The Garden of Eden

[aspect]

Julia,

How do you do that "quote" thing? It looks good but I haven't quite gotten the hang of it. Silly me.

aspect

[juliainkc]

Hello aspect,

Type the right bracket without pressing shift. Type in the word quote and close with the left bracket. Then copy and paste whatever you wish to place in the quote box and finish with typing the right bracket, backslash, type the word quote and then left bracket. I'm using spaces but don't use spaces.

Right bracket- quote- left bracket.- Copy and paste.- Right bracket- backslash -quote- left bracket.

Hope this helps. And no, your not silly. I asked the same question too.

InJoy,

Julia

[Adrian]

Hello aspect,

To place text in quotes you add {quote} at the begining of the text and {/quote} after the text but replace the { and } with [ and ].

I cannot actually show you what the quote tag looks like because it would appear as a quote instead of the text.

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[Ew1g]

I cannot actually show you what the quote tag looks like because it would appear as a quote instead of the text.

How about this ?:

Code:

[quote]example[/quote]

[juliainkc]

Good Morning Ew1g,

You did it!! :wink

Thank you! InJoy this day,

Julia

[melody]

Hello Apect and all,

I find that the best way to quote is to use the Quote button on the top right of the post. This way the quote will come with a heading - the name of the author, as well as date and time, so one can go back and check the entire text, if one wishes to do so.

-   If one presses the Quote button, then the whole text of that post will appear in the Reply window.
-   If you wish to use just some parts of the text, it needs a clean up job.
-   Place your courser at the begging of the text you wish to delete, left click your mouth, drug it to the end of the text you wish to delete up to the text you wish to quote. The text you wish to delete will be highlighted. Now hit Delete button and that text will be gone.
-   Now go to the end of the passage you want to quote and write [/quote].
-   Write your response to that passage.
-   If there are more passages you want to quote from the same text, put your courser at the beginning of the passage you want to delete and highlight it up to the part you want to keep. Delete it.
-   Write in front of  this next  passage you want to quote {quote} (with square brackts) leave the text you want to quote and write {/quote} with square brackets. Reply to it. Clean the rest.
-   Be sure to delete the final quote command [\quote] at the end of your writing, if it is still there. Otherwise your entire post will come out to be a quote.

You can also quote from several posts either from the same person or from different ones in the same reply. To do that, open a second browsing window, go to the forum, find the passage you want to quote, press Quote button, clean it up the text the way you want it. Highlight it. Right click – Copy – open the original browser, Paste it in the reply box where you want it.

This way you will quote lets say two different people, yet on top of the first quote you will have a heading of who said it and when.

[melody]

My research also suggests that Genesis... 

My own research suggests that ...

Hello Adrian,

In your above post you talk about your research, yet in other posts you told us that you don’t read, have never been an avid reader, and have only a few books at your home, not even enough to fill one book shelf. I am quite curious how do you do your research? Is it mostly what the spirit guides tell you? Or do you only read what you find on the internet? In my opinion the internet sources should be double checked. The information might be biased or not reliable.

In case you do use internet sources for your research but do not consider it a reading , did you also use internet sources as a research source when you were writing your OUR?

[Adrian]

In your above post you talk about your research, yet in other posts you told us that you don’t read, have never been an avid reader, and have only a few books at your home, not even enough to fill one book shelf. I am quite curious how do you do your research? Is it mostly what the spirit guides tell you? Or do you only read what you find on the internet? In my opinion the internet sources should be double checked. The information might be biased or not reliable.

The research I refer to in the above post, which you have quoted out of context for effect, refers to the Bible.

I have always specifically stated that I research the Bible - or at least have researched for the last couple of years. How else could I quote from and analyse it so extensively? I even say in the same post "when I read the Bible..."

And the same goes for when I quote from any Source which is attributed in my book at the same time.

And I do not communicate with "Spirit Guides" - or Angels, or Ascended Masters, or Pleiadians, or any other intra or extra terrestrial entity, fictitious or otherwise.

Now, how about a positive viewpoint on this topic since it is one of your favourites?

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[melody]

Hello Adrian,

I am not sure why you consider my previous post negative. I was just curious how do you do your research. I am sorry, I should have quotted you more fully. Here is the text below from your quote:

Genesis was almost certainly written by, or at the time of Moses around 1450 - 1410 BCE, and therefore around 1450 years before the official birth of Jesus.

My research also suggests that Genesis was heavily influenced by the earlier Summerian legends, for example the Epic of Gilgamesh which contains the earliest recorded account of the Great Flood where Utnapishtim and his wife built a boat which they filled full of animals and which were the only survivors. The only aspect of this legend that substantially varies are the names of the characters.

Almost the entire Old and New Testaments can be traced back to, often recurring legends originating from previous early civilisations including the birth, death and resurrection sequences of the Gospels which are basd upon astrology, or more specifically astrotheolgy.

My own research suggests that he may have lived two or three hundreds years before his official lifetime, and that when Constantine brought together the various fragments that formed the cannon of the Bible, he based them around the teachings of this character from a few hundred years before.

This type of data is not found in the Bible alone. There are no statements to this effect in the Bible. And since you don't read books, I was just wondering where from do you gather such information.

I really have no ulterior motive when asking this question. I simply and really want to know how do you come to state what you state. If you get this information by simply reading the Bible, does that mean that the Source tells you that, the Source tells you that Jesus lived several hundred years before the times we believe he lived in?

[Adrian]

Hello Melody,

Hello Adrian,

I am not sure why you consider my previous post negative. I was just curious how do you do your research. I am sorry, I should have quotted you more fully. Here is the text below from your quote:

Genesis was almost certainly written by, or at the time of Moses around 1450 - 1410 BCE, and therefore around 1450 years before the official birth of Jesus.

My research also suggests that Genesis was heavily influenced by the earlier Summerian legends, for example the Epic of Gilgamesh which contains the earliest recorded account of the Great Flood where Utnapishtim and his wife built a boat which they filled full of animals and which were the only survivors. The only aspect of this legend that substantially varies are the names of the characters.

Almost the entire Old and New Testaments can be traced back to, often recurring legends originating from previous early civilisations including the birth, death and resurrection sequences of the Gospels which are basd upon astrology, or more specifically astrotheolgy.

My own research suggests that he may have lived two or three hundreds years before his official lifetime, and that when Constantine brought together the various fragments that formed the cannon of the Bible, he based them around the teachings of this character from a few hundred years before.

This type of data is not found in the Bible alone. There are no statements to this effect in the Bible. And since you don't read books, I was just wondering where from do you gather such information.

I really have no ulterior motive when asking this question. I simply and really want to know how do you come to state what you state. If you get this information by simply reading the Bible, does that mean that the Source tells you that, the Source tells you that Jesus lived several hundred years before the times we believe he lived in?

I have been aware of history for many years - I did go to school after all. And I have said time and again that specific historical facts I acquired from physical sources, and attribute them as appropriate as you will see if you read my book.

And obviously Source does not "tell me" anything. That shows a very limited perception of our connection with Source.

Apart from that I am not going to be drawn in to yet another "challenge Adrian" series of posts.

These forums and this topic are here for constructive discussions and furtherment of our understanding.

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[aspect]

Julia,

I would like to ask, what did I do other than offer my views, and some of my perspective and experience and insights? Did I judge anyone? Did I debate or denigrate? Did I attempt to tell anyone else they should ascribe to or agree with what I said?

Maybe my views are not the "acceptable" ones...

Very well stated Evangelical Christian point of view here.

Your choice to place a label on me tells me you are not reacting to me personally, but to things in your own history that have tainted your perception.

But it goes against the teachings of Jesus The Christ who stated that the Mind of God is written in the Conscience of every 'man'.

Taking that to its logical conclusion, Jesus went against his own teachings when he sent out the apostles to preach the good news. In fact, he broke his teachings whenever he taught anything. Furthermore, if you, or Adrian, or me and anyone else should teach anything or open our mouths to speak, we go against the teachings of Christ because we deny the person to whom we speak has the Mind of God.

I have the mind of Christ, how is it then that you are qualified to teach me?

On the other hand, you are quite correct that the law of God is written within the heart and mind of man. In fact, to teach and instruct is quite natural and valid. It isn't because the person being taught doesn't know, but in fact is because they do know, but as is often the case they are not aware that they know.

Like it says:

I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit - just as it has taught you, remain in him. I John 2:26-27

Don't make the mistake of reading my words and then assuming to know my perspective. You are looking at things from the outside, without considering the reality behind that of which I speak (specifically, in this instance, concerning the "church"). You assume I refer to some visible entity, as if I promote those buildings we see on so many street corners, and putting on our "Sunday best" and all the crap that goes along with the show. How far removed that is from what I see when I gaze into the mind of God.

Avoid the thinking that starts with the outward and then forms the inward. Realize that although the outward may not correspond, the invisible will in time become visible.

Perhaps you are looking at things from your own experience? Were you mistreated and spiritually abused by the so-called church and so now you have closed your eyes and ears to the point you are no longer able to see and hear?

Did you stop to consider that what I wrote about did not come from what my physical eyes have seen? Did you fall back on those outward forms of things that you've encountered, or did you rely solely on the teaching you received from the Source? Did you stop to consider that I might possibly be speaking from the Source and that what I have seen was not with my eyes, but rather with the eyes of my heart and that those things were revealed to me?

I've borne witness to what I've seen. Do you presume to tell me I didn't, on the basis that it doesn't fit your theology?

It was some twenty years ago, as you would measure time, I was given conscious awareness across multiple dimensions - simultaneous, each one separate, and yet integrated as a whole because space and time prove to be no barrier.

Although some things were shown to me many years past I can see it as plainly today, because they are timeless and true. Do you now presume to tell me I did NOT see the body, the bride of Christ, when I know for a FACT that I did? Has Source revealed to you the true oneness of the body?

Have you seen the truth of what the church is? I'm speaking about the reality of it, and not the outward form. Have you witnessed, as I have, the corporate man that God has created? I've seen it as plainly as I can see the wall or desk in front of me. That is why I can't be sold some cheap imitation. Not that you would ever try, for I know that isn't your intent. Just some thoughts here for you to keep in mind, when you are correcting me in the future. It might be that I know what I'm talking about but that not all things are easily put into words. Remember, I'm not debating with you. I'm just observing you here.

The practicing of the law was obviously useless and so it was nailed to the cross. It is finished as in the laws of man.

Very well put... That is pretty much the point of the good news of Jesus Christ. "Very well stated Evangelical Christian point of view here."

Debates can abound however, no one can argue against ones own personal testimony now can they? That would be playing God in another's life. And I trust this is not what you mean here.

First of all, you are the one who is debating. I didn't debate. I didn't argue. I simply wrote my perspective. You are turning my words around by implying I've argued against your personal testimony. I wrote my own personal perspective and testimony to what I've witnessed, and you are the one arguing against it. Are you trying to play God in my life? I trust this is not what you meant.

Secondly, let me refresh your memory here. To quote the greeting of my post...

Melody, Julia, and all others,

You seem to have taken my words rather personally, when I was not speaking primarily or directly to you.

I wrote as a friend. It seemed to me from reading the thread that you, along with others, were "stumped" about the meaning of things in relation to the Garden of Eden. I did not realize it was a debate. If there is a debate, it is your own consciousness debating with itself, and that is surely draining your energy.

If I speak of that which I have seen and know, and you argue against my personal testimony, aren't you contradicting yourself?

I have not judged you. I am not a church-goer as you presume. I have not placed a label upon you so as to place you within a box in my thinking. What I did was offer my perspective, my views, and some of my experiences. Since my perspective is centered on Jesus Christ the Son of God, maybe I don't fit within your "box" or frame of reference. Am I now deemed by you to be inferior because I am so limited in my thinking, while you are so broad-minded? (I'm not saying here that I am limited in my thinking, since I know he who is, and was and is to come.)

As Adrian stated...

I suppose what I am saying is that we should all take from the Bible that which we consider to be of value, and disregard the rest.

And so, what if I consider it all to be of value? Am I then wrong, or somehow inferior? (I'm speaking in reference of course to your viewpoint, since I don't consider myself to be inferior to you in any way.)

Or then again, maybe what I've said does correspond to some frame of reference you have, and you are being overly defensive because of a battle you're experiencing within. And if that is the case, do I judge you for that? No, of course not, and I hope you will no longer judge yourself either. If I had experienced what you have maybe I would have exactly the same frame of reference.

The Bible was revealed to be a Love Story my friend. And you so validate this in your statements above whether you recognize this or not. I am just observing you here.

The fact the bible was revealed to be a love story was pretty much the point of what I wrote.

When you asked whether I recognized it or not... I almost wasn't sure whether you had read my post. That's when I realized that you didn't. What I mean by that is, yes, your eyes and your brain certainly did read and process the words I wrote. But your consciousness was on a different topic. You were re-living and re-acting to something in your past. You were not in the moment of what I wrote.

I wrote with Joy and Love and Freedom as I was in conscious recognition of the divine liberty that I experience. I didn't  speak against you or anyone else. I spoke of what I enjoy. I spoke of my passion. I spoke of what I experience and of things I have witnessed. Show me what I wrote wherein I judged you or spoke against you in any way, and I will apologize.

I have a question for you, but I'll allow you to ask it of yourself...

Debates can abound however, no one can argue against ones own personal testimony now can they? That would be playing God in another's life. And I trust this is not what you mean here.

Why am I writing this response? Do I wish to debate? No. Do I feel the need to defend myself? Certainly not, and I don't need you to validate me.

Surely you are not meaning to play God in my life by telling me which of my thoughts and views and experiences are valid and which ones are not. I didn't think so.

Did you consider that I wrote perhaps to share my joy with those reading it? Maybe you should read my original post again. But this time, take off the blinders. Forget the past experiences you've had, probably when religion was shoved down your throat and you were being judged harshly. I know it too well, because I've gone through all of those things. There is no place for religion in my heart.

Can you look through the eyes of a child and read the beautiful story of unconditional love?

I, in fact, sense unconditional love operating toward you. It isn't coming from myself, but from the Source. I've seen a future in which you lay down your armaments and return to your first love. I never intended to enter a debate, and I'll not say any more about it after this.

Although you sought to demean me, I hope you understand that nothing I've written is meant to return the same. I haven't written because you don't know, but because you already do. There would be no sense in my trying to show you something you don't already know. I've held nothing but love and joy in respect to you.

I prefer that you avoid placing labels on my views and attempting to place me inside of a box. I ask this not because it bothers me personally, but because it is a limitation within your own consciousness and does not serve you well. Keep in mind, it isn't about the defense of an ego, for that is an illusion.

I know it wasn't me you were correcting. It was yourself, aspects of your own awareness, and that is a good thing. I admire your passion for seeking truth.

The Truth is not some "thing" but is a person.

I came to you by law of attraction, as a reflection of yourself. Have you forgotten that I am you, as you are me, or did you think there was separation?

What am I? A sinner saved by grace. An empty vessel, which, though emptied, remains filled with  infinite supply. A leaf blowing in the wind. A paradox. Nothing more, and nothing less.

aspect

[aspect]

Adrian,

I have always specifically stated that I research the Bible - or at least have researched for the last couple of years. How else could I quote from and analyse it so extensively? I even say in the same post "when I read the Bible..."

It is good that you search the scriptures, and I commend you for it.

Here are some things that you might find helpful... In the words of Jesus:

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life. (John 5:39)

So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”  (John 8:31)

aspect

[aspect]

Hi Adrian,

Hopefully you will find this helpful...

I have not checked the original Ancient Greek wording, but I am almost certain that the word "church" would be a mistranslation. The entire concept of the "church" did not appear until around the 4th century CE with the onset of Christianity.

I would think that "church" or more specifically the original word used is a metaphor for the "brotherhood of man" and women or course.

The original Ancient Greek word which is translated into the English word "church" is "ekklesia  ek-klay-see'-ah:  a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation--assembly, church."

It comes from 'ek' meaning "out" and 'klesia' meaning "to call" and so it means "to call out", or in other words, the ones who are called out.

aspect

[Adrian]

Dear Aspect,

Thank you for your comments - I think you have defended your position well, even if I do not necessarily agree.

I would say that these forums are by definition forums for discussion  - they are not a bill board that you simply post your ideology to, and then walk away from.

Your original post came across as evangelising, even though your most recent post does not.

I read the Bible because I would not be complete without studying the books of every religion without bias. I once made the mistake of confusing Christianity with Jesus and the Bible - which I have now rectified.
As for your comments:

The original Ancient Greek word which is translated into the English word "church" is "ekklesia  ek-klay-see'-ah:  a calling out, i.e. (concretely) a popular meeting, especially a religious congregation--assembly, church."

It comes from 'ek' meaning "out" and 'klesia' meaning "to call" and so it means "to call out", or in other words, the ones who are called out

These are extracts from the Enyclopedia Brittanica:

Ecclesia, or Ekklesia (ancient Greek assembly)

"(“gathering of those summoned”), in ancient Greece, assembly of citizens in a city-state. Its roots lay in the Homeric agora, the meeting of the people. The Athenian Ecclesia, for which exists the most detailed record, was already functioning in Draco's day (c. 621 BC). In the course of Solon's codification of the law (c. 594 BC), the Ecclesia became coterminous..."

"Meaning change:
 
The Greek word ekklesia, which came to mean church, was originally applied in the Classical period to an official assembly of citizens. In the Septuagint (Greek) translation of the Old Testament (3rd–2nd century BC), the term ekklesia is used for the general assembly of the Jewish people, especially when gathered for a religious purpose such as hearing the Law..."

So as I suspected. the original Ancient Greek word "ekklesia" originally meant "gathering", but only much later, after the onset of Christianity morphed into the word "Church" for the purposes of the interpretation of the Bible.

Our own government, formed by the Vikings over 1000 years ago, here is named after a Viking word meaning "gathering" or "assembly", and every year the population meets for an open air assembly to hear the readings of the new laws of the land. The greek word "ekklesia" is evidently similar.

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[melody]

Hello Melody,
....

Apart from that I am not going to be drawn in to yet another "challenge Adrian" series of posts.

Hello Adrian,

It is really too bad you feel challenged by my posts. When I read your other posts I actually thought you felt good about having all this information about the humanity and its spiritual path without having many books in your house, and I thought that you would elaborate further on the specific way you receive your information. I never imagined that my present question would therefore challenge you.

Feeling challenged has an aspect of being defensive. But is there anything to defend?

I come from a background where questions are freely asked in a direct manner and are freely answered, without conditions being elaborated on how one should ask the questions, or what one can ask the questions about. And I thought that this forum would be just such an environment as well… (Besides, there was never anything rude or profane about any of my questions).

Well, this is really too bad that you feel challenged by my posts…