From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed May 31 15:24:46 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:24:46 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] (no subject) Message-ID: <053120061524.29682.447DB53E000978AE000073F22200734364CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> This is a test! Richard Campbell , arcam1970@comcast.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Tue Jun 6 14:00:08 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 14:00:08 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] Testing the connection Message-ID: <060620061400.17456.44858A680009EDB4000044302207021053CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> To the moderator: I would like to sign up to LUCERNA. Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net Can you please e-mail me back with rules and regulations? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 8 23:26:18 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 19:26:18 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna References: Message-ID: <010801c68b53$134b82a0$6500000a@lukene181ef1c1> Thanks Michael! I look forward to the discussions. LUKEN From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 01:39:16 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 21:39:16 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I send you all these greetings in Jesus the Anointed who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit now and forever and ever. Amen. During the past four years I have engaged in a study of the term KNH in the Hebrew Word. All Biblical scholars agree there is no place for the term CALAM* (in the Latin search engine) in the Writings. I identified the 'celestial Church' as the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and have been blessed by Patriarch Abuna Merkorios by name, 'Greg'. The three wise men were Ethiopian Israelite priests. All of Jerusalem were in an uproar by their saying because they are the ones that have the ark of the covenant. The Heavens consider Africa to be the East, Get it? Or, are you still looking. This study will be completed when Doctrine of Truth and Good is finished. When this occurs hopefully within the next 30 days I will be sending to all 'New Church' clergy who 'hold the office of priest'. I located a site that contains their addresses wordwide. This study in CD form has a direct bearing on the Second Coming. This study conclusively proves that the priesthood for the 'New Church' has not yet been established. I invite any of you all to send me your address and a CD will posted to you when complete. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: reform@novahierosolyma.org, lucerna@novahierosolyma.org, >phl-discuss@novahierosolyma.org, phl-news@novahierosolym.org, >phl-sermons@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 08:46:20 -1000 (HST) > >Hi Folks, > >The Lucerna e-mail discussion list is available for your use, as it has >been since 1997. Lucerna is about the doctrine of "this church" and is NOT >about "that organization." > >What it's about is here: >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >Anyone can join the Lucerna discussion without approval or identification, >which can also be done at the page above. > >The Lucerna archives are available on the web here: >http://novahierosolyma.org/pipermail/lucerna/ > >This message archive is open to the public, and anyone can view it without >registration or password, whether subscribed to the list or not. > >"That organization" does not approve of, support, or in any way acknowledge >any usefulness in what I am doing here, and in the event of trouble, I will >be entirely on my own. So keep in mind when posting to Lucerna that you are >handing the burden of liability for what you write to me, and that if I >don't want such a burden, I will feel free to remove your writing and you >from the system. > >I would hope that we can also refrain from creating other sorts of >liabilities, such as the barriers imposed by bizarre or antiquated >language, or by writing in a way that suggests that only people of a >particular age and sex are able to benefit from the Lord's Word. > >I will be sending out invitations to everyone on Reform or that I know is >connected with the church. Replying to that invitation will be the easiest >way to join. > >Aloha, >Michael > > > > >-- >Michael V. David ---------- http://mvdavid.com >E kaup? aku n? i ka hoe a k? mai. >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 04:59:31 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:59:31 EDT Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion Message-ID: <271.ab00158.31ba5a33@aol.com> In a message dated 6/8/2006 10:47:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: I will be sending to all 'New Church' clergy who 'hold the office of priest'. I located a site that contains their addresses wordwide. This study in CD form has a direct bearing on the Second Coming. This study conclusively proves that the priesthood for the 'New Church' has not yet been established. I invite any of you all to send me your address and a CD will posted to you when complete. Dear Greg: If you located a site that contains the addresses worldwide of all 'New Church' clergy, why are you asking for the clergy to send you their addresses? If your study proves conclusively that the priesthood of the 'New Church' has not yet been established, then are there any 'New Church' clergy? And if not, then to whom can you send your CD? Hugh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 13:16:25 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 09:16:25 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion In-Reply-To: <271.ab00158.31ba5a33@aol.com> Message-ID: They 'hold the office of priest'. The representation established by the Lord for the establishment of the 'New Church' is the 'anointing' with the blessed 'oil'. The study shows according to doctrine that there is a difference between 'holding the office of priest' and being 'adjoined to the office of priest'. The list administer deleted me from posting to your group because I copied to you all. You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. I don't know that you are 'clergy' or that the addresses on this site contains your address. This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error according to the Writings. The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is written in Greek. The first object of my study was to 'gather truths from out of the Word' the Hebrew Word. My ministry is prophetic and given by the Lord alone to educate those 'holding the office of priest' the truth of doctrine which is established by the literal understanding of the Word. The 'office of prophet' to which I am enjoined was established in me by the Lord alone by the representative of the 'oil' administered by Donald K. Rogers who 'holds the office of priest' in the General Church of the New Jerusalem. As a young man I was 'set aside'. The 'illumination and illustration' that is given me is real and documented and offered to those on this list who want to be educated on the Word. "The return of the Lord is to be in the understanding of the literal and spiritual meaning of the Word." Emanuel Swedenborg. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 00:59:31 EDT > >In a message dated 6/8/2006 10:47:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: >I will be sending to all >'New Church' clergy who 'hold the office of priest'. I located a site that >contains their addresses wordwide. This study in CD form has a direct >bearing on the Second Coming. This study conclusively proves that the >priesthood for the 'New Church' has not yet been established. I invite any >of you all to send me your address and a CD will posted to you when >complete. >Dear Greg: > >If you located a site that contains the addresses worldwide of all 'New >Church' clergy, why are you asking for the clergy to send you their >addresses? > >If your study proves conclusively that the priesthood of the 'New Church' >has >not yet been established, then are there any 'New Church' clergy? And if >not, >then to whom can you send your CD? > >Hugh >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 17:09:12 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion Message-ID: <3f2.37e6fe4.31bb0538@aol.com> In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is perhaps not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. Out of whose intelligence are you writing? This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error according to the Writings. Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could you please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this conclusion? > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is written in Greek. Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? Hugh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 17:38:04 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 13:38:04 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion In-Reply-To: <3f2.37e6fe4.31bb0538@aol.com> Message-ID: Your right. My apologies. My frustration on trying to relate to Swedenborgian priests is telling. Instead of answering on point, I get pithy responses to arcane minutia. So again, you are right in critizing my abrubt manner and I promise it won't happen again. The Word was written in Latin upon the Cross by Pilate. The significance is that the Writings were written in Latin. I am familiar with the drill. The Hierosolyma's from what I understand believe that there is a hidden meaning in the Writings and the work is to try and understand what that meaning could be. >From that premise it follows that you must investigate the Latin and find this hidden meaning. You need to investigate the principles of your own teachings and the Writings. "59. With these people the first thing is, that out of the Word's literal sense they procure for themselves Doctrine, thus they light for themselves a lamp, in order to progress further; moreover, after the Doctrine has been procured, and a lamp thus lit, out of that they see the Word." It is this excersize upon which I engaged and have taught for 4 years. All of the references to CALAM* in the Latin search engine are in ERROR all Biblical scholars agree. This is on purpose, so that it can be later "revealed". This term is the key. >From Apocalypse Explained 627 But that "they placed a reed in the Lord's hand and afterwards smote His head with it" signifies that they falsified Divine truth or the Word, and made an utter mockery of the understanding of truth and of Divine wisdom, a "reed" signifying falsity in what is most external (as above), and "to smite the head" signifying to reject and mock at the understanding of truth and Divine wisdom, which is what "the head of the Lord" signifies; and in "giving the Lord vinegar to drink," which signifies what is falsified, they placed a sponge filled with it on a "reed," which signifies falsity in what is most external, which is falsity sustaining. * Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is perhaps >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error >according to the Writings. >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this whole >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could you >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this conclusion? > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is >written in Greek. > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > >Hugh >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 18:07:15 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 14:07:15 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion Message-ID: Another quote to amplify the fact that CALAM* in the Latin of Emanuel Swedenborg is in ERROR for KNH in the Hebrew Word: From Apocalypse Revealed 904 states that the literal Word cannot be understood in the Greek. Interesting concept, eh? This is has been the most difficult of all in my investigation of this mystery. That the Word in the Greek calamus is also in ERROR. This can be confirmed by comparing the quotes in the Gospels where CALAM* is presented as a correct translation for KNH in the Hebrew when the Hebrew scriptures are quoted. A very real mind twist that completely overwhelmed me at the time. My work deals with this revelation. Only the a falsity can be used to strike the Lord because He is the Divine Truth in ultimates. The very fact that there is a falsity in the Word actually proves the Divinity of the Word. On and on it goes. My work is to show the true meaning of KNH in the Word and this is what the Swedenborgians will come to acknowledge. When this occurs the literal and spiritual meaning of the Word will be revealed. The future state is described in Rev. 14: 6, 7 as the anouncement. The Lord will be seen then in the 'sitting upon the clouds' with a scythe in His hand and wearing a golden crown. Rev. 14:14. As far as my intelligence is concerned though, my work can be judged whether the 'illumination and illustration' of the Lord alone is upon me or not. Tell me, is Jesus the Anointed? literally? 904. Verse 15. And he that spoke with me had a golden reed to measure the city and the gates thereof and the wall thereof, signifies that there is given by the Lord to those who are in the good of love the faculty of understanding and knowing what the quality of Lord's New Church is, as to doctrine and its introductory truths, and as to the Word from which they are. And "he that spake with me," signifies the Lord speaking out of heaven, because he was one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, mentioned above (verse 9), by whom is meant the Lord speaking out of heaven (n. 895); by "a reed" is signified power or faculty from the good of love, by "a reed" power or faculty (n. 485), and by "gold" the good of love (n. 211, 726); by "measuring" is signified to know the quality of a thing, consequently to understand and know (n. 486). By "the city," which was the holy Jerusalem, is signified the church as to doctrine (n. 879-880); by "gates" are signified the knowledges of truth and good from the sense of the letter of the Word, which from the spiritual life in them are truths and goods (n. 899); and by "a wall" is signified the Word, in the sense of the letter, from which they are (n. 898). Hence it is evident that by "he that spoke with me had a golden reed to measure the city, and the gates thereof, and the wall thereof," is signified that there is given by the Lord to those who are in the good of love, the faculty of understanding and knowing what is the quality of the Lord's New Church, as to doctrine and its introductory truths, and as to the Word from which they are. [2] That these things are signified cannot be seen at all in the sense of the letter, for in this it only appears that an angel who was speaking with John had a golden reed to measure the city, its gates, and wall; but, nevertheless, that another sense, which is spiritual, is contained in these words, is plain from this, that by "the city Jerusalem" is not meant any city, but the church, wherefore all things which are said of Jerusalem as a city signify such things as relate to the church, and all things relating to the church are in themselves spiritual. Such a spiritual sense is also contained in what is said above, where these words occur: And there was given unto me a reed, like unto a staff, and the angel stood, saying, Arise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that adore therein (Rev. 11:1). There is also a like spiritual sense in all the things which the angel "measured with a reed" (in Ezekiel, chapter 40-48). And likewise in these words in Zechariah: I lifted up mine eyes and saw, and behold, a man, with a measuring line in his hand. And I said, Whither goest thou? who said unto me, To measure Jerusalem, to see what is the breadth thereof, and what is the length thereof (Zech. 2:1-2). Yea such a spiritual sense is in all things of the tabernacle, and in all things of the temple in Jerusalem, the measures of which we read, and also in the measures themselves; and yet nothing of them can be seen in the sense of the letter. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is perhaps >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error >according to the Writings. >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this whole >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could you >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this conclusion? > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is >written in Greek. > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > >Hugh >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 20:30:20 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion In-Reply-To: <3f2.37e6fe4.31bb0538@aol.com> Message-ID: On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a "virtual priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively written by Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church Life 1973:93:399-410 The History Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group of men who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see that those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this new church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to form a distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and separate worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This shortly led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but gradually they came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately from the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group were placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the lots, which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." This lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing this fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve then placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel Smith, Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in the Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by this procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not until the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following resolution was passed: ". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot to ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider it as the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of the regular ordaining ministers." The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies the Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine Truth literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? Your brother in the Anointed, "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is perhaps >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error >according to the Writings. >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this whole >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could you >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this conclusion? > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is >written in Greek. > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > >Hugh >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 21:35:18 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need to aclimatize myself. I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. "Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the use being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a "virtual >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively written by >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church Life >1973:93:399-410 > >The History >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group of men >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see that >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this new >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to form a >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and separate >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This shortly >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but gradually they >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately from >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group were >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the lots, >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." This >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing this >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve then >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel >Smith, >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in the >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by this >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not until >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following resolution >was passed: >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot to >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider it as >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of the >regular ordaining ministers." > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies the >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine Truth >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? > >Your brother in the Anointed, > >"Greg" > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is >perhaps > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in >error > >according to the Writings. > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this >whole > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could >you > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this >conclusion? > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation is > >written in Greek. > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > > > >Hugh > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >_________________________________________________________________ >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 9 23:50:30 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:50:30 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object of the hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the Writings. My work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion thread and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According to my studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been established. The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by looking to the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these concepts together. The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to this subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is or was ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian theology. When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in that the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All Biblical scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH BSM. My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be 'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These studies are based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church doctrines. It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use a fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the question is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the Anointed? It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of the Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To reform the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine order. The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of wax. What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus 30:23? In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to know. My work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what will cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind who the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that the Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need to >aclimatize myself. > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the use >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 > > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a >"virtual > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively written >by > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church Life > >1973:93:399-410 > > > >The History > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group of >men > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see that > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this new > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to form >a > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and separate > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This shortly > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but gradually >they > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately from > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group were > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the >lots, > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." This > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing this > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve then > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel > >Smith, > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in the > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by this > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not >until > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following resolution > >was passed: > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot to > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider it >as > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of the > >regular ordaining ministers." > > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies the > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine Truth > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, > > > >"Greg" > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > >Word > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > > > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is > >perhaps > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > > > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in > >error > > >according to the Writings. > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this > >whole > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could > >you > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this > >conclusion? > > > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation >is > > >written in Greek. > > > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > > > > > >Hugh > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >lucerna mailing list > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 13:26:33 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:26:33 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well, my first reaction to this message was: "What is the arcanum contained in Greg's writing that 'the "priesthood" for the New Church has not yet been established?'" Since you chose to refer to the Robert Hindmarsh story (reported by Elmo Acton) on the one hand, and here refer to anointment with the "'oil' of Moses" on the other hand, I take it that you object to the idea of the New Church Movement (so that it encompasses five or so branches) claiming to have a "priesthood" when the members of that "priesthood" have not been ordained (anointed) with the "'oil' of Moses." Is that meant to suggest that all acts performed by so-called "priests" over the 200+ year life of the New Church Movement have been in vain spiritually? A second question that comes to my mind for you is: "The fact that you are emphasizing the anointing of Jesus--which is the Hebrew identity of THE CHRIST, if you will allow me to say it that way--does this in any way lead us away from the importance of Jesus as 'The Christ'?" Regards, Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:50:30 -0400 > >Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object of >the Hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the Writings. My >work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion >thread >and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According to my >studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been established. >The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return >concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by looking to >the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these concepts >together. > >The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to this >subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with >Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is or >was >ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one >contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian theology. >When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question >becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in >that >the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All Biblical >scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH >BSM. > >My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be >'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These studies >are >based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church >doctrines. >It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use a >fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the >question >is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the >Anointed? >It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of the >Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To reform >the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine >order. > >The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is >anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of wax. >What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus 30:23? >In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to know. My >work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what will >cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind who >the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that the >Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally > >"Greg" > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 > > > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just > >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need >to > >aclimatize myself. > > > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual > >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. > >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the use > >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > >Word > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 > > > > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the > > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a > >"virtual > > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively >written > >by > > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church >Life > > >1973:93:399-410 > > > > > >The History > > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or > > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group of > >men > > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and > > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see that > > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the > > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this new > > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to >form > >a > > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and separate > > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This >shortly > > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the > > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered > > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but gradually > >they > > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new > > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately >from > > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the > > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group >were > > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the > >lots, > > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." >This > > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing >this > > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve then > > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel > > >Smith, > > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in >the > > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. > > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by >this > > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not > >until > > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following >resolution > > >was passed: > > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot to > > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider >it > >as > > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. > > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in > > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of >the > > >regular ordaining ministers." > > > > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies the > > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine Truth > > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown > > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you > > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you > > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? > > > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, > > > > > >"Greg" > > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > > >Word > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > > > > > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: > > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your > > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. > > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is > > >perhaps > > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > > > > > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? > > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in > > >error > > > >according to the Writings. > > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this > > >whole > > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? >Could > > >you > > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this > > >conclusion? > > > > > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and >Revelation > >is > > > >written in Greek. > > > > > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > > > > > > > >Hugh > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >lucerna mailing list > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how >to > > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >lucerna mailing list > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >_________________________________________________________________ >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 14:45:47 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:45:47 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology Message-ID: <061020061445.17807.448ADB1B0005654A0000458F2213539653CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Gregory: I believe Jesus is the One and Only Annointed, the only Incarnation of God, born in one time and in one place, 1 C.E., Israel of planet Earth. And yes, He certainly was annointed with oil, but exactly how and when that ritual took place on Him physically, I do not know and neither does Alan (give him credit for at least answering you) nor any other New Church priest or layman. I only know cinnamon, the second term, sensually. I do not know myrrh, the first term, sensually, and I do not know cane (qaneh or KNH), the third term, sensually, only that the word is best defined in English as "reed" and in Latin as "calamus". We in the New Church tend to believe that Swedenborg translated all Hebrew words perfectly into Latin and so CALAM is correct for KNH but I will credit your doubt as when you think about it--what's so great about a reed or calamus? But could it be like the palms of Palm Sunday? Then probably the Lord (Dominus) was annointed on Palm Sunday with myrrh, cinnamon, and palm reeds. This way He would have fulfilled all of the prophesies of the Old Testament. Bottom Line: No serious New Church person doubts that the Lord (Jesus) did everything He was supposed to do from the Divine Power within Him (called the Father) and only a small portion of things that He did are recorded in the literal sense of the New Testament. So if He was supposed to be annointed according to the Law of Moses, then He was annointed according to the Law of Moses and with MR, KNNMN and KNH. Is my answer good enough for you? Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its ordination practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? I don't know the answer to that one and I think "antichrist" is a little excessive of a derogatory term to use for people who don't live up to the absolute details of the Law of Moses, we use that term for those who subscribe to the idea of salvation by faith alone. But stay tuned for more discussion on the priesthood of the Lord's New Church as there are other issues about to surface and other men of both authority and perception and also some women who hopefully will answer your questions without turning this LUCERNA web-site discussion group into a soap opera or worse, a circus. Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net -------------- Original message -------------- > Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object of > the hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the Writings. My > work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion thread > and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According to my > studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been established. > The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return > concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by looking to > the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these concepts > together. > > The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to this > subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with > Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is or was > ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one > contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian theology. > When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question > becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in that > the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All Biblical > scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH BSM. > > My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be > 'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These studies are > based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church doctrines. > It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use a > fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the question > is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the Anointed? > It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of the > Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To reform > the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine > order. > > The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is > anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of wax. > What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus 30:23? > In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to know. My > work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what will > cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind who > the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that the > Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. > > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > "Greg" > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 > > > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just > >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need to > >aclimatize myself. > > > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual > >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. > >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the use > >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > >Word > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 > > > > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the > > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a > >"virtual > > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively written > >by > > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church Life > > >1973:93:399-410 > > > > > >The History > > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or > > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group of > >men > > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and > > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see that > > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the > > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this new > > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to form > >a > > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and separate > > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This shortly > > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the > > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered > > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but gradually > >they > > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new > > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately from > > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the > > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group were > > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the > >lots, > > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." This > > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing this > > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve then > > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel > > >Smith, > > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in the > > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. > > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by this > > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not > >until > > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following resolution > > >was passed: > > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot to > > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider it > >as > > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. > > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in > > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of the > > >regular ordaining ministers." > > > > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies the > > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine Truth > > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown > > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you > > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you > > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? > > > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, > > > > > >"Greg" > > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > > >Word > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > > > > > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: > > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your > > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. > > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is > > >perhaps > > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > > > > > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? > > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in > > >error > > > >according to the Writings. > > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how this > > >whole > > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? Could > > >you > > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this > > >conclusion? > > > > > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and Revelation > >is > > > >written in Greek. > > > > > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > > > > > > > >Hugh > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >lucerna mailing list > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to > > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >lucerna mailing list > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > lucerna mailing list > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 15:28:59 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:28:59 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST Message-ID: The first difficulty you must realize is my attempt to distill what really amounts to a whole lifetime of work into a few succinct paragraphs to enlighten you on the 'mysteries'. Because my work is outside of the 'New Church Movement' I can only guess that the 'five branches' referred to the different denominations that have sprung up around the Writings. All of these 'branches' are the degenerate offspring of the 'Lutheran' or 'Protestant' Church. The Writings refer to the middle of the 7th week of Daniel in the descriptive. I was baptized upon the order of the General Church of the New Jerusalem at Morning Star Chapel in Alpharetta, Georgia in the last part of the year 2002. I told them then and I will tell you now that I appreciate the fact that they were there for me. But at the end of the day my perception of what they are about on my first trip there still holds. I said on my way there that first Sunday in July of 2002, "We are the holders of the secret knowledges. We cannot tell anyone." I laughed all the way there. Of course, a church of librarians. Wouldn't you know it. The spiritual meaning of the Word is held by the Church of the librarians. Later in September of 2003 the Office of Holy Oil (Coptic modified to New Church standards by myself) was officiated by Rev. Donald K. Rogers a priest of the General Church of the New Jerusalem who resigned his commission earlier and changed his name and blames that religion for driving him insane. I don't deny the power of the Word or that of the 'office of priest' as being without authority. The state of the New Church I describe for out of the Word as this: In Luke, "And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things (Jesus anounces Himself as the Anointed), were filled with wrath, and rose up, and thrust Him out of the city, and led Him unto the brow of the hill, (whereupon the city was built,) that they might cast Him down headlong. iv. 28, 29. The state that the New Church is to enter into now is further described by what happens next. "But He passing through the midst of them, went His way, And came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath-days. And they were astonished at His doctrine: for His Word was with power." 30, 31. I left off attendance at one of the dead branches because the clergy at Mornging Star Chapel literally deny the Word of God. The spiritual experience left me gasping for breath. The Lord in His Divine Mercy led me to attend Saint Gabriel Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The life of His Church can be found in the Orthodox practices that are retained by this Oriental Orthodox Church (look in the Orient for the Ancient Word) as taught by the Lord to His disciples which established His Church. The Divine Human is worshipped there and the Word is literally believed and known. In todays world Jesus is seen as the sacrificial or bloody atonement to the Father God. Swedenborgian theology defines the concept of the Divine Human that will be seen and worshipped in the future sense differently. When you come to realize that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally then you can understand what this future definition means. Ultimate truth is so simple a child can undersand. In the future, a little child is going to ask their mother, "But how come men didn't understand that Jesus is the Anointed? It is His name." Additions to True Christian Religion VII. The Thoughts of Materialists Respecting God. ?Those who are constantly in a material idea, like the learned who are in the mere rudiments of philosophy, and think that they are wise, if they acknowledge God, adore the mere phrase, that there is a God. But if they are told that God is Man, and that the Lord and Savior Jesus the Anointed is that Man, they do not acknowledge it; because their thought respecting Him is material, and not at the same time spiritual, wherefore they also separate His Divine Essence from His Humanity, and declare that there is a mystical conjunction between them.? Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:26:33 -0400 > >Well, my first reaction to this message was: "What is the arcanum contained >in Greg's writing that 'the "priesthood" for the New Church has not yet >been >established?'" Since you chose to refer to the Robert Hindmarsh story >(reported by Elmo Acton) on the one hand, and here refer to anointment with >the "'oil' of Moses" on the other hand, I take it that you object to the >idea of the New Church Movement (so that it encompasses five or so >branches) >claiming to have a "priesthood" when the members of that "priesthood" have >not been ordained (anointed) with the "'oil' of Moses." Is that meant to >suggest that all acts performed by so-called "priests" over the 200+ year >life of the New Church Movement have been in vain spiritually? > >A second question that comes to my mind for you is: "The fact that you are >emphasizing the anointing of Jesus--which is the Hebrew identity of THE >CHRIST, if you will allow me to say it that way--does this in any way lead >us away from the importance of Jesus as 'The Christ'?" > >Regards, Alan > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:50:30 -0400 > > > >Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object of > >the Hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the Writings. >My > >work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion > >thread > >and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According to >my > >studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been established. > >The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return > >concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by looking >to > >the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these concepts > >together. > > > >The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to >this > >subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with > >Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is or > >was > >ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one > >contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian >theology. > >When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question > >becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in > >that > >the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All Biblical > >scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH > >BSM. > > > >My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be > >'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These studies > >are > >based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church > >doctrines. > >It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use a > >fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the > >question > >is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the > >Anointed? > >It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of >the > >Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To reform > >the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine > >order. > > > >The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is > >anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of >wax. > >What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus >30:23? > >In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to know. >My > >work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what >will > >cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind >who > >the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that >the > >Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > > >"Greg" > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > >Word > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 > > > > > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just > > >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need > >to > > >aclimatize myself. > > > > > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual > > >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. > > >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the >use > > >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > > >Word > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 > > > > > > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the > > > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a > > >"virtual > > > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively > >written > > >by > > > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church > >Life > > > >1973:93:399-410 > > > > > > > >The History > > > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or > > > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group >of > > >men > > > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and > > > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see >that > > > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the > > > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this >new > > > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to > >form > > >a > > > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and >separate > > > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This > >shortly > > > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the > > > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered > > > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but >gradually > > >they > > > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new > > > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately > >from > > > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the > > > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group > >were > > > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the > > >lots, > > > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." > >This > > > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing > >this > > > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve >then > > > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel > > > >Smith, > > > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in > >the > > > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. > > > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by > >this > > > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not > > >until > > > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following > >resolution > > > >was passed: > > > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot >to > > > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider > >it > > >as > > > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. > > > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in > > > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of > >the > > > >regular ordaining ministers." > > > > > > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies >the > > > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine >Truth > > > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown > > > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you > > > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you > > > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? > > > > > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, > > > > > > > >"Greg" > > > > > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > > > >Word > > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > > > > > > > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: > > > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your > > > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. > > > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is > > > >perhaps > > > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > > > > > > > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? > > > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is >in > > > >error > > > > >according to the Writings. > > > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how >this > > > >whole > > > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? > >Could > > > >you > > > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this > > > >conclusion? > > > > > > > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and > >Revelation > > >is > > > > >written in Greek. > > > > > > > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > > > > > > > > > >Hugh > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > >lucerna mailing list > > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on >how > >to > > > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >lucerna mailing list > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >lucerna mailing list > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's >FREE! > >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 16:39:55 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:39:55 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: <061020061445.17807.448ADB1B0005654A0000458F2213539653CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: My encounters with Swedenborgians always ends with these types of 'blind' statements. You state that the Lord was anointed with 'Palm reeds'. So what? You then go on to state that no serious New Church man doubts that the Lord did everything that the law of Moses required. Yes they do. That is exactly what my frustration in dealing with those who have been educated in the Writings is caused by. You honestly believe that you are on point. You are not on point. The law of Moses specifically states as do the Writings that all priests are required to be anointed with the 'oil' to be 'ordained' and 'sanctified'. When you dismiss this concept as so what. You deny the Word and affirm the doctrine of Korah. He wore the ephod and had a censor therefore Korah and his 250 followers were priests. You who are educated in the Writings state that there is no error in translation. The Writings themselves which I quoted specifically state that there is. The term CALAM* all Biblical scholars are in agreement is in error for KNH BSM in Exodus 30:23. If New Church priests were interested in being obedient to the Word and the Writings and the doctrines that established the Christian Church you would know what the literal Word means. The Word is Divine. >From the Arcana Coelestia 9954 (1) ?It is of interest to know what is implied in all this, since anointing has remained in practice from ancient times down to the present day (monarchs are anointed), and anointing is held to be holy today in just the same way as it was in former times.? 9475, 9954, 10249 & 10267 My purpose here on this siite is to educate those who are called to serve His New Church on the revelation of the literal Word that is spoken of in the Writings. I have encountered mockery consistently when doing this work. How you and the 'virtual priests' of the New Church define antichrist is not pertinent. The term means those who are anti anointed. If you portray yourself to men as one who is called by the Lord to do His work according to His Word you had better know and understand what it means, literally. This is not a joke or a circus. It is time to get with the program. When you mock the Word you mock Him. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:45:47 +0000 > >Gregory: > >I believe Jesus is the One and Only Annointed, the only Incarnation of God, >born in one time and in one place, 1 C.E., Israel of planet Earth. And >yes, He certainly was annointed with oil, but exactly how and when that >ritual took place on Him physically, I do not know and neither does Alan >(give him credit for at least answering you) nor any other New Church >priest or layman. I only know cinnamon, the second term, sensually. I do >not know myrrh, the first term, sensually, and I do not know cane (qaneh or >KNH), the third term, sensually, only that the word is best defined in >English as "reed" and in Latin as "calamus". We in the New Church tend to >believe that Swedenborg translated all Hebrew words perfectly into Latin >and so CALAM is correct for KNH but I will credit your doubt as when you >think about it--what's so great about a reed or calamus? But could it be >like the palms of Palm Sunday? Then probably the Lord (Dominus) was >annointed on Palm Sunday with myrrh, ci! > nnamon, > and palm reeds. This way He would have fulfilled all of the prophesies >of the Old Testament. > >Bottom Line: No serious New Church person doubts that the Lord (Jesus) did >everything He was supposed to do from the Divine Power within Him (called >the Father) and only a small portion of things that He did are recorded in >the literal sense of the New Testament. So if He was supposed to be >annointed according to the Law of Moses, then He was annointed according to >the Law of Moses and with MR, KNNMN and KNH. Is my answer good enough for >you? > >Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its ordination >practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? I don't know the answer >to that one and I think "antichrist" is a little excessive of a derogatory >term to use for people who don't live up to the absolute details of the Law >of Moses, we use that term for those who subscribe to the idea of salvation >by faith alone. But stay tuned for more discussion on the priesthood of >the Lord's New Church as there are other issues about to surface and other >men of both authority and perception and also some women who hopefully will >answer your questions without turning this LUCERNA web-site discussion >group into a soap opera or worse, a circus. > >Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object >of > > the hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the Writings. >My > > work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion >thread > > and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According to >my > > studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been >established. > > The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return > > concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by looking >to > > the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these concepts > > together. > > > > The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to >this > > subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with > > Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is or >was > > ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one > > contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian >theology. > > When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question > > becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in >that > > the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All Biblical > > scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH >BSM. > > > > My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be > > 'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These studies >are > > based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church >doctrines. > > It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use >a > > fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the >question > > is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the >Anointed? > > It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of >the > > Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To >reform > > the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine > > order. > > > > The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is > > anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of >wax. > > What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus >30:23? > > In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to know. >My > > work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what >will > > cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind >who > > the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that >the > > Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. > > > > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > > > "Greg" > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > >Word > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 > > > > > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just > > >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I need >to > > >aclimatize myself. > > > > > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual > > >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. > > >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the >use > > >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > > >Word > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 > > > > > > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the > > > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a > > >"virtual > > > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively >written > > >by > > > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church >Life > > > >1973:93:399-410 > > > > > > > >The History > > > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or > > > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group >of > > >men > > > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and > > > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see >that > > > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and the > > > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this >new > > > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to >form > > >a > > > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and >separate > > > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This >shortly > > > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the > > > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered > > > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but >gradually > > >they > > > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new > > > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately >from > > > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the > > > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group >were > > > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of the > > >lots, > > > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." >This > > > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing >this > > > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve >then > > > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and Samuel > > > >Smith, > > > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests in >the > > > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. > > > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by >this > > > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was not > > >until > > > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following >resolution > > > >was passed: > > > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot >to > > > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference consider >it > > >as > > > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. > > > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; in > > > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one of >the > > > >regular ordaining ministers." > > > > > > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies >the > > > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine >Truth > > > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown > > > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can you > > > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are you > > > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? > > > > > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, > > > > > > > >"Greg" > > > > > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > > > > >Word > > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion > > > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT > > > > > > > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: > > > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your > > > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. > > > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" is > > > >perhaps > > > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. > > > > > > > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? > > > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is >in > > > >error > > > > >according to the Writings. > > > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how >this > > > >whole > > > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? >Could > > > >you > > > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this > > > >conclusion? > > > > > > > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and >Revelation > > >is > > > > >written in Greek. > > > > > > > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? > > > > > > > > > >Hugh > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > >lucerna mailing list > > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on >how to > > > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >lucerna mailing list > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >lucerna mailing list > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's >FREE! > > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lucerna mailing list > > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 18:34:47 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 08:34:47 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: <061020061445.17807.448ADB1B0005654A0000458F2213539653CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> References: <061020061445.17807.448ADB1B0005654A0000458F2213539653CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 arcam1970@comcast.net wrote: > subscribe to the idea of salvation by faith alone. But stay tuned for > more discussion on the priesthood of the Lord's New Church as there are > other issues about to surface and other men of both authority and > perception and also some women who hopefully will answer your questions > without turning this LUCERNA web-site discussion group into a soap opera > or worse, a circus. Hi Richard, In my view, all doctrinal issues must be discussed with regard to the spiritual sense of the Letter of the Third Testament. And then as a second step attached to the first, must be confirmed by various Numbers in the Letter of that Testament. Those who do not have a love for some doctrinal idea will not be able to see the confirmation of the doctrine in the Numbers presented for confirmation. Hence some debate may be helpful, but only if charity is in it on both sides of the debate. Hence I don't think we can have useful exchanges if we present a new docrtrinal idea by justifying it through the letter of the Writings, and even less so, by the letter of the NT or OT. An example is the presentation of the Doctrine of the Wife (DOW). I presented it in Reform as the spiritual sense of Conjugial Love. Then I gave Numbers to confirm it. There were those who looked at those Numbers but did not see in them a confirmation of the DOW. The discussion on it ended for now. To summarize: Doctrinal issues must be introduced through the spiritual sense of the TT. Failing this, the issues cannot be rightly discussed as doctrinal (but only and merely as political and psychological). This is the universal rule in the genuine New Church, in the regenerating New Church mind, and in the science of theistic psychology. Aloha, Leon From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 18:57:35 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 14:57:35 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >To summarize: > >Doctrinal issues must be introduced through the spiritual sense of the TT. >Failing this, the issues cannot be rightly discussed as doctrinal (but >only and merely as political and psychological). This is the universal >rule in the genuine New Church, in the regenerating New Church mind, and >in the science of theistic psychology. > >Aloha, > >Leon The Universal rule is mistated in ERROR. The following is the true Universal rule for the establishment of doctrine for His New Church. THE WORD OF THE LORD XXI The Spiritual Sense: 58. No one can see the spiritual sense except from the doctrine of genuine truth; from this doctrine the spiritual sense can be seen, when there is some knowledge of correspondences. He who is in false doctrine cannot see anything of the spiritual sense. He draws out and applies the correspondences, which he sees to the falsities of his doctrine; and thus he can still more falsify the Word. Wherefore the true spiritual sense of the Word is from the Lord alone. This is the reason why it is not permitted any one in the natural world, nor in the spiritual world, to investigate the spiritual sense of the Word from the sense of the letter, unless he is wholly in the doctrine of Divine truth and in enlightenment from the Lord, wherefore from the doctrine of Divine truth confirmed from the sense of the letter of the Word, the spiritual sense can be seen, but doctrine can never first be seen from the spiritual sense. He thinks falsely who says within himself, I know many correspondences, I can know the true doctrine of the Divine Word, the spiritual sense will teach it to me. This cannot be done. But, as has been said, let him say with himself, I know the doctrine of Divine truth, now I can see the spiritual sense, provided I know correspondences. But still this must be in enlightenment from the Lord, because the spiritual sense is Divine truth itself in its light, and is meant by glory, and the sense of the letter by a cloud in passages in the Word where these are mentioned. DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURES 26. The Spiritual Sense of the Word will not be given to any one hereafter who is not in genuine truths from the Lord. The reason is that no one can see the spiritual sense except from the Lord alone, and unless he is in genuine truths from Him; for the spiritual sense of the Word treats of the Lord alone and of His kingdom; and that is the sense in which His angels in heaven are, for it is His Divine truth there. A man can violate this if he has a knowledge of correspondences, and wishes by it to investigate the spiritual sense of the Word from his own intelligence; for by means of some correspondences known to him he can pervert its meaning, and force it to confirm even what is false; and this would be doing violence to Divine truth, and to heaven also. Wherefore, if any one wishes, from himself and not from the Lord, to open that sense, heaven is closed; and when it is closed, the man either sees nothing, or becomes spiritually insane. The reason also is that the Lord teaches every one by the Word, and He teaches him from the truths that are with man, and does not infuse new ones without a medium. Wherefore, if man is not in Divine truths, or if he is in only a few truths and at the same time is in falsities, he may from these falsify truths; as is also done by every heretic with the sense of the letter of the Word, as is known. Lest, therefore, any one should enter into the spiritual sense, or should pervert the genuine truth, which is of that sense, the Lord has placed guards, which are meant in the Word by cherubs. That guards are set, was represented to me in this manner: - It was given me to see great purses, appearing like sacks, in which silver was stored up in great abundance; and as they were open, it seemed as if everyone could take out the silver there laid up, yes, carry it off. But near the purses two angels were sitting, who were the keepers. The place where the purses were stored appeared like a manger in a stable. In the next room were seen modest virgins with a chaste wife; and near that room stood two little children; and it was said that they were not to be played with childishly, but wisely. Afterwards appeared a harlot, then a horse lying dead. Having seen these things, I was instructed that they represented the sense of the letter of the Word, in which is the spiritual sense. The great purses full of silver signified cognitions of truth in great abundance. That they were open, and yet guarded by angels, signified that every care is taken lest any one violated the spiritual sense, in which are unmixed truths. The manger in the stable, in which the purses were lying, signified spiritual nourishment for the understanding; a manger has this signification, because a horse, which eats from it, signifies the understanding. The modest virgins, who were seen in the next room, signified affections for truth; and the chaste wife, the conjunction of good and truth. The little children signified the innocence of wisdom therein; these little children were angels from the third heaven, who all appear like little children. The harlot, with the dead horse, signified the falsification of the Word by many at this day, by which all understanding of truth perishes: a harlot signifies falsification; and a dead horse, no understanding of truth. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 20:03:49 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:03:49 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Well, again, my first reaction is to an assertion (yet another arcanum) in the first paragraph of this message. Considering the emphasis put upon "faith alone" in the Protestant (including Lutheran) Movement, and the condemnation of "faith alone" found in the Writings of Emmanuel Swedenborg, it is indeed an arcanum to me for you to write that: "All of these 'branches' are the degenerate offspring of the 'Lutheran' or 'Protestant' Church." Indeed, considering the personal history you have just laid out, what is it you are expecting to find on this website "LUCERNA"? Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:28:59 -0400 The first difficulty you must realize is my attempt to distill what >really amounts to a whole lifetime of work into a few succinct paragraphs >to enlighten you on the 'mysteries'. Because my work is outside of the 'New >Church Movement' I can only guess that the 'five branches' referred to the >different denominations that have sprung up around the Writings. All of >these 'branches' are the degenerate offspring of the 'Lutheran' or >'Protestant' Church. The Writings refer to the middle of the 7th week of >Daniel in the descriptive. I was baptized upon the order of the General Church of the New Jerusalem at Morning Star Chapel in Alpharetta, Georgia in the last part of the year 2002. I told them then and I will tell you now that I appreciate the fact that they were there for me. But at the end of the day my perception of what they are about on my first trip there still holds. I said on my way there that first Sunday in July of 2002, "We are the holders of the secret knowledges. We cannot tell anyone." I laughed all the way there. Of course, a church of librarians. Wouldn't you know it. The spiritual meaning of the Word is held by the Church of the librarians. Later in September of 2003 the Office of Holy Oil (Coptic modified to New Church standards by myself) was officiated by Rev. Donald K. Rogers a priest of the General Church of the New Jerusalem who resigned his commission earlier and changed his name and blames that religion for driving him insane. I don't deny the power of the Word or that of the 'office of priest' as being without authority. The state of the New Church I describe >for out of the Word as this: In Luke, "And all they in the synagogue, when >they heard these things (Jesus anounces Himself as the Anointed), were >filled with wrath, and rose up, and thrust Him out of the city, and led Him >unto the brow of the hill, (whereupon the city was built,) that they might >cast Him down headlong. iv. 28, 29. The state that the New Church is to >enter into now is further described by what happens next. "But He passing >through the midst of them, went His way, And came down to Capernaum, a city >of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath-days. And they were astonished >at His doctrine: for His Word was with power." 30, 31. I left off attendance at one of the dead branches because the clergy at Mornging Star Chapel literally deny the Word of God. The spiritual experience left me gasping for breath. The Lord in His Divine Mercy led me to attend Saint Gabriel Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The life of His Church can be found in the Orthodox >practices that are retained by this Oriental Orthodox Church (look in the >Orient for the Ancient Word) as taught by the Lord to His disciples which >established His Church. The Divine Human is worshipped there and the Word >is literally believed and known. In todays world Jesus is seen as the sacrificial or bloody atonement >to the Father God. Swedenborgian theology defines the concept of the Divine >Human that will be seen and worshipped in the future sense differently. >When you come to realize that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and >literally then you can understand what this future definition means. >Ultimate truth is so simple a child can understand. In the future, a little >child is going to ask their mother, "But how come men didn't understand >that Jesus is the Anointed? It is His name." Additions to True Christian Religion >VII. The Thoughts of Materialists Respecting God. ?Those who are constantly >in a material idea, like the learned who are in the mere rudiments of >philosophy, and think that they are wise, if they acknowledge God, adore >the mere phrase, that there is a God. But if they are told that God is Man, >and that the Lord and Savior Jesus the Anointed is that Man, they do not >acknowledge it; because their thought respecting Him is material, and not >at the same time spiritual, wherefore they also separate His Divine Essence >from His Humanity, and declare that there is a mystical conjunction between >them.? Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" > > >>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>Word >>To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>Subject: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST >>Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:26:33 -0400 >> >>Well, my first reaction to this message was: "What is the arcanum >>contained >>in Greg's writing that 'the "priesthood" for the New Church has not yet >>been >>established?'" Since you chose to refer to the Robert Hindmarsh story >>(reported by Elmo Acton) on the one hand, and here refer to anointment >>with >>the "'oil' of Moses" on the other hand, I take it that you object to the >>idea of the New Church Movement (so that it encompasses five or so >>branches) >>claiming to have a "priesthood" when the members of that "priesthood" have >>not been ordained (anointed) with the "'oil' of Moses." Is that meant to >>suggest that all acts performed by so-called "priests" over the 200+ year >>life of the New Church Movement have been in vain spiritually? >> >>A second question that comes to my mind for you is: "The fact that you are >>emphasizing the anointing of Jesus--which is the Hebrew identity of THE >>CHRIST, if you will allow me to say it that way--does this in any way lead >>us away from the importance of Jesus as 'The Christ'?" >> >>Regards, Alan >> >> >> >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >> >Word >> >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >> >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:50:30 -0400 >> > >> >Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object >>of >> >the Hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the Writings. >>My >> >work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion >> >thread >> >and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According to >>my >> >studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been >>established. >> >The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return >> >concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by looking >>to >> >the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these concepts >> >together. >> > >> >The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to >>this >> >subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with >> >Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is or >> >was >> >ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one >> >contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian >>theology. >> >When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question >> >becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in >> >that >> >the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All Biblical >> >scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH >> >BSM. >> > >> >My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be >> >'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These studies >> >are >> >based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church >> >doctrines. >> >It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use >>a >> >fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the >> >question >> >is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the >> >Anointed? >> >It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of >>the >> >Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To >>reform >> >the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine >> >order. >> > >> >The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is >> >anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of >>wax. >> >What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus >>30:23? >> >In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to know. >>My >> >work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what >>will >> >cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind >>who >> >the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that >>the >> >Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. >> > >> >Your brother in the Anointed, literally >> > >> >"Greg" >> > >> > >> > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >> > >Word >> > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> > >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >> > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 >> > > >> > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just >> > >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I >>need >> >to >> > >aclimatize myself. >> > > >> > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual >> > >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are using--eg. >> > >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the >>use >> > >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan >> > > >> > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >> > > >Word >> > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >> > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 >> > > > >> > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is the >> > > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a >> > >"virtual >> > > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively >> >written >> > >by >> > > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church >> >Life >> > > >1973:93:399-410 >> > > > >> > > >The History >> > > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or >> > > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group >>of >> > >men >> > > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading and >> > > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see >>that >> > > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and >>the >> > > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this >>new >> > > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary to >> >form >> > >a >> > > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and >>separate >> > > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This >> >shortly >> > > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the >> > > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered >> > > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but >>gradually >> > >they >> > > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new >> > > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority immediately >> >from >> > > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the >> > > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the group >> >were >> > > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of >>the >> > >lots, >> > > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word "Ordain." >> >This >> > > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men knowing >> >this >> > > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve >>then >> > > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and >>Samuel >> > > >Smith, >> > > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests >>in >> >the >> > > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. >> > > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh by >> >this >> > > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was >>not >> > >until >> > > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following >> >resolution >> > > >was passed: >> > > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot >>to >> > > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference >>consider >> >it >> > >as >> > > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. >> > > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; >>in >> > > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one >>of >> >the >> > > >regular ordaining ministers." >> > > > >> > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies >>the >> > > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine >>Truth >> > > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has shown >> > > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can >>you >> > > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are >>you >> > > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? >> > > > >> > > >Your brother in the Anointed, >> > > > >> > > >"Greg" >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >> > > > >Word >> > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >> > > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT >> > > > > >> > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, >> > > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: >> > > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your >> > > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. >> > > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" >>is >> > > >perhaps >> > > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. >> > > > > >> > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? >> > > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is >>in >> > > >error >> > > > >according to the Writings. >> > > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how >>this >> > > >whole >> > > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? >> >Could >> > > >you >> > > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this >> > > >conclusion? >> > > > > >> > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and >> >Revelation >> > >is >> > > > >written in Greek. >> > > > > >> > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? >> > > > > >> > > > >Hugh >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >> > > > >lucerna mailing list >> > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >> > > > >> > > >_________________________________________________________________ >> > > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on >>how >> >to >> > > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement >> > > > >> > > >_______________________________________________ >> > > >lucerna mailing list >> > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >> > > >> > > >> > >_______________________________________________ >> > >lucerna mailing list >> > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >> > >> >_________________________________________________________________ >> >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's >>FREE! >> >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >lucerna mailing list >> >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>lucerna mailing list >>lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >_________________________________________________________________ >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 21:20:01 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:20:01 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Writings also speak of those without life in the same manner 142. Verse 15. So thou hast them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate, signifies those who separate good from truth, or charity from faith, which is against Divine order. This is evident from what was said and shown above (n. 107), where similar words occur. To which this is to be added: That those who separate truth from good, or faith from charity, turn away from themselves all influx of heaven into the goods they do, in consequence of which their goods are not good; for heaven flows in, that is, the Lord through heaven, into the good of man's love; he, therefore, that rejects the good of charity from the doctrine of the church, and receives instead only those things that are called matters of faith, is shut out of heaven; truths with such have no life; and it is the life of truth, which is good, that conjoins, but not truth without life, or faith without charity. (But more on these subjects in The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem where it treats of Charity, n. 84-107, and of Faith, n. 108-122.) The Divine Goodness is 'Esse' the mystery of the use of the 'oil'. Again I come back to this subject because to reject the literal Word is to reject Him. When one states that whatever the Christ means literally does not matter because I believe and have faith that He is the Anointed they lose sight of the mystery of the literal return. One cannot believe what one does not understand. I don't have the reference available for that spiritual law according to the Writings but you should recognize it. My statement is clear on what my purpose is here. I gathered the literal truths from out of the Word. One must first know and act upon the literal truth of the 'oil'. A great help has been the spiritual practises of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Writings literally and spiritually were opened to me from out of this literal understanding. My purpose is to attempt to relate the importance of this discovery. This is the 'return' concept. One simply cannot understand the Writings without being knowledgable to the 'mysteries' of the Oriental Orthodox Church. It is extremely frustrating experience. However, headway is being made. My work is almost complete. There is one more paper that needs to be written entitled 'Doctrine of Truth and Good'. When this is complete my intention is to send it out to all of the 'virtual priests' of the New Church to let them know that the return concept is in the literal Word. As of now, I have addresses listed from a New Church website that show all of the New Churches and their pastors names as well as the Seminaries. Right now, this literal meaning is hidden. This discussion started on the arcana hidden in the Latin of the Writings. Central to this concept I keep trying to point out is that the literal meaning of the term CALAM* is of extreme importance. Do a search of the term and you will see just how important the term is. In one sense the Writings state that it symbolizes the ultimate truth. In its oppossing sense it symbolizes falsity sustaining. In the symbolism of the golden reed it states that this term cannot be literally understood, only spiritually. I literally and spiritually understand this arcana because I know what the term KNH means. When adminstrator of this site states, "So what" in regard to this whole concept one has to wonder why anyone bothers at all. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:03:49 -0400 > >Well, again, my first reaction is to an assertion (yet another arcanum) in >the first paragraph of this message. Considering the emphasis put upon >"faith alone" in the Protestant (including Lutheran) Movement, and the >condemnation of "faith alone" found in the Writings of Emmanuel Swedenborg, >it is indeed an arcanum to me for you to write that: "All of these >'branches' are the degenerate offspring of the 'Lutheran' or 'Protestant' >Church." > >Indeed, considering the personal history you have just laid out, what is it >you are expecting to find on this website "LUCERNA"? Alan > >>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>Word >>To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>Subject: Re: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST >>Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 11:28:59 -0400 > >The first difficulty you must realize is my attempt to distill what >>really amounts to a whole lifetime of work into a few succinct paragraphs >>to enlighten you on the 'mysteries'. Because my work is outside of the >>'New Church Movement' I can only guess that the 'five branches' referred >>to the different denominations that have sprung up around the Writings. >>All of these 'branches' are the degenerate offspring of the 'Lutheran' or >>'Protestant' Church. The Writings refer to the middle of the 7th week of >>Daniel in the descriptive. > >I was baptized upon the order of the General Church of the New Jerusalem at >Morning Star Chapel in Alpharetta, Georgia in the last part of the year >2002. I told them then and I will tell you now that I appreciate the fact >that they were there for me. But at the end of the day my perception of >what they are about on my first trip there still holds. I said on my way >there that first Sunday in July of 2002, "We are the holders of the secret >knowledges. We cannot tell anyone." I laughed all the way there. Of course, >a church of librarians. Wouldn't you know it. The spiritual meaning of the >Word is held by the Church of the librarians. Later in September of 2003 >the Office of Holy Oil (Coptic modified to New Church standards by myself) >was officiated by Rev. Donald K. Rogers a priest of the General Church of >the New Jerusalem who resigned his commission earlier and changed his name >and blames that religion for driving him insane. > >I don't deny the power of the Word or that of the 'office of priest' as >being without authority. The state of the New Church I describe >>for out of the Word as this: In Luke, "And all they in the synagogue, when >>they heard these things (Jesus anounces Himself as the Anointed), were >>filled with wrath, and rose up, and thrust Him out of the city, and led >>Him unto the brow of the hill, (whereupon the city was built,) that they >>might cast Him down headlong. iv. 28, 29. The state that the New Church is >>to enter into now is further described by what happens next. "But He >>passing through the midst of them, went His way, And came down to >>Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath-days. And >>they were astonished at His doctrine: for His Word was with power." 30, >>31. > >I left off attendance at one of the dead branches because the clergy at >Mornging Star Chapel literally deny the Word of God. The spiritual >experience left me gasping for breath. The Lord in His Divine Mercy led me >to attend Saint Gabriel Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The life of His Church >can be found in the Orthodox >>practices that are retained by this Oriental Orthodox Church (look in the >>Orient for the Ancient Word) as taught by the Lord to His disciples which >>established His Church. The Divine Human is worshipped there and the Word >>is literally believed and known. > >In todays world Jesus is seen as the sacrificial or bloody atonement >>to the Father God. Swedenborgian theology defines the concept of the >>Divine Human that will be seen and worshipped in the future sense >>differently. When you come to realize that Jesus is the Anointed, >>physically and literally then you can understand what this future >>definition means. Ultimate truth is so simple a child can understand. In >>the future, a little child is going to ask their mother, "But how come men >>didn't understand that Jesus is the Anointed? It is His name." > >Additions to True Christian Religion >>VII. The Thoughts of Materialists Respecting God. ?Those who are >>constantly in a material idea, like the learned who are in the mere >>rudiments of philosophy, and think that they are wise, if they acknowledge >>God, adore the mere phrase, that there is a God. But if they are told that >>God is Man, and that the Lord and Savior Jesus the Anointed is that Man, >>they do not acknowledge it; because their thought respecting Him is >>material, and not at the same time spiritual, wherefore they also separate >>His Divine Essence from His Humanity, and declare that there is a mystical >>conjunction between them.? > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >> >> >>>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>>Word >>>To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>>Subject: [lucerna] JESUS as CHRIST >>>Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:26:33 -0400 >>> >>>Well, my first reaction to this message was: "What is the arcanum >>>contained >>>in Greg's writing that 'the "priesthood" for the New Church has not yet >>>been >>>established?'" Since you chose to refer to the Robert Hindmarsh story >>>(reported by Elmo Acton) on the one hand, and here refer to anointment >>>with >>>the "'oil' of Moses" on the other hand, I take it that you object to the >>>idea of the New Church Movement (so that it encompasses five or so >>>branches) >>>claiming to have a "priesthood" when the members of that "priesthood" >>>have >>>not been ordained (anointed) with the "'oil' of Moses." Is that meant to >>>suggest that all acts performed by so-called "priests" over the 200+ year >>>life of the New Church Movement have been in vain spiritually? >>> >>>A second question that comes to my mind for you is: "The fact that you >>>are >>>emphasizing the anointing of Jesus--which is the Hebrew identity of THE >>>CHRIST, if you will allow me to say it that way--does this in any way >>>lead >>>us away from the importance of Jesus as 'The Christ'?" >>> >>>Regards, Alan >>> >>> >>> >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>> >Word >>> >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >>> >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 19:50:30 -0400 >>> > >>> >Alan I appreciate your asking me to expound on the subject. The object >>>of >>> >the Hierosolyma is to understand the hidden meaning within the >>>Writings. My >>> >work is to make that mystery known. I have never been in a discussion >>> >thread >>> >and so please accept my apologies for my lack of education. According >>>to my >>> >studies the 'priesthood' for the New Church has not yet been >>>established. >>> >The use of the blessed 'oil' is required. This also goes to the return >>> >concept and the need to understand the hidden literal meaning by >>>looking to >>> >the Hebrew KNH. It is this literal truth that ties all of these >>>concepts >>> >together. >>> > >>> >The question on whether one accepts that Jesus is the Anointed goes to >>>this >>> >subject as well. It has been my experience from engagements with >>> >Swedenborgian 'virtual priests' that they do not accept that Jesus is >>>or >>> >was >>> >ever physically anointed. Which of coarse is rather odd when one >>> >contemplates the importance of the literal Word in Swedenborgian >>>theology. >>> >When one accepts the fact that Jesus is the Anointed then the question >>> >becomes with what? According to the Writings the answers are oblique in >>> >that >>> >the CALAM* is claimed to be the third term in Exodus 30:23. All >>>Biblical >>> >scholars are in agreement that this term is in error for the Hebrew KNH >>> >BSM. >>> > >>> >My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be >>> >'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses. These >>>studies >>> >are >>> >based upon not only the Writings but the Oriental Orthodox Church >>> >doctrines. >>> >It seems that they have dispensed with the use of the 'oil' and now use >>>a >>> >fabrication termed 'chrismation' that does not conform. Anyway, the >>> >question >>> >is whether one accepts the literal truth of the Word. Is Jesus the >>> >Anointed? >>> >It the answer to this question that goes to the heart of the mystery of >>>the >>> >Writings and their hidden meaning. Did the Lord speak to Moses? To >>>reform >>> >the New Church the priesthood must be established base upon His Divine >>> >order. >>> > >>> >The term 'sanctified' and 'ordained' mean clearly that the initiate is >>> >anointed with the 'oil' of Moses. And that opens up the whole ball of >>>wax. >>> >What is the third term in the Holy anointing oil of Moses in Exodus >>>30:23? >>> >In order to establish the priesthood for His New Church we need to >>>know. My >>> >work establishes the undeniable fact of what it is. This fact is what >>>will >>> >cause the division in the 'Christian Church' and establish in the mind >>>who >>> >the antichrist is. The antichrist is the doctrine of those who say that >>>the >>> >Lord's anointing oil, Lev. 10:7 is no longer a 'representative'. >>> > >>> >Your brother in the Anointed, literally >>> > >>> >"Greg" >>> > >>> > >>> > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>> > >Word >>> > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> > >Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >>> > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 17:35:18 -0400 >>> > > >>> > >Well, Brother Gregory, my name is Alan Longstaff, and I have just >>> > >transferred over to LUCERNA from the REFORM website, and I think I >>>need >>> >to >>> > >aclimatize myself. >>> > > >>> > >I see that the subject is "The Priesthood," or perhaps the "virtual >>> > >priesthood," and while I am familiar with the terms you are >>>using--eg. >>> > >"Anointed"--I'm not yet sufficiently sure of the terminology--ie. the >>>use >>> > >being made of the terms--to answer your questions. Alan >>> > > >>> > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>> > > >Word >>> > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >>> > > >Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 16:30:20 -0400 >>> > > > >>> > > >On the question of ordination of the priesthood the following is >>>the >>> > > >doctrine of the Swedenborgian Churches that recognize that only a >>> > >"virtual >>> > > >priesthood" has been established.This report was authoritatively >>> >written >>> > >by >>> > > >Rt. Rev. Elmo Acton on, "The Priesthood" and reported in New Church >>> >Life >>> > > >1973:93:399-410 >>> > > > >>> > > >The History >>> > > >Our subject properly begins with the first New Church ordination or >>> > > >inauguration, which took place in London, England, in 1788. A group >>>of >>> > >men >>> > > >who met regularly, beginning in 1783, for the purpose of reading >>>and >>> > > >studying the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, gradually came to see >>>that >>> > > >those Writings revealed the consummation of the former church and >>>the >>> > > >beginning of a new dispensation of the church. For the uses of this >>>new >>> > > >church to exist in the world, they saw that it would be necessary >>>to >>> >form >>> > >a >>> > > >distinct organization, and they began by introducing a new and >>>separate >>> > > >worship, with baptism and administration of the Holy Supper. This >>> >shortly >>> > > >led them to see that for the orderly performance of worship and the >>> > > >sacraments a new priesthood was necessary. At first they considered >>> > > >requesting ordination from one of the existing churches, but >>>gradually >>> > >they >>> > > >came to see that as the New Jerusalem was the beginning of a new >>> > > >dispensation of the church, it must derive its authority >>>immediately >>> >from >>> > > >the Lord in His second coming. They were enlightened to observe the >>> > > >following order. The names of the sixteen men constituting the >>>group >>> >were >>> > > >placed in a receptacle, and of them twelve were chosen. On one of >>>the >>> > >lots, >>> > > >which were prepared by Robert Hindmarsh, he wrote the word >>>"Ordain." >>> >This >>> > > >lot was drawn by himself. Then, without the other eleven men >>>knowing >>> >this >>> > > >fact, Hindmarsh was chosen by them to read the service. The twelve >>>then >>> > > >placed their right hands upon the heads of James Hindmarsh and >>>Samuel >>> > > >Smith, >>> > > >Robert Hindmarsh reading the service, and ordained them as priests >>>in >>> >the >>> > > >Lord's New Church. Thus began the priesthood of the New Church. >>> > > >The church only gradually came to see fully that Robert Hindmarsh >>>by >>> >this >>> > > >procedure was the first ordained priest of the New Church. It was >>>not >>> > >until >>> > > >the Conference of 1818, thirty years later, that the following >>> >resolution >>> > > >was passed: >>> > > >". . . in consequence of Mr. R. Hindmarsh having been called by lot >>>to >>> > > >ordain the first minister in the New Church, this Conference >>>consider >>> >it >>> > >as >>> > > >the most orderly method which could then be adopted and that Mr. R. >>> > > >Hindmarsh was virtually ordained by the Divine auspices of heaven; >>>in >>> > > >consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Hindmarsh as one >>>of >>> >the >>> > > >regular ordaining ministers." >>> > > > >>> > > >The question I ask you all is this: Since the name Jesus signifies >>>the >>> > > >Divine Goodness and Christ signifies Divine Truth, Is the Divine >>>Truth >>> > > >literally true? Is Jesus the Anointed, literally? My study has >>>shown >>> > > >conclusively in the Writings that this is affirmatively true. Can >>>you >>> > > >confess that Jesus is the Anointed, physically and literally? Are >>>you >>> > > >sanctified? Or are you anti-anointed? >>> > > > >>> > > >Your brother in the Anointed, >>> > > > >>> > > >"Greg" >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>> > > > >Word >>> > > > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> > > > >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Lucerna discussion >>> > > > >Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:09:12 EDT >>> > > > > >>> > > > >In a message dated 6/9/2006 9:20:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, >>> > > > >brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: >>> > > > >You are the only one so far to even give me a response. Your >>> > > > >reply seems to be from out of your own self intelligence. >>> > > > >To say that one is replying out of their "own self intelligence" >>>is >>> > > >perhaps >>> > > > >not the best way to encourage anyone to respond to you. >>> > > > > >>> > > > >Out of whose intelligence are you writing? >>> > > > >This whole discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' >>>is in >>> > > >error >>> > > > >according to the Writings. >>> > > > >Would you please indicate more precisely from the "Writings" how >>>this >>> > > >whole >>> > > > >discussion of 'doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word' is in error? >>> >Could >>> > > >you >>> > > > >please show passages from the "Writings" that lead you to this >>> > > >conclusion? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > The Word is written in 'Hebrew' and later the Gospel and >>> >Revelation >>> > >is >>> > > > >written in Greek. >>> > > > > >>> > > > >Do you believe that the Word was also later written in Latin? >>> > > > > >>> > > > >Hugh >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >_______________________________________________ >>> > > > >lucerna mailing list >>> > > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >>> > > > >>> > > >_________________________________________________________________ >>> > > >On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on >>>how >>> >to >>> > > >get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement >>> > > > >>> > > >_______________________________________________ >>> > > >lucerna mailing list >>> > > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >_______________________________________________ >>> > >lucerna mailing list >>> > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >>> > >>> >_________________________________________________________________ >>> >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's >>>FREE! >>> >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >>> > >>> >_______________________________________________ >>> >lucerna mailing list >>> >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>> >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>lucerna mailing list >>>lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>>http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >> > > >>_______________________________________________ >>lucerna mailing list >>lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 21:50:42 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:50:42 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE Message-ID: Ok, Brother literally "Greg," I think your purpose is now clear: "The Writings literally and spiritually were opened to me from out of this literal understanding. My purpose is to attempt to relate the importance of this discovery. This is the 'return' concept." But surely, in your experience, you have come to realize the importance of "knowing" your audience before you begin to preach to them. (In "The Writings" it says that the Lord ACCOMMODATES Himself to the human race. That implies "knowing" the state of the audience.) In as much as you have accused your audience of being the "offspring" of the "Lutheran and Protestant" degeneracy, and of being "dead branches" and perhaps "those without life," it hardly seems to me that you have attempted to get off on the right foot with what this audience may want to hear. If you have important things to reveal, perhaps you might want to put this in the context of positive things you know about the New Church Movement, as a way of demonstrating some empathy and solidarity with your listerners. Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word<>To: >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:20:01 -0400 The Writings also speak of those without life in the same manner 142. Verse 15. So thou hast them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate, signifies those who separate good from truth, or charity from faith, which is against Divine order. This is evident from what was said and shown above (n. 107), where similar words occur. To which this is to be added: That those who separate truth from good, or faith from charity, turn away from themselves all influx of heaven into the goods they do, in consequence of which their goods are not good; for heaven flows in, that is, the Lord through heaven, into the good of man's love; he, therefore, that rejects the good of charity from the doctrine of the church, and receives instead only those things that are called matters of faith, is shut out of heaven; truths with such have no life; and it is the life of truth, which is good, that conjoins, but not truth without life, or faith without charity. (But more on these subjects in The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem where it treats of Charity, n. 84-107, and of Faith, n. 108-122.) The Divine Goodness is 'Esse' the mystery of the use of the 'oil'. Again I come back to this subject because to reject the literal Word is to reject Him. When one states that whatever the Christ means literally does not matter because I believe and have faith that He is the Anointed they lose sight of the mystery of the literal return. One cannot believe what one does not understand. I don't have the reference available for that spiritual law according to the Writings but you should recognize it. My statement is clear on what my purpose is here. I gathered the literal truths from out of the Word. One must first know and act upon the literal truth of the 'oil'. A great help has been the spiritual practises of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Writings literally and spiritually were opened to me from out of this literal understanding. My purpose is to attempt to relate the importance of this discovery. This is the 'return' concept. One simply cannot understand the Writings without being knowledgable to the 'mysteries' of the Oriental Orthodox Church. It is extremely frustrating experience. However, headway is being made. My work is almost complete. There is one more paper that needs to be written entitled 'Doctrine of Truth and Good'. When this is complete my intention is to send it out to all of the 'virtual priests' of the New Church to let them know that the return concept is in the literal Word. As of now, I have addresses listed from a New Church website that show all of the New Churches and their pastors names as well as the Seminaries. Right now, this literal meaning is hidden. This discussion started on the arcana hidden in the Latin of the Writings. Central to this concept I keep trying to point out is that the literal meaning of the term CALAM* is of extreme importance. Do a search of the term and you will see just how important the term is. In one sense the Writings state that it symbolizes the ultimate truth. In its oppossing sense it symbolizes falsity sustaining. In the symbolism of the golden reed it states that this term cannot be literally understood, only spiritually. I literally and spiritually understand this arcana because I know what the term KNH means. When adminstrator of this site states, "So what" in regard to this whole concept one has to wonder why anyone bothers at all. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org Subject: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:03:49 -0400 From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 22:30:35 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:30:35 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE Message-ID: In Luke, "And the messengers of John having gone away, he began to say unto the multitudes concerning John: `What have ye gone forth to the wilderness to look on? a reed (KNH or CALAM* ?) by the wind shaken? But what have ye gone forth to see? a man in soft garments clothed? lo, they in splendid apparellings, and living in luxury, are in the houses of kings! vii. 24, 25. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >CC: brothergregory@hotmail.com >Subject: KNOW THY AUDIENCE >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:50:42 -0400 > >Ok, Brother literally "Greg," I think your purpose is now clear: "The >Writings literally and spiritually were opened to me from out of this >literal understanding. My purpose is to attempt to relate the importance of >this discovery. This is the 'return' concept." > >But surely, in your experience, you have come to realize the importance of >"knowing" your audience before you begin to preach to them. (In "The >Writings" it says that the Lord ACCOMMODATES Himself to the human race. >That implies "knowing" the state of the audience.) In as much as you have >accused your audience of being the "offspring" of the "Lutheran and >Protestant" degeneracy, and of being "dead branches" and perhaps "those >without life," it hardly seems to me that you have attempted to get off on >the right foot with what this audience may want to hear. If you have >important things to reveal, perhaps you might want to put this in the >context of positive things you know about the New Church Movement, as a way >of demonstrating some empathy and solidarity with your listerners. Alan > >>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word<>To: >>lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>Subject: Re: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? >>Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:20:01 -0400 >The Writings also speak of those without life in the same manner > >142. Verse 15. So thou hast them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, >which thing I hate, signifies those who separate good from truth, or >charity from faith, which is against Divine order. This is evident from >what was said and shown above (n. 107), where similar words occur. To which >this is to be added: That those who separate truth from good, or faith from >charity, turn away from themselves all influx of heaven into the goods they >do, in consequence of which their goods are not good; for heaven flows in, >that is, the Lord through heaven, into the good of man's love; he, >therefore, that rejects the good of charity from the doctrine of the >church, and receives instead only those things that are called matters of >faith, is shut out of heaven; truths with such have no life; and it is the >life of truth, which is good, that conjoins, but not truth without life, or >faith without charity. (But more on these subjects in The Doctrine of the >New Jerusalem where it treats of Charity, n. 84-107, and of Faith, n. >108-122.) > >The Divine Goodness is 'Esse' the mystery of the use of the 'oil'. Again I >come back to this subject because to reject the literal Word is to reject >Him. When one states that whatever the Christ means literally does not >matter because I believe and have faith that He is the Anointed they lose >sight of the mystery of the literal return. One cannot believe what one >does not understand. I don't have the reference available for that >spiritual law according to the Writings but you should recognize it. > >My statement is clear on what my purpose is here. I gathered the literal >truths from out of the Word. One must first know and act upon the literal >truth of the 'oil'. A great help has been the spiritual practises of the >Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Writings literally and spiritually were >opened to me from out of this literal understanding. My purpose is to >attempt to relate the importance of this discovery. This is the 'return' >concept. One simply cannot understand the Writings without being >knowledgable to the 'mysteries' of the Oriental Orthodox Church. It is >extremely frustrating experience. However, headway is being made. My work >is almost complete. There is one more paper that needs to be written >entitled 'Doctrine of Truth and Good'. When this is complete my intention >is to send it out to all of the 'virtual priests' of the New Church to let >them know that the return concept is in the literal Word. As of now, I have >addresses listed from a New Church website that show all of the New >Churches and their pastors names as well as the Seminaries. Right now, this >literal meaning is hidden. > >This discussion started on the arcana hidden in the Latin of the Writings. >Central to this concept I keep trying to point out is that the literal >meaning of the term CALAM* is of extreme importance. Do a search of the >term and you will see just how important the term is. In one sense the >Writings state that it symbolizes the ultimate truth. In its oppossing >sense it symbolizes falsity sustaining. In the symbolism of the golden reed >it states that this term cannot be literally understood, only spiritually. >I literally and spiritually understand this arcana because I know what the >term KNH means. > >When adminstrator of this site states, "So what" in regard to this whole >concept one has to wonder why anyone bothers at all. > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" > > > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:03:49 -0400 > > _________________________________________________________________ Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 23:22:56 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:22:56 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: it hardly >>seems to me that you have attempted to get off on the right foot with what >>this audience may want to hear. If you have important things to reveal, >>perhaps you might want to put this in the context of positive things you >>know about the New Church Movement, as a way of demonstrating some empathy >>and solidarity with your listerners. Alan >> The discussion was and is on the hidden doctrine of the Latin in the Writings. I could wax poetic on www.heavenlydoctrines.org As a matter of fact, the Atlanta Oyez Oyez ad campaign in the Saturday Atlanta Religious Announcement section was funded by me for 22 weeks. It opened the 'Heavens through chinks'. Important work has been done in this "New Church Movement." But is the Church militant? Does it take on the hells? I have consistently and patiently sent documentation on these revelations in an orderly and proper manner to the General Church of the New Jerusalem. And like you they don't want to hear about their ERROR. "The return of the Lord is to be in the understanding of the literal and spiritual meaning of the Word." But only if you stroke the 'virtual priests' of the General Church of the New Jerusalem and tell them what the want to hear, is that it? Bishop Thomas Kline doesn't want to hear about ERROR either. I pointed out to him and over 40 of your fellow 'virtual priests' that the 'golden eagle' that is part of your occult practise in the Chapel at Bryn Athyns is in ERROR. Go to the website of your "New Church Movement" and look for it http://ancss.org/chapel/index.htm but you won't be able to find your idol there because the picture is cropped. Everyday the children at the Academy of the New Church are taken into this Chapel and at the end of the services are forced to make the pledge. This pledge states while looking to the flag representing country, 'one nation under God'. On top of this flagstaff right next to the Ten Commandments is the 'golden eagle idol'. So tell me how do want me to sugar coat that? I have not heard a word of acknowledgment of my work or if this 'golden eagle idol' has been taken down. I know my audience all right. Blind priests who don't know enough to recognize an idol when they see one. But this practise will not continue. The Lord will no longer allow you 'virtual priests' to continue to spiritually damage the children there. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jun 10 23:41:32 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:41:32 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] shouting in the wilderness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I don't think you read my last message to you, Greg, for all you want to do is self-justify why you should continue to harang people not yet prepared to listen. If, as you say, you have uncovered secrets, one secret you have not succeeded in uncovering is how to communicate with people--who while they should in your eyes listen--do not appear to be listening. How important is it that they listen? The 18th century American form of sermonizing was called the "Jeremiad." People were prepared for and entertained by that in the 18th century. However, I think Jeremiah would have about the same success at this day as in his own day by drawing one's attention to "THE ERROR" in capital letters. A person who sincerely wishes to convert people speaks to people in a tone of voice to which they will listen. All else, it seems to me, is shouting in the wilderness. Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 19:22:56 -0400 > > >it hardly > >>seems to me that you have attempted to get off on the right foot with >what > >>this audience may want to hear. If you have important things to reveal, > >>perhaps you might want to put this in the context of positive things you > >>know about the New Church Movement, as a way of demonstrating some >empathy > >>and solidarity with your listerners. Alan > >> >The discussion was and is on the hidden doctrine of the Latin in the >Writings. I could wax poetic on www.heavenlydoctrines.org As a matter of >fact, the Atlanta Oyez Oyez ad campaign in the Saturday Atlanta Religious >Announcement section was funded by me for 22 weeks. It opened the 'Heavens >through chinks'. Important work has been done in this "New Church >Movement." >But is the Church militant? Does it take on the hells? I have consistently >and patiently sent documentation on these revelations in an orderly and >proper manner to the General Church of the New Jerusalem. And like you they >don't want to hear about their ERROR. "The return of the Lord is to be in >the understanding of the literal and spiritual meaning of the Word." But >only if you stroke the 'virtual priests' of the General Church of the New >Jerusalem and tell them what the want to hear, is that it? > >Bishop Thomas Kline doesn't want to hear about ERROR either. I pointed out >to him and over 40 of your fellow 'virtual priests' that the 'golden eagle' >that is part of your occult practise in the Chapel at Bryn Athyns is in >ERROR. Go to the website of your "New Church Movement" and look for it >http://ancss.org/chapel/index.htm but you won't be able to find your idol >there because the picture is cropped. Everyday the children at the Academy >of the New Church are taken into this Chapel and at the end of the services >are forced to make the pledge. This pledge states while looking to the flag >representing country, 'one nation under God'. On top of this flagstaff >right >next to the Ten Commandments is the 'golden eagle idol'. > >So tell me how do want me to sugar coat that? I have not heard a word of >acknowledgment of my work or if this 'golden eagle idol' has been taken >down. I know my audience all right. Blind priests who don't know enough to >recognize an idol when they see one. But this practise will not continue. >The Lord will no longer allow you 'virtual priests' to continue to >spiritually damage the children there. > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally > >"Greg" > >_________________________________________________________________ >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna ma=neutral Feb 9 15:52:48 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=eljkpctkhk@ransdorf.riz.co.at; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:52:53 jasper.mvdavid.com from=eljkpctkhk@ransdorf.riz.co.at; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:52:58 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=aaherder@yahoo.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:53:14 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=frank.arensmeier@nikehydraulics.se; sender-id=neutral; spf=pass Feb 9 15:53:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gnmfe@thejokester.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:53:27 jasper.mvdavid.com from=aiavnbdqod@wellness.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:53:31 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hauntedTyndale's@free4web.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:53:35 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171036415; bh=aU9DXoWTNfWDYkBJ1Ro9B1fXkng=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Received:Authentication-Results:\n\t Received:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:\n\t Feb 9 15:53:35 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=cjnk@pickeringtest.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:53:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=SmarterTravel@lists.smartertravel.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 15:53:43 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171036423; bh=aU9DXoWTNfWDYkBJ1Ro9B1fXkng=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Received:Authentication-Results:\n\t Received:X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:\n\t Feb 9 15:53:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ytbnxrdougd@craftsreport.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:53:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=banister@hajkasem.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:54:08 sapphire.mvdavid.com resent-from=security-basics-return-43060@securityfocus.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 15:54:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=clericalstreamline's@merlin.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:54:15 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=wavoltage@pamesa.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:54:27 jasper.mvdavid.com resent-from=security-basics-return-43061@securityfocus.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 15:54:41 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=dorma@mail2techie.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:54:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=disembodyingnostalgically@ata.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:54:43 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=uvgmxx@ytlhs.sgtarshoured.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:54:45 jasper.mvdavid.com from=uvgmxx@ytlhs.sgtarshoured.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:54:59 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=evolution-list-bounces@gnome.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:02 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=extragreg@golfleversant.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=scoredoverstays@chanin.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:10 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=sxyacademy@impresa.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=diddlingCastor@sisat.com.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=woodworking'scatfishes@itasc.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bogpalimpsest@bernard.co.il; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:31 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=doshinsb@enternet.hu; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 15:55:36 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=evolution-list-bounces@gnome.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=wftvjdfgh@ak-asahi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:55:43 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=fovgfcu@net.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:55:51 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ormwn@rphillips.biz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:56:09 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=mijb@westardsley.fsnet.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:56:12 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=tqub@mvdavid.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:56:18 jasper.mvdavid.com from=farlevincent@mailmatters.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:56:40 sapphire.mvdavid.com resent-from=security-basics-return-43065@securityfocus.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 15:56:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=collectivismhooky@acypl.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:56:55 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=arjoke@jazzo.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:06 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=lennon@abel-consulting.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:10 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ball'shilarious@artlovers.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=observesStephen@ir.ro; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:36 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jhg@welch-tarkington.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ymbaffecting@schledermann.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=heikelley@mailit-wv.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:57:51 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=qalbstedwdd@academica.fi; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:08 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Pennsylvaniadocudramas@ct.com.br; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Goodyear'sattar's@bepinc.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:58:21 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=zgwklwzp@rr.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 15:58:22 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=FEMREL-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:26 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=FEMREL-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ojepycbthhf@thejokester.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 15:58:35 jasper.mvdavid.com from=broadsideddefinite@tcsh.csh.sh; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:45 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=nqyirtmyf@com.br; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:45 jasper.mvdavid.com from=tendrilsempowerment@corriente.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:58:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Iowa'sSheldon's@phreaker.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=tastelessness'sdemonstrable@chemheritage.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:24 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=urichphaedr@wattyl.com.au; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:24 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=tgknkn@sipetrol.com.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Thackerayaxing@progonos.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:36 jasper.mvdavid.com from=zulfa@haus-schwarzenberg.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:56 jasper.mvdavid.com from=schy@pagosa.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 15:59:57 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bfalljqqbf@empereur.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:02 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pelalune@satanconsulting.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=albeoking@balestris.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:08 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=quintanokarri@maccosmetics.delivery.net; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:00:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=umochw@atp-plastic.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:00:29 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=glqxmx@crs-group.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:00:35 jasper.mvdavid.com from=kristof@vaticano.it; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:37 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=talu@ebbc.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:45 jasper.mvdavid.com from=owebrgrjrtd@pennywisemail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:52 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=baz@ucmartinrealtyco.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=beliariola@cardsetc.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:00:58 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=enitanasim@a7up.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:05 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=bostrodamay@talbotdesign.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Southampton'sbedpan@pacadar.es; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:29 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=fqqdtvepwx@net.nz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:30 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ialthough@dougglos.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:31 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ujqozm@almizcle.com.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=uncompromisinglyintermezzo's@cofoce.gob.mx; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:01:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=geology'shomecoming@betaengineering.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:01 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ignau@taroplanning.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:03 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=breachedwoman@srpnet.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:11 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=carmichae@taec.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=glqxmx@crs-group.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:02:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dependenceinsect's@veriomail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:42 jasper.mvdavid.com from=rotundityfacsimile@srsc.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:46 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=godrica@na47sun29.cern.ch; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:02:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=refractingstylus's@truth247.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:03:14 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rbse8x-jtb@juicyhammer.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:03:16 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rbse8x-jtb@juicyhammer.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 16:03:24 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=FEMREL-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:03:54 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=yoioclpg@terra.cl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:04:17 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rroot@patteninc.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:04:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mullinmlad@gallard-schlesinger.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:04:18 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=qualoabpy@icpnet.pl; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:04:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=chuck.amadi@rokcorp.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:04:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=nxjcards@novusglass.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:04:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=steamrolleringmountaintops@irel.com.sg; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:05:00 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=qtopnn@surfersrugby.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:05:08 jasper.mvdavid.com from=iserebarnes@dawho.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:05:29 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=seagravepamela@favorites.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:05:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=muledsense's@limanet.hn; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:05:37 jasper.mvdavid.com from=reinforcesBetty@csvenvironment.org.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:06:04 jasper.mvdavid.com from=burgeonsprecipitated@coganowens.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:06:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mistimeinternee's@grs.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:06:33 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=wcelebrated@nuk.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:06:43 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=yzaq@conceptconstruction.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:06:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=uaithne@capecodderresort.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:06:49 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bfp@novahierosolyma.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:07:02 jasper.mvdavid.com from=arousesnonconformist@yyhmail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:07:09 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Sazuke289@aol.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:07:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=individual@furanet.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:07:42 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=yxurfxrh@pldt.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:07:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bfifjazle@pldt.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Big@expand-inc.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:14 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=writers@findedu.