Keys Writings 2014, Part 23

This entry is part 27 of 33 in the series 2014

2014

Sept 28, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 8

Here’s the next scriptural riddle we’re considering.

22 Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, “These nursing babies are like those who enter the <Father’s> kingdom.” They said to him, “Then shall we enter the <Father’s> kingdom as babies?” Jesus said to them, “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom].”

As of when I posted this I hadn’t seen any explanation that sheds much light on this verse. Like Larry it would seem that the nursing babies merely symbolizes humility and a willingness to trust and learn new things or be born again, and, like Keith, it would seem that the rest is merely telling us that we need to balance the dualities within us.

Then Jim came up with an interesting interpretation that applies to us when we are separated from our bodies. He talks of:

the soul leaving the mind behind to travel to the Father’s Kingdom finally arriving there as a babe in Awe of finding itself among all the other Mansions in The Kingdom Within as Points of glittering Light, reflections of the magnificent BEING of LIGHT.

Arriving as the SPHERICAL Ball, or Point of Light that each member of THE MARKED ELECT that has succeeded in arriving as babes in the FATHER’s KINGDOM within, no longer has any remaining Earth Forms such as male or female anatomies or Genders, nor eyes, feet, hands, ears, or ANY THING of the earthly nature we left. We can’t tell the difference between the inside from the outside, or if we are right side up, or up side down, because now, we have become ONE with the FATHER in CHRIST!!!

This is a very interesting slant on interpreting this verse and corresponds to the words quite well. After death there are a number of different levels where various entities go in the spirit world. In the lower levels the occupants keep their human form because they are attached to it and feel comfortable interplaying with others through form.

But, in the higher levels the form is not seen as necessary and entities interplay as beings of light. As beings of light the inner is like the outer and the upper like the lower. There is no male and female form though there will be a male or female charge in the life force.

The verse also says you can make an image in the place of an image. The image of the old physical body is replaced by light and energy, but the consciousness, when meeting another individual, can read his vibration and create an image of how he looked in the body. He can thus interplay with others through the seeing of images or just sensing the vibratory signature.

Let us move on to verse 23:

23 Jesus said, “I shall choose you, one from a thousand and two from ten thousand, and they will stand as a single one.”

This illustrates how few there are who truly seek higher knowledge, but if such persons are gathered they have the capacity to see eye to eye through the soul and “stand as a single one.”

Verse 24:

24 His disciples said, “Show us the place where you are, for we must seek it.” He said to them, “Anyone here with two ears had better listen! There is light within a person of light, and it shines on the whole world. If it does not shine, it is dark.”

I think the wording is much better in Matthew:

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!” Matt 6:22-23

Put simply, if our focus is on the light that comes from God we will be filled with light. If not, darkness will reign.

25 Jesus said, “Love your friends like your own soul, protect them like the pupil of your eye.”

The meaning here is pretty obvious.

26 Jesus said, “You see the sliver in your friend’s eye, but you don’t see the timber in your own eye. When you take the timber out of your own eye, then you will see well enough to remove the sliver from your friend’s eye.”

Again the Gospel of Matthew says basically the same thing:

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye. Matt 7:3-5

The message is obvious. Work on you own faults before you go around correcting your neighbors.

Now we get to another verse that may require a little thinking:

27 “If you do not fast from the world, you will not find the <Father’s> kingdom. If you do not observe the sabbath as a sabbath you will not see the Father.”

To fast from the world is to not be attached to it. Does the second part mean that we must be like the good church goers and not work and go to church on the Sabbath? And does it matter if we rest on Saturday or Sunday?

Or is keeping the Sabbath a different thing than people have been led to believe?

***

Jim:

I owned the entire set of massive Hard Back volumes of the complete history of The Seventh Day Adventists and The Millerite’s.

I notice that this is a pattern with you, but in a good way. That is, when a subject interests you or you get involved in a philosophy that you get all the core materials and research leaving no stone unturned.

This approach is one thing that sets apart the true seeker.

