religion « WordPress.com Tag Feed

I Always Knew You

7elkman7 — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:27:44 +0000

May 21, 2013

The culmination of talking to two friends led to an understanding by the Holy Spirit that dealt with Jesus on the Cross. – the culmination of G-d’s old creation and its death and His bringing the Kingdom of G-d into the world.

I could have described this in my journal with a question and answer format, but to connect the dots didn’t work very well. Instead, a short story might work, not necessarily better, but the ideas were better seen. So, I’m back to my book again and Thomas having a vivid dream on the airplane with some of the other characters.

In the dream:

There were people adjusting some boxes in a familiar office, just ordinary workers and then the scene became very vivid:

Thomas was walking outside the Temple of G-d in heaven, and he was thinking – thinking about the young bull that he had left there and it being sacrificed for his sins. These were real memories within him, even though he didn’t see any of these events in his dream, only the memory in his mind that this had just happened. He felt relieved, almost happy and free in his heart. The road that he was walking on led to a small hill, which had an olive tree at the top and a young man sitting beneath it. He stood up as Thomas approached.

“Thomas, do you mind if we talk for a moment?”

Thomas felt very light-hearted and comfortable, so he walked right up to the man.

“No, not at all.”

“Now that you are free, I’d like to explain some things that might help you in the days to come.”

“Uh-huh.”

“I’m going to be living my purpose through your life, using all that makes up your body, mind, emotions, even your heart. I’ll be in you and you’ll actually be hidden in me. At first, it’ll be very easy, because of the strength of life that you’ll be experiencing, but as your life goes on it’ll become harder. You see I will be living through you, fighting a war against the devil, sin, and setting people free so they will become alive. People don’t believe that they are actually dead, but they are completely dead, and only I can raise them from the dead.”

“Okay. And so what is the problem?”

“The problem will be you Thomas. You see I can only fight this war, which I’ve already won by you giving me permission to work through you. What you believe you should be doing or living in your freedom is really the habits of a dead person – you – before you were raised from the dead. You’re actually completely brand new, new heart and new mind. You will struggle to let go of what’s dead and to live the new you, which is actually me doing what I am.”

Thomas was smiling. “You know, I had this talk with a friend of mine about the people of G-d being the problem with the world.”

“That was the right idea, but I’m trying to get you ready for what will be your struggle coming up. You see, I took your death on the cross, all of the old you, but you won’t want to let go of your dead self as your life goes on.”

“And how do I live the freedom that you gave me, while you’re living your life through the life I’m living in my body?”

“Well, you are actually hidden in me. You will have to keep trusting my words to the very end and keep listening for my voice and obeying it. But it’ll be hard, very hard if you keep trying to live the old Thomas. Don’t live the old Thomas.”

“Should I be a monk then, which will be very hard for me?”

“No, your life is not your own. I purchased you so that “we” could do good works that have already been prepared. I will lead you, but it’ll be me that’s doing all the good work; but you can share my work if you want to. It is the way that you will come to know me more and more, and you will understand your new life, which has no beginning and has no end. Your old life had a beginning and an end, but you’ve been born again into my eternal nature. You always existed in me just like I always existed in my Father. But, don’t let that trouble you now. Just don’t forget I’m the one doing all the good work, but I can’t do it unless you let me do it, even the love part. I’m the one who really loves, but you can permit me to do it through you. By using your free will and faith in me, results in a transformed you, a new creation alive from the dead. You will begin to know me by becoming as I am. Don’t be afraid, my burden is light and easy.”

“Hmm. That’s really interesting, but now I think you’ve given me a couple of questions – if you don’t mind.”

“I don’t mind,” said the young man.

Sighing, “Well, why is it that you almost always pick violent men and even tough women to do your work, since we’re preaching a gospel of peace and love, all coming from violent dead men?”

“…You sure you want this answer?”

“…I’m sure,” said Thomas.

“It’s to prove to everyone that I’m the one doing the work, the saving; I’m the one that’s fighting the war. I prove it even to those I redeem. You see, until I’m revealed again, I will not share my glory with anyone.”

Thomas turned for a moment and then turned back.

As kindly as possible, the young man said, “These things are only normal understandings, but you have refused to let go of something I’ve been telling you from the beginning – for you and many others – time does not exist. If time existed for you, we could never love you as equals (John 1:2, 13). You have not understood the significance of this truth.”

Thomas woke up almost with a snort, and glanced about to see if anyone heard him. Just barely, the plane’s noise was too loud.

Comment: Thomas always was, is, and always would be. All that’s created is subservient to Jesus and the sons of G-d, for they were not created. They are as He is.

St. Ambrose – Bk 3 – Chapter 10

Kawsa Ni Maria — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:24:34 +0000

Observations on the words of John the Baptist (John 1:30), which may be referred to divine fore-ordinance, but at any rate, as explained by the foregoing considerations, must be understood of the Incarnation. The precedence of Christ is mystically expounded, with reference to the history of Ruth.
63. But [say they] it is written: After me comes a Man, Who is made before me, because He was before me; John 1:30 and so they argue: See, He Who was aforetime is ‘made.’ Let us take the words by themselves. After me comes a Man. He, then, Who came is a Man, and this is the Man Who was made. But the word man connotes sex, and sex is attributed to human nature, but never to the Godhead.
64. I might argue: The Man [Christ Jesus] was in pre-existence so far as His body was foreknown, though His power is from everlasting— for both the Church and the Saints were preordained before the worlds began. But here I lay aside this argument, and urge that the being made concerns not the Godhead, but the nature of the Incarnation, even as John himself said: This is He of Whom I said: After me comes a Man, Who was made before me.
65. The Scripture, then, having, as I showed above, discovered the twofold nature in Christ, that you might understand the presence of both Godhead and Manhood, here begins with the flesh; for it is the custom of Holy Writ to begin without fixed rule sometimes with the Godhead of Christ, and descend to the visible tokens of Incarnation; sometimes, on the other hand, to start from its humility, and rise to the glory of the Godhead, as oftentimes in the Prophets and Evangelists, and in St. Paul. Here, then, after this use, the writer begins with the Incarnation of our Lord, and then proclaims His Divinity, not to confound, but to distinguish, the human and the divine. But Arians, like Jew vintners, mix water with the wine, confounding the divine generation with the human, and ascribing to the majesty of God what is properly said only of the lowliness of the flesh.
66. I have no fears of a certain objection they are likely to put forward, namely, that in the words cited we have a man— for some have, Who comes after me. But here, too, let them observe what precedes. The Word, it is said, was made flesh. John 1:14 Having said that the Word was made flesh, theEvangelist added no mention of man. We understand man there in the mention of flesh, and flesh by the mention of man. After the statement made, then, that the Word was made flesh, there was no need here to particularly mention man, whom he already intended by using the name flesh.
67. Later on, St. John uses the lamb, that takes away the sins of the world, as an example; and to teach you plainly the Incarnation of Him, of Whom he had spoken before, he says: This is He of Whom I said before: After me comes a Man, Who is made before me, to wit, of Whom I said that He was made as being man, not as being God. However, to show that it was He Who was before the worlds, and none other, that became flesh, lest we should suppose two Sons of God, he adds: because He was before me. If the words was made had referred to the divine generation, what need was there that the writer should add this, and repeat himself? But, having first said, with regard to the Incarnation only, After me comes a Man, Who is made before me, he added: because He was before me, because it was needful to teach the eternity of [Christ's] Godhead; and this is the reason why St. John acknowledged Christ’s priority, that He, Who is His own Father’s eternal Power, may be presented as on that account duly preferred.
68. But the abounding activity of the spiritual understanding makes it a pleasing exercise to sally forth and drive into a corner the Arians, who will understand the term made in this passage, not of the manhood, but of the Godhead [of Christ]. What ground, indeed, is left for them to take their stand upon, when the Baptist has declared that after me comes One Who is made before me, that is, Who, though in the course of earthly life He comes after me, yet is placed above the degree of my worth and grace, and Who has title to be worshipped as God. For the words comes after me belong to an event in time, but was before me signify Christ’s eternity; and is made before me refer to His pre-eminence, forasmuch as, indeed, the mystery of the Incarnation is above humandeserving.
69. Again, St. John Baptist also taught in less weighty language what ideas they were he had combined, saying: After me comes a Man, Whose shoes I am not worthy to bear, setting forth at least the more excellent dignity [of Christ], though not the eternity of His Divine Generation. Now these words are so fullyintended of the Incarnation, that Scripture has given us, in an earlier book, a human counterpart of the mystic sandal. For, by the Law, when a man died, themarriage bond with his wife was passed on to his brother, or other man next of kin, in order that the seed of the brother or next of kin might renew the life of the house, and thus it was that Ruth, though she was foreign-born, but yet had possessed a husband of the Jewish people, who had left a kinsman of near relation, being seen and loved of Boaz while gleaning and maintaining herself and her mother-in-law with that she gleaned, was yet not taken of Boaz to wife, until she had first loosed the shoe from [the foot of] him whose wife she ought, by the Law, to have become.
70. The story is a simple one, but deep are its hidden meanings, for that which was done was the outward betokening of somewhat further. If indeed we should rack the sense so as to fit the letter exactly, we should almost find the words an occasion of a certain shame and horror, that we should regard them as intendingand conveying the thought of common bodily intercourse; but it was the foreshadowing of One Who was to arise from Jewry— whence Christ was, after the flesh— Who should, with the seed of heavenly teaching, revive the seed of his dead kinsman, that is to say, the people, and to Whom the precepts of the Law, in their spiritual significance, assigned the sandal of marriage, for the espousals of the Church.
71. Moses was not the Bridegroom, for to him comes the word, Loose your shoe from off your foot, Exodus 3:5 that he might give place to his Lord. Nor wasJoshua, the son of Nun, the Bridegroom, for to him also it was told, saying, Loose your shoe from off your foot, Joshua 5:16 lest, by reason of the likeness of his name, he should be thought the spouse of the Church. None other is the Bridegroom but Christ alone, of Whom St. John said: He Who has the bride is theBridegroom. John 3:29 They, therefore, loose their shoes, but His shoe cannot be loosed, even as St. John said: I am not worthy to loose the latchet of His shoe. John 1:27
72. Christ alone, then, is the Bridegroom to Whom the Church, His bride, comes from the nations, and gives herself in wedlock; aforetime poor and starving, but now rich with Christ’s harvest; gathering in the hidden bosom of her mind handfuls of the rich crop and gleanings of the Word, that so she may nourish with fresh food her who is worn out, bereaved by the death of her son, and starving, even the mother of the dead people—leaving not the widow and destitute, while she seeks new children.
73. Christ, then, alone is the Bridegroom, grudging not even to the synagogue the sheaves of His harvest. Would that the synagogue had not of her own will shut herself out! She had sheaves that she might herself have gathered, but, her people being dead, she, like one bereaved by the death of her son, began to gather sheaves, whereby she might live, by the hand of the Church— the which sheaves they who come in joyfulness shall carry, even as it is written: Yet surely shall they come with joy, bringing their sheaves with them.
74. Who, indeed, but Christ could dare to claim the Church as His bride, whom He alone, and none other, has called from Libanus, saying: Come hither fromLibanus, my bride; come hither from Libanus? Song of Songs 4:8 Or of Whom else could the Church have said: His throat is sweetness, and He is altogetherdesirable? Song of Songs 5:26 And seeing that we entered upon this discussion from speaking of the shoes of His feet—to Whom else but the Word of Godincarnate can those words apply? His legs are pillars of marble, set upon bases of gold. Song of Songs 5:15 For Christ alone walks in the souls and makes His path in the minds of His saints, in which, as upon bases of gold and foundations of precious stone the heavenly Word has left His footprints ineffaceably impressed.
75. Clearly we see, then, that both the man and the type point to the mystery of the Incarnation.

spkbhrm5

spkbhrm5 — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:23:55 +0000

130522 - Ark

mebehorst — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:23:36 +0000

KJV – 1Ch 16:37-40 So he left there before the ark of the covenant of the LORD Asaph and his brethren, to minister before the ark continually, as every day’s work required: 38 And Obededom with their brethren, threescore and eight; Obededom also the son of Jeduthun and Hosah to be porters: 39 And Zadok the priest, and his brethren the priests, before the tabernacle of the LORD in the high place that was at Gibeon, 40 To offer burnt offerings unto the LORD upon the altar of the burnt offering continually morning and evening, and to do according to all that is written in the law of the LORD, which he commanded Israel;

ERV – 1Ch 16:37-40 Then David left Asaph and his brothers there in front of the Box of the LORD’S Agreement. David left them there to serve in front of it every day. 38 He also left Obed Edom and 68 other Levites to serve with Asaph and his brothers. Obed Edom and Hosah were guards. Obed Edom was Jeduthun’s son. 39 David left Zadok the priest and the other priests who served with him in front of the LORD’S Tent at the high place in Gibeon. 40 Every morning and evening Zadok and the other priests offered burnt offerings to the LORD on the altar of burnt offerings. They did this to follow the rules written in the law of the LORD, which he had given Israel.

ESV – 1Ch 16:37-40 So David left Asaph and his brothers there before the ark of the covenant of the LORD to minister regularly before the ark as each day required, 38 and also Obed-edom and his sixty-eight brothers, while Obed-edom, the son of Jeduthun, and Hosah were to be gatekeepers. 39 And he left Zadok the priest and his brothers the priests before the tabernacle of the LORD in the high place that was at Gibeon 40 to offer burnt offerings to the LORD on the altar of burnt offering regularly morning and evening, to do all that is written in the Law of the LORD that he commanded Israel.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Barnes – This is the first mention that we have of Gibeon as the place at which the tabernacle of the congregation now rested. Previously it had been at Nob 1Sa_21:1-6, from where it was removed probably at the time of the slaughter of the priests by Doeg 1Sa_22:18-19. It is uncertain whether Gibeon was regarded as a “high place” before the transfer to it of the tabernacle: hut thenceforth, until the completion of Solomon’s Temple, it was the “great high place” 1Ki_3:4 – a second center of the national worship which for above 50 years was divided between Gibeon and Jerusalem.

Upon the altar of the burnt offering – The original altar of burnt-offering Exo_27:1-8 continued at Gibeon with the tabernacle 2Ch_1:3, 2Ch_1:5. David must have erected a new altar for sacrifice at Jerusalem 1Ch_16:1. The sacrifices commanded by the Law were, it appears, offered at the former place; at the latter were offered voluntary additional sacrifices.

Clarke – Zadok the priest – Both Zadok and Abiathar were high priests at this time: the former David established at Gibeah, or Gibeon, where the ark had been all the days of Saul; and the latter he established at Jerusalem, where the ark now was: so there were two high priests, and two distinct services; but there was only one ark. How long the service at Gibeon was continued we cannot tell; the principal functions were no doubt performed at Jerusalem.

Gill – So he left there, before the ark of the covenant of the Lord, Asaph and his brethren,…. Whom he, that is, David, had appointed for the service of it:

to minister before the ark continually; in singing the praises of God:

as every day’s work required; at the time of the morning and evening sacrifice, as Jarchi and Kimchi interpret it.

The Levites, the brethren of Asaph and Obededom, these were left before the ark to minister there:

Obededom also the son of Jeduthun; or Ethan, which some take to be another Obededom; but the ו, “vau” may be explanative, “even Obededom”:

and Hosah to be porters; these he left to be doorkeepers of the ark.

And Zadok the priest, and his brethren the priests,…. These he left, having appointed them

to be before the tabernacle of the Lord, in the high place that was at Gibeon; namely, the tabernacle of Moses, which was removed from Nob thither in the days of Saul, and continued there to the times of Solomon, 1Ch_21:28.

To offer burnt offerings unto the Lord,…. Which was the work of the priests only to do:

upon the altar of burnt offering continually morning and evening; the lambs of the daily sacrifice, which were a burnt offering, and only to be offered on the brasen altar at the tabernacle:

and to do according to all that is written in the law of the Lord, which he commanded Israel; with regard to them, and all other sacrifices, see Exo_29:38.

JFB – So he left there before the ark of the covenant of the Lord Asaph and his brethren, etc. — The sequel of the chapter describes the appointment of the sacred musicians and their respective duties.

Obed-edom with their brethren — Hosah, mentioned at the close of the verse, and a great number besides (see on 1Ch_26:1).

to be porters — doorkeepers.

And Zadok … before the tabernacle … at Gibeon — While the above-mentioned officers under the superintendence of Abiathar, were appointed to officiate in Jerusalem, whither the ark had been brought, Zadok and the priests subordinate to him were stationed at Gibeon to perform the sacred service before the ancient tabernacle which still remained there.

K & D – Division of the Levites for the management of the public worship. – At the same time as he set up the ark in the tent erected for it on Mount Zion, David had prepared a new locality for the public worship. The Mosaic tabernacle had continued, with its altar of burnt-offering, to be the general place of worship for the congregation of Israel even during the long period when the ark was separated from it, and it was even yet to be so; and it became necessary, in order to carry on the religious service in both of these sanctuaries, to divide the staff of religious officials: and this David now undertook.

1Ch_16:37-38

Before the ark he left Asaph with his brethren (לְ( nerht before the accus. obj., according to the later usage), to serve, to minister there continually. בְּיֹומֹו לִדְבַר־יֹום, “according to the matter of the day on its day,” i.e., according to the service necessary for each day; cf. for this expression, Exo_5:13, Exo_5:19; Exo_16:4, etc. “And Obed-edom and their brethren.” In these words there is a textual error: the plural suffix in אֲחֵיהֶם shows that after אֱדֹום עֹבֵד at least one name has been dropped out. But besides that, the relation in which the words, “and Obed-edom the son of Jeduthun, and Hosah, to be porters,” stand to the preceding clause, “and Obed-edom and their brethren,” is obscure. Against the somewhat general idea, that the words are to be taken in an explicative sense, “and Obed-edom indeed,” etc., the objection suggests itself, that Obed-edom is here defined to be the son of Jeduthun, and would seem to be thereby distinguished from the preceding Obed-edom. In addition to that, in 1Ch_15:21 and Obed-edom is mentioned among the singers, and in 1Ch_16:24 one of the doorkeepers bears that name, and they are clearly distinguished as being different persons. On the other hand, however, the identity of the two Obed-edoms in our verse is supported by the fact that in 1Ch_26:4-8 the doorkeepers Obed-edom with his sons and brethren number sixty-two, which comes pretty nearly up to the number mentioned in our verse, viz., sixty-eight. Yet we cannot regard this circumstance as sufficient to identify the two, and must leave the question undecided, because the text of our verse is defective. Jeduthun the father of Obed-edom is different from the chief musician Jeduthun (= Ethan); for the chief musician is a descendant of Merari, while the doorkeeper Jeduthun belongs to the Korahites (i.e., Kohathites): see on 1Ch_26:4.

1Ch_16:39-40

צָדֹוק וְאֵת is still dependent on the וַיַּעֲזָב in 1Ch_16:37. The priest Zadok with his brethren he left before the tent of Jahve, i.e., the tabernacle at the Bamah in Gibeon. For בָּמָה see on 2Ch_1:13, and for Zadok on 2Ch_6:12. It is surprising here that no priest is named as superintendent or overseer of the sacrificial worship in the tent of the ark of the covenant. But the omission is accounted for by the fact that our chapter treats properly only of the arrangement of the sacred music connected with the worship, and Zadok is mentioned as overseer of the sanctuary of the tabernacle at Gibeon only in order to introduce the statement as to the Levitic singers and players assigned to that sanctuary. Without doubt Abiathar as high priest had the oversight of the sacrificial worship in the sanctuary of the tabernacle: see on 1Ch_18:16; with 1Ch_16:40 cf. Exo_29:38; Num_28:3, Num_28:6. לְכָל־הַכָּתוּב corresponds to לְהַעֲלֹות: and in reference to all, i.e., to look after all, which was written. This refers not only to the bringing of the sacrifices prescribed, in addition to the daily burnt-offering, but in general to everything that it was the priests’ duty to do in the sanctuary.

Does God Care

GadgetGirl — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:19:09 +0000

In recent days we’ve seen all the tragedy of the recent tornado that destroyed Moore, Oklahoma and my thoughts and prays are with those facing this tragedy and all the challenges it brings. One thing I have noticed from those interviewed is that most, when asked what were you thinking and doing when the tornado came they said, “I was praying” and “Thank God I survived.” One such woman said she had two things for her prayer is for herself to survive and for her dog to survive. While the new reporter was interviewing her the reporter noticed the woman’s dog below some rubble. The woman and the news reporter dug the dog out and it was an incredible reunion and the woman praised God for answering her prayers.

Many people during these times will turn to God and ask for help and blessings. Others will ask “Why does God allow things like this to happen. How can God be seen as loving if he lets people die.” These are good questions and to answer them we must look to God’s word.

First we must remember what God says in Jeremiah 29:11 ”For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” God wants us to have a prosperous future and does not want harm to come to us. But then we see tragedies like the recent tornado, the Boston bombing, or a massive shooting like Sandy Hook or Denver Colorado and many will think, if God really does not want to harm us, then why does he allow things like this to happen? If we look at Acts 17:26-28 we find that God set the times and places that we should live so that we would seek him and find him. God does not want to harm people but he will allow things to influence each of us so we can seek him.

Take Job for instance, Job was “blameless and upright” (Job 1) before God and Satan asked permission from God to challenge Job’s faithfulness to God and God granted this request. Although Job lost his livestock, family, and even his health he remained faithful to God. I will not pretend to know God’s intentions but perhaps God allows these situations to occur so that people will turn to him and seek him, or perhaps he is looking to help people increase their faith by going through a challenge, or to find out if we are as faithful as we say we are. Are you as faithful as Job? Regardless, of the reasons, we must always keep our focus on God because he is our salvation (Psalm 18:1-3; Psalm 27:1-3) and when we remain in him he will remain in us; and we will bear much fruit and God will bless us (John 15:5-7).

Anything but ordinary!

sistersheila — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:18:45 +0000

Yes, we are in ordinary time! But what does “ordinary time” mean in the Liturgical year? And what does “ordinary time” mean in each of our lives?

In the Liturgical year, there are two main Seasonal times, Advent – Christmas and Lent – Easter, each celebrating a major mystery in the life of Christ. The rest of the liturgical year is called, “ordinary”, and during this time we celebrate the different events in the life of Christ. We know all too well, that Jesus’ life was ordinary in many ways. Day followed day with its routines and daily chores. And like all of us, Jesus’ life was marked by ups and downs. There were moments when the people flocked to him and other times when he was laughed at and rejected. We know he went to a wedding with his mother and that she was sometimes concerned about him. We know that his closest friends often failed to understand his teaching or see the depth of meaning in his actions, that he looked for quiet times to get away and pray, only to have the crowd pursue him. We know that Jesus suffered fatigue, got hot and dusty as he walked the roads, and was sometimes better accepted by “foreigners” than by his own or by religious authorities. And, as Jesus went about his life, we know that his one desire was to do the will of his Father and to proclaim the Kingdom of God in the here and now. Yes, it was in the midst of his ordinary life that he brought good news to the poor, set prisoners free, cured the blind and sick, raised the dead to life, and showed compassion to all the persons he met along the way. It is these concrete actions of Jesus that the Gospels proclaim Sunday after Sunday in ordinary time.

But, what about you and me? Are there not “ordinary times” in our lives? Times, when there are no great events or milestones to celebrate? Times when life is marked by daily routines and chores, when the ups and downs get to us, and life seems rather humdrum? How do we live these moments? What is it that gives meaning to our lives in these ordinary times? How do we keep our faith and hope alive? Is it not precisely here, in the concrete actions of each day that we are called to imitate the life of Jesus? Is it not as we go about our daily routine, that we are called to bring the good news to the poor, to give sight to the blind, to set the prisoners free, to cure the sick and to bring comfort and compassion to all whom we meet?

Jesus’ life was anything but ordinary in the ordinary times! What about ours?

Sister Sheila

Chapter 16

Abhi — Wed, 22 May 2013 08:13:43 +0000

Chapter 16 – From “The Life of Pi” by Yann Martel

We are all born like Catholics, aren’t we–in limbo, without religion, until some figure introduces us to God? After that meeting the matter ends for most of us. If there is a change, it is usually for the lesser rather than the greater; many people seem to lose God along life’s way. That was not my case. The figure in question for me was an older sister of Mother’s, of a more traditional mind, who brought me to a temple when I was a small baby. Auntie Rohini was delighted to meet her newborn nephew and thought she would include Mother Goddess in the delight. “It will be his symbolic first outing,” she said. It’s a samskara!” Symbolic indeed. We were in Madurai; I was the fresh veteran of a seven-hour train journey. No matter. Off we went on this Hindu rite of passage, Mother carrying me, Auntie propelling her. I have no conscious memory of this first go-around in a temple, but some smell of incense, some play of light and shadow, some
flame, some burst of colour, something of the sultriness and mystery of the place must have stayed with me. A germ of religious exaltation, no bigger than a mustard seed, was sown in me and left to germinate. It has never stopped growing since that day.

I am a Hindu because of sculptured cones of red kumkum powder and baskets of yellow turmeric nuggets, because of garlands of flowers and pieces of broken coconut, because of the clanging of bells to announce one’s arrival to God, because of the whine of the reedy nadaswaram and the beating of drums, because of the patter of bare feet against stone floors down dark corridors pierced by shafts of sunlight, because of the fragrance of incense, because of flames of arati lamps circling in the darkness, because of bhajans being sweetly sung, because of elephants standing around to bless, because of colourful murals telling colourful stories, because of foreheads carrying,
variously signified, the same word–faith . I became loyal to these sense impressions even before I knew what they meant or what they were for. It is my heart that commands me so. I feel at home in a Hindu temple. I am aware of Presence, not personal the way we usually feel presence, but something larger. My heart still skips a beat when I catch sight of the murti, of God Residing, in the inner sanctum of a temple. Truly I am in a sacred cosmic womb, a place where everything is born, and it is my sweet luck to behold its living core. My hands naturally come together in reverent worship. I hunger for prasad, that sugary offering to God that comes back to us as a sanctified treat.
My palms need to feel the heat of a hallowed flame whose blessing I bring to my eyes and forehead.

But religion is more than rite and ritual. There is what the rite and ritual stand for. Here too I am a Hindu. The universe makes sense to me through Hindu eyes. There is Brahman, the world soul, the sustaining frame upon which is woven, warp and weft, the cloth of being, with all its decorative elements of space and time. There is Brahman nirguna, without qualities, which lies beyond understanding, beyond description, beyond approach; with our poor words we sew a suit for it–One, Truth, Unity, Absolute, Ultimate Reality, Ground of Being–and try to make it fit, but Brahman nirguna always bursts the seams. We are left speechless. But there is also Brahman saguna, with qualities, where the suit fits. Now we call it Shiva, Krishna, Shakti, Ganesha; we can approach it with some understanding; we can discern certain attributes–loving, merciful, frightening;–and we feel the gentle pull of relationship. Brahman saguna is Brahman made manifest
to our limited senses, Brahman expressed not only in gods but in humans, animals, trees, in a handful of earth, for everything has a trace of the divine in it. The truth of life is that Brahman is no different from atman, the spiritual force within us, what you might call the soul. The individual soul touches upon the world soul like a well reaches for the water table. That which sustains the universe beyond thought and language, and that which is at the core of us and struggles for expression, is the same thing. The finite within the infinite, the infinite within the finite. If you ask me how Brahman and atman relate precisely, I would say in the same way the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit relate: mysteriously. But one thing is clear: atman seeks to realize Brahman, to be united with the Absolute, and it travels in this life on a pilgrimage where it is born and dies, and is born again and dies again, and again, and again, until it manages to shed the sheaths that imprison it here below. The paths to liberation are numerous, but the bank along the way is always the same, the Bank of Karma, where the liberation account of each of us is credited or debited depending on our actions.

This, in a holy nutshell, is Hinduism, and I have been a Hindu all my life. With its notions in mind I see my place in the universe.

But we should not cling! A plague upon fundamentalists and literalists! I am reminded of a story of Lord Krishna when he was a cowherd. Every night he invites the milkmaids to dance with him in the forest. They come and they dance. The night is dark, the fire in their midst roars and crackles, the beat of the music gets ever faster–the girls dance and dance and dance with their sweet lord, who has made himself so abundant as to be in the arms of each and every girl. But the moment the girls become possessive, the moment each one imagines that Krishna is her partner alone, he vanishes. So it is that we should not be jealous with God.

I know a woman here in Toronto who is very dear to my heart. She was my foster mother. I call her Auntieji and she likes that. She is Quebecoise. Though she has lived in Toronto for over thirty years, her French-speaking mind still slips on occasion on the understanding of English sounds. And so, when she first heard of Hare Krishnas, she didn’t hear right. She heard “Hairless Christians,” and that is what they were to her for many years. When I corrected her, I told her that in fact she was not so wrong; that Hindus, in their capacity for love, are indeed hairless Christians, just as Muslims, in the way they see God in everything, are bearded Hindus, and Christians, in their devotion to God, are hat-wearing Muslims.

The Blessings of Krishna

V.L.M. — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:59:59 +0000

(Quotes within this posting are taken from an article entitled “The Chance to End Suffering” from the magazine Back To Godhead, Jan./Feb 2012 Issue Volume 46, No. 1, © The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International. To purchase copies of this magazine or subscribe to its bi-monthly publication, contact the BTG subscription services through http://btg.krishna.com/ )

In April of 1975, during a discussion with some of his disciples, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, known as Srila Prabhupada to his followers, talked about ending suffering.

“Srila Prabhupada: …why do you suffer?

Disciple: Well, it’s all God’s plan. I suffer according to God’s plan.

Srila Prabhupada: No. It is not God’s plan that you suffer; you suffer because you violate God’s laws. He is controlling everything, but He has given you minute independence: You can either follow His laws or violate them…if you become obedient to God you will not suffer…

Disciple: But the devotee also seems to be suffering.

Srila Prabhupada: Yes, but they are not suffering like the non-devotees. Material life, which is the cause of suffering, is like a disease, and devotees are giving up this diseased condition of life for Krishna consciousness. If you are suffering from some disease, you cannot expect to be cured immediately. But one who is taking the medicine is very intelligent. His sufferings will soon be gone. But these non-devotee rascals will not even take the medicine—Krishna consciousness—so they continue to suffer.

And for the most part, devotees enjoy. Why are you always chanting Hare Krishna and dancing unless you are enjoying?

Disciple: Sometimes I get a sick stomach, too.

Srila Prabhupada: That’s because you have a material body. But your suffering is just like the movement of a fan that has been switched off. The fan is still moving, but the switch is off; so it will soon stop. Similarly, your suffering will soon stop, because you are acting on the spiritual platform. …We can use our senses for either sense gratification or for serving Him {Krishna/God}, which is the real pleasure of the senses …You have to cure your disease by becoming Krishna conscious. Then you will enjoy unlimitedly.”

The Blessing of God is there, and available to all. But you must choose it. Free will is both our gift and curse. We can choose God, or we can choose the material world and the satisfying of our senses.

It’s all up to us.

If we choose God/Krishna consciousness, as Srila Prabhupada says, the motor to the fan of suffering is immediately switched off. But sometimes it takes awhile for the spinning to stop. But it will stop.

I have met so many believers, who still suffer and believe that God wants them to suffer. My words to them will always be the same. “You live in the Blessing of God now, but it is up to you to choose it.”

Sometimes, as followers of God, we believe we are still meant to suffer what we refer to as our karma, but our spiritual grand-master and God tell us, that is not so. We may still take hits from the material world but once the fan stops spinning, suffering need not occur, for we are now living in God’s Blessing and just like born-again Christians, we born-again Krishnas can reject those negative events and throw them out of our lives.

I have spent a lot of time studying the world of the born-again, faith filled healing Christian, and that world is really no different from that of the initiated twice-born devotee. The worlds are essentially the same. One uses water to baptize and one uses fire, but the results are identical.

As devotees of God, Karma becomes no longer an issue. Many just don’t realize it yet. And so they continue to verbalize the very opposite of the Blessing, the curse of economic, medical and other forms of suffering.

They continue to say out loud things like, “I never get…, I always get the flu or cold…, I have such and such illness…, I am poor…, it’s God’s will that I am sick or poor…, I take after my mother. She died of cancer…I probably won’t live past my fifties…I guess God wants me poor…, I would rather die in a plane crash and go quickly… etc. and on and on.

Get the picture? All of this is not good. All of this constitutes predictions over one’s own life. Very dangerous indeed.

Once you cross over the line and dedicate your world to God, you enter into God’s world and into the protection of the Godhead, and the fan blade stops.

There are so many studies and books on the power of speech now, that only a complete recluse would not know about this topic. What you say is what you get. That is a complete truism.

If you say, “I always get the flu every fall.” Well, guess what, you will fulfill your spoken destiny. God has given us free will to choose. By speaking out loud your choice, you have the God-given right to receive it.

Now, if you say out loud repeatedly, “I never get the flu.” And that becomes a mantra in your life, guess what? You won’t.”

It’s all up to you.

Will bad things sometimes happen? Of course, such is the nature of the beast. Some things are the choices of others, but even those can be adjusted in mid-air.

I have heard of bullets going around heads leaving halo defining patterns around people, but they were completely uninjured. A friend experienced being removed from a car as a tree trunk went through his seat, and then found himself back in the car beside the tree, and back within his seat belt. It was an impossible situation to have survived. He remembers being pulled out of the car and then coming back into it.

Others have said, “No. No I don’t accept this. I deny this…. Go away. Get out.” Etc. to seeming unchangeable events and watched the course of their history change.

It’s all up to you to choose your words and choose your destiny.

So…the fan blades will stop and when they do, choose God and His world not man’s. You have free will, but remember you are more helpful to God healthy and prosperous, than you are sick and poor. What kind of advertisement are we as believers, if we are the sick and the poverty stricken? That would not be a good marketing strategy on the part of the Almighty.

Think about that,

Hare Krishna,

Abhidheya Devi Dasi

There is no God the Mother because there are no Father's records about "Elohim"?

skyblueguy — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:57:54 +0000

Many people think there is only one God: God the Father. However, the Bible also testifies to the existence of God the Mother. When creating man, God said, “Let us make man in our image.” Moreover, the word “God” is the translation of “Elohim” meaning “Gods” and it’s the plural form of “El” or “Eloah.” This means that there isn’t only one God. Then, how many Gods are there?

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 1:27)

Male and female were created in the image of God. Therefore, there are two images of God: the male image of God and the female image of God. We have called the male image of God “God the Father” for a long time. Then, what should we call the female image of God? The word “Elohim” appears more than 2,500 times throughout the Scriptures.

Some insist that Elohim was used to refer to God in the Trinity: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. If the word “Elohim” was used due to the Trinity, there should be three images. And which God has the female image among the Holy Three? In fact, the Trinity means that God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are same and one God: the male image of God. (Please refer to this page for the Trinity.) Therefore, the Apostle Paul wrote, “Christ is the image of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4.)

All Christians know that there is Heavenly Father or God the Father even though they have never seen Him. It’s because the Bible testifies to God the Father:

This, then, is how you should pray; “‘Our Father in heaven…’” (Matthew 6:9)

The same Bible also testifies to Heavenly Mother or God the Mother:

But the Jerusalem that is above [Heavenly Jerusalem] is free, and she is our mother. (Galatians 4:26)

And it’s prophesied that the Spirit [God the Father] and the Bride [God the Mother] would give us the water of life (eternal life) in the book of Revelation. There may be those who ask, “The Bible says there is only one God, why do you say there are two Gods?” God is only one as Father, but there is also God the Mother.

one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all (Ephesians 4:6)

In addition, in the Old Testament time, women were not counted when counting the number of the Israelites. And in Romans 5:12, it’s written that sin entered the world through one man: Adam. However, as you know, Adam and Eve (Eve first and then Adam) committed sin. Although only Adam was mentioned, Eve was also included within Adam. In the same way, although God the Father is mentioned, God the Mother is also included within Him. (Although only the name of Father is written in a nameplate on a door of a house, in general people do not think that only he lives in it.)

The existence of God the Mother was the hidden secret of the Bible. Christ Ahnsahnghong unveiled the existence of God the Mother according to the prophecies of the Bible. However, the NCPCOG claims that God the Mother does not exist because there are no Christ Ahnsahnghong’s records about “Elohim”. The above video shows that their claim is not true. (Please refer to this page for this topic.) The NCPCOG insists that Elohim who is referred to as “Us” in Genesis Chapter 1 indicates God and the angels. However, in Genesis 1:27, it’s clearly written that God created man in the image of God, not the image of God and angels. And it’s written that Elohim God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1.) If their claim were correct, they had to worship the angels too as the creators. This shows that their claim is non-Biblical.

Actually, Christ Ahnsahnghong testifies to God the Mother in various ways. He wrote as follows:

“Elisha followed Elijah.

Joshua followed Moses.

Peter followed Jesus.

I follow Mother.”

fcjk3q97.wordpress.com

fcjk3q97 — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:49:14 +0000

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

wakqasahmed — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:43:42 +0000

رَبِّ اشْرَحْ لِي صَدْرِي وَيَسِّرْ لِي أَمْرِي وَاحْلُلْ عُقْدَةًمِّن لِّسَانِي يَفْقَهُوا قَوْلِي
[Al-Quran, 25-28: Surah طه]

Allah’s Apostle (Prophet Muhammad peace and blessings be upon him) said, The best amongst you are those who have the best manners and character.

Narrated by ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr, recorded in Sahih Bukhari

Volume 4, Book 56, Number 759
Volume 8, Book 73, Number 56

Hand Fasting: the right title for same sex marriage?

donallan — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:39:58 +0000

This article replaces the article posted two hours ago Hand Fasting: the right title for same sex ma

The Great Flood

Drew Mitchell — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:28:50 +0000

When I was a kid, pre-school, I can remember a great flood.

One of the neighbours was rowing down the street, at night-time, an image I never forgot.

But later, as a Christadelphian youth, the Great Flood was always presented as something that was dark, and bad.

My flood memory was dark, and fun.

Given few had row boats back in Noah’s days, (I watched Bruce Almighty and few seemed to have boats there too), and the Great Flood lasted for 40,000 years (or something), its predictable that this would be a dark and bad event.

Here’s my interpretation of it from my King James Version (wide margin):

As I look at this, it brings backs memories. But now, I start to raise a few questions.

Like, wouldn’t the beaver’s been a pain in the ~~arse~~ aft.

And, verse 4;

There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Yeah. Giants. Begetting giants.

But the ark was made from gopher wood. Which instantly made me think of gophers, then I began to think of beavers.

You know, the flat tailed variety.

I could just imagine what those pesky little beavers were up to all day (and night) long.

And (guessing here), the giants were not tall enough to survive the Great Flood, so we have no giants today.

PUPUH JIWA

sandozsantosa2110 — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:28:18 +0000

PUPUH JIWA

Lihatlah cahaya ketika datang menyentuh benda…. benda menjadi ada terlihat, namun ada sisi hitam gelap yang tak terkena cahaya sebagai bayangan-nya.

Begitulah cahaya (ruh) selama berada dan menyentuh jasad kemanusiaan, menjadikan nyata keberadaan dan hidup-nya…… maka begitu pula jiwa adalah sebagai bayang hitam kegelapan-nya.

Jasad kan hidup ada sebagai eksistensi keberadaan ruh yang terang juga menghidupkan, dan jiwa yang gelap merusak,……… keduanya bathin tersembunyi di dalam jasad sebagai yang saling bertentangan.

Bayang gelap adalah jiwa yang selalu bergerak bertolak arah dengan menjauhi cahaya…..

cenderung mencederai dan menyakiti jasad-nya sendiri,

cenderung menolak terang dan petunjuk,

cenderung menyukai kenikmatan sesaat dan sesal kemudian,

dan cenderung menyukai pandangan indah yang menyesatkan.

“Ia (iblis) berkata : Tuhan-ku oleh karena Engkau telah menghukum aku sesat, aku pasti akan jadikan (kejahatan) terasa INDAH BAGI PANDANGAN mereka di bumi, dan aku akan menyesatkan mereka semua-nya.” [QS 15:39]

Jiwa adalah nafsu yang amat perlu dikendalikan……

Maka siapakah yang Maha Mengendalikan ??

Tidak secuilpun kekuatan yang kita miliki untuk mengendalikan jiwa, karena jiwa adalah diri kita sendiri…..

Adakah diri-diri kamu merasa sebagai yang dpt mengendalikan diri kamu sendiri…. ??

Jika benar begitu, siapakah yang memberi petunjuk bahwa yang ini benar dan yang itu salah, atau sebaliknya ??

Siapakah yang memberi akal untuk dapat mengetahui ??

Siapakah yang memberi mata untuk melihat kebenaran dan kesalahan ??

Siapakah yang memberi telinga untuk mendengar pelajaran ??

Siapakah yang memberi hati untuk memahami hikmah kebenaran ??

Maka siapakah yang memberi kekuatan hati untuk berhijrah dari kegelapan menuju terang benderang ??

Kelahiran hidup-nya di dunia saja bukan diri-nya sendiri yg menghendaki…… bahkan gerak bernafas dan detak jantung pun bukanlah diri-nya sendiri yg menghendaki….

Jika dirimu yg merasa menguasai dan memiliki itu semua…. bersiaplah, krn pendengaran, penglihatan dan hati kamu akan diminta pertanggung jawaban-nya kelak.

Wayutuzzakata adalah tindakan pensucian jiwa dari kekotoran pengakuan rasa memiliki kekuatan dan kekuasaan atas semua tersebut….. (zakat, bukanlah pensucian harta-benda, melainkan pensucian jiwa yg terikat materi dan merasa sbg yg menguasai dan memiliki-nya).

Hanya DIA-lah yg memiliki kendali atas apa-apa yg terjadi di semesta alam ini…..

“Maka Allah mengilhamkan kpd jiwa itu (jalan) KEFASIKAN dan KETAKWAAN-nya, sesungguhnya beruntunglah orang yg mensucikan jiwa-nya itu, dan merugilah orang yg mengotori-nya.” [QS 91:7-10]

Janganlah menyalahkan iblis yg ternyata adalah jiwa sesat-mu sendiri…..
Sebab dia adalah bayang gelap yg tercipta dari cahaya yg terhalang kekotoran jiwa ketika hendak masuk kedalam hati-mu….

Cahaya yg berubah menjadi bayang gelap adalah malaikat yg tak mau tunduk patuh pd kepentingan murni kemanusiaan….

Begitulah iblis yg pd mulanya adalah cahaya malaikat, kemudian membangkang tak mau tunduk dan bersujud kpd kemanusiaan atas perintah Tuhan-nya (QS 2:34, renungkanlah ayat ini…. yg diperintah utk tunduk sujud adalah seluruh para malaikat, tp mengapa jd disebut iblis bagi yg membangkang ??)

“Allah mengetahui segala sesuatu yg di hadapan dan yg di belakang (para malaikat) mereka, dan mereka (para malaikat) tiada memberi syafaat (manfaat kebaikan) melainkan kpd orang2 yg diridhai Allah, dan mereka selalu berhati-hati krn takut kepada-NYA” [QS 21:28]

Memahami jiwa adalah memahami diri pribadi….. dan memahami diri pribadi adalah memahami pula segala yang ghaib agar menjadi nyata keberadaan-nya.

“Kami akan memperlihatkan kepada mereka tanda-tanda (kekuasaan) Kami di segenap ufuk dan pd diri mereka sendiri, sehingga jelaslah bagi mereka bahwa al Qur’an itu adalah benar…..” [QS 41:53]

Perhatikan satu saja, yaitu apa-apa yang terjadi di dalam tubuh-mu…… Dari mulai yang masuk sebagai asupan (energi) dan informasi (energi pula)….. Ada milyaran bahkan trilyunan proses mekanisme pada sel-sel tubuh yang jumlah-nya trilyunan (dapat-lah dibayangkan bila proses yang terjadi pada satu helai rambut saja yang berisi ratusan juta sel), dari mulai pernafasan sebagai bahan bakar setiap proses-proses tersebut, makanan yang diubah menjadi intisari energi dan disalurkan ke masing-masing sel tubuh, belum lagi pada proses perintah motorik (gerak) sel, gerak pikiran, gerak bahasa (bayangkan berapa karakter huruf yang terucap setiap hari-nya)………. subhanallah !!

Adakah jiwa-mu merasa sebagai yamg mengatur semua proses di dalam jasad-mu itu ?? Bahkan dalam berdoa pun tak pernah kau meminta-nya kepada Yang Maha Mengatur….. sungguh kita termasuk jiwa-jiwa yang lalai……….. Taukah kau wahai sahabat, faedah memahami semua itu kemudian meminta dalam doa-mu kepada-NYA ?? …… yaitu menyembuhkan penyakit atau menjaga kesehatan tubuh-mu !!

Begitulah hingga terjadi peneguhan kembali iman kita terhadap segala yang semula ghaib (tak terlihat nyata) menjadi nyata ada, dan ternyata selama ini adalah sebagai yang selalu hadir bersama dalam kehidupan sehari-hari kita, mempermudah dan membantu kehidupan kita, sehingga iman tak sekedar meyakini sesuatu berdasarkan aqidah yang tak dapat dicerna akal kesadaran kita…..

Iman kita bukanlah iman taqlid buta !!

Iman kitapun bukan sekedar ikut2-an karena semua orang yang mengaku telah beriman !!

Bukan pula iman warisan ibu-bapak atau nenek moyang !!

Tidak pula iman karena guru yang mengajarkan dogma kepatuhan tanpa hikmah !!

Iman kita adalah karena akal kesadaran anugerah-NYA yang kita gunakan sebagai alat untuk menjelajah dan menyelami kedalaman serta luas-nya samudera ilmu Allah yang tak terukur oleh keterbatasan makhluk….. adalah juga iman yang dapat mengantarkan akal kesadaran kita menemui KEBENARAN REALITAS SEJATI.

Karena Allah pun mengingatkan kita, ….

“Dan janganlah kamu mengikuti apa yang kamu tidak mempunyai pengetahuan tentang-nya. Sesungguhnya pendengaran, penglihatan dan hati, semuanya akan diminta pertanggung jawaban.” [QS 17:36]

Dengan demikian jiwa dengan sepasang sayap akal kesadaran adalah sebagai yang terkendali (nafs al muthma’inah) oleh iman yang berdasar KEBENARAN SEJATI (al HAQQ), yang mutlak tak terbantahkan……. kemanapun ia terbang menjelajah di alam raya ini, takkan pernah tersesat karena adanya ‘compass iman’ yang tertanam di dalam dada dan selalu tepat menunjuki arah yang benar menuju kebenaran hakiki, kebenaran Tuhan-nya.

Semoga bermanfaat………………… insya Allah, kelak jiwa kita termasuk sebagai jiwa-jiwa yang telah dapat berserah diri (islam) secara kaffah (totalitas).

— sandoz —

Balanced Action.

Barbara Anne — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:23:50 +0000

The standards which act as the guiding principle for balanced right action are the qualities of your threefold flame.

Before taking any action:–

1. Weigh your intentions by the simple formula:–

right reason (wisdom).
right motive (power).
right cause (love).

2. Make sure that all your actions, including both words and deeds are not motivated by wilfulness, rebellion, pride, anger, aggressiveness or ambition.

3. Make sure that your actions are constructive, well-organized and will benefit or be of gain to some part of life.

4. Take time to study, research, analysis and carefully consider your options and the consequences of those options.

5. Test every move, project or plan —-Is it motivated by love? Are your motives pure? Is it practical? Is it realistic? Is it attainable?

6. Give God the glory for each action accomplished through you. Remember that you are only able to think, feel, speak and act because God’s life and energy are flowing into your being over your silver cord.

LIONSGATE ACHIEVES RECORD SALES AT 2013 CANNES MARKET WITH SLATE OF NINE FILMS LED BY MOCKINGJAY 1 & 2, STEP UP 5 AND THE LAST WITCH HUNTER

kakonged — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:22:55 +0000

Studio Generates More Than $250 Million In Sales For Its Cannes Slate, Topping Last Year’s Company Record By More Than 50%

CANNES, France, May 22, 2013 /CNW/ – Lionsgate (NYSE: LGF) continued to dazzle its International distribution partners with its lineup of films for the 2013 Cannes Film Festival, achieving a Company record of more than $250 million in sales for nine titles that included MOCKINGJAY 1 and 2, the third and fourth installments of the global blockbuster HUNGER GAMES franchise, STEP UP 5 and upcoming Lionsgate and Summit titles such as DRAFT DAY, THE LAST WITCH HUNTER and Lionsgate UK’s A LITTLE CHAOS.

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20110919/LA70620LOGO)

The record total surpassed last year’s mark by more than 50% and doesn’t include the expected revenue from territories where Lionsgate distributes directly, such as the UK, or through distribution partnerships such as its 50/50 joint venture with IDC in Latin America and its partnership with Universal Pictures in India.

“Our strong performance at Cannes this year is attributable in part to the international framework we’ve set in place combining output deals around the world with self-distribution in key territories such as the UK and Latin America,” said Lionsgate Motion Picture Group Co-Chair Patrick Wachsberger. “This infrastructure gives us enormous flexibility and is already delivering remarkable results.”

Wachsberger also noted that Lionsgate fielded one of its strongest slates ever at Cannes, and the Company built anticipation among its distributors by showing them elements of THE HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE campaign and a sneak preview of footage from one of its upcoming young adult franchises, Summit Entertainment’s DIVERGENT. Distributor enthusiasm was fueled by the presence in Cannes of CATCHING FIRE stars Jennifer Lawrence and Liam Hemsworth and director Francis Lawrence, who met international press and attended a gala party for the film’s distributors.

The titles on this year’s slate included the third and fourth installments of THE HUNGER GAMES franchise, THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY PARTS 1 & 2, Summit Entertainment’s DRAFT DAY; Roman Polanski’s VENUS IN FUR (R.P. Productions, Monolith Films) which is in competition for this year’s Palme d’Or ; JOHN WICK (Thunder Road); THE LAST WITCH HUNTER (Mark Canton Production, One Race Entertainment, Emmett/Furla); A LITTLE CHAOS (Potboiler Productions, The Bureau); REAWAKENING (Blumhouse Productions, Mosaic); and the latest installment in Summit’s global dance franchise, STEP UP 5.

Wachsberger led a team that included Wendy Reeds, Executive Vice President of Content Sales and Distribution atCelestial Tiger Entertainment, and Crystal Bourbeau, Senior Vice President of International Sales at Lionsgate as well as recently named Lionsgate International Chief Operating Officer Andrew Kramer.

Details include:

THE HUNGER GAMES: MOCKINGJAY PARTS 1 & 2 (ColorForce, Lionsgate)
Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Jeffrey Wright, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland
Director: Francis Lawrence
Writer: Danny Strong
Producers: Nina Jacobson and Jon Kilik
Logline: In MOCKINGJAY PARTS 1 & 2, we follow heroine Katniss Everdeen’s journey as she leads the districts of Panem in a rebellion against the tyrannical and corrupt Capitol. As the war that will determine the fate of Panem escalates, Katniss must decipher for herself who she can trust and what needs to be done, with everything she cares for in the balance.

Notable non-output partner sales include:

Volga – CIS/Baltics
Impuls – Switzerland
Forum – Poland, Czech Republic, Romania, Hungary, Ex-Yugo, Bulgaria, Israel
Eagle – Middle East
Fida – Turkey
Long Shong – Taiwan
Lark - Hong Kong
Universal – India, Italy

DRAFT DAY (Montecito Picture Company, OddLot Entertainment, Summit)
Cast: Kevin Costner, Jennifer Garner, Denis Leary, Ellen Burstyn, Sean Combs, Terry Crews, Chi McBride, Frank Langella, and Chadwick Boseman
Director: Ivan Reitman
Producers: Ivan Reitman, Joe Medjuck, Ali Bell, and Gigi Pritzker
Logline: On the day of the NFL Draft, general manager Sonny Weaver (Costner) has the opportunity to save football inCleveland when he trades for the number one pick. He must quickly decide what he’s willing to sacrifice in pursuit of perfection as the lines between his personal and professional life become blurred on a life-changing day for a few hundred young men with dreams of playing in the NFL.

Territory sales include:

Metropolitan – France
Belga – Benelux
Impuls – Switzerland
Acme – Baltics
Monolith – Poland
Eagle – Middle East
IDC – Latin America
Golden Harvest – Taiwan, Hong Kong

VENUS IN FUR (R.P. Productions, Monolith Films)
Cast: Emmanuelle Seigner and Louis Garrel
Director: Roman Polanski
Writers: Roman Polanski and David Ives
Producer: Basil Iwanyk
Logline: A director becomes enslaved by desire after reluctantly agreeing to audition one last actress for the lead role of his play. The film is an adaptation of David Ives’s play Venus in Fur, a Broadway and off-Broadway success, that received a Tony® nomination for Best Play and garnered a Tony for Nina Arianda as Best Actress.

Territory sales include:

Ascot Elite – Switzerland
Rai – Italy
e1 – Benelux
Pris – Portugal
West – CIS
Acme – Baltics
Eagle- Middle East
Gussi – Latin America
Showgate – Japan
Long Shong – Taiwan
Delta Mac – Hong Kong

JOHN WICK (Thunder Road)
Cast: Keanu Reeves
Directors: David Leitch and Chad Stahelski
Writer: Derek Kolstad
Producer: Basil Iwanyk
Logline: From the producer of CLASH OF THE TITANS and THE TOWN comes a tale of adrenaline-fueled revenge and redemption. When a retired hit man is forced back into action by a sadistic young thug, he hunts down his adversaries with the skill and ruthlessness that made him an underworld legend.

Territory sales include:

Studio Canal – Germany
Metropolitan – France
MK2 – Italy
A-Film – Benelux
West – CIS
Acme – Baltics
Monolith – Poland
Media Pro – Czech, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria
Imagem – Latin America
Golden Harvest – Taiwan, Hong Kong

THE LAST WITCH HUNTER (Mark Canton Production, One Race Entertainment, Emmett/Furla)
Cast: Vin Diesel
Director: Breck Eisner
Writer: Cory Goodman
Producers: Mark Canton, Bernie Goldman, and Vin Diesel
Logline: In THE LAST WITCH HUNTER, an immortal witch hunter (Diesel) partners with his natural enemy, a female witch, to stop the covens of NYC from unleashing a plague on humanity.

Territory sales include:

e1 – Canada, UK, Australia
Studio Canal – Germany
Ascot Elite – Switzerland
SND – France
Aurum (e1) - Spain
Nordisk – Scandinavia
Belga – Benelux
Central Partnership – CIS
Monolith – Poland
Jaguar – Middle East
IDC – Latin America

A LITTLE CHAOS (Potboiler Productions, The Bureau)
Cast: Kate Winslet, Matthias Schoenaerts, and Alan Rickman
Director: Alan Rickman
Writers: Alison Deegan, Alan Rickman, and Jeremy Brock
Producers: Gail Egan, Andreaa Calderwood, and Bertrand Faivre
Logline: A passionate love affair challenges a beautiful landscape gardener both personally and professionally as she navigates the sexual and political intrigues of the Versailles court.

Territory sales include:

Tobis – Germany/Switzerland
Metropolitan – France
Eagle Pictures – Italy
Volga – CIS
Monolith – Poland
Jaguar – Middle East
Kadokawa – Japan

REAWAKENING (Blumhouse Productions, Mosaic)
Cast: Olivia Wilde and Mark Duplass
Director: David Gelb
Writer: Luke Dawson and Jeremy Slater
Producers: Blumhouse’s Jason Blum and Mosaic Media Group
Logline: In REAWAKENING, a team of research students discovers the secret to bringing subjects back from the dead however their actions result in a series of sinister consequences.

Territory sales include:

Lionsgate UK – UK
Wild Bunch – Germany
Impuls – Switzerland
Metropolitan – France
Belga – Benelux
West – CIS
Monolith – Poland
Eagle – Middle East
Fida – Turkey
IDC – Latin America
Golden Harvest – Taiwan, Hong Kong

STEP UP 5
Director: Trish Sie
Writer: John Swetnam
Logline: Fifth installment of Summit Entertainment’s successful STEP UP franchise.

Territory sales include:

Constantin – Germany
MK2 – Italy
Nordisk – Scandinavia
Belga – Benelux
Central Partnership – CIS
Monolith – Poland
Jaguar – Middle East
Niners Entertainment – Korea
Universal – UK, Australia, Switzerland, France, Latin America

ABOUT LIONSGATE
Lionsgate is a leading global entertainment company with a strong and diversified presence in motion picture production and distribution, television programming and syndication, home entertainment, family entertainment, digital distribution, new channel platforms and international distribution and sales. Lionsgate currently has 28 television shows on 20 networks spanning its primetime production, distribution and syndication businesses, including such critically-acclaimed hits as the multiple Emmy Award-winning Mad Men and Nurse Jackie, the new comedy Anger Management, the network series Nashville, the syndication successes Tyler Perry’s House of Payne, its spinoff Meet the Browns, For Better Or Worse, The Wendy Williams Show, Are We There Yet? and the upcoming Orange Is The New Black, an original series for Netflix.

Its feature film business has been fueled by such recent successes as the blockbuster first installment of The Hunger Games franchise, The Twilight Saga Breaking Dawn – Part 2, Tyler Perry’s Temptation, Warm Bodies, Snitch, Texas Chainsaw 3D, The Expendables 2, The Possession, Sinister, The Cabin in the Woods and Arbitrage. Lionsgate’s home entertainment business is an industry leader in box office-to-DVD and box office-to-VOD revenue conversion rate. Lionsgate handles a prestigious and prolific library of approximately 15,000 motion picture and television titles that is an important source of recurring revenue and serves as the foundation for the growth of the Company’s core businesses. The Lionsgate and Summit brands remain synonymous with original, daring, quality entertainment in markets around the world.

For more information, please contact:
Hans-Dieter Kopal
hans@pcommgroup.com
323-658-1555

SOURCE: Lionsgate

For further information:

http://www.lionsgate.com

http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20110919/LA70620LOGO

PRN Photo Desk, photodesk@prnewswire.com

47th Discussion: Monique Truong’s The Book of Salt

timmy kaiser lupin — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:15:10 +0000

Raj, as our chef de cuisine whenever we hosted the discussions over at Tanjong Pagar, served up food inspired by the book – crepes with duck & fig and ham & cheese fillings, and duck and chicken & prawns spring rolls. Merci, Raj, comme toujours.

Aaron moderated the discussion; Amit and Luke were there to show their support.

What did we like about the book? Food and France, according to Raj, were the two factors that he approved of. Miss Toklas was also a contributing factor, whom Raj said reminded him of his lesbian friends. Overall, he thought the book felt “real” and was a nice read. Har enjoyed the way that the book was written; he appreciated its specificity and how accessible the text was. Aaron agreed, saying that the writing was beautiful and cited the first chapter as “amazing”. Timmy commended Truong for the thorough research she conducted for her first book.

We questioned the meaning of the book’s title. Raj talked about the usage of salt in French cuisine, and briefly explained that for one to become the top chef in France, he has to master its cuisine. Timmy brought up the quote about salt existing in the kitchen, sweat, tears, and the sea, and viewed it as the ingredient that gives any dish its flavour. He alluded that life is not always sweet; there is always a little salt to give it more taste and flavour. Aaron opined that it is about ambition.

In Chapter 19, Miss Toklas instructed Binh not to use salt in his cooking. (“Salt is not essential here.”) What we have derived from that exchange was a showcase of who the superior in the house was (Raj); an indication of the characters, highlighting the charmed life Alice has been leading (Aaron); a no-salt diet requirement (Timmy). “Because it may lead to high blood pressure,” Raj quipped with regards to Timmy’s observation.

We also talked about the significance of food in the book. Aaron thought the ways in which food was described was very sensuous, to which Raj explained that food was used as a form of seduction. “Trust me, I know it!” he boldly proclaimed. Har then brought up the plentiful mentions of rice within the book and what it meant. Raj quipped that it showcased how versatile Asians can be, i.e. being able to adapt to different kinds of situations as well as the varied tastes in men we have.

If food is the metaphor for sex, then what is love? Raj brought up the bit about quinces. (“To answer your question, Gertrude Stein, love is not a bowl of quinces yellowing in a blue and white china bowl, seen but untouched.”) According to him, humans and quinces are not dissimilar – “People have to be given the right amount of heat, to be cooked and simmered (like quinces) before they attain the ability to love.”

Binh, the protagonist of the book, was brought up, which led to a discussion on his name, and why there were instances of characters not using their real names when introducing themselves. Raj vehemently said Binh was not his real name. “We don’t even know his real name!” Aaron said, before proclaiming that names are important in that it gives one his identity. Timmy thought that Binh giving false names during encounters with other people was his way of creating a new identity for himself. Aaron added that Timmy’s explanation was akin to an outsider looking in, before further questioning Truong’s intention of creating him as a gay character on top of being a second-class citizen in a foreign country.

The pronunciation of Binh’s name was also briefly touched on, with Har asking whether this was racist as none of the Caucasian characters could even pronounce his name correctly. Aaron and Raj both agreed that “Ang Mohs don’t care”, further perpetuating the notion that they really are racist.

An example of Binh’s name being “mangled” is when Sweet Sunday Man started calling him Bee. Timmy felt that that was used as a term of endearment, while Aaron equated it to Binh being a “honey bee”. Raj then explained how Caucasians tend to call others by the first initial of their names, i.e. A for Aaron, T for Timmy, and so forth. Very Gossip Girl.

Despite his affections, Sweet Sunday Man still made Binh steal The Book of Salt. Gertrude Stein wrote about Binh in the book, which caused Aaron to question whether anyone – even the great Gertrude Stein – could describe him perfectly. The part in which Sweet Sunday Man said that Stein captured Binh’s essence perfectly only caused Raj to exclaim that “Americans tend to agree with their countrymen.” We all agreed that Binh did not particularly reveal his true self throughout the book.

Varying opinions were shared when we talked about Sweet Sunday Man. Was he in love with Binh? Was he purely using him for sex? Was Sweet Sunday Man vindictive, since he used Binh to steal the book? Aaron asked whether he was a bad guy through and through. Raj said the only reason why Sweet Sunday Man was called as such was because it came from Binh’s point of view.

Is this book homophobic? Aaron finally tossed out (one of) his favourite question(s). Raj said the book made it look like homosexuals cannot find love. Aaron also added that the book depicted homosexuals as evil; Binh was a stereotypical gay man; lesbians were painted as selfish bitches.

Aaron read out loud the last passage of the book, and asked everyone what it meant. Timmy correctly guessed that it was about suicide. We briefly discussed about the “you” mentioned in that bit, which could have been referring to his mother, or his grandmother. It could even be about love or just holistically used as a metaphor.

Speaking of suicide, we moved on to why Binh kept hearing the Old Man’s voice in his head. The best quote used to describe the father: “He is a bloody cibai!” (© Raj 2013). Har viewed it as Binh’s criticism of himself, while Raj felt that it was his way of fulfilling his father’s expectations of him. Timmy thought he was delusional, and then brought up the scene of him burying his father alive.

Binh’s paternity was also questioned, with Timmy believing that The Old Man was not his biological father due to his mother’s affair with the schoolteacher. Aaron, however, didn’t think it was plausible and instead, suggested that Binh may have made the story up.

Aaron noted that religion played a big theme within the book, though Raj was unsure whether the author was against it.

When it came to favourite characters, Har picked Minh (up until Chapter 8, anyway) as he found the sous chef cool and was often dishing out advice to his younger brother. Both Timmy and Raj selected the mother, who, according to T, was “the Destiny’s Child of Vietnam in the 1920s”, while Raj likened her to The Little Nyonya, who was always busy in the kitchen, has got the guts to go to a different church from her husband’s, and was accepting of Binh. In terms of least favourite characters, Timmy disliked the (ex-) Madame’s secretary, calling her a slut and a bitch. Raj chose Sweet Sunday Man, saying that he was manipulative and had the nerve to break it off with Binh on a Post-It note. He then cited Carrie Bradshaw’s cardinal rule on breaking up with anyone using a Post-It note. Aaron found the grandmother to be selfish as she sold her daughter off to be matchmade before killing herself, just so that she could join her deceased husband in the afterlife.

We rounded up the session by asking one another what we don’t like about the book. Raj thought that it was full of stereotypes, though overall, he does not and could not hate the book. Har found the food references too tough to follow, and after the discussion, thought the ending was horrible. Timmy, who by then could not hold back his vitriol, said he found the book boring and monotonous, joking that he would rather watch paint dry or grass grow than read it. He didn’t think there was any satisfaction from reading the book, and could not appreciate Truong’s writing style. Aaron thought the same. “The writing is so beautiful, yet it’s a beautiful nothing,” he poetically said.

Germany to Store Europe’s Energy

aurelius77 — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:15:10 +0000

Power transition will result in domineering monopoly. Whether it’s storing money, gold, armaments or

The Lion's World: A Journey into the Heart of Narnia

Teresa — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:11:28 +0000

Despite growing up bookish in a Christian home, Rowan Williams, former Archbishop of Canterbury, did not discover C.S. Lewis until he was in his teens, when he read several of his apologetic works. When he eventually turned to the Narnia books, he was nonplussed, finding the theological message too obvious (a feeling that he says was partly the result of seeing a 1967 television production of The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe). It was only upon rereading that he realized that the books provide much of what he loved about Lewis’s other books—”a doorway into a simple intensity of feeling about God that was able both to register all the range of ambiguous and confused human feeling and still evoke an almost unbearable longing for that fullness of joy which Lewis points to so consistently in his best writing.”

The Lion’s World builds on a series of lectures that Williams gave at Canterbury Cathedral in Holy Week 2011. In the book, he answers some of Lewis’s critics and shares some of the ideas in Lewis’s writing, especially the Narnia books, that he has found especially meaningful.

Although I grew up as a voracious reader in a Christian home, I, like Williams, didn’t read the Narnia books as a child. After seeing a cartoon version on TV, I did read The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, but I stopped there, mostly because the descriptions of the later books that appeared on my copy of Lion did not mention Aslan, and a Narnia book without Aslan seemed like a waste of time. (I did not, I should add, get the religious symbolism, being only seven years old and reading the book entirely on my own.) So it wasn’t until college that I returned to C.S. Lewis, and at the time, I was newly invested in questions of faith and o wanted overt religious teaching. I wasn’t bothered by the obviousness of the message. Today, I’d prefer more subtlety, but in this book, Williams shows that the Narnia books are more subtle and complex than they may appear at first.

He begins, however, with a discussion of the books’ critics, who are many. J.R.R. Tolkien, for instance, didn’t like the mixture of mythologies, but Lewis wasn’t interested in creating an internally coherent alternate world, as Tolkien did. Nor was he interested in creating a systematic theology in a form palatable to children. Williams writes,

To try and map the entire set of stories on to a single theological grid is difficult. As I hope to show, there is a strong, coherent spiritual and theological vision shaping all the stories; but this dos not necessarily mean that they must all be read as self-conscious allegories of theological truths … Lewis repudiates the idea of reading the stories as allegory and instead suggests that they answer the question of what sort of Incarnation and redemption would be appropriate in a world like Narnia.

If you press the theological questions too hard, you’ll end up in a mess. What’s important are the stories. It’s theology through narrative and imagination, through thinking of what it’s it like to be in the presence of great power and great good, to know you’ve done wrong in the face of such power, to be part of a world that’s bigger on the inside. These are stories about seeing the truth about yourself and being given grace and love even when you don’t deserve it. Williams writes that Lewis “wants his readers to experience what it is that religious (specifically Christian) talk is about, without resorting to religious talk as we usually meet it.” It is true that Lewis uses a great deal of Christian imagery, but some books have surprisingly little obvious Christian symbols, are there’s also a lot of pagan imagery. It seems like Lewis uses whatever works for the story, and even if it’s sometimes heavy-handed, those moments don’t predominate.

As for some of the criticisms regarding depictions of foreigners and of women, Williams doesn’t let Lewis off the hook, but he does put those depictions in context, pointing out that Lewis was a man of his time, and he was drawing upon literary traditions from before his time, with all their flaws. In writing about the much-discussed problem of Susan, Williams notes that Lewis wrote to a reader that he did have hope that Susan would find her way back to Narnia, and he encouraged her to try to write how it would happen. I found the idea of C.S. Lewis encouraging Narnia fanfic back in 1960 to be utterly charming. I wonder if anyone has written that story.

It’s been a long time—probably about eight years–since I’ve read the Narnia books, and I’ve worried that they would lose their luster for me now that my own theology has become more complex and I’ve become more aware of the criticisms of the books. But Williams helps me see that even a jaded adult like me can find a lot of value in a good, imaginative story.

Towards Reality: The Solarian Creed

WhiteLight — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:08:50 +0000

The Solarian Philosophy finds itself in a peculiar place in the modern world. As a Religious Philosophy that seeks to base itself in reality everything about modernity is a challenge to it. Modernity is in its essence based upon the fictitious nonsense of commercial law. The Modern exalts the false as its god. Paper documents, paper money, fictions of nation, fictions of commercial law, gods that are not your natural father, all of these are the foundational ideologies of modernity. In most of modern thought, even their god Yahweh is to a large extent an irrelevancy long since having been eclipsed by the compounded god that is humanity. Satan as the tempter of man has been replaced by the boogeyman Nazis who seek to have their own separate nations.

We are constantly told that the great fictions of the past are God and the ideology of Blood. Race is a social construct they say with smiles upon their faces. Yet, a social construct is presumably something that doesn’t exist in reality, but is said to exist and is acted upon by a percentage of the population. Does this not well describe the nature of the paper priesthood of modernity? Does this not describe aptly the yahwehists? The universe is based upon blood and soul. There is nothing else but Blood and Soul within the Universe. Those who embrace these realities are the heretics of modernity and in violation of its laws, but they laugh along with the universe at how false everything is.

Primer on Commercial Law:

Note (i.e. all paper money are notes): a written statement of debt by one or more people to one or more people, with a statement of a specific amount owed or due, date it is due, interest (if any) on the amount, and other terms such as installments, penalty for late payment, full amount due if delinquent, how secured (as by real property), and attorneys’ fees and costs if required to collect on the note.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/note

In other words, all of that money that you earn are certificates of debt that you can’t exchange for anything. They also claim to be in the denomination of dollars however:

2. It weighs four hundred and twelve and a half grains. Of one thousand parts, nine hundred are of pure silver and one hundred of alloy. Act of January 18, 1837, ss. 8 & 9, 4 Sharsw. Cont. of Story’s L. U. S. 2523, 4; Wright, R. 162.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/dollar

A dollar is a specific amount of silver.

Everyone likes to boast about how free they are, however most of their property is controlled and owned by organizations that they themselves create. The staff of these organisations are also owned by the same organisations which are created and thus owned by everyone. Confusing is it not? I refer of course to the concept of the license bureau.

A license can be defined as: The permission granted by competent authority to exercise a certain privilege that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act, a Trespass or a tort. The certificate or the document itself that confers permission to engage in otherwise proscribed conduct.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/license

Your entire life is controlled by licenses which are one of the most brutal forms of state control out there. Despite the fact that you yourself are not transporting anything, you must get a driver’s license from the transportation bureau in your country, state or province. Want to get married? Well you will have to get a marriage license which gives the state a controlling partnership in the relationship. There’s no difference between two serfs requiring their lord’s permission to get married because they are his slaves and two people that require the state’s permission to get married.

Why is the state concerned about marriage anyways you may ask. They don’t care about people having almost any other sort of sexual relationship and in fact encourage it in their institutions. And given that in all western countries parking for an extra ten minutes in that place with a parking meter is legally bad while adultery carries no fine whatsoever (and in fact they elect them to public office such as hollande), why do they care exactly? A marriage in the corporatist mindset represents the merging of two corporations.

The state in modern times views you as a person which is much like a mini corporation. A corporation is defined as: “an organization formed with state governmental approval to act as an artificial person to carry on business (or other activities), which can sue or be sued, and (unless it is non-profit) can issue shares of stock to raise funds with which to start a business or increase its capital. One benefit is that a corporation’s liability for damages or debts is limited to its assets, so the shareholders and officers are protected from personal claims, unless they commit fraud.”

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/corporation

Thus, your family is seen as an artificial person that is united for the purposes of tax collection. It’s always about that dirty little fiction known as money in the end.

Religious Irreality:

Modern day religions are not based in reality. The agreed upon philosophies for most religions now are globalist in orientation and have been moving there since day one. The highest principles are usually given as a form of self-denial in favor of others. While perhaps that has its place at times, in the modern day liberals and liberal Christians you see exactly where this emphasis ends up. Other races are worshipped by whites and the poor are exalted as heroes of sorts.

The three major religions Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all find their basic identity in irreality. Men are said to be born sinners in this world and must turn back to god. The way that this is most often phrased is that men are by nature the children of the devil. The rites of these religions are designed to show that there is something wrong with our reality that must be changed. In Judaism it is mandated that all male converts must be circumcised and in many cases there is also a ceremonial washing that must take place. The rite of circumcision draws upon the idea of being separate and called out from ones people and becoming a new person which you are sworn to reproduce by circumcision. Washings in Judaism are almost always about becoming ritualistically cleansed.

The conversion rite in Christianity requires the Christian to be baptised and take communion. This at first seems to incorporate only the ceremonially unclean aspect of a person, however in Christianity Christ is said to be received into a person upon baptism (this is the original rite, the protestant reception of Christ prior to baptism is a more modern view). To take communion is to partake in the body and blood of Christ in which Christ enters into us. Islam is similar to Judaism in that it requires converts to be circumcised.

The Pagan (as noted, not my preferred way of describing the concept but used here for clarity) way of viewing the world emphasises the unity between its many elements while also appreciating the distinctions. Gods are viewed as representing several different things. They control the elemental forces of nature and derive some of their titles from these forces. They represent the different human emotions and psychological states. They represent the great role models to base character upon. Lastly, they are both the creators and the fathers of man almost all of whom have at some time bred into human lineages.

In Christianity, Judaism and islam, there is always a separation between god and creation. This is disturbing even with their claims of transcendental deity for such a deity is present in all of creation by necessity rather than being somehow far off and distinct from creation. Christianity in its doctrine states this partially, but rather immediately emphasizes how far off god is rather than how near he is hence the emphasis upon communion as a way for god and matter to unify in Christ, god and matter personified. In Judaism and islam god is transcendental and appears rather far off from creation. All of these doctrines are based upon worshipping something that is identified as the all; however it is in really bizarre ways. The All does not require the priestly intermediaries to contact it as it is all and is within all. You can never be cut off from the All in the manner that these religions claim. Also, while it is understandable for non-transcendental deities to use sacrifices, it is rather absurd for the All to claim a sacrifice from man for there is no real reason to demand it.

Against these notions there stand the great pagan doctrines. The all is the great creator who represents the great unity between the active animation of creation and the infinite potential that is the passive part of creation. As I have stated in the High Allegory, the greatness of these two parts of the divine mind are what morality itself and the love of life can be derived from. From the active part of the All we learn about giving of itself to partake in the infinite potential. From this union, creation is born though it is an eternal birth for in truth the mind has always been. This is the first and greatest reality. There are those who say god is a fiction, yet they must still believe in this concept with the distinction that they believe the union is not cognisant which is absurd.

The Gods themselves represent the ultimate ties of both the spiritual and the physical realms. All Gods are worshipped and held with honor by the lands that they are said to have tread and the people that they are the fathers and mothers of. The people are tied to the lands and the bloodlines of their Gods. They strive to act as their fathers acted for in their stories they have role models of how the Gods wish for their lineages to act.

You are no longer a separate entity in this creation. That much can certainly be said. Your personality is a part of your Father’s soul and you carry the substance of your Mother the Earth as your body. You have a duty to both of them. You have a duty to uphold the Soul of your Father and the land that is your Mother.

The reason morality has failed in the nations is because it is based on a false premise. When you are told that you are a sinner and to turn from your sins, it is inherently a guilt trip. You are told to uphold and honor something that is separate from you. The Gods are not like this. You follow a moral code to honor both yourself and your Father who you exist in as a part of his Soul. If you do wrong and dishonor yourself, it is to yourself first and foremost that you deal the greatest blow for your Father’s displeasure shall be revealed to you and you harm your own substance. There need be no talk of the other in this system. You need not hate the people of other deities (and yes, should the need arise I see no real reason why not to help in some circumstances), however this pursuit of others as the highest virtue must cease. We are called to honor our Father.

Instead of viewing morality as the Yahwehist does, consider that by following a certain moral path you are affecting the Universe in certain ways as your Father has determined. Morality itself is based upon the reproduction of Life and what gives your lineage the greatest success in this world to prosper period. If instead of looking at everything through the lenses of what should I do so that I won’t be punished; instead look at morality with the eyes of Deity. How should you act to affect creation in a certain way? What actions uphold My name and the name of my Father? What actions give power to the gods that are enemies of my Father? This is a far more effective way of viewing morality than the yahwehist creed. The modern day secularist view is even more absurd than the yahwehist creed. The new world order bases its morality upon a secularized version of judeo-christian morality. This morality dictates that god is to be reckoned as all of humanity and therefore humanity is to be worshipped. It is the oldest yahwehist trick in the book and suddenly their pretentions of piety have vanished and they have created the fiction of the human race.

Indeed, the fiction of one human race is central to the new world order and yahwehist ideology. It dictates that we are all the same race descended from the same Africans known as adam and eve. All Yahwehist religions teach this and secular powers such as the UN and the European Union have mandated that there is only one humanity. In the end, even the jewish nation which has seen itself as an elite called out of common humanity shall find that they must acquiesce before the logic of the ideology spoken of within their religious texts. The ideology of one humanity justifies the vast resettlement of lands and the amalgamation of all the different nations as they are one soul and are therefore the same. In these lands, everyone is equal as a mini-corporation underneath the law because they have paper documents and little plastic cards. Good Lord, they are even in a government computer database! How could anything be more representative of reality! Of course it takes all of a couple of days for this system to show how bankrupt it is which is quite unsurprising.

Men are not built to be anthro-centric ad focussed upon ourselves as the highest part of creation. The old story of the Yahwehist religions is that satan refused to bow down to god when god told him to worship man. Man is but a tiny part of this creation and rationally speaking if there are such beings as the Gods than it is foolish to see ourselves as somehow better representatives of the All than they. Indeed, in a universe so vast under the guardianship of such great spiritual beings, we are very unlikely to be the only such people that exist. The pagan mind is the mind of freedom for the Gods have not dictated everything to us. We have religious stories, Models of Gods, and some moral notions. Yet, We are Men who are called to seek out and search rather than be dictated to as the Yahwehists and the Secularists would have us. And so in this point at last we show ourselves to be the faithful sons of the Active All, not the passive minded effeminacy within the yahwehist and secularist mind. The pagans succeed where the yahwehist can only fail.

Now, think back to what commerce does. Commerce like the yahwehist religion forces a fantasy to emerge as the mediator between reality and the active energy of work. Money is a fiction, everyone is agreed on that. They say that it represents the industrial output of a nation, but it is paper and numbers in a computer that have absolutely no effect upon reality itself. Yet, you are paid in this fantasy and then must use this fantasy to buy real goods and real services. The government is in control of this fantasy which it uses to claim the right to arbitrate between almost everything that individual people do within its system.

The greatest treason possible is the creed of the yahwehist and modernity. Leave your people and abandon the lineage of Your God. Come follow after the god of creation and contract yourself to him. To starve the gods of the nations as the Old Testament puts it. The fundamental lesson of the All is the greatness of the bloodline. Man is a representation of the All mind in his functions of creation and the production of life. By abandoning your line you abandon your Father. This is the definition of treason. Worship the All yes, but understand that it is by following the pursuit of life that your Father has given you that you will honor and find the All. Emulate the Gods and your Father and you will again discover yourself when you have been blinded to the reality that was always present.

Honor to the All, Honor to Father Tiw, Honor to Lord Thunor, Honor to Mother Sol

God is perfect!

mcd555 — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:08:13 +0000

In response to: http://www.speakingtree.in/public/spiritual-slideshow/seekers/self-improvement/so-many-gods-and-goddesses-in-hindu-religionwhy/10236

God is perfect. He has given us everything and keeps giving us everything. We don’t have to ask Him for anything except His remembrance everywhere at all times. He is the ‘Kaaran Karan Kareem!’ We all pray to Him in our own ways depending on our upbringing, culture, educational background and socio-economic situation, and we ask Him to fulfill our various material and abstract desires. All religions involve different formats, rituals and practices. They are all there to bring together the masses in unity despite diversity. The differences of religious practices, faiths and traditions must be respected and must not be argued upon to prove ourselves right and the other wrong. In front of God we are all children and perhaps equally ignorant! So may Him be as He is! And may His Will be done! Our focus should be on spiritual development and social integration in a global perspective! In my humble opinion this is wisdom!

- Mahesh Daswal

Clark: On the philosophical underpinnings of non-demonstration / faith

borgan — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:05:46 +0000

“Prove it!”

The above statement is often a rallying cry for disbelief. Of course, there is nothing wrong with proof where proof/demonstration is possible; but, certainly the epistemological limitations of a non-terminating recursive quest for proof are obvious … As Dr. Gordon Clark noted:

“There is a definite reason why not everything can be deduced. If one tried to prove the axioms of geometry, one must refer back to prior propositions. If these too must be deduced, there must be previous propositions, and so on back ad infinitum. From which it follows: If everything must be demonstrated, nothing can be demonstrated, for there would be no starting point. If you cannot start, then you surely cannot finish.

Every system of theology or philosophy must have a starting point. Logical Positivists started with the unproved assumption that a sentence can have no meaning unless it can be tested by sensation. To speak without referring to something that can be touched, seen, smelled, and especially measured, is to speak nonsense. But they never deduce this principle. It is their non-demonstrable axiom. Worse, it is self-contradictory, for it has not been seen, smelled, or measured; therefore it is self-condemned as nonsense.

If the axioms of other secularists are not nonsense, they are nonetheless axioms. Every system must start somewhere, and it cannot have started before it starts. A naturalist might amend the Logical Positivist’s principle and make it say that all knowledge is derived from sensation. This is not nonsense, but it is still an empirically unverifiable axiom. If it is not self-contradictory, it is at least without empirical justification. Other arguments against empiricism need not be given here: The point is that no system can deduce its axioms.”

http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=50

What then, is the nature of the knowledge that is axiomatic, non-demonstrated, and not deduced from any other prior principles? Such knowledge is a part of a systems of philosophy and world views. Surely it may be obvious to some (as it is to me!) that it is a knowledge that is based upon faith! Dr. Clark continues:

“The inference is this: No one can consistently object to Christianity’s being based on a non-demonstrable axiom. If the secularists exercise their privilege of basing their theorems on axioms, then so can Christians. If the former refuse to accept our axioms, then they can have no logical objection to our rejecting theirs. Accordingly, we reject the very basis of atheism, Logical Positivism, and, in general, empiricism. Our axiom shall be, God has spoken. More completely, God has spoken in the Bible. More precisely, what the Bible says, God has spoken.”

The veracity of this principle undermines any type of claim similar to: “I only believe that which can be proven”; since the logical sequence of proof itself relies upon non-demonstrated pre-conditions!

Peace

rossisaurus — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:04:26 +0000

Contrary to the above-mentioned tag, I’m not religious. I’m not bound by dogma, I have no creed, there is no deity judging me, there is no eternal damnation for transgressions committed, there is no eternal bliss for mindless obedience. Similarly, I’m not looking / seeking / searching. I base my thoughts on what is measureable, reproduceable, predictable, and plausible.

All of that being said, I’m super interested in the process of religion as it wends its way through individuals, families, societies, and cultural groups.

I am also interested in the traditions of culture and religion.

Christians say, “Peace be with you,” “And also with you.”

It’s a nice cultural gesture. I wonder if it can become a global phenomenon. The Moslems say, “Salaam alaikum,” “Wa alaikum es-salaam.” It basically translates to the same thing. The Buddhists and Hindus say, “Namaste,” or “Namashkar.”

Peace be with you! Salaam! Namaste!

This, I like.

Celebration of "First Fruits" Teaches Humility, Gratitude

johnib — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:02:07 +0000

Also called the Day of Bikkurim, first fruits, because when the Temple was in J’lem, nation would bring fruits to J’lem from Shavuot on.

Photo: Wikimedia Commons

The festival of Shavuot is also called the Day of Matan Torah, the giving of the Torah, the day on which Am Yisrael stood at the foot of Mount Sinai and heard the Ten Commandments – the day on which the nation made a covenant with God and willingly and lovingly received the Torah.

But it is also called the Day of Bikkurim, first fruits. This is because when the Temple stood in Jerusalem, the nation would bring their first fruits to Jerusalem from Shavuot on.

The commandment of bringing the first fruits is described at length in the Mishna: “A man goes down into his field, he sees a fig that ripened, or a cluster of grapes that ripened, or a pomegranate that ripened. He ties a reed-rope around it and says: ‘Let these be bikkurim.’ All [the inhabitants of] the cities assembled in the city… And the ox with horns bedecked with gold and with an olive-crown on its head led the way.

By SHMUEL RABINOWITZ

The flute was played before them…

and when they arrived close to Jerusalem… the governors and chiefs and treasurers [of the Temple] went out to meet them… All the skilled artisans of Jerusalem would stand up before them and greet them: ‘Brethren, men of such and such a place, we are delighted to welcome you’… Even the king would take the basket and place it on his shoulder and walk as far as the Temple court.”

(Mishna, Tractate Bikkurim 3, 1-4) This vivid and colorful description is unique to the offering of the first fruits. In what way is this commandment so unique that the entire capital city ceases to work and goes out to welcome those bringing the first fruits? All of us remember the wonderful experience of receiving our first paycheck; the sweet taste of the first profit. It was a wonderful feeling to earn payment for hard work and effort; no longer charity, but profit earned.

But a cloud shadows this experience.

Without noticing it, when you earned your first paycheck, you made a pact between yourself and the money. It was then that the race to accumulate money began. At that moment, you learned the immense power of money, its mysterious value that tugs at all our hearts.

The farmer goes out to his fields after months of effort, after long days of sweat and hard work, of plowing and seeding, weeding and safeguarding, and sees the first fruit buds sprouting on the tree. His heart expands with a sense of great satisfaction – a feeling he can become addicted to and then bound to in the search for pride of having property and possessions.

And then, he ties a thin rope around the delicate bud. He knowingly relinquishes the new fig, the first cluster of grapes. But this loss is actually a profit that compares to none, he acquires control over greed and lust for possessions. He remains free and liberated and not enslaved to money.

He brings these first fruits to Jerusalem in a glorious parade, accompanied by music. When he is welcomed by the people of Jerusalem, he knows and internalizes: I did it! I will place this first fruit in a basket and place it on my shoulder and declare: The land is not mine, the property is not mine; they are the Lord’s, who graciously gave me the land and its fruit! And thus, by renouncing possessiveness and the joy of ownership, a proper and healthy society is formed, a society in which the first paycheck does not become a symbol for chasing and accumulating money, but a symbol of relinquishment, gratitude and humility.

The writer is rabbi of the Western Wall and Holy Sites.

A Christian despite.

Hera — Wed, 22 May 2013 07:00:55 +0000

I’m a Christian. Sometimes I’m a Christian despite. I’m a Christian despite hearing that a friend of a friend of a friend’s baby died. Before the baby was born, she was diagnosed with Hypoplastic left heart syndrome. Many babies with this disease have a high chance for survival, but this particular baby’s case was too severe. I had been following her story through Facebook. After I found out that she had gone to heaven, I went to the mother’s Facebook (I feel horrible even posting about this, but there is a point to this!)

Have you ever seen this meme before?

Going to this woman’s Facebook was like this, but the opposite. I read all the posts from when she found out she was having the baby and when she found out that the baby had HLHS. I read all the prayer requests and I found her blog which went into more detail. I guess that’s the thing about the internet. You get to see your life play out, but your past is there as well. It’s weird reading about the baby’s diagnosis, birth, the parents prayers, and all that was done to keep her on Earth since I know what happened.

I wanted to pray for the baby’s parents as soon as I found what happened, but I didn’t know what to pray for. I still don’t know. I guess all I can pray is that God gives me what they need at this time. I know I said at the beginning of this post that I’m a Christian despite something like this happening, but seeing how much faith the baby’s parents have in God and seeing the strength that it took and will take to get through this is inspiring. I know often people see situations such as this and say, “See? There’s obviously not God or this wouldn’t have happened.” I don’t see it like this. There is a God, and I don’t understand him Maybe that’s the point. Maybe we as humans are not meant to understand how God works. I don’t know for sure, but I’m still a Christian, despite this news.

My love affair with Mr Fear (thekenyaninme.wordpress.com)
Reflecting on Reputation by Julie Arduini (christiansread.wordpress.com)
Why People Prayed for Boston on Twitter and Facebook, and Then Stopped (theatlantic.com)
What power? (grayzentattoo.wordpress.com)
I should continue to be Christian (mengamayesu.wordpress.com)
Modern Day Miracles (sudryandspecific.wordpress.com)
Day 17: Feels like I hit a wall; hope it passes. (sabrenee27.wordpress.com)
Christian without prayer? (mengamayesu.wordpress.com)
To be Christian (mengamayesu.wordpress.com)
Pray Harder (accesstothealtar.com)

religion « WordPress.com Tag Feed

I Always Knew You

St. Ambrose – Bk 3 – Chapter 10

spkbhrm5

130522 - Ark

Does God Care

Anything but ordinary!

Chapter 16

The Blessings of Krishna

There is no God the Mother because there are no Father's records about "Elohim"?

fcjk3q97.wordpress.com

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Hand Fasting: the right title for same sex marriage?

The Great Flood

PUPUH JIWA

Balanced Action.

LIONSGATE ACHIEVES RECORD SALES AT 2013 CANNES MARKET WITH SLATE OF NINE FILMS LED BY MOCKINGJAY 1 & 2, STEP UP 5 AND THE LAST WITCH HUNTER

47th Discussion: Monique Truong’s The Book of Salt

Germany to Store Europe’s Energy

The Lion's World: A Journey into the Heart of Narnia

Towards Reality: The Solarian Creed

God is perfect!

Clark: On the philosophical underpinnings of non-demonstration / faith

Peace

Celebration of "First Fruits" Teaches Humility, Gratitude

A Christian despite.

Related articles