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=sharyn@capsys.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ckziiuaeoh@bitmicro.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=In@froon.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=T'spaved@donwood.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:54 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=abneyu@fairylandtrust.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:08:59 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=nsfg@bearnes.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:03 jasper.mvdavid.com from=uadjust@hsb.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:07 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=3rdPlanIt@yahoogroups.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:07 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=3rdPlanIt@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 16:09:25 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=zvjut@cvti.fr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=qywtivyyqj@braehead.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:28 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hateextraditing@naeil.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:34 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=tflcmw@andpartners.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:09:45 jasper.mvdavid.com from=meringuniversal@akces.org.pl; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:09:52 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Registry@evansboatwork.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:10:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bzdcwwkhyrp@globnet.md; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:10:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ukflcfes@globnet.md; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:10:20 jasper.mvdavid.com from=unluckiestgoop's@cartwright-group.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:10:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=us@fenghang.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:10:40 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Discussion@grandview.com.hk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:10:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=toastingstomaching@sungi.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:03 jasper.mvdavid.com from=eglepaq@kastaniotis.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hate@elviscup.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=oxnmiwul@t-dialin.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dollieiwain@paramedicmail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=million@duchy.devon.sch.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:53 jasper.mvdavid.com from=aqrdkfmvqc@bnnorth.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:56 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=enbhcqm@lublin.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:11:59 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ztdodbv@net.il; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:12:14 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=qigaow@polysl.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:12:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cornet'sinfamies@ankeny.k12.ia.us; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:12:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=este@firo.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:12:53 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=vmyfujaqi@dmsymphony.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:13:11 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=orubb@larking-gowen.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:13:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=vmyfujaqi@dmsymphony.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:13:28 jasper.mvdavid.com from=orubb@larking-gowen.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:13:32 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ecusnwnwqil@kis.ru; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:13:37 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jweysvh@crada.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:13:54 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ystuck@appraisal.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:05 jasper.mvdavid.com from=newsletter@landsend.rsc02.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:14:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gill@estech.irk.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Evelyn'spassion@sinnerschrader.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=number@fadira.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hvdycshx@ak-asahi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:14:41 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ukrain@fionawalkernyc.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:41 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=cornelluk@garrisonpartners.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:48 jasper.mvdavid.com from=itchierostracizes@arge.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:56 jasper.mvdavid.com from=step@carletonltd.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:14:57 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=maoq@hastingscentre.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:15:16 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=lists@cmsws.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=pass Feb 9 16:15:27 jasper.mvdavid.com from=yxuphhzho@club-internet.fr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:15:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=messaging@epunkt.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:15:45 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rgx@gmx.de; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=pass Feb 9 16:15:49 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ydvhubvvmy@wimgoossens.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:15:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=huxtable@macmail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:15:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwkfdelementm@kfdelement.no; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:16:12 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ragazze@elearning.swbts.edu; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:16:15 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=william@telefonica.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:16:18 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gorey@gnt.cc; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:16:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cosett@saintxfac.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:16:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=terrier@gaysport.ch; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:16:59 jasper.mvdavid.com from=others@gnpspecialties.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:17:09 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Developer@ea.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:17:11 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Limewire@egglead.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:17:27 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Memory@equitytrust.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:17:37 jasper.mvdavid.com from=baegwplrymr@dhin.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:17:45 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=sbrhhy@pfd.nn.hu; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:17:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=stocknews@tpsguide.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:17:55 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=SylRey@aol.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:17:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Derrickinhalator's@changyang.com.tw; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:18:24 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=agusoc@greatfloridabank.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:18:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=fshptukcwi@sabritowel.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:18:39 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=candidkiwis@prelude.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:18:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=most@flanno.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:19:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lives@fusionyouthonline.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:19:09 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=puristswatches@marketdevelopment.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:19:15 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=lgecffbglx@crs-group.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:19:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lgecffbglx@crs-group.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:19:20 jasper.mvdavid.com from=beltsunder@firstcommercialbk.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:19:33 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rll@felton.felton.ca.us; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:19:35 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=bojanycry@face-clan.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:19:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=glmjcxmiu@oslobusiness.no; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:19:48 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:19:48 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; domainkeys=fail (testing) Feb 9 16:19:53 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=SmarterTravel@lists.smartertravel.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:19:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=blocks@freezefm.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:01 jasper.mvdavid.com from=other@florida-dream-homes.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=reproduced@finin.info; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:15 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=himself@expertlatorre.e.telefonica.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:21 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dpbeoxf@crs-group.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:20:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hogsheadpretext's@cclf.org.br; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mqnlgdfd@proxad.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Tom.David@BarryControls.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:49 jasper.mvdavid.com from=filingelmo@dydbienesraices.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:20:59 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038059; bh=nAzFHCGSqHJ/knjtVvYzMX/FzvI=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:X-MimeOLE:\n\t Content-class:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:\n\t Feb 9 16:21:00 jasper.mvdavid.com from=expelledscrewballs@akals.co.za; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:21:02 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038061; bh=nAzFHCGSqHJ/knjtVvYzMX/FzvI=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:X-MimeOLE:\n\t Content-class:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:\n\t Feb 9 16:21:05 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038065; bh=nAzFHCGSqHJ/knjtVvYzMX/FzvI=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:X-MimeOLE:\n\t Content-class:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:\n\t Feb 9 16:21:13 jasper.mvdavid.com from=liouba@kbclarke.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:21:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=terrace'sdissertations@ds.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:21:32 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=FEMREL-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:21:35 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=oqp@pic-pgi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:21:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=jessica.odhner.ngwb@statefarm.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:21:51 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Trust@estudiogadaleta.com.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ore@ew3d.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:22:13 jasper.mvdavid.com from=beatricelhilla@4ei.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:18 jasper.mvdavid.com from=worofionnbhar@garts.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:28 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=dampness'shearted@pup.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:31 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=fotiy@farber.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=spitefruitier@post.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:47 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=FEMREL-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:22:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=throne'sreputedly@itsacinch.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:23:02 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=wemjqnc@rr.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:23:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=listerullewell@kabctv7.cotmail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:23:13 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lourensoosthuizen@myway.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:23:36 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rmndbj@www.ergeg.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:23:50 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=fdt@mvdavid.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:24:01 jasper.mvdavid.com from=kbfwvnp@larking-gowen.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:24:12 jasper.mvdavid.com from=meticulousnessjilt@bizquest.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:24:17 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=kqixmbytlm@larking-gowen.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:24:21 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ujlvcot@unext.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:24:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=achapin81@hotmail.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:25:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mattsonloth@galileogames.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:25:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwrapidadvertisingm@rapidadvertising.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:25:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=asgpgktu@effem.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:26:19 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=veeh@swisscentrum-eng.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:26:27 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=besmac@sunumail.sn; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:26:45 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gambit'sbenchmark's@miraf.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:27:01 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=cualquier@finnwood.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:27:02 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=image@evansvillefcu.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:27:19 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038439; bh=EMgDO/CS2uZ5htM6jl5msUElpDM=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:27:21 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038441; bh=EMgDO/CS2uZ5htM6jl5msUElpDM=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:27:28 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038447; bh=EMgDO/CS2uZ5htM6jl5msUElpDM=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:27:29 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038448; bh=EMgDO/CS2uZ5htM6jl5msUElpDM=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:27:35 jasper.mvdavid.com from=freeurllta@fermatorium.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:27:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=achapin81@hotmail.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:27:42 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=at@eyeofhawaii.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:27:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=used@falconwheel.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:27:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lyiitamw@wimgoossens.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:28:11 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ibxcij@wimgoossens.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:28:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=demotesbarreling@arne.si; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:28:42 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pauli@dbbcg.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:28:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ErnestaMercer@uk2.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:29:17 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=uddpd@homebizpros.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:29:20 jasper.mvdavid.com from=uddpd@homebizpros.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:29:27 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ceremoniouslyYokohama's@obusa.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:29:30 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=xwgd@heiwa-auto.com.sg; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:29:36 jasper.mvdavid.com from=steamship'sricochet@singelland.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:29:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=flrtmdgxqxe@aparx.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:29:54 jasper.mvdavid.com from=visually@fbcokemos.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:29:58 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=where@filter.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:30:00 jasper.mvdavid.com from=handiestvexes@basturk.com.tr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:30:31 jasper.mvdavid.com from=quotSalva@gestluna.e.telefonica.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:30:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=grumbo@baldhead.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:30:41 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=hjolodvppq@lannonce.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:31:11 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lordsmansoor@eastnoble.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:31:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=melodic@firstplaceschool.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:31:42 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Palmer@goorinbros.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:32:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwmayogenuinem@mayogenuine.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:32:40 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jgt@ajax.gr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:33:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lourensoosthuizen@myway.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:33:15 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=clay'sdeeply@sanden-shanghai.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:33:59 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038839; bh=X0UcF1qMOgt731Hdmn72v6MHD6M=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:34:05 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038845; bh=X0UcF1qMOgt731Hdmn72v6MHD6M=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:34:07 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171038846; bh=X0UcF1qMOgt731Hdmn72v6MHD6M=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:To:\n\t Received:X-AntiAbuse:X-AntiAbuse:From:MIME-Version:X-Sender:\n\t Feb 9 16:34:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pumphreelin@hawaiianfire.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:34:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=please@essi-bodyboarding.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:36:10 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=precious@eijuniorladyceltics.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:36:34 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:36:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=normativeoncology's@groupm.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:37:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=heatherznyj@dormant.demon.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:37:33 jasper.mvdavid.com from=holinessoxidizing@abissi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:38:07 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=znmhagp@net.my; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:38:19 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=3rdPlanIt@yahoogroups.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:38:19 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=3rdPlanIt@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 16:38:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=newscastboycotting@zitter.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:38:33 jasper.mvdavid.com from=rebirthuncomplicated@biologie.uni-r.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:38:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=fedora-test-list-bounces@redhat.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:39:06 jasper.mvdavid.com from=saffol@saes.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:39:22 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ningbo_ningshing_holdings_co57@hotmail.fr; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:39:33 jasper.mvdavid.com from=zanyingturning@biologie.uni-regensburg.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:39:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Tokelau@fdforadoption.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:40:08 jasper.mvdavid.com from=puringactivate@sbs.be; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:40:26 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Frannyratcheting@vatech-td.at; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:40:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=concoursepredominate@telebig.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:41:12 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:41:13 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=EarlyN@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 16:41:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=It@exchange.inland.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:41:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=resources@faroukahmad.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:41:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=moonstenths@azane.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:42:04 jasper.mvdavid.com from=prau@hartmanns.dk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:42:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=miko@kaiserassociates.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:43:36 jasper.mvdavid.com from=coy@aamatrix.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:44:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hxnprwfkrzy@com.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:44:10 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=SPAM-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:44:52 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=brqste@rheinbraun-benelux.be; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:45:20 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:45:24 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:46:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:46:05 jasper.mvdavid.com from=word@guysforgod.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:46:45 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwsmos@ransdorf.riz.co.at; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:46:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=puffiestcrankiest@masd.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:46:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=christacriad@mages-touch.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:47:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=operativos@fiberliteawnings.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:47:12 jasper.mvdavid.com from=9128stocknews@tracemode.com.cn; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:47:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=deikenvelj@weinzentrale.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:48:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=imoeqzze@telecom.by; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:48:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=eye@golanweb.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:48:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=zvhzilpfr@pacbell.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:48:53 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lorei@lamar.colostate.edu; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:49:26 jasper.mvdavid.com from=m@newearth.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:49:32 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=nalazaro@uk2.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:49:52 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=plug-bounces@lists.phillylinux.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:49:53 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=plug-bounces@lists.phillylinux.org; domainkeys=fail (testing) Feb 9 16:49:57 jasper.mvdavid.com from=neilmayna@bairespiscine.it; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:50:00 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:50:21 jasper.mvdavid.com from=kawaca@pacificcorp.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:50:59 jasper.mvdavid.com from=remember@ercinc.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:51:28 jasper.mvdavid.com from=slaw'scyclic@solton.co.jp; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:52:14 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lzyabrpgbz@ne.jp; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:52:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=wluapjwyv@charter.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:52:21 jasper.mvdavid.com from=penalties@egyptiansoccer.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:52:37 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwreevetilem@reevetile.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:52:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=esteedv@braboverpakking.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:52:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=778stocknews@tountevich-agencement.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:53:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=largoYerevan's@adamsnelson.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:53:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwfarmandhomeksm@farmandhomeks.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:53:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=sallespe@cabrey-associates.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:54:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwexpressignm@expressign.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:54:33 jasper.mvdavid.com from=in@hab.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:54:38 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:54:39 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:55:19 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=xtrkcad-fork-developers-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:55:35 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Fantasy@ekipemlak.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:55:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hxzqmqhrobl@rr.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 16:56:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hubsgas@ellismachinerysolutions.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:56:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=qy@newchurch.net; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 16:56:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gxj@0733.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:56:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=systematicendives@skateboardwinkel.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:57:05 jasper.mvdavid.com from=saddison@gemizo.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:57:30 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=vegetariangf@yahoogroups.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:57:30 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=vegetariangf@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 16:57:49 jasper.mvdavid.com from=chroniclesoulfully@macrofer.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:57:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ubpbeverage@quantumcomm.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:58:16 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=fedora-test-list-bounces@redhat.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 16:58:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dateideasyxv@fmhsi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:58:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=paper@epriority.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:58:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=crusader'smaundering@prograd.epm.br; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:59:00 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=evolution-list-bounces@gnome.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:59:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mobile@gdata.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:59:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=certifiablewomanlike@headricks.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:59:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gmihran@spresscoffee.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 16:59:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=uknationalpromotion@adelphia.net; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:00:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=jymcoedni@british-expats.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:00:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=encumbrance'ssuperintendency's@ace-of-base.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 17:00:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=erk@xcentric.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:00:36 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwcliftyengineeringm@cliftyengineering.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:00:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dramaticsbuoyancy@onsitelasermedic.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:00:42 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwkadooriem@kadoorie.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:00:56 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bxjwtjksde@brygge.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:01:11 jasper.mvdavid.com from=shall@ehomelandmortgage.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:01:32 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:01:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwlokeyandsmithm@lokeyandsmith.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:02:27 jasper.mvdavid.com from=boiledcelery's@mbox.cfh.ufsc.br; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:02:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=newsreelsbushels@softbe.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:02:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Escherichia'srefectory@bepc.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:02:55 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=evolution-list-bounces@gnome.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:02:57 jasper.mvdavid.com from=otbylvsvg@dhin.nl; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:02:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=nlypszrmh@wanadoo.fr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:03:00 jasper.mvdavid.com from=used@geoanna.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:03:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=qequjj@newchurch.net; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:03:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=lruageo@british-expats.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:04:02 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=evolution-list-bounces@gnome.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:04:39 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=XTrkCad@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 17:04:53 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Namibia'scontusing@abtassoc.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 17:05:10 jasper.mvdavid.com from=preppieKandinsky's@ion.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:05:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwkewwestm@kewwest.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:06:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=clay@ecstasytheatre.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:06:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=speck'sindirected@akaba.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:06:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Software@fantasysportsbook.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:06:51 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Contact@genealogysearch.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:07:04 jasper.mvdavid.com from=vbvvw@macher.fake-ip.shacknet.nu; sender-id=fail (DomainDoesNotExist); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:07:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=tgiwwdtunb@macher.fake-ip.shacknet.nu; sender-id=fail (DomainDoesNotExist); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:07:36 jasper.mvdavid.com from=yesterday'strillion@ays.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:07:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=4stocknews@topq.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:07:46 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=FEMREL-L@listserv.aol.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:08:11 jasper.mvdavid.com from=yaoemdpzc@clarkhill.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:08:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Methuselah'scomplain@bronto.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:08:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pervertedsmooths@tavr.sbor.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:08:32 jasper.mvdavid.com from=nitrogen'scrinkle@ccib.be; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:08:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=frankedobvious@health-wks.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:09:03 jasper.mvdavid.com from=sfzftdpge@broadband.hu; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:09:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=charismatictangled@ngate.