Will you make it to Heaven? Cont.

[VincitVeritas1]

Feel free to join me in a discussion about Heaven according to the Holy Bible/ Christianity in general.

@Kdtym10 you really don't seem to rate Paul and you really do seem to rate William Blake.

Yep!

What do you mean about Hammersmith?

First area of “London” swallowed up by the sprawl oif the capital during the industrial revolution where the Thames ran through that came to mind.

It was Blake’s view of London how it could be seen on many levels - an industrialised hell hole of dark satanic mills of Albion or the wonderful city of imagination of Albion as Kathleen Raine describes it.

“….And did those feet in ancient times, walk upon Englands mountains green?”

@Kdtym10

"4 Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.
5 “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." (John 15:4-5)

How do you understand this? I understand Jesus Christ as the vine and us as the branches which can bear fruit. How do you view remaining in the vine? Attempting to bear fruit by yourself? What do you see as fruit of the Spirit?

I like the way this illustrates how God creates and is connected with us. As the 'vine' has a purpose of bringing forth the fruit, God made us to be the beautiful and holy fruit of His creative 'spark'. Being part of the Body of Christ is the same idea.

Is see it as a statement of emanation, I’d see it as an iteration of as above so below, as within so without.

what about you?

@Kdtym10 well, as I have already said and as a Christian I believe being in Christ is holding up Jesus Christ as being the same as God, God in the flesh. I actually looked up, this morning all the points at which Jesus said "I am..." which confirmed my faith.

I see it this way. On one extreme you have the people who are very legalistic towards Old Testament law and seem to have a hard time forgiving people for breaking it even when they have being victims of injustice after injustice which has changed how they function in the world. From there you get extremism wars and abuse.
On the other extreme you get people who think they can do anything they will, no matter how it might hurt others. Those involved in more spiritual practices might dabble in witchcraft and occult practices in anger and this is what projects aground them and ultimately gets turned back onto themselves and the people they love. Or they might, from within the church, exploit the hierarchy to awards their own ends. Those involved more in the secular world might play God as doctors / psychologists condemn people who could recover and perhaps exploit people for money and social standing. Or they might hurt lots of people in their romantic relationships. Whatever. That's not what I seek.

The thing is, I see the way, as a Christian in Christ, is to follow Him as a sheep. See Him as God, far superior and above me. And there are times I might not understand, because I originate from a place where I did/do not have complete, perfect unity with God. And as such I perceive you to have a different perspective (the god/God difference) from this and was wondering how that could be reconciled.

And going on from this, if you see Jesus Christ as a man when He was on earth, do you now see Him as God? In perfect unity with the Creator. An extension of the Creator God? Joined. As He ascended to Heaven? Before then? At what point do you believe he achieved God (rather than god) status? So what part might the prophetic have, seeing things as they ultimately will be and are in terms of the beginning of things which have been spoken into being by God?

I am curious to know who, for those of you that believe in God, created God/Jesus in first place?

If all things have a creator (according to you) then who created God??

I believe God was there from the beginning. There was nothing before God, no before. He is eternal.

You say God 'was there' from the beginning?

Given that things don't appear out of nowhere, surely he must have been created by someone or something?

Given that things don't appear out of nowhere,

@sunflowerpinks, don't they? Can't they? If they did would you recognise it? Or would you just think you had missed something?

I would say it suggests the existence of an uncreated, eternal being. There must be something that is outside our concepts of time and causation, or else we (/the universe/ big bang) wouldn't be here.

I agree that there is a lot we (yet) don't understand.

But I don't see any evidence or have any reason to just 'believe' in any creator just because I don't understand.

It's not really in the "We don't (yet) understand" category for me. It's the ultimate question in a way, because whatever we discover through science will lead to another iteration of the same question. That's why it's a profound mystery that points to the existence of something quite Other.
Physical existence is absolutely dependent on the laws of physics and one process kicking off another. But who or what made physics itself and started the whole thing off (with a bang!)?

@sunflowerpinks

or have any reason

Do you know what (reason) you have? Have you discovered it all?

You might findThis of interest

No, because I have no evidence and because I don't understand the history of the universe, I choose to accept that. I'm ok with admitting that I do not know.

Maybe it would be easier to 'believe' in something that could explain it all, but I choose not to. I am of course always curious and open minded about different explanations.

@sunflowerpinks believing is not about making things mentally easier (there will always be a force pulling you back from belief without proof). It is more about reaching forwards into what might be for long enough to recognise the data / evidence of it when it does occur. And remaining there even longer (a lifetime) for conclusive evidence.

It is more about reaching forwards into what might be for long enough to recognise the data / evidence of it when it does occur. And remaining there even longer (a lifetime) for conclusive evidence.

I'm not sure I understand this.

I am certainly very curious and open minded to any new evidence.

But in the meantime I am ok to accept that we just don't know everything about the Universe and its history.

But in the meantime I am ok to accept that we just don't know everything about the Universe and its history.

@sunflowerpinks, I am talking about considering what things might be (even though you don't know everything) and holding that thought there long enough to notice data which might support that particular consideration. Instead of either discounting that data as inconclusive by itself/random or not noticing the data at all because your focus has moved on or deciding the particular consideration untrue for lack of conclusive evidence and regarding data as either random or not noticing the data.

The issue that people always have with these sort of conversations is clinging to concepts such as data, evidence etc.

You're viewing the matter from the perspective of the scientist rather that poet.

People expect the laws of physics like time and space to apply to the spiritual.

If you’re truly curious you need to shift your perspective otherwise you will get no where.

What are your thoughts on the link I shared re the Kabbalistic interpretation of where “God” came from?

@Kdtym10 I view science as a type of poetry. Read some Merlin Sheldrake and tell me that's not sheer poetry!

@Kdtym10
And aren't occult practices considered by some a type of science?