As one with a Mormon background in my early days, I noticed that those who are most content with the religion are those who have studied very little into its doctrines and history. Those ex LDS on the list like Larry Woods, Susan, Tyler, Greg and others were serious students. These are the ones who see things that do not add up and are not content with just surface stuff. Once one becomes a true seeker he finds he is never satisfied with what he has devoured, but always wants more. If his religion does not give it to him then he will look elsewhere.

Sept 29, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 9

The Question:

Is keeping the Sabbath a different thing than people have been led to believe?

Judging from the answers given by the group I’d say that most of the reject the orthodox view of the Sabbath. You are not asking whether we should rest on Saturday or Sunday, but are questioning whether a set time is even needed.

It is interesting that members of many orthodox religions place a lot of weight on obeying the Sabbath by not working, attending church and placing extra attention on God. On the other hand, those not caught up in the religious thoughtform and left to their own rational thinking can’t see much value in rigidly setting apart one day out of seven for the spiritual side of things.

When one frees himself from the Beast he finds he must have some reason for what he does. Just being commanded to do something by an outside authority doesn’t do the trick.

So are the Bible writers in illusion or just out of date concerning the Sabbath?

Not completely. What I have found is that even the scriptures that seem impractical are based on some principle and if we can understand the principle then we can see the benefit and will willingly apply it.

So, what is the principle behind the Sabbath?

To find it, let us return to Genesis.

There are two pauses or rests from labor in the creation account. Most are familiar with the one mentioned in Genesis 2:2-3

And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

So where is the other rest? There is a Sabbath pause after each day of creation. During each of the six days God ceased laboring, looked at his work and saw to it that it was “good” or “correct.”

Where is the word correct you say? The King James says “and it was so” which is translated from the Hebrew KEN which more literally means “right” or “correct.”

Notice too that right after we are told that God took a Sabbath rest after the six days of creation that man was not yet physically on the earth and God did additional work on the Sabbath by creating man, the plants, the animals and the Garden of Eden.

It looks like then, if we copy God, that we will still perform labors on the Sabbath.

The problem for millennia is that the basic principle has not been understood which is this.

The Sabbath is a pause taken after a work is completed and the purpose of the pause is to examine and contemplate that work and assess whether it needs additional tweaking or not. After each day of creation God took a pause, examined his work and through contemplation made sure the work was good and correct.

After six cycles of work He took a greater pause and made sure everything was “good” and then completed his work.

The principle can be simply stated as follows. To initiate a successful work one must not just forge ahead and work ceaselessly, but at the end of each stage or cycle one must pause and contemplate the work and assess it. Normally corrections will be in order. After the pause one implements the corrections and moves on to the end of the next stage or pause and assess again.

If one does not follow this pattern his work will wind up having little value and often being destructive.

The world would be so much better off if politicians could follow this principle and pause, assess and correct their work, but they do not. They pass their bills and then move on to the next thing that will be an irritant to society.

When a major field of endeavor is completed one takes a greater pause, enjoys the fruits of his labor and then contemplates his next endeavor

Let us pause and go to the next verse:

28 Jesus said, “I took my stand in the midst of the world, and in flesh I appeared to them. I found them all drunk, and I did not find any of them thirsty. My soul ached for the children of humanity, because they are blind in their hearts and do not see, for they came into the world empty, and they also seek to depart from the world empty. But meanwhile they are drunk. When they shake off their wine, then they will change their ways.”

People do not thirst for true knowledge because they are drunk. What does this mean?

A drunkard in the scriptures does not always refer to one drunk with wine. David explains, “Thou hast showed thy people hard things; thou hast made us to drink the wine of astonishment.” (Psalms 60:3) Another example: “And I will tread down the people in my anger, and I will make them drunk in my fury… .” (Isa. 63:6) “They are drunken, but not with wine; they stagger, but not with strong drink. For the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of a deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes: the prophets and your rulers, the seers hath he covered.” (Isa. 29:9-10) “But they also have erred through wine, and through strong drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.” (Isa 28:7)

People become spiritually drunk not with alcohol, (which the American Indians called “spirits”) but by the spiritual doctrines they follow. Instead of seeing the spirit of their teachings they follow the letter and this makes them drunk and lead a life that would be shunned by any rational person free of such teachings.

