Response to "Debunked"

[jacob]

Hello. I would just like to respond to a few things from your "debunking" page (sorry if this is the wrong place to put this).

I really did cry when I read that you threw away 15 years, cried because you failed to love G-d with all your heart and soul which is what you owed him after he showed you so much-- how can you trust some nonsense psychologist babble when you have your own heart and soul to testify, when your entire unconscious 90% of your being resonated to its core with the knowledge of G-d and every intelligent nerve you possess united to proclaim the one Truth.. given in infinite compassion directly from G-d. And it doesn't matter that your 10% conscious mind could not fully comprehend that deep hidden knowledge stored in your unconscious, that you spent 15 years working on something false. What matters is that behind it all you experienced G-d's love. And it is my belief after 15 years (gematria YaH, the father and mother) of G-d giving birth to you slowly, giving you years of plenty and nurturing you like a suckling babe, G-d desired for you now to give your love back to him (W-H, the son and daughter) and become yet closer -- and so he tested your faith, robbed you of that understanding, showed you the error of your logic, removed your unconscious sustenance -- and then you used that very same false logic, human theory ever fallible, to sever the sacred umbilical connection.

After praying, I went to a nearby Barnes-n-Nobles to clear my mind, randomly picked out a book and I happened to open it to this:

In inquiries respecting the laws of the world and the frame of things, the highest reason is always the truest. That which seems faintly possible -- it is so refined, is often faint and dim because it is deepest seated in the mind among the eternal verities. Empirical science is apt to cloud the sight, and, by the very knowledge of functions and processes, to bereave the student of the manly contemplation of the whole. The savant becomes unpoetic. But the best read naturalist who lends an entire and devout attention to truth, will see that there remains much to learn of his relation to the world, and that it is not to be learned by any addition or subtraction or other comparison of known quantities, but is arrived at by untaught sallies of the spirit, by a continual self-recovery, and by entire humility. He will perceive that there are far more excellent qualities in the student than preciseness and infallibility; that a guess is often more fruitful than an indisputable affirmation, and that a dream may let us deeper into the secret of nature than a hundred concerted experiments.
Only after reading that and seeing how amazingly relevant it is to your story, did I realize I was on page 44! (This was a book of Essays by Emerson, from the essay "Prospects")


Let me say formally, I hereby accept upon myself the commandment of "love thy neighbor as thyself." And I will pray to G-d to allow you to come back and help again spread his true word, his love, and light to all, after correcting the flaws in your previous beliefs.
I believe your tragedy began with your flawed belief in Jesus the Nazarene as divine being, which prevented you from realizing the true nature of your relationship with G-d as one where you are required to sacrifice. No one died for your sins -- you are the Son and you must die for your error, not a true death but the death of ego. In this way you make love real, just as G-d made His infinite love real when he created the world out of darkness, which is the essence of ego. And G-d desires you to Love him, only for that purpose does he give you understanding!

Now to your claims which you cited as reasons for abandoning the bible.

1) Immorality in the Bible (I refer only to old testament, as I am Jewish)
The bible is in fact the most moral of books, as the story of Isaac's binding teaches us that morality is an attribute of G-d himself (and therefore is as essential a part of nature as gravity), as G-d does not wish us to die but rather to live, though he desires that we accept his word unquestionably with the full belief that it ultimately is moral though at present it seems not so. This is the position Abraham was in when G-d tested his faith & love, and he passed the test along with his son. When we read the supposedly "immoral" (in our own limited view) actions in the Bible, G-d in his wisdom is placing us in the shoes of Abraham and is giving us a chance to actualize our love for G-d as Abraham did, by trusting in G-d's ultimate morality over our own. How else can G-d allow us to truly actualize our love, then by telling us to do something that goes against every aspect of our ego, not just our logic but even our sense of morality and -- a test reserved only for the highest souls, as was Abrahams -- pure love itself?

