Garden of Eden part 1

[Stocktrader561]

That's amazing. Yeah I was reading a couple days ago about Mary, Martha and Lazarus and I couldn't help but think there was a hidden message in there and I thought about you. What do you make of the stories invoving them especially the death and resurrection of Lazarus.

[houseofjustin]

@Stocktrader561 I believe the Lazurus that Jesus raised is the same as the Lazurus that was in Abraham's bosom in Luke 16. He was full of sores, which sounds much like Job. Also, the name Lazurus is a form of Elazar of the Old Testament. I have a hunch that they are related. Elazar was Aaron's third son through Elisheba. The meanings of all of these names, including Aaron's other sons are meaningful to me.

I think it is better to understand the Lazarus of Luke 19 first, and maybe Job.

[houseofjustin]

@houseofjustin The rich man is in hell. Hell is a place of torment as you see your riches (the things you have come to believe) consumed by the fire that purifies what is good and consumes what is bad. It seems Lazarus must be the opposite, one who wants to believe something. It seems begging would represent seeking. He ends up finding (in Abraham's bosom). There is a chasm between the one who believes everything and the one who has found truth. Neither can get to where the other is.

[houseofjustin]

@houseofjustin Now if the other Lazarus is really the same one, the one who was sick, died, and was resurrected would be the seeker who was covered with sores and ended up finding. Actually, he isn't one, as an individual. Think of him as representing those who seek and find. I'm thinking that the sores are the individuals who are finding pieces of truth, or something to that effect (I have reason to think that). The seekers die to anything they believed and are resurrected into Truth.

[Stocktrader561]

Yeah I know what you mean. I read that you believe that the New Testament is allegorical as well. Can you give me an example of one.

[houseofjustin]

@Stocktrader561 I mentioned in my first comment with PJ that I see even the main things like the virgin birth, crucifixion, and resurrection. They all make sense figuratively, the question is whether they were also literal. Also any of the sorries and of course the parables and miracles.

An example is when Jesus got in Peter's ship and taught the people. He told them to shove off a little from shore. The water is people with a message. He taught first where there wasn't too much people. (cont)

[houseofjustin]

@houseofjustin Think of Peter's ship being his church. Jesus first teaches from the shallow water which would mean that there aren't too many people. This is probably on a Wednesday night study when most people are home. If there are too many people his message will cause confusion, so it is better with a small group. Then when that group understands it is time to teach on Sunday, or some revival meeting. Others may now listen because of those who understand. Now the ships are filled.

[houseofjustin]

@Stocktrader561 Here is an example of one that can make sense half literal and half figurative. At the well with the Samaritan woman the disciples left and went to town for some meat. When they came back Jesus said that he had meat that they knew not of. Jesus' meat is clearly figurative.

Think of the well as a church. The disciples left to listen to the message at a different church. They came back to tell of what they heard. Jesus said that he had a message they never heard before.

[Stocktrader561]

I see what you mean and I see how you got there but how it all came together in your mind is your gift from God. 1 Corinthians 12

[houseofjustin]

@Stocktrader561 I wouldn't have seen these things without first seeing many other things. Once you see something, the things that used to make sense don't make sense anymore. Then more things can make sense that didn't make sense before.

[Stocktrader561]

I agree 100%. I see exactly what you mean. I personally believe the entire Old Testament is symbolic. I could list all the scriptures but I know you know what I mean because my mind sees the scriptures as you do. Sorry about PJ not everyone is given eyes to see. I would love to hear your thoughts about noahs ark especially the events after the ark came to rest. What the birds and their actions represent? Thanks for the insight and may our Lord Jesus continue to bless you.

[houseofjustin]

@Stocktrader561 Waters are peoples, multitudes, etc. The mountains are normally above the waters with rivers running down them. I feel that the mountains are organized religious leaders issuing forth people (rivers) which flow to the sea. The people covered the religious leaders so that all die. Not physically, but as if slain by the word. It seems that the ark is a way of saying that the righteous (Noah and his sons and wives) are isolated from the people that are covering the mountains. (cont)

[houseofjustin]

@houseofjustin I think spending time in the ark is much like spending time in the wilderness, away from all the doctrines. Probably the same thing also as the upper room. Two of all kinds were taken in the ark. I feel they represent people with various beliefs and views. They are likely discussing and debating, trying to come to the Truth. The raven and dove would likely represent messengers Noah sends out. One goes to and fro until the flood is over. He was still in error but didn't realize it.

[houseofjustin]

@houseofjustin The dove saw it wasn't time and came back, whether to wait or perhaps to continue preparing. The second time it came back with the olive leaf. As in my video I feel the leaves represent the doctrine of the tree, the olive tree being God's people. The leaf was in its mouth, meaning the dove was speaking the message. Even though it was preaching, it wasn't time yet until the third time. Noah becomes a husbandman, which is a preacher. He plants a vineyard, a church. Drinks his wine..

[houseofjustin]

@houseofjustin After reading what I wrote I'm thinking that the death caused by the flood is a spiritual death rather than as being slain by the word. I see it as prophecy of our day. The whole world is flooded with religious people. As in the day of Noah, marrying and giving in marriage (preacher joining with a church). Some of us have gone into the ark, safe from the waters.

[houseofjustin]

Again, any similarity between the Bible, including the gospels, and ancient writings earlier than the Bible, would be evidence that the earlier writings were also Scripture by earlier prophets telling the same figurative prophecies.

If your desire is to take the Bible as myths rather than prophetic allegory, then there isn't likely anything I can say that would cause you to see it otherwise. And if it weren't for evidence that I have seen in the last few years, I might also question it.

[houseofjustin]

It is all allegory. Creation in Gen 1 is allegory about creation of the spiritual realm of religion. The light is spiritual light. The water represents people, as noted by John in Revelation. There were people above the abode (heaven) and people below. The heavens is where the stars are. The stars are messengers (referred to as angels by interpreters) as noted by John in Rev 1. People under the stars are subject to those messengers (most people). Those above the heavens know better.

[PJDesseyn]

Actually, you still have it all wrong, which is rather hard if you keep arguing from your already completely wrong point of view. Christian mythology is basically a rip-off of ancient religions. The water being separated comes from Egyptian mythology. (look for the god Nun)

So water literally meant water and Earth was flat and had a dome and was surrounded by literal water, etcetera. That's what the bible says and that's what the people believe(d).

I suggest you learn ancient history.

[houseofjustin]

I feel that it is quite possible that other ancient writings older than the Bible's Scriptures may have been writings of earlier prophets. There are similarities in those ancient writings and the Bible because they contain the same message. That message is against the religions that hold those writings as Scripture. It is ironic that the religions hold prophecies against themselves as Scripture. If they had understood the writings, they would have burned them long ago. Prophecy is figurative.

[PJDesseyn]

Ah, so if an Egyptian comes up with it, he's actually proving Christianity (which didn't exist yet), but if a Christian comes up with it, the same doesn't apply to him. Sorry kid, but that's being a hypocrite. Christianity STOLE tons of myths from older civilisations. In fact, Jesus isn't really the Christ, according to the Old Testament. According to the OT, it would be Immanuel, which is NOT Jesus.

Not to forget that the scripture and myths by other religions fit perfectly in their faiths.

[PJDesseyn]

You interpret it incorrectly. First of all, the Serpent was NOT Satan, when Genesis was written. Only later on, did they symbolise Satan as the Serpent. Originally, the Serpent was simply a snake. As for the fruit: "knowledge of good and evil" means you know what is good and what is bad. For example, you understand killing people is bad, which makes the message good. You understand stealing is bad, which makes the message good, etc.

Knowing what is bad is good for us. They HAD to eat the fruit.

[houseofjustin]

John in Revelation says that the dragon, the old serpent, the devil, and Satan who deceived the whole world were all the same thing (Rev 12:9; Rev 20:2). It says that the serpent deceived Eve. In deception you may find truth plus falsehood, which would make it a lie. So good and evil together may refer to error, falsehood, and deception.

Because of eating of that tree the fields bring forth thorns. Paul defined thorns as messengers of Satan. Garden of Eden part 2 shows how this ties in.

[PJDesseyn]

Again, you have it all wrong: first of all, Revelations is the last book of the bible. If you had read my comment properly, you'd realise that you just confirmed what I said: originally, the Serpent was NOT Satan and LATER (Revelations falls under "later") the Serpent WAS Satan.

Genesis 2:9 shows that the trees refer to literal fruits to eat.

Also, it's very clear that it was not Satan, since God punished the snake, while Satan was unharmed. If Satan did it, he'd be punished, not the snake.

[houseofjustin]

The people above the heavens join with the people below the heavens to cause the flood of people who cover the earth. The earth has been covered with people of religion. That, I believe is Noah's flood. People are marrying and giving in marriage. That refers to preachers taking a congregation as his wife. It's all about spiritual things. And it all is prophetic of todays mess in religion.

The serpent was punished. He crawls on the dust of the ground. The dust represents people.

[PJDesseyn]

Next, Genesis 3 doesn't say the Serpent DECEIVED Eve, it says he BEGUILED Eve. To beguile is similar to deceiving, but by taking something away. Like a disease takes away your strength. Nevertheless, if you actually read the bible, you'll see that the Serpent said nothing but the truth. He didn't lie one bit. It's also clear that what was meant with "the fruit of knowledge of good and evil" is what it meant. A fruit which gave you knowledge of good and evil.

Clearly, you're wrong.

[houseofjustin]

At 1 Peter 1:11 it says that the spirit of Christ was in the prophets beforehand. If the spirit of Christ could be in the Old Testament prophets, it could also be in others before those prophets.

The main thing that I would say is that the Garden of Eden was meant to be allegory, but people took it literally. It doesn't make sense as literal, but makes much sense as allegory. As allegory it shows that if we eat error, we sow error and reap error. See Garden of Eden part 2.

[PJDesseyn]

The entire New Testament is pure apologetics. It makes excuses for all the bad things and mistakes in the Old Testament and is intentionally edited to fit as many "prophecies" they could. The NT is one giant hoax and you fell for it. Just look up the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.

The Garden of Eden is indeed allegorical, but not as to what you mean. It's a creation myth to explain our early beginnings, making up things to explain how we got our morals and such. Again, learn history, it helps.

[houseofjustin]

Nicaea doesn't have much to do with the New Testament. It was 300 years after what was supposed to have happened. Nobody had first hand knowledge of what happened, or didn't happen. Some were taking Christ as allegory, but the majority couldn't understand spiritually and took things literally. The majority won and controlled religion.

I'm thinking the Gospels were continued allegorical prophecy. The figurative virgin birth, crucifixion, and resurrection, and miracles make sense figuratively.

[PJDesseyn]

The Council of Nicaea was when they edited the bible, not when they wrote it. For example, the Gospel of Judas wasn't added as Scripture.

Also, the claims like a virgin birth, crucifixion and such weren't figuratively, but mythically. Throughout history, many religions have used such claims to deify a persona. Horus had many of the same attributes and claims as Jesus did, which is just more proof that the whole Christian mythology is a rip-off of older religions. They meant it, you know...