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:09:34 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ovrvwmbu@vtr.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:10:08 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mltpxghjb@numaline.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:10:25 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=fedora-test-list-bounces@redhat.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:10:33 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gujpvg@mazona.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:10:49 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Flash@fetyv.knowledgesterngth.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:10:57 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:11:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=aitonfdu@bbtec.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:11:42 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Solway@erebor.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:11:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=nonphysicalascendants@doctor.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:11:48 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=evolution-list-bounces@gnome.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:12:20 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=XTrkCad@yahoogroups.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:12:20 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=XTrkCad@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 17:12:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=TanyaJones@adventis.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:13:12 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bfmaoa@ak-asahi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:13:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Mexico@goipc.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:13:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=file@girodidactico.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:14:17 jasper.mvdavid.com from=FOOTBALL@galaxystar.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:14:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=da@dynamic.com.pe; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:14:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=sherryaavow@telesp.net.br; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:14:42 jasper.mvdavid.com from=reomcdxc@pldt.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:15:06 jasper.mvdavid.com from=beaver@ensofus.se; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:15:27 jasper.mvdavid.com resent-from=secureshell-return-9264@securityfocus.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:15:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mainstream'sflux's@enda.sn; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:15:41 jasper.mvdavid.com from=blina@cmpnetmail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:16:18 jasper.mvdavid.com from=vtzngaeaxu@bbtec.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:16:21 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Opiniones@enthronerecords.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:16:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=mwmcmlln@mnsi.net; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=neutral Feb 9 17:16:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=reported@eventsoundpro.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:17:20 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ryjampn@goa.org.in; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:17:37 jasper.mvdavid.com from=perfectionist'sprognostics@fromnorthdakota.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:17:48 jasper.mvdavid.com from=euawjompa@hinet.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:17:56 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Dwayne_Abuel/HIGHLAND/HIDOE@notes.k12.hi.us; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:18:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ccdaum@msn.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:18:32 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171041512; bh=BvfzgtG5L0DWgdHAXdPR4yv8H/E=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:\n\t Received:Message-ID:Received:X-Originating-IP:X-Originating-Email:\n\t Feb 9 17:18:36 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171041516; bh=BvfzgtG5L0DWgdHAXdPR4yv8H/E=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:\n\t Received:Message-ID:Received:X-Originating-IP:X-Originating-Email:\n\t Feb 9 17:18:38 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171041517; bh=BvfzgtG5L0DWgdHAXdPR4yv8H/E=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:\n\t Received:Message-ID:Received:X-Originating-IP:X-Originating-Email:\n\t Feb 9 17:18:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Cathy'samputated@libertymedical.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:18:49 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=afipieqhm@pppool.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:19:10 jasper.mvdavid.com from=1stocknews@topdrawerclosets.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:19:23 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=WCHs@fasb.ws; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:19:33 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=uacxgopit@t-online.hu; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:19:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ajydxtna@zebra.lt; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:20:00 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jnfkve@rightscom.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:20:30 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=aacft@freezs.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:20:40 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=sstjqfukbee@couchscout.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:20:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=qzrkmoupod@estnet.bg; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:20:57 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=aikai@bwhyman53.fsnet.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:21:02 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Midas'sdenominates@rover.ee; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:21:10 jasper.mvdavid.com from=thirdparty@floorshow.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:21:17 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=qhvjnatrfkc@charter.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:21:31 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dwfascinationm@fascination.be; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:21:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=513stocknews@totalsalessolutions.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:21:43 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=portrayal@ennar.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:22:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=mhxounxvc@bigdig.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:22:41 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=cqjuf@stageads.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:23:14 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=udyrmgaxhg@charter.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:23:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=zpzu@oasis.is; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:23:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=friarscynically@alpaca.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:23:52 jasper.mvdavid.com from=q@novahierosolyma.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:24:13 jasper.mvdavid.com from=vsctrqw@wanadoo.fr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:24:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=rll@felton.felton.ca.us; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:24:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=clerkingdiesel@comuneladispoli.it; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:24:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=yeae@novahierosolyma.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:25:03 sapphire.mvdavid.com resent-from=secureshell-return-9262@securityfocus.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:25:06 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=wwpjgzgzv@mm.pl; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:25:15 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Earle'scheckpoints@theologie.uni-goettingen.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:25:26 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Guayaquil'sbackpack's@chemi.muni.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:25:29 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Location@ericavijay.net; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:25:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=weeingmoderator's@sismex.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:25:43 jasper.mvdavid.com from=qhvachw@net.co; sender-id=fail (DomainDoesNotExist); spf=fail (DomainDoesNotExist) Feb 9 17:25:47 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=quiertgaayg@bluedogstudios.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:26:00 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=boy@findpayroll.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:26:18 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=proposal@ferk.si; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:26:37 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ryrloitql@malaysia.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:26:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=whichlivestock's@robertmontana.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:27:11 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=questions@ernwest.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:27:11 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pvbunmfil@calcot.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:27:19 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=nsktsl@lovesongs.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:27:43 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:27:43 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; domainkeys=fail (testing) Feb 9 17:27:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=wgsnpmc@telepac.pt; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:27:59 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Reuters@em-marketing.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:28:02 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=grmlevbsvh@numaline.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:28:22 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jnrrgxpqr@aparx.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:28:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=harrismh777@earthlink.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:28:22 jasper.mvdavid.com from=harrismh777@earthlink.net; domainkeys=fail (testing) Feb 9 17:28:28 jasper.mvdavid.com from=jnrrgxpqr@aparx.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:28:39 jasper.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:28:52 jasper.mvdavid.com from=feeblenessRosanna@alp.pt; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:28:52 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Juddslangier@ccjax.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:29:06 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=kgzrcl@wheezeright.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 17:29:23 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Guys@enzinnainteractive.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:29:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=disbelievesituate@anth3m.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:29:56 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ljlpi@software-domain.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:30:16 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ucnsyfap@gaoland.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:30:18 jasper.mvdavid.com from=oyw@newchurch.net; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:30:25 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bgflqsj@chello.nl; sender-id=permerror; spf=permerror Feb 9 17:30:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gjnxljp@41000.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:30:41 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=massage@franklinaluminum.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:30:49 jasper.mvdavid.com from=roughneck'sclarity@internetemails.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:30:52 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=limb@europsx.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:31:03 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jip@groemo.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:31:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=bawwyhzrcn@wanadoo.fr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:31:27 jasper.mvdavid.com from=bounce@doody.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:31:42 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=mrskittie2000@yahoo.ca; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:31:51 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=youget@elmaneyik.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:09 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=w@swedenb.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:32:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cutsystechdes@systech.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:29 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cutsztianjiudes@sztianjiu.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:30 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=sgdwqwf@btcentralplus.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:31 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cutszyihedes@szyihe.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:37 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jxramox@coltfrance.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rzsbthoeurv@tpnet.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cutszjmsdes@szjms.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:55 jasper.mvdavid.com from=2stocknews@tophercam.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:59 jasper.mvdavid.com from=islandersceremonials@ada.lt; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:32:59 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ddjones@aol.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:02 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=Calling@enqueue.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:02 jasper.mvdavid.com from=sailboattranslator's@nortour.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:06 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=WordPress@flabeachhouse.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:30 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hfizhmm@biscu.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:32 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pljyaj@lotustechsupport.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:33:38 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=characteristic'sAlan@raks.com.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:51 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=arbeitet@faheyfund.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:56 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=yfdlu@kikibu.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:33:58 jasper.mvdavid.com from=abjntnbie@t-dialin.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:34:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=suwvmwsgu@globalpolymerscorp.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:34:47 jasper.mvdavid.com from=spdgtthjtv@sabritowel.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:34:52 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ruediger.pluem@vodafone.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=pass Feb 9 17:34:53 jasper.mvdavid.com from=drvhiqohblh@punkass.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:34:59 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cattiness'sstatuesque@airflights.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:35:10 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=pyik@nhaelbe.niedersachsen.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:35:23 jasper.mvdavid.com from=fudex@k-ortho.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:35:56 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dkdvya@dmsymphony.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:35:57 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=prsghkc@oslobusiness.no; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:35:59 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=dale.morris@zen.co.uk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:36:02 jasper.mvdavid.com from=prsghkc@oslobusiness.no; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:36:06 jasper.mvdavid.com from=speculation'sfreeloader@veronaschools.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:36:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=jcfobynwq@boldvisionkids.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:36:18 jasper.mvdavid.com from=pfifzxnonm@t-dialin.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:36:26 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=neuhauser@sigpipe.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=pass Feb 9 17:36:48 jasper.mvdavid.com from=torxb@zjfqgroup.com; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:37:04 jasper.mvdavid.com from=ginghamcommerces@agh.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:37:29 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jfqtnoq@homesswflorida.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:37:31 jasper.mvdavid.com from=stocknews@toyota-camry.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:37:40 jasper.mvdavid.com from=jfqtnoq@homesswflorida.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:37:49 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jdd@dodin.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:38:06 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=manixrafuhd@karneval.cz; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:38:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=srcyhhvn@rr.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 17:38:11 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=mhl@lrbuero.de; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:38:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=minibikeboxers@trops.pl; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:38:27 jasper.mvdavid.com from=xngruxltdj@com.ar; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:38:30 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=zrnxujiv@net.in; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:38:38 jasper.mvdavid.com from=awaitBorden's@phillip.com.hk; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:39:12 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ntvwilaioad@in-addr.arpa; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:39:19 jasper.mvdavid.com from=kbqzicoopj@t-dialin.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:39:40 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com; sender-id=pass; spf=pass Feb 9 17:39:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=threateninglyundoings@bioresonant.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:39:46 jasper.mvdavid.com from=Carney28556@mail.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:39:47 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=gylovw@ak-asahi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:39:52 jasper.mvdavid.com from=gylovw@ak-asahi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:40:02 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=lists@cmsws.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=pass Feb 9 17:40:13 jasper.mvdavid.com from=a_neuhaus@nokia.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:40:18 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=nwymnes@natm.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:40:39 jasper.mvdavid.com from=hkyyonni@software-domain.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:40:44 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dgxeiqqxrv@backwest.org; sender-id=fail (NotPermitted); spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:41:03 jasper.mvdavid.com from=igors@altern.org; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:41:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=dqvapftjco@printops.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:41:09 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dqvapftjco@printops.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:41:12 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=harrismh777@earthlink.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:41:13 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=harrismh777@earthlink.net; domainkeys=fail (testing) Feb 9 17:42:07 jasper.mvdavid.com from=scantilyineptness's@ssau.ru; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:42:12 jasper.mvdavid.com from=beijlkel@bdb-uk.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:42:12 jasper.mvdavid.com from=dave@stormbefore.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:42:27 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171042946; bh=ZTcvg0SgHwRqahM84hPBvxvcR6o=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:From:\n\t To:References:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:\n\t Feb 9 17:42:29 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171042948; bh=ZTcvg0SgHwRqahM84hPBvxvcR6o=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:From:\n\t To:References:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:\n\t Feb 9 17:42:29 a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=reunion.newearth.org;\n\ts=20060820j4; t=1171042949; bh=ZTcvg0SgHwRqahM84hPBvxvcR6o=; h=X-DomainKeys:\n\t DomainKey-Signature:Received:Authentication-Results:Received:From:\n\t To:References:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:\n\t Feb 9 17:42:44 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=rlzrtoxou@verizon.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:42:50 jasper.mvdavid.com from=sampaiomcwv@courier-tribune.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:42:50 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=lewzmdksr@comunitel.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:42:51 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=uehjbq@ak-asahi.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=fail (NotPermitted) Feb 9 17:43:10 jasper.mvdavid.com from=expatiateSaturday's@zinq.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:43:10 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=sampaiomcwv@courier-tribune.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:43:35 jasper.mvdavid.com from=a_muhannayahoo.de@nokia.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:43:39 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=XTrkCad@yahoogroups.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:43:39 sapphire.mvdavid.com sender=XTrkCad@yahoogroups.com; domainkeys=pass Feb 9 17:43:43 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=known@franklinfueling.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:43:52 jasper.mvdavid.com from=vybdlfvw@tiscali.fr; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:44:05 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=ojwdtlfqxa@bellsouth.net; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:44:08 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=jwhrywkcmfs@tmg.md; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:44:28 jasper.mvdavid.com from=xjdpvikia@com.mx; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:45:04 sapphire.mvdavid.com from=qbskdmuzql@rr.com; sender-id=softfail; spf=softfail Feb 9 17:45:13 jasper.mvdavid.com from=cutsysramdes@sysram.com; sender-id=neutral; spf=neutral Feb 9 17:45:24 jasper.mvdavid.com from=burghersignorance's@amiantit.write it down and was told, "It cannot be written." In appreciation I returned the mystery by stating, 'truly a reed like unto a rod.' These two Churches know. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church is the one with the 'Ancient Word'. The Lord provides that there will be a Church that understands the literal Word to conjoin man to heaven. The books of Jasher, Jubilee and Enoch are part of their Canon. They are the ones to be found in the 'East' which according to heavenly geography is located in Africa. These two Churches are part of the 'Oriental' Orthodox Church. So, if you 'looked' in the 'Orient' you would find it. The Ethiopian Church worships the 'Divine Human' and so have I in attendance. It is absolutely wild. Nothing in the Western churches compare to celebration day in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church or their worship practise. The three wise men were Israelite Ethiopian priests and they have the ark of the covenent. Hence, all of Jerusalem in an uproar. The literal Word is understood there just as Emanuel Swedenborg prophesied. This is the 'secret knowledge' of the Church. This is what is to be revealed in the Revelation. This could have been understood by the New Church if they were obediant to the command of the Lord in the ordination of the priesthood. I guess it just takes time or Divine Providence. It really has been an adventure being led to understand all of this. I do complain too much. This past Sunday was an uplifting experience and I believe the Word will be delivered from out of this mystery soon. I have been documenting all of these discoveries and conversations with the various clergy in doctrinal papers and sending it to the General Church of the New Jerusalem. I have been met with villification, mockery and denial. When I examine this Church to find out the cause of their blindness to the work in the Lord, I discover the most horrible idol worship ever practised in the history of mankind. They have an American flag right next to the Ten Commandments in the Chapel and top of this flag is a 'golden eagle idol'. Every school day the innocent are forced to stand before this idol and repeat that it is a god to close their worship service. I was told that this practise is 'true and good'. In my travels some years ago I had gone to Bryn Athyn and an Odhner adolescent girl told me, "I don't believe in any of it." I understand now her anger at this horribly profane religion and pray that the Lord will deliver her and fellow classmates. I believe my prayers will be answered and this profanity will not continue for another school year. But I should not take my anger out upon you all. I do apologize for my rude behavior and ask you to forgive me. I asked Alan Longstaff to forgive me and I think he has. I have sent him 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' which is a compilation of source material. He has graciously offered to read this work. It is a 40 page document 12 pt 1 1/2 line spaced with only a few Ed. comments. The other works are documentation and exasperating experiences attempting to get the priests of the General Church of the New Jerusalem to accept the Truth of Doctrine. If you could forgive me of my insulting behavior I would appreciate it. If you would be interested in reading this document I will send it to you. If you want to pass it on to others you have my appreciation. Your errant brother, Greg _________________________________________________________________ Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From brothergregory@hotmail.com Sun Jun 11 00:27:31 2006 From: brothergregory@hotmail.com (Gregory Davis) Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:27:31 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Shouting in the Wilderness Message-ID: All else, it seems to me, is shouting in the wilderness. Alan Yes, I read you loud and clear. The important information that you have gleaned from my posts is my rather abrupt manner. That innocent children in their spiritual development and at a critical time in life are taken before a 'golden eagle idol' and made to take a pledge to it as it stands right besides the Ten Commandment is not worthy of even a simple comment by you. Oh, I tried to get your attention all right. But this horror doesn't bother you one bit. What offends you? How dare you use all caps, what a terrible sin! An insight into the return of the Lord? Forget about it. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From xenolith44@msn.com Mon Jun 12 02:16:49 2006 From: xenolith44@msn.com (Alan Longstaff) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 22:16:49 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] judgment on an unknown In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Look, Greg, as I have done with one other who offered judgments about me on one of these websites, I'm going to caution you that you know nothing about me whatsoever that you should feel entitled to say what you have been saying about me (let alone others). I tell you that I have no connection with New Church schools that you should hold ME responsible for any pledging to a "'golden eagle idol' . . . as it stands right beside the Ten Commandments," such that I should be obliged to make any comment upon the matter. What I have suggested to you is that you show a little respect to the people you are addressing, in order that they might take you and your message seriously. Alan >From: "Gregory Davis" >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] Shouting in the Wilderness >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 20:27:31 -0400 All else, it seems to me, is shouting in the wilderness. Alan > Yes, I read you loud and clear. The important information that you have gleaned from my posts is my rather abrupt manner. That innocent children in their spiritual development and at a critical time in life are taken before a 'golden eagle idol' and made to take a pledge to it as it stands right besides the Ten Commandment is not worthy of even a simple comment by you. Oh, I tried to get your attention all right. But this horror doesn't bother you one bit. What offends you? How dare you use all caps, what a terrible sin! An insight into the return of the Lord? Forget about it. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From arcam1970@comcast.net Mon Jun 12 17:56:58 2006 From: arcam1970@comcast.net (arcam1970@comcast.net) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:56:58 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] Shouting in the Wilderness Message-ID: <061220061756.23554.448DAAEA00028C5B00005C022200762194CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Gregory: I don't understand what you are angry about and I have some questions about your postings. Maybe I can give you some satisfactory replies but only if I know the answers to these questions: (1) What is the "golden eagle idol" you mention? (2) Where did you hear or read that biblical scholars agree that Exodus 30:23 is in error (with respect to the third term after myrrh and cinnamon)? (3) What should that third term be (in Hebrew, Latin, and English, please)? (4) Would it satisfy you if the Lord's New Church which is Nova Hierosolyma began to ordain priests according to that Law of Moses (Mosche)? How about the General Church of the New Jerusalem? (5) Can you describe in detail just how the ritual of ordination should take place? (I will actually admit that I do not know how that ritual has been performed as of late. I assume that A. Vashetov was the last one ordained over here in America and I did not witness it.) Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Gregory Davis" > All else, it seems to me, is shouting in the wilderness. Alan > > Yes, I read you loud and clear. The important information that you have > gleaned from my posts is my rather abrupt manner. That innocent children in > their spiritual development and at a critical time in life are taken before > a 'golden eagle idol' and made to take a pledge to it as it stands right > besides the Ten Commandment is not worthy of even a simple comment by you. > Oh, I tried to get your attention all right. But this horror doesn't bother > you one bit. What offends you? How dare you use all caps, what a terrible > sin! > > An insight into the return of the Lord? Forget about it. > > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > "Greg" > > _________________________________________________________________ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > _______________________________________________ > lucerna mailing list > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From arcam1970@comcast.net Mon Jun 12 18:22:31 2006 From: arcam1970@comcast.net (arcam1970@comcast.net) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:22:31 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE Message-ID: <061220061822.10705.448DB0E700040E5A000029D12207020653CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Gregory: What does it mean, KNH, other than a reed and ultimate truth? I'm going to have patience with you because you seem to be runnning out of potential friends or allies. You've insulted Alan L., Michael D., and myself Richard C. because we don't have the insight to the ordination ritual of Exodus 30 that you do, but you are not explaining yourself very well. Wait, I think I understand the "golden eagle idol" now. Is it the United States of America? In spite of the obvious imperfections of our country (such as the proliferation and dominion of secular humanism) we could not have the orderly technical society that we have right now that allows us to print and even fax the New Word of God and to hold these internet discussions as we are doing right now. I don't think we can get away from that "golden eagle idol" without the Lord's Divine Providence in the natural society allowing it to fall down on its own, and that would be a tradgedy. I would never want to knock it down, at least not from my heavenly proprium, as far as my infernal proprium is concerned, I have no comment right now. Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net -------------- Original message -------------- From: "Gregory Davis" > In Luke, "And the messengers of John having gone away, he began to say unto > the multitudes concerning John: `What have ye gone forth to the wilderness > to look on? a reed (KNH or CALAM* ?) by the wind shaken? But what have ye > gone forth to see? a man in soft garments clothed? lo, they in splendid > apparellings, and living in luxury, are in the houses of kings! vii. 24, 25. > > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > "Greg" > > >From: "Alan Longstaff" > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >CC: brothergregory@hotmail.com > >Subject: KNOW THY AUDIENCE > >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:50:42 -0400 > > > >Ok, Brother literally "Greg," I think your purpose is now clear: "The > >Writings literally and spiritually were opened to me from out of this > >literal understanding. My purpose is to attempt to relate the importance of > >this discovery. This is the 'return' concept." > > > >But surely, in your experience, you have come to realize the importance of > >"knowing" your audience before you begin to preach to them. (In "The > >Writings" it says that the Lord ACCOMMODATES Himself to the human race. > >That implies "knowing" the state of the audience.) In as much as you have > >accused your audience of being the "offspring" of the "Lutheran and > >Protestant" degeneracy, and of being "dead branches" and perhaps "those > >without life," it hardly seems to me that you have attempted to get off on > >the right foot with what this audience may want to hear. If you have > >important things to reveal, perhaps you might want to put this in the > >context of positive things you know about the New Church Movement, as a way > >of demonstrating some empathy and solidarity with your listerners. Alan > > > >>From: "Gregory Davis" > >>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word<>To: > >>lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >>Subject: Re: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? > >>Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 17:20:01 -0400 > >The Writings also speak of those without life in the same manner > > > >142. Verse 15. So thou hast them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, > >which thing I hate, signifies those who separate good from truth, or > >charity from faith, which is against Divine order. This is evident from > >what was said and shown above (n. 107), where similar words occur. To which > >this is to be added: That those who separate truth from good, or faith from > >charity, turn away from themselves all influx of heaven into the goods they > >do, in consequence of which their goods are not good; for heaven flows in, > >that is, the Lord through heaven, into the good of man's love; he, > >therefore, that rejects the good of charity from the doctrine of the > >church, and receives instead only those things that are called matters of > >faith, is shut out of heaven; truths with such have no life; and it is the > >life of truth, which is good, that conjoins, but not truth without life, or > >faith without charity. (But more on these subjects in The Doctrine of the > >New Jerusalem where it treats of Charity, n. 84-107, and of Faith, n. > >108-122.) > > > >The Divine Goodness is 'Esse' the mystery of the use of the 'oil'. Again I > >come back to this subject because to reject the literal Word is to reject > >Him. When one states that whatever the Christ means literally does not > >matter because I believe and have faith that He is the Anointed they lose > >sight of the mystery of the literal return. One cannot believe what one > >does not understand. I don't have the reference available for that > >spiritual law according to the Writings but you should recognize it. > > > >My statement is clear on what my purpose is here. I gathered the literal > >truths from out of the Word. One must first know and act upon the literal > >truth of the 'oil'. A great help has been the spiritual practises of the > >Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The Writings literally and spiritually were > >opened to me from out of this literal understanding. My purpose is to > >attempt to relate the importance of this discovery. This is the 'return' > >concept. One simply cannot understand the Writings without being > >knowledgable to the 'mysteries' of the Oriental Orthodox Church. It is > >extremely frustrating experience. However, headway is being made. My work > >is almost complete. There is one more paper that needs to be written > >entitled 'Doctrine of Truth and Good'. When this is complete my intention > >is to send it out to all of the 'virtual priests' of the New Church to let > >them know that the return concept is in the literal Word. As of now, I have > >addresses listed from a New Church website that show all of the New > >Churches and their pastors names as well as the Seminaries. Right now, this > >literal meaning is hidden. > > > >This discussion started on the arcana hidden in the Latin of the Writings. > >Central to this concept I keep trying to point out is that the literal > >meaning of the term CALAM* is of extreme importance. Do a search of the > >term and you will see just how important the term is. In one sense the > >Writings state that it symbolizes the ultimate truth. In its oppossing > >sense it symbolizes falsity sustaining. In the symbolism of the golden reed > >it states that this term cannot be literally understood, only spiritually. > >I literally and spiritually understand this arcana because I know what the > >term KNH means. > > > >When adminstrator of this site states, "So what" in regard to this whole > >concept one has to wonder why anyone bothers at all. > > > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" > > > > > > > > From: "Alan Longstaff" > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: [lucerna] does faith alone justify the degenerate offspring? > >Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 16:03:49 -0400 > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "Gregory Davis" Subject: Re: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 22:33:25 +0000 Size: 661 URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From brothergregory@hotmail.com Mon Jun 12 18:32:53 2006 From: brothergregory@hotmail.com (Gregory Davis) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:32:53 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] judgment on an unknown In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > >Look, Greg, as I have done with one other who offered judgments about me on >one of these websites, I'm going to caution you that you know nothing about >me whatsoever that you should feel entitled to say what you have been >saying about me (let alone others). I tell you that I have no connection >with New Church schools that you should hold ME responsible for any >pledging to a "'golden eagle idol' . . . as it stands right beside the Ten >Commandments," such that I should be obliged to make any comment upon the >matter. > >What I have suggested to you is that you show a little respect to the >people you are addressing, in order that they might take you and your >message seriously. Alan > > I see, Reverend Alan Longstaff, that is your name and title, isn't it? It was you who claimed to be part of the 'New Church Movement' and claimed an affinity with the 'five branches'. It was you who objected to my statement that they are 'dead'. Now, when it is pointed out to you that the practice of one of these 'dead branches' is to force innocent children before a 'golden eagle' and profane the Word and a worship setting, you distance yourself. You should be able to tell that there is an extremely serious problem. The clergy of the 'New Church Movement' are not in the Doctrine of Divine Truth. Until they are willing to identify that there is a problem none of the 'blind virtual priests' will be able to receive the Divine Goodness. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From xenolith44@msn.com Mon Jun 12 18:51:01 2006 From: xenolith44@msn.com (Alan Longstaff) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:51:01 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] counterproductive to your cause Message-ID: Again, Greg, because you have guessed at a few things about me you act as though you know all about me. I do not distance myself from the New Church Movement at all. However, I also know how one might and again might not be able to influence people. Nothing that you have presented so far has such credibility--espescially as the "Doctrine of Divine Truth"--as to influence me, and your manner remains counterproductive to your cause. Alan >From: "Gregory Davis" >To: xenolith44@msn.com, lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: RE: judgment on an unknown >Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:32:53 -0400 Look, Greg, as I have done with one other who offered judgments >>about me on one of these websites, I'm going to caution you that you know >>nothing about me whatsoever that you should feel entitled to say what you >>have been saying about me (let alone others). I tell you that I have no >>connection with New Church schools that you should hold ME responsible for >>any pledging to a "'golden eagle idol' . . . as it stands right beside the >>Ten Commandments," such that I should be obliged to make any comment upon >>the matter. >> >>What I have suggested to you is that you show a little respect to the >>people you are addressing, in order that they might take you and your >>message seriously. Alan >> I see, Reverend Alan Longstaff, that is your name and title, isn't it? It was you who claimed to be part of the 'New Church Movement' and claimed an affinity with the 'five branches'. It was you who objected to my statement that they are 'dead'. Now, when it is pointed out to you that the practice of one of these 'dead branches' is to force innocent children before a 'golden eagle' and profane the Word and a worship setting, you distance yourself. You should be able to tell that there is an extremely serious problem. The clergy of the 'New Church Movement' are not in the Doctrine of Divine Truth. Until they are willing to identify that there is a problem none of the 'blind virtual priests' will be able to receive the Divine Goodness. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" > >_________________________________________________________________ >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From brothergregory@hotmail.com Mon Jun 12 19:27:36 2006 From: brothergregory@hotmail.com (Gregory Davis) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:27:36 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] counterproductive to your cause In-Reply-To: Message-ID: You are correct that my manner is counterproductive to the work. The 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' is a Word document of 40 pages, 12pt, 1 1/2 line. It stricktly quotes source material with only 7 lines or so of Ed. comment. If you can look past my ignorant behavior it would be a blessing to be able to share it with you. Let me know, and I'll send it to you. Your errant brother, Greg. Please forgive me. > >Again, Greg, because you have guessed at a few things about me you act as >though you know all about me. I do not distance myself from the New Church >Movement at all. However, I also know how one might and again might not be >able to influence people. Nothing that you have presented so far has such >credibility--espescially as the "Doctrine of Divine Truth"--as to influence >me, and your manner remains counterproductive to your cause. Alan > > >>From: "Gregory Davis" >>To: xenolith44@msn.com, lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>Subject: RE: judgment on an unknown >>Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:32:53 -0400 > >Look, Greg, as I have done with one other who offered judgments >>>about me on one of these websites, I'm going to caution you that you know >>>nothing about me whatsoever that you should feel entitled to say what you >>>have been saying about me (let alone others). I tell you that I have no >>>connection with New Church schools that you should hold ME responsible >>>for any pledging to a "'golden eagle idol' . . . as it stands right >>>beside the Ten Commandments," such that I should be obliged to make any >>>comment upon the matter. >>> >>>What I have suggested to you is that you show a little respect to the >>>people you are addressing, in order that they might take you and your >>>message seriously. Alan >>> >I see, Reverend Alan Longstaff, that is your name and title, isn't it? It >was you who claimed to be part of the 'New Church Movement' and claimed an >affinity with the 'five branches'. It was you who objected to my statement >that they are 'dead'. Now, when it is pointed out to you that the practice >of one of these 'dead branches' is to force innocent children before a >'golden eagle' and profane the Word and a worship setting, you distance >yourself. You should be able to tell that there is an extremely serious >problem. The clergy of the 'New Church Movement' are not in the Doctrine of >Divine Truth. Until they are willing to identify that there is a problem >none of the 'blind virtual priests' will be able to receive the Divine >Goodness. > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >> > > _________________________________________________________________ Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From xenolith44@msn.com Mon Jun 12 19:48:34 2006 From: xenolith44@msn.com (Alan Longstaff) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:48:34 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] productive dialogue sought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I called your behavior "counterproductive," not "ignorant." I would like to see this work you mention, and with your permission, share it with some others. While the people (including priests) in the New Church Movement may be in darkness (and practicing other things that set you on edge), I don't think you shine a light on your work (your contribution) by giving the appearance of disrespecting others. Let's see if we can get this dialogue on a better footing. Alan >From: "Gregory Davis" >To: xenolith44@msn.com >CC: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: RE: counterproductive to your cause >Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 15:27:36 -0400 You are correct that my manner is counterproductive to the work. The 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' is a Word document of 40 pages, 12pt, 1 1/2 line. It stricktly quotes source material with only 7 lines or so of Ed. comment. If you can look past my ignorant behavior it would be a blessing to be able to share it with you. Let me know, and I'll send it to you. Your errant brother, Greg. Please forgive me. >Again, Greg, because you have guessed at a few things about me you >>act as though you know all about me. I do not distance myself from the New >>Church Movement at all. However, I also know how one might and again might >>not be able to influence people. Nothing that you have presented so far >>has such credibility--espescially as the "Doctrine of Divine Truth"--as to >>influence me, and your manner remains counterproductive to your cause. >>Alan >> >> >>>From: "Gregory Davis" >>>To: xenolith44@msn.com, lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>>Subject: RE: judgment on an unknown >>>Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:32:53 -0400 >> >>Look, Greg, as I have done with one other who offered judgments >>>>about me on one of these websites, I'm going to caution you that you >>>>know nothing about me whatsoever that you should feel entitled to say >>>>what you have been saying about me (let alone others). I tell you that I >>>>have no connection with New Church schools that you should hold ME >>>>responsible for any pledging to a "'golden eagle idol' . . . as it >>>>stands right beside the Ten Commandments," such that I should be >>>>obliged to make any comment upon the matter. >>>> >>>>What I have suggested to you is that you show a little respect to the >>>>people you are addressing, in order that they might take you and your >>>>message seriously. Alan >>>> >>I see, Reverend Alan Longstaff, that is your name and title, isn't it? It >>was you who claimed to be part of the 'New Church Movement' and claimed an >>affinity with the 'five branches'. It was you who objected to my statement >>that they are 'dead'. Now, when it is pointed out to you that the practice >>of one of these 'dead branches' is to force innocent children before a >>'golden eagle' and profane the Word and a worship setting, you distance >>yourself. You should be able to tell that there is an extremely serious >>problem. The clergy of the 'New Church Movement' are not in the Doctrine >>of Divine Truth. Until they are willing to identify that there is a >>problem none of the 'blind virtual priests' will be able to receive the >>Divine Goodness. >> >>Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" >>> >>>_________________________________________________________________ >>>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's >>>FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >>> >> >> > >_________________________________________________________________ >Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! >http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ > -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From brothergregory@hotmail.com Mon Jun 12 20:07:31 2006 From: brothergregory@hotmail.com (Gregory Davis) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:07:31 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] productive dialogue sought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >I called your behavior "counterproductive," not "ignorant." I would like to >see this work you mention, and with your permission, share it with some >others. While the people (including priests) in the New Church Movement may >be in darkness (and practicing other things that set you on edge), I don't >think you shine a light on your work (your contribution) by giving the >appearance of disrespecting others. Let's see if we can get this dialogue >on a better footing. Alan Alan, I appreciate your forgiving nature and will post the 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' Word document to you. This was the first study. There are subsequent studies that were done that show authoritative support. You do have permission to share it with others. Your "counterproductive" not "ignorant" brother, "Greg" > > _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From Reformstuf@aol.com Tue Jun 13 22:28:16 2006 From: Reformstuf@aol.com (Reformstuf@aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:28:16 EDT Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology Message-ID: <496.3183290.31c09600@aol.com> In a message dated 6/10/2006 10:49:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, arcam1970@comcast.net writes: Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its ordination practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? The Third Testament indicates that inaugurations into the Priesthood are to be done with the "laying on of hands," see DLW 220, CL 396, AE 79, AC 6292. True, inaugurations were performed by anointing with oil as was done by Moses to Aaron and his sons. (see Leviticus 8:12 and 8:30) However, to be fair it must be pointed out that such inaugurations were also to include sacrifices (Lev. 8:14-30 and special clothing (Lev. 8:7-9;13) So if it is insisted (as Greg seems to be saying) that Priests be anointed as Moses was commanded to do, then animal sacrifice must be included as part of the ritual. (Lev. 8:17,21,29,36) Hugh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Tue Jun 13 22:38:38 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:38:38 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology Message-ID: <061320062238.24206.448F3E6E00082A3300005E8E2207024553CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Hugh: I think that pretty much settles that. If Gregory can't accept that I think he is making a serious disturbance as he would be putting the remote revelation (the Bible) of the Word over the proximal revelation (the Writings of Swedenborg) of the Word. You are absolutely right. I hope he sees this. If he doesn't, I will stop discussing matters with him. Richard C. -------------- Original message -------------- In a message dated 6/10/2006 10:49:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, arcam1970@comcast.net writes: Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its ordination practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? The Third Testament indicates that inaugurations into the Priesthood are to be done with the "laying on of hands," see DLW 220, CL 396, AE 79, AC 6292. True, inaugurations were performed by anointing with oil as was done by Moses to Aaron and his sons. (see Leviticus 8:12 and 8:30) However, to be fair it must be pointed out that such inaugurations were also to include sacrifices (Lev. 8:14-30 and special clothing (Lev. 8:7-9;13) So if it is insisted (as Greg seems to be saying) that Priests be anointed as Moses was commanded to do, then animal sacrifice must be included as part of the ritual. (Lev. 8:17,21,29,36) Hugh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:29:17 +0000 Size: 624 URL: From brothergregory@hotmail.com Tue Jun 13 22:38:39 2006 From: brothergregory@hotmail.com (Gregory Davis) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:38:39 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] KNOW THY AUDIENCE In-Reply-To: <061220061822.10705.448DB0E700040E5A000029D12207020653CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: > >Gregory: > >What does it mean, KNH, other than a reed and ultimate truth? > >I'm going to have patience with you because you seem to be runnning out of >potential friends or allies. You've insulted Alan L., Michael D., and >myself Richard C. because we don't have the insight to the ordination >ritual of Exodus 30 that you do, but you are not explaining yourself very >well. Wait, I think I understand the "golden eagle idol" now. Is it the >United States of America? In spite of the obvious imperfections of our >country (such as the proliferation and dominion of secular humanism) we >could not have the orderly technical society that we have right now that >allows us to print and even fax the New Word of God and to hold these >internet discussions as we are doing right now. I don't think we can get >away from that "golden eagle idol" without the Lord's Divine Providence in >the natural society allowing it to fall down on its own, and that would be >a tradgedy. I would never want to knock it down, at least not from my >heavenly proprium, as far as my infernal pr! > oprium >is concerned, I have no comment right now. > >Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > Richard, I do apologize for blasting away but this really tough stuff to handle alone. The KNH in the Hebrew is a specific plant. Hence the KNH BSM of Exodus 30:23. I asked Abuna Eliais at Saint Mary Coptic Orthodox Church on CID day and was referred to Bishop Youssef who officiated later that evening. After service when asked he said, "Why do you want to know this thing." When I relayed that the New Church needs to understand the literal Word for the proper ordination of their priests I was asked, "What is this New Church?" I told him that there has been a new revelation in the work of Emanuel Swedenborg. He asked me, "Who is this Swedenborg, I have never heard of him. Does this New Church believe that the Lord is Jesus Christ?" I affirmed that it does. He asked, "What about the Trinity. Does this Church accept the Trinity?" I affirmed that it does but looks upon the teaching differently than does the Coptic Church. "How so?" I told him that we see Jesus as the Father being the soul such as we have. That Jesus is the Man such as we are both here together and that the Spirit is the arm or how God acts. "This is heresy." I was told by the Bishop. "No, you would not call this heresy according to your religion, but profanity," I observed. "This was decided a long time ago in council, I will pray for you," he said as I held up my right hand palm facing him. "That won't be necessary. My state is ascending. I see that this interview is over. I will be leaving now," I told him back in July of 2003. After that encounter, not too much later, I was brought in the spirit to meet Aba Tsige Dengle outside Saint Gabriel Ethiopian Orthodox Church. With him was our interpreter. I asked him the same question, "What is calamus?" He didn't understand the question. Again, I explained that I wanted to know what is the third term in the Holy oil of Moses in Exodus 30:23. After a spirited conversation between himself and the interpreter. I was told. "It cannot be spoken." Then I asked if he could write it down and was told, "It cannot be written." In appreciation I returned the mystery by stating, 'truly a reed like unto a rod.' These two Churches know. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church is the one with the 'Ancient Word'. The Lord provides that there will be a Church that understands the literal Word to conjoin man to heaven. The books of Jasher, Jubilee and Enoch are part of their Canon. They are the ones to be found in the 'East' which according to heavenly geography is located in Africa. These two Churches are part of the 'Oriental' Orthodox Church. So, if you 'looked' in the 'Orient' you would find it. The Ethiopian Church worships the 'Divine Human' and so have I in attendance. It is absolutely wild. Nothing in the Western churches compare to celebration day in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church or their worship practise. The three wise men were Israelite Ethiopian priests and they have the ark of the covenent. Hence, all of Jerusalem in an uproar. The literal Word is understood there just as Emanuel Swedenborg prophesied. This is the 'secret knowledge' of the Church. This is what is to be revealed in the Revelation. This could have been understood by the New Church if they were obediant to the command of the Lord in the ordination of the priesthood. I guess it just takes time or Divine Providence. It really has been an adventure being led to understand all of this. I do complain too much. This past Sunday was an uplifting experience and I believe the Word will be delivered from out of this mystery soon. I have been documenting all of these discoveries and conversations with the various clergy in doctrinal papers and sending it to the General Church of the New Jerusalem. I have been met with villification, mockery and denial. When I examine this Church to find out the cause of their blindness to the work in the Lord, I discover the most horrible idol worship ever practised in the history of mankind. They have an American flag right next to the Ten Commandments in the Chapel and top of this flag is a 'golden eagle idol'. Every school day the innocent are forced to stand before this idol and repeat that it is a god to close their worship service. I was told that this practise is 'true and good'. In my travels some years ago I had gone to Bryn Athyn and an Odhner adolescent girl told me, "I don't believe in any of it." I understand now her anger at this horribly profane religion and pray that the Lord will deliver her and fellow classmates. I believe my prayers will be answered and this profanity will not continue for another school year. But I should not take my anger out upon you all. I do apologize for my rude behavior and ask you to forgive me. I asked Alan Longstaff to forgive me and I think he has. I have sent him 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' which is a compilation of source material. He has graciously offered to read this work. It is a 40 page document 12 pt 1 1/2 line spaced with only a few Ed. comments. The other works are documentation and exasperating experiences attempting to get the priests of the General Church of the New Jerusalem to accept the Truth of Doctrine. If you could forgive me of my insulting behavior I would appreciate it. If you would be interested in reading this document I will send it to you. If you want to pass it on to others you have my appreciation. Your errant brother, Greg _________________________________________________________________ Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Tue Jun 13 22:59:55 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:59:55 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: <061320062238.24206.448F3E6E00082A3300005E8E2207024553CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: Hugh, My study on this subject is entitled 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' and quotes from source material. It is 40 pages long 12 pt. type 1 1/2 line spacing. This is the first paper I did. I only include a minimal amount of Ed. comment maybe 7 lines tops. Subsecquent papers document my spiritual experiences on this subject. The subject is anything but as simple as you state. This is the mystery you all are trying to understand. I really am trying to tell you. My rude behaviour is directly attributed to the difficulty I have had in trying to relay my discoveries to the General Church of the New Jerusalem. But anyway, if you would like to take a look at this paper you can then decide if you want to go deeper into the 'mysteries'. The 'laying on of the hands' is a 'mystery' statement that hides the true meaning for those who are not 'adept'. My further research shows that the Sacrament of Baptism' is to include three seperate degrees in the New Church. I quote Bishop Pendleton and the Writings to prove this subsequent discovery. I do apologize for my rude behaviour and seek your forgiveness. Greg > >Hugh: >I think that pretty much settles that. If Gregory can't accept that I >think he is making a serious disturbance as he would be putting the remote >revelation (the Bible) of the Word over the proximal revelation (the >Writings of Swedenborg) of the Word. You are absolutely right. I hope he >sees this. If he doesn't, I will stop discussing matters with him. >Richard C. > >-------------- Original message -------------- >In a message dated 6/10/2006 10:49:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, >arcam1970@comcast.net writes: >Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its ordination >practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? >The Third Testament indicates that inaugurations into the Priesthood are to >be done with the "laying on of hands," see DLW 220, CL 396, AE 79, AC 6292. > >True, inaugurations were performed by anointing with oil as was done by >Moses to Aaron and his sons. (see Leviticus 8:12 and 8:30) However, to be >fair it must be pointed out that such inaugurations were also to include >sacrifices (Lev. 8:14-30 and special clothing (Lev. 8:7-9;13) So if it is >insisted (as Greg seems to be saying) that Priests be anointed as Moses was >commanded to do, then animal sacrifice must be included as part of the >ritual. (Lev. 8:17,21,29,36) > >Hugh >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Tue Jun 13 23:46:45 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:46:45 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hugh, I quote here the pertinent parts that are referred to and then close with an Editorial comment in parenthesis. The final parenthesis quote is from the Writings and sites an exhaustive examination of this subject in the Writings. In D.L.W. 222 ?I have often wondered that the angels have such knowledge from the mere action of the body through the hands; but that it is so has been shown to me repeatedly by living experience, and it has been said that it is from this that inductions into the ministry are performed by the laying on of the hands, and that "touching with the hand" signifies communicating, with other like things. From all this the conclusion is formed, that the all of charity and faith is in works, and that charity and faith without works are like rainbows about the sun, which vanish away and are dispersed by a cloud. On this account "works" and "doing works" are so often mentioned in the Word, and it is said that a man's salvation depends upon these; moreover, he that doeth is called a wise man, and he that doeth not is called a foolish man. But it should be remembered that by "works" here are meant uses actually done; for the all of charity and faith is in uses and according to uses. There is this correspondence of works with uses, because the correspondence is spiritual, but it is carried out through substances and matters, which are subjects. (Note: As can be readily seen in this quote, ?it is carried out through substances and matters,? Ed.) C.L. 396 ?Hence also it is that at this day, inauguration into the priesthood is made by the laying on of hands.? (Note: This refers to the middle of the 7th week of Daniel. Ed.) A.E. 79 ?[2] The reason why to touch with the hand denotes to communicate, and to transfer to another, is, because all the power of man is transferred from the body into the hands; therefore, what the mind wills that the body should do, the arms and hands perform accordingly. Hence it is that by arms and hands in the Word is signified power (as may be seen, Arcana Coelestia, n. 878, 3091, 4931-4937. 6947, 7673, 10,019); this power, however, is natural power,? (Note: The reference here is to natural power which of coarse we know to be from out of the proprium. Ed.) A.C. 6292 'Place your right hand on his head' means that good should accordingly occupy the first place. This is clear from the meaning of 'placing the right hand on a head' as considering to occupy the first place, as above in 6269, 6287. The placing of his hand by one on the head of another when he was going to bless belonged to a custom received from the ancients For the head is where a person's actual powers of understanding and will reside, whereas the body is where actions in response and in obedience to them are located. Thus 'placing a hand on the head' was a representative act, denoting that a blessing should be imparted to a person's understanding and will, thus to his real self. That same custom originating in those ancient times remains even to this day and is followed at ordinations as well as in blessings. (From the Arcana Coelestia 9954 (1) ?It is of interest to know what is implied in all this, since anointing has remained in practice from ancient times down to the present day (monarchs are anointed), and anointing is held to be holy today in just the same way as it was in former times.? 