2) Male bias in the Bible
The bible is in a sense more pro-female than male! The Female is the soul (neshama is feminine in Hebrew), while the Male is the body (guf). Male is the 6 directions of space (6 days of work, pre-Messianic era, physical reality), Female is the point of origin and ultimate destination (shabbat sacred day of rest, kingship, Messianic era, the Shekinah). The Bible teaches us that the role of man is to "do" (men are action-oriented), while the role of the female is to "be" (to turn the potential of Male energy, photons, to something meaningful)

All of of this can be seen with a proper reading of the Bible in Hebrew.

In conclusion:
Please, don't give up! There is much good you can do, as this world needs G-d, humanity needs G-d to survive, and I am a case in point. I tried psychologists, they are worthless, only G-d can heal depression and anxiety. Act not for your own selfish motivations, but think of all the positive impact you can make on another, by giving him/her the sublime delight and pleasure of living under the care and love of G-d!

G-d bless.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hey there jacob, :yo:

Welcome to our forum!

:welcome:

Thanks for your very interesting and thoughtful comments. You bring up a lot of stuff I would like to discuss. But I have to go to my day job right now. I'll respond as time permits.

Meanwhile, feel free to comment on any other threads.

Talk more soon,

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hello. I would just like to respond to a few things from your "debunking" page (sorry if this is the wrong place to put this).

I really did cry when I read that you threw away 15 years, cried because you failed to love G-d with all your heart and soul which is what you owed him after he showed you so much-- how can you trust some nonsense psychologist babble when you have your own heart and soul to testify, when your entire unconscious 90% of your being resonated to its core with the knowledge of G-d and every intelligent nerve you possess united to proclaim the one Truth.. given in infinite compassion directly from G-d. And it doesn't matter that your 10% conscious mind could not fully comprehend that deep hidden knowledge stored in your unconscious, that you spent 15 years working on something false. What matters is that behind it all you experienced G-d's love. And it is my belief after 15 years (gematria YaH, the father and mother) of G-d giving birth to you slowly, giving you years of plenty and nurturing you like a suckling babe, G-d desired for you now to give your love back to him (W-H, the son and daughter) and become yet closer -- and so he tested your faith, robbed you of that understanding, showed you the error of your logic, removed your unconscious sustenance -- and then you used that very same false logic, human theory ever fallible, to sever the sacred umbilical connection.

Hey there Jacob,

I'm back. It's the weekend and I have time to reflect on your comments.

Your comments leave me somewhat mystified. How could you be so distressed by my rejection of a religion that you don't believe in? I believed in the Divinity of Christ, the Trinity, and that the traditional Protestant Bible of 66 books was truly the "Word of God." You don't believe any of that. From what I can tell from your writing, you wouldn't accept the Bible Wheel or any of the gematria that "confirmed" Christian doctrines about Christ. So what exactly is this "knowledge of G-d" and "one Truth" you thought I was proclaiming? Is it just the part that fits with your Jewish Kabbalistic beliefs?



Let me say formally, I hereby accept upon myself the commandment of "love thy neighbor as thyself." And I will pray to G-d to allow you to come back and help again spread his true word, his love, and light to all, after correcting the flaws in your previous beliefs.
I believe your tragedy began with your flawed belief in Jesus the Nazarene as divine being, which prevented you from realizing the true nature of your relationship with G-d as one where you are required to sacrifice. No one died for your sins -- you are the Son and you must die for your error, not a true death but the death of ego. In this way you make love real, just as G-d made His infinite love real when he created the world out of darkness, which is the essence of ego. And G-d desires you to Love him, only for that purpose does he give you understanding!

There is an irony in your comments. On the one hand, you appear to reject the New Testament as a "divine revelation" like the Tanakh, but then you want to use it as if it were. It seems like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If it is not a divine revelation why not just toss it out? Do you think "G-d" would inspire the New Testament with hidden Kabbalistic truths while knowing that it would deceive billions of Christians to believe Jesus was a divine being?



Now to your claims which you cited as reasons for abandoning the bible.

