hundred years for the ideas to be expunged."

http://kuriakon00.tripod.com/reincarnation/council.htm

@Keryola, Viaro, and mavenbox.

Please research about an early christian group called the Gnostic. Check out their view on reincarnation.

Thanks and remain blessed.

modupe01:
This is what the Bible says:

And as it is appointed to men once to die, but after this the judgment. -- Hebrews 9:27 (The Evidence Bible).

This verse shows that there is no such thing as reincarnation. It is merely wishful thinking for guilty sinners. Many of the worlds religions teach their followers that if they don't get it right now that they will have other opportunities in their future lives. The implication of this heresy is that you don't need to trust in Jesus before you die. This lie is from the pit of hell and many folks have swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

@modupe01

Did Lazarus and those Jesus raised from the dead die once?

seeklove:
This issue of re-incarnation has already been treated in the past. Here is the thread:

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-94905.0.html#msg1697718

Read justcool's, doescade's and m_nwankwo's posts in the above thread.

Since seeklove brought up a thread in which I heavily posted on, I wish to clarify some issues.
The theme of thread(Biblical accounts that suggest reincarnation) that seeklove brought is not exactly the same with the theme of this thread(Reincarnation - Deepsight, Let's Talk Here)


Therefore have these facts in mind while reading my posts in that thread.

1) I am not saying that the bible teaches reincarnation. The bible we have today does not teach reincarnation, although there are stories in it that suggest reincarnation. IE stories that suggest that the writers might have believed in reincarnation.

2) It is my perception that some of the early Christains believed in reincarnation. Reincarnation was one of the issues that was deliberated on in the council of Nicaea. And from then, it was removed from teachings of the church; the bishopes votes against it.

3) The Grail Message does not say that the bible teaches reincarnation. The Grail Message does not draw from the bible. The Grail message teaches about reincation, which is a manifestation of the love and justice of God.

4) The fact that something is not in the Bible does not mean that it is not true. Trinity is not really taught in the bible, although is suggested in the bible; but it is believed by most Christian churches today because the bishopes voted for it during the council of Nicea. Like reincarnation, trinity is a reality and not a fallacy; although in the bible, the word Trinity is not mentioned.

Thanks.

@poster
Anybody talking about loving one thing more than the other, either does not know what love is or has not experienced real love.

Love has no measure, you can't love one thing more than the other. Love is not a measurable quantity, it is a spiritual thing. In the spirit there is partiality, falsehood or half-heartedness.

If a guy and a girl love each other, then one of them cannot love the other person more than the other person loves him/her. If you find out that you love something less than the other, the Truth is that you don't really love that thing which you think you love less.

You can love less or more; you can either love or not love. Love and likeness are two different thing;, you can like one thing more than the other, but you cant love one thing more than the other.