F01.justanswer.com



The βiblePuzzle-ParadigmRedefining InterpretationDawn M. WesselThe βible Puzzle-ParadigmRedefining Interpretation ISBN: 978-0-557-47320-5All Rights Reserved ? 2010 by D.M. (Dawn) WesselNo part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or by any information storage retrieval system, without written permission from the author. book ID #: 8800925Lulu Storefront URL: printings - 2003 titled VindicatusFirst Published Edition – 2005 titled VindicatusUnofficial printings: 2007- Redefining Bible InterpretationAug. 2009 – Vindicatus: Bible Interpretation RedefinedApr. 2012 – The βεβαι?ω Principle: Redefining BIBLE InterpretationFinal August 2013: The Bible Puzzle-Paradigm: Redefining InterpretationBox 454,Mundare, AlbertaT0B 3H0CANADAE-mail: dmwessel@TABLE OF CONTENTSIntroduction ………..…..………………………….. 9ONEReligion – Not Biblical! 13TWOGlaring Inconsistencies 22THREEKeen Observers 34FOURThe Self Interpreting Law 42FIVEWritten in Stone 54SIXAn Oath 73SEVENThe Immortal Mortal 83EIGHTThe Immortal Spirit 88NINEThe Mortal Soul103 TENA Gift Within121ELEVENPoor in Spirit127TWELVEA Supernatural Place134THIRTEENSeparation144FOURTEENThe Holographic Curtain155FIFTEENA Gnostic161SIXTEENBuried Treasure170 SEVENTEEN Sophia - A Rare Pearl178EIGHTEENBuy the Truth189NINETEENThe Gospel of Paul the Apostle198This book has gone through many changes, as it was first titled, Vindicatus, later re-titled, Redefining Bible Interpretation and Vindicatus: Redefining Bible Interpretation. I finally settled on this new title. Biblical information will often overlap so sometimes variations of the same material in this book are repeated in some of my other books. The material intertwines in so many ways, subjects and books that it’s impossible to separate it.Bible verses are quoted primarily from the New King James Version, but in some cases I have used the Authorized. I used Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible with Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries as my main study aid.emeritus vindicatus Introduction_____________________More than twenty years ago I discovered a unique interpreting method in Bible writings. It led me away from Christianity as I learned that religion and the Bible are very different things. I know it’s a strange thing to say as we mostly suppose that the Bible leads to religion!Slowly I began unraveling Bible mysteries and my thinking changed along with it. The changes were welcome but over time as my religious ideas fell by the wayside, so too did religious family, friends, associates, whole churches and a very defined and strict lifestyle. During that time I found my true personality, freedom of thought and conscience, as my mind was liberated. It had none of the trappings of religion but at times it was scary in the sense that I no longer had any one to telling me how I should think. I was alone. I was still a Bible advocate but because I was non-religious I was no longer teaching the Bible in an acceptable Christian way. When you live in a predominantly Christian community and many of your relatives are Christian, it’s very difficult to be different. If I dared say out loud what I was learning, Christians got very angry. As a consequence my ideas were forced underground so-to-speak. I lived a double life. Outwardly I became muzzled but inwardly I was full of life and started putting my ideas on paper.Writing not only helped me sort out my thoughts but also helped me emotionally. I needed an outlet and writing became that for me. It was in writing that I found my soul. I was able to pour out my thoughts on paper and it further became a way to communicate what I had learned to others.God is very different things to different people. In Judeo-Christian thought he is, Jesus Christ the Messiah. In Jewish culture he is the unspeakable Divine name, JHW(H). Islam reverently calls him Allah and others by the sacred name, Jehovah. The uniqueness of the writings that speak of this Divine Entity is that though penned by human beings, the author is said to be God Himself. Always cited in the masculine sense he is not a person per se’ in the sense that we understand. Rather, God is an all-embracing presence if you will - a spirit entity. Were it not for the writings that speak of him it might be easy (in the face of human suffering) to believe that he does not exist. Yet the writings (in so many ways still a mystery yet unsolved) keep us searching for an explanation. Every culture has a unique personality to describe their God, woven into religious tradition. Yet meanings for the name are as different as the religions that define him. I personally would have liked to call the author, Bob! Though it may appear as irreverent my purpose in so doing is not disrespect for I am in awe of these writings. Rather it’s merely to get people thinking about the Bible (and so its author) in an entirely new way.Due to the unusual nature of this particular author the expectation is (or should be) that distinct anomalies will be present in these writings. As a divine (perfect/eternal) entity the writings must contain characteristics that are beyond human engineering. It was very surprising for me to discover that a singular writing style is present in the Bible and some apocryphal writings. It was not easy however. In fact it was downright difficult as what I call the puzzle-paradigm is not readily noticeable and is complex, otherwise it would have been discovered long ago. Afterwards was the enjoyable but huge and time-intensive job of separating ideas into an understandable format. It took me some time to see the duality to the writings, both literal (from the heavenly perspective) but figurative (from our point of view).As I began using the interpreting methodology that I introduce in this book it had a very surprising (and completely unexpected) effect on me. Having been quite religious I slowly became non-religious. In fact I became scientifically minded and the more I learned (and am learning) the more scientific-minded I become. To me it clearly reveals that if the interpreting methodology was religious in nature it would stand to reason that I would still be religious. Instead it led me away from religion and to science. Therefore, I have to conclude that the interpreting rule is a scientific method!Both science and religion tend to view Bible writings from very different perspectives and it has become virtually impossible for both parties to see them in any other light. Overcoming long-held biases would prove to be a most daunting task. To suggest that the Bible and religion are not the same things is so different from long-held views that people have a difficult time with it. However, the idea is not mine but God’s.I found that Bible writings start from a simple idea and evolve into a complex puzzle-paradigm effect. It’s a building process; line upon line, precept upon precept. I have no idea where it ends but I do know that it’s very different from what we thought we knew.ONEReligion – Not Biblical!Most Christians think of themselves as being separate from the world. It’s a huge deal and one they are proud of as to “be friends with the world is to be separated from God” (James 4:4).To even suggest that they are very much a part of “the world” would be the highest insult and one a staunch Christian would vehemently deny. Yet if we look at the basic structure of Christianity, we could hardly call it anything else.Let me first explain what such an entity looks like. The main component of a worldly system of administration is a pyramid/corporate (top on down) form of leadership. It always consists of one strong leader at the top (if incorporated is governed by a Board that in reality wields the power). Still the basic idea behind the corporate structure is that one (or a few) holds the real power, everyone else falling behind them depending upon their position in the line. In a political structure only the very good and most assertive ascends the ladder of excellence, but it’s the strongest personality that will lead everyone else. The leader that best exemplifies the requirements of the group gets to be the Chief Executive Officer. Someone has to lead, the buck has to stop somewhere or chaos would result and I would agree. In the corporate world of every day life such a thing is necessary but is it good! More specifically (and the topic of this chapter) is it God’s model for the churches?A political/corporate structure always has an Alpha leader; the one that everyone else answers to. A religious Alpha may not look like a secular one but in any political group only the strongest rises to the top. In the case of Bible-based religions the person (usually male) that best and most staunchly defends the faith, while being equally benevolent (given to serve, kind), is chosen.Alpha characteristics are not as noticeable in Bible-based circles but individuals that rise highest must be ‘strong’ leaders. However, because Alpha characteristics are seen as undesirable in many religious circles, Alpha traits are masked.The Pope holds great sway in Roman Catholic matters as regarding doctrine and church leadership his decisions are considered infallible. In lesser degrees there are clerics in all Bible-based denominations that hold offices of influence in their particular circles. It matters not what you call them (Rabbi, Vicar, Bishop, Pastor, Cardinal, Reverend, etc.) it’s still a political hierarchy. All sit in the same chair in varying degrees of authority. Religious leadership then is really no different from other bureaucracies. The criterion for selecting a religious leader may appear different from the rest of the world but the structure of authority is not. It’s a far cry from Jesus’ admonition:“Be you not called Rabbi, for one is your Master, even Christ, and all you are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be you called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.” (Matt. 23:8-10)Rabbi, master and father are translated as titles. Jesus was proposing a radical idea as he challenged the right of the religious leaders to have positions over others in God’s church. For that they had him killed.So why aren’t the similarities between the world and the church seen by the Bible-religious? Jesus referred to it in no uncertain terms as, “the blind leading the blind” (Matt. 15:14)!The reason why there’s so little fighting amongst Christians in particular is because their controversies are always resolved the same way. Love is the ruling authority for all true Christians, their slogan, “let’s agree to disagree”. Doctrinal inconsistencies are swept under the carpet and they don’t think it the least bit wrong!Bible-based religions with some similarities often explain their differences as being unique perspectives of the same subject (each is seeing a different side to the same picture). However, when pressed, most will insist their viewpoint is the right one (that’s why they attend a particular church). Primarily though the reason for attending a certain church is because people are attracted by the Pastor/Priest, etc. and his or her (mostly his) doctrinal position. It’s like people drinking different flavors of the same brand of pop and each one insisting theirs is better.To add to the confusion there are other great world religions [Judaism (the mother of it all), Islam and Jehovah’s Witnesses] that take some of their creeds from parts of the same writings. And those religions are just as certain as the different forms of Christianity that only they possess the true knowledge of God.Those that are most familiar with Christianity know just how varied a scope the term encompasses, as there are many, many different forms of it today. In a nutshell, old Christianity (Catholicism) is stringently class oriented in the sense of being a complicated hierarchy. Each position (top on down) is an unquestionable authority in their respective roles. It’s was really more of an aristocracy in the past as the higher echelons had great influence over governments: surprisingly in this day and age still wielding a great deal of power.Newer forms of Protestantism (Evangelical/Born-again) are becoming as complicated. It’s like anything else in this world, the longer an institution is around the more powerful and arrogant they become. It’s not that I think that clergy are insincere. Most of them are very dedicated and the expectations from their flock are extremely demanding. They must have great zeal for their religion (a prerequisite for any religious leader), must show unlimited patience for their congregation and be free from the temptations of money, power, greed and sex. Of course, the more people (especially those with the most influence) that affirm the leader, the easier it is for him or her (mostly him) to maintain the role. I think it’s far easier to be a leader (Priest, Bishop, etc.) in old Christianity than the newer versions of it! Add the never-deviating ritualistic forms of worship to the no-resistance to authority policy, a guaranteed monthly allowance, job security for life (as long as you stay), Nuns that do a good deal of the cooking and cleaning and you have a pretty cushy job.Evangelical leaders in smaller churches are not as fortunate as many of them are often underpaid and overworked. They must carefully navigate the labyrinth of maintaining the old ideas while creatively introducing fresh insights to excite their flock to religious fervor. They must minister to the needs of their congregation while not neglecting the needs of their own families, (which often happens anyway). The Pastor/Minister must be versatile: he or she must do everything for free (in the smaller churches anyway). They must be available to all people at all times, in any situations. In short he (and to an only slightly lesser degree, a wife if he has one, and most of them do) must be able to satisfy most of the people most of the time. Only few do it really well while many end up discarded victims of the corporate religious entity (and labeled bitter when they cry injustice). Yet from smallest to largest one component stands out: you must not challenge authorities.To then call the present religious system (in whatever form/denomination it takes) anything but “worldly” would be wrong. To further call it God’s model would be a gross error of judgment. If the vehicle of understanding is wrong then whatever it produces will be also. These and other inconsistencies should alert everyone to the fact that something is fundamentally wrong with the whole thing! The fact that so few within the congregations protest the contradictions is indicative of a much larger problem.It’s not just Christianity as all Bible-based religions believe that only they are correctly representing God. He however, is supposed to be perfect, which by implication means, “never changing”. Yet all religions that are based on the same books (or parts thereof) are very different entities, most of them changing over time.The religious often answer that it’s because human beings are subject to error that the differences exist. Somehow that’s supposed to justify the errors! In no way does it validate God’s perfection however, but in reality does the opposite. What about God Himself? As an all-powerful entity surely he can defend himself? Would he not have foreseen the problems inherent in humanity and taken steps to prevent us from (at least) misrepresenting his character!Or it could be that we tread where angels fear to! After-all how can that which is finite possibly understand what is infinite? Or how does the imperfect elucidate the attributes of the perfect? Not recognizing the differences we could only hope to fail by our own devices. Nevertheless many tried and try. Yet logic dictates that finite beings would be impossibly handicapped right from the start. God obviously is incapable of error and we very much capable - so that leaves only one answer. We are the problem and the reason for the inconsistencies but just admitting it doesn’t get the religious off the hook. Bible-based religions are the attempt of human beings to explain God via the way each individual perceives him to be. The methodology I present is “God explaining himself”. There is a vast difference between the two. Bible advocates have thought to easily grasp the eternal, as I too thought at one time. The reality is however, that immortality is inconceivable to us. Nonetheless, the religious tread where angel’s fear to go and made/make guesses to their own peril.In the endeavor lofty ideals were replaced with human pettiness and God was stripped of the very thing that makes him different from us. Religious resolve stubbornly continued on not realizing that our best interpretation would pale in comparison to a divine one. Still religion persisted to put itself in divine shoes even though in such shoes it cannot stand.I’m not saying that we are incapable of an intelligent thought but that whatever interpreting strategy we use for these writings cannot be a human invention. Anything coming from God would far surpass our abilities, no matter how academically brilliant some people are.Intentionally or not (I’m beginning to think the whole thing was an accident) the divine Spirit reached down and granted us His image. Had God not condescended to where we are we would not have the slightest interest in (or even the capacity) to understand higher truths. We would still be animal and nothing more as it was in gaining a higher consciousness that makes us human.Interest and even sincerity does not make our interpretations of Bible writings infallible. The only time we can say that we’re infallible (and not us specifically) is when God has revealed one of his infallible (and verifiable) principles to us. It’s God’s principle and not a human creation so only then can we say with certainty that it’s unerring. Unless God explains himself (from his perspective) we could not know the infinite. And that has been the entire problem with Bible-based religions, which attempt to explain God from a perspective they cannot possibly know. As a consequence we have many gods rather than one “God”!TWOGlaring InconsistenciesReligious institutions seem to start out humbly enough but deteriorate into hierarchical monsters. It was certainly no different in Jesus’ day. At that time Holy Writ was firmly lodged in the hands of the Jewish religious academics, the scribes and teachers of The Law. Today it’s not any different. The common person has easy access to Holy Writ but if you want to plumb the depths of the really deep understanding of God, it’s believed that to do so you must attend Seminary, Bible College, or the like.Concerning Jesus’ teachings, “the common people heard him gladly.” (Mark 12:37b) “And they were all amazed, insomuch that they questioned among themselves saying, What thing is this, what new doctrine is this?” (Mark 1:27a)Jesus taught from the same books as the teachers of the law. His teachings however, were so different from what the common people had been used to hearing that it sounded foreign (new) to them. They were positively amazed by and welcomed it with open arms. Religious establishments on the other hand tend to be dogmatic and ritualistic. Potentially they are good and evil, very often accomplishing both simultaneously. On one hand the churches encourage, uplift and provide for the needy by the financial sacrifices of others. On the other are the many (and awful) stories of sexual abuse of children by trusted Catholic priests. Protestants have faired no better as some popular Tel-evangelists have tumbled headlong off their lofty pedestals. I do not rejoice in their chastisement though I see it as the inevitable result of religious-political forms of governance.Abuses of power don’t just happen in religious circles though. The potential is there wherever you have the political/corporate structure. Position can create a monster as “power often corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Jesus well understood the political mentality and its affects on human beings, and no doubt the reason why he referred to us as sheep. He taught very different things from what the teachers of the law were promoting. Nevertheless, the religious leaders were convinced they alone held the copyright on interpretation of the Law. It would have been fine had they stopped there but then committed the biggest error of all time and killed the author of the very words they professed to uphold. The only way that such a thing could happen was because they were interpreting the words incorrectly.On one hand Christians say that, “God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34)” but on the other, expect that I should present religious credentials. Of course the credentials must come from their respective denominational institutions. Things have come full circle.God would not write above the heads of the common person as to do so would be to break his own law of impartiality. We don’t require a religious degree to interpret these writings (neither do we need a computer, although it sure helps) but only the knowledge of the interpretation method itself. I’m not saying the writings do not require scholarly study. I am stating that an elitist mentality is not in line with the impartial nature of the author that is supposed to have inspired the words of the Bible.A dilemma for many people outside of religious groups is the seeming lack of consistency. So many things just don’t add up. A strange paradox is that though Christianity (one God/three persons), while having its roots in Judaism (one God/one person); the two don’t mix on any level. It makes me seriously question how the two could be related - the evolved form (Judeo-Christianity) is so different from the original organism. Judaism (the mother of it all) has its own factions, orthodox and not. Judaism’s offspring, Christianity, however, is really perplexing for there are many branches, and branches within branches. A few collective beliefs exist among most Christian groups, specifically a belief in the God that inspired Bible writings and his son, Jesus Christ. Most everything else is open for discussion. Other religions not within the Christian context take parts of their creeds from Bible writings and are just as complex.One predominant Christian teaching is that “God is not the author of confusion”. Inconsistency (due to variations of doctrine) only undermines the author and his message. A reasonable person must assume then that the many groups under the banner of Christianity alone cannot be correct imitations of such a deity! Many Christians believe that after the old dispensation (Old Testament) was over, God (the Father) introduced new things. There’s a problem with this view because those that divide the writings into old and new are very clearly stating they believe that God changed his mind however, the Old Testament (Written Torah) says:"For I am the Lord, I do not change..." (Malachi 3:6)A verse from the New Testament concurs:“…with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” (James 1:17)God is supposed to be perfect (which means never changing) but religions are ever changing. By the constant changes religion shows itself to be incompatible with God’s changeless nature. Again, religions explain it that human beings are subject to error and so imperfection has resulted. That however, still does not explain how an all-powerful God was not able to foresee the problems that would arise and compensate for them!To be constant, God (by implication any teachings said to be from him) must remain exactly the same throughout all generations. If there are changes in Bible-related teaching that cannot originate from the author of these writings. While the writings say that God introduced what appeared to be changes (New Testament), it was not a substitute because the original (Old Testament) was deficient in some way. It was the same covenant but wrapped in a seemingly new package as the New Testament phrases the previous concept in another way:“Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8)Logic dictates that if God changes in any way then he falls short of infallibility. Unwittingly church fathers contradicted their own beliefs about God’s invariable nature when they named it the New Testament – as if the Old Testament was, or could be, outdated! This raises a bunch more questions. The books of Moses stood seemingly alone for many generations of Hebrews as the only law (does that mean there was no law before Moses?). Moses’ law was seemingly a complete book so then why the need for additions by other prophets, and, the New Testament itself? In actual fact while books by other prophets were added over time they were only affirmations of the original message. A true prophet will only repeat the original message. If anyone changes the message in any way then they are not a messenger of God. In its inception as a special book inspired from God to human beings through the prophet Moses (in reality the books of Eden and Enoch came first), it was the Law. These were the statutes of governance; not just spiritual rule, it was the law of the land. The Law in its earliest formation wasn’t a separate institution of state and religion. The law was the religion and visa versa.It could be the law of the land because it was nothing like religious-run state affairs in past, nor the state-religion separation that evolved in many countries today. Hebrew Law encompassed all issues concerning the people and situations that might arise and it was the same for all. It was a non-exclusive and impartial law, somewhat like a truly democratic country is supposed to be like. However, God’s Law will always empower the innocent and satisfy most everyone where questionable matters are concerned.I’m not stating that I believe in a return to a religiously run state. The separation of state and religion is a good one – as long as things remain in their present form.The law of the earth is “the strong rule” and often to the detriment of the weak. If there’s no clear law because of faulty or confused rules then a “no law (lawless)” state exists. Politics (the strong) will just naturally take over for such is the law of this reality. Human beings are often self-centered creatures. In tough situations (but even in good times) we tend to do whatever it takes to guarantee our own comfort and security. Therefore, laws had to be put in effect to govern general behavior to ensure fairness for all. I read an article on the Internet (at best I can pinpoint a search to early 2008), which states that, “human evolution created morality but with a wide birth”. God compensated for the wide birth by giving the Law but it did not resemble religious models of today.Many people believe that Bible-based religion is the one place where individuals can find a level playing field. Christian ministry however, is often concerned with “forgiveness/love one another”. It’s more advantageous for leadership to have cohesion/unity within its congregations; therefore this topic is a popular pulpit theme. The giving of money to support the institution is also a necessity for without it no religious organization can continue on. In the case of some denominations, financial support is called tithing (everyone gives one tenth of their financial and other resources God – which really means, to the church) but a financial offering is clearly preferred. This is a recent adoption of some forms of Evangelical Christianity. From a leadership perspective there is less preaching required ensuring that church finances are regularly topped up. Still, it’s necessary to have a lot of reminders in the form of motivational preaching to keep the collection plate from being empty. The point I’m making is that while many religious people claim that God keeps the churches, it’s evident that without the collection plate religions would die a quick death. Being as familiar as I am with Evangelical Christianity I know that tithing is not (that I witnessed) intentional manipulation of church adherents by leadership. While there does appear to be Biblical justification for it at face value, from a purely pragmatic view it’s interesting how such a practice is so very beneficial to the institution's continuance. All churches no matter the size have people jockeying for position because that’s the behavior that the political-corporate-minded structure produces in people. That’s why religion is not the Biblical model.It has been said that religion brought freedom (and not to say it didn’t help at times) but if that was so, why did (do) we have need of government? Religion did not in fact bring freedom to western society, democracy did. Not to say that Christianity did not influence Western thinking in its early formation but as religion became increasingly sectarian, things changed. Government had to step in to ensure ‘equality for all’ because religious institutions only favor those that support their convictions. I’ve heard it said (and thought it a brilliant statement at the time) that people should vote on the basis of conscience, not doctrine. However, if the conscience is dictated to by religious resolve it will follow that leading. There must be a clear and impartial law and only then will there be freedom with integrity.Good government represents the wishes of informed people. Religious motivation on the other-hand is often for the preservation of doctrine and denomination. People become secondary, a means to uphold the faith, which maintains the institution. God’s writings refer to such a practice as the “traditions (of men)”. Rather than bringing solidarity and peace the traditions actually divide human beings. In order to preserve their traditions, religion (any religion) will shun all that do not tow the line. In Christian circles the rebukes are accomplished in a somewhat civilised manner but there are extreme religions where the punishment for such is severe. So we see that while claiming to be impartial, religion favors those that support its various creeds, revealing it’s selective. True democracy however, is based upon the idea of “all law-abiding people deserve equal rights”, making it unbiased. Therefore, true democracy is Biblical but religion is not.One important New Testament teaching is The Golden Rule: “Treat others in the same way as you would want to be treated in that same situation”. In other words, don’t do to another person what you would not want done to you. You don’t want to be robbed so don’t rob another, literally or figuratively, as in not properly compensating someone for his or her work and time. However, this law has been skewed in many religious circles as; “if I perceive you an enemy (pagan/unbeliever/infidel) I can treat you any way I see fit”.Many Christians are just as fanatical as Islamic or Muslim terrorists however; New Testament Christian teaching stresses “love your enemy”. Old Testament-based writings however, appear to teach “an eye for an eye”. Depending upon what part of the writings they formulate their doctrine, depends how they view and treat others outside of their groups.Much of what is called Christianity is thought to encompass the entire Bible but in reality is predominantly New-Testament-based. The primary focus of Evangelical doctrine is on “one specific teaching” from the New Testament. Pentecostals are called so because of their heavy emphasis on the Pentecost story in the book of Acts, the Baptists after the supposed austere leader, John the Baptist. Many Evangelical’s attempt to incorporate the entire Bible into their studies yet a great deal of Old Testament law is foreign to them. If they embraced their Judaic roots, should be just as comfortable in a synagogue on Saturday as a church on Sunday! As it stands, Judaism and Christianity are so vastly different. Though frustrated with religion many people also recognize its social importance. Some people fear that the introduction of something new (even though it might be better) will upset the present balance (if you can call it that). The concept I present in this and my other books will most definitely upset a lot of ideas about the Bible and related apocryphal writings. Very possibly it’s revolutionary.THREEKeen Observers“I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts; the rest are details.”