The next verse is another tricky one:

29 Jesus said, “If the flesh came into being because of spirit, that is a marvel, but if spirit came into being because of the body, that is a marvel of marvels. Yet I marvel at how this great wealth has come to dwell in this poverty.”

What do you suppose this saying means? Can spirit come into being because of the body?

Sept 30, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 10

Here is the verse under consideration

What do you suppose this saying means? Can spirit come into being because of the body?

This is a tough one and it is no surprise that only two took a stab at it.

The first part is a no brainer to the esoteric student for many teach that matter and flesh came into being because of spirit, but few say anything relating to spirit coming into being because of the body.

Ruth points out that the body could be a molecule which draws a higher spirit or intelligence to it. This kind of fits. It creates a vehicle for a new life or spirit to manifest.

Then Keith tells us that matter cannot create spirit.

There is another interpretation that fits quite well. That is when the disciple advances beyond soul contact to achieving oneness with God, so he can say as did Jesus, “I and my Father are one” – then he achieves power to raise his vibrations to the level of spirit. Spirit thus comes into being from matter and as spirit the adept can walk through walls or teleport himself over long distances and then manifest a physical body from spirit.

One might say that the relation of spirit and matter is like water and ice. Water creates ice by reducing its vibration and ice creates water by increasing it. They are the same substance, but exist in different interchangeable states.

There is another time spirit comes into being because of a body and that is when the body of the entire material universe reaches its end. At this point pralaya, or the great rest, is entered through the process of all matter reverting back to spirit.

Verses 30-36 are covered in the Bible and have already presented there in more eloquent language.

Here they are from Thomas:

30 Jesus said, “Where there are three deities, they are divine. Where there are two or one, I am with that one.”

31 Jesus said, “No prophet is welcome on his home turf; doctors don’t cure those who know them.”

32 Jesus said, “A city built on a high hill and fortified cannot fall, nor can it be hidden.”

33 Jesus said, “What you will hear in your ear, in the other ear proclaim from your rooftops. After all, no one lights a lamp and puts it under a basket, nor does one put it in a hidden place. Rather, one puts it on a lampstand so that all who come and go will see its light.”

34 Jesus said, “If a blind person leads a bind person, both of them will fall into a hole.”

35 Jesus said, “One can’t enter a strong person’s house and take it by force without tying his hands. Then one can loot his house.”

36 Jesus said, “Do not fret, from morning to evening and from evening to morning, [about your food–what you’re going to eat, or about your clothing–] what you are going to wear. [You’re much better than the lilies, which neither card nor spin. As for you, when you have no garment, what will you put on? Who might add to your stature? That very one will give you your garment.]”

Finally, the next verse says something not covered in the Bible:

37 His disciples said, “When will you appear to us, and when will we see you?” Jesus said, “When you strip without being ashamed, and you take your clothes and put them under your feet like little children and trample then, then [you] will see the son of the living one and you will not be afraid.”

So… are people who join nudist colonies more enlighten than people who like to wear clothes? Or, is there more to interpreting this verse?

***

They are also outraged when I quote anything from their forum (which is rare) but they feel it is fine to quote anything they wish from our forum.

Oh, well… In spite of distractions I will continue to guide the group toward positive learning. Anyone who wants to stay positive and on topic should comment on the topic of he day.

Off topic posts should be of something interesting to the group. Arguing ancient doctrinal disputes is not interesting to many here as they are looking for greater understanding of principles and why things are the way they are.

Oct 1, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 11

So… are people who join nudist colonies more enlighten than people who like to wear clothes? Or, is there more to interpreting this verse?

It’s kind of funny that people I have met who are exhibitionists or into nudity have not been particularly enlightened though they seem to think that running around in the buff is an evolved thing to do.

Have you ever seen a streaker who looks like he could teach you anything?

Though not being ashamed of ourselves physically, emotionally, mentally or spiritually is a good trait to acquire one must also honor the customs of society when appropriate.