9475, 9954, 10249 & 10267 Ed.) Greg >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:59:55 -0400 > > >Hugh, > >My study on this subject is entitled 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' and quotes >from source material. It is 40 pages long 12 pt. type 1 1/2 line spacing. >This is the first paper I did. I only include a minimal amount of Ed. >comment maybe 7 lines tops. Subsecquent papers document my spiritual >experiences on this subject. The subject is anything but as simple as you >state. This is the mystery you all are trying to understand. I really am >trying to tell you. My rude behaviour is directly attributed to the >difficulty I have had in trying to relay my discoveries to the General >Church of the New Jerusalem. But anyway, if you would like to take a look >at >this paper you can then decide if you want to go deeper into the >'mysteries'. > >The 'laying on of the hands' is a 'mystery' statement that hides the true >meaning for those who are not 'adept'. My further research shows that the >Sacrament of Baptism' is to include three seperate degrees in the New >Church. I quote Bishop Pendleton and the Writings to prove this subsequent >discovery. > >I do apologize for my rude behaviour and seek your forgiveness. > >Greg > > > > >Hugh: > >I think that pretty much settles that. If Gregory can't accept that I > >think he is making a serious disturbance as he would be putting the >remote > >revelation (the Bible) of the Word over the proximal revelation (the > >Writings of Swedenborg) of the Word. You are absolutely right. I hope >he > >sees this. If he doesn't, I will stop discussing matters with him. > >Richard C. > > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > >In a message dated 6/10/2006 10:49:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, > >arcam1970@comcast.net writes: > >Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its >ordination > >practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? > >The Third Testament indicates that inaugurations into the Priesthood are >to > >be done with the "laying on of hands," see DLW 220, CL 396, AE 79, AC >6292. > > > >True, inaugurations were performed by anointing with oil as was done by > >Moses to Aaron and his sons. (see Leviticus 8:12 and 8:30) However, to be > >fair it must be pointed out that such inaugurations were also to include > >sacrifices (Lev. 8:14-30 and special clothing (Lev. 8:7-9;13) So if it is > >insisted (as Greg seems to be saying) that Priests be anointed as Moses >was > >commanded to do, then animal sacrifice must be included as part of the > >ritual. (Lev. 8:17,21,29,36) > > > >Hugh > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >_________________________________________________________________ >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 14 00:36:34 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:36:34 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Shouting in the Wilderness In-Reply-To: <061220061756.23554.448DAAEA00028C5B00005C022200762194CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: I don't understand what you are angry about and I have some questions about your postings. Richard, In 1 Chronicles, "and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that it may not grieve me! iv. 10. Maybe I can give you some satisfactory replies but only if I know the answers to these questions: > >(1) What is the "golden eagle idol" you mention? The children at the Academy of the New Church in Bryn Athyns, Pennsylvania are required to attend Chapel service each morning to begin their school day. At the close they are required to stand and look to the American flag on display right next to the Ten Commandments. On top of the staff holding this flag is a 'golden eagle'. They state in this pledge that the flag represents the nation state and that it is 'under God'. In their minds eye they see this 'idol' and state 'under God'. As a Swedenborgian clearly you must understand the significance of this 'representative'. >(2) Where did you hear or read that biblical scholars agree that Exodus >30:23 is in error (with respect to the third term after myrrh and >cinnamon)? I have tried to define 'calamus' and all of my research confirms that all Biblical scholars agree that this term is in error when placed into the Seputigent. The translator priests of the Hebrew into the Greek hid the true meaning of the term so that the pagan Greeks would not know the true meaning of the term. Robert Alter in, 'The Five Books of Moses' an authoritative translation just published recently defines the term as, 'sweet cane'. This mystery continues with us. The revealing of this term is the revelation of the literal word spoken of in the Writings. >(3) What should that third term be (in Hebrew, Latin, and English, please)? The totality of my work defines the term. At present another paper is being written entitled Doctrine of Truth and Good. When this is finished, I will be sending it out to all of the New Church priests that I can locate worldwide. Until then, I just don't want to simply state the authoritatively documented definition of the term. >(4) Would it satisfy you if the Lord's New Church which is Nova Hierosolyma >began to ordain priests according to that Law of Moses (Mosche)? That is >the works objective. How about the General Church of the New Jerusalem? I have sent the completed documentation as it has been given to Bishop Thomas Kline. Also, priests of the Ethiopian, Coptic and Syriac Orthodox Churches for witness as well as to a prophet of the genuine truth representing the Hittites. Over 40 priests of the General Church of the New Jerusalam have received partial documentation. My thinking is to send this all out in total when completed. My thinking now is that it will be done within the next 30 days. Right now the conclusions are on point but the final equation is now what? I want to be able to provide that answer as well. >(5) Can you describe in detail just how the ritual of ordination should >take place? My favorite ordination is documented in 2 Kings, " And Elisha the prophet hath called to one of the sons of the prophets, and saith to him, `Gird up thy loins, and take this vial of oil in thy hand, and go to Ramoth-Gilead, and thou hast gone in there, and see thou there Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, son of Nimshi, and thou hast gone in, and caused him to rise out of the midst of his brethren, and brought him in to the inner part of an inner-chamber, and taken the vial of oil, and poured on his head, and said, Thus said Jehovah, I have anointed thee for king unto Israel; and thou hast opened the door, and fled, and dost not wait.' And the young man goeth -- the young man the prophet -- to Ramoth-Gilead, and cometh in, and lo, chiefs of the force are sitting, and he saith, `I have a word unto thee, O chief!' and Jehu saith, `Unto which of all of us?' and he saith, `Unto thee, O chief.' And he riseth and cometh in to the house, and he poureth the oil on his head, and saith to him, `Thus said Jehovah, God of Israel, I have anointed thee for king unto the people of Jehovah, unto Israel, and thou hast smitten the house of Ahab thy lord, and I have required the blood of My servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants of Jehovah, from the hand of Jezebel; and perished hath all the house of Ahab, and I have cut off to Ahab those sitting on the wall, and restrained, and left, in Israel, and I have given up the house of Ahab like the house of Jeroboam son of Nebat, and as the house of Baasha son of Ahijah, and Jezebel do the dogs eat in the portion of Jezreel, and there is none burying;' and he openeth the door and fleeth.And Jehu hath gone out unto the servants of his lord, and [one] saith to him, `Is there peace? wherefore came this madman unto thee?' and he saith unto them, `Ye have known the man and his talk.' And they say, `False, declare, we pray thee, to us;' and he saith, `Thus and thus spake he unto me, saying, Thus said Jehovah, I have anointed thee for king unto Israel.' And they haste and take each his garment, and put [it] under him at the top of the stairs, and blow with a trumpet, and say, `Reigned hath Jehu!' " ix. 1-13 >(I will actually admit that I do not know how that ritual has been >performed as of late. I assume that A. Vashetov was the last one ordained >over here in America and I did not witness it.) Don't know the man, you have piqued my curiosity though, who is he? To get a grasp on this subject you should first read the 'Doctrine of Divine Truth'. This quotes source material, Third Testiment, Word, New Church Life and Matthew Henry. There are only a few Ed. comments. The other papers contain my spiritual experiences in making these discoveries of the literal Word and the interpretation of Psalm 72. So, if you would like to know more on this subject let me know and I will send you this document. Greg > >Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > All else, it seems to me, is shouting in the wilderness. Alan > > > > Yes, I read you loud and clear. The important information that you have > > gleaned from my posts is my rather abrupt manner. That innocent children >in > > their spiritual development and at a critical time in life are taken >before > > a 'golden eagle idol' and made to take a pledge to it as it stands right > > besides the Ten Commandment is not worthy of even a simple comment by >you. > > Oh, I tried to get your attention all right. But this horror doesn't >bother > > you one bit. What offends you? How dare you use all caps, what a >terrible > > sin! > > > > An insight into the return of the Lord? Forget about it. > > > > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > > > "Greg" > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's >FREE! > > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lucerna mailing list > > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna _________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 14 05:24:47 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:24:47 EDT Subject: [lucerna] Anointing of Jehu and what makes a true Priest Message-ID: <2d4.8de0bc0.31c0f79f@aol.com> In a message dated 6/13/2006 8:40:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, brothergregory@hotmail.com writes: Can you describe in detail just how the ritual of ordination should >take place? My favorite ordination is documented in 2 Kings, " And Elisha the prophet hath called to one of the sons of the prophets, and saith to him, `Gird up thy loins, and take this vial of oil in thy hand ... and see thou there Jehu ...and said, Thus said Jehovah, I have anointed thee for king unto Israel.... Greg, you have just described the ordination of a king, not the ordination of a Priest as Moses was commanded to do. It appeared that earlier you were criticizing New Church ordinations because they were not performed according to the law of Moses. On 6/9/06 you said: "My studies further prove without question that the priesthood must be 'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses." The ordination and sanctification of Priests according to the law of Moses is described in Leviticus chapter 8. Jehu, an Israelitish chief was not anointed according to the law of Moses. Further, you have placed great emphasis upon being anointed with a holy oil made according to the formulation given in Exodus 30:23-25, which contains 5 ingredients -- myrrh, cinnamon, cane (KNH), cassia, and olive oil. This oil was to be used for anointing the holy articles used in worship (see Exodus 30:26-29) as well as Aaron and his sons (Exodus 30:30). That it was used as the Lord commanded Moses is clear from what is said in Leviticus chapter 8 (see also Exodus 40:9-16). Jehu could not have been anointed with such holy oil because it was forbidden that this oil be poured upon any "layman" or "stranger". (Exodus 30:33) But again, if it is insisted that Priests be ordained according to the law of Moses (as Moses was commanded to do) then the prescribed clothing and sacrifices must also be carried out. (Consider the fate of Nadab and Abihu, who offered strange fire which the Lord had not commanded them. {Lev. 10:1,2}) According to the law of Moses, Priests were to come from the tribe of Levi (Deuteronomy 18:1; Numbers chapters 3 and 4). That the Lord was anointed with oil is described in Matthew 26:6-13; and Mark 14:3-9. It is said that the oil was very expensive spikenard or pure nard, that the anointing was for Jesus burial, and that the anointing was done by a woman. Jesus was a descendent of David of the tribe of Judah and not a Levite. There is no record that the Lord was anointed according to the law given to Moses. Yet the Lord is called a Priest and also a King. That the Lord is called a Priest is not because he was anointed with the holy oil or because he was of the tribe of Levi -- it is because He is the Divine Good united to the Divine True in His Human and that Divine Good is represented by a Priest and the Priesthood. While it is said in several places that a Priest is to be inaugurated into the Office by the laying on of hands, and that the Priesthood represents Divine Good, what makes a person a true Priest comes from the love for the salvation of souls and from honestly, justly, and faithfully carrying out the uses of the priestly office. A Priest is a true Priest from the love of and faithfulness to the Uses of the Priesthood, and not solely from the ritual by which the person is inaugurated into the Priesthood. The Lord set the example in this. Hugh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 14 19:29:19 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 15:29:19 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] true believer crusade Message-ID: Dear Brother Greg, now that you are anecdotally laying out your complaint?as Brother Richard Campbell has also threatened us with doing (<;?it is becoming clearer why you are upset. However, I am going to try to put your complaint in a different perspective, if I can. I had previously spoken to you about Jeremiah and the Amer-ican form of preaching call the Jeremiad as examples of ?knowing one?s audience.? Although Jeremiah is found in the Old Testament, it seems that his contemporaries did not care to listen to him. I think that it was a matter of his tone. You come off giving the impression on being on a crusade: namely, to free some New Church school children from idolatry. The problem with crusading is finding a way to reach the audience. Obviously, the adults in the General Church?especially those representing the ?Establishment??are going to be an extremely difficult sale, so you may want to count them out. You spoke in a separate message [13-06-2006 18:38:39] about one ?adolescent girl? who spoke skeptically about what she is taught. But are you sure that she is an audience ready to accept your message in the fashion you?re choosing to deliver it? (Will not the ?Ethiopian Orthodox Church? appear as another ?Establishment? to her and play to her skepiticism?) I?m trying a gentle critique here, and may sound like I?m coming ?off the wall,? but look into a fifty year old book by Eric Hofer entitles ?the True Believer,? not because of his own experiences, but because of what he has to say about a crusader trying to reach an audience. In other words, your message may be important, but you must first figure out how to attune your audience to receive the message without filtering it out from ?their true belief.? (It don?t think it?s as though tomorrow is Judgment Day and people will be lost for not listening today.) Regards, Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Shouting in the Wilderness >Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:36:34 -0400 > >I don't understand what you are angry about and I have some questions about >your postings. >Richard, In 1 Chronicles, "and that thou wouldest keep me from evil, that >it >may not grieve me! iv. 10. > >Maybe I can give you some satisfactory replies but only if I know the >answers to these questions: > > > >(1) What is the "golden eagle idol" you mention? >The children at the Academy of the New Church in Bryn Athyns, Pennsylvania >are required to attend Chapel service each morning to begin their school >day. At the close they are required to stand and look to the American flag >on display right next to the Ten Commandments. On top of the staff holding >this flag is a 'golden eagle'. They state in this pledge that the flag >represents the nation state and that it is 'under God'. In their minds eye >they see this 'idol' and state 'under God'. As a Swedenborgian clearly you >must understand the significance of this 'representative'. > > >(2) Where did you hear or read that biblical scholars agree that Exodus > >30:23 is in error (with respect to the third term after myrrh and > >cinnamon)? >I have tried to define 'calamus' and all of my research confirms that all >Biblical scholars agree that this term is in error when placed into the >Seputigent. The translator priests of the Hebrew into the Greek hid the >true >meaning of the term so that the pagan Greeks would not know the true >meaning >of the term. Robert Alter in, 'The Five Books of Moses' an authoritative >translation just published recently defines the term as, 'sweet cane'. This >mystery continues with us. The revealing of this term is the revelation of >the literal word spoken of in the Writings. > > >(3) What should that third term be (in Hebrew, Latin, and English, >please)? >The totality of my work defines the term. At present another paper is being >written entitled Doctrine of Truth and Good. When this is finished, I will >be sending it out to all of the New Church priests that I can locate >worldwide. Until then, I just don't want to simply state the >authoritatively >documented definition of the term. > > >(4) Would it satisfy you if the Lord's New Church which is Nova >Hierosolyma > >began to ordain priests according to that Law of Moses (Mosche)? That is > >the works objective. > > How about the General Church of the New Jerusalem? I have sent the >completed documentation as it has been given to Bishop Thomas Kline. Also, >priests of the Ethiopian, Coptic and Syriac Orthodox Churches for witness >as >well as to a prophet of the genuine truth representing the Hittites. Over >40 >priests of the General Church of the New Jerusalam have received partial >documentation. My thinking is to send this all out in total when completed. >My thinking now is that it will be done within the next 30 days. Right now >the conclusions are on point but the final equation is now what? I want to >be able to provide that answer as well. > > >(5) Can you describe in detail just how the ritual of ordination should > >take place? >My favorite ordination is documented in 2 Kings, " And Elisha the prophet >hath called to one of the sons of the prophets, and saith to him, `Gird up >thy loins, and take this vial of oil in thy hand, and go to Ramoth-Gilead, >and thou hast gone in there, and see thou there Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, >son >of Nimshi, and thou hast gone in, and caused him to rise out of the midst >of >his brethren, and brought him in to the inner part of an inner-chamber, and >taken the vial of oil, and poured on his head, and said, Thus said Jehovah, >I have anointed thee for king unto Israel; and thou hast opened the door, >and fled, and dost not wait.' And the young man goeth -- the young man the >prophet -- to Ramoth-Gilead, and cometh in, and lo, chiefs of the force are >sitting, and he saith, `I have a word unto thee, O chief!' and Jehu saith, >`Unto which of all of us?' and he saith, `Unto thee, O chief.' And he >riseth >and cometh in to the house, and he poureth the oil on his head, and saith >to >him, `Thus said Jehovah, God of Israel, I have anointed thee for king unto >the people of Jehovah, unto Israel, and thou hast smitten the house of Ahab >thy lord, and I have required the blood of My servants the prophets, and >the >blood of all the servants of Jehovah, from the hand of Jezebel; and >perished >hath all the house of Ahab, and I have cut off to Ahab those sitting on the >wall, and restrained, and left, in Israel, and I have given up the house of >Ahab like the house of Jeroboam son of Nebat, and as the house of Baasha >son >of Ahijah, and Jezebel do the dogs eat in the portion of Jezreel, and there >is none burying;' and he openeth the door and fleeth.And Jehu hath gone out >unto the servants of his lord, and [one] saith to him, `Is there peace? >wherefore came this madman unto thee?' and he saith unto them, `Ye have >known the man and his talk.' And they say, `False, declare, we pray thee, >to >us;' and he saith, `Thus and thus spake he unto me, saying, Thus said >Jehovah, I have anointed thee for king unto Israel.' And they haste and >take >each his garment, and put [it] under him at the top of the stairs, and blow >with a trumpet, and say, `Reigned hath Jehu!' " ix. 1-13 > > >(I will actually admit that I do not know how that ritual has been > >performed as of late. I assume that A. Vashetov was the last one >ordained > >over here in America and I did not witness it.) >Don't know the man, you have piqued my curiosity though, who is he? > >To get a grasp on this subject you should first read the 'Doctrine of >Divine >Truth'. This quotes source material, Third Testiment, Word, New Church Life >and Matthew Henry. There are only a few Ed. comments. The other papers >contain my spiritual experiences in making these discoveries of the literal >Word and the interpretation of Psalm 72. So, if you would like to know more >on this subject let me know and I will send you this document. > >Greg > > > >Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > > > > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > > > All else, it seems to me, is shouting in the wilderness. Alan > > > > > > Yes, I read you loud and clear. The important information that you >have > > > gleaned from my posts is my rather abrupt manner. That innocent >children > >in > > > their spiritual development and at a critical time in life are taken > >before > > > a 'golden eagle idol' and made to take a pledge to it as it stands >right > > > besides the Ten Commandment is not worthy of even a simple comment by > >you. > > > Oh, I tried to get your attention all right. But this horror doesn't > >bother > > > you one bit. What offends you? How dare you use all caps, what a > >terrible > > > sin! > > > > > > An insight into the return of the Lord? Forget about it. > > > > > > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > > > > > > "Greg" > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's > >FREE! > > > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > lucerna mailing list > > > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > > > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >_________________________________________________________________ >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 14 19:48:20 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 15:48:20 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] which is your authority? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I'm flommoxed, Brother Greg: if you are so disapproving of the General Church establishment then why would you write "I quote Bishop Pendleton and the Writings to prove this subsequent discovery," as one of your authorities [13-06-2006 18:59:55, your second message below]. And since there were three Bishops Pendleton, which one is your authority? Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 19:46:45 -0400 Hugh, I quote here the pertinent parts that are referred to and then close >with an Editorial comment in parenthesis. The final parenthesis quote is >from the Writings and sites an exhaustive examination of this subject in >the Writings. > >In D.L.W. 222 ?I have often wondered that the angels have such knowledge >from the mere action of the body through the hands; but that it is so has >been shown to me repeatedly by living experience, and it has been said that >it is from this that inductions into the ministry are performed by the >laying on of the hands, and that "touching with the hand" signifies >communicating, with other like things. From all this the conclusion is >formed, that the all of charity and faith is in works, and that charity and >faith without works are like rainbows about the sun, which vanish away and >are dispersed by a cloud. On this account "works" and "doing works" are so >often mentioned in the Word, and it is said that a man's salvation depends >upon these; moreover, he that doeth is called a wise man, and he that doeth >not is called a foolish man. But it should be remembered that by "works" >here are meant uses actually done; for the all of charity and faith is in >uses and according to uses. There is this correspondence of works with >uses, because the correspondence is spiritual, but it is carried out >through substances and matters, which are subjects. (Note: As can be >readily seen in this quote, ?it is carried out through substances and >matters,? Ed.) > >C.L. 396 ?Hence also it is that at this day, inauguration into the >priesthood is made by the laying on of hands.? (Note: This refers to the >middle of the 7th week of Daniel. Ed.) > >A.E. 79 ?[2] The reason why to touch with the hand denotes to communicate, >and to transfer to another, is, because all the power of man is transferred >from the body into the hands; therefore, what the mind wills that the body >should do, the arms and hands perform accordingly. Hence it is that by arms >and hands in the Word is signified power (as may be seen, Arcana Coelestia, >n. 878, 3091, 4931-4937. 6947, 7673, 10,019); this power, however, is >natural power,? (Note: The reference here is to natural power which of >coarse we know to be from out of the proprium. Ed.) > >A.C. 6292 'Place your right hand on his head' means that good should >accordingly occupy the first place. This is clear from the meaning of >'placing the right hand on a head' as considering to occupy the first >place, as above in 6269, 6287. The placing of his hand by one on the head >of another when he was going to bless belonged to a custom received from >the ancients For the head is where a person's actual powers of >understanding and will reside, whereas the body is where actions in >response and in obedience to them are located. Thus 'placing a hand on the >head' was a representative act, denoting that a blessing should be imparted >to a person's understanding and will, thus to his real self. That same >custom originating in those ancient times remains even to this day and is >followed at ordinations as well as in blessings. (From the Arcana Coelestia >9954 (1) ?It is of interest to know what is implied in all this, since >anointing has remained in practice from ancient times down to the present >day (monarchs are anointed), and anointing is held to be holy today in just >the same way as it was in former times.? 9475, 9954, 10249 & 10267 Ed.) > >Greg > > > >>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>Word >>To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>Subject: Re: [lucerna] aclimatizing to the terminology >>Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 18:59:55 -0400 >> >> >>Hugh, >> >>My study on this subject is entitled 'Doctrine of Divine Truth' and quotes >>from source material. It is 40 pages long 12 pt. type 1 1/2 line spacing. >>This is the first paper I did. I only include a minimal amount of Ed. >>comment maybe 7 lines tops. Subsecquent papers document my spiritual >>experiences on this subject. The subject is anything but as simple as you >>state. This is the mystery you all are trying to understand. I really am >>trying to tell you. My rude behaviour is directly attributed to the >>difficulty I have had in trying to relay my discoveries to the General >>Church of the New Jerusalem. But anyway, if you would like to take a look >>at >>this paper you can then decide if you want to go deeper into the >>'mysteries'. >> >>The 'laying on of the hands' is a 'mystery' statement that hides the true >>meaning for those who are not 'adept'. My further research shows that the >>Sacrament of Baptism' is to include three seperate degrees in the New >>Church. I quote Bishop Pendleton and the Writings to prove this subsequent >>discovery. >> >>I do apologize for my rude behaviour and seek your forgiveness. >> >>Greg >> >> > >> >Hugh: >> >I think that pretty much settles that. If Gregory can't accept that I >> >think he is making a serious disturbance as he would be putting the >>remote >> >revelation (the Bible) of the Word over the proximal revelation (the >> >Writings of Swedenborg) of the Word. You are absolutely right. I hope >>he >> >sees this. If he doesn't, I will stop discussing matters with him. >> >Richard C. >> > >> >-------------- Original message -------------- >> > >> >In a message dated 6/10/2006 10:49:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, >> >arcam1970@comcast.net writes: >> >Your real question should be about the Lord's New Church and its >>ordination >> >practices and should we follow the Law of Moses? >> >The Third Testament indicates that inaugurations into the Priesthood are >>to >> >be done with the "laying on of hands," see DLW 220, CL 396, AE 79, AC >>6292. >> > >> >True, inaugurations were performed by anointing with oil as was done by >> >Moses to Aaron and his sons. (see Leviticus 8:12 and 8:30) However, to >>be >> >fair it must be pointed out that such inaugurations were also to include >> >sacrifices (Lev. 8:14-30 and special clothing (Lev. 8:7-9;13) So if it >>is >> >insisted (as Greg seems to be saying) that Priests be anointed as Moses >>was >> >commanded to do, then animal sacrifice must be included as part of the >> >ritual. (Lev. 8:17,21,29,36) >> > >> >Hugh >> >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >> >lucerna mailing list >> >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna >> >>_________________________________________________________________ >>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! >>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>lucerna mailing list >>lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >>http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > >_________________________________________________________________ >FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! >http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ > >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 14 23:43:07 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 19:43:07 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] no less an angel Message-ID: Ok, that is fair enough . . . but I suggest that we not try to confirm this by means of science--paleo-anthropology--and history. Science now sees that the "human race" began in Africa and has spread over the globe from there, into Australia at least 40,000 years ago. Let us assume that the Most Ancient Church existed 60,000 years ago: does that imply to you that all the different people on the globe at that time constituted a homogenous church? And speaking of the "third hell," why did any of its members have to go there if this is before the "fall and flood"? We've all got anecdotes, but as to your first, how do you plan to relate it to DNA? Does this mean that 'spiritual heredity' comes from the male and natrural heredity from the female? And what's this with the "attitude" thing again? I thought you liked "aggressive attackers" like David Chambers. What my attitude is, I suppose, is challenging, and it doesn't appear that you like to look at things with a critical (evaluative, not judgmental) eye, as I do. Now, as to the Most Ancient Church, it did not have to "fall"--indeed, it did not "fall"--in order to necessitate the coming of the New Church. It is taught that the New Church was foreseen from the begin: not because people fell away from a "golden age"; rather, because the New Church is the crown of all the churches. If one ponders this, one can come to see that the Most Ancient Church is representative of a state within us. Alan >To: "Alan Longstaff" <> >CC: lucerna-request@novahierosolyma.org (LUCERNA) >Subject: Re: no less an animal >Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 22:38:19 +0000 From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 15 00:21:30 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 20:21:30 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] the divine priesthood? In-Reply-To: <061420062318.26518.4490992B000BDF3F000067962200762194CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: Richard, you write, ?priests of the New Church both represent and communicate with the Lord and thus perform a divine function.? I don?t understand your use of the word ?divine? in any of this. Also, to ?communicate with the Lord,? is this in any way like the Catholic priesthood as intercessors between man (the laity) and God? What exactly is ?a divine function?? Although priests represent the Lord?on that we agree?how do they do any-thing that is ?divine?? When they administer the Holy Supper, are they part of the process of conjunction with the ?Divine?? Speaking of the Lord, how precisely does ?His Divinity? act through the priesthood? Alan >To: "Alan Longstaff" >CC: lucerna-request@novahierosolyma.org (LUCERNA) >Subject: Re: more technical correction (<; >Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 23:18:05 +0000 What I see as the"divine institution" of the Priesthood may be what it is to become in my mind and not what it is now in reality outside of my mind. In my mind, priests of the New Church both represent and communicate with the Lord and thus perform a divine function and their collective is a divine institution. Good priests and bad priests participate in this divine institution which serves divine uses not the least of which is to teach us all divine lessons. What the Priesthood actually is right now, or what its state is, I don't know and out of fear almost don't wish to know. I have faith that the Lord will bring up humanity with the Priesthood of His New Church from His Divinity acting through it, but how, I don't know yet. >Richard C. > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > Well, Richard, this is where the 'rubber meets the road' as to the state >of > > the current debate. I have written that the 'Descending Line' is a >function, > > and in the PRESENT state of the church, the priesthood REPRESENTS that > > function. Similarly, the 'Ascending Line' is a function, and when >priests > > participate in THAT function they do not do so as priests. Certainly, if >one > > views the priests as 'running the church,' it is not going to be >accepted as > > "dominion ... given to the Descending Line." Thus, ALL MEMBERS >participate > > in the 'Ascending Line': but "the priests" DO NOT "participate in it" as > > priests, and they have not come to see this idea as yet. > > > > You have been portraying yourself as a doctrinal "conservative" and >perhaps > > one might use the expression 'traditionalist.' I realize from remarks >you > > have made in passing that you more or less observed Philip Odhner as > > exercising the "dominion ... given to the Descending Line." However, I >never > > found that to be the case in the discussions I had with him, albeit, >that > > was in his later years after he was 'fired' as pastor in 1990. > > > > In order for the "process" you "envision for the Church" to work, we do > > INDEED need to come to that state where "no distinction between" the >"laymen > > and ordained priests" exists when they are allowing "the Lord to raise >up > > their intellect and report new interpretations of the New Word." That is > > part of the current struggle: trying to have the priests come down off >the > > pedestal on which they've put themselves at present. > > > > In educating you on 'ideas' concerning the priesthood, I must disclose >to > > you that I am not well regarded by the priests at present, and certainly >you > > must not regard my 'ideas' as representing the priests' position! >(Stephen > > Burleigh is more or less in the same predicament.) Now, while I might >say to > > you that the priesthood should be in freedom to "administor" the >priesthood, > > the priesthood DOES NOT have the sole responsibility for defining the > > priesthood! That is why lay members are taking apparent liberties in > > speaking out. Also, I would be interested to know why you refer to the > > priesthood as a "divine institution." Other than the fact that priests > > "stand in for" the Lord, I know of nothing "divine" about the >institution > > (other than its representations). And what does this expression "thus >NOT > > AUTHORIZED TO AFFIRM but only to report their perceptions" mean? [my > > emphasis] > > > > Also, understand that this is just you and I having a discussion. I'm >not > > trying to tell you what to think or recruit you as my ally or cultivate >you > > as a special friend. (<; Alan > > > > >Subject: Re: Alan?s technical correction > > >Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 16:07:48 +0000 > > > > Alan, I think I see what you are saying and that I am technically >incorrect. > > The Descending Line is the Priesthood and not both the Ascending and > > Descending Lines. For years and years I have considered the "ordained" > > Priesthood to be the Descending Line of the Priesthood and all of the >men of > > the Church contributing together to be the Ascending Line of the >Priesthood, > > and with dominion (if you'll excuse the term) given to the Descending >Line. > > The process I envision for the Church is that laymen and ordained >priests > > with no distinction between them allow the Lord to raise up their >intellect > > and report new interpretations of the New Word. Ordained priests decide > > what is to be accepted as the genuine Doctrine of the Church. This may >not > > be the current perception. So where I've been wrong is in believing the > > Ascending Line to be related to or part of the Priesthood, although the > > priests must participate in it. > > > > Feel free to educate me on the current, accepted view of the Priesthood > > including definitions of the Ascending and Descending Lines and the > > ordination rituals as well. I will respect what you, Stephen, Hugh, >Dushan, > > Risto and Andrei have to relate about their personal perception of that > > divine institution, the Priesthood. I also respect what Leon, David, > > Michael and Lori have to say about their perception of that divine > > institution as long as they accept the fact that they are not "ordained" >and > > thus not in the Descending Line and thus not authorized to affirm but >only > > to report their perceptions. > > > > What I don't respect is that aspect of anyone who thinks that the Church >has > > been "wrong" for not ordaining women all these years or who thinks we >should > > still be practicing ritual from the Law of Moses in ultimates or that >the > > Lord's New Church's fortune is the natural wealth (money) held by the > > Corporation ("that organization"?) as long as those people think such > > thoughts. > > > > Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > