The Atonement, Salvation and Forgiveness

12/4/99

The Atonement, Salvation and Forgiveness

First let us cover the forgiveness of sins. Does this concept apply to modern people of today or was it just dreamed up by controlling old men in the past to dominate an ignorant people? Let us see how the Bible actually handles this subject by examining the real meaning of the words involved.

The word sin comes from the Greek word HAMARTANO which means “to miss the mark.” In other words, when the Greeks 2000 years ago, shot at a target with an arrow and missed they “sinned” (HAMARTANO) or missed the target.

Is this how the word “sin” is used today? Verily no. When the religious person thinks of sin in our age he generally thinks of being unclean and ridden with guilt.

Now when you shoot at a target and miss the bullseye do you feel degraded and guilty to the extent that you feel paralyzed and even feel unworthy to shoot again? No. Of course not. When you miss you may find it mildly irritating, but you generally can’t wait to have another try at it.

Now guilt has been identified with sin by those who have sought to control the souls of men, but among the enlightened prophets it was not always so. To them sin was seen as a human error and salvation from sin is the path that leads to a correction of error. The prophets in times past did not seek to control through guilt, but sought to shift consciousness from error to perfection as they saw it.

Now let us look at the second major word – “forgiveness,” for the scriptures always talk about the obtaining forgiveness of sins.

Forgiveness in the Bible is translated from the Greek APHIEMI. The trouble is that this word does not mean forgiveness as we understand the word today, even though it seems to when it is used in connection with the forgiveness of sins. But unknown to most the real meaning of the word is difficult to decipher and is translated a number of different ways. Here are some verses where the word APHIEMI is used

Mark 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mark 7:8 For LAYING ASIDE (APHIEMI) the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

Matt 19:27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have FORSAKEN (APHIEMI) all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?

Matt 19:29 And every one that hath FORSAKEN (APHIEMI) houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

John 14:18 I will not LEAVE (APHIEMI) you comfortless: I will come to you.

John 14:27 Peace I LEAVE (APHIEMI) with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.

John 16:28 I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I LEAVE (APHIEMI) the world, and go to the Father.

Matt 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, YIELDED UP (APHIEMI) the ghost.

Now if you substitute the modern word forgiveness in each of the above cases you will see that it just does not make consistent sense. For instance in Mark 7:8 do we forgive the commandment of God or in Matt 27:50 did Jesus forgive the ghost when he seemed to die?

If you go through the New Testament and examine all the places where APHIEMI is used you will see that the most consistent meaning of the word is “to give up, let go, yield or release.”

Now in this light let us retranslate the Biblical term “forgiveness of sins.” A much more accurate translation would be “the letting go or giving up of error.”

So how about salvation from sin? What would that mean then?

Salvation comes from the Greek SOLTERIA which literally means “to rescue or deliver.” Therefore salvation from sin is really a deliverance from error.

If one is taught the truth about guilt and its cause and release and the person accepts this teaching as correction then he is saved from sin or delivered from a great error in his thinking.

In the old days many people believed that the world was flat. But when Columbus proved to the them that it was round it could be said that Columbus saved the world from its sin. In other words, he delivered (saved) the world from its error (sin) in thinking.

When it is said that Jesus was crucified for the sins of the world the truth is that the world made a grave error in crucifying him.

When it is written that Jesus saved the world from its sins the meaning is simply that he left the teachings and example necessary to correct the world from it’s error in belief and thinking. Most people did not believe a man could rise from the dead. Jesus corrected this error by demonstrating power over death, thus he saved the world from sin in this matter.

Does being saved from sin or obtaining forgiveness of sin (the giving up of error) nullify the law of cause and effect or karma? In other words, if you robbed a bank in the past would the slate be wiped clean?

No. The scriptures do not bear this out. Concerning the law Jesus said: Matt 5:18 “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (accomplished).”

The law of cause and effect is one of the laws of God and this will stay in place until heaven and earth pass away.

Paul also said it well:

“For every man shall bear his own burden. Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things. Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” Gal 6:5-7

Here we learn that every man will bear his own burden and reaps that which he has sowed. In other words, he will suffer an effect for every cause he initiates.

The words of Jesus ring true to this principle:

“Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.” Matt 5:26

Every cause will be counterbalanced by effects to the uttermost farthing.

Now if anyone should have had the effects of sin neutralized it would have been the severely persecuted saints in Biblical times, but of them it is written:

“And it was given unto him (the antichrist) to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” Rev 13:7

Here we are told that the dark powers overcame the saints and a few verses later we are given the reason for their suffering:

“He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.” Rev 13:10

The saints were led into captivity because sometime in their past they led others into captivity. They were killed with the sword because sometime in their past they killed with the sword. This is why (says the scripture) the saints must have “patience” and “faith.”

Even though these great souls were “saved from their sins,” or delivered from error in thinking, they still suffered the effects of their sins or mistakes.

To forgive does not mean to neutralize the law of cause and effect, but it does mean that we let go of grievances for the holding of grievance is a great error in thought as taught in the Course in Miracles.

Let us say that Jim was in a car accident that was caused by a mistake on his part and he ran into Rick, an innocent driver. Both of them were badly injured. For some time after the accident Jim was racked with tremendous guilt and cursed himself daily for making a stupid mistake. Rick also has problems for he feels a strong grievance toward Jim for the pain and suffering he has endured. Finally, Jim seeks to rectify the situation and visits Rick, explains his feelings and grief and asks for forgiveness. Rick is touched and lets the grievance pass. They hug each other and cry and both depart company feeling peace of mind again. Jim still realizes he made a dumb mistake, but decides to accept the fact that sometimes mistakes just happen. Rick realizes that Jim did not mean him harm and corrects his own thinking by letting go.

Now that forgiveness has taken place and both men are filled with peace has the actual physical effects been neutralized? Are Jim and Rick’s cars suddenly restored to their new condition? Of course not.

Are the scars they bare removed?

No.

Are the hospital bills miraculously paid?

No again.

All the effects of every cause still remain in place. But this is a good thing because love and forgiveness are causes which produce the effects of joy and peace and thus the law of Dominating Good works through cause and effect for the long tern benefit of all.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Older Archives in the Process of Updating

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

 

The Name of Jesus Christ

12/2/1999

The Name of Jesus Christ

A reader with a Mormon background asked me to elaborate on teachings on Christ and the atonement. He is concerned about the great difference in approach between the new age community and standard religious people. Is there some unifying truth to be gleamed here?

This is an important question, for the belief or non belief in the Atonement of Christ as well as the scriptures in general has created a great chasm between those of New Age leanings and scriptural faith.

It is interesting to watch a debate between a new ager and a born againer. The born againer will quote scripture after scripture to back up his beliefs and the new ager will smile as if the guy is from the stone ages and preach back his philosophy quoting no authority, but his heart. Consequently, the two are not speaking each other’s language and both go away from the discussion feeling that the other is as far down the enlightenment scale as you can get.