Ruth says that “When we strip without shame, then we are reverting back to our true essence as Souls.”

She is on the right track. On earth we can hide our thoughts, desires and intentions, but after we die and go to the spirit world we are virtually naked in that nothing can be hidden. The higher you go in the spirit realms the more you share with others. When two can become one and share all, then they will see the Son of God in each other.

Ruth gave a good explanation of the dropping of clothes:

Putting your “garments” under your feet, demonstrates that you have put all your Earthly possessions under the control of the Soul, e.g. the image of washing Jesus feet also demonstrates the dusting off of our lower self, and placing our lower self under the control of our higher self, because our feet are the closest physical representation to being on Earth or walking on soil, which demonstrates that our feet are connected to Mother Earth and the lower part of materialism whilst our higher self is connected to that which is above soil and Earth and is more in touch with Spirit.

So anything to do with trampling our clothes under our feet, is representing our lower desires being trampled by our higher desires, and the higher outweighs the lower.

Here is the next verse:

38 Jesus said, “Often you have desired to hear these sayings that I am speaking to you, and you have no one else from whom to hear them. There will be days when you will seek me and you will not find me.”

No deep meaning here so let us move on:

39 Jesus said, “The Pharisees and the scholars have taken the keys of knowledge and have hidden them. They have not entered nor have they allowed those who want to enter to do so. As for you, be as sly as snakes and as simple as doves.”

This is similar to a passage from Luke:

Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. Luke 11:52

Notice though that there is one major difference. Thomas talks about the KEYS of Knowledge instead of just one Key.

So what is a key of knowledge anyway?

It is the understanding of a principle that opens the door to, not just one piece of information, but unlimited knowledge.

I teach about twelve keys if knowledge, but there are more. These are merely twelve important keys that enlighten the mind. The problem with the authorities in the days of Jesus is that they only doled out dry facts and did all they could to prevent the common people from learning principles that would free them from outer authority. The more the seeker learns true principles the less he will depend on some outer authority who is trying to be the voice of God to him.

Then finally the seeker will obtain soul contact and learn to trust in the inner voice and will be free.

40 Jesus said, “A grapevine has been planted apart from the Father. Since it is not strong, it will be pulled up by its root and will perish.”

Here you have the simple teaching that one must focus his consciousness on the true Source to receive nourishment and strength. If one focuses on the cares of the world he will not have strong spiritual life.

41 Jesus said, “Whoever has something in hand will be given more, and whoever has nothing will be deprived of even the little they have.”

This by itself makes little sense, but is explained much better in the Parable of the Talents in Matthew 25:14-30

It (the kingdom of heaven) is like a man going abroad, who called his servants and put his capital in their hands; to one he gave five bags of gold, to another two, to another one, each according to his capacity. Then he left the country.

The man who had the five bags went at once and employed them in business, and made a profit of five bags, and the man who had the two bags made two. But the man who had been given one bag of gold went off and dug a hole in the ground, and hid his master’s money.

A long time afterwards their master returned, and proceeded to settle accounts with them. The man who had been given the five bags of gold came and produced the five he had made:

“Master,” he said, “you left five bags with me; look, I have made five more.”

“Well done, my good and trusty servant!” said the master. “You have proved trustworthy in a small way; I will now put you in charge of something big. Come and share your master’s delight.”

The man with the two bags then came and said, “Master, you left two bags with me; look, I have made two more.”

“Well done, my good and trusty servant !” said the

master. “You have proved trustworthy in a small way; I will now put you in charge of something big. Come and share your master’s delight.”

Then the man who had been given one bag came and said, “Master, I knew you to be a hard man: you reap where you have not sown, you gather where you have not scattered; so I was afraid, and I went and hid your gold in the ground. Here it is—you have what belongs to you.”