1) Immorality in the Bible (I refer only to old testament, as I am Jewish)
The bible is in fact the most moral of books, as the story of Isaac's binding teaches us that morality is an attribute of G-d himself (and therefore is as essential a part of nature as gravity), as G-d does not wish us to die but rather to live, though he desires that we accept his word unquestionably with the full belief that it ultimately is moral though at present it seems not so. This is the position Abraham was in when G-d tested his faith & love, and he passed the test along with his son. When we read the supposedly "immoral" (in our own limited view) actions in the Bible, G-d in his wisdom is placing us in the shoes of Abraham and is giving us a chance to actualize our love for G-d as Abraham did, by trusting in G-d's ultimate morality over our own. How else can G-d allow us to truly actualize our love, then by telling us to do something that goes against every aspect of our ego, not just our logic but even our sense of morality and -- a test reserved only for the highest souls, as was Abrahams -- pure love itself?

I'm sorry, but I see no reason to believe that an intelligent Creator would want his creatures to "accept his word unquestionably" since that is what all cult leaders demand. How is anyone supposed to know what his word is anyway? If a Jew is justified to "unquestionably" believe the book they received from their ancestors, why not Muslims, Mormons, and Christians?

And how could we believe rationally believe that the Bible "ultimately is moral though at present it seems not so"? That sounds a lot like this Christian fundamentalist who says that he would believe the Bible even if it said 2 + 2 = 5. Here's the clip.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ysecinv367w

The idea that we just "believe" whatever we want no matter how explicitly it contradicts logic and facts strikes me as the definition of delusion.

I can see how Abraham trusting God could make sense if there were a way for Abraham to actually know it was God who gave the command. But how would he know that? This is one of those things most people rarely question. How did Abraham know it was God talking?

Likewise, when you say that I am supposed to "accept his word unquestionably" you need to explain how we are supposed to know what is or is not his word. The fact that "his word" looks exactly like what we would expect from primitive ignorant humans seems to be good evidence that that is exactly what it really is. It makes no sense to assume that God would masquerade as a brutal, cruel, irrational tribal war god when trying to teach humanity about ultimate moral values.


How else can G-d allow us to truly actualize our love, then by telling us to do something that goes against every aspect of our ego, not just our logic but even our sense of morality and -- a test reserved only for the highest souls, as was Abrahams -- pure love itself?

Easy. It's called the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That's how we teach our children. We don't tell them to do things that are blatantly immoral.



2) Male bias in the Bible
The bible is in a sense more pro-female than male! The Female is the soul (neshama is feminine in Hebrew), while the Male is the body (guf). Male is the 6 directions of space (6 days of work, pre-Messianic era, physical reality), Female is the point of origin and ultimate destination (shabbat sacred day of rest, kingship, Messianic era, the Shekinah). The Bible teaches us that the role of man is to "do" (men are action-oriented), while the role of the female is to "be" (to turn the potential of Male energy, photons, to something meaningful)

All of of this can be seen with a proper reading of the Bible in Hebrew.

I read the Bible in Hebrew, and that didn't change the fact that it is sexist. See my blog post on this subject: The Inextricable Sexism of the Bible (https://www.biblewheel.com/Blog/2012/10/18/the-inextricable-sexism-of-the-bible/).

Of course, if you interpret it according to subjective symbology, you can make it mean pretty much whatever you want. And that's fine, we do that with poetry every day, and perhaps that is the best way to interpret the Bible. But then it has no objective validity.

As for the gender of nouns, I don't think there is any consistent correlation between the gender of nouns and the meaning of the concept represented by the noun. Of course, you can cherry pick particular words to fit a narrative, but I do not believe there is an objective correlation between the gender of nouns and the concepts of male and female.




In conclusion:
Please, don't give up! There is much good you can do, as this world needs G-d, humanity needs G-d to survive, and I am a case in point. I tried psychologists, they are worthless, only G-d can heal depression and anxiety. Act not for your own selfish motivations, but think of all the positive impact you can make on another, by giving him/her the sublime delight and pleasure of living under the care and love of G-d!

G-d bless.
Don't worry, if there's a God who wants to get my attention, I'm sure he knows where I live and how to do it.

As for healing depression and anxiety, I know that subjective beliefs can help subjective conditions, and sometimes even objective maladies through the placebo effect. But there is no contest between God and modern medicine when it comes to biologically based maladies. Human doctors beat God 1000 to 1. For example, take a 1000 people with a deadly plague. Let half pray and give the other half antibiotics. Who lives? Who dies?

I appreciate your comments and hope the conversation continues.

Great chatting!

Richard

:sunny:

[jacob]

Hi,
Though I am far from qualified I will attempt to answer your questions. The answers all exist in me, but special skill is required to transmit something from one heart to another; forgive me if the road is a bit bumpy. More so as we deal with things so close to the essential Truth which is ineffable, and can only be percieved in this world by infinite reflections on mirrors arrayed throughout, the most reflective accesible to us being human souls (mostly our own) and G-d's own word.


Your comments leave me somewhat mystified. (1) How could you be so distressed by my rejection of a religion that you don't believe in? ... (2) So what exactly is this "knowledge of G-d" and "one Truth" you thought I was proclaiming?

(1) The story of G-d is the story of all of existence; it is universal to all peoples, is told within all lives and imprinted on all souls, no matter the particular religion or other circumstances of the individual. I was distressed for you and I both, as I have only G-d's love in this world to keep me alive. And I was also distressed for G-d's sake, as part of loving G-d is sympathizing with Him, the pain of a spurned lover, and of a parent abandoned by a child lovingly raised.


(2) By "knowledge of G-d" I refer to the passion and certainty you had all those years which fueled your work, a certainty I believe comes ultimately only from G-d.



There is an irony in your comments. (1) On the one hand, you appear to reject the New Testament as a "divine revelation" like the Tanakh, but then you want to use it as if it were. (2) If it is not a divine revelation why not just toss it out? (3) Do you think "G-d" would inspire the New Testament with hidden Kabbalistic truths while knowing that it would deceive billions of Christians to believe Jesus was a divine being?


(1) If you refer to the "Son" comment, this is an OT teaching that all peoples are sons of G-d.

(2) The NT is not the word of G-d as it contains falsehoods and distortions, manifestations of human ego and appeasement of desires of old pagan cultures, and ancient Church doctrines only amplified these NT flaws; though it is inpsired by G-d's word (the OT), and contains many of its teachings directly. However it *is* a work of G-d's hand in the same sense of all souls with their Good and Evil; and I believe it is another step in the correction of those pagan cultures although incomplete, and it does serve to this day to bring people closer to the word of G-d.

(3) Human's wrote the NT, and all things that human's write contain reflections of hidden Kabbalistic truths to some degree. The NT which was inspired by the OT even more so.

However the source of the "deception" was human ego and not G-d, as it is the nature of human ego to desire G-d be revealed in physical terms in our own lowest of domains (as we see in pagan cultures), and this very act of falsely pulling G-d down into our world is the act of "killing" the Son (which "Son" is in fact the concealed "Truth" and not (G-d forbid) any human, and you "kill" it just as Adam is killed by being brought down from Heaven onto the Earth), as it requires subjugation of ego to love the Son which is concealed (as opposed to part of the Self), and in so doing ("killing" the Son -- both above and below, below being the physical flesh of Jesus which was of course fated to die) Christian doctrine manages to absolve its adherents to almost all commandments which would indeed require subjugation of human ego (that being the central (revealed) point behind these commandments -- "to love your G-d" - Deut 11:13 ).




I'm sorry, but I see no reason to believe that an intelligent Creator would want his creatures to "accept his word unquestionably" since that is what all cult leaders demand.


I agree, sorry I was being imprecise with my language. Questions are in fact essential when studying as first we must ask many questions, and only then arrive at the answers. Our answers if derived humbly and faithfully are often reflections of the state of our soul at the moment, and there is often much more than one answer (a common saying is "70 faces to the Torah"), and the set of them often beautifully harmonize as different paradigms to some essential physical reality. But what we must accept upon us without question is the fact that the word of G-d is true and perfect and moral and good and right (etc...), and that the questions we have are not resultant from imperfections of the word but from imperfections of our finite understanding. We must ask questions, but always with complete faith that answers exist. With this faith and humility (which opens our heart to recieve from G-d and from our deep unconcious which is capable of plying the deep allegorical depths of Torah and reality) we then proceed to search for answers and G-d willing we'll find them... usually deep in our hearts and sometimes, there in the darkest depths, through personal travail (which is Egypt, and the angel that wrestled Jacob). And that is why G-d's answer to Abraham's question "How will I know?" was the enigmatic "Your children will sojourn in a land not theirs." (See Genesis 15:8)





How is anyone supposed to know what his word is anyway? If a Jew is justified to "unquestionably" believe the book they received from their ancestors, why not Muslims, Mormons, and Christians?


On the individual scale, I see no fault in anyone for believing the belief of their ancestors, as it is the fault of society at large and not the individual that his beliefs are set. And if you ask why can't G-d then simply "fix" society at once to align with the Truth; the answer is exactly the same reason G-d cannot simply "fix" you to align with the Truth: As this would rob you of free choice, and you must arrive at the Love of G-d by your own volition and thereby truly attain your potential of being created in the "image of G-d."

Also on a global scale, all nations are justified to their beliefs just as each species is justified to its particular niche within the biome. At every moment the ecosystem balance is maintained by the unconcscious support of each species with all the others, and removal of one might cause collapse of the entire delicate system (and therein lies each one's "justification") into a much more simple system; however over long spans of time, a movement toward some "goal" can be discerned, this is the process of evolution. The biological goal is the human species which is the unified essence of all other species, in the sense that it can adapt to all niches using its special connection with "Truth," its ability for self reflection, its quality as a sort of universal computer which can simulate reality within and thereby mold it. Society is the same.

And similiar to above, you might ask why did G-d not simply create the perfect most adapted species (homo sapiens) but instead require billions of years of evolution to achieve the same result? And a similar answer applies, but bottom-up: Because it is the process of evolution which asserts that the optimal species is indeed a perfect reflection of its environment.



And how could we believe rationally that the Bible "ultimately is moral though at present it seems not so"? That sounds a lot like this Christian fundamentalist who says that he would believe the Bible even if it said 2 + 2 = 5.


*You* can't. You, right now, simply have to trust that it is moral, and the trust has to derive out of love (and sometimes fear) of G-d. This is what G-d wants of you -- love. This is why he conceals himself from you. And the good news is nowhere does the Bible say 2+2=5... that is to say, usually once you get over that hump (imagine the "activation energy" of chemical reactions), you will discover the answer and find even greater depths of beauty and morality to G-d's word.



The idea that we just "believe" whatever we want no matter how explicitly it contradicts logic and facts strikes me as the definition of delusion.

Correct, but G-d alone is the keeper of logic and facts, and as humans we can only borrow them occasionally and often unsucessfully. And again, if you can humbly believe your own logic to be faulty and\or your own facts to be incomplete, and become like an empty vessel (which in truth perhaps is all we are) ready to be enlightened by G-d, you will be able to arrive at the true and moral teaching of the Torah.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



I can see how Abraham trusting God could make sense if there were a way for Abraham to actually know it was God who gave the command. But how would he know that? This is one of those things most people rarely question. How did Abraham know it was God talking?

G-d talks to all of us at every moment of every day, the question is only if we can understand his word.
The first communication Abraham had from G-d was simply: Go out from your home to a place you know not. Is this not in fact a very common urge most people experience at some points in their lives? To redefine themselves. G-d speaks to us all in this way, from deep in our hearts, driving us towards His ultimate purpose.



(1) Likewise, when you say that I am supposed to "accept his word unquestionably" you need to explain how we are supposed to know what is or is not his word. (2) The fact that "his word" looks exactly like what we would expect from primitive ignorant humans seems to be good evidence that that is exactly what it really is. It makes no sense to assume that God would masquerade as a brutal, cruel, irrational tribal war god when trying to teach humanity about ultimate moral values.


(1) G-d simply tells you. He injects that knowledge (of the truth of his word) into your unconcious. Allow me to quote yourself, as you are far more articulate:



Divine Revelation is True Light. When the Spirit of God illuminates His Word, we know His Truth with the same certainty a blind man would have if he received sight. Everything suddenly comes into focus with perfect clarity. We can walk without stumbling in the Daylight of God?s Word. All the pieces effortlessly fit together with supernatural grace when the vision of the Whole is received. Ten thousand witnesses lift their voices in unison to confirm God?s Word. There is no perplexing doubt, no confusion. Scripture super-abundantly conforms to its own reiterative command that ?every word? must be established ?in the mouth of two or three witnesses? (Deut 19:15, Mat 18:16, 2 Cor 13:1). There is nothing but light, Light, LIGHT that drives out any shadow of darkness. The Gates of Heaven are thrust open; the Divine Perfection of the Holy Word shines like the noontime sun in a cloudless sky for all to see. This is the overwhelming power of God?s prophetic Capstone. Enigmatic clouds that have shrouded the self-reflective prophecies of God?s Word given within the Word itself, such as Ezekiel?s Wheels and Zechariah?s Stone, simply evaporate in the light of its blazing glory.


You say it yourself: The vision of the whole is *recieved.*

And when you are cut off from that light? When G-d takes away from us that "blazing glory," that absolute sense of certainty, and sends us down into Sheol, where as King David said "there is no memory of Him?" At these moments we must not abandon Him, but rather be thankful to Him, for all that he does is for the ultimate good! As now we have a chance to show true love, by being faithful and doing His will even when it goes against the grain of our desires. Only at these times of darkness can we truthfully subjugate our ego (which is not dead but fully alive and kicking during our travail) to Him. And surely if you show your love and faith to G-d, he will return you to him with even greater light and will bring you closer to his Truth. That is why I began this correspondence: Your passionate words inspired me to hope that you can still return.. and may I ask, do you not miss those feelings you had when you wrote the above paragraph? Don't you miss the certainty of truth of G-d's word? You can still return -- if you humble yourself to G-d, open your heart to Him, love Him and his word despite your misgivings of it.

(2) His word seems like a lot of things to a lot of people, and that is by His design. He gives you freedom to choose what to believe. But I assure you that with a proper deep reading of the Torah, it will seem just as you described it in your above paragraph.



Easy. It's called the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That's how we teach our children. We don't tell them to do things that are blatantly immoral.

And neither does the Torah! Just the opposite: the simple lesson of the Binding is *don't* do human sacrifice. Not to mention the 613 commandments themselves are all of a higher moral standard than the current US civic and government law.
And continuing your parent child analogy:
You expect your kids to do what you tell them even without understanding! Which is *exactly* the teaching behind the Binding story. If your kid does what you tell them to without question even when it completely disagrees with their own internal "kid" logic, only then do you know that kid is truly obedient and well disciplined, and can be trusted. In the case of Abraham, the "internal kid logic" was human morality, while the parent's (G-d's) logic was (among other things) to teach the nations exactly this essential lesson (that human and G-d morality are aligned)! That's via the parent-child paradigm of our relationship with G-d. Via the lover-lover paradigm, however, my previous point still stands: Sacrifice of principles and egotistical logic for the sake and in complete trust of one's lover is an expression of purest and highest love, more than if the desires of both husband and wife are aligned.

To be continued... Good night for now!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi,
Though I am far from qualified I will attempt to answer your questions. The answers all exist in me, but special skill is required to transmit something from one heart to another; forgive me if the road is a bit bumpy. More so as we deal with things so close to the essential Truth which is ineffable, and can only be percieved in this world by infinite reflections on mirrors arrayed throughout, the most reflective accesible to us being human souls (mostly our own) and G-d's own word.