One of the problems is that the sincere religious person has felt soul contact while reading the scriptures and because of this is not about to drop his belief in the closest link he has to the Spirit. On the other hand, many new agers have not even read the scriptures, or had them forced upon them while they were young, and do not identify with this feeling. Instead, many of them have received some spiritual contact while reading other books that teach enough truth to draw the inner voice.

What the true seeker must realize is that God has spoken to many different people in many different ways and even though the vocabulary and definitions may vary the core truths are the same.

The Book of Mormon expresses this quite well:

(7) Know ye not that there are more nations than one? Know ye not that I, the Lord your God, have created all men, and that I remember those who are upon the isles of the sea; and that I rule in the heavens above and in the earth beneath; and I bring forth my word unto the children of men, yea, even upon all the nations of the earth?…

(9) And because that I have spoken one word ye need not suppose that I cannot speak another; for my work is not yet finished; neither shall it be until the end of man, neither from that time henceforth and forever.

(10) Wherefore, because that ye have a Bible ye need not suppose that it contains all my words; neither need ye suppose that I have not caused more to be written.

(11) For I command all men, both in the east and in the west, and in the north, and in the south, and in the islands of the sea, that they shall write the words which I speak unto them; for out of the books which shall be written I will judge the world, every man according to their works, according to that which is written.

(12) For behold, I shall speak unto the Jews and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the Nephites and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; and I shall also speak unto all nations of the earth and they shall write it. II Nephi 29:7; 9-12

Now here is an interesting question for the Mormons, who of course accept the above words from the Book of Mormon. God here says he will “also speak to all nations of the earth and they shall write it.” General Christianity believe that God spoke to prophets of one nation, and a past nation at that – ancient Palestine. The Mormons go a step further and they have scriptures from basically two nations past – America and Palestine. On the other hand, the Book of Mormon teaches that God will speak to “all nations.” All nations are definitely more than two.

Where are these scriptures from the other nations?

The answer is quite simple. Every people of every nation has available sacred writings containing truths geared for the “salvation” of the people to whom they were given. These writings can range from the sacred teachings of the Hopi Indians to the Koran of Islam, to the Bavagad Gita, to the ancient Vedas to the writings of Confucius, to the sayings of Buddha to name a few.

Notice what God says about these words of his to all nations:

“I will judge the world, every man according to their works, according to that which is written.”

Thus those people who do not have the Christian scriptures, but have other words of God, will be judged by those words that are accepted by their own peoples.

Now we get to the synthesizing point. The Christian will say: “Those other books you call scriptures may be good, but they do not speak of Jesus Christ who is essential for salvation.”

To this we answer: “Ah, but they do my friend…”

To this the astounded believer will ask: “Where?”

Remember what we have said about the belief of the ancients regarding names? Today when we hear a name we just hear the sound, but when the ancients spoke a name they heard the meaning. If you called an Indian Running Bear you were acknowledging that he could run with the strength of a bear. Among the Hebrews if you were called David it meant that you were a person with a good heart easy to love.

So what does it mean to be called Jesus Christ? As we stated before this name means “anointed to deliver.” Jesus did not intend to keep the name just for himself, but advised all of his followers to take the name upon themselves. All enlightened Souls are anointed to deliver those of a lower vibration. When we have been lifted up by someone above us, then it is our mission to lift or deliver others to higher ground also. There is a universal rule which tells us that we cannot go higher until we have given out what we have learned and assisted in lifting our brethren to where we are. When we have done this, then another will come along and lift us to higher ground. This is the principle behind the name of Jesus Christ. To believe on His name is to believe on this principle, that there are higher lives in the Universe waiting to help deliver, or “save” us when we are ready.

This salvation is a mutual effort of the student and teacher. The teacher does not actually do the saving, but provides the tools, example and the knowledge to the student. The student then has the choice to use those tools to take the next step or to stay where he is for a while longer. If he takes the next step he is “saved” from his past moves into a bold new future.

Now let us get back to our question: Where in these other inspired works is the mention of the name of Jesus Christ?

Answer: You do not look for the sound “Jesus Christ.” If you were transported back 2000 years ago to ancient Palestine and asked for Jesus Christ even the apostles would not recognize the sound for the name then was pronounced something like Yaysoos Christos. What you look for in the ancient writings is the meaning behind the name and you will find that the concept of the higher lending a helping hand to the lesser evolved or less fortunate is a principle taught in all sacred text and where this is taught the name of Jesus Christ stirs within the souls of men.

Those with greater knowledge and power lending a helping hand to those with less knowledge and power is the principle behind the name of Jesus Christ and is the principle of eternal salvation. (Joseph Smith called it Eternal Progression.) One must pass along the knowledge that he receives before he will be given more. If you keep it welled up within you or “hide your talent buried in the earth” you will be damned. In other words, if you do not give out the light you have your channels of reception will be dammed up until cut off from the spiritual flow.

Christ was the greatest teacher and example of helping his brethren, and being “anointed to deliver,” but it is the principle we must look to and not the man.

This is why, when a man called Him good, He replied:

“Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.” Matt 19:17

He understood the principle in the scripture that teaches that one is cursed that trusts in the arm of flesh. (Jeremiah 17:5) Even trusting in the visible Jesus is thus trusting in the arm of flesh. Instead we must trust in the invisible Spirit and the teachings manifested through it.

I’ll make more comments on the atonement later.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Older Archives in the Process of Updating

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

 

Karma and the Atonement

132

Sept 12, 2016
The Law of Karma
Or Cause and Effect – Part 4
Karma and the Atonement

A reader wants t know how to determine the karmic results of various misdeeds, such as lies ranging from mild ones to whoppers.

The consequences are exactly as the scriptures say:

“He (Christ) shall reward every man according to his works.” (Matt 16:27)

And what does “according to our works” mean?

The scriptures says:

“But this I say, He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.” (2 Cor 9:6)

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” (Gal 6:7)

If you lie, you will synchronistically encounter people in this life or the next that will lie back to you with the similar intensity with which you lied. This cycle will continue until you cease to lie.

There does not have to be a large book of consequences for lies and other errors any more than you have to have a large book of instructions of steering corrections necessary to drive across town. After a couple miles driving you have corrected your course hundreds of times but writing a book of instructions concerning every correction would be silly. The corrections are built into you and happen automatically when the goal is in mind. Even so are the causes created by lying stored in the Mind of God and returned in kind automatically without anyone having to make tabulations.

John continues with: “Who benefits from the consequences? Let’s go back to the lying example. Let’s say I lied about you, and spread hurtful gossip that caused you embarrassment. Let’s say we looked in the big book and it said, ’37 lashings.’ Who benefits? Does my sore back remove your embarrassment? No. Does it cure me of lying? Not necessarily. So, without consequences, laws would be meaningless, BUT it appears the consequences themselves can be meaningless.”

So, what is the benefit derived fro the consequences of karma?

