The Garden of Eden

[melody]

Hello Aspect,

I see that you are concerned with the Holy words, and the name of God. There is a practice in Buddhism where they repeat as a mantra a name of a holy person, of a Bodhisattva, and contemplate it. It is one of the meditation methods. They also meditate on the sounds of vowels and syllables. So your practice with the holy words is very sound and I can see how it can achieve the spiritual effects you are experiencing.

[Adrian]

Hello Melody,

The "truth" only upset you due to your own pre-conceived ideas of the meaning of Lucifer.

We cannot and must not withhold truth, simply because some people might misconstrue or confuse it with something else.

Surely it is much better for people to know the truth about Lucifer, than to continue to live in fear of death, and of being sent to roast in hell for all eternity as a guest of Lucifer if they haven't been a good Christian?

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[melody]

Hello Adrian,

Could you please elaborate on the truth of Lucifer, what it is exactly that is needed to be understood about Lucifer for spiritual development.

[Adrian]

Hello Melody,

Hello Adrian,

Could you please elaborate on the truth of Lucifer, what it is exactly that is needed to be understood about Lucifer for spiritual development.

We have discussed this before in these forums, and Science of Being includes a whole chapter.

In summary Ego is Lucifer.

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[Kailaurius]

...Science of Being includes a whole chapter.

Yeah, that's a really good chapter.  I enjoyed reading that.  It added a new perspective for me on the idea of Lucifer and Christ.

[aspect]

Dear Adrian,

I hope you don't find this anti-climactic, but I agree with your summarization of the origin and meaning of the tetragrammaton.

I have set out my understanding of the origin and meaning of the 4 letters YHVH - the Tetragrammaton - I would like to hear yours.

You put it exceptionally well when you stated:

One thing I have noticed is that it seems so easy for people to get sucked in to anything that sounds mystical or occult in some way, believing it to have great power, but invariably these things had simple beginnings, which, like the party game "Chinese whispers" turned in to something completely different over the years, assuming a life of its own.

That statement succinctly made whatever point I would have been trying to get across concerning this topic.

When you made the following statement, you led me to believe that your point would be to introduce the mystical and occult elements that were added and polluted the simple truth:

p.s. The Tetragrammatron is Jewish mysticism - trust me. It was taken and used or mis-used as the ineffable name of God, Lord - Adonai. But that is an entirely different story.

And again, as you also said (here I have added emphasis to parts of your statement, merely to highlight my point)

But the point I am making is that, as so often happens, what started off as something very simple, in this case an abbreviation so that the ineffable name of God would not be taken in vain in accordance with Jewish customs, later assumed massive esoteric and occult proportions.

My point exactly! What started off as something very simple assumed massive esoteric and occult proportions.

I would have also made this exact same point (again, I've emphasized the gist of it)

In occult terms YHVH came to represents the four Elements as well as the Kabbalistic vessels or worlds of creation.

It is funny how these original names can take on such proportions.

Again, you did very well at stating the point, that it "came to represent" and that is to say it was not the original intent or meaning, but it was only later that the mystical and esoteric elements were introduced.

In other parts of your post, there are some things that I would perhaps state differently for sake of clarification, but not due to any strong disagreement. For example:

For example, the original name of Jesus was Yahu'Shuah which became abbreviated to "Yeshua".

Yahu'Shuah and Yeshua are English phonetic translations from the Hebrew, which is the language of (most of) the Old Testament. By the time Jesus lived, the world was under Roman rule and the common language was Greek, and the name "Yeshua" was translated into the Greek as "Iesus" (pronounced "Ee-ay-suse").

As I made the point earlier, it isn't so much that the YHWH is an "abbreviation" in the normal sense of the word, but rather:

The four letters to which that referred is YHWH, if we were to "transliterate" (not, "translate") from the Hebrew writing directly into the English alphabet.

The word YHWH, then, is an approximated version of the four Hebrew letters that make up the name of God translated as "I AM" in English.

The word "YHWH" with vowels supplied becomes "Yahweh". Another form of the same word is "Jehovah." (In which case, the "Y" has been replaced with "J", and the "W" with "V")

As you should recall, all of this was found in my original post, in which I already discussed the origin and meaning of the tetragrammaton.

