Bible Mysticism and Symbology

Fruiteloop

Fruiteloop

Community Member
MBTI
INFP
I'd like to keep this simple.

If you participate in this thread please respect others and what they say, this is not a thread for telling others they are wrong. We are hear to talk about what we have read and what it means to us. We do not need to be perfect and all opinions are welcome. If anything is on your mind please share.

When I think of the bible and I think how it is based on spirituality not rationality. Rationality can be part of it but not with materialism. God does not exist as a nonliving entity. God is a person who is "above" us somehow who knows us and has both mind and consciousness. This is why he can speak to people as they understand or can understand. Abraham left Ur because the family idols were made of stone and not alive. Joseph had dreams and they came true.

When I was little about 3 to 4 years old I was on the bed mom put on my shoes and I saw an image on tv - there was a program of the tomb Jesus was in opening from the inside with light pouring in from the darkness. That is all I can remember. It had an impact on me.

In the movie the Prince of Egypt I remember mosses saw the burning bush. It also impacted me.

I remember the kids show of Super Book.

I have several more things to say but to keep it from diverting away:

Moses means drawn from the water - this could mean in relation to the flood God said he would not use water to harm the earth again, saved Noah and his family from the flood.
YHWY - I say a presentation that said this could be the sound of baby breathing because Air goes in and out to convey the words, Gods word requires air then. The breath of life.
The burning bush is of course fire
Bread I can relate to the earth - many passages about bread in the bible

Jesus is a translation of Joshua

Joshua is a classic masculine name of Hebrew origin (Yehoshua) that means "Yahweh is salvation" or "God is deliverance." It represents strength, divine protection, and faithful leadership
Click to expand...

Jesus is said to be the lamb of God: lambs blood was put on the doors of Hebrews to save them from the angel of death passing over them.

Finally:

In the Book of Daniel (Chapter 3), the fourth man in the fiery furnace with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego is described by King Nebuchadnezzar as looking like a "son of the gods" or an "angel" sent by God to deliver them. Many Christian theologians interpret this figure as a theophany or a Christophany—a pre-incarnate appearance of Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...

Angel means messenger: if it was an angel or someone else I believe that God does miracles.

My favorite verse in the bible is Mathew 5:8

Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
 
I've had many experiences that I believe were ones God has spoken to me. I've had visions, prophecies, dreams, been a part of miraculous healings, etc.

It's interesting that Apostle Paul was very reluctant to share his vision of the third heaven. What is also interesting with this is that Paul often speaks in a logical, reasonable way, not a mystical way. I think the reason for this is that God blesses different people with different giftings. Some see visions. Some are great at articulation. Some have great acts of service. Some face martyrdom with unflinching bravery. We all have gifts God has given us as Christians. We are made of different parts, as in different body parts, but Paul says, "The hand cannot say to the eye, 'I have no need of you,'" for we are all of one body.

Further, even though I do have a lot of supernatural experiences, I do not believe they are necessary for a person to be close to God. John the Immerser is recorded to not have a single miracle attributed to his name. Yet, Jesus says he is greatest in the first covenant.
 
Last edited:
QuickTwist said:
I've had many experiences that I believe were ones God has spoken to me. I've had visions, prophecies, dreams, been a part of miraculous healings, etc.
Click to expand...
Same here. Amazing, VIVID inner visions sometimer of the past but usually of the future. Most of my dreams are perfectly ordinary, but I've had several that were so profound that they altered my life.

And here is a strange one. I used to occasionally have problems with my ankles swelling. One weekend I was at a three day seminar where we would sit for hours in those metal folding chairs. My lower legs swelled up so badly that the nurse drove me to the ER. The scan of my heart revealed that I had congestive heart failure. Several weeks later when I finally saw the cardiologist, he repeated the scan. There was absolutely NO EVIDENCE of congestive heart failure. Nor have my ankles ever become swollen again since. No one prayed over me that weekend or after. It just... happened.
QuickTwist said:
Some face martyrdom with unflinching bravery. We all have gifts God has given us as Christians.
Click to expand...
You do realize that other religions also have their martyrs? We can talk about Rabbi Akiva and other Jews martyred by the Romans. Or if you wish, the Jews who chose death rather than to be converted to Christianity.
QuickTwist said:
Further, even though I do have a lot of supernatural experiences, I do not believe they are necessary for a person to be close to God.
Click to expand...
Right on!
 
meowzician said:
You do realize that other religions also have their martyrs? We can talk about Rabbi Akiva and other Jews martyred by the Romans. Or if you wish, the Jews who chose death rather than to be converted to Christianity.
Click to expand...