“You lazy rascal!” said the master. “You knew that I reap where I have not sown, and gather where I have not scattered? Then you ought to have put my money on deposit, and on my return I should have got it back with interest. Take the bag of gold from him, and give it to the one with the ten bags. For the man

who has will always be given more, till he has enough and to spare ; and the man who has not will forfeit even what he has. Fling the useless servant

out into the dark, the place of wailing and grinding of teeth!” (New English Version)

This parable has many applications but an important one applies to our abilities to expand on our keys of knowledge, principles and understanding. Many religious people hide their talent deep in the physical side and think they can absorb further light by merely attending church. Many new agers are equally lazy. The one who gains the most knowledge will be given more, but the lazy ones will lose the little light they have.

This also applies collectively. Many organizations are started by an enlightened initiate, but those who do not seek will not see the original light. It will not be lost, but picked up by other seekers.

Jesus was thinking of this principle when talking to he authorities of his day:

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. Matt 21:42-43

Because they were merely caretakers of the spiritual treasure, they lost the light they had, but others picked it up and expanded upon it.

Next we have a short verse containing good advice:

42 Jesus said, “Be passersby.”

What do you suppose he means by this?

Also, feel free to comment on any verse already interpreted or passed over.

Oct 2, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 12

The verse to interpret

42 Jesus said, “Be passersby.”

What do you suppose he means by this?

We have received some good comments on this – all going the right direction.

Ruth came up with the interesting twist that we are to pass by the distractive elements of material life and then hit the core of the matter saying, “we are to become as Observers to the lower self and realms and not become so entangled in the movie of Life, but become the Life in the Movie.”

Jim presented a similar idea in that we are to live in the world but not be of the world. He took the interpretation of this further than usual by stating that we can leave our bodies and actually live in higher worlds for a time without having to die to do so.

Johann reinforced the idea of the observer:

It means to take the stand of the observer and not get trapped in and used up by the world but put the outside world in it’s rightful place. Then your spirit is free to roam and serve.

Then Keith added this:

By passing by one does not get involved in the mundane events of life. Only the important happenings of the life of the soul should occupy your mind. This only applies to disciples on the path. The average person must immerse themselves into the trails of everyday life in order to learn the lessons which will bring them to the point of questioning their involvement and its purpose. Later burgeoning soul contact will emerge.

I have written a number of times about the importance of detaching ourselves from events and effects and taking upon ourselves the viewpoint of the observer. The problem many have, from the lesser evolved to intelligent seekers, is they identify too much with the form side of life, especially with the emotional effects produced.

Discussions around the first Key in the Immortal centers around the question, “who or what are you?” It is concluded that we are not our bodies and neither are we our emotions or even our minds, so what are we really?

Often seekers may think they are beyond attachment and then the moment someone says something offensive they take it way too personally and overreact. Why? Because they are not being the observer and identify too strongly with the emotions.

When we realize the emotions are not the real part of our being we can then step back and observe them and then we can use them intelligently with detachment.

Here’s the next verse:

43 His disciples said to him, “Who are you to say these things to us?” “You don’t understand who I am from what I say to you. Rather, you have become like the Judeans, for they love the tree but hate its fruit, or they love the fruit but hate the tree.”

It sounds like Jesus was hit with a version of the mantra of he Dark Brotherhood, which is, “Who do you think you are?” The problem was that it came from his own disciples. This is understandable as when disciples are learning the ropes they are often still attached to old ways of thinking causing errors as happened to Peter:

From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. Matt 16:21-23

That was a pretty strong rebuke to a friend who merely did not want his master to be executed. What Peter did not see was that Satan himself could not have spoken better words to tempt Jesus to flee from his mission.

Then we have the example of James and John who wanted to call fire down from heaven to consume those who rejected their message. To them Jesus said, “ye know not what manner of spirit ye are.”

Students seem to think that the disciples were to total awe of Jesus, that they accepted everything he said and did without question but such is not the case. They were concerned that he was taking too much authority on himself and may have too much pride because of his abilities and the attention he drew. The “who do you think you are” mantra did arise in their minds at times.

In the last part of the verse Thomas quoted Jesus saying that the disciples were acting like the Judeans who “love the tree but hate its fruit, or they love the fruit but hate the tree.”

What did he mean by this?

***

Jim:

You and Keysters here have been more than generous to me, and no one had disrespected me, regardless of any strange comments I may have made

Thanks for the comment. This is a point that goes over Allan’s head. He thinks he was rejected here because of his advanced teachings. He doesn’t realize that we will consider most any point of view if the person is considerate and tries to make it of interest to the group.

We agree with Allan’s main point that we need to become one with the Higher Self, but the problem was that he insults us by telling us we have it wrong and need to listen to is version of merging or we are on the path of death. Then he insults us comparing us to those who put Jesus to death among other things.

It is his manners that are the problem, not his teachings.

We’ll entertain a certain amount of comment on most any subject as long as it is not too distracting or generate complaints. What seems to irritate the group the most is when someone comes here accusing us of being ignorant and attempting to straighten us out.

If someone thinks they have a higher truth and just presents it with respect then they will fit in fine even if all do not agree.

***

Allan:

As I have stated, the only reason you are presently tolerating Jim, Ken (ImAHebrew) and Allen (Latuwr), is because they denigrate and disparage me.

That’s pretty outrageous. We accept all who come here and behave themselves, even you. How we treat people here is determined by themselves, not their opinion of you.

Allan:

As stated, I was guided to this forum to convey to you the esoteric knowledge of the Tree of Life and the Key of Knowledge. That you reject this Sacred Knowledge, is not mine to judge.

The problem is that you haven’t specified any knowledge that I have rejected. I accept the idea of merging with the higher self and embrace the tree of life. So shat are you complaining about?

Oct 3, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 13

In the last part of the verse Thomas quoted Jesus saying that the disciples were acting like the Judeans who “love the tree but hate its fruit, or they love the fruit but hate the tree.”

What did he mean by this?

Good assortment of answers today and you all have good points. Here is my take:

What was overlooked was the verse was centered on Jesus. Note how it starts out:

His disciples said to him, “Who are you to say these things to us?” “You don’t understand who I am from what I say to you.

In principle the group was going the right direction but Jesus was using these words in reference to himself. In this context I would say that the tree was Jesus and the fruit was his works and teachings. Jesus saw himself as symbolizing the tree because he was linked up through Spirit to the Father within, the source of life for all of us.

Some of the disciples loved Jesus as a person, (the tree) but didn’t like some of his teachings, or even works or his direction. (the fruit). Others liked his teachings and works, but saw him as a flawed person.

Ruth made the point that “both pieces are the same pieces when joined as one.” In other words, he was saying that if you like me you should like my teachings because they came through me and if you like the teachings you should also accept me.

Verses 44-47 are a rewording of verses already in the Bible.

He gives a different twist of New Testament teachings here:

48 Jesus said, “If two make peace with each other in a single house, they will say to the mountain, ‘Move from here!’ and it will move.”

Here is Matthew’s account of a similar teaching:

Jesus answered and said unto them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done.

And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. Matt 21:21-22

The account of Thomas says that peace is needed to move a mountain but Matthew says it is faith that is the prime ingredient.

Are both qualities needed, just one or is this just wishful thinking? After all, not even Jesus or Moses is reported to have moved a mountain.

Or… Is this just a symbolic teaching? If so what is the meaning?

***

Oct 4, 2014

Examining Thomas, Part 14

The Question:

So what’s the meaning behind moving a mountain using peace, faith or both?

Ruth did take a stab at the symbolism saying that the mountain being cast into the sea is like the ego being drowned in the sea of emotions.

That doesn’t seem to completely fit through. She was right though that you can’t move a mountain by peace alone, at least not by peace as is generally understood.

Let us look at the verse gain. Thomas writes:

“If two make peace with each other in a single house, they will say to the mountain, ‘Move from here!’ and it will move.”

Now two or more people live in peace in many houses but haven’t heard of any of them moving a mountain by the power of their word. But the scripture is not talking about a peace that merely represents a lack of conflict, but the peace of the spirit which is called the peace that passes all understanding. When two people think as one in the peace of the spirit together they become a potent force indeed. Sometimes two people living together who understand this do not take the time to withdraw from the cares of the world and merge as often as they should.

Faith is the second ingredient mentioned in the other scripture. You need both ingredients to manifest the power of God on the earth. The disciple needs to stand focused in the light and speak and act by the power of faith.

So is it possible that a person or persons centered in peace and being full of faith can move a mountain? I think so. I believe the words of Jesus that through faith all things are possible even to the moving of a physical mountain. The elements themselves possess intelligence and can be commanded to move by one wholly centered in the originating monad.

There is only one example mentioned in the scriptures and this is from the LDS Book of Moses speaking of the acts of Enoch:

And so great was the faith of Enoch that he led the people of God, and their enemies came to battle against them; and he spake the word of the Lord, and the earth trembled, and the mountains fled, even according to his command; and the rivers of water were turned out of their course; and the roar of the lions was heard out of the wilderness; and all nations feared greatly, so powerful was the word of Enoch, and so great was the power of the language which God had given him. Moses 7:13

So what would the allegorical meaning be here?

A mountain is a symbol of a kingdom or belief system. The sea into which it is cast is a symbol of the masses of people centered in the emotions. He who has faith can topple a kingdom by the power of his words and cause it to return to the people to be reformed or replaced.

From this view Jesus did move mountains. He told he authorities that, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. Matt 21:42-43

Jesus thus moved the kingdom (mountain) of God from the Jews to the Gentiles. Then through the centuries nations (mountains) have risen and fallen fighting over the meaning of the words of Jesus.

Let us move on to the next verse:

49 Jesus said, “Congratulations to those who are alone and chosen, for you will find the kingdom. For you have come from it, and you will return there again.”

I think that finding the kingdom has more to do with choices we make than waiting around to be chosen. It is possible that the aloneness referred to represents the disciple standing centered within his own soul.

We originated from spirit and to spirit we will return just as the verse says.

Next verse:

50 Jesus said, “If they say to you, ‘Where have you come from?’ say to them, ‘We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established [itself], and appeared in their image.’ If they say to you, ‘Is it you?’ say, ‘We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living Father.’ If they ask you, ‘What is the evidence of your Father in you?’ say to them, ‘It is motion and rest.'”

Does this turn on a light for anyone? One could wrestle with the symbolism and come up with something, but I do not see any aha moment here.

Simply put we come from the same source as does light and the interplay of light creates form. God is in us because of motion (higher consciousness) and rest (the peace that passes understanding).

51 His disciples said to him, “When will the rest for the dead take place, and when will the new world come?” He said to them, “What you are looking forward to has come, but you don’t know it.”

Interpretation: The kingdom of heaven is here now for those with eyes to see.

52 His disciples said to him, “Twenty-four prophets have spoken in Israel, and they all spoke of you.” He said to them, “You have disregarded the living one who is in your presence, and have spoken of the dead.”

Jesus is noting the tendency to give more credibility to dead authorities than a living one. The great sages of the past always seem to outshine any who are living.

Verses 53-76 are either self explanatory or already in the Bible. Verse 77 says something a little different:

77 Jesus said, “I am the light that is over all things. I am all: from me all came forth, and to me all attained. Split a piece of wood; I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there.”

So does this verse relate any truth to you? Can you really find Jesus under a rock?

***

Ron Says:

The whole passage is ”

Jesus said, “Lucky is the lion that the human will eat, so that the lion becomes human. And foul is the human that the lion will eat, and the lion still will become human.”

JJ, do you believe he is speaking about a main course for dinner hear?

What would a Lion represent inside of us, animal nature? Ego? Tame the lion of our being, perhaps.Just a thought.

I’ve already commented on this verse. Here is what I said a few days ago.

This verse is just not true. If one of the apostles heard Jesus talking about the evolution of humans and animals then he must have misunderstood and wrote it down wrong.

A lion does not become a human by eating a human. Some particles from the human may become part of the lion but that does not make him human. Neither does the reverse work.

If we interpret it allegorically we could say that partaking of either a higher or lower nature will cause us to progress or go backwards. If this is what the writer meant to communicate then it was a silly way to do it. It would have been much better to just come out and state the obvious meaning.

Easy Access to all the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Series NavigationKeys Writings 2014, Part 22Keys Writings 2014, Part 24