You have adequately made the point I would have wished to make had this turned into a debate. Namely, that a simple unfolding of the meaning of the word is sufficient, without attempting to place some "deeply" mystical, occult meaning or practice to it.

Job well done!

aspect

p.s. I have some other things I can say about "the name" but right now I need to turn my time and attention elsewhere. Perhaps I will introduce that discussion at a later point in time.

[aspect]

Hello Aspect,

I see that you are concerned with the Holy words, and the name of God. There is a practice in Buddhism where they repeat as a mantra a name of a holy person, of a Bodhisattva, and contemplate it. It is one of the meditation methods. They also meditate on the sounds of vowels and syllables. So your practice with the holy words is very sound and I can see how it can achieve the spiritual effects you are experiencing.

Melody,

Thanks for your intent, but I must have been unclear about the point I was making. I'm not at all concerned about "Holy words" or secret names or mantras, sounds and etc., neither do I ascribe importance to things of that nature.

My interest in words is to uncover their meaning, in simple, everyday terms and then to employ them in my mind, applying reason and hopefully to grow in understanding.

There is also, of course, the direct experiential knowledge of Christ, and he is the summation and goal of all true spiritual experience.

If I did form a mantra, I believe what I would do is always recall "the simplicity of the gospel." For it really and truly is very, very simple and even a child can understand. Perhaps the simplicity of the message is what proves to be the greatest stumbling block to so many human beings.

It seems that the further I go, the more I return to the simplicity of what I was originally made to be. It is a matter of dropping all the masks and pretentiousness, the animosity, the false reasonings, and returning to the state of being, of awareness and energy.

What seems to me to be the greatest difficulty in communicating it, is that it is so simple and people always want to inject more into the meaning of things. Perhaps the pride and ego of man truly is his downfall.

aspect

[Adrian]

Hello Aspect,

Well I am pleased we have reached a consensus on so many points.

Regarding the origin of the name Jesus - I stand by my understanding, because "Yashua" was not Jesus true name, and therefore could not have been translated as such. In any case, there is always a reason for the way a name can change with bias.

But that is a mere detail - it is the person, not the name that matters.

As for the Kaballah - it is a human construct although a very elaborate one. The Zohar, the most important book in Jewish mysticism, was written in the middle ages by a person or persons unknown, but yet, because it looks really mystical, it has become a religion in its own right.

Kaballah came in to being when Ezekiel had a vision where he thought he saw God, as a human male, sitting on "His" throne in the sky. From that day forth Jewish mystics have sought to realise the same vision by gaining favour with God.

Kaballah also is based upon the idea that God speaks Hebrew, and created the Universe by combining letters of the Hebrew alphabet, in special sequences. Jewish occultists and Magicans generally have been seeking these combinations of Hebrew letters so they too can speak kaballistically and have the power of creation.

Also, the Tree of Life in occult terms corresponds to the anatomy of the "body" of God - like the internal organs. Of course there are several levels of occult meaning to that.

But none of this matters in a way.

By using the Kaballah as a focal point, and by meditating deeply on certain words which are thought to contain power, many mystical experiences and inner connections have been achieved which, in and of themselves have proved valuable. When you see these Orthodox Jews with a book in their hand, nodding their heads as they read, they are emphasising specific words designed to bring about mystical experiences. The fact that they do not understand the mechanism does not matter at all.

I describe concentration exercises by focusing on numbers, images, scenes and so on.  In Jewish mysticism the practitioners focus on these words that are thought to have great powers - combinations of letters from the Hebrew alphabet, but they are still deeply concentrating and the results are the same which is fine - we all have freewill through which we learn by experience.

In Love and Light,

Adrian.

[juliainkc]

Hello aspect,

I am responding to your response. Post #55

http://www.ourultimatereality.com/forums/profiles/aspect-u2708.html

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...

 Okay, I will dance the zydeco with you. Observe me? I welcome it. I myself do it all the time. Speak for me? As in your projections in this very long response to my brief statement? Well, in kind aspect, this is going to be a long response. I will share it in two posts. You said alot here.

Judge? What would you call your 'judgments' or opinion here? Everyone has an opinion aspect.
 
How you came to assume all this is coming from your own way of thinking aspect. Not mine. I am quite capable of speaking for myself here. Are we equals here? Or perhaps you will take this as a 'teaching'. Actually, you seem to be interested in 'teaching' as in giving a discourse or instructions on the subject at hand. That's fine with me. Your reactionary response here is about 'identifying the terms by...' preaching the gospel according to Evangelical Christianity's view point. That's a definition of a system of belief my friend, it isn't the Buddhist view now is it? Or is that me labeling again? Am I attempting to tell you what you should ascribe or agree with whether it is my thoughts or yours?

Denigrate? How was your character slammed in my response? Show me how I personally said to you aspect, that your character was lacking or inferior in any way? I don't see any mention of your personal character at all. You brought that idea up.

I know that the 'explanations' you used are taught in theological seminary's/colleges for those training to become Preachers or Pastors. I was personal friends with the pastors of the Evangelical Christian churches I was a member of throughout the 16 years of studying with them and I was told directly in regards to this particular statement you used, that this is what is taught in seminary via a pastor of the church.

As the saying goes "In the Old Testament, Christ is concealed. In the New Testament, He is revealed."


I sat under these teachings aspect. The pastors did all the logical and methodical listing out just like you have done here and explained it just like you have done here my friend. I've walked this road as an active participant, because that is what all are encouraged to do. I studied this Bible. So what is judgmental with saying it is an Evangelical Christian view point? That you take or find offense in my statement and need to defend yourself like this speaks for itself or yourself as is the case here.

What in your mind or way of thinking is 'denigrating' by categorizing a system of beliefs?
 
Let's view your own 'sharing' of your opening 'instructing view' and observe whom may be attempting to teach whom. In observing your own statements here and for the sake of the length of this already too long discussion, I will not copy all the scriptures by listing your post so others can read this through for themselves if they so choose.  I am not offended by the scriptures aspect.

Post # 40 -  http://www.ourultimatereality.com/forums/profiles/aspect-u2708.html

It is easy to see how some of these issues have 'you' stumped. 'I am preparing the answer,' but it may take some time to put it all into writing. Therefore in the meantime, 'if you will do but  one thing', then 'I will work on it' as time permits.

That, my friends is the gospel, which translated means "good news."

It is not by rote or tradition but by my own experience and insight.

 I am speaking of the FACT that I have in myself the growing awareness, that is in my perception, that I am not at all what it appears....

...by my own experience and insight by my own experience and insight that I can say ...

aspect, are you able to allow this to be true for all others or does this only apply to yourself? Because this response does not bear out that you share this idea with others given your reactionary response here. You are really defending yourself here.

Are these terms and scriptures used in other Faith's? Or are these terms used in what is defined as the Christian faith, Evangelical or not? How would you define it? You seem to enjoy  'assisting' ones in their thinking so I am allowing you to do so here.

You quoted from the Bible only. I didn't see any quotes from any other Spiritual Faiths at all in your post. So defining what it is known by in definition, Evangelical Christianity, a definition of one of many faith's. Yet you being already far surpassed of any so-called evolution, respond to this statement by saying by making it personal. Hmmm...

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.

That's a pretty bold assumption my friend. You got all this from my response just by my saying Evangelical Christianity and you assumed I was labeling you? Hmm...sounds like your taking it personally.

 

I am not waiting to evolve... I have already far surpassed any so-called evolution.

 
Are you aware that all other faiths teach along with the Bible the' saying that Source (the Kingdom of Heaven is within?) Are all these other faiths 'wrong' in their view as in only Christianity's view due to ones interpretation of the Bible is the only 'right' way in knowing the way? Christ appeared to many and said he had many who were not of this flock.

 
Christ dwells within my friend. The Kingdom of Heaven is within. As to the resurrection? It is in the Mind that this event takes place. The Heart. It is a changing of ones mind from ego to Spirit filled living. That's what changes the outer picture.
 
I am sharing my view here; the disciples 'needed' proof from the Christ because they did not recognize him. Their minds had not resurrected yet. They were hiding in fear because they were stuck on a body at the cross, believing they were separated from thier Life Giver, Source of Living or God, which is what 'sin' is, choosing the incorrect entry, missing the mark (still in ego thinking mind). Not relying by not understanding where Source Is nor trusting that Source was in them their power and life energy force.
Mary didn't recognize him either. She thought he was the gardener.

That is above all astral plane and every plane that can be known or that exists, right to the very center of the Source of all things, the One, the Spirit of all life, the Original Being, the "I AM" as He made Himself known to Moses at the burning bush.
Indeed, I am the burning bush. For in me the fire burns, and yet I am not consumed by it.

You are definitely consumed with something here my friend. And maybe you have a bit of smoke in your eyes. I apologize my 'personality' or unique aspect is coming through.

I live in the arms of Infinite and Unconditional Love. I am supported by Infinite Grace and Loving kindness. I see no lack and I know the liberty that is mine.

Yes the everlasting and open arms my friend. There is room for all.

Do you believe this and know this with all your heart, with all your mind and with all your Spirit? Because if this is your truth my friend then isn't it enough for you to know this and trust that 'God' is handling all the details for all? Using your own words here, as to seeing no lack and knowing that liberty is yours, and also mine and everyones.
 

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.

Where does it say in my response that I was 'qualifying myself' to teach anyone? Show me in my statement. You have obviously spoken out of place here my friend.  Recently in another post my position regarding the 'teacher and student' was clearly stated, which is the only position I can share from. I am my own student and teacher in how I receive what is filtering through from my Higher Self which connects me directly to Source or Original Being, isn't this true for all?


 I have also shared that I am here to teach what I Am here to learn. How? By the leading of  Divine Spirit within. How did you find yourself in the position of you being my student? You are free by choice. Hmm?
I believe that you as we all here have, have more than enough to learn by teaching our own selves based on and through our own unique life experience. This is what makes ones relationship with ones God 'personal' or Intimate, or as you say 'hidden' and I will add within.
 
I will say honestly that you are not any more qualified to teach anyone else but yourself aspect as I am. It's your One on One. Perhaps you may consider asking yourself why you wrote such an extreme position of defense by taking offense as I said, I have traveled this road and it was Jesus who led me out of the church.

What's your point here? You seem to be 'trying' to convince someone of something here.

I will also say, that the logical mind cannot comprehend the 'things' of the Spirit. I have stated this also in previous posts. I wouldn't take it to any logical conclusion at all but I am speaking for only for myself.
 
You say you have the mind of Christ and on the other hand you state that I am 'correct' that the law of God is written within the heart and mind of every man.  How big of you to say so. Thank you.

And then you make the statement that Jesus broke his own teachings? Wow. That is an extreme. You seem to be swinging in a zydeco dance. Does this make sense to you aspect?

You see it doesn't matter to me either what you believe or think. You seem to say this repeatedly in one fashion or another here and in the other posts I have been observing your responses to.

Surprise aspect!! I have the Mind of Christ also. I am being Divinely led and taken care of and I have the faith and trust to believe the same applies for all other 'aspects of God'.

Shining the Inner Light by removing the barriers to Love's presence. Bring the Light together by Unity not separation. Also known as forgiveness. This is done by example my friend. Jesus knew this well. The disciples were sent out to share as living examples (epistles, or letters) written by being Spirit led (Inspired) by the Source of all Living connected through our Higher Self (Whole or Holy Spirit, Christ Mind). They had their hands full of disagreements and arguments and yes, debates already ongoing within the church as well.

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.

I don't hold onto theology. I have a Divine Intimate relationship within Source. Is it possible that it may be yourself who seems to have the issues of fitting something into a theology?

 
I have a Divine and Intimate relationship with my Source of Origin or Heavenly Parent. I am not separated from my Source. In fact I shared:

[quote]...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.[/quote]

I am allowed to ask you the same question here aspect. Did you stop to consider that what I write from may come from my Inner Eyes seeing as well? I did not bring this up for consideration. You did.



Assuming? Where are you getting all this out of my response aspect? You are the one saying this. So you are reflecting your own self in this equation my friend.  Who is saying this? You are. You are making very arrogant statements in speaking for me. You are telling me what I am thinking and you have no idea.

That is not your place my friend. You certainly have given this rebuttal, a lot of energy and thought based on your view of looking at this from your own experience and transferring onto me. Are you basing this on some issue in your own life? Here again is what I said:

...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.

 
And because your response is so based on telling me what I am thinking and feeling, I am moved to respond.

I will post the other half.

[juliainkc]

Hello aspect,

Here is the remaining response to your long response.


 Grace? Unconditional Love? Loving kindness? These are not just nice and pretty words my friend. These are natural outflowing attributes of our natural inheritance of a Spirit led life. Not coming from some 'authority' that speaks for God in telling another what they are presuming or avoiding or perhaps basing a response on an experience of being mistreated.  You are talking out loud here to yourself by alluding to all these things in your statement above.

 
I do thank you for giving me the opportunity to practice and evolve in these attributes by your 'showing up' here! I am honored that you would take so much time to convince yourself of what you say you know by reading so much into my response.


I encourage you to read my response again.  I do and have asked ones to consider that before reading anything that anyone writes, Ask for Divine Wisdom and Discernment. I learned that years ago. Perhaps this is what you may be sensing in my response.

Post # 43 http://www.ourultimatereality.com/forums/profiles/juliainkc-u2087.html

Now using bold for the word debate  and both bold and italicized for clarifications:

Good Morning Aspect,

Ahh. Very well stated Evangelical Christian point of view here. What a flashback my friend.

Quote
As the saying goes "In the Old Testament, Christ is concealed. In the New Testament, He is revealed."

I remember this statement well.

My point in raising this discussion was missed here my friend. That is all I will share with you. I do appreciate your offer to 'unstump' us. 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'. 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. Another ongoing debate.

By your response aspect, it is obvious that you took this as an invitation to do just this. I wonder that my
response touched a nerve in you somewhere. Your response is quite overstated. [/i]

I see that you would debate well here. I believe we have traveled the same road. For myself, it was Jesus who led me out of the church.

Key word is would. Not you are...

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.

Can, isn't saying 'you' are debating here. There is no you in these statements. How did 'you' put yourself in there?  You've proven your own perceptions and intentions to yourself by your own response.

Again, I could debate here. Why? 'God' does not need defending. Man does. Because man is not convinced that he was never separated from his Origin. 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.

I believe I said I not you.

Love WithIn Divine Spirit, InJoy Being an aspect,

Julia

You seem eager to jump on an opportunity to hear yourself expound on your knowledge, in arrogance expounding on 'your' knowledge while using and twisting my words to make yourself superior in an argument that never happened.

You have no idea what my purpose for beginning this discussion was for.  You assumed you did. And we know what the cliché is for doing that now don't we?

What I shared above was to prevent what you obviously seemed eager to create here. A reason to argue and 'teach' your 'point of view'. You are the one mis-taken here aspect. We've all been privy to the contentious nature of others in regards to the Bible posts here.
 
You have made a delaration that bases my response as some personal affront to you. Seems to be a well used statement when one voices an opinion that may differ while expounding on their rights to be heard and not allowing the same for others.

I've already been down that road here in this forum. See for yourself. You are free to observe me.

And I will say this to you as I did to another; how can you know what one's 'Inner intentions' are? That is called 'mind reading or co-dependency'. And I am sure that you will need to have the last word. I find this uncanny as in the similarities of those who say they are 'open minded' to learning. You did not say that. You've made it clear that you are not.

Am I not allowed to disagree with you without it turning into a personal affront? That's an easy out.

These are your thoughts as you shared and you own them.
 
And now I have shared mine and I own them. So Be IT.

Judgment? Perhaps we could agree to leave it to Source who sees the Whole picture and trust in this. That is what I am 'hearing' from within.
 
I would appreciate you speaking for yourself and allowing me to express for myself which is ours by Divine Rightful Inheritance. As an a unique aspect of God.


In closing I wish to share something that is shared with me, while being taken from the Bible I have found that this is open for all's consideration no matter what ones faith may be, it applies to all faiths:

 
1 Corinthians 13

Love

 1. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.

2. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.

3. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,  but have not love, I gain nothing.
 
4. Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.

5. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

6. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.

7. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
 
8. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.