Hey there Jacob,

I appreciate your humble approach. Your reference to "infinite reflections on mirrors" captures the challenge of communication very well.



(1) The story of G-d is the story of all of existence; it is universal to all peoples, is told within all lives and imprinted on all souls, no matter the particular religion or other circumstances of the individual. I was distressed for you and I both, as I have only G-d's love in this world to keep me alive. And I was also distressed for G-d's sake, as part of loving G-d is sympathizing with Him, the pain of a spurned lover, and of a parent abandoned by a child lovingly raised.

I understand your position, but I have a difficult time imagining God as a person who could be likened to a spurned lover because that seems impossible for a being of "cosmic proportions." That's one of my big problems with the image of God portrayed in the Abrahamic religions. He seems to be a projection of the human ego, whereas if there were a God, I would think he/she/it would be more like the "Ground of Being." Of course, when I was a believer, I saw God as both the immanent (able to say I AM) as well as "transcendent" (like the Ground of Being).



(2) By "knowledge of G-d" I refer to the passion and certainty you had all those years which fueled your work, a certainty I believe comes ultimately only from G-d.

Well, lots of people have displayed equal "certainty" and been quite wrong. I don't think passion and certainty are good measures for truth.



(1) If you refer to the "Son" comment, this is an OT teaching that all peoples are sons of G-d.

Yes, the concept is found in the OT, but your reference to it seemed to reflect ideas from the NT as well. It seemed you were reinterpreting its meaning to align it with your beliefs, which made me think you believed it has some sort of authority.



(2) The NT is not the word of G-d as it contains falsehoods and distortions, manifestations of human ego and appeasement of desires of old pagan cultures, and ancient Church doctrines only amplified these NT flaws; though it is inpsired by G-d's word (the OT), and contains many of its teachings directly. However it *is* a work of G-d's hand in the same sense of all souls with their Good and Evil; and I believe it is another step in the correction of those pagan cultures although incomplete, and it does serve to this day to bring people closer to the word of G-d.

It seems to me that the OT contains at least as much if not more "falsehoods and distortions, manifestations of human ego and appeasement of desires of old pagan cultures" as the NT. Why do you rationalize the problems in the OT but not the NT. It seems to me that you would reject both if you held the OT to the same standards as the NT.



(3) Human's wrote the NT, and all things that human's write contain reflections of hidden Kabbalistic truths to some degree. The NT which was inspired by the OT even more so.

Are you saying that humans did not write the OT? It's one thing to say the humans that wrote it were "inspired" in some sense, but how could we deny that it was actually written by humans?

By what standard do you determine that the OT was inspired, but not the NT? Again, it seems you must reject both if you use the same standards.



However the source of the "deception" was human ego and not G-d, as it is the nature of human ego to desire G-d be revealed in physical terms in our own lowest of domains (as we see in pagan cultures), and this very act of falsely pulling G-d down into our world is the act of "killing" the Son (which "Son" is in fact the concealed "Truth" and not (G-d forbid) any human, and you "kill" it just as Adam is killed by being brought down from Heaven onto the Earth), as it requires subjugation of ego to love the Son which is concealed (as opposed to part of the Self), and in so doing ("killing" the Son -- both above and below, below being the physical flesh of Jesus which was of course fated to die) Christian doctrine manages to absolve its adherents to almost all commandments which would indeed require subjugation of human ego (that being the central (revealed) point behind these commandments -- "to love your G-d" - Deut 11:13 ).

You obviously have developed a very rich symbolic system. I can see how the ideas connect. But I don't have any reason to think that such an elaborate symbolic system accurately reflects reality. It strikes me more like an untestable speculative metaphysical system. I can't say that I have much interest in developing such systems since I know that everyone can invent their own and I don't see how we could discern between truth and fiction. On the other hand, there may be some value in it that I don't see yet. I look forward to discussing it more.

Well, that's all the time I have right now (I'm on my lunch break). I'll pick up the conversation as time permits.

Richard