A just consequence will indeed cure one from lying. Many of us are thick-headed and have to suffer the same consequence dozens of times before we learn, but eventually we do indeed learn.

The liar is the main beneficiary of the natural consequences of his lying, but his circle of associates also benefit.

Some think that justice melted out by karma is not right and there must be a better way. What better way is there than to learn from experience — to experience the effects of our own causes so that we may become a master of causes as was the Christ? We may be imperfect, but all of us are capable of paying off debt. I have written much previously about how this debt is paid off. One can pay off several lifetimes of debt in one lifetime through selfless service. Just like we can indeed perfectly pay off a bank loan quickly if we work smart and earn more money, even so can we perfectly pay off our karma. We can more than pay it off and start accumulating a positive balance rather than a negative.

“And every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.” (1 Cor 3:8)

A reader asks about Jesus appearing and suffering for our sins creating an atonement which removes cause or karma.

This is not what the scriptures say, my friend. No where in the scriptures does it say that the atonement removed any Cause or Karma. Where do you get such an idea?

Cause cannot be removed by anyone — not even God, for to remove cause is to remove all creation as it says in the Book of Mormon concerning the idea that duality could be suspended: “there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away.” (2 Nephi 2:13)

Remove karma and you remove duality, remove duality and all things vanish away.

Concerning our debts or Karma, Jesus said:

“Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.” (Matt 5:26)

But, you say, Jesus paid the uttermost farthing for us and fulfilled the law with an infinite atonement.

But did He? Is that what the scriptures really say?

Here is a scripture relating to the fate of those who did receive the atonement of Jesus:

“And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kind reds, and tongues, and nations. And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

“If any man have an ear, let him hear. He that leader into captivity shall go into captivity: he that skillet with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.”
Rev 13:7-10

Here we are told that power is given to the Beast to make war with the saints and overcome them. We saw that this was true in the time of Christ. If anyone received an atonement it would have been the Twelve Apostles, yet all but John were killed with the sword or other means. Thousands of others suffered brutal painful deaths.

Why did they suffer so?

The scripture plainly tells us that there is a reason they must have patience and faith. It explains here that the beast has such power over them because of this principle: “He that leader into captivity shall go into captivity: he that skillet with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.”

Now keep in mind that this is a New Testament scripture given after the Atonement had been made.

Does it say that the one who kills with the sword will be killed with the sword — except for those who have had an atonement?

No.

It gives no exception to the rule, but makes a point blank statement.

Those who were the early Christian Saints being put to death by the Beast, which was Rome, were given into his power because in past lives they themselves were the perpetrators of atrocities. In the past these saints had put others in prison and to death with the sword and were in that life suffering the consequences of their action and therefore had to have patience and faith in their sufferings.

Question: If the Atonement removed the results of karma then why did those who had received the atonement continue to receive results of karma?

My Mormon readers revere Joseph Smith as a man who was righteous and received an atonement; yet he was tarred and feathered, kidnapped, placed in jail and finally killed all as a result of cause and effect. Why did not the Atonement protect him from this karma which some say should not exist?

If the atonement does not remove karma which is cause and effect, then what does it do?

The atonement removes guilt, and guilt often has more to do with imagined causes rather than real causes.

One always feels guilt when he violates the commandments of his religion, no matter which one that may be. Judaism was a religion with a great number of laws, most of them manmade and there probably was not a Jew in the days of Jesus who did not suffer some guilt for some violation of what he perceived to be God’s will.

If you feel that God has commanded you to not eat peas and you break His will and eat peas then you will feel guilt. Even though the peas cause no real harm you still need the guilt removed. But then if a savior comes along and reveals to you that your guilt is produced by illusion and reveals the truth, the guilt magically disappears. This is how the magic of the Atonement works.

It is best expressed in these words of Jesus: “You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”

The true atonement is a revelation of the truth so illusion passes away and guilt is lifted. Then real progress can be made.

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

Keys Writings 2013, Part 18

This entry is part 20 of 25 in the series 2013

July 7, 2013

Theory – Action – Subconscious

Stephen writes:

My son impressed me recently when he came out with a bit of an insight.

Theory – Action – Subconscious

Our thoughts need to be turned into Actions which then rewrites the Subconscious.

Good thoughts lead to right actions leads to a healthy subconscious which leads to more healthy thoughts/actions etc – and so one starts to rise up the spiral.

JJ

I think your son is on to a true principle. Many people think the way to reprogram our subconscious is with our thoughts, but an action is much more powerful.

For instance, many have daydreams of being courageous but fall apart when confronted with real danger. It is the person who acts with real courage that sends by far the strongest message to his subconscious of who he is becoming.

that is not to say that thought does not play a part for it starts the process.

 

July 10, 2013

Atonement Dialog

Sorin:

I see some benefits that this psychic mechanism called guilt can have in many circumstances. For instance, when somebody lies to somebody and realizes he did a mistake, guilt makes him realize that and tell the truth.

JJ

The benefits are very minimal and the harm from guilt is very great. The Biblical word for sin is the Greek HAMARTANO which means “to miss the mark.” In other words when the Greeks 2000 years ago shot at a target with an arrow and missed they “sinned” (HAMARTANO) or missed the target.

Now imagine if a target shooter felt guilty when he missed the target. He may throw the bow down and not feel worthy to pick it up and try again for another month.

But when guilt is removed and common sense replaces it he no longer curses himself for missing but tries again immediately. The person who moves forward without guilt progresses much more rapidly than one hampered by it. He may feel bad when a mistake is made but feeling bad for missing a target is much different than the unworthy feeling created by guilt which often immobilizes the individual.

Sorin

What about forgiveness? Couldn’t forgiveness help us transcend the retribution morality.

JJ

Of course. The greatest benefit of forgiveness comes to the one who is the victim. If one harbors a grievance it can do harm to soul and body. On the other hand, forgiveness does not undo the results of the sin or offense.

Let us go back to our example. The offender stole the operation money from the victim and his daughter died just before she would have accepted Christ. Let us suppose the victim forgives the thief. Does it bring his daughter back to life?

No.

The forgiveness is good for his soul and body but both the victim and the offender live the rest of their lives in a world where the effect of the theft remains. The girl remains dead and the father misses her until he dies.

Forgiveness lifts a dark cloud over the soul but the effects of our actions remain.

Jul 10, 2013

A Course in Miracles

Sarah writes:

I know this has discussed before and I tried to search for it. But someone was recently telling me about “the course” and there is a meet up group on Mondays near my house.

Don’t know too much, sure there are kerns of truth etc…but sort of beastly it seems to me…or at least how it was presented to me. Anyways…what’s the consensus on this?

A Course in Miracles (ACIM) does have some good material in it. The most important guides the student toward the removal of grievances. “The truth is true and nothing else is true” is my favorite quote from it.

Even so, any writing, even mine or the Bailey writings, can become a beast of authority if teachers insist his version of the teachings be accepted or no conversation is allowed that seems to contradict or give additional enlightenment. I know many of the ACIM students seem to tap into a particularly beastly mindset that does not allow the consideration of alternative opinions.

Atonement Dialog

Sorin Writes:

If the effects remains, isn’t forgiveness the solution that Christ brought to the world for ending what it appears to be an infinite chain of effects, that can no longer be balanced via the retribution system? We seem to be in a vicious system, as we keep harming each other and create endless karma chains. Shouldn’t we focus more on forgiveness?

JJ

Yes, forgiveness ends the cycle of retribution but it does not negate the effects of the offense. In our example the guy’s daughter is still dead no matter how much he forgives. Forgiveness does not negate effects and the girl is not brought back to life.

Through forgiveness, however, he does not propagate additional harm by attacking the thief and creating a new round of retribution.

A lot of people have the mistaken idea that forgiveness neutralizes effects but cause and effect always plays out. There is not one exception in our billions of years of history. Forgiveness itself is a cause that produces an effect.

Sorin

Where I live religious people are mainly judging and acting, albeit entirely subconsciously more often than not, based on fear. They understand everything through fear, submission and retribution.

JJ

Many think this problem applies particularly to religious people but it applies to over 99% of humanity but is hidden from people through their blind spots.

For instance, doctors are controlled by the same beastly fear when they tremble at the thought of endorsing an alternative treatment for cancer, even though it may work better than radiation.

The politician is terrified at going against the mindset of his party.

People are terrified in challenging the IRS.

A journalist is terrified at writing something that goes against the mindset of his fellow workers and editors.

Common people tap into what their group thought tells them is acceptable to believe and they accept without question or critical thinking.

New Age believers have many of the same fear based and illusionary beliefs but merely use a different vocabulary.

For instance, instead of preaching an apocalyptic end they may preach a shift into the 5th dimension that will take the righteous and leave the wicked behind to be destroyed.

 

July 11, 2013

Principles

Ruth asks:

Is there a Principle of Absorption and will you be expanding on it?

JJ

Yes, there is such a principle and will probably get to it at some time. Not sure when.

Ruth:

Of the 5,000 Light workers in Germany who were supposed to pick up on the Shamballa energy, did all, any, or many of them work in the German army for

Hitler? Did any of them kill Jews? Did any of them go down the wrong path with Hitler, instead of working against Hitler?

JJ

A lot of them worked for Hitler including Stauffenberg until he realized the situation. Some are pound of how the handled a difficult situation and others not so much.

Ruth;

If so, what is their karma in this lifetime if they have reincarnated?

JJ

Different for each one. Many learned the lesson to not follow an unjust authority.

Ruth

Would they be able to pay off any bad karma through service in this lifetime?

JJ

Sure. Service is the best and least painful way to pay off karma.

Ruth

I only ask, because I swear that I was a German man and my family were German too in our past lifetime.

JJ

If you sense this there is a good possibility it is true.

JJ, it clearly says here that Jesus died for our sins. It right here in the

Bible. So far you have not proven that Jesus did not die for our sins. It

right here in plan English.

1 Corinthians 15:3

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ

died for our sins according to the Scriptures,

JJ

My last article does not say that Jesus did not die for our sins, but that he did and the point is misunderstood. The Greek meaning of sin is to miss the mark or error and my point was that Jesus died to correct our errors in thinking which in essence is dying for our sins. His example wipes away our errors or sins so long as we accept the correction.

Tom

Also, what happens to those who die like my Grandparents who believed

Jesus died for our sins yet were wrong, in the afterlife? I asked you a similar

question like this before.

JJ

Those trapped in illusion go among others who are in the same state and live out their illusions in the spirit world until they realize something is wrong with them. At that point teachers come to assist them.

Ruth writes:

On a spiritual level or a higher level, is Justice weighed up in the balance of

Karma when in this type of scenario, Zimmerman shot the younger guy in self

defense, but…… is this because the younger guy had killed Zimmerman in a

previous lifetime, so Cause and Effect caught up with him?

JJ

This doesn’t mean that Martin killed Zimmerman in a previous life. It could be just one of those situations that arise through our decisions. But because it is having such a world wide impact it is possible the event was planned out on a soul level to assist humanity in learning a lesson.

Ruth:

Does this now balance out the two karmic lifetime crossovers of these two men,

so that in their next lifetime, they won’t murder each other or anyone else?

JJ

The most likely scenario is that Martin killed someone (didn’t have to be Zimmerman) in a past life and incurred some debt and this was payment for it.

 

July 20, 2013

Justice

Ruth:

Or when one kills another person “in self defense”, then what sort of karma or

effect does one accrue personally in how the karma plays out?

JJ

If self defense or one’s own death was the only choice then there would be little or no karma.

Ruth:

How do the scales of Karmic Justice carry to fruition the ending of a negative

effect for any particular person?

JJ

Lots of ways. More than I have time to explain here, but I have written quite a bit about it in the past.

Concerning the Zimmerman case, I get a strong impression on George’s brother Robert. He is a very advanced soul and I get the impression his Higher Self saw this situation evolving before his birth and he placed himself in the family in an attempt to be a spokesman for truth and justice in this confusing situation for the masses.

 

July 21, 2013

Feeling vs Mind

John C

The Left/Right Paradigm in America is two illusions chasing one another.

JJ

They both have their illusions but both are creators of reality that we must deal with.

John C

If the Right was the side of the Mind, they would be generating thoughts and ideas, not blindly trying to stop the Left at every turn.

JJ

And the Left tries to stop the Right at least as much. That’s what they do because they both see reality through different filters.

The fact that they both oppose each other does not indicate whether they are polarized in the mind or emotion.

Real workable ideas comes from the atmic plane and when they filter down they may appeal to either the mentally or emotionally polarized depending on how it suits their purpose or desire.

When I spoke of the polarization of the Right I did not say mind, but the “analytical mind.” 90% of the members of both sides are polarized in the emotional/astral body and very few are able to use the pure reason of the upper mental body.

Also remember the meaning of the word “polarization.” The fact that one is polarized in the emotions or analytical mind does not mean that is his total influence. It only means the influence dominates.

For instance, most females are polarized in their right brain or the emotions, but this does not mean they do not also use their left analytical brain when it suits them.

John W

Case in point: immigration reform.

Few in Congress ever come up with original ideas (which come from the atmic) but when ideas do filter down they may be embraced in some warped manner by either party.

On immigration the Republicans do take the more analytical approach. Most want the border secured before we liberalize immigration. The Democrats feel that they want to pass a bill legalizing the illegals now and all will work out okay without applying thought. The Republicans definitely have the left brain approach here.

The same goes for the application of the law where Republicans want current laws enforced and if they do not work we should replace them.

Democrats pass laws that feel good and then generally are not concerned about enforcing then. This particularly applies to immigration.

We may not like all laws, but without consistent the rule of law a nation will deteriorate into lawlessness and chaos.

John C

If the Right was the side of the Mind, they would be able to present rational ideas, not hysterical religious rhetoric for why marriage equality should not be the law of THIS land.

JJ

Both sides promote their ideas with religious fever. What you want to look for in polarization is not whether the person is flawless in his reasoning but whether he presents his case using emotion or reasoning.

As far as gay marriage goes the Left pretty much say they feel it is just and good and that is about it.

The Right analytically breaks things down and makes their case. For instance, they say that if we take this step then the next step could be legalizing polygamy or possibility something more hard to swallow. You may not agree with this but it is presenting a case with reason.

The fact that the Right is polarized in the analytical mind does not mean that they are always right for they have not mastered illusion.

John C

We need both mind and emotion, but Mind must rule over Emotions, as the higher controls the lower, but the Right does not rule the Left.

JJ

In our society emotion has ruled over mind for thousands of years. It is desirable that mind rule over emotion and in a few people this does happen. These people face an uphill battle in presenting their case but when they can prove their point beyond emotional doubt then even the astral ones will accept. For example, Edison invented the light bulb using his mind and it was so useful that even the most emotional of people eventually accepted it.

John C

The Course in Miracles says that when Truth is placed in opposition to Falsehood, Truth will always win, hands down.

JJ

Truth will eventually win but many will embrace a falsehood as being true even when wisely contrasted. It takes time for truth to become manifest to those in illusion.

John C

The fact that neither side has won shows that neither side represents the complete truth.

JJ

As long as there are two sides neither will be declared the winner. Their contrasting viewpoints does help the public in the middle see truth in ways they could not if there were no contrast.

Without contrast we could not see anything revealed by the light of the sun or the light of the soul.

 

July 22, 2013

Two Different Approaches

I’ve been thinking about the subject of the polarization of the Left and the Right and I thought I would tabulate some of their differences.

I stated that the Right is polarized in the left brain/ analytical mental area and the Left centers more on the right brain/ emotional nature. A lot of people, especially from the Left would disagree with this as many of them consider the Right as being flat earthers who do not even accept science, or what to them appears to be common sense.

Discussing polarization is a much different animal than talking of intelligence. There are some very intelligent people polarized on both sides of the brain. Determining that polarization just tells us the direction their intelligence is focused.

Here is a tabulation illustrating the differences of the two sides. Keep in mind that all is not black and white. Both sides analyze and feel but one will always dominate more than the other.

(1) The Budget

The Right approaches this from the analytical mental angle. They advocate balancing the budget as much as possible for if we overspend too much the whole financial system could collapse as it has done for other nations in history.

The Left approaches this from the emotional side. If they feel a project is benevolent and desirable then they are willing to purchase it with borrowed money without taking the time to analyze what the end result will be if we continue to buy programs with money we do not have.

(2) How the money is spent.

The Right supports spending money on defense and national security. Their analytical minds tell then that even if the is not a great threat in the present history tells us that we can expect something to crop up soon and we must be prepared for it. They only support social programs that are essential and put emphasis on self reliance which appeals to the analytical mind.

The Left seek to defund the military any time that we are not facing an imminent threat. If it feels like we are not threatened in the present then it feels like it will be that way tomorrow. Instead of concentrating on security they seek to spend money on programs that feel good, even though they are not essential.

(3) Authority

The Right does not support strong authority or powerful centralized government that does things for us that we can do for ourselves. It takes analytical thinking to be self-sufficient and this is the direction they pursue.

The Left wants strong authority and a strong central government that prevails over states and restricts individual freedom. This takes the thinking out of much of our decision-making and forces the people toward focusing on emotion.

(4) Career choices

The Right tends to gravitate toward business, especially in the small and intermediate range. They are big on being entrepreneurs and working for themselves if at all possible. To be successful in business requires a lot of analytical thinking.

The Left gravitates toward bureaucratic work, especially in government. These jobs often require little analytical thinking but provide security which appeals to the emotional side.

The Left excels in the entertainment industry and creative arts. Highly charged emotional people do well here and the mental types are seen as backward.

(5) Arguments

Though both sides use facts in their arguments the Right tends to analytically piece various facts together to make a point.

For instance, on global warming the Right will lay out quite a number of facts whereas the Left will make maybe one statement and expect that to settle the argument. The most popular one is, “All scientists agree there is climate change.” By declaring this statement the guy seems to think the argument is settled even though there are a thousand loose ends to clear up.

Then a while back I heard a person on the Left state, “Haven’t you heard of Hurricane Sandy?” He felt that this reminder should be enough to settle the argument for any reasonable person for everybody knows (in his mind) that Sandy is the concrete proof of the dangers of global warming.

(6) The Constitution

The Right definitely approaches this from the analytical side. Many study it carefully analyzing the meaning of every word and every phrase.

The Left tends to read the Constitution much more casually and interpret it the way that feels right rather than how it may literally read.

That’s probably enough to make my point. We could go through all the differences and discover how one side approaches it from a more analytical side and the other from the feeling side.

(7) How they handle things when they do not get their way.

The Right is, of course, disappointed and may complain about unfairness and what is seen as a bad situation, but they regroup and attempt to work within the system to make change.

On the other hand, this is where the Left really shows their emotional polarization. When they do not get their way, instead of regrouping and merely planning a strategy, they will often protest and march in the street. This they do at least ten to one more than the Right. In addition they will often confront those who are at the center of their discontent by going to their homes and even harassing their kids. If they are really upset they will turn violent, break windows, set cars on fire and physically attack police and innocent bystanders. This type of reaction is definitely from the emotions rather than the mind.

Examples of this are several of the most famous trials in recent memory.

The first was O.J. Simpson. Almost all the Right thought he should be judged guilty and most of the Left were sympathetic toward his innocence. When the Right did not get their way there were no marches and no violence. Even OJ himself did not consider his life being in danger and he was seen in public regularly after his trial.

On the other hand, after the Left did not get their way in the trial of the policemen involved in the Rodney King beating the reaction was based on pure unbridled raw emotion. Mobs formed and extreme violence erupted with many innocent people being injured. And it wasn’t just whites that were attacked but many Asians and black businesspeople suffered damages.

Then when the Left didn’t get their way in the Zimmerman trial, again there were protests. The media portrays these as being peaceful and yes, the reaction is not as violent as with the Rodney King case but there as been quite a bit of violence that has not been reported.

Here’s a site that lists 35 incidents:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/16/Twenty-One-Acts-of-Post-Zimmerman%20Verdict-Violence-and-counting

Unlike the OJ aftermath, Zimmerman is in fear of his life and has received many death threats, some of them from public figures published in the media. In addition, his family has received threats. These threats create a great contrast to the problems OJ faced which were merely of a legal nature created by the rational mind of Fred Goldman.

 

July 27, 2013

Rejuvenation

Johann wrote;

You once wrote that we never lost the knowledge of restoring our bodies, how does one do that exactly and why are you not at the body age of 25 JJ?

JJ

I do not recall saying that – especially in the way you are interpreting it.

Everyone who is born will age fairly normally until they become a master. Then they can rejuvenate themselves so long as they are fulfilling higher purpose.

I am not yet a master so my aging process is proceeding normally. I am thankful that I have been blessed with good health throughout my life and I take no prescription drugs. That, of course, with a few exceptions, that helps the overall health.

We have all the knowledge of the universe programmed into the atoms of our various bodies but that does not mean that you or I can access and make use of it all with our current limitations. As we remove our limitations the access becomes greater. To recreate a past physical body one would have to be working on the Seventh initiation or higher. To extend life indefinitely one must pass the Fifth. Not all Fifth degree initiates extend their lives as it is sometimes more beneficial to be reborn in a new and more useful body.

 

July 29, 2013

The Truth is True

I agree with Rick that the group is making good comments on the latest assignment. Perhaps Alex made the most controversial statement in saying;

“Since this principle works so well, is it even possible to find the truth?” Alex: No, it is not possible to find truth. In this environment we are supposed to live in illusion, and any “truth” is only a slightly better model or variance of the illusion, let alone everyone has different truths.

Then after receiving some counterpoints Alex added this:

Let us say that you take the statement “The Sun is bright” as truth. Well, it is not the truth. Sun is not bright. Brightness is only a perception or illusion created in your brain because your eyes happen to be sensitive to certain energy photons.

JJ

I would agree with Alex if he had said that it is not possible for us in our present state to find the ultimate truth or the complete truth, but it is indeed possible to find many things that are absolute truths as indicated by the Course in Miracles:

“For if what is not true is true as well as what is true, then part of truth is false. And truth has lost its meaning. Nothing but the truth is true, and what is false is false.”

There are many things that are absolutely true. Millions of truths can be found in mathematics. For instance 2+2=4 and does not equal anything else.

Now let us examine Alex’s statement that he says is not true. “The sun is bright.” He says this is not true because it is only a perception. In other words, the brightness of a thing is relative to the eyes of the beholder, for if our sun was placed side by side with Sirius, which is many times brighter, then the sun would not seem so bright.

Does this make the original statement untrue?

Absolutely not. When someone says the sun is bright they are comparing its brightness to other things not as bright. So in comparison to the moon and stars it is absolutely true that the sun is bright.

To say that you cannot make true measurements within a standards that is accepted by your consciousness is a thing that is not true.

If I say it is 100 degrees Fahrenheit out there and you say that is not true because it is 37.7 degrees Celsius you are just making a contentious and false argument. Both statements are absolutely true within the reference points of accepted measurements here on Planet Earth.

Absolute truth exists within relative measurements. If a thing is bright to me and dim to a visiting alien then it is still true that it is bright to me. I care not how bright it is to the alien.

There is truth within illusion. For instance, you may dream you are being chased by a monster and wake up to your relief and discover the monster is not real. Even so, it is absolutely true that you did dream of a monster and had the experience of being chased by him.

Our whole universe is created out of wavelengths (an absolute truth) so in reality solid matter is an illusion. Even, so it is still true that I am having the experience of sitting in a solid chair. It is absolutely true that the chair is solid to my reference points.

The path to greater truth is to first accept the truths that we see about us. If you dream that you are being chased by a monster it will not make the monster go away if you just think, “I am not being chased by a monster.” Outside of waking up, the best thing you can do is turn and face the monster and fight it. I did that once in a dream and beat the dickens out of it. That was a wonderful experience.

I have already written a lot about the subject of absolute and relative truth. If you want to check it out go here:

http://www.freeread.com/archives/

Then scroll down and read these post numbers:

258, 260, 261, 262, 263, 268, 269

More later…

Alex:

Over the years people have learnt a “truth” that Fgrav = k * M1 * M2 / (R^2).

This law of gravity is very helpful particularly in space tavel. This equation

has been proven true by experiment. It serves mankind well. But can this law of

gravity be considered truth? No, because no one, no one scientist knows, WHY the

(celestial) bodies KNOW that they have to be attracted to each other? The real

truth is hidden.

(And if you tell me that you know the answer to that question, for instance

because all the bodies possess some sort of magnetic female energy, etc.,

blah-blah-blah, I would laugh. It would be just another illusion even less

useful than the concise equation above.)

JJ

Why do you say that an incomplete knowledge about gravity negates the truth about its law and effects? That’s like saying that because you do not know how a radio works that it cannot be true that my favorite station is 670 on the dial. That’s silly.

If you do not know how gravity works then average people still know many truths about it. Here are some.

1. Gravity pulls us toward the earth.

2. If we jump over a cliff we will hurt ourselves.

3. If we overeat we will wind up weighing more.

4. Gravity keeps our orbit around the sun in place and consistent.

I could go on and on.

Conclusion: You do not need to know all truth about a subject to know some truths about it.

You do not need to know how consciousness originated to know the truth that you are conscious. Let us hope you are, anyway.

I figured you were using an unorthodox definition of truth. Here is what the dictionary says it is:

“The actual facts or information about something, rather than what people think, expect, or make up.”

What you are defining as truth is not even in the dictionary and to be technically correct you should have used something like “ultimate truth’ or “complete truth’ rather than just “truth.” Any fact or accurate piece of data is true.

The use of unorthodox definitions without clarifying how one is using the word is the cause of many disagreements where no real disagreements are to be had.

We had this problem when talking about law a while back. I tried to get everyone to use the dictionary definitions of the words “law’ and “legal” and because all would not accept the same definitions we couldn’t get off page one in the argument.

Well, Alex, you say that you do not go by the dictionary definition of truth and it appears that in your mind truth can never be discovered or known so it is pretty difficult to have a discussion with you about a subject that does not even exist in your mind.

For instance, because my favorite radio station is different than yours means to you that it is not true that I have a favorite radio. That is pretty strange thinking.

As I said, we had a discussion a while back on what was legal and because we could not agree on the meaning of the word the discussion was stopped in its tracks. I had about seven points I wanted to make and we couldn’t even get to point one because the word legal was a moving target. Truth seems to be a moving target in this case.

Like I said I covered these points on truth earlier here:

http://www.freeread.com/archives/

Then scroll down and read these post numbers:

258, 260, 261, 262, 263, 268, 269

LWK

Maybe they ought to add a new logical fallacy to the list. You could call it:

The argument from definition

Basic idea is when a person tries to define a word so that only her conclusion is “logical.” 🙂

JJ

Good point. Many do define words in their own way making any other conclusion other than their own valid in their minds.

I always just go by the dictionary definition unless some original new meaning is needed which is rare indeed.

Ruth:

I think it was only one or two men in the group who had a problem with your

legal discussion.

Most of us here probably agreed or did agree with the terms that you were

defining legal as.

JJ

I understand but it just takes one in a group to distract from unity. What I was doing at the time was demonstrating how difficult it is to reach unity when one or more people in a group disagree. If we cannot contact the soul as a group we have to at least agree on definitions of the words we are using or there is no hope. People often get hung up on their own slant on definitions instead of using the common one that everyone understands.

As far as truth goes 99% of the people would accept as truth that my favorite station is what I honestly declare it to be. Alex is defining truth to be the ultimate cause behind all things that can never be understood by us. Since it cannot be understood by us then it does not exist to our consciousness. if it does not exist to our consciousness then it does not exist for us. If truth does not exist then it is useless to talk about a subject that is a no thing.

 

Aug 2, 2013

Obamacare

Here’s another letter I submitted to the editor of my local paper.

Obamacare – A Train Wreck

Obama stated that his healthcare plan would cost us a mere $900 billion over ten years. The most recent estimate of a Senate Budget Committee now places the amount at $2.6 trillion. All but the true believers from the Left knew this was going to happen.

The outrageous cost is just one of the problems. Because it mandates businesses with over 50 employees to provide Obamacare to those working 30 hours or more a week many are now hiring part time workers. Even Obamacare’s call centers are avoiding insurance expenses by hiring part time.

Then to top that, not only Congress, but unions, including the IRS are now trying to get out of the Obamacare exchanges.

Even Senator Max Baucus, one of the architects of Obamacare, says he fears it will be a train wreck.

They say there are 47 million uninsured, but take away the illegals, and those who have healthcare access and we are left with only around 20 million citizens that need help with insurance. Some type of voucher system for them would cost far less than Obamacare and eliminate the need for 16,000 new IRS agents to enforce it. Let’s eliminate the 20,000 pages of legislation and pass a new bill of no more than three pages.

 

Aug 3, 2013

The Complete Truth

Alex;

It all boils down to subjectivism and relativity in finding the truth. One paradigm is replaced by another. One truth — by a more true truth.

JJ

There is no such thing as a more true truth. If a thing is true then it is true and nothing else is true. If attention is shifted to something else that is true then the first thing is still true.

For instance, if your attention is on 2=2=4 and is shifted to 8+8=16 then 2+2 still equals four and it equals nothing else.

Alex

What is more true: to say that a physical body is connected to astral body by a silver cord or by cigarette smoke? Both are not true. It just our way of interpreting something we do not fully know.

JJ

The truth has nothing to do with interpretation. Either the astral body is connected to the physical by a silver cord or it is not. Either it is composed of cigarette smoke or it is not. There is no grey area for something that is true. A thing or statement is either true or false. If two statements contradict then both cannot be true. Either one is true and one is false or they are both false.

Alex;

However there exist complete truths. A complete truth always takes place if you create something and fully master and control it.

JJ

I think you are using the wrong word in what you are trying to say. There exists complete knowledge of various principles, ideas, concepts etc. This complete knowledge may be composed of thousands of truths and each truth is a complete piece of data.

Alex

For example, Euclid made his geometry based on several axioms. In that system the sum of the angles of a triangle is always 180 degrees. This is an absolute truth. He created it by definition. We accept it if we accept the Euclidian system altogether.

JJ

Because a truth is defined within a system does not mean the truth is changeable or relative. If we divided the circle into 180 degrees instead of 360 then the angles of his triangle would be 90 degrees rather than 180 and the truth of his equations would still be the same ratios. Pi is 3.14… in any system.

Similarly, if we write 2+2=4 in Spanish nothing changes. Just because we use different words does not change the equation or the truth.

This is really basic reasoning if you think of it. Sometimes we should stay with what we learned in the third grade.

Alex;

But when it comes to seeking for the truth in something broader — the quest for truth becomes a quest for refining models in one’s minds.

JJ

This does not apply to me. There are plenty of models that make our current reality and as I seek for truth I define the truths I see using the models already available. No need to reinvent the wheel and create new ones. Instead of refining a model I seek to refine my understanding of what is and exp5ess it within the current model.

lwk: Whatever one knows that conforms with what is, is true.

Alex: This is far better definition than JJ gave. It has two very important words: “one knows”.

JJ

As Ruth said, the definition I gave was not mine but the dictionary. The one given by lwk is more concise.

Alex:

If JJ got a more sensitive radio receiver or a receiver with shortwave bands and explored more radiostations, he could have found that there exists another radio station even better than his current favourite 670 KHz.

JJ

If I found a thousand stations I like better than my current favorite the truth would not be changed. The truth is this: as of this day, Aug 4, 2013 on planet earth this is my favorite station. Changing my mind tomorrow does not alter the truth of today. You should read my past posts about points of truth in time and space. They are not relative and do not change. It is true that what I like may change, but what I like at a point in time and space does not. I didn’t like peas as a kid and now I do. The truth that I didn’t like peas as a kid will be true for all eternity. That truth or any other truth does not change and you cannot tell me one that does. It is impossible for truth to change. Because our understanding changes does not mean that truth changes. If what we believe to be true changes this does not cause truth to change. The truth is still true.

The fact that circumstances change does not mean the truth changes. It only means circumstances change. In fact it is a truth that change is always occurring in the worlds of form.

Alex:

I would be more cautious and paraphrase your “The Truth shall set you Free” into:

“Replacing illusions with better illusions is setting you freer and making you feel happier.”

JJ

It is true that we all have illusions to unravel and one illusion is often replaced with another illusion that contains more truth than the old one. None of us knows all truth but all of us know many things that are true. Putting the pieces we call truth together so an accurate picture of reality is formed is the great quest.

 

Copyright by J J Dewey 2013

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

 

Keys Writings 2013, Part 9

This entry is part 9 of 25 in the series 2013

The Thinker Examines Sin and Salvation

Thinker: So, what is your thinking on the atonement of Christ?

True Believer: I believe he died for my sins and through the shedding of his blood I am saved.

 

Thinker: And what have you done to be saved?

True Believer: I believe on Him and accept the gift he has given me.

 

Thinker: And what are you saved from?

True Believer: My sins.

 

Thinker: All your sins or part of them?

True Believer: All of them, of course.

 

Thinker: Are you saved now?

True Believer: Yes, I’m saved through the blood of Jesus.

 

Thinker: Does this mean that your past sins will be as if they never happened?

True Believer: Yes.

 

Thinker: Theft is a sin, is it not?

True Believer: Yes. The scripture says, “Thou shalt not steal.”

 

Thinker: Let us suppose that before you were saved you robbed a guy on the street of his money that was going to pay for an operation to save his daughter’s life. Without the money the kid dies but shortly thereafter you find Jesus and get saved. Is the kid still dead?

True Believer: Of course.

 

Thinker: So, even though you are now saved, your sin still has a terrible effect and the father hates your guts. Sounds like your sin still has an effect even though you accept Jesus.

True Believer: Well, I suppose our sins have a residual effect in this world, but when we accept the atonement we have a clean slate in God’s eyes for the next world.

 

Thinker: So, even though you are saved your sins have an effect in this world but none in the next.

True Believer: Yes.

 

Thinker: Let us suppose that the sick girl was not saved when she died but was on the verge of it and would have found Jesus if she had lived. Because of your sin then she goes to hell instead of heaven. Does that sound like your sin will have no effect in the next world?

True Believer: There’s no way to tell if she would have been saved.

 

Thinker: We do know that a lot of kids do eventually accept Christ.  That is a fact and in our example we are talking about one of these. Now, let us place ourselves in the kid’s position after death. There she is suffering in hell with the realization that she was going to turn her life around if she had lived, but this didn’t happen because of you. She curses your name even as you are enjoying bliss with Jesus. Does that sound like your sin has no effect in the next world?

True Believer: God will take away the memory of my sins so I will not be affected by anyone in hell.

 

Thinker: Where does it say that in the Bible?

True Believer: I’m not sure.  It’s in there somewhere.

 

Thinker: Wrong.  It’s not in there. And even if this strange idea were true it would be pretty cold hearted to ignore the eternal suffering of a child, by blotting out the memory, when that suffering was your fault. Don’t you agree?

True Believer: God’s ways are not man’s ways.  If we could understand God then it would all make sense.  We can’t use the reasoning of this world.

 

Thinker: But it sounds like you are using the reasoning from your mind in this world to make sense of the atonement.  What makes you think that reasoning from your thinking in this world is correct?

True Believer: That’s what faith is all about.

 

Thinker: So your faith is based on the reasoning of this world?

True Believer: You’re twisting things. My faith is based on the Bible, the Word of God.

 

Thinker: And what makes you think you understand it since you have to use your worldly mind to read it?

True Believer: The Bible is clear.  I just accept what it says.

 

Thinker: Let’s see if you accept this:

Gal 6:4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

Gal 6:5 For every man shall bear his own burden.

Gal 6:6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.

Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

 

Would you read verse five for me?

 

True Believer: “For every man shall bear his own burden.”

 

Thinker: Does that sound like Jesus is going to negate the effects of our mistakes or sins?

True Believer: You’re taking things out of context.

 

Thinker: But the context continues in verse seven. Read that.

True Believer: “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

 

Thinker: So, even though you have found Jesus this does not negate the fact that you robbed a guy and caused his daughter to die and go to hell. What do you suppose this will cause you to reap?

True Believer: I will reap heaven because I am saved.

 

Thinker: Not so fast.  Read Revelations 14:13

True Believer: “And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.”

 

 

Thinker: So, even though you now accept Jesus and are righteous what happens to your works?

True Believer: (He doesn’t want to answer.)

 

Thinker: Since you won’t say it, I will.  It says “their works do follow them.” It is clear here that it is speaking of our works following us into the next world. Concerning our debts, Jesus said something interesting. He stated that those who are cast into prison “shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.” Matt 5:26

 

So let us sum these scriptures up.  They tell us that we will bear our own burdens, that we reap what we have sown, that our works follow us to the next world, and finally we have to pay our debts to the “uttermost farthing.” That doesn’t sound like a simple belief in Jesus is going to instantly undue all the damage created by the robber who cost the girl her life, does it?

True Believer: But the scriptures clearly say we are saved by the blood of Jesus. How do you explain that?

 

Thinker: One of the problems with the scriptures is that those who prize them greatly often misinterpret them the most. A prime example, from the Christian viewpoint, is the ancient Jews belief in the Messiah. From diligently reading the scriptures they thought he was going to come as a conquering hero, destroy the wicked and restore the kingdom to Israel. Did that happen?

True Believer: No.

 

Thinker: Correct. They missed reality by miles. He had no army, he said to love our enemies and his kingdom was not of this world. Yet you can’t blame them because when you read the Old Testament it does sound like they could have been right. Have you ever considered that you may also have wrong interpretations of the scriptures?

True Believer: No, because I interpret them just the way they are written.

 

Thinker: And so did the Jews who were looking for a conquering Messiah – and so do the hundreds of religions who disagree with you. They all think they are interpreting the scriptures just the way they read, but obviously they are not all correct. Would you agree?

True Believer: Some people just read things into them that are not there.

 

Thinker: Well, let us see what is there. Since you give much eight to the scriptures that tell us that we are saved from sin through the sacrifice of Christ let us examine those words. The word “sin” in the New Testament comes from the Greek word HAMARTANO which means “to miss the mark.” In other words, when the Greeks, 2000 years ago, shot at a target with an arrow and missed they “sinned” (HAMARTANO) or missed the target. Another way to phrase this would be to say that to sin is to make an error in their aim or judgment. Would you agree?

True Believer: I suppose.

 

Thinker: The word “saved” comes from SOZO which is “to save or deliver.” The similar word “salvation” comes from SOTERIA which is more correctly rendered “deliverance” or “rescue.” Therefore, when the prophets wrote of being saved from sin they were literally saying they were delivered from error. So what did Jesus do to save the people from error?

 

True Believer: I’m not sure what you are getting at,

 

Thinker: Let us look at the actual words of Jesus.  He said to his disciples, “Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.” John 15:3

 

Notice that this was spoken before his sacrifice of the cross.  He didn’t speak of blood saving them from sin but something else.  What was it?

True Believer: His word.

 

Thinker: Good. In other words, that which delivered the people from error was the words of Jesus.  He also said, “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” John 6:63

So what did he say his words were?

True Believer: Spirit and life.

 

Thinker: Here’s another powerful scripture giving light on the words of Jesus: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” John 5:24

So, his word can lead to what?

 

True Believer: Everlasting life.

 

Thinker: Notice that he taught this salvation before he shed any blood. Now let us read the advice of James.  He advised us to “receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls. But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.” James 1:21-22

So, what is it that can save our souls?

True Believer: The word.

 

Thinker: Yes, Jesus’ words were so powerful he was referred to as the “Word of God.” Now we see that when he saves us from sin he really delivers us from error.  How did he deliver people from error when he was alive?

True Believer: I see what you are getting at.  You want me to say his word.

 

Thinker: That’s what the Bible you believe in says and it is quite a simple principle. When we error we can be corrected through words that set us on the right course.  For instance, the people sinned or erred in thinking that they should hate their enemies but the words of Jesus corrected or saved them.  He told them to love their enemies and do good to those who despise them.

 

What error did the sacrifice on the cross correct?

True Believer: I’m not sure.

 

Thinker: Again, the answer is quite simple. People had very limited ideas of how far we should go in showing love and forgiveness. Jesus not only forgave those who crucified him but volunteering for the great sacrifice was an unheard of act of love that saved or delivered the people from their wrong thinking. One could say that the shedding of his blood saved many from their errors. Because of him many take the principle of love to a much higher level than before.

True Believer: Wow, you are really twisting the scriptures.

 

Thinker: No, I’m following in the footsteps of Jesus and attempting to save you from your sins by the power of the word. In other words these teachings have power to deliver you from your errors of judgment and wrong interpretation.

 

“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” John 17:17

Copyright by J J Dewey 2013

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE