freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Correcting Assumption......
Correcting Assumption......
For those really interested in discovering the truth of GM's claim above, which is off topic,....go here. - being properly educated is better than remaining ignorant
The UB is only one interesting and significant book of religious philosophy among many others in the great library of universal wisdom. Being properly educated about a particular work and the actual theological-philosophical scope and breadth of an individuals actual 'belief-system' is recommended before making singular, specific or presumptuous claims thereon.
~*~*~
My first commentary here on Arianism holds, especially the first paragraph, concerning issues of 'how' or 'why' Jesus could be referred to as 'elohim'. (includes controversy over John 1:1 translation). In all regards however the Son is ever the unique and specially 'begotten' Son in the divine hierarchy, in the purview of 'creation' and 'redemption/salvation', the archetype and prototype of man's own new creation as the 'new man', perfected in Christ, as the last or second Adam (see Adam-kadmon as well). We in Christ are that new creation, being the image and likeness of YHWH fully redeemed, restored and glorified. Such is the meaning of Immanuel, but even more intimately realized, since we are His tabernacle.
Correcting Assumption......
You do realize that Freelight is a believer in the Urantia book, right? He's an eclectic Cult/Occultist.
For those really interested in discovering the truth of GM's claim above, which is off topic,....go here. - being properly educated is better than remaining ignorant
The UB is only one interesting and significant book of religious philosophy among many others in the great library of universal wisdom. Being properly educated about a particular work and the actual theological-philosophical scope and breadth of an individuals actual 'belief-system' is recommended before making singular, specific or presumptuous claims thereon.
~*~*~
My first commentary here on Arianism holds, especially the first paragraph, concerning issues of 'how' or 'why' Jesus could be referred to as 'elohim'. (includes controversy over John 1:1 translation). In all regards however the Son is ever the unique and specially 'begotten' Son in the divine hierarchy, in the purview of 'creation' and 'redemption/salvation', the archetype and prototype of man's own new creation as the 'new man', perfected in Christ, as the last or second Adam (see Adam-kadmon as well). We in Christ are that new creation, being the image and likeness of YHWH fully redeemed, restored and glorified. Such is the meaning of Immanuel, but even more intimately realized, since we are His tabernacle.