Go to Sannhetseeker
- Add a comment
- Go to The First Commandment - It's Not All God's Word
?????
Y-L-F -
I'm not following your statement. Please explain.
posted by
sannhet
on July 20, 2004 at 7:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Does it mean that God cannot be seen as existing solely in an object?
posted by
TARZANA
on July 15, 2004 at 1:35 PM
| link to this | reply
What is a graven image?
posted by
TARZANA
on July 15, 2004 at 1:32 PM
| link to this | reply
precepts -- check the lexicon in the back of Strong's Concordance
and on the graven image thing
again, using the YHVH being Existence, which to me is God as the Universe as an Organism, the truly spiritual cannot be conceived. In John 3 (famous for John 3:16), the word for "spirit" there is Pneuma, meaning, wind or breath -- also meaning thoughts, etc. Again, spirit as something that cannot be imaged.
the idea of that precept is that what is truly god is beyond any image anyone can create.
our problem today is not so much with graven images of stone, etc (although statues and portraits do abound), but with mental images (at least partly,derived from these statues and portraits, to be sure).
The Trinity -- Father, Son and Holy Ghost -- is an imaging.
We've got to get away from the male anthropomorphic image with a white beard and long white hair and white flowing robes (Sistine Chapel Ceiling) and stop and begin contemplating the spiritual as it really exists.
posted by
Xeno-x
on July 14, 2004 at 8:20 AM
| link to this | reply
An Interesting Translation
Very interesting. I'm not familiar with your translation, but would be interested in learning more.
posted by
sannhet
on July 13, 2004 at 4:00 PM
| link to this | reply
check out my translations
we have the first three PRECEPTS -- not commandments, as King James would have you believe.
the word used here is LORD -- or YHVH, meaning Existence.
the other word is gods.
it recognizes other gods
but Existence is supreme.
ok?
posted by
Xeno-x
on July 13, 2004 at 2:04 PM
| link to this | reply
Agreement
I agree with both of you. There is only one God and I am sure that s/he doesn't want us to put something on our "list" ahead of him. But I just don't think s/he would say that to us. I love my wife with all of my heart.She loves me as well with the same intensity. But I don't need to tell her not to put someone else or something else in front of me on her list. It's something that we both know. And she wouldn't anyway because love supercedes everything else. But if she did, it would be okay. I would understand that she may have strayed from her path and her vow to me and I would forgive her. And I think that is how God would act as well.
Roen (peace)
posted by
sannhet
on July 13, 2004 at 8:26 AM
| link to this | reply
The first commandment
We must believe with our heart that God is love. God tells us that «Our ways are not His ways» and sometimes it is very difficult to understand when we try to look at His ways from our perspective. What God tells us is for our protection
. There is only one God and if we were to worship other gods, we would be going down the wrong spiritual path. Yes, I believe the destiny of the believer is to be like God. But we will never be God. However we must bear His image if we are to attain the highest spiritual path.
We are the children of God and just as we would teach our children obedience, God teaches us.
An authenic spiritual journey is difficult but most rewarding. Keep up the good work.
Be at peace.
posted by
Ricci
on July 12, 2004 at 5:15 PM
| link to this | reply
Interpretation can be weird
Maybe God meant it in the literal sense. Like actually THINKING an object is God. Since so many others have so many different Gods, I think that really all paths lead to the same place. Maybe God didn't mean to not "worship" something just because it has another name, since our God is thought of in the same way as someone else's, it all really may be an ultimate road to Him. Maybe he just meant to not place anything on your important list that is more important than him.
posted by
Kelli
on July 12, 2004 at 4:50 PM
| link to this | reply