9. For we know in part and we prophesy in part,

10. but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.

11. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.

12, Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13. And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

 
What I believe aspect is that 'God' is big enough to contain all and is in each one of us.

Peace is a very good indicator of who is leading in ones experience my friend. I do have a Peace that surpasses all understanding. I trust the same for you.


Love in Divine Spirit, InJoy being an aspect,


Julia

[aspect]

Dear Julia,

Thank you for the time and energy you invested in your response. There are so many things to love about you I would hardly know where to begin. I think your passion shone through most beautifully. At least that is what I saw when I read the responses you have posted. I have no quarrel or debate or issue with you. Thank you for sharing your joy with me.

I think I may give you a nickname "Jewels". Get it? Julia - Jewels - shines like a diamond?   

aspect

[wavepsychic]

Hi Adrian, I agree with this

In summary Ego is Lucifer.

So Lucifer is Mara then. How come Buddhism remained pure and Christianity made Lucifer out to be a person who is eternally Evil?

[Adrian]

Hello Wavepsychic,

Hi Adrian, I agree with this

In summary Ego is Lucifer.

So Lucifer is Mara then. How come Buddhism remained pure and Christianity made Lucifer out to be a person who is eternally Evil?

In one word - agenda.

Christianity was created by Constantine and his associates to replace paganism - from which Christianity was derived - at a time when the Roman Empire was failing, and needed an alternative way of controlling the masses through fear and guilt.  The Roman Empire still lives on through the Roman Catholic Church with the Vatican as its power base. If you think about it - the version of Christianity with the same name is all about fear of being sent to "purgatory" upon "death", being "saved", and guilt instilled by "confession" and atonements of various types.

So to that sect of Christianity, Lucifer is the big stick that keeps the congregation "faithful".

Buddhism of course is an enlightened culture who have metaphors such as Lucifer or their equivalent in a proper context.

In Love and Light,

Adrian.
 

[juliainkc]

Good Morning aspect and all,

I wish to acknowledge your reply and then back to the subject at hand which I see as a very important aspect of this discussion.

Posted by: aspect 
Insert Quote
Dear Julia,

Thank you for the time and energy you invested in your response. There are so many things to love about you I would hardly know where to begin. I think your passion shone through most beautifully. At least that is what I saw when I read the responses you have posted. I have no quarrel or debate or issue with you. Thank you for sharing your joy with me.

I think I may give you a nickname "Jewels". Get it? Julia - Jewels - shines like a diamond?   

aspect

You are very welcome and thank you aspect, I mean this from my heart.

In response, you are 'seeing' your reflection in the mirror (aka) Julia.

Love In Divine Spirit, InJoy this day being an aspect, the part of the Diamond you shine from,


Julia
 

[Talker]

Good Morning aspect and all,

I wish to acknowledge your reply and then back to the subject at hand which I see as a very important aspect of this discussion.

Posted by: aspect 
Insert Quote
Dear Julia,

Thank you for the time and energy you invested in your response. There are so many things to love about you I would hardly know where to begin. I think your passion shone through most beautifully. At least that is what I saw when I read the responses you have posted. I have no quarrel or debate or issue with you. Thank you for sharing your joy with me.

I think I may give you a nickname "Jewels". Get it? Julia - Jewels - shines like a diamond?   

aspect

You are very welcome and thank you aspect, I mean this from my heart.

In response, you are 'seeing' your reflection in the mirror (aka) Julia.

Love In Divine Spirit, InJoy this day being an aspect, the part of the Diamond you shine from,

Julia

Greetings All
Splendid display, of points of view, topic wise, as is shown here and throughout this meaningful forum. From my perspective, and as I believe it to be, all the responders are awakened to that which is being posted, and mirrored back to them. This may be either harmoniously or in-harmoniously triggering emotions deep within one. These emotions may be calling for a corrective action internally, if inharmonious. Felt I should respond as the reading of Julis's comments about the 'mirror' struck a cord of interest based on reseach into the mirroring process.

In response, you are 'seeing' your reflection in the mirror (aka) Julia.

So along with asking the question of 'what lesson is to be gleaned from this experience', I dig in deeper, to see what may need some internal patching when certain emotions are activated.
Be Well