Of course. Almost every religion has their martyrs. Not all martyrs are equal though. The Apostles went to their deaths for what they SAW, not some idea they came up with.
 
www.oldthingspassawayallbecomesnew.net

Spiritual Forces... In a Dream.

I want to tell you a story about something I experienced.On April 23, 2024, I had an engagement with a pro-Hamas supporter. He responded to my initial comment about Dr. Michael Brown and the article he linked about anti-Semitism. Here is the discussion in a screenshot.Notice where he says that I...
www.oldthingspassawayallbecomesnew.net www.oldthingspassawayallbecomesnew.net
 
QuickTwist said:
Neither can you prove that I am a real person... But so much of human knowledge is not based on "proof" but based on probability.
Click to expand...
Believing you are a real person is the default position. Until one has evidence otherwise, you opt for the default position.

I don't know if this will make you feel better or not, but when I was younger, I had to learn these rules too. And do you know who taught me? Atheists. My thinking is much clearer and more rational due to their patient teaching. I owe them a debt.
 
meowzician said:
Believing you are a real person is the default position. Until one has evidence otherwise, you opt for the default position.
Click to expand...

Why is that the default? Bots exist... AI exists... There are other possibilities... If you were just as skeptical of me being a real person as you were in the resurrection, you would probably conclude you were a boltzmann brain.

meowzician said:
I don't know if this will make you feel better or not, but when I was younger, I had to learn these rules too. And do you know who taught me? Atheists. My thinking is much clearer and more rational due to their patient teaching. I owe them a debt.
Click to expand...

Stop with your holier than thou attitude. You're not some enlightened figure. You're just liberal when it comes to theology and science. Stop condescending me. I don't treat you like you know nothing. I also don't know nothing.
 
QuickTwist said:
Why is that the default?
Click to expand...
The basic idea is that when you’re talking to someone in a chat, the most reasonable starting assumption is that they are a real person, not a bot. That comes from what philosophers and scientists sometimes call “default realism,” which just means you start with what is most normally true in everyday life, and only move away from it if you have a reason to.

It also connects to something called “methodological conservatism,” which is a fancy way of saying you should not overcomplicate your assumptions at the beginning. In most chat environments, the majority of participants are humans, so assuming “this is a human” is usually correct. It keeps your thinking accurate and efficient.

There is also a statistical idea behind it, sometimes called a “prior.” That just means your starting guess should match what is most common in real life. If most of what you encounter in chat spaces are real people, then your starting belief should be that the person is real. You only change that belief if you see evidence that suggests otherwise, like responses that are clearly automated, repetitive patterns, or signs the timing and content don’t match human behavior.


If you start by assuming everyone might be a bot, you will often be wrong in the opposite direction. You would end up mislabeling real people as fake, which makes communication harder and less reliable. So it is more practical to begin with the assumption that the other side is a person.

QuickTwist said:
Bots exist... AI exists...
Click to expand...
Less probable.
QuickTwist said:
Stop with your holier than thou attitude.
Click to expand...
Wait.... I admit that I've experienced the same thing as you, which puts us on the same level as you, but you think I'm being holier than thou?
 
meowzician said:
Less probable.
Click to expand...

Thank you. So stop saying I need proof for things.

meowzician said:
Wait.... I admit that I've experienced the same thing as you, which puts us on the same level as you, but you think I'm being holier than thou?
Click to expand...

Because you did it to pat yourself on the back that you are not in that place anymore and have ascended to glory already.
 
QuickTwist said:
Thank you. So stop saying I need proof for things.
Click to expand...
You misssed the point. You asked me what the default position is. It is the position that is more probable.
QuickTwist said:
Because you did it to pat yourself on the back that you are not in that place anymore and have ascended to glory already.
Click to expand...
Oh trust me. I still have plenty to work on. And while I don't know what things I'm wrong about, I'm absolutely certain I'm still making mistakes.
 
meowzician said:
You misssed the point. You asked me what the default position is. It is the position that is more probable.
Click to expand...

>You tell me I need proof.
>I tell you you don't have proof I exist
>You say believing it is the default
>I say there are alternate explanations
>You say it's more probable
>I say Then don't tell me I need proof
>You tell me I missed the point

I didn't miss any point... You missed the point. You want proof, but when there does not exist proof for like 90% of human knowledge it's simply not fair to demand proof because we don't have any proof for any historical event. If you only want proof you have logic and math and that is all you get.
 
Rationality is something introduced by the Greeks.

I know I cannot separate myself from how that has influenced me and my cultural thinking but I know people had different ways of looking at the world back then.

The menorah has 7 Hebrew letters on it symbolizing God like the burning bush. God used his finger to write his words on the tablets of the ten commandments. In the Maccabees the temple only has 1 days worth of oil to light the menorah and it lasted 8 days.

I do not read Hebrew but I understand that it came from paleo Hebrew sort of like hieroglyphics but in an phonetic not pictogram language.

Language is how we understand the world because each one has its own unique way of viewing the world.

In Spanish you can say: the broken jar happened next to the boy instead of the boy was next to the broken jar.

This has a totally different meaning because the first phrase implies the jar broke without the boy but the second implies the boy caused the jar to break. They have a different way of looking at causality and how things happen.

Japanese is based on pictograms so they have a very picture like way of understanding things because everything happens together not separately.

This I think shows that even in ancient times we cannot assume they thought like us. English also has changed from 500 years ago you would not understand it even 200 years ago. The way George Washington says things sounds odd in a letter he wrote about a topic I remember in a history documentary. Shakespeare calls someone a bully which was a complement at that time in the 1500's. A Shakespeare play And the King James bible is definitely not how we talk today. Even accents changed in British history going back to the 13 hundreds of the how the upper class people spoke documented by voice pronunciations.

Greek rationality was where we got most of static math from. Starting with Plato, Aristotle, Euclid's elements other philosophers, but in the 1500s we began understanding moving things mathematically. Language then changed to fit this new understanding in English and other European languages.

Not to mention all the euphonism's - turn of phrases used by different cultures

Getting all your ducks in a row is a saying

Don't put all your eggs in one basket is a saying.

Other cultures have sayings to we don't understand. Because of how language works.

So I never read Hebrew I do not think in Hebrew. It be curious to know how they thought in ancient times.
 
Fruiteloop said:
Rationality is something introduced by the Greeks.

I know I cannot separate myself from how that has influenced me and my cultural thinking but I know people had different ways of looking at the world back then.

The menorah has 7 Hebrew letters on it symbolizing God like the burning bush. God used his finger to write his words on the tablets of the ten commandments. In the Maccabees the temple only has 1 days worth of oil to light the menorah and it lasted 8 days.

I do not read Hebrew but I understand that it came from paleo Hebrew sort of like hieroglyphics but in an phonetic not pictogram language.

Language is how we understand the world because each one has its own unique way of viewing the world.

In Spanish you can say: the broken jar happened next to the boy instead of the boy was next to the broken jar.

This has a totally different meaning because the first phrase implies the jar broke without the boy but the second implies the boy caused the jar to break. They have a different way of looking at causality and how things happen.

Japanese is based on pictograms so they have a very picture like way of understanding things because everything happens together not separately.

This I think shows that even in ancient times we cannot assume they thought like us. English also has changed from 500 years ago you would not understand it even 200 years ago. The way George Washington says things sounds odd in a letter he wrote about a topic I remember in a history documentary. Shakespeare calls someone a bully which was a complement at that time in the 1500's. A Shakespeare play And the King James bible is definitely not how we talk today. Even accents changed in British history going back to the 13 hundreds of the how the upper class people spoke documented by voice pronunciations.

Greek rationality was where we got most of static math from. Starting with Plato, Aristotle, Euclid's elements other philosophers, but in the 1500s we began understanding moving things mathematically. Language then changed to fit this new understanding in English and other European languages.

Not to mention all the euphonism's - turn of phrases used by different cultures

Getting all your ducks in a row is a saying

Don't put all your eggs in one basket is a saying.

Other cultures have sayings to we don't understand. Because of how language works.

So I never read Hebrew I do not think in Hebrew. It be curious to know how they thought in ancient times.
Click to expand...

Sorry for derailing the thread.

I provided one article I wrote which details some experiences I have had.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top