—Albert EinsteinAt the time he made this statement Mr. Einstein must have been grappling with the question of God, which by the sounds of it, he thought about a lot. He would have asked some very astute questions but obviously the religious answers he got did not satisfy his inquiring mind, or, he would have joined a church. Religious people loved (love) Einstein because he (as indicated by the quote) defended the existence of God. Others that went against the grain (when religion dictated much of the thinking of the day) were not as fortunate. Darwin in particular threw the religious community of his time into frenzy as his theories seemed anything but Biblical (and very possibly we were not ready for some of it until now). Yet his rationale was based on what he observed in the environment that God supposedly created. All things being equal, would that not make him God’s advocate rather than God’s enemy?As Mr. Darwin studied he arrived at some very unconventional (at the time) theories and called it evolution, adaptation and natural selection. Nature pulled the strings and the creatures of earth either rose to the occasion (survived by strength, adapted, or evolved) or disappeared forever. Time and more evidence have only served to prove that Mr. Darwin was right about so many things. Mother earth continues on its merry way throughout the ages without God interfering in its cycles. If there’s any regular maintenance by a creative hand it’s certainly not evident. Apparent though is a continuation of natural laws. The Bible states that it was made to work in this very way, in perpetual seasons. Contrariness exists in nature, a random order of what I like to call perfect-imperfection. The order is shown in the perpetuation of species in both flora and fauna. And yet there’s also room for the rules to be broken as when nature does something seemingly contrary (random) to its own laws, e.g. the Duck-billed Platypus. I believe that our world and the cosmos are evidence of a higher design (but not Intelligent Design/ID) that went wrong and the resultant evolution. The initial set-up (Big Bang) eventually produced a self-sustaining earth. It did not work perfectly but it worked none-the-less. In the animal kingdom the rules were fixed as the harsh master, Gaia (mother earth) rewarded the strongest (natural selection), or just plain lucky. Everything else had to sneak in under the radar. Gaia is a dictator. Science observed mother earth and allowed her to teach them and consequently, made incredible strides. Religion did the opposite; tried to dictate how mother earth ran her business and missed the boat entirely. I’m not suggesting that science is incapable of making errors or that all of science is benevolent but for the most part they are trying to help. It does seem though that very often scientific breakthroughs come with an Achilles Heel: microwaves, computers and cell phones are convenient but all of them can cause cancer. Prescription-medicine both heals and has serious side-affects (sometimes worse than the disease they cure). At any other time Bible-based religion is perfectly content to accept scientific information, except when it appears to refute the Bible and suddenly science becomes something evil. Concerning creation while many Bible advocates claim to be able to explain it, many don’t understand rudimentary science. However, when they get sick who do the Bible faithful often turn to for answers? Early discoveries by Palaeontologists met with great resistance from the Christian community, who refused to even consider the evidence. The age of the bones according to science contradicted Biblical ideas about the age of the earth. As evidence of dinosaurs became impossible to ignore, Christians began looking for Biblical evidence to explain the bones.Astronomers told us that the universe began with a Big Bang and Christian communities were affronted, thinking the idea refuted the Biblical account of creation. However, Bible writings agree with it as Isaiah 40:22 states: “It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth…that stretches out the heavens as a curtain, and spreads them out as a tent to dwell in.” The word sits is figurative (as judge), by implication ‘to dwell, remain, settle’. Note the word circle in this verse - by implication the primary Hebrew root means ‘to move in a circle’ (Strong’s #2287) or revolve (Strong’s #2283). Another verse from Isaiah (42:5a) says: “Thus says God the Lord, He that created the heavens, and stretched them out…” The phrases ‘stretches out’ or ‘stretched them out’ means just that, to stretch or spread out and we now know from astronomers the universe is still expanding (stretching out) from the Big Bang. Psalm 104:2 repeats the information from Isaiah: “Who covers yourself with light as with a garment: who stretches out the heavens like a curtain.”The real meaning of the word curtain is hidden in this context; it means ‘illumination, luminary, happiness’. In a secondary sense it means ‘garment = a dress’ in the sense of clothing as ‘a cover, mantle’. [Concerning Bible writings there’s first the literal meaning (but only from a metaphysical sense), in our case it would be figurative.] The Hebrew translation from the Psalms verse means ‘a hanging (as tremulous’ – Strong’s 3407), the primary root of it is yara, which means ‘to be broken up (with any violent action’ – Strong’s 3415). The same word from Isaiah translated means, ‘something crumbling’ or ‘a thin cloth’ (Strong’s #1852) and the primary root of that means ‘crush, crumble, break into pieces, powder’ (Strong’s #1854). A big bang would certainly and violently ‘break things up’. The translation also suggests a ‘breaking down’ (collapse) of something, which may refer to an anti-matter implosion. One of the translations, tremulous, may denote some form of liquid. If we look to honest science as it reveals how nature works we should never think that Bible writings will contradict those findings. Regarding spiritual matters though, science can learn many things from these writings but it won’t come from Bible-based religion.The six thousand-year (actually for the longest time it was thought to be seven thousand) creation story was one of the dominant Christian messages for generations. It was a foundation teaching (a supporting-pillar of Christian doctrine) and even now among many is non-negotiable. A recent and quiet adjustment hardly created a ripple as some Christians began correcting themselves by saying that only humankind was six thousand years old. A major shift occurred as the term creationism was replaced with ‘Intelligent Design (ID)’ in some circles. The switch came as scientists with Christian biases discovered that creationism theology contradicted scientific evidence. Many of them realised the validity of much of Mr. Darwin’s views. A quiet plan developed to find a new title to include God and explain creation but at the same time agree with their scientific ideas. ‘Intelligent Design’ fit the bill; incorporating God on a much broader scale than the term creation ever could while not disagreeing with what they were learning in their labs. Many in Christendom are not happy about the changes and there is now confusion as a serious rift between creationism believers and ID proponents tries to mend itself. The wound however, is beyond repair as IDer’s attempt to bring their less-informed brethren up-to-speed.The very fact that scientists with Christian biases changed to ID is their admittance that something was wrong with creationism. As scientists you would think that as the creationism foundation crumbled, ID advocates would have abandoned the old structures altogether and started over. Instead they tore down some of the building, did some patchwork and rebuilt on the same foundation. Nevertheless, if the creationism foundation is wanting the new structure can’t be trusted any more than the old one. If ID were strictly a scientific answer for the existence of God, one would think that many more non-Christian sympathisers would be in support of it! Though they will try to deny that ID has any affiliation with Christianity, its supporters are (as far as I know) Christian. ID is most definitely a Christian idea and a spin-off of creationism as many ID scientists began as creationists. Even though evolution-science adjusts as new evidence surfaces their basic philosophy has not changed. Creationism to ID however, is a huge change. And the reason why non-religious science has been as successful is because they did not try to change the rules but “worked with them”. Many people will say to me to leave well enough alone and we should pursue the motto, “live and let live”. The reality though is there’s a lot of fighting going on and not just religion versus evolution-science (that up until now were content to let sleeping dogs lie). Bible-based religions themselves cannot agree with each other. If however, they allow for obvious Biblical imperfections they are clearly stating that God is confused. I hope to change the perception of Bible writings in both religious and non-religious circles. You will discover in this book that it’s not the writings themselves but rather that religious tampering is the cause of the disorder. FOURThe Self-Interpreting LawIn keeping with divine character the Bible should fall into the category of extraordinary! However, inconsistent interpreting strategies have made it appear dull to a large number of people. In some churches the irony is hard to miss while witnessing the nodding heads of pew sitters (might be the reason why the Catholic church instituted a constant standing, sitting, kneeling routine, to keep everyone awake) while they listen to the supposed creative mind of God. Rationally speaking, quoting from the same source should (in theory) produce the exact same results! As I said earlier, the fundamental law of inspired writings is “oneness of thought/doctrine”. In order to have that you must have a universal (the same for all) interpreting law. It’s the lack of such that’s creating differences among those that are reading the same material.In all of my books I present a new side to old writings that are mostly perceived as one book with many messages rather than as they are, many books having one message. This side of things reveals an unprecedented labyrinth of words, which the benevolent author also left instructions on how to decode. This interpreting law is repetitive-based and is as complex as the manner in which the information restates and confirms itself. Through this means the information joins to like verses. In addition is the use of synonyms (words and whole phrases), which can complicate the interpreting process.The best way I can explain this process is to contrast it beside an ordinary puzzle. A puzzle is an easy concept for everyone and most everyone loves to do them from simple children’s ones to the more challenging. The larger the puzzle (more pieces it has) increases its complexity. We keep going because we know that in the end we will have the picture on the box. Concerning inspired writings however, no picture is available but only repetitious/confirming information to guide us. We have no idea what the end result will be until it’s complete and until now many people have been following the wrong picture.To reiterate, though the writings of other prophets and apostles were added to ‘The Law’ it did not change the original message but only repeated (for purposes of confirming-joining) what God had already stated. I believe you will be surprised at the number and manner of ways Bible writings accomplish this order. For instance, the writings clearly state a need for witnesses (I need state from the onset that this in no way relates to the Jehovah’s Witnesses or any other religion for that matter):“At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death: but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.” (Deuteronomy 17:6)The idea of witnesses for the purpose of convicting someone of wrongdoing is an old practice where there is fair government. Regarding capital punishment – these passages are clear, there must be two or three, one witness is not enough. A person is innocent until proven guilty and only witnesses can verify the truth of a matter. This same thought is expressed a little differently in another part of Deuteronomy:"One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established." (Deut. 19:15b) Interestingly enough, another verse containing the same words is found in the New Testament: “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone…But if he will not hear you, take with you one or two more, that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.” (Matthew 18:15-16) The immediate preceding verse agrees with the ones from the Old Testament because it repeats the information. Another like verse was written by the apostle Paul and also found in the New Testament: "...In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established." (NT 2 Corinthians 13:1) The word established found in three of the previous verses is an extremely important one and means; abide, accomplish, confirm, continue, decree, rise (up), remain, up(hold), etc. So then, and extremely important - to be established in the Biblical sense is when something is repeated by two or three witnesses, which then confirms it. If Paul had copied the information (and presumably aware of its divine merit) would most certainly have written it exactly the same way. Only someone that was not appreciative of the divine aspect would have been careless, as in paraphrasing the divine aspect is lost. However, we see an ever so slight seeming change from the Old Testament. The matter in Deuteronomy appears to speak of judicial or moral matters only, and the NT references say ‘if your brother sins against you’, which concurs. However, while the phrase ‘the matter’ from the OT seems to speak of ‘certain matters only (as in civic)’, the phrase every word from the NT verses is all encompassing.As the phrase every word (in two of the verses) is all-inclusive, this reveals the matter means all matters, as in ‘all of God’s matters’ will be handled the same way, requiring two or three witnesses to establish the meaning. This has to mean the witnesses are used in a much broader sense than judicial or moral. Are these speaking of human witnesses? Certainly in a practical way, eyewitness accounts are invaluable to either corroborate or refute stories! Even still, they are not infallible!Jehovah’s Witnesses base their religion on the following verses: "And I will take for Myself faithful witnesses to record..." (Isaiah 8:2 and Luke 24:48) "I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no saviour. I have declared and saved, I have proclaimed, and there was no foreign God among you; therefore you are My witnesses, says the Lord, 'that I am God'." (Isaiah 43:11-12) "It is also written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. I am One who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me." (John 8:17-18)"If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true. You have sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth." (John 5:31-33)The fundamental principle behind the Jehovah’s Witnesses religion is ‘they are God’s only and personal witnesses’. Is it possible that a comprehensive religious organisation can be created from a few Bible verses? Obviously so and not only in this instance as there are many Bible-based religions that do the same and claim likewise using other verses. Still, is a human being capable of validating a divine person? Human witnesses can establish human matters but a divine matter is something altogether different. Only another ‘like witness’ can establish something divine and only God is infallible. Therefore, God’s witnesses must also be divine ones.The real intent behind Biblical witnesses is, ‘God confirms his own words’. Therefore, God’s ‘witnesses’ can only be His words, statements that He made and confirmed by repeating them. Only as they are confirmed do they become unfailing as one by itself is not a true witness in the Biblical sense. Inspired writings alone can be the divine witnesses because God authored them and so must be infallible as the mind they came from. If we want to understand Bible writings (recognize if something is from God) we cannot go anywhere else but to the writings to get an answer. God bound himself to this rule of witness so there would be no confusion concerning the interpretation. Human beings can only be God’s witnesses and/or faithful witnesses as they use the law that God instituted for interpreting. A true witness shows it by using this method.So there’s no mistaking the previous phrases are related I have downsized the verses so you can better see how they repeat: “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses ….” (O. T. Deut. 17:6)“...at the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established." (O. T. Deut. 19:15)“...in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.” (NT Matthew 18:15-16) “In the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established.” (NT 2 Corinthians 13:1) I have not exhausted all like verses but showed you only enough to convince you of this repeat of information in Bible writings. The above sentences are slightly rephrased but the premise or thought remains the same. The reason for the repetitiveness is (again) for purposes of confirming as everything Biblical is established (set in stone) by finding repetitive data (witnesses).Why would it be necessary for a perfect being to repeat Himself? Unless He was clearly pointing out this law! The unusual rephrasing of words in combination with synonyms speaks of something out of the ordinary. As was shown earlier, ‘no variableness’ and ‘no shadow of turning’ are different ways to express the same thought - ‘no changing’.If the verses are viewed as separate ideas then of course they will appear contradictory. If however, it’s understood they are repeats of one thought (or multi-dimensional views of the same topic), it gives a completely different slant to the writings. All of the verses about a topic add to the whole and the meaning is clarified. I’ll give an unrelated practical example of this: three people are eyewitnesses to a vehicle accident. They’re all viewing the same accident; they saw some of the same, but also different, aspects of it because of where they were situated. They will all agree that the vehicle flipped but two will say they thought the driver turned too fast while the other one will say (because they could see), “no that’s not what happened, he was trying to avoid hitting a deer”. Nevertheless, they will corroborate each other on some major points because they were all present at the same incident. However, it’s only when the testimony of all the witnesses is compared that the police can get a true picture of what happened. Many people have assumed that Biblical corresponding (often verbatim or close to) information is evidence of copying. A close look however, reveals anomalies inconsistent with imitation. This is not the one-dimensional writing of human beings. When comparative information is superimposed over one another, the affect is an amazing many-sided picture. Many people also believe that much of the original writing was lost in subsequent translations over the centuries. However, if that were so, the New Testament (written many generations later and in Greek) would not so closely agree (by use of Biblical witnesses) with the Old Testament that was written ages earlier in Hebrew and Aramaic. Whereas other puzzle pieces only fit one way, Bible verses very often intertwine. It’s this inter-twining by witnesses that further reveals the unprecedented writing style of its author. The interweaving of the same information from one dispensation to the next (prophet to apostle and others) does not exist anywhere else. There is something highly uncommon about Bible writings and so should there be if the author is divine.Passing through the hands of so many dissimilar human beings from entirely different eras yet managing to retain the same message, is surprising. Add to that the unusual aspect of the writings’ ability to lead us is more so. No one will have to interpret it because it interprets itself (again the idea that God is the only one that can explain his own self).Hebrew and Greek dictionaries are helpful for translating the meanings of words but sometimes that only produces more confusion. I have discovered that the confirming rule can stand by itself.As you read on to the many examples I will present, you will see that no human being could have put this puzzle of words together. People from entirely different generations wrote variations of the same information but we would not know it from general observation. Without witnesses to confirm we would have no credible method for learning the meanings as the information can easily be misinterpreted if there are no guidelines.The guidelines however, cannot be set by human beings but must be put in place by the author. Just as an inventor is the one that supplies assembly directions for their product, God is the only one that can tell us how to correctly read his message. Some scholars use historic and other aids to prove their interpretations but all methods have proven inconsistent. God was not taking any chances and creatively put together a puzzle of words that no human being could invent. I don’t believe that a super-computer could even mimic it!Regarding witnesses, the book of Isaiah 43:10-12 says:“(10) You are my witnesses, saith the Lord…(12b) you are my witnesses, saith the Lord, that I am God.”A true witness does not just say that ‘God is God’. Anyone can say anything they want to but that does not make them credible. A true witness as intended within the Biblical perspective is someone (or something) that proves that God is who (and what) he says he is. We can only be that as we use the method that God put in place for interpreting. In this manner we reveal the unusual nature of Bible writings, so giving credibility to its author. God would be His own interpreter, eliminating the need for us to do it. Once the interpreting method is understood the writings could then be interpreted universally from any language, giving equal access to all interested parties. The religious academic would have no advantage over the lay person (which creates a problem for those that directly benefit from current nebulous interpretations). Everyone will be in the same boat beginning at square one.FIVEWritten in StoneGalileo thought the Bible was written from the terrestrial perspective. It was an astute observation but one that was lost amidst all the confusion. Most Christians agree that the Revelation to John is a figurative book (i.e. the ten horns symbolize ten kings). While agreeing, born-again Christians also believe that the mark of the beast is an actual physical mark to be placed on/in the body at some time in the future. How can the Book of Revelation be figurative but this one part suddenly breaks from that rule by having a literal meaning? Or how can parts of it be figurative while other sections are literal - and who chooses which is which? As Galileo noted, from a ‘celestial realm perspective’ the information is literally/figurative but from a ‘human point of view’ it would be figuratively/literal. For example, we know the red (synonyms used in other verses: fiery red, scarlet) dragon in Revelation is symbolic of a government of the last days. Heaven sees the world power of the last days literally as a fiery red monster; we would see it as a global corrupt government. I’ve heard China referred to as ‘The Red Dragon’, however, (and although a weird coincidence) again, the Revelation is a figurative book and the color red a Biblical simile for blood. Even still the necessity for confirming is the principle theme:“And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them.” (Acts 15:32)Judas and Silas exhorted with many words, and confirmed them – meaning - they ‘confirmed the words’. This methodology was obviously an important part of their teaching.Consider the two stone tablets containing God’s commandments whereby all Hebrew Law was established. What was God's purpose for giving two tablets (KJV tables)? He could just as easily given one tablet – why the need for two? The very fact there were two has serious implications: “And Moses turned, and went down from the mount, and the two tablets of the Testimony were in his hand. The tablets were written on both sides; on the one side and on the other they were written." (Exodus 32:15, also Exodus 34:1, 28 and Deut. 4:13) A variation of that information is: "Now it was so, when Moses came down from Mount Sinai (and the two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses' hand when he came down from the mountain)..." (Exodus 34:29) Very often one Biblical witness will provide information the other does not have. The first verse in the proceeding paragraph tells us that Moses came down from the mount (mountain) but we don’t know which mountain it was. The second confirming verse however, clarifies that it was Mt. Sinai. Such information becomes very important when you have to put a written puzzle together.The question is never asked (not that I ever heard) in religious circles – “why did God give two tablets?” After I thought about it I presumed the reason might be because the Testimony was too long and had to be split up between the two. To say that ‘God ran out of room’ and had to resort to finishing his written work on another tablet is to say that the perfect creator ran into an unforeseen problem. If coming from a divine entity (and especially one with the attributes described in Bible writings) there would be no surprises. Therefore it must be that God intentionally designed the stone tables so there were two for a specific reason.If the Testimony were spread over two tables this would still be solid evidence of God’s confirming law. Yet, nowhere in the writings does it say that God split up the words of the Testimony between the two tables, even though it may be inferred from the verses just previous and the following also:"...He gave Moses two tables of the Testimony, tables of stone..." (Exodus 31:18). These confirming verses can actually be read two ways: 1) God gave Moses one Testimony spread over two tables, or, a literal interpretation 2) God gave Moses two of the Testimony as in two copies. Why would God do that?More probable and consistent with verses that I have previously quoted is that God made two duplicate stone tables. The purpose being that they repeated each other for the purpose of confirming! In the case of the two testaments the unusual rephrasing of words reveals the unsurpassed aptitude of the author. The writing style is unique as each book appears completely different from the other but (and again) is ‘the same’ information. Until a few years ago I did not know that each table was two-sided, the words are written on both sides of each table. Why?Each table not only confirms the other but can confirm itself as well. It must be so if one is two and two are one.In the case of the Testimony it would be of paramount importance there were ‘two copies of the message’ because the need for witnesses is the very foundation of Mosaic Law. Jesus said (and I re-quote from the previous chapter) “it is written in your Law (originally written on the stone tables), the testimony of two men is true..."The very nature of Biblical witnesses is their testimony is the same! Should the writing on the tables be a different message one from the other then according to Jesus it would not be a true testimony. They must say the same thing in order to be true. However, the information is often scrambled in such a way the Old and New Testaments appear at first glance to be completely different books. Only when we use witnesses/confirming data to interpret do the similarities become apparent. It can then be said the two tables are a way to symbolise the idea of confirming, as it can also be said they represented the two testaments of the Bible. Two can also represent ‘additional (three) ways to say the same thing’! I will show many more examples of this very anomaly later on.The word judgement was used in the Old Testament while in the New Testament a confirming phrase defines it as condemnation. The two words have the exact same translation. To be condemned is to come under judgement as to be judged is to come under condemnation. I have found many instances like this but in every case where it appeared different words or expressions were used - they turned out to be synonyms.Without a clear ‘method for interpretation’ anyone can make Bible writings say whatever they want them to and many misconstrue the words to their own and others hurt. The law of two or three is by far the better way because another aspect of the author’s superior mind is clearly visible. Nature reveals a magnificent creativity - gone wrong (animals cruelly kill and eat each other). If (as the writings show) God did set things in motion then his genius would be apparent in his written handiwork also. And the two (nature and the written account) would agree with each other. The perfect God inspired imperfect men to write, which makes many people think the words then became flawed. Other people believe that over time the words were changed but think about dictation. If a person re-writes the thoughts of someone else the original intent can be misinterpreted however, dictation is different. Pretend someone is dictating a letter to you, the ideas are not yours, you are just writing down someone else’s thoughts. There is no room for misinterpretation if we write exactly as someone dictates to us. However, these writings claim to be inspired on a supernatural level and if so the puzzle-paradigm effect will be unprecedented.God communicated his words to men that would not presume to re-write the words because in so doing they knew they would change the meaning. They wrote as God dictated. Though the men that penned the words were often generations removed from each other, proof they had heard from the same source is revealed in how they repeated (in various ways) the same information. The prophets were true witnesses in that sense because they did not change the words but wrote exactly as God inspired them. Even still the unusual aspects of Bible writings are not at all evident until one uses confirming information to piece together God’s puzzle.The conjoining aspect of the writings is especially important because it connects information, also a way of crosschecking, somewhat like connecting-the-dots? In the case of this material you join information by finding confirming data and it produces a picture. You can find a phrase in the New Testament and jump over to the Old and find either the exact or similar wording. I will later show how the words are linked in this extraordinary manner. Another amazing aspect about Bible writings is that we don't have to follow a definitive order of study. Regardless of what point we begin a puzzle we will always arrive with the same picture at the end. Bible writings work the same way. By using the confirming rule no matter where you begin your study, when the verses are complete you will always finish with the same message.The manner whereby many Bible-based denominations have come into being is two people can read a passage but often come away with two different interpretations. However, by using God’s method of finding two or three witnesses, everyone arrives at the same conclusions.Where people put their own understanding to Bible meanings you will end up with many varied teachings. Not so when the writings interpret themselves.There’s a vast difference between us giving our ideas about what the writings might say to the writings explaining themselves. And a superior (to us) being would have devised a method for deciphering the contents of his message, leaving no room for conjecture. The real tragedy of Bible writings and some apocryphal books is that religious people got a hold of them first. If they had been first found by the scientific community and been translated by the same methods I mention here, might have been viewed differently today. Once you know what to look for the confirming rule and puzzle effect stands out noticeably. I will show there is a pattern of two or three throughout Bible writings. Two angels were sent to Sodom in the account in Genesis 19:1. Why was there a need for two? Perhaps that does not sound unusual but consider this, when Abraham was making an offering to God he, “…cut them in two…” (Gen. 15:10) There are many more times in Bible writings where these kinds of incidents involving two are mentioned. It was not until I knew about the purpose for Biblical witnesses that I began to see just how many times this occurs.In the story of the widow in the New Testament that gave to the temple treasury, she had two mites (see Mark 12:42 and Luke 21:2). After Jesus rose from the dead He appeared to two disciples as they were walking in the account in the NT Gospel of Mark (16:12). Two angels appeared in the tomb in the New Testament account in John 20:12 on the day Jesus was resurrected. When Jesus was transfigured on the Mt. of Olives there were two prophets, Moses and Elijah. There are two witnesses mentioned in Rev. 11:1-12 that prophesy from Jerusalem. If something is from God there will always be a minimum of two. The basic (and foundational idea) of two is again in the sense of confirming.I am presently focusing primarily on the number two because of the figurative meaning of the two tablets as representing to confirm. Two appears to be associated with heavenly matters, as there were two prophets (from heaven, Elijah and Moses) on the mountain when Jesus was transformed. The number three appears to be associated with man, as there were three apostles (Peter, James and John) present at that same event. It appears that three kings (wise men) visited the baby Jesus, as there were three gifts (gold, frankincense and myrrh).The wise men saw a star in the east and recognised it was associated with the birth of a special person. Their search led them to Jerusalem. Enquiring there about the birth of the ‘King of the Jews’, Herod then sent them to Bethlehem. However, before they arrived they were guided to the child in an unusual way: “…the star which they had seen in the East went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was. When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy.” (Matt. 2:9-10) The wise men noticed a star (symbolic of angels) when they were in ‘the east (Paradise and East are synonymous)’. The star did not lead them the entire way as popularly supposed. The reason why they rejoiced with great joy “when they saw the star” was because they recognized it as the same one that they had first seen in the east, it now reappearing. They would not act surprised and rejoice (or would need to ask directions from Herod) if the star had been leading them all the way! The star (angel) reappeared as they started for Bethlehem and ‘stood over’ where the ‘young child (suggests that Jesus was no longer an infant)’ was living. Mary and Jesus (and Joseph, though he is not mentioned) were living in a house (translated as ‘residence/ an abode’) when the wise men visited (Matt. 2:11). They were no longer in the stable where Jesus had been born and the place the shepherds had visited. It’s very plausible the inn was vacated as people completed their census duty making it conceivable that Joseph moved them into one of the rooms. This would make complete sense, after-all that was the original plan. Absolutely certain is they were still in Bethlehem when the wise men visited but living in a different location from where the shepherds found them. The visitation of the wise men occurred sometime during Mary’s purification (a period of seven days, see Old Testament law and Luke 2:22). So then the long-held tradition of the shepherds and wise men visiting at the same time is wrong. After Mary’s purification time, Joseph and Mary went to Jerusalem to have Jesus circumcised at eight days old (Luke 2:21). Afterwards they did not return to Bethlehem but to their hometown of Nazareth (Luke 2:39).Herod was a shrewd politician but a paranoid one as well; when he asked the wise men to report back to him the child’s whereabouts he did not have tribute on his mind. Upon realizing the wise men were not coming back, Herod became very angry (Matt. 2:16). Having previously questioned the wise men as to the time the star appeared gave him an idea of the child’s age. Herod then had all children in Bethlehem and vicinity from two years old and under murdered (Matt. 2:16b), a heinous act of political ambition. Due to the significance of the number I believe I can assume that Jesus may have been two years old (or close to) when they had to flee to Egypt.A witness or confirmation always happens on a divine level and not something that human beings can orchestrate. Only God can bring it about, as it requires miraculous timing. If God is behind it, it will be inexplicable because it’s free from human manipulation and planning. The account where Jesus's parents brought him to the temple to be circumcised at eight days old shows two witnesses appointed by God: "And behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon...So he came by the Spirit into the temple..." (Luke 2:25-35) Simeon came by the Spirit meaning he was led by God to go to the temple at a specific time. Someone else was appointed by God to appear in the same place at the exact same time also:"Now there was one, Anna, a prophetess...and coming in that instant...spoke of Him..." (Luke 2:36-38) Simeon and Anna did not plan this meeting - God did. It appears they had no previous association with each other because Anna lived at the temple while Simeon lived elsewhere in Jerusalem. God had supernaturally co-ordinated this meeting.If you’re still in doubt about the need for witnesses there is the story of Joseph in Genesis, beginning at Chapter 40. Two prisoners (the royal baker and the chief butler of Pharaoh) were assigned under Joseph's care (Joseph was in prison because he was wrongly accused) and while in prison they each had a dream on the same night. Joseph interpreted their dreams for them and it came to pass just as he said, the baker was obviously found guilty and put to death and the chief butler was restored to his position. Joseph asked the chief butler to mention his (Joseph’s) wrongful incarceration to Pharaoh. However, the butler was no doubt so relieved that he was going to keep his head and completely forgot about the incident until:"Then it came to pass, at the end of two full years, that Pharaoh had a dream..." (Gen. 41:1) Pharaoh was puzzled by two dreams he had on the same night: "Then Joseph said to Pharaoh, 'the dreams of Pharaoh are one; God had shown Pharaoh what He is about to do'." (Gen. 41:25) The dreams, meaning two dreams, are one or in other words ‘two dreams having the same meaning’ (one confirmed the other). Joseph explained to Pharaoh the reason why God gave two variations of the same dream:"And the dream was repeated to Pharaoh twice because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass." (Gen. 41:32) The confirming rule was not a new concept for Joseph. He well understood that when God repeated something it was then firmly established and therefore, unchangeable. This rule does not only apply to God’s words but seems to permeate everything associated with God in this universe. If he says or does it a minimum of twice, it’s unalterable. Joseph told Pharaoh that God would shortly bring his dream to pass. I am convinced if prophetic (inspired by God) dreams are repeated on the same night or within a few days of each other; it will happen quickly (“…God will shortly bring it to pass.”). However, reading further into this, I believe if there is a length of time between confirming dreams, it will be some time before the fulfilment of those as in Joseph's case. Genesis 37:5 and 7 gives the account of the two dreams Joseph had on two different nights. We don't know how far apart those dreams were: it's popularly believed that Joseph was around sixteen years old when he was taken captive to Egypt and thirty when he was promoted by Pharaoh (fourteen years). Therefore, I’m reasonably certain there may have been fourteen days between his dreams. Incidentally, the name Joseph translated means dreamer. The unusual thing about this is Joseph’s father could not have then known the part that dreams would play in his son’s future. Joseph's first dream happened long before Pharaoh had his dream but both men dreamed about food sources, crops in particular, which is significant. You or I might dream on a smaller level but someone in a position where many people were dependent upon them for food would have bigger concerns pressing on their minds. Obviously Pharaoh did because he dreamed of corn stocks and cattle (Gen. 41:5). Long before, Joseph dreamed of sheaves (37:7). There is disagreement as to what crop or crops were actually grown, some say corn, others say predominantly grains, others a mixture. The KJV (Genesis 41:49 and 42:1) states it was by growing corn crops that Joseph saved Egypt from famine. However, sheaves denote gathering into bundles, which was done to grain, so this is uncertain. We do know it was a crop of some kind. I personally believe there were many crops grown but grain and corn made up the bulk of it.The symbols in prophetic dreams are extremely meaningful. Knowing that his dreams were prophetic messages from God, Joseph (at a young age) understood that at some time he would be elevated to a position of great importance. In the second dream he had the sun, moon and stars (clarified later as his parents and siblings) bowed (made obeisance) to him (Gen. 37:9). However, notice the sheaves in the first dream also made obeisance to him (Gen. 37:7). Bowing signified that Joseph would one day be in a position of importance, which most of his family immediately rejected (Gen. 37:9-11).One might never link these two dreams because at first look they don’t appear to have a lot in common. However, in prophetic (from God) dreams there will be one common component linking them, which in this case is made obeisance. It’s important to note the details of dreams, as Pharaoh was certain his dreams had great significance though he did know the Hebrew God. The two dreams though having different symbols, ears of corn and kine (cattle) nevertheless confirmed in other ways. Use of the number seven in both dreams but also the seven good kine were eaten up by the seven lean-fleshed ones, and the seven thin ears of corn were devoured by the seven good ears.Sold as a slave in Egypt and then imprisoned for an indiscretion he did not commit, over the course of time Joseph forgot about his dreams. Only when they were fulfilled did he recall them: “Then Joseph remembered the dreams which he had dreamed.” (Gen. 42:9) A number of times in these writings some verses will repeat themselves within a few verses of each other and sometimes directly after. This occurs noticeably in Psalms and Proverbs, (see Psalm 96:13 and 98:9, Proverbs 4:5 & 4:7b, and 9:10 & 15:33). God is a benevolent creator and as such would foresee our needs. He does not need us to help him. We are the ones that are in need of his assistance and so God provides a method whereby we can know for certain the meaning of the words. On our part we need to know the procedure that he has put in place so that everyone arrives at the same conclusions. Bible translators that realised the value of the words as being God’s would take every precaution to make sure those words were copied exactly as written. Each time the words are changed in any way from the original then inconsistencies will result. The original words must be translated word-for-word. Most translators have used great caution when dealing with these special writings. Even though I understand the idea behind the paraphrased version, nevertheless was a huge mistake as in so doing, the divine aspect is lost. I have personally found the King James (Authorised) to be the most consistent translation. Many people think that the old English prose of the King James is the true Bible language but it was simply the speech of the King James era. Today it sounds outdated and cumbersome, as the actual native languages of Old Testament are Hebrew, Aramaic and the New Testament, Greek. Minor errors have occurred in the KJV translation but it has not erased evidence of the prolific puzzle. As the confirming rule is used it quickly becomes obvious that the writings were designed in such a unique way that it would take a great deal of tampering to eradicate the authors genius. God’s words would encompass all areas relating to human beings. These are big boots to fill but following chapters fill-in a lot of the blanks that are missing in Bible-related (past and present) interpretation.SIXAn OathOne must wonder why God would bother to spend so much time and energy inspiring the writing of books that was going to take such effort to decode! He could have written the message so it could be read easily, saving human beings much time and argument. To that I must respond that if Bible writings could be read like a textbook there would be nothing special about them. Could we effortlessly figure out the message, how would that prove divine intervention? Instead, as we put the information together by the manner instructed, it reveals a highly creative puzzle. Nature does not easily give up its secrets: today’s scientists are riding on groundwork information from those that have gone before them. Someone had to start the process and lay the foundation that others built upon. Just as nature, Bible writings do not effortlessly give up their secrets either – we must dig to find the answers. And why should it be easy? The law of witnesses is confirmed time and again in various ways but is the same concept throughout: "...an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute..." (Heb. 6:16) God made an oath for confirmation. In other words, God made an oath for ‘the purpose of’ confirming his other oath. He had specific intention for giving an oath for confirmation, which was to ‘put an end to all dispute’. Bible disputes are caused by different opinions regarding interpretation – but confirming information would put an end to that. Two or three would end all disputes because God has already established the meaning of the words with witnesses. “Cursed is the one who does not confirm all the words of this law…” (Deut. 27:26) The authorised or King James version states it; “Cursed be he that confirms not (fails to confirm) all the words of this law to do them…” Some people might read into this verse that God puts a hex on people. The real meaning however, is that an individual’s life will be dysfunctional because they try to follow a wrong set of rules that God never asked for in the first place. Consequently they end up emotionally unhealthy as their lives are in a very real sense, cursed. The witness rule is so important that Bible writings emphasise it time and again. Continuing from the opening verse: "...Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath...” (Heb. 6:17) God wanted to show how steadfast and sure his counsel was and how does this verse say he accomplished it? He 'confirmed it by an oath'. For our benefit God added another statement and repeated and/or confirmed his initial remark. God didn't do it for his benefit because he’s perfect, it was done for us so that we would have a method to properly interpret the words.Next in line in this same context of verses it says: "...that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie..." (Heb. 6:18) Once again there are ‘two’ immutable (unchanging, constant, incorruptible, and permanent) things. The matter will be found infallible by two, and in that manner ‘it cannot lie’. If said twice, it’s set in stone. However, the repetition is again, confirming in order to build the puzzle and so get a picture.The rest of those verses read:"...we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us. This hope we have as an anchor of the soul...” (Heb. 6:18b-19) The word anchor is a metaphor as an anchor keeps a boat from drifting. If there’s no Biblical point of reference (anchor) then human beings cannot learn God’s teachings as they drift from one wrong teaching to another. If we are not able to establish the words then neither can we be sure about the meaning! If however, we know that God will always confirm his words we will be able to prove the meanings. In effect this provides stability, an anchor for the human soul. Jesus sent the disciples out in pairs to confirm each other’s words: "And He called the twelve to Him, and began to send them out two by two..." (Mark 6:7) You would think this would read ‘he sent them out in two’s’ – but it’s worded ‘two by two’, which is somewhat unusual. It could be in reference to how the stone tables were – they were two, written on both sides; therefore, the tables can be said to be two by two. Or it might mean that God sent out two human witnesses that ‘confirmed the words by showing them twice’. Whatever the case, confirming is definitely a precedent. How can we understand Bible writings if we’re not using the method that the author instituted for explaining it? Biblical witnesses clarify the words and then we can know what God is like. Where there exists only one witness or witnesses that don’t agree, there will always be confusion and division but where there is two or three, there is no argument."Then Moses lifted his hand and struck the rock twice..." (Numbers 20:11) Was it not for what I have previously written one would probably gloss over this verse with hardly a thought! However, because of what I have written this verse and many others suddenly take's on new meaning.Every time I thought I had nearly exhausted references to the rule of witnesses I would find something else. Often I find that I have only scratched the surface on many things. Revelation 1:16, speaking of Jesus says: "...out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword...” The sword has two edges or sides and it comes ‘out of His mouth’. Or in other words, whatever Jesus speaks is two-sided, again the idea of confirming. Confirming information will almost always tack-on something about another aspect. This can propel us in an entirely different direction but connecting somehow. This again is the conjoining or linking aspect to the writings.Corroborating the two-sided sword further is Hebrews 4:12a: "For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword..." Another verse says: "And He has made My mouth like a sharp sword...” (Isaiah 49:2a) The words he and my are capitalised because they refer to God. Therefore, out of God’s mouth (Jesus’s name was mentioned in an earlier verse, making Jesus and God synonymous) comes a sword and it has two sides to it. Isaiah mentions that ‘the word of God’ is like a ‘sharp sword’. The next verse replaces ‘the word of God’ and phrases it ‘My mouth (as in Jesus’s mouth)’ being like a ‘sharp sword’. The initial verse mentioned previously also says ‘out of His (Jesus’s) mouth’ went a ‘two-edged sword’. So then, whatever comes from Jesus’s mouth (God’s mouth) is two-sided and is also the word of God. The many-sided effect is quite noticeable in these verses. Each verse is rephrased: information is added to one that gives new dimension and clarity to the others and the whole.As someone involved in Evangelical circles for quite some time, I never noticed the repetitive aspects of Bible writings. Neither did anyone ever point it out to me. Consequently at the time I was only guessing at what the sharp sword represented, and at the time it did not seem really important that I know. "Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?" (Amos 3:3) Not a perfect fit:Have you ever tried to make a puzzle piece fit where it doesn't belong? You can't quite put your finger on it; it looks like it should fit perfectly but yet it does not fit like it should. It can happen there are two Biblical witnesses appearing to repeat each other but a piece of the puzzle is not fitting properly. The story of Jesus’s ride into Jerusalem from the gospel of Matthew is an excellent example of how two can seem to be a true confirmation but can be wrong. The New King James says: “Now when they drew near to Jerusalem…then Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, ‘Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Loose them and bring them to Me…” (NKJV Matt. 21:1-10) These verses clearly say that Jesus instructed the disciples to get two donkeys. Another verse says: “They brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and sat Him on them.” (Matt. 21:7) This verse however, says “they laid their clothes on them (both donkeys)” and Jesus somehow sat on both (the mother and her colt) at the same time. I began to believe the disciples made a type of sling out of the clothes and strung it between the two animals and Jesus sat on it (thinking it to represent confirming). However, there was a nagging suspicion that something was wrong because the other gospels (Mark 11:1, Luke 19:28 and John 12:12) only mention one donkey, the colt that had never been ridden. The same passage in the King James and/or Authorised Version appears to confirm this point: “Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold thy King comes unto you, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.” The idea that Jesus somehow rode two animals clearly contradicts the other gospels but also, the triumphant entry is symbolic of Jesus’s return to earth – when He returns riding a white horse. There are many references to a white horse in Isaiah, the gospels and the book of Revelation, or you might want to read my other book titled REVEALED for clarification.A confirming verse in Zechariah 9:9 (‘New’ King James Version-NKJV) says: “…He is just and having salvation, lowly and riding on a donkey, a colt, the foal of a donkey.” This verse clearly states that Jesus rode one donkey (a colt, the foal of a donkey) rather than two animals. The Authorised Version says the same: “…behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation, lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.”Again this may appear to suggest two animals: “riding upon an ass, and…” However (and once more) this does not agree with the other accounts: the and however, can mean ‘also called’. Regarding the first verse I quoted from Matthew 21:7 the original words do not have them – I have it on good authority that this word was added. Regarding the verses from Zechariah I found out (through the same source) the "and" had also been added in, it was not in the original writings. The confirming rule can only work accurately where the words have been translated word-for-word; nothing has either been added or subtracted. If there is any question make sure it’s clarified. In all my studying I have only run into this instance where a serious conflict occurred due to human error.As I began to use the author’s method of confirming, a brand new world of information opened up to me than what I had previously known. Whereas before certain things in Bible writings often confused me, I was now finding all disputes settled quickly by finding witnesses.SEVENThe Immortal MortalDictionaries interpret spirit and soul as being the same and in my initial studies, the Bible seemed to agree. I don’t know how many hours I spent on this one subject alone! It was worth it though as I discovered just how unique each is from the other. At the time the revelation was so mind-bending that my brain felt as if it actually changed in some way. Like this one, each subsequent discovery was like a physical jolt as my religiously indoctrinated brain was confronted with how the confirming principle changed the meanings entirely. At first look of the Hebrew and Greek translations for those words it seemed to me the interpretations supported the dictionary explanation. 1st Thessalonians 5:23b in the New Testament however, suggest that they are distinct: "...and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless..." According to this verse human beings appear to be comprised of three parts, spirit, soul, and body. Spirit and soul are dissimilar entities. The body however, appears as a separate component from those!Strong’s Concordance interprets both spirit and soul from Hebrew and Greek as wind or spirit as in an ‘unsubstantial force' or, something that has ‘no material substance’. In other words we can’t physically see it but it’s there none-the-less just as wind is felt but unseen. However, spirit and soul are not the same. There is a big difference between them and even though there is no question they are both an intangible force of some kind that ‘s where their similarity ends.Spirit and soul are so much more difficult to comprehend because they do not have physical properties that we understand. When Bible writings name them differently it’s for very good reason - because they are so very unlike.Spirit in Hebrew is defined as, wind, breath, spirit (of heaven), movement of air, and the breath of nostrils or mouth, which is somewhat vague. However, the Greek translation is not confusing in the least, it refers to something supernatural. Once I found the Greek meaning the Hebrew definition was made clear. Spirit is referring to an immaterial force from heaven.Human beings don’t usually fall into the category of superhuman but the Greek translation is certain. In part, humanity is supernatural and/or eternal and/or immortal. The Greek translation further reveals that this word also refers to angels as in ‘spirit beings’. Stranger still it’s also used in association with the divine Spirit, God. Spirit is always used in the context of ‘the wind of God’s breathing’ or ‘the breath from God’s nostrils or mouth’ or ‘the breath of heaven’. Therefore, the exact meaning of spirit is ‘a supernatural force that is breathed from God's nostrils or mouth’.When referring to a spirit, the writings always indicate whom that particular spirit belongs to: i.e., "And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." (Gen. 1:2b) Notice that directly after the mention of 'the Spirit' - the writings clarify it is God's Spirit being spoken of. In every instance where I found the writings mention a particular spirit - it shows whom the spirit belongs to: "...the spirit of Jacob their father revived." (Gen. 45:27b)According to these writings human beings possess a supernatural spirit that is breathed from God. The verse from 1st Thessalonians quoted previously also says we possess a soul. Already stated is that spirit and soul are very different from each other.The Hebrew word for soul is nephesh and it means ‘a breathing creature’ as in human beings, animals, birds, etc. This definition is pretty straightforward, 'a soul is any creature that breathes’ or ‘requires oxygen to sustain its life'. Another way to say it is, ‘every creature born/hatched on the earth is a soul’. Psuche is the Greek word for soul and translated means, ‘the animal sentiment principle only’. This agrees with the Hebrew definition because the animal principle refers to body and soul. Although human beings and all other creatures of the earth, including birds and fish, have different physical forms, all are souls. Psuche further means ‘a breathing creature’, which again, encompasses all creatures of the earth because we all need oxygen in some form to survive. Once again the Greek definition is the most helpful because it clearly shows the distinction between spirit and soul. The distinguishing characteristic between them being that the spirit is an immortal, imperishable or eternal entity. The soul on the other-hand is not like it, being created on the earth, body and soul are mortal.So while it’s true spirit and soul are both wind they are not the same. The spirit is ‘wind of heaven’, the soul, ‘wind of earth’. One is immortal, the other mortal.The things that feed and nourish the immortal spirit are very different from our physical needs. According to Bible writings our spirit need spiritual food because it’s otherworldly. This would certainly explain the spiritual or religious leanings of many people! "...I will speak in the anguish of my spirit; I will complain in the bitterness of my soul." (Job 7:11)It may appear as though Job was using the two words interchangeably, however, spirit used here is from Strong’s #7307, which is ‘ruwach’ (Hebrew), and shown previously to be a metaphysical force from the breath of God's nostril or mouth. Strong’s definition of ‘soul (#5315)’ here is 'nephesh (Hebrew)’, shown just prior to be ‘a breathing creature’. Job used two different words because he was well aware of their distinctions. EIGHTThe Immortal SpiritCertain people are very sensitive to spiritual phenomenon. Although I sometimes question how accurately they are seeing into that realm, nevertheless many people can see auras (I have seen them myself) around every person. What I believe they are seeing is ‘the eternal spirit’ of a person. When a limb is severed people can still ‘feel pain’ in the severed area called Phantom Limb Syndrome. Science believes this is neurological remembering, which it may very well be. I have another theory however. I think it may be that the aura (spirit) is still there in the original shape because it’s eternal. Spirit and body are inseparably linked until death of the body. The spirit is the ethereal counterpart of the human body but because it’s immortal, never changes even though the physical body may. Your spirit extends beyond your body and touches the spirits of other people, telling you things about them. This doesn’t happen on a cognitive level, it’s more that we sense things. Since the spirit is not subject to time and space we can pick-up what some call vibes from that level and some are more in tune than others. Invading someone’s personal space happens because auras touch and if you’re not comfortable with someone it’s good to listen to those feelings. That doesn’t explain what the spirit is. I have always believed there was some part of human beings that goes on after death of the body but not until recently was it made clear to me what part that is. I was therefore quite surprised to find that we share a likeness with angels. Even more awe-inspiring however, is that we have an attribute in common with the Divine Spirit:"Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness...So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." (Genesis 1:26-27) The first part of this verse says, “Let Us make man in Our image”. Once again the pronouns ('us' and 'our') are capitalised. Again the capitalising of these pronouns always refers to divinity and those words are plural as in more than one. Later in this same context of verses, God is referred to in the singular as His and He. Therefore Us and Our (more than one) is also He as in one. More than one is also one! This would, should and has caused great difficulty because how can one be more than one at the same time?The New Testament appears to use three different names associated with God, in Christian circles known as the Holy Trinity. This triune embodiment consists of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. If God consists of ‘three’ persons, this implies three distinct personalities. The Old and New Testaments, however, speak of one God:“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.” (Deut. 6:4) Habakkuk 1:12 (KJV) says; “Art thou not from everlasting, O Lord my God, my Holy One?” (See also Habakkuk 3:3 KJV and more confirmations can be found in the New Testament, Mark 12:29, Matt. 23:8, 9, 10 and Ephesians 4:5, 6.) Jesus said: “I and my Father are one.” (John 10:30) Did Jesus mean that ‘he and the Father are of one mind’ meaning they have the same thinking about everything? The word one is translated firstly, as united, which would make sense if there were more than one but the translation also means first and/or only. Other verses provide more information:“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men…There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light…He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which gives light to every man who comes into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him…And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John bore witness of Him...For the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ…” (John 1:1-18) The procession of information in these verses builds a picture. At first it mentions a person vaguely as ‘the Word’ and this thought is carried into the next verse until in the final analysis the person is given a name. Word is capitalized because there is something distinctive about this person – ‘the Word was/is God’. The progression goes on to show ‘all things were made through Him’ and ‘in Him was life’ – so then ‘the Word’ is another name ‘for God that created everything’. In the end of the discourse we learn His name – Jesus Christ is ‘the Word’ that created the heavens and the earth. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis1: 1) “In the beginning was the Word…all things were made through Him…Jesus Christ.” (Verses just prior from John 1) He (the child that would be born) is called Immanuel in the Old Testament (Isaiah 7:14), which translated means ‘God with us’. God would be with human beings by becoming human - Jesus Christ.God’s essence is Spirit, which was shown earlier to be supernatural. So then when the NT mentions the Holy Spirit, it’s not some other distinct entity but the same Spirit (Father) called God. It’s therefore correct to say, God is more than one (this would agree with Genesis quoted earlier that said ‘let Us make man in our image’) but He has two forms, The Father (Spirit and/or Holy Spirit) that gave himself a human body (Jesus the Christ). Therefore, God is one person that has two forms (Father/Spirit, and the Son) and not three.It appears that human beings are also comprised of two and not three. Although prior verses from the previous chapter seemed to suggest that we have three parts (spirit, soul and body); body and soul are mentioned as part and parcel of each other, as in one entity not two. Even though we have two parts we would not say that we are two people but one person. In light of this God’s dual, and singular, nature does not seem out of place.What does it mean when it says that mankind was created 'in God's image'? As we saw just previously that one God has two forms and human beings also have two parts! Is this how we are made in His image? Until he was put into a situation where he needed to do a work of redemption, the Son of God did not have a physical body and did not need one. What then was the specific reason why humankind would have both a spirit and a soul? "Now the Lord is the Spirit." (2 Cor. 3:17),Further we read: "God is a spirit: And they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and truth." (John 4:24) God (the Father) is a spirit form and it goes without saying that Jesus Christ had a physical form but his spirit essence would be no different from God’s. The only difference was that Jesus’s spirit was contained within a human body. He possessed a supernatural spirit as does all of humanity but in his case, he is the Great Spirit. In the verse immediately proceeding we are being instructed to worship God in spirit meaning ‘in our spirit’. If spirit were capitalised in the verse just prior it would mean we are to worship God ‘by the power of his Spirit’ but such is not the case. We are instructed to worship God ‘in spirit’ or in other words, ‘in our spirit’. God is a spirit and if we want to communicate with him we must do so on that same level. Talking with God is spiritual communication, one spirit communicating with another.God would give human beings a spirit so He could commune with us and us with Him. There would be no possible way we could touch God and the immortal realm unless we possessed that same image. God gave human beings a part of Himself so He could communicate with us and that we might eventually live where He is, in the spirit realm. The only way such a thing was possible was if He gave us a part of Himself.God's is an immortal and/or eternal being; therefore anything in His image must also possess this same quality. Body and soul are ruled out because they are mortal. God made a part of human beings in the same form that He is in:"Shall we not much more readily be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live?" (Heb. 12:9) God is not the Father of 'body and soul' but of spirits. Picture if you will a far superior form giving his essence to human beings so that he could communicate with inferior creatures, in effect giving them supernatural abilities in part. At the same time this superior form benevolently allows its host to retain their complete independence, even allowing them to reject His existence, and you will have somewhat of an idea of what God is like and what He has done for human beings. We are God’s offspring in the sense we have a spirit from heaven, in this respect we can be said to be gods: “I said, ‘You are gods, And all of you are children of the Most High. But you shall die like men’...” (Psalm 82: 6-7) We are ‘children of the Most High’ because we inherited a supernatural spirit that makes us god’s, in part. The great contradiction is we are still mortal in one part and will go the way all human beings must travel at death of the body. The mortal part of us cannot function on a spirit level as ‘you shall die like (all) men’:"But the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Cor. 2:14) The ‘natural man’ is the earthly or animal part (body and soul) and is incapable of receiving spiritual information, as the animals are incapable. Spiritual and/or metaphysical matters are discerned in and with the spirit, while natural things are understood with the brain. Not to say the brain is not engaged in the thinking processes when it comes to written material: it’s very apparent that the confirming rule is a logical thinking process. However, the spirit transcends the physical, as I believe a mentally challenged individual can commune with God. Interaction with the supernatural realm can only be accomplished with the spirit – the physical brain cannot commune on this level. A brain-damaged person’s cognitive ability is impaired but their spirit is free of the restraints of the body and can still talk with God. They may not be able to communicate it verbally because spiritual information is expressed differently from verbal speech.The spirit dimension is the realm of thought transfer, ESP, astral travel, and more. However, because human beings cannot actually and physically see into the realm of the spirit, we are at a disadvantage. “…And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever, even the Spirit of truth…but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.” (John 14:16-17) “But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me…” (Acts 1:8) “And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit…” (Acts 2:4a) As human beings learn God's teachings by using witnesses they become filled with God's spirit. To what part of them would the Spirit fill? "The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God." (Romans 8:16) The Holy Spirit does not ‘bear witness’ with the human part of us, body and soul, the mortal part is incapable of hearing his supernatural voice. God communicates with us through His image.Bible writings categorise spirit and soul differently. Isaiah 57:15 says:"For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble..." This verse is speaking only of the humble spirit and not referring in any way to the human soul. The word humble is a very misunderstood word in Christian circles that I will clarify its Biblical meaning in a later chapter.Many more witnesses confirm that God’s activity occurs solely within the ‘supernatural spirit’ of human beings: "...when Jesus perceived in His spirit..." (Mark 2:8) "For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit..." (Romans 1:9a) "...Paul was pressed in the spirit..." (Acts 18:15), "...being fervent in the spirit..." (Acts. 18:25). "...purposed in the spirit...” (Acts 19:21)Spirit in all of these cases is from the Greek definition meaning that immortal/eternal part of humankind made in God's image. God's activity is in the spirit of human beings, not in the human soul. Speaking of Jesus it says:“And the child grew and became strong in spirit...” (Luke 2:40) Of John the Baptist it says the same thing: "So the child grew and became strong in spirit..." (Luke 1:80)Only a spirit can produce another spirit just as only a mortal entity can birth another mortal one: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." (John 3:6) This verse is speaking in a literal sense and the first Spirit is capitalised because it is ‘God’s Spirit’. The second word spirit is in lower case because it refers to all spirit’s that come from the one Great Spirit, God. Anything ‘breathed from God’s nostrils or mouth’ is a spirit. The spirit is perpetuated in human beings when egg and sperm meet.The Holy Spirit is described like ‘cloven tongues like as of fire’ in Acts 2:1-3. (The fact the tongues are cloven (in two parts) is to be expected as everything shows the two-edged sword.) When you light a candle and light other candles from it the original candle flame is never diminished: it retains its same strength no matter how many candles you light from it and the other candles all have the same size flame too. In somewhat the same manner God’s spirit works likewise. Each person receives the same portion of the spirit, at the same time God’s Spirit is never diminished in size or strength. Nothing can exist ‘in Heaven’ apart from God. The divine gave us a part of His self so when the body dies the spirit will continue on and if desired, live with Him eternally. Unless God gives ‘His Immortal Spirit’ we could not communicate with Him let alone exist where He is. There are two kinds of ‘spirits of heaven’; those estranged from God called ‘fallen spirits’ or demons and ‘good spirits’ or angels: “Who makes His angels spirits, His ministers a flame of fire.” (Psalm 104:4, Psalm 103: 20-22) If as witnesses have shown, we all possess a spirit given by the ‘Father’ of spirits (all spirit’s are breathed from His Spirit), then the spirit of human beings and angel forms are the same, the only difference is angels are not impeded by a physical body. And just as there are demon spirits that are estranged from God so too can the spirits of human beings be. Many accounts exist of people that have had near-death experiences and they mention one common occurrence, they see a tunnel with a ‘white light’ at the end. One could dismiss such things as nonsense except that so many people have experienced the exact same event. Although I currently have no Biblical proof, I believe death is the reversal of birth and everything in the spirit realm has a counterpart in the physical realm. My theory of the tunnel event that people with near-death experiences have is that we have a spiritual umbilical cord (a ‘spirit tunnel’) that upon death pulls us back into the immortal realm (womb). The white light at the end of the tunnel is the presence of God because previous verses referred to Jesus as the Light. Perhaps this is a stretch for some of you but again consider the ‘common evidence’ among people that have had these experiences.We have memories because our brain stores them, which is a physical thing but possibly a metaphysical experience as well as people can still feel a limb (phantom limb) even though the physical limb itself is gone. Unusual spiritual phenomenon occurs quite frequently. Even though intangible, nevertheless it cannot be discarded simply as nonsense because it happens to so many unrelated people on different parts of the earth. We cannot fathom any other existence but a physical one and so to even picture a spiritual dimension is impossible. If however, we have what these writings say we do then it’s an understatement to say that we have untapped abilities.NINEThe Mortal SoulHuman beings possess not only an immortal spirit – but a mortal soul as well. What is the soul’s purpose? It must also be very important if God took such great pains to ensure its preservation. Although it’s a comforting thought (to many) there is some part of humanity that’s indestructible and goes on forever, there is at the same time a part that’s strictly of the earth. This is the body or our fleshly self, which has a temporary existence because it’s mortal.Genesis states the first man (translation = ruddy) was created ‘from the dust of the ground’ (Gen. 2:7). Dust and ground are synonyms and the Hebrew translation is, (as powdered or gray); hence clay, mud earth; -ashes, etc. It’s more than evident that ruddy came from dirt of some kind. Genesis Chapter one states that God created the heavens in six days. Genesis Chapter Two (vs. 4) however, says “in the day when God created the heavens and the earth.” The word day translated from Hebrew means ‘to be hot’; therefore at some time the earth was hot. Creationists are surprisingly appalled at the idea of evolution that claims the same thing: life evolved from the primordial soup (hot mud). Heat appears to be the catalyst in the mud that produced life. Ruddy also came from the dust (clay/earth/powder/mud) seemingly at a time when the earth was hot. There is no contradiction between evolution-science and what the Bible shows.The human body is needful of elements that are found in the ground: iron, magnesium, calcium, copper, zinc, potassium, salt, sulphur, and the list goes on, and including vitamins that come from fruit and vegetables, which come from the ground. Why is it so absolutely necessary for the body to get certain quantities of these minerals and vitamins in order to thrive? If the human body came from the ground/earth through evolutionary processes then of course it would make perfect sense that it would get its nourishment from the same source.The translation of the word’s Adam and man mean the same thing, they are synonyms, (Strong’s 120 ‘ruddy’, 119/120, ‘to show blood, ruddy, red’). The translations do not initially suggest the words are referring to a ‘human being’ but a lower order of creature, ‘a brute animal’ (soul = the animal sentiment principle only) that had red blood flowing in its veins. If ruddy in its first state was a brute animal (we know we are a mammal species) then the question that needs to be asked is, “What animal/mammal was it?” We now know, because of genome evidence, there is an unmistakable DNA correlation between human and primate. Biblical evidence does not disagree as it shows that man (before the garden) was initially only a brute animal. One primate (Chimpanzee/Rhesus Monkey or possibly Orangutan) gained something the other primates did not, which allowed him to evolve past the brute animal state into a human being. This agrees with evolution-science but with a different twist.One primate (Gen. 2:7) somehow wandered on all fours into a different realm (Gen. 2:8) and gained a supernatural spirit (God’s image). In the garden changes occurred to it as it later walked out on two legs. This Biblical explanation would answer the Christian complaint, ‘if evolution is an ongoing process we could expect to see it happening even now in primates’. If it only happened to a single primate (science is now saying there are two sides of the evolutionary tree/primates on one side, and Lemurs on the other), a one-time event, it would perpetuate in that species only. Recently there’s a discrepancy about the species of primate that humans evolved from. To my mind it’s immaterial to argue what specific species that ruddy was; what’s important is that we know that the Bible does not refute that ruddy was initially a brute animal of some kind. I have no doubts that science will eventually figure out what animal that Adam was in its initial state. However, it was the gaining of God’s image that caused amazing changes to happen to it. We have no idea where the woman came from; she seems to appear out of no where. The Bible says that she came from his bones (rib = curved) and flesh. As shown, ruddy initially was a product of evolutionary forces. The laws of evolution and natural selection teach that nature adapts itself. I don’t believe that initially there were two distinct sexes that just popped out of no where. I’m convinced there was one creature that was asexual/both sexes. Nature made a way that it could perpetuate itself; otherwise the species would quickly die out.If the woman came ‘from the man’ and natural processes had taken over once ruddy left the garden, only one explanation remains. Ruddy produced its own offspring - ‘it gave birth to her’. Gen. 1:27 clearly shows that man/ruddy came first and was alone (God created he him). “From him” came him and her (“male and female created he them”) as if the female was a by-product (of him).After the female’s birth, Adam is mentioned as being strictly male. All of the female attributes were pooled into her! Right after it says, “God closed up the flesh” (where she had come out of him), meaning that he no longer had the ability to give birth.Regarding evolution I think that my theories can satisfy all parties. It agrees with evolution-science in respect of our primate origins but also the Bible in regards to human consciousness. It would also explain why our ancestor suddenly walked upright (thus creating weak backbones) and, the mystery of how humans gained a higher consciousness, which the other animals do not possess. I recently read that the human body moves on sound impulses rather than electrical ones. If true this would make more sense to me. If the universe itself is made up of sound waves called dark matter/energy (my amateur, all-embracing term for the matter that comprises the universe), everything filtering down from it (evolution) would operate on the same principles. Bible writings agree with this theory as the Hebrew translation for the human body is the same for heavens (universe), which is pulverize. “...let the earth bring forth grass, herb… and the fruit tree…” (Gen. 1:11), “Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind.” (Gen. 1:24)The earth first brought forth plants and later ‘the living creature (cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth)’. Mankind, animals and insects came ‘from the ground or dust’. Some geneticists are right now exploring links between human genes and certain clays. Microscopic mites live on human skin. I believe these creatures are a link to the ‘clay or dust’ from where we originated. There were actually two situations where life originated. The immediate preceding verses state that ‘cattle (animals and insects), and vegetation’ came from ‘the ground’, however, according to Bible writings, other life began ‘in water’. Genesis gives us some interesting food for thought: “And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that has life, and fowl that may fly above the earth…” (Gen. 1:20) Moving creatures came from ‘the waters’. However, this verse also says that ‘fowl (birds, as in flying creatures)’ came from water. In the account of creation in Genesis, birds are initially mentioned in the context of coming from water and not land. Palaeontologists believe that birds are distant relatives of dinosaurs. I personally believe (because of the Biblical evidence) in scales to feathers, and there is scientific evidence to support this [add a beta gene (whatever that is) to scales and you get feathers]. I think that feathers (from scales) were an adaptation to cold that some denizens of the deep developed after they left the water to live on dry land. I further believe that eventual flight happened accidentally. Were these creatures very big to begin with or did a friendlier earth support longer life spans! I believe it’s only a matter of time before science answers these questions as well. We do know they were here. Of course the process would have been very slow, over millions of years and produced many different kinds of dinosaurs, suddenly wiped out during the Cretaceous period. So then, two types of evolving occurred, life in the ground (“Let the earth bring forth…” Gen.. 1:24) and life in water, (“Let the waters bring forth...” Gen. 1.20) and ruddy came from the former. "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being." (Gen. 2:7) Without the ‘breath of life’ the body could not be alive. It was the breath of life that animates the body and causes it to be living or alive, creating a soul. The 'breath of life' was just that - it is 'a spirit force' on the earth that created 'living, breathing creatures’. Without it the body would be incapable of life, in fact there would be no life on earth of any kind. Speaking of the flood period the book of Genesis says: "And all flesh died that moved on the earth...All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life..." (Gen. 7:21-22)This verse calls it ‘the breath of the spirit of life’ showing it is a spirit force as I said previously. Except for the people and creatures in the ark, all flesh, which encompasses all land creatures both human and animal died during this period. Geologists insist there is no geological evidence for a global flood. One has to wonder if the flood was not what we have always thought as Missing Pieces of the Bible…The Updated Version changes the perspective of many things!It is a spirit that causes everything to be alive on the earth but is not the same divine spirit of heaven. Rather it is spirit ‘of earth'. What causes life to flourish on the earth? The main component for that is oxygen – therefore, oxygen is the ‘spirit of life’ on the earth.Earlier I discussed the animal principle! Another name for it is 'vital force’ or vitality, which was responsible for creating life on earth. Anything alive on the earth is said to have this. This includes humankind because we are still very much a part of the earth but it also includes vegetation, which is also alive in another sense. Speaking about flesh (flesh & blood bodies), all living creatures receive the same 'breath of life' that creates a ‘living soul’. But if both man, animals and insects, birds and fish, have the same breath of life to animate the body then what’s the difference between them?A very important one – again, Adam gained a spirit, which according to Bible writings the other animals of earth do not possess. Adam entered another realm and in doing so got a new nature capable of abilities its animal counterparts did not have. Unless it had been in the garden it could not have moved beyond the primate stage. It was the gaining of a supernatural spirit that set apart the first man from the other primates and the reason why we don’t see primates in various stages of evolving today. Genesis says, "Let Us make man (Adam) in our image" - it says nothing of animals and other creatures of the earth being made in the image of God – only Adam. If animals had a spirit we could not kill them for food, it would be wrong to do so because they would be equal to human beings in the sense that they too would partake of God's divine nature. If any animal on earth was to gain a supernatural spirit they too could evolve beyond their animal condition. That very thing may be happening right now as some geneticists try to engineer human/animal embryo cells, which may turn out to be a negative development. I don’t mean that in the sense of using stem cell therapy to help cure various diseases, (which I think is a good thing), I mean in the sense of the possibility of one day producing abnormal creatures.A ruddy creature somehow found the supernatural paradise. We have no idea how long it was there but only that when it walked out, was very different form when it had walked in!We are more than just from the earth whereas all other creatures of the earth receive the breath of life and no more. They remain solely creatures of the earth, never able to become more than that, whereas humankind is both from earth and heaven. It seems that initially all animals were herbivores: “And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creeps upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat…” (Gen. 1:30) Meat means food. Therefore, at one time all animals were herbivorous (ate strictly green herbs) but we don’t know when things changed.In the garden, man/ape gained a supernatural spirit and later the knowledge of good and evil. Animals are neither good nor evil, not possessing a supernatural nature they could never gain such knowledge. When animals hunt for food they do so only to survive. They are subject to the whims and fancies ‘of their bodies’ and they never stop to think whether what they are doing is right or wrong. They are instinctive and that’s how they live and survive on the earth. Even so where we can we should have kind regard for the type of life we provide our animals during their short sojourn on the earth: "A righteous man regards the life of his animal..." (Proverbs 12:10) Genesis Chapter Two speaks of God forming the creatures of earth. Whatever 'the body' the creature has decides their nature and function on earth and they mostly produce 'after their own kind’. Some creatures have more intelligence than others and are capable of what I call 'soul communication' with humans. Some people understand their cat’s meow or their dog’s bark and animals often develop strong attachments to their young and to human beings. Many animals are also extremely intelligent depending upon the size of the brain.The body and soul part of human beings is entirely ‘of the earth’ with all the creature propensities that go along with that. The soul is formed by the circumstances wherein we are born, our parents and the particular genes we have inherited from them including early influences and of course our own unique egos. Many factors contribute to human development. It’s in the ‘soul’ that we find our particular talents, abilities and temperament. Our soul is formed as a result of the body’s interaction with the things of earth. The soul generally learns habits – it’s programmed so-to-speak by the environment it grows up in, whereas the spirit being otherworldly is not affected by those influences.The soul is quite amazing on its own as the seat of the emotions and personality. Many animals display emotion, despair, happiness, satisfaction, love, excitement, etc. Observing various animals with their young, I’ve witnessed caring and nurturing behavior. I’ve also witnessed depressed and mourning dogs and cats. A close friend told me of an incident where her younger dog helped (pushed from behind with his nose) an older and crippled dog up some stairs. Social behavior is observed in all animal species: even insects have a code of conduct. I must deduce that these behaviors are evidence that emotion is an animal condition (of the soul). Morality is different from both emotion and social behaviour though, being spiritual in nature. Animals don’t have a spirit and that’s why they’re not moral. They don’t think about the consequences of their behaviour but react from biological and environmental stimulus only. What does the spirit accomplish then?It’s the higher consciousness, the connectivity to the spirit world. Without a spirit humankind would be nothing more than another animal, albeit with (sometimes) more intelligence because of brain size. Humankind has the ability to reason, which produces (but not always) civilised behaviour. However, civility can also be taught in the formative environment, but that can be nothing more than mimicking. In a civilised society however, such mimicking would be beneficial as the better you get along, the more circles you’re welcomed in.We are dual-natured and our oneness with the earth is easily apparent but also evident is an ability our animal counterparts don’t have, the creative aspect. Animals don’t paint beautiful pictures or construct magnificent buildings! In our bodies and souls we are creatures of the earth, we are animal and in this respect have a great deal in common with them but in our spirits we are divine. Strong similarities in sexual behavior are apparent between human and animal. Hormones largely motivate us as they. According to some new research, physical and sexual attraction in both humans and animals is the result of the ‘sense of smell’ because of bodily chemicals called ‘pheromones’ (see and ). ‘Alpha male and female’ roles are as much a part of human behavior as it is an animal propensity.The nurturing side of most female creatures is evident. Of course there are varying factors between human and animal behavior but on some very fundamental levels we have much in common with them because we are in part animal. Our physical bodies have evolved but there’s a downside, as we’ve become less in tune with nature we lessen our ability to thrive on the earth. Primates are often presented in the media as those cute critters with almost human capability but in the wild they can be ferocious with each other. Whatever primate or other creature we descended from, our behavior will just naturally mirror theirs on some levels. Most men process information through logic first, emotion later and most women are the opposite. If you’ve ever watched couples for any length of time you will see both sexes have a calming effect on each other but in different ways. The body and soul of human beings is a part of ‘the earth’ and will behave in an earthly or animal way – is normal and to be expected. It’s because human beings have a supernatural side from God that we can become more than just creatures of the earth by overriding our more instinctive drives. I’m not saying those drives are not normal and healthy, we just need to control them. Very often knowledge is the key to that. "For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his own soul?" (Mark 8:36 - Matt. 16:26). Earlier witnesses showed that the spirit is immortal and so is incapable of destruction. However, because body and soul are formed on the earth and are therefore, mortal (which again is a temporary state), the human/animal part of us can cease to exist after death - unless God intervenes. God made a way so that our physical selves could be changed into the same essence as the spirit and so survive eternally with the spirit. Body and soul are mortal, they will die but God wanted that part of us to be able to go on, as the spirit does. If body and soul (personality) are not changed it cannot continue after death, only the spirit moves on. However, where the spirit of a person has connected with God it would influence their mortal soul to such a degree that it too could change and actually become immortal.Consider that God is a supernatural entity, the Father of all spirits. His spirit is very powerful and we can actually “look upon him”, in other words we can see into the supernatural realm with our spirit. When we look at God via our spirit, His powerful immortal presence actually flows from our spirit and over to our mortal soul, changing it into that same essence. It does not happen immediately but is a process. Every time we look upon God through our spirit, our mortal soul is changing.Those of us that have come to grips with our mortality recognize that we are not going to live forever. At some time our body and soul is going to go the way of all humanity. While some people believe there’s nothing afterwards, Bible writings say very definitely there is some form of life after death.What part of humankind exists perpetually once body and soul is gone? The immortal spirit continues forever. When immortal and mortal meet the mortal must give way because immortal is so much more powerful. In favourable conditions a metamorphosis takes place and the mortal soul actually takes on the properties of the immortal spirit. For the spirit that does not want to be with God, after death of the body it will remain in the ‘Spirit Lake of Fire’ called hell or Hades. This is of course not the kind of fire that exists on earth but is entirely different just as immortality is different from mortality. The souls that were not changed cannot attain an eternal existence and so their spirit remains in the supernatural environment prepared for them. “…A generation that did not set its heart aright, and whose spirit was not faithful to God.” (Psalm 78:8)A spirit that is faithful to God is a reasonable person but everyone has his or her own perceptions of what that is. That’s the reason why it’s so necessary to understand God’s requirements in the right context. (See Eccl. 7:16, Proverbs 11:23, 1 Cor. 9:25)God's law has decreed, at least for the earth anyway, that oxygen is necessary ‘for life’. Scientists continue to look for planets containing the building blocks for life, oxygen being the main component of a habitable planet for human beings. I believe it’s just a matter of time before there’s the possibility of seeding another planet to resemble earth. Astronomers are presently looking for a planet suitable for human life, which means we would have to find one similar to earth. Included in that is a friendly solar system as I’ve read that Saturn affects the earth in a positive way. Perhaps the other planets in our solar system also help the earth in some way! Our fascination with the heavens goes beyond finding other habitable planets just in case we mess up this one too badly (which we have already done), or exhaust our natural resources (which we are close to doing). Something greater draws us. We human beings are in a very real sense not of this earth because we have a spirit. God has placed eternity in our hearts. However, we are also body/soul and therefore, quite comfortable on the earth at the same time.TENThe Gift Within‘A bird does not sing because it has an answer. It sings because it has a song’ (Chinese Proverb). Our relationship with God should flow from our spirit just as naturally. If a connection with the Creator can only be established under certain conditions and only in certain places (as in church buildings) then God is not omnipresent! God is within and so available to all people in any circumstances. He comes to earth through us. And the things of interest and concern to beneficent human beings would also interest Him. The Divine Spirit wanted to share perpetual life with mortal beings. And so he came to earth as we all do, naked, crying and bewildered. He so identified with human beings that many of those that were around when he was thought him unremarkable. Very few people will live into their hundreds with all their faculties still in place, for most of us our bodies will shrivel and eventually die around seventy to eighty years. It’s a relatively short time, is inevitable and we have no guarantees of anything. What comes after is either nothing or, something that defies our current understanding. Jesus came preaching the gospel of God’s kingdom so that we could understand the world of the spirit (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, Mark 1:14). He is quoted in Matthew 6:33 and Mark 12:31 saying; "Seek first the kingdom of God...” The gospel of the Kingdom of God speaks about something concerning all of us – after death. When the human body dies our spirit lives on.Some of you have spent a good deal of your lives studying things of the earth and that is commendable but of the realm of the spirit you have little knowledge. If there truly is life after death (and Biblical witnesses have shown evidence for it) it would be of paramount importance that we know about this subject also.Religious leaders of Israel during Jesus’s time thought they understood God's kingdom better than any. Nevertheless their curiosity got the better of them and they questioned Jesus: "Now when He was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, he answered them and said, 'The kingdom of God does not come with observation; nor will they say, See here! or 'See there!' For indeed, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:20-21) The kingdom of God does not come ‘with observation’ meaning, it’s not something visible to the naked eye because it’s not on the physical dimension of earth. It’s another reality entirely but available to us in our spirit. When you think of it, it’s quite fantastic that we have this capability of crossing-over to another realm!It appears by the previous verse as if Jesus was telling the Pharisees that they had found God's kingdom because he said to them ‘the kingdom of God is within you’! Yet Jesus was always rebuking the teachers of the law: "...Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness." (Matt. 23:26-28, see also Matt. 15:12, Mark 8:15) Inside used here is translated the same as within in the verse just previous. How could Jesus tell the Pharisees that God’s kingdom was within them and at the same time rebuke them for being lawless inside? Jesus was speaking in general terms when he told the religious teachers that the kingdom of God was within/inside them. He meant they, as all people, are capable of finding God's kingdom because all human beings possess an immortal spirit.At the same time, Jesus made it quite clear to the Pharisees their spirits were corrupted by hypocrisy and so they did not have the kingdom of God within. Jesus frankly told the Pharisees they had to clean the inside of the cup and by it He was telling them to clean their spirit:“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisees, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also.” (Matt. 23:25-26).You can imagine the reaction from the powerful religious lobby! Questioning well-established authorities is tantamount to suicide in any generation. Not only do the authorities take themselves seriously but also their followers are often vehement in their defence of them. Jesus never allowed himself to be intimidated by the religious powers of his day. Of course He knew all along the price He would pay but He had bigger things in mind for allowing it – the emancipation of the spirits and souls of human beings. God being a Spirit, His presence can only abide in another spirit. "God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24) "The Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit..." (2 Tim. 4:22) Once more, it’s the spirit Jesus referred to as being within or inside where the kingdom of God can be found. (Jesus is here called ‘the Lord’, a title reserved for God.) We cannot observe or see God’s kingdom when it comes because it’s on another dimension but with our spirit we can access it. Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world." (John 18:36) A verse previous says, “the kingdom of God does not come with observation so that we can see it”. God's kingdom is in another dimension entirely that we humans can access via our spirit.Once a human being finds the Kingdom of God within it begins to influence and change their human and mortal soul. This takes time and most importantly correct knowledge.Pharisees, scribes, supposed pillars of the church, men believing they were skilled in the Law of Moses, looked for outward signs. Religions are all about outward signs, but God’s kingdom is inward. Today we think the men of those times were totally lacking in any understanding of the scriptures but they were very knowledgeable men and were no different than learned religious people of today. Human beings do not change we are all born with like nature, those men knew the scriptures according to their own understanding rather than by the confirming rule and that’s why they erred.It’s possible for human beings to be absolutely convinced they know the way to God’s kingdom and yet miss the mark. A wrong spiritual focus always looks for outward signs as indications of God’s approval. God’s kingdom though is hidden. At the same time God desires that all should find it though not everyone will appreciate its value.ELEVENPoor in SpiritOne very popular Christian teaching is called ‘the Beatitudes’: "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 5:3) Another verse says: “Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God…” (Luke 6:20) As previously explained, the repetitive data is confirming in nature. ‘The kingdom of heaven’ and ‘the kingdom of God’ are the same thing and a way to connect these verses (as being witnesses of each other). Therefore, quite clearly this means that “poor in spirit” and “you poor” also refer to the same thing! It appears that Jesus taught that only those that are ‘financially poor’ (Luke 6:20) can enter God’s kingdom. This is often the accepted interpretation. One reason for that is the story of Jesus’ birth. Joseph and Mary had to go to Bethlehem for the census and while there, Jesus was born. Many Christians read into the story that the Son of God was born in stable to show that a life of poverty is a life of true piety. However, Joseph had money to pay for the room otherwise he wouldn’t have gone to the inn in the first place. The reason why they ended up sleeping in the stable where Jesus was born was simply because there was no room, the inn was booked up solid because of the census. If God were showing that poverty is akin to holiness then the wise men would not have presented Jesus with the very expensive gifts of ‘gold, frankincense and myrrh’.At any time the all-powerful God could have orchestrated affairs so that Jesus might have been born in more lavish circumstances. This story reveals an important aspect of how God works in this world of men. There would be no preferential treatment for Messiah: He would suffer the same trials as are common to all human beings. To be poor and/or poor in spirit then is speaking of something other than financial matters. "...but to this man will I look: even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word." (Isaiah 66:2) Speaking about the same thing Psalms 34:18 says: "The Lord is near to those who have a broken heart, And saves such as have a contrite spirit." These verses are clearly confirming ones, therefore ‘poor’, ‘contrite spirit’, ‘poor in spirit’, ‘broken heart’ and ‘one who trembles at My word’ are all synonymous expressions concerning the spirit. This has nothing whatever to do with someone’s financial state.The translation of poor means humble or meek and the word contrite means the same thing. However, religion has misconstrued the meanings of these words. The translation simply means, “those that have truth”, as in “God’s truth” that is established by Biblical witnesses. As human beings know the confirming rule for interpreting, whether financially rich, poor or whatever makes no matter, they can find God’s kingdom. The wonderful thing about God’s realm is that regardless of our station in life, we all have the same capacity to interact with God.Spirit humility is very different from outward or soul lowliness, which is often mistaken for true piety. God does not judge outwardly as men do, He judges the intent of the spirit, a place where no human being can see. True humility (truth) is very often missed because people look for meekness in the outward behavior. Real humility therefore, is something that only the spirit is capable of. Moses was a great prophet because he was, "...more humble, more then all men who were on the face of the earth..." (Numbers 12:1) Moses was not an unintelligent illiterate, on the contrary,“And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and deeds.” (Acts 7:22) Raised in Pharaoh’s palace, Moses was mighty in the wisdom of the Egyptians. He was also a man of action (deeds) but afterwards found himself in the desert tending sheep, where he learned other lessons. Moses gained humility (truth) in his spirit to a great degree and so could find the Kingdom of God because:"God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble." (James 4:6, also 1 Peter 5:5, Proverbs 3:34) Job 22:29 says: "...and He shall save the humble person." Psalm 9:12 says: "He does not forget the cry of the humble." An earlier chapter stated that those that commune with God must do so in spirit but the same verse also adds, in truth. All of the prophets were humble men of truth. Psalm 51:6a says: "...You desire truth in the inward parts..." (see also Psalm 15:2) Another way to say this is, “you desire truth in the spirit”. A person can possess true meekness in their spirit and others can miss it entirely as the ruling church leaders missed the humility of Jesus Christ. Therefore, the humility that God approves is 'inward truth' and it’s obviously not something that impresses the soul realm of men. God is concerned for the inside. When truth is within then a person is humble, meek and contrite and so can find God's kingdom.Jesus will reward those that do their good deeds in secret where no person can applaud our behavior:"Search me, O God, and know my heart; Try me, and know my anxieties; And see if there is any wicked way in me..." (Psalm 139:23-24a) God must do the searching, not us. When you are truly comfortable with someone they accept you for who you are and you them and there is no need to hide anything. God knows everything: deep introspective pondering into our psyche to see if there’s any evil way within are a waste of time, it’s the Spirit of God that must do the searching. Not to say that we must not examine our motives but if we look out of fear or arrogance then we’re not seeing correctly, but God does.Human beings are built a certain way and if we are manipulated to act contrary to our natural bent (which religion does), it produces hypocrisy. If an adult tells some innocent child that a normal and healthy emotion of theirs is sinful (because the adult’s thinking is distorted) it produces unhealthy guilt in the child. The child’s self esteem cannot progress in a healthy way because they are now convinced that there is something wrong with them. If a parent (even unknowingly) makes a child feel inept, should they be surprised if that child ends up ashamed, confused and rebellious!If God acts the same way then a reasonable person could/should not love Him. Yet religion often teaches people to be afraid of God or he will punish them in an eternal hellfire. Confirming information however, reveals an entirely different God. It shows one that is reasonable, which for me is the highest compliment that I can pay anyone. TWELVEA Supernatural PlaceMany people think that Moses was so favoured, he could enter God’s presence with ease. However, being chosen did not ensure peaceful entry into the presence of the all-powerful deity but was in reality a very frightening experience: "...And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, ‘I am exceedingly afraid and trembling’.” (Heb. 12:18-20, Exodus 19:12, 13, Deut. 9:19) While on the mountain, God gave Moses instructions for the building of The Tabernacle. Moses’ writings very clearly describe the building of this important structure. It had to be made perfect according to the instructions from God. All the instruments and decorations represented something important about heaven and had to be made just so. What was God’s reason for making such a request? It must have been significant because the creator of the heavens and earth would not waste his, and other’s, time on something that had no purpose. Exodus 25:8 explains the reason:“And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them.” (See also Deut. 15:17) God wanted to dwell among human beings! However, his incredible power could not be contained in just any structure. At first look it appears that this verse is saying that God would be among human beings while his presence would never leave the sanctuary but the words show something much more profound.The Tabernacle that God instructed Moses to build was nothing more than an elaborate tent, nevertheless it would be the place where ‘God would supposedly dwell’. At the same time though and a seeming contradiction, the writings also say:"...the Most High does not dwell in temples made with hands...Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool. What house will you build for Me? Says the Lord, or what is the place of My rest? Has My hand not made all these things?” (Acts 7:48-50)“God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. Nor is He worshipped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things.” (Acts 17:24)God requested that the Tabernacle be built so that he might dwell among human beings. No mortal place however, can contain his presence. I have to take a little side road here (common with these writings) and mention something in these verses that’s very important. Did you notice it says, “Heaven is My (God’s) throne”? There are so many instances where the Bible mentions a throne. God’s throne is not a separate object of itself sitting as the focal point of heaven because, ‘all of heaven’ is ‘where God sits’. God’s throne is heaven and heaven is God’s throne - they are one and the same. Wherever God’s presence is, is His throne and at one point in time the all-powerful God chose to reside in a tent ‘on the earth’, which became His throne.If, as Biblical witnesses showed earlier, God’s immortal Spirit cannot dwell in mortality how then was God’s Spirit able to lodge in the flimsy structure of the Tabernacle ‘made with human hands’ from earthly substances? We know from the books of Moses that God's powerful presence came down from Mt. Sinai and rested in the Tabernacle. So there had to have been some part of the Tabernacle 'not made with human hands' - rather it was divinely built. Only God can construct such a place for himself to dwell in because only he, “…alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see…” (1 Tim. 6:16)No man, meaning ‘flesh and blood’, can see God. We can only look upon him via our spirit. A part of the Tabernacle must have been made from the same divine essence as God, something that only He can accomplish. Although the Tabernacle was made with human hands the place where God would actually dwell ‘among them’ (within the Tabernacle) would be different. This is a word picture: God’s presence rested on top of Mt. Sinai (the mountain is always symbolic of Heaven). God came down from the mountain, Heaven, and his presence rested in the Tabernacle. However, God did not rest in the entire Tabernacle. Made from earthly substances, the entire Tabernacle could not hold such a presence as the all-powerful God. Again, there was a part of the Tabernacle was not constructed with human hands.When God’s presence came down from the mountain upon the Tabernacle in the form of a cloud, He rested in a place called The Most Holy Place, also called The Holy of Holies because it was different from the rest of the Tabernacle. This part of the Tabernacle was special! Although the outer shell was obviously made with the same substances as the rest of the tabernacle, the Most Holy Place was unusual because it was ‘divinely built by God Himself’ in some way. Something miraculous happened to The Most Holy Place of the Tabernacle so that God could dwell there. The furniture and symbols in the Holy of Holies all represented things found in Heaven. If God’s presence came into that part of the Tabernacle then The Holy of Holies became Heaven or in other words, The Most Holy Place of the Tabernacle became a metaphysical place!God is a supernatural being so therefore, The Most Holy Place would have to be also and so He changed it and it became Heaven. Heaven came to earth, which is truly astonishing. Yet God’s purpose for doing all this is even more incredible.The Tabernacle (later called the Temple) was a forerunner, an archetype. God was showing us an illustration of His future temple. I’m sure you will be surprised to learn (as I was) that the Tabernacle represented a human being, spirit, soul and body! "Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you?...for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple." (1 Cor. 3:16-17 NIV) So then God’s temple (also Tabernacle) are you yourselves, spirit, soul and body. There were seemingly three parts to the Tabernacle, The Most Holy Place, The Holy Place and The Outer Court. The Most Holy Place was an illustration of the spirit of human beings, God's image or likeness that was initially given to Adam and then passed to Eve and later onto their descendants. It was the only part of the temple where God could dwell because it was changed into a supernatural place. The ornamentation and furniture in the Tabernacle were not just fancy decorations they had a purpose, to turn the Most Holy Place into Heaven. How can we know The Most Holy Place was an illustration of the spirit of human beings? When God came down from the mountain, His presence only resided in this part of the Tabernacle! The other two parts of the Tabernacle were not specially built, as was this place. And to what part does God’s kingdom come – it comes within! God was revealing to us exactly what part of our person would be enabled to hold His powerful presence. The Most Holy Place of the Tabernacle was not made with human hands and neither is ‘the spirit’ that all humankind inherits at conception.What part of human beings is made in God's image, meaning it’s also divinely built? It’s the immortal part of us – our spirit. When a human being finds God’s kingdom, their spirit then becomes The Most Holy Place. God needed an essence that was capable of containing His own self and only another supernatural essence could do that. As there was no other presence but His own capable of such – God gave us a part of Himself. In this part we are gods, as the angels (Psalm 82:6-7). Impossible as it may seem the same awesome presence that so terrified Moses and the Hebrews chose to make His dwelling in human beings. How would God be with us? He would be within those that are poor in spirit. God's plan was that humanity would become His Temple and the Tabernacle was constructed to reveal this very thing. The Old Testament prophets understood this and gained wisdom.God makes the immortal spirit of human beings into His dwelling place. In this new dispensation (the New Testament) the Most High will not dwell in a tent but in the regenerated spirit of humankind: "...Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?..." (2 Cor. 13:5b) Notice this verse says Jesus Christ is in you and 1 Cor. 3:16 quoted previously says, God's spirit lives in you. Whether we call Him Jesus Christ or God or the Holy Spirit, He is all the same person, there is only one God.What then of body and soul? The Holy Place represented the soul; therefore the Outer Court was symbolic of the outer human shell or human body. The outer structure or tent of the Tabernacle was covered with badger skins. Badgers live in the ground, which may be symbolic of our beginnings in the dust! It would be advantageous to work alongside objective Jewish scholars that are well versed in the knowledge of the Written Torah – for it was to the Hebrews that God committed the original words. However, just because one is Jewish by birth does not automatically make them an authority, for much has been lost in the traditions of religions.A curtain divided The Most Holy Place and/or Holy of Holies from the Holy Place, they were side by side yet separated and this was done for a reason. This is also how it is with spirit and soul; they are so completely different one from the other, one is immortal, the other mortal, yet they exist in the same person.Why was The Most Holy Place of the Temple closed off to everyone except for one visit a year and the priest had to be especially prepared to minister? It was separated, distinct from the rest of the temple. The other two parts, The Outer Court and the Holy Place were not separated from each other in this same manner. Human beings could venture into The Outer Court and some of them into The Holy Place, but The Most Holy Place was cut off to human presence. The reason for this can only be that the spirit is so different from soul and body. God's presence is holy (divine, perfect), it was therefore, necessary for God to separate His presence from anything that was not perfect. The mortal part of humanity was separated from the divine and so the reason for the dividing curtain. Mortality is imperfection and so corruptible, a substance incapable of standing before God. Unless the curtain is removed, no soul could hope to gain perfection.God's initial work then is in the spirit of human beings, which then influences the human soul for good so that it can become immortal. The curtain dividing spirit and soul must be removed though so the transformation can take place. If, as was shown, The Most Holy Place represented the spirit and The Holy Place represented the soul then initially there is a curtain within human beings dividing spirit and soul. The curtain must be removed in order for the soul to reap the benefits of God’s presence.Picture someone in one room taking a picture and the flash is so strong you can see it from another room –this is somewhat how it works with God’s Spirit. God is Light and when the curtain dividing spirit and soul is removed (more on this in the next chapter) then God’s light filters from our spirit into our soul. But this is no ordinary Light – it is the very presence of God, which is so powerful we can only gaze upon Him with our spirit, human eyes cannot see into this realm. When it happens, a metamorphosis takes place and the soul can actually gain an immortal state. A person that suntans is said to be “soaking up the suns rays”. In somewhat the same way the soul comes into contact with God’s presence (in their spirit) and it actually has the affect of changing the soul into the same form. According to the Bible there will come a time when God will supernaturally reunite body, soul and spirit. The resurrection from the dead is the promise human beings have from God.THIRTEENSeparationIf you were standing in The Holy Place (although only the priests could minister there) you could not see into The Holy of Holies because of the curtain. It separated (completely cutting off) the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Tabernacle. It was as much a protection as it was a barrier. The Most Holy Place was different from the other parts of the Tabernacle. The reason for that was because it contained God’s presence. God, resided in The Most Holy Place, necessitating it be cut off from humanity because no human could see God and live (Exodus 33:20). Though the Tabernacle was on the earth, The Most Holy Place was not from earth and the purpose of the curtain was to hide the presence of God. However, if God intended to hide Himself, why would He bother to have the Tabernacle constructed in the first place?An expression often used throughout Bible writings when someone saw an angel is, “and they were exceedingly afraid”. Read again the story of the Zacharia (John the Baptist’s father), the visitation Mary received, and read in Revelation how John fell down ‘as dead’ before the angel that spoke with him. If human beings have such a hard time in the presence of angels, how will we fair in the presence of the perfect and all-powerful Divine God?We could not stand in God’s presence in our mortal body (soul) – but there was some part of human beings able to behold God in a different sense. Human beings could see God in their immortal spirit but only as ‘the curtain was removed’. What prevents God's presence from being seen and felt in the human soul? It’s the curtain that hides the spirit. But how did the curtain come to be there in the first place?When Adam and his wife ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in Paradise, the eating was of a spiritual nature and so affected them spiritually. Their spirits died. It produced the curtain ‘covering the spirit’ of human beings from then on. Adam and his wife did not eat mortal food in the Garden of Paradise; they ate immortal food. Genesis states that God planted a garden eastward in Eden. So therefore, Eden was already in existence before ‘God planted a garden there’. God took a ruddy creature that had evolved from the dust of the earth and placed it in a garden in Eden. Eden is a supernatural place where spirit beings reside because God is a Spirit and ‘He walked there’ (Gen. 3:8). God is in Heaven, so then Eden is Heaven. God has an immortal Spirit form so it has to be that Paradise (the garden) is not a physical place but a supernatural one. Therefore, it stands to reason that the fruit on the trees in Paradise was not like fruit on the earth, but also supernatural. As I said before, the ‘immortal spirit’ requires different food from what nourishes the mortal body but both need food. Jesus said, “I have food to eat of which you do not know…” (John 4:32) And what did Jesus say His food was? “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work.” [John 4:34 - when on the cross Jesus said, “it is finished” (John 19:30 - he had accomplished what he was sent to do)Even though the food in the garden had a form that Adam and his wife could touch and eat from, this place was not like a garden that we would find on the earth. When the woman (she was not called Eve until after they left the garden) ate the fruit and gave some to Adam, they ate ‘spiritual death’. For more information you may want to read Missing Pieces of the Bible: Lost Books Fill-in the Blanks, REVISED EDITION and/or the 3rd and Final Updated Version () and Apples from the Song of Solomon (Publish America). Let me explain what I think happens at spiritual death. Even though the spirit is immortal and cannot be destroyed, it nevertheless can die. However, it does not die in the sense as something mortal does, never to exist again! Its death is that it cannot function the way it was intended (as I mentioned earlier, like a light bulb without electricity). As some angels left their first estate and cohabited with women (Missing Pieces of the Bible…), they too died in some sense. A human being without the physical body is a spirit and if the spirit is dead, will just naturally gravitate to the place where apostate angels are. Both Adam and his wife’s spirits became ‘covered by the curtain’. It was because of the curtain (spiritual death) that they could no longer remain in God’s Paradise.God’s entire purpose for sending Jesus Christ was to redeem humanity – but redeem them from what? The spirit of human beings is eternal – but what about the mortal part of us – again, what happens to it after death? God wanted our ‘entire person’ to be able to ‘go on forever’ but such was not possible because (as I said earlier) body and soul are mortal. God must change the soul (personality) to be the same essence as the immortal spirit, otherwise it could not continue indefinitely. If body and soul are changed it too can live eternally joined with its spirit, otherwise body and soul would be lost forever at death of the body.What was the purpose for circumcision of males in the Old Testament? There must have been good reason for instituting this strange ritual! Old Testament law seemed to require bodily circumcision but New Testament teaching says bodily circumcision is not necessary. What changed between the Old and New Testaments if they are repeats of each other?Circumcision was symbolic of something of great significance. In the figurative sense it was the removal of something.Circumcision of males was the removal of the foreskin. What is the foreskin symbolic of in the world the spirit? As the Tabernacle represented human beings and contained a curtain, the curtain itself is that which divides (keeps separate) spirit (immortal) and soul (mortal). In order for God’s presence to influence the soul the curtain must be removed! What does it mean in the world of the spirit? Simply that ‘the curtain’ in the Tabernacle represented ‘the foreskin’ in circumcision: "Therefore, circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer." (Deut. 10:16) As already shown, heart is a Biblical synonym for spirit. The spirit must be circumcised and only then will a human being no longer be stiff-necked (in the OT God called the Israelites “a stiff-necked people” because they were circumcised in body but not spirit). The foreskin/curtain covering the spirit (Most Holy Place) was inherited by all of humanity when Adam and his wife ate knowledge from a tree in the garden. God is always there ‘in the spirit’ but just as in the Tabernacle, His presence is ‘cut off’ to humanity by the curtain/foreskin. When a person finds God’s kingdom, then the curtain is removed and God’s presence is no longer cut off from the soul.The presence of the curtain is spiritual death. Knowing that by ourselves we had no chance of removing it (because it’s supernatural), God took it upon Himself through a certain person:“In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ.” (Col. 2:11) The sins of the flesh mean our animal nature. When the spirit is dead then the animal nature is ruling. However, when a person becomes ‘poor in spirit’ because they have learned the truth, their spirit is supernaturally circumcised. The curtain that separates spirit and soul is removed, called ‘the circumcision of Christ’. The previous verse says the circumcision is ‘without hands’ because again, it’s not a physical act but a spiritual one. Only the circumcision of Christ can remove the veil (curtain) over the immortal spirit. Atonement is different from circumcision. For some reason I do not as yet understand (though I believe it is related to Satanic requirement rather than God’s), the heavenly atonement had to be by blood. Certainly this can be no ordinary blood but only that from a perfect ‘lamb’ would suffice. Again, this is a spiritual matter. Jesus Christ came to free human beings from the problem of mortality in body and soul and it seems that His blood was the only thing able to accomplish such. "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Romans 2:29) This verse clearly confirms the one just prior, verifying it’s ‘the spirit/heart’ that must be circumcised. Also clarified once more is that heart and spirit are the same thing. However, this verse adds information that the previous one did not mention (as is often the case that a confirming verse will supply additional information that the other does not have): ‘he is a Jew’, which is one inwardly – meaning “in the spirit”. Therefore, though we may be born a Gentile, if we are poor in spirit, spiritually-speaking we become a Jew (God’s people). Many people will find this idea very surprising. Nevertheless, the scriptures are clear (witnesses have shown all along) that God’s kingdom is a spiritual one and not a building nor a tradition nor a result of one’s heritage. Ancestry does not guarantee entry into God’s kingdom. God will reject Jews by heredity if they do not have the gospel of the prophets, which is established with confirming information.Once Eve and Adam ate the knowledge of good and evil it brought spiritual death, their spirits died as God said would happen (Gen. 2:17 & 3:3). God’s presence became hidden from them, as they became mortal. Now covered by a curtain, their immortal spirit had died and they were no longer comfortable in God’s presence. All human beings automatically inherit the covering from the first parents, spiritual death. Recall the mortal soul is the seat of the emotions – our personality, drives and ambitions come from our human self. The spirit is the supernatural counterpart that changes the earthly soul into another form (immortality) so that it can eventually inherit eternal life. That however, can only occur when the spirit has been circumcised. Both atonement and circumcision is by faith alone in the sacrifice of Christ’s blood. However, spiritual growth can only be accomplished with right knowledge (food for the spirit). Think of it this way: as the physical body requires food to help it grow and sustain it, the spiritual body (the spirit) also needs food. If we feed our physical body junk food, it deteriorates and just so with the supernatural spirit. Jesus said that his food was to do 'God’s will', so we need to know God’s requirements in order to correctly feed our spirit. "For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh." (Phil. 3:3)The flesh is the human body and we are not to place any confidence in it because it’s temporal and therefore, fallible. Many religious people are expecting that their religious works are going to get them into heaven but that is ‘confidence in the flesh’. A circumcised spirit is what God is after."But their minds were hardened. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ." (2 Cor. 3:14) The veil is the curtain or foreskin. The spirit of humankind is God’s temple held prisoner in a mortal body. There is no ceremonial ritual able to make the soul one-ounce spiritual, only circumcision: "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." (2 Cor. 5:17) What are the 'old things' that have 'passed away'? It is 'the veil (curtain)' that is cut away.After circumcision the spirit of human beings becomes new in the sense that prior to this time it was not in its original intended use because the veil prevented such. At circumcision the veil no longer hides the spirit but is in the same image that Adam and Eve had while in the garden. If however, the spirit eats wrong food then the circumcised spirit is unable to grow and spiritual blindness will result. It takes right knowledge to feed the spirit, otherwise it will stagnate.This brings me to a different aspect to the curtain. I did not arrive at it quickly or easily. FOURTEENThe Holographic CurtainAs far back as I can remember I recall thinking that I did not fit well with this world. Early on I expected that it should be friendly but it was hostile instead. Now I know that I was merely feeling a truth that I could not then put into words. An idea began taking shape in my mind after I read a quote from Plato: “...there were two worlds and the one we see is just an illusion, evil, an imperfect copy of the real world, transitory, and will decay. The real world, which we cannot see because it’s invisible, is good, perfect, eternal, and static or unchanging. In the real world there’s obviously no variation or change, nor need for any because all the organisms there, the Types, are perfect.” According to what many read in the Bible, our universe and earth was supposedly created by a perfect entity, God. And that’s my difficulty. If God created it where is the perfection? There is more evidence for chaos than order as wars and disease, famines and natural disasters devastate our world. It’s more unfriendly than friendly as a large percentage of the world’s population starves.Many years ago I could not, would not, have seen it but now it’s glaringly evident. God could not have been the creator of this reality! Then I realized something else. There exists another veil or perhaps it’s one and the same. In chapter one I mentioned that Bible writings concur with the Big Bang: “…who stretches out the heavens like a curtain...?” (Isaiah 40:22)The heavens or universe itself is also a curtain or veil. This curtain is the same word used to describe the foreskin over the spirit. Therefore the universe is a covering for something.Apparently the idea is not new, though it was news to me. The Gnostics also believed that “our world was a degraded copy of a higher level of reality and consciousness, sort of like the loss of resolution when you look at a painting within a painting”. The Urantia Book challenged me the most even though I question some of its ideas. For the first time I read a description of God’s realm the way it should be, BIG, instead of the tiny one I had pictured of a throne in heaven and a few angels flying around. And when some Quantum Physicists began bringing up some strange theories about our reality, I started taking note. How is it that we can look at something, and sometimes for a very long time, and yet not see what’s right before our eyes? I had read it over and over so many times but never noticed it before but now it practically jumped off the page:“In whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of them which believe not…” (2 Cor. 4:4)When Adam forfeited his rights to Paradise, something awful happened and it changed things. Adam handed over this dominion to Satan and that’s why it’s the awful mess it is. God is not here and mortality is the evidence for it. God is immortal/perfect and whatever he made would be that way also, making it absolutely unquestionable that this is not God’s creation. This is Satan’s domain as I said before. We are not what we appear and neither is the veil of space. The whole thing is a very bad copy of the original creation. It appears to me as if everything on the earth is a mirror of the immortal realm. Our seeming existence according to some Quantum Physicists is more akin to a hologram (like pixels generated from somewhere else). The supposed substance we call reality is really unstable, changing and multi-dimensional with possible parallel universes. It’s real in some sense as we appear to be stuck here until death but it’s not God’s idea. God initially created everything but it became so much less than perfect (these verses were quoted previously): “…and the whole world lies in wickedness.” (1 John 5:19) “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principals, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ehp. 6:12)I quoted Jesus saying this in a previous chapter: “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews…” (John 18:36)If this were God’s world, Jesus would not have been crucified. This world is speaking about the earth (and the universe in general), this reality. The characteristics of Satan’s world are imperfection and suffering as the strong rule. God does visit here but he does not stay because he’s not welcome by the spirit that rules here. When God visits earth He does so through His image (spirit) that Adam got (and passed on to us) when he entered the supernatural garden.The Bible is very plain that this world is the product of a deceiver, one whose nature is to lie. I believe this seeming reality is nothing but a deceptive ruse, an elaborate illusion created by the prince of the powers of the air to trick humanity, keeping us trapped in something akin to a holographic prison. People are fooled into believing they’re something they’re not, entirely missing who they actually are, spirit beings trapped in a physical universe. It’s crafty, a word used to describe how Satan tricked the woman. Two theories presently exist among astronomers concerning the universe; 1) the universe is still expanding away from the big bang and will stretch indefinitely into eventual nothingness as everything stretches further apart. 2) The universe will stretch ‘to its max’ and suddenly rip. Although ‘big rip’ theorists have not said how the pieces will react once the universe rips, other scriptures say that the universe will rip in two and roll up like a scroll. When Jesus died, the curtain in the Tabernacle was ripped ‘in half, from top to bottom’. The curtain in the tabernacle divided the Holy of Holies from the rest of the temple. It cut off spirit from soul. When it’s removed then spirit and soul unite and we will see things as they really are. The universe is another veil (thin cloth) that is hiding what is temporal from what is eternal, the real reality. The temporary universe is a curtain (foreskin) and just as the human spirit is circumcised so too will the universe one day be. This idea is not so far-fetched considering what some astronomers are theorising about a Big Rip.FIFTEENA Gnostic I quoted a passage from the Gnostic gospels in the preceding chapter to show that unusual ideas about our universe are not new. Nevertheless I think I need to touch on aspects of Gnosticism itself. The Da Vinci Code’s portrayal of it left me with the feeling (that Gnosticism in general does) of something unfinished. The book itself resounded loudly with the same statement that scientists have been saying for ages: “…No more so than they can confirm the authenticity of the Bible” (Page 256 of the Da Vinci Code). It’s true; though revered worldwide throughout generations by many people as the infallible word of God, nevertheless, until now no one has ever shown anything truly peerless about the Bible - yet insisted on its superiority anyway.Even though I appreciate Dan Brown’s exposure of Roman Catholicism’s obviously flawed system; the Da Vinci Code gives rise to more superstition. There is a tendency within human nature to legitimize something because a famous person endorses it. The fact is no one really knows what Da Vinci was trying to portray in his paintings. It’s speculation at this point, though for certain it does seem to lead in the Gnostic direction.If a secret society exists that guards the heredity of the sexual union of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene (according to The Da Vinci Code) they are unwilling to share that privileged knowledge with the rest of the world. Indeed if such offspring exists, how can it be confirmed? Unless we have a sample of Jesus’s and Mary’s DNA (and how do you prove that!), the story remains shrouded in mystery. Though no evidence exists to prove the story true nevertheless, the seed of possibility has been sown. While it can never be proved true, it can never be proven wrong either. This makes the tale indisputable in the minds of many people, and everyone loves a mystery.Call me a prude but the idea that a man and his wife would have ritual sex in front of others (haven’t you people ever heard of closing the goddamn door) and call it a spiritual act was a little perverted for my taste. While it may appear to elevate women to near the god-hood (and I thought all we wanted was equality!) the goddess was fallible. It was plain to me that Mary Magdalene’s womb was the only part of her that was considered of any real value to the Gnostics. It was not the person herself but only what her womb could produce! What happens though when a woman cannot produce - is her value diminished?While Gnostic philosophy appears to elevate woman to me it only encourages sexual exploitation of the female body. At the same time if certain women want it that way, and are not abused by it, that's entirely up to them. However, this ideology doesn’t seem to understand one very fundamental issue that women have been trying to change for a long time. Yes we are sexual but we’re also maternal and spiritual, and, we also possess intelligence in varying degrees and subjects. Most females don’t mind being appreciated sexually, it’s a part of us but it’s not the biggest part for many women. I recently heard a song on Rock Star Supernova (US TV 2006): speaking about sex, the gist of the song was ‘there’s nothing ladylike about it’. I thought it a brilliant observation. From what I’m hearing from the religious men, women are supposed to throw away all propriety in the bedroom and resume sainthood everywhere else. To me religion was/is the greatest reason for the loss of women’s uniqueness. Christianity tried to mould the perfect submissive woman but she lost something in the bedroom because she simply couldn’t reconcile the two obviously contrary (puritan vs. animal sexual) behaviors. Gnosticism, while claiming to elevate women only devalues her in my mind. Any religion or philosophy not balancing all aspects of the female psyche (women are a mix of attributes) is repressive. The Da Vinci Code’s mystery man, Leonardo himself is a strange enigma, able to move about society’s upper-crust with privilege while at the same time having to conceal some of his ideas. Gnostic beliefs seem to permeate some of his religious artwork, as Leonardo left posterity to wonder. Intellectually he was brilliant and was also very talented. As good as that is, does not automatically procure Da Vinci an infallibility rating.Apparently Leonardo had sufficient distinction to push the limits of propriety. In some respects he appeared to be above the law. Exhuming and then dissecting the bodies of deceased people would have got most everyone else thrown in prison for immoral behavior but in Da Vinci’s case, the law seemed to turn a blind eye. Was he an eccentric scientist or a brilliant artist with a penchant for mischievous pranks, or possibly he was a spiritual man whose beliefs had to be suppressed. More likely he was a mixture of those complexities and more. We may never know. Perhaps Da Vinci’s dissatisfaction with Christianity drove him to desperation. Discontent seems to have the affect of driving people into the arms of suitors that are the extreme opposite of that which they hate. Strangely though, Gnostic theology is an odd mixture of Christianity, nature worship and the occult. This makes me think that Da Vinci tried to reconcile his scientific nature with his spiritual side, Gnosticism being his answer to that. I can certainly understand his conflict – as he tried to harmonize the Bible and nature. During Da Vinci’s time Christian thought ruled with an iron fist, which means a good deal of scientific and naturalist thinking had to be repressed. I am most surprised that as a scientist, Leonardo Da Vinci would embrace (it appears) some of the strange ideas of Gnosticism. When I first heard of the Gnostic gospels I excitedly read through a good deal of the information hoping to find something extraordinary that I could point to and say that’s something - but I was disappointed. In my mind, Gnostic ideology is a poor settlement in the attempt to balance science and Bible writings. There are a number of good online sources featuring the Gnostic Gospels (Nag Hammadi Library). One of those is the following Internet address: . This information states much the same of what many related sites have to say that Gnosticism is indefinable. A direct quote from the aforementioned Internet address says:“…Gnosticism asserts that ‘direct personal and absolute knowledge of the authentic truths of existence is accessible to human beings…” According to Gnostic belief, absolute knowledge is accessible to human beings and so attainable. “…and the attainment of such knowledge is the supreme achievement of human life…” So then, according to Gnostic teaching, this knowledge is not only of immense value to all human beings but attaining it should be the principal aim of human life. It goes on to say that: “…Gnosis is not a rational, propositional, logical understanding, but a knowing acquired by experience. The Gnostics were not much interested in dogma or coherent, rational theology – a fact that makes the study of Gnosticism particularly difficult for individuals with ‘bookkeeper’ mentalities. One simply cannot cipher up Gnosticism into syllogistic dogmatic affirmations…”What about those of us that need authentication – where do we fit in? To my mind if something can’t be defined then it can’t be understood. If I can’t understand it then what use is it to me?Further the quote says: “…The Gnostics cherished the ongoing force of divine revelation—Gnosis was the creative experience of revelation, a rushing progression of understanding, and not a static creed.” So then, gnosis is a divine and ongoing revelation, which means that it has no end to it. At the same time the Gnostics also reject the idea that Jesus Christ could have been the physical embodiment of the divine. I found it quite a task to even begin attempting to unravel the many faces of Gnosticism. Just as The Da Vinci Code portrays, Gnostic wisdom holds the promise of enlightenment but doesn’t deliver anything substantial that you can point to and say, “that’s Gnosis”. Nevertheless, there were some things about Gnosticism, that I think have merit:“…a religion that differentiates the evil god of this world from a higher more abstract God revealed by Jesus Christ, a religion that regards this world as the creation of a series of evil archons/powers who wish to keep the human soul trapped in an evil physical body, a religion that preaches a hidden wisdom or knowledge only to a select group as necessary for salvation or escape from this world.”Being as familiar as I am with Christianity, I think Gnosticism is really a spin-off of some of the stranger forms of Roman Catholicism. I couldn’t help but notice that The Da Vinci Code’s persona of Mary Magdalene so closely resembles the Blessed Virgin Mary of the Catholic Church. The Da Vinci Code appeared to me to present Gnosticism as the lost savior of humanity, which would be fine if it really delivered something. All along the book held the promise of revealing a long lost amazing secret and throughout I anticipated the unveiling of it - but it never came. One of the books’ final characters smugly retains the enlightening gnosis, which supposedly would change the world, and in the end I was left dangling where the story began. What shall I say of Walt Disney, a supposed Gnostic proponent? Apparently he allowed his staff to put subliminal Gnostic sexual messages in at least one of the children’s movies he produced. Doesn’t really say much for Mr. Disney or Gnosticism, does it?If Christianity disappoints (as The Da Vinci Code clearly shows concerning Roman Catholicism) where then do adherents turn? While The Da Vinci Code seemed to me to present Gnosticism as a possible candidate to fill the void, it’s sadly lacking to my mind. If you’re going to replace one thing with another the replacement should be worthy of the honor! Perhaps that’s its attraction! Gnosticism doesn’t demand anything from its adherents; ‘believe what you will’ or ‘anything goes’ appears to be its mandate.The Da Vinci Code does make us wonder; is there a special gnosis that human beings should gain during our short sojourn on the earth? Is there something able to lift us above the mundane and fit us for some form of life after death? SIXTEEN Buried Treasure I view Bible writings as uncharted waters. Although I have been studying the writings by using the confirming rule for many years now, I am constantly making some new discovery. And that’s as it should be.Though my area of expertise appears unlike other sciences, to me the study of Bible writings is akin to archaeology or palaeontology. References within Bible writings liken it to a field and I am constantly digging to find the treasure buried there:"...the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which a man found and hid; and for joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field." (Matthew 13:44) I find the man in this story unusual because he hides his treasure instead of taking it to the nearest bank. Then he joyfully goes and ‘sells all that he has’ and buys 'the entire field'. The only reason why the man would part with all that he has and buys the entire field is because he suspects there is more treasure buried there. I used to believe this story was telling everyone to ‘sell our worldly possessions or goods’, if we have them, and so be poor. As hard as I tried to get excited about being poor, I can tell you from personally trying to ‘live by faith’ (a term used in Evangelical circles and basically means ‘to work for free’ for a Christian group or organization), it’s no fun. I often hear from religious people, ‘money is the root of all evil’ but money in itself cannot be evil. 1 Timothy 6:1 actually says, “The love of money is the root of all evil.” So then it’s not money itself but rather the love of it that is the root of evil. King Solomon looked at it this way: “For wisdom is a defense, and money is a defense…” (Eccl. 7:12) The Hebrew translation for the word defense is ‘to shade’. What do the writings mean then when it speaks of “selling all that we have”! Many of you will say God’s spiritual gifts are free and you are correct, however, a confirming verse in the book of Revelation has this to say: “I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fires, that you may be rich…” (Rev. 3:18) It follows that this mention of buying is speaking in a spiritual sense because Malachi 3:3 says; “And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.” There is ‘gold refined in the fires’ we must buy from God so we can be rich in the knowledge of His kingdom. So then speaking about the treasure hidden in the field is obviously symbolic because God’s treasure is spiritual in nature, as is His kingdom.Without witnesses it would be very easy to read into these verses that God requires us to ‘sell everything we have’ as in our ‘worldly goods’ and ‘give the proceeds to the poor’. God is always reasonable though as ‘poor in spirit’ does not mean financially destitute. Those under the yoke of spiritual indoctrination will interpret these verses through the ‘law of works’ and read ‘sell your possessions’ but remember the law of God always concerns our spirit. We may think we know so much about God and are adamant in our beliefs but then like happened to Saul, when Jesus reveals the treasure – nothing compares. We joyfully sell our ‘old knowledge’ of what we thought was God’s knowledge for the truth that we find with witnesses. I was seriously involved in religion for twenty years and for a long time I thought I had arrived at God’s kingdom. However, I began to see the futility of my Pharisee religion revealed in my own hypocrisy and that of churches in general. When I discovered the true gospel of God by witnesses then I knew that I had found the real treasure. It was then easy for me to sell ‘my religious knowledge’ and ‘buy the new knowledge I had found’– and there was no comparison between the two. What I thought I had before I easily let go of (I sold it), it was useless and even detrimental knowledge, the treasure I found by witnesses was/is far better. "Where your treasure is, there will your heart will be also.” (Matthew 6:21 and Luke 12:34) But where or what is the field where the treasure is buried so the poor in spirit can dig there?Nature is a great field of earthly discovery - but there is another field – a spiritual one where God's treasure is buried. What has God left to humankind? It is ‘His word’, our ‘spiritual food’ and God’s treasure will be buried there: "I rejoice at Your word as one who finds great treasure." (Psalm 119:162)We must ‘search God’s word' to find the hidden treasure of God. Although I have never found study of Bible writings boring, I know there are people that do. However, I don’t believe you will find study by the confirming rule boring. Jesus compared God’s kingdom to treasure but what is the treasure specifically? It must be so vastly different from worldly hoards because God’s treasure would not consist of monetary things but would be different: "Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old." (Matt. 13:52) It still doesn't tell me what God's treasure actually is but Isaiah knew the answer:"...the fear of the Lord is His treasure." (Isaiah 33:6)'The fear of the Lord' is God's treasure. Although I was amazed I had discovered what the treasure is at the same time I wondered, ‘what is the fear of the Lord?’ It’s obviously important because another verse adds: "In the fear of the Lord there is strong confidence..." (Prov. 14:26) I had to go digging again to find the meaning of those words. When I dug in Psalm 111:10 and Proverbs 9:10 I discovered: "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. And the knowledge of the Holy One is called understanding.”Proverbs 1:7 also says; "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge." (See also Job 28:28) The “fear of the Lord” is wisdom and knowledge, which means that those words are synonyms. One can easily misread that God wants us to fear Him yet other verses speak of a loving entity. We can’t love what we fear! And the actual translation of fear is revere. Human beings revere other human beings all the time, how much more should we venerate a generous God? 'The fear of the Lord' is only the beginning of the wisdom/knowledge of God. This isn't any knowledge though, it’s 'knowledge of the Holy One', also called understanding. All of the prophets had this understanding. Only as we have the fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of wisdom (only discoverable by the confirming principle), do we begin to have 'knowledge of God', which the writings call ‘truth’. Only this kind of knowledge can properly feed the spirit and so free the soul.Religion is based on the premise of one will become emotionally healthy when they become spiritually so, however, many church people are extremely paranoid, dogmatic and intolerant. They are nice until you begin poking holes in their theology and then you will see how loving many of them really are. One healthy idea behind religion is for people to stop sinning and in doing so, will free their conscience from guilt. A lot of people are affronted by this word sin but translated it means offence. The offences can not only hurt individuals themselves but others as well so for that reason alone it’s healthy to stop the offensive behaviour! No one can have a healthy self-esteem if they feel bad about themselves because they keep making bad choices. Every time we act contrary to our conscience and not correct it we become emotionally hardened.Very often Bible-based messages are preached to propel people in a certain direction. Some give comfort, other messages bring healing, but a surprising amount are intended to motivate people to do some work for their church or very often, as I said earlier, to give more money. A message from God will always bring a sense of rest, a peaceful and tranquil feeling of well being. Always consider what part of you is being motivated by a supposedly ‘spiritually-based’ message. If you have to buy God’s graces with your money, goods or time, it’s not from the author of Bible writings.SEVENTEENSophia - A Rare PearlMost people believe that the gaining of wisdom is a lifelong pursuit and one person’s wisdom is different from another’s. Wasn’t I surprised then to run into the grandest of wisdom as a consequence of learning something else?The Gnostics are right in one sense as wisdom is not an easy thing to define. If you were to ask people from various backgrounds we would no doubt get many contrary answers. Wisdom is one of those loosely defined statements that falls into a certain criteria; namely it rings of something lofty. Can wisdom truly be defined? Its very nature dictates it’s honorable and not something to be exchanged carelessly. Some people believe as the Gnostics did/do that real wisdom is so profound that most people cannot grasp it; though everyone should at least try. And only those that are willing to make the necessary and difficult sacrifices can attain it. Very often when something cannot be explained it’s shrouded in mystery to give the impression of knowledge where none exists. As in The Da Vinci Code, should wisdom be so elusive?Granted, God’s wisdom is not for the insincere but I would not want it withheld from those that are genuine in their quest to understand it. At the same time I can only hope that it will not be tossed flippantly about, though I recognize it must be accessible for purposes of examination. I often use young Saul (before he was Paul the Apostle) as an example because I see in him many zealous religious people including myself at one time. As a young man, Saul the Pharisee was absolutely convinced that he knew God's law and had the fear of the Lord. After all, doesn't possessing the fear of the Lord mean that a person is wholeheartedly devoted to the things of God? A more devoted servant no one could find. Saul no doubt pursued his Pharisee studies with the same intensity he later poured into Paul the Apostle of Christ. Concerning the Law of Moses he had intense fervor, learning the ways of the Pharisees better than most. He no doubt excelled them all but it was zeal ‘without knowledge' (see Romans 10:2).Although Saul had wholehearted devotion to his ‘Pharisee religion’ he did not possess wisdom and so he had a wrong knowledge of the Holy One. A person can have a lot of Bible knowledge (be able to recite many verses, even feel the presence and leading of the Spirit at times) but yet still not possess the fear of the Lord that brings the kingdom of heaven within. Such was the state of the Sanhedrin (the reigning religious body during Paul’s day including two factions, the Pharisees and Sadducees). "The fear of the Lord is to hate evil; Pride and arrogance and the evil way. And the perverse mouth I hate." (Prov. 8:13a) "The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring forever." (Psalm 19:9a) "...By the fear of the Lord men depart from evil." (Prov. 16:6b) To have the fear of the Lord is to 'hate evil' being described as, 'pride, arrogance’, the ‘evil way’ and a ‘perverse mouth'. A perverse mouth and the evil way, is one ‘not speaking the truth’ but twists out of context, or ‘makes crooked’ as in ‘perverting God’s words’. So then any gospel not using God’s own law of confirming to establish Bible doctrine – is not ‘the truth’ and so perverse and evil. God especially hates a perverse mouth. It distorts His words, actually turning all those that heed such messages away from Him, leading people to spiritual error and suffering and they cannot find His kingdom. Jesus said to the Pharisees: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in…Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel land and sea to win one proselyte, and when he is won, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.” (Matt. 23:13-15) Often we think of evil as being something sinister and easy to spot, by its very ugliness it clearly stands out but this evil is far more subtle: "...lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil." (1 Tim. 3:6) "Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before a fall." (Proverbs 16:18a) Satan fell because he was haughty.As a spirit can be haughty and be condemned by God, so it can also be poor and find God’s kingdom. Wisdom is the key. It’s always calling out to those that will listen: "Does not wisdom cry out, And understanding lift up her voice?...For my mouth will speak truth; Wickedness is an abomination to my lips. All the words of my mouth are with righteousness; Nothing crooked or perverse is in them." (Proverbs 8:1-8) “Wisdom calls aloud outside; she raises her voice in the open squares. She cries out in the chief concourses." (Proverbs 1:21)"Wisdom is the principal thing; Therefore get wisdom. And in all your getting, get understanding..." (Proverbs 4:7-9)‘Wisdom’ and/or ‘understanding’ and/or ‘knowledge’ and/or ‘knowledge of God’ are synonymous expressions for the same thing. It is the principal thing, which means she is the most important of God's treasure. For those that desire to find the kingdom of God, wisdom is a must: "That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him." (Eph. 1:17) The ‘spirit of wisdom’ is ‘the revelation in the knowledge of God’, which can only be understood by finding witnesses. Wisdom is the principal (chief, first) thing to gain. We cannot enter God's kingdom without her. Wisdom says: "I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently will find me." (Prov. 8:17) Where is wisdom found? "And in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom." (Psalm 51:6b) Wisdom comes in the hidden part of humankind, which we now know is our spirit. Wisdom says “my mouth will speak truth”, just as we saw earlier that God desires truth in the inward man. Again, truth is something specific"Thy word is truth." (John 17:17)Let me clarify what the truth is. If God said it, He will confirm it by repeating it (in different ways). If it’s not confirmed then we can be sure that God did not say it. However, wrongly taught God’s word becomes crooked or perverse this word also meaning corrupted. The poor in spirit though have the keys to the kingdom: "In the house of the righteous there is much treasure..." (Prov. 15:6a) What is the treasure that brings a right relationship with God? "For wisdom is better than rubies, And all the things one may desire cannot be compared with her." (Proverbs 8:11) Nothing compares with wisdom, referred to as her. God’s treasure contains 'rubies' but 'wisdom' excels even those: "No mention shall be made of coral or quartz, for the price of wisdom is above rubies." (Job 28:18) If wisdom is 'above or better than' rubies then God's treasure must contain other gems as well? Speaking further of the kingdom of heaven being like treasure hidden in a field, Jesus spoke of another part of the treasure:"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls, who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had and bought it." (Matthew 13:46) The merchant seeking beautiful pearls is like the man that found treasure hidden in a field that “sold all that he has and buys it”. If wisdom is not a ruby because she is “better than” and above rubies then she must be 'a pearl'. Wisdom is the most important and not even rubies can compare with her then without a doubt she is 'the pearl of great price'.If you’ve attended an Evangelical Church for very long then you will know the expression ‘the Proverbs 31 woman’ (Proverbs 31:10-31). She is the perfect woman. “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” (Matt. 5:48)The word perfect in this verse does not mean perfection in the sense of what many Christian religions are teaching. For me, attempting to be like the 'Proverbs 31 woman' was just too much of a stretch. As it turns out, she's too much for anyone because these verses are speaking about wisdom. Wisdom is always referred to as her or she in Bible writings so it’s just assumed that Proverbs 31 is speaking about a human female, but what does it say of her? "Who can find a virtuous wife? For her worth is far above rubies." (Prov. 31:10) Only wisdom is “far above” rubies. And what does this woman do? "She considers a field and buys it." (Prov. 31:16) Recall the treasure is hidden in a field and we all must 'buy it'? Those that gain the fear of the Lord consider the field of God and buy the knowledge of His kingdom. "Many daughters have done well but you excel them all." (Prov. 31:29) Many daughters refer to rubies but we see that she (wisdom) excels them all. "Happy is the man who finds wisdom...She is more precious than rubies..." (Prov. 3:13-18) Proverbs speaks so much about wisdom because only when we buy her do we enter the kingdom of heaven. If an entire book has been devoted to this subject then we should take note. Indeed the entire Bible speaks of wisdom but that this topic is so condensed in Proverbs reveals its great importance. We cannot have a correct understanding of God until we first have wisdom. And wisdom is always reasonable.All the patriarchs of Bible writings had wisdom. The Pharisees however, could not find the kingdom of God because they rejected the only one that could remove the veil.Speaking about the laws of God: "Therefore be careful to observe them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding..." (Deut. 4:6) God's law contains rubies but more importantly the pearl of great price, she is the principal thing because she brings the ‘knowledge and/or understanding of God’ also called revelation elsewhere in Bible writings."The fear of the Lord is the instruction of wisdom, and before honor is humility." (Proverbs 15:33) The second part of the verse seems out of context but in actual fact it is the way to gain wisdom:"When pride comes, then comes shame; but with the humble is wisdom." (Proverbs 11:2) Only the humble (poor in spirit) recognize the benefit of wisdom and only they will sell all they have to buy it. King David had wisdom and spoke about it often in the Psalms: "The mouth of the righteous speaks wisdom..." (Psalm 37:30, also 49:3, 90:12, and 111:10)Solomon could have asked God for many things but his request was: "Therefore, give to Your servant an understanding heart to judge Your people...” (1 Kings 3:9) Solomon was asking God for an understanding heart, which is wisdom. Job also knew what true wisdom is: "From where then does wisdom come? And where is the place of understanding?" (Job 8:20) Answering himself Job says: "...Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom, and to depart from evil is understanding." (Job 28:28) People get enthusiastic about many things concerning the earth, which is good but God hopes that we will gain an interest in spiritual things too. A person that is thinking about the future realises that life on earth is a mere vapour that appears for only a short time. “So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom.” (Psalm 90:12) Wisdom teaches us that we are going to die and it makes us number our days. Otherwise, death is an unwelcome enemy. And Only God’s wisdom can preserve the earthly life (soul) past the grave: "He who gets wisdom loves his own soul." (Proverbs 19:8) EIGHTEENBuy the Truth“For the Lord gives wisdom: out of his mouth comes knowledge and understanding.” (Proverbs 2:6) Mary was a young unwed girl of around thirteen years old when she became pregnant with Jesus. Such stigmas were dealt with severely in those days. No one would believe her real story and Joseph (the man she was betrothed to) only did so after God spoke to him in a dream. The whole thing sounded preposterous and had the ruling church leaders got a hold of the information would have had her locked away for the rest of her life, or worse. Jesus Himself (author of the words of wisdom) was despised by the church hierarchy of his day. So it will be for those that follow in His path [“If the world hate you, you know that it hated me before it hated you.” (John 15:18)].In Matthew Chapter 25 Jesus told a parable of ten virgins that were waiting for His return to earth: “Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps…Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage; and the door was shut…” (Matt. 25:1-13) The number ten may be a reference to the ‘Gentile’ church of Christ because any reference to ‘Israel’ is always represented in Bible writings by the number twelve. If you notice, five of the virgins were 'wise', but five were ‘foolish’ and the foolish were not ready when Christ returned. Five of them were wise because they had God’s wisdom (olive oil) for their lamps 'but the foolish ran out of oil', "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction." (Prov. 1:7)Too late the five foolish realise they are devoid of wisdom and they ask the wise to: "Give us some of your oil, for our lamps are going out." (Matt.25: 8) But the wise answer:"No, lest there should not be enough for us and you; but go rather to those who sell, and buy for yourselves." (Matt. 25:9) In the verses I quoted about the treasure and the pearl of great price, both of those references said, “and sold all they had and bought”. Each must buy their own! A message in Revelation to one of the churches figuratively neither hot nor cold says: "I counsel you to buy from Me..." (Rev. 3:18) Jesus said, "...buy from Me..." From whom are you trying to buy God’s wisdom? If from men then you will miss God's kingdom because true wisdom can only be bought from Jesus alone: “In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” (Col. 2:3) Though the wise and the foolish were all virgins meaning they received spiritual teaching from the same source, nevertheless the foolish did not buy instruction, which adds learning to his lips: "In the mouth of the fool is a rod of pride, but the lips of the wise will preserve them." (Prov. 14:3) If the foolish don't possess the fear of the Lord it's because they have the fear of man: "The fear of man brings a snare." (Proverbs 29:25a) The word snare translated means ‘a noose, trap’ and ‘to ensnare’. Spiritually speaking if you are standing on a foundation of ‘human understanding of the scriptures’ then you are resting on ‘human strength’, which is the fear of man. Wisdom is the knowledge of God. How can anyone gain the fear of the Lord and God’s wisdom if they are being improperly instructed by a perverse (wrong) gospel? "A scoffer seeks wisdom and does not find it, but knowledge is easy to him who understands. Go from the presence of a foolish man, when you do not perceive in him the lips of knowledge. The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way, but the folly of fools is deceit." (Prov.14: 6-9) In Matthew 19:21 is the story of Jesus speaking to a young man that had great wealth: "...If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions." (Matt. 19:21-22, Mark 10:21, Luke 12:33) Jesus was not asking this young man to sell his possessions, He just said, “sell what you have”. If it was a matter concerning the man's wealth, if it was standing between him and God, why didn't Jesus just tell him to give his possessions away to the poor instead? The phrase “sell what you have” is exactly like the man that found treasure hidden in the field that “went and sold all that he had”, and also the merchant seeking beautiful pearls that “sold all that he had and bought”. Likewise the five foolish virgins are instructed in this manner also, “go rather to those that sell and buy”. But what is it they are supposed to buy?"Buy the truth, and do not sell it, also wisdom and instruction and understanding." (Prov. 23:23) Jesus didn't tell the rich young man to give the proceeds from the sale of his possessions to the poor; He just said “give to the poor”. "...the poor have the gospel preached to them." (Matt. 11:5)Remember from a previous chapter that poor means ‘poor in spirit’ or contrite, or humble? Although this verse only mentions the word poor, nevertheless it has already been established with witnesses that the writings are referring to a spiritual condition. Jesus wants everyone to get wisdom. However, though it is presented to all people, it’s the poor in spirit that will appreciate the message.Jesus was telling this young rich man to sell his wrong ideas about what he thought the kingdom of God was like and buy the pearl of great price. Possessing wisdom he could then ‘sell his wrong ideas’ and ‘share his new knowledge with others’. The young man could not receive the message Jesus was trying to convey because he thought God’s wisdom could be bought with monetary sacrifices. God’s wisdom cannot be bought in that manner because it’s a ‘spiritual’ thing. Jesus does not give His pearls to those that will despise such knowledge as He clearly did not enlighten the young man: "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces." (Matt. 7:6) As Jesus did with the young man so He spoke in parables to the scribes and teachers of the law “so that seeing they cannot see and hearing they cannot hear” (see Luke 8:10 and Matt. 7:6). To others Jesus spoke plainly. The common people (not among the indoctrinated teachers of the law) welcomed Jesus, marvelling at His words and receiving His teachings gladly (see Mark 12:37). The ones that were poor in spirit drank in the life-giving words of Jesus but those that believed themselves to be teachers rejected the only person from whom they could buy wisdom. If God desires the sacrifice of worldly possessions then rich people are able to make a better sacrifice than those with few resources can. Or if only poor people can find God’s kingdom, isn’t that buying God in a different sense? Should the rich young ruler's salvation be dependent upon selling his wealth to satisfy God's decree to gain wisdom, it would mean wisdom could be bought with money. The greater the monetary sacrifice the more God would prize it, which would make Him partial to those that can give the most. God is not partial though! Whether financially poor, rich or otherwise means nothing to Him, wisdom cannot be bought that way. Wisdom is bought in our spirit and all have the same opportunity to buy. If any person thinks there is some worldly sacrifice to buy God’s wisdom they would be no better off than the rich young ruler was. What are the things we sell? We sell what Saul sold! We sell a perverse or wrong knowledge of God's kingdom so that we can 'buy the truth'. This is a spiritual matter and has nothing to do with the things of the earth as worldly sacrifices are an insult to God. The only sacrifice pleasing to Him is: "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, a broken and a contrite heart - these, O God, You will not despise." (Psalm 51:17) As God's treasure is spiritual so are the sacrifices that please Him:“Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the Lord.” (Psalm 4:4, also 107:22, 116:17, Matthew 9:13, 12:7)Wisdom instructs those that possess her: "The wise heart will be called prudent, And sweetness of the lips increases learning." (Prov. 16:21) "The heart of the wise teaches his mouth, And adds learning to his lips." (Prov. 16:23, also Prov. 15:7a) If a human being speaks what is thought to be words of wisdom, people sit up and take notice. But Jesus did more than speak wisdom; he backed it up with miracles. Surprising though is that the very people that claimed to be teaching about him completely missed who he was because they did not know wisdom! At the same time I realise that at a surface level only these writings appear to encourage people to follow after human personalities that exhibit certain traits. This, however, places the majority of responsibility on human beings to produce an impossibly high standard by which everything is modelled (the Proverbs 31 woman). We have seen the historical evidence of the negative outworking as human beings have attempted and attempt to interpret divine thought. Should we reduce Bible writings to a human book, replacing it with our thinking, then it will be no surprise that we end up with a mess of contradictions. But if God explains His words, He will be shown to be the superior intelligence that He is. There were few people on the earth that recognised God in human form while He was very young, they came from the East and were called wise men. They could discover the star leading to Jesus because they knew how to decipher the writings: "The wise shall inherit glory." (Prov. 3:35) NINETEENThe Gospel of Paul the ApostleThe Apostle, Paul, wrote a good portion of the New Testament. He was a Jew and a Roman citizen. As a young man (then called Saul) he was a strict Pharisee and the son of a Pharisee (Acts 23:6, part of the reigning religious group called the Sanhedrin). Those men were the elite academics of the then religious world. As I said in the previous chapter, although Saul was only a young man he was extremely zealous for his religion. He could always be found in the synagogue praying or with other party members discussing the books of the prophets. There were probably few in his party that could match him in single-minded devotion to the law and the prophets. He was ‘a Pharisee among Pharisees’. Saul was convinced that the Jesus people were corrupting the scriptures of the prophets, interrupting his studies. His anger burned within him as he thought of ways to silence the supposed blasphemers. They were unsettling the faith of many and turning some from the way of what he then believed was the truth. And so the eager young man with the zealous heart for his God becomes a persecutor. People with a great degree of zeal for religion can become the greatest persecutors. Is it because they are insincere? On the contrary, they are the most sincere and dedicated of the groups. What they believe they embrace with their whole heart. Unfortunately, as their belief system is so very rigid, so are they. Even though Saul believed that he was absolutely right, something happened to him while he was going about his work of punishing supposed religious dissidents. He could not dismiss from his mind the well-grounded arguments that his detainees were using to refute his theology. It made him very angry, which is the telltale reaction of a religiously indoctrinated person when they feel threatened: “And Saul, yet breathing out threats and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord…” (Acts 9:1, also Acts 8:3)Saul reacted fanatically when confronted with wisdom but the sad thing was that he had the influence to have innocent people put in prison or worse, killed. While he was travelling on the road to Damascus (going there for the purpose of throwing people into jail for speaking about Jesus) something very unusual happened. Jesus spoke to the man that was being convicted by the words of supposed heretics: “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? Who are you, Lord? I am Jesus whom you persecute: it is hard for you to kick against the pricks.” (Acts 9:5 and 26:14) The word pricks translated means ‘goad, point or sting’. Saul had been kicking hard against the goads that God was using to get through to him, and hurting his own self in the process: “The words of the wise are as goads...” (Eccl. 12:11a) As hard as he tried, Saul could not escape the beauty and logic of the words of wisdom spoken by those he was oppressing. God showed Saul mercy because Saul acted in ignorance but yet Jesus did not enlighten the rich young ruler - why? “Those whom I love I rebuke and chasten.” (Rev. 3:19) “Rebuke a wise man and he will love you.” (Prov. 9:8b)Religious indoctrination has certain common behaviors. As I said previously, an indoctrinated religious person (when challenged with credible arguments) will often react with intense anger. If others of their congregation happen to witness their unloving behavior they will lose face. So rebuked, they will berate themselves unmercifully for their uncharitable reaction and suffer the most horrible guilt. Religious indoctrination behaves and treats its own in this hypocritical manner.Whatever ideas that Saul had of God before his experience on the Damascus road he “sold it all in an instant” when Jesus spoke to him. Saul sold his Pharisee (religious) beliefs in a moment. With joy he bought the treasure that he had found, which was wisdom, personified in Jesus Christ.As I gradually learned the information contained in this and my other books, I have been slowly, over fifteen years and ongoing, re-educated. Even then, at times it was very shocking. I am not sure how it will affect others as they are confronted with this information all at once? However, I believe that the poor in spirit will recognize it for what it is.Again it was the common people that appreciated Jesus’s words, they said: "What new doctrine is this?" (Matt. 7:28, 22:33, Mark 1:22, 1:27, 11:18, Luke 4:32, Acts 13:12, 2 John 9, 10, Rev. 2:24)The people thought Jesus's doctrine was new because they had never heard such teaching. The Pharisees had so confused the real message that the common people were amazed at hearing the difference. However, Jesus was not preaching something new. He simply explained the original gospel that God had passed down through the prophets but had been lost when men believed it their duty to attempt to interpret divine thought.Jesus came to restore this doctrine, which is the true gospel of God. The scribes and the teachers of the law were preaching another gospel and Jesus said to them: "...Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures..." (Mark 12:24, Matt. 22:29) How the scribes and teachers of the law were offended by his remark, believing they were stewards of the sacred. They could recite large passages from memory and debated long and hard on the meanings. Yet Jesus called them hypocrites and told them they did not know the true meaning.It’s this same gospel that Jesus taught and Paul the apostle became a staunch defender of. The list of names of defenders must include all those throughout history that had gained wisdom.Over ninety Bible references mention one consistent gospel of God. Mark 1:1 says: "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God." (See also 2 Cor. 2:12, 4:3-4, 9:13, Eph. 6:19, 2 Tim. 3:10) "We preached unto you the gospel of God." (1 Thess. 2:9, also 3:2) Further in Matthew 24:14 it says, "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world...” There are many gospels that are preached today but only “this gospel of the kingdom” is the right one. The Apostle Paul sometimes referred to the gospel message in the possessive: "In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel." (Romans 2:16, also 16:25) Paul was clearly stating that Jesus’s gospel and his own were exactly the same message. When he was alive he preached a consistent gospel. Even though the early churches were in different geographical locations, they believed the same things. And Paul laboured constantly to preserve his gospel:"But even if we or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed." (Gal. 1:8-9) Only the gospel of Christ (wisdom) can bring God's blessing, any other teaching will bring a curse with it. The curse being that people will try to follow impossible or inconsistent teachings they believe are from God, which causes them to become hard-hearted. While warning the disciples, Paul also had foreknowledge that his gospel would be compromised after his death. Speaking prophetically he said: "For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. And also from among yourselves men will rise up, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves." (Acts. 20:29-30) Men from without, whom Paul referred to as savage wolves, would come in among the disciples after he was gone. How do we recognize a wolf? They feed off the sheep! The world is no stranger to such wolves. Various religious leaders are always rising up that claim divine inspiration, asking their followers to support them - in this way they 'live off' the sheep. Some leaders have led those that follow them to destruction. Other leaders claim to be benevolent but still have no qualms about asking their followers to sacrifice their money, time and goods, even if it means that the giver must struggle to do so. Wherever you have a situation where the leader is living better than the sheep by living “off of them”- there is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Paul's next words from the same passage in Acts 20 are a little surprising: "And also from among yourselves men will rise up speaking perverse things…" (Acts 20:30)Some of their own would rise up, which means they were rising up to something. After Paul died, some men within the congregations would rise to a position of authority among their brethren. These people were not called wolves but nevertheless, they were drawing the disciples away from Christ and to themselves. They would not carry on the teachings of Paul but would speak perverse things. After Paul was gone, and we don't know how long it took for this to happen, men with distorted theology rose up to prominence among the early church disciples.Paul's statement was prophetic that men would begin to 'draw away' the disciples 'after themselves' meaning after their own perverse teachings, gaining for themselves personal followings. Paul's warnings were forgotten, as he said would happen. The disciples began following ‘after men’ and their various philosophies based upon the understanding that each leader interprets the writings. Wisdom was entirely forgotten and denominationalism was born.How do we tell when a doctrine is perverse? It divides people! Disciples are dispersed into different groups, each with their own variation of doctrinal teaching. Although those groups may agree on the one central theme of Christ's divinity (because they hold the same writings as their authority) nevertheless, they are fragmented because of different teachings. Those that profess to follow the Bible should strongly question why so many people that say they follow the same God have so many varied teachings among them. People can only truly unite when they believe ‘exactly the same things’. When disciples of Bible writings follow 'after men' they will be driven apart by different doctrines, as unique as the men themselves are. People begin following a person whom they believe is divinely inspired to lead them. When a particular leader rises up and his/her understanding of Bible writings satisfies the demands of the group, it creates a church. When groups of people give credence to the doctrine it then creates a denomination. Denominations are always based upon a human leader whom the people believe is divinely inspired by God to lead them; the Roman Catholic Church is a classic example as the Pope holds virtually complete authority. In this manner different gospels have come into being in the past and present. The true gospel of Christ on the other-hand will unite people under 'consistent teachings'. At one point the disciples at the church in Corinth were fighting over which one of their leaders they thought was the most spiritual. Paul was among the list and he said to them:"...there are quarrels among you. What I mean is this; One of you says, 'I follow Paul', another, 'I follow Apollos', another, 'I follow Cephas', still another, 'I follow Christ'." (1 Cor. 1:11) Paul obviously was not the only person among these disciples that was looked upon as a leader. The people were fighting over whether they were following Paul, Apollos or Cephas (Peter), while others said that they were following Jesus, which is the right way. We know that Paul and Peter were apostles but Apollos was not and yet he was esteemed right along with the other two. Paul did not encourage their behaviour for a second. He told them they must not follow after human personalities, himself included, but Jesus Christ alone by the gospel that Paul preached. Jesus tells us what the group (pack) mentality is like: “…To what then shall I liken the men of this generation, and what are they like? They are like children sitting in the marketplace and calling to one another, saying: ‘We played the flute for you and you did not dance…” (Luke 7:32 see Matthew 11:17 to confirm) The religious group of Jesus’s time played a flute (a system of beliefs) and expected Him to dance to it but Jesus rejected them. Any religious group has a tune its adherents are expected to dance to and God help you if you don’t dance along. Expectations from every group always come with the unvoiced motivation of ‘do as we do or you are not one of us’. Families can be guilty of this same thing – where parents ostracise their own children because their children won’t yield to the pressures of guilt motivation. Subtle (or not) guilt produces subtle pressures and the means whereby the group keeps control and gets things done. Of course the rewards of being in the group are acceptance, which is very important to many people. They get self-satisfaction from the pats they receive from the group. However, where guilt or pressure motivations are present there is always a lot of unhealthy jockeying for position between members of the group. You might ask me, “what’s the difference between giving yourself over to the group or to God, are they not the same things?” The group mentality always says, ‘give yourselves to us’ and ‘do what we do’, it’s parasitic. Jesus’ gospel is not even mutualism (both sides equally benefit) it’s commensalism. He does not benefit at all because He needs nothing from us. We are the recipients of this completely unselfish benefactor. Bible-based religion has not accurately portrayed God to the world but has done more to alienate Him from many sincere people. A person that is awed by nature at its best is singing God’s praises more surely than the minister that preaches eloquent but misleading doctrine.The apostle Paul turned people’s attention ‘to Jesus’ by turning them to ‘His gospel’. John the Baptist literally pointed out Jesus and so fulfilled his ministry.When Paul was alive he kept bringing the disciples back to the need for witnesses to correctly interpret God’s words because it would keep them free from the rule of men and spiritual error. A perverse gospel will always direct the focal point of attention onto a human personality. As God did not hold Saul accountable for his ignorance done in unbelief, neither does he others. And the growing process is both sweet and painful!Paul told the disciples what the behavioural evidence is that they were not yet following the true gospel of Christ: "For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh, and behaving like ordinary men? For when one says, 'I belong to Paul,' and another, 'I belong to Apollos’, are you not carnal?" (1 Cor. 3:3-4) Paul very clearly told those believers that where they were picking favourites among their leaders (esteeming one man higher than another) it showed him that they were still ‘carnal (not spiritual, but fleshly/worldly: today that same thing would sound as “I follow Billy Graham”, or I follow Benny Hinn”, etc.). Those believers had not yet gained wisdom but let others ‘rule over their spirit’, bringing into effect ‘the commandments of men’. As people follow such they will remain in a carnal religious state, not having bought the truth. In the corporate world of business there is need for leaders, those that must make decisions for the betterment of their companies. This is the natural realm of body and soul where there is necessity for leadership, otherwise there would be chaos. Someone must lead and others must follow or nothing would get done. In the world of life on earth most everyone follows behind someone else and the most gifted are chosen. In the spirit realm with Jesus leading, everyone's gifts are fully appreciated and utilised. Jesus will bring each individual to fulfilment but in the natural realm under men only some are fulfilled.No person is lord over another in God’s kingdom however, because absolute equality exists for everyone under one leader, Jesus Christ. You would think it would lead to anarchy (as it certainly would in the natural world) but supernatural matters are different. Speaking of spiritual matters (of conscience) we are not to give anyone authority over our spirit. In that regard we answer to God alone. Where there exist leaders over others in churches you will then find the corporate mentality no matter how benevolent those leaders appear to be. Someone will always be above, which means others will be beneath him or her, some right under and some landing on the bottom. True equality in God’s church can never exist under those conditions no matter how much “love one another” is preached. Under the very best conditions you will still find some being treated unfairly and under the worst case scenario of leadership - a tyrant dictator. Some people will honestly say that a group without a human leader could not possibly work even in a church because you must have someone to lead. God's ability to explain His own words has been grossly underestimated. Jesus very plainly taught us not to follow ‘after men’ in the gospel of Matthew 23:8:"But you are not to be called 'Rabbi', for you have only one Master and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth 'father', for you have one Father, and He is in heaven. Nor are you to be called 'teacher', for you have one Teacher, the Christ." Rabbi, Father and teacher are directly translated from Greek as titles. The Jews gave titles to their church leaders, which created positions and the ‘commands of men’. Jesus said, “you are all brothers” meaning, “you are all equal”. No one in Christ’s body must have a title so that one is spiritually over others in position. Where this happens, situations will just naturally be created where one will “lord it over” others, which creates favouritism/hypocrisy. Jesus was speaking directly to each one of us because He said, "you are not to be called", and "do not call anyone", and, "nor are you to be called". When we set up any human being (or allow ourselves to be entitled as master, teacher or father) then we set up the ‘commandments of men' and remain in a carnal corporate/political state. Some might say, “We don't follow after men because we don't call our church leaders, 'Rabbi', 'father' (the Roman Catholic Church actually does call priests, ‘Father’) or 'teacher'.” However, and again, these particular names merely stand for titles that create positions. Those that profess Christ are not to have titles among them:"You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you..." (Matt. 20:25-26) “Those who are great” are those people that have risen higher and have authority over others because of a position. Jesus was speaking to His followers and telling them that they must not have such government, “it shall not be so among you”. Spiritually-speaking when people that claim to follow Christ give titles to people, whatever the title may be [Reverend, Pastor, Teacher, Priest, Deacon (attendant, to serve), Elder, etc.], they will be following after men that will (however benevolently) exercise authority over their spiritual life. I am speaking in a church sense and not about a situation where you are being paid by someone to do a job. In such a case then yes you must come under their authority because they are paying you. You always have the option of quitting if an employer asks you to do something that undermines your integrity.The teachers of the law said long eloquent prayers but were teaching false doctrine: “Beware of the scribes, which love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the marketplaces, And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts: Which devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayers: these shall receive greater damnation.” (Mark 12: 38-40 see also Luke 20:46-47 and Matthew 6:5)Jesus was very strongly saying, “beware of the religious leaders”. He was teaching a revolutionary idea when He spoke such words. The scribes and teachers of the law were affronted because He spoke directly against the positions they held over others in the synagogues. Jesus challenged their right to ask for such subservience and paid with his life. Speaking to the scribes of the law and specifically the Pharisees, Jesus said: "Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: 'These people draw near to Me with their mouth, and honour Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men'." (Matt. 15:7-9, see also Mark 7:7) Men that held positions of authority in the church were teaching as doctrines (meaning as God's word) their own or other men's interpretations of the scriptures. This perverse doctrine is called “the commandments of men” in both old and new testaments. This very thing is happening today. Isaiah said that when we follow such it will seal up vision and prophecy. The reason for that is that God must be the teacher and He does so through the interpreting law (wisdom) that He set in place."...not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14)So we see that heeding the commandments (teachings) of men has the affect of turning people away from the truth. Jeremiah wrote: "Thus says the Lord: 'Cursed is the man who trusts in man and makes flesh his strength, whose heart departs from the Lord'." (Jeremiah 17:5) The phrase “cursed is the man…” rephrased is “the person that trusts in man (makes flesh his strength) will be cursed because of following corrupt teachings”. It will cause the heart to depart from God. The from Matthew (quoted from Isaiah) says, “their heart is far from Me”. These are confirming verses because they are speaking about the same matters pertaining to the spirit and how it has turned or departed from God because of perverse doctrine. When people follow after the commandments of men then they have turned their spirit from God and will be resting on human strength. It was not God that had turned from them but the people had removed their hearts far from God by following men. The phrases “trusts in man” and “makes flesh his strength” means that people are trusting man to do for them what only Godly wisdom can do. The heart had turned away from God and begun to trust in man and their teachings to lead them spiritually, creating indoctrination. The curse will be they are unable to unlock the true Bible message because they are not using the correct method. And if they were using it, would not be setting him or herself up as a teacher, except to point out this law.The meaning of the word repent is “after understanding”; I understand what I am being asked to do, therefore I can do it. Religion on the other-hand often teaches “faith above understanding”. Cults are especially devious in getting people to do things on this basis. Concerning the world of men you must not give yourself over to something if it requires you to act contrary to your conscience. You must guard your spirit. If your spirit is free from hypocrisy then your conscience will be healthy also and will lead you rightly in the spirit of true democracy.Church leaders said to Jesus: "Teacher, we know that you are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men." (Matt. 22:16, read almost the exact same words in Mark 12:14) The phrase “nor do you care about anyone” is correctly interpreted as “you don't care what people think of you”. In other words Jesus was not out to impress anyone. If it were true that Jesus didn't care about people then he would not have gone out of his way to heal everyone that asked! This verse means that Jesus didn't care about politics. He never tried to impress members of the Sanhedrin; on the contrary, he often rebuked the teachers of the law. Therefore, this means that Jesus did not cater to the titles that men held in the synagogue. The next phrase, "...You do not regard the person of men" means, “you do not regard the positions men hold in the churches”. The Pharisees said this to Jesus because they knew that He did not regard them more highly because they held various positions of importance in the synagogue. Jesus never flattered those leaders at any time by allowing them to have spiritual authority over Him. It made many of the scribes and the teachers of the law very angry that Jesus refused to recognize their spiritual authority. These individuals were used to the respect of the people, members of their synagogue hanging on their every word. They were called ‘Rabbi’, ‘father’ and ‘teacher’, but Jesus rejected them (see Matt. 22:29 and Mark 12:24). What a blow to their big egos His words must have been. Presuming they knew God so intimately they failed to recognize Him when He was among them. Had they followed His doctrine they would not have crucified Jesus.The “teachings of men” have certain characteristics to distinguish them. We read in Colossians 2:20-22: "Let no one defraud you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels...vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the Head...Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations - Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle, which all concern things which perish with the using - according to the commandments and doctrines of men? These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body (fasting, beatings, etc.), but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh." (Quotation marks are mine - see also Matt. 15:9) Religion is notorious for its many rules. Twice in these verses false humility is brought up and we are not to miss what is meant here. When people follow after other human beings in a religious sense, there will be false humility. If you examine any religion you will see that they are following traditional thinking of their particular belief system. False humility is only concerned with making a fair showing outwardly by “diligently following all the rules and regulations” of their respective traditions. Adherents may be extremely sincere in their devotion but their humility will be false because it’s based upon the commandments of men. Those commands always have a lot of rules, “do not taste, do not touch, do not handle” - “don't do this, don't do that”, but these things all concern the mortal earthly life that is passing away. We can reach God in our spirit and not by the constraining regulations that human beings impose upon one another to try and look righteous. One of the great purposes of many religions has always been to ”restrain the flesh” but it’s only properly restrained where there is reasonableness. Another mark of the teachings of men is putting themselves into groups or classes. Paul said: "For we dare not class ourselves or compare ourselves with those who commend themselves. But they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise." (2 Cor. 10:12) “We dare not class ourselves” meaning “we dare not put ourselves in classes and/or groups (denominations)” like they do. Those that class themselves “among themselves” (various denominations) are not wise. If they possessed wisdom they would not class themselves, which is divisive and promotes spiritual authority over others. The more gifted in any group will just naturally rise to the top leaving the less gifted to grovel at their feet. Paul said, we 'dare not' behave so. He meant that “we dare not act that way” because it encourages partiality.Every peer group esteems certain attributes among its members. It matters not what group you’re in, if there’s a corporate mentality, the same rules prevail. Depending upon who best personifies the preferred traits of the group decides who rises highest in the group. They are classed “among their peers” as in “classing themselves” or “comparing themselves” with themselves. The most gifted among them is always the leader, everyone else falling in line behind them depending upon the strength of their gifts. This type of thing must happen in the corporate world of earth but not in God's church. Where the gospel of Christ is there will be impartiality and equality for all under one master, Christ."How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that comes from the only God?" (John 5:44) “Comparing themselves with themselves” does not produce the right basis for critical thinking. When we judge ourselves “by others”, or “others by ourselves”, that is unfair comparisons. There are people that are naturally gifted, charismatic leaders, entertainers, etc. but there are just as many people that are not. It would be unfair to judge people on the basis of something that no one has any control over! It’s also less likely that ideas will be challenged in church settings and this scenario creates ingrown thinking. We can only be equal as we believe the same things. While Paul was alive he instructed the disciples: "Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement." (1 Cor. 1:10) Paul instructed that there was to be “no divisions” among you. Any variations in teaching will just naturally divide people as they choose what they think makes the most sense.After Paul was martyred the disciples began to do the very thing that he warned them not to do. They followed after men and it caused (and causes) different factions, as we have today. They no longer had the same mind because they were not all believing exactly the same things. "...And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand..." (Mark 3:24-27, see also Luke 11:17, Matt. 12:25) The word divided that Jesus used here means to, 'disunite, split into factions’ or ‘divide (into pieces)'. Where believers are divided because of differences in doctrine the house cannot stand. The word stand does not mean “stand in power” or “stand the test of time”. The Greek translation actually means, abide or “have covenant relationship”. Disciples can only abide in a “covenant relationship with God” as they get wisdom. Jesus cannot abide where His church is fragmented by different teachings because: "...God is not the author of confusion but of peace..." (1 Cor. 14:33) While it is true that Paul was called an apostle and instructed believers, nevertheless he did not draw the disciples “to himself”. Rather he continually pointed them to Jesus by the law of two or three. He often warned the disciples to the point of tears not to follow any other gospel than what he preached because he knew that any other teaching was corrupt and would divide them. John the Baptist had this same mind: "...John stood with two of his disciples. And looking at Jesus as He walked, he said, 'Behold the Lamb of God!' The two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus." (John 1:35-37) This demonstration of the Spirit through John was showing how all of us should behave. There were two disciples were with John, which is a word picture for confirming. John “pointed Jesus out” to the disciples and then the disciples “followed Jesus”. When we point out wisdom then Jesus will lead his people. When Jesus is leading then all that follow his words will come into their own. Although Jesus is no longer physically here on earth, He is just as accessible in the spirit and is pointed out when His true gospel is preached. So when John's disciples left him to follow Jesus, John did not feel loss or abandonment but a sense of great accomplishment: "Therefore my joy is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease." (John 3:29-20) God does not waste His words on meaningless lessons. The ‘law of two' is so much a part of all of God’s writings: "Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth...for where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them." (Matt. 18:19) To be “gathered in the Lord's name” means they agree because they are following the same gospel. "A disciple is not above his teacher, but everyone who is perfectly trained will be like his teacher." (Luke 6:40, Matt.10:24) In human matters the better the professor the better our training. In spiritual matters, Jesus is the perfect teacher, able to lead from within. Let human beings instruct you in human matters and you will be well trained if you have a good teacher. In matters concerning your spirit, let God train you with wisdom. Paul knew that his gospel perfectly represented the Lord. He was able to call it my gospel because he knew that his understanding was correct. Without wisdom, no one will see the Lord. With it, we will become as God intended."Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ...and by the prophetic Scriptures..." (Romans 16:25-26) Other of my books:*:MISSING PIECES OF THE BIBLE: Lost Books Fill-in the Blanks (Original Book)MISSING PIECES OF THE BIBLE: Lost Books Fill-in the Blanks (Revised Edition)MISSING PIECES OF THE BIBLE: Lost Books Fill-in the Blanks (The Updated Version)REVEALED: Resolving Bible End Time MysteriesHidden Meanings in Proverbs & Parables of the BiblePublish America:Apples from the Song of Solomon*I highly recommend for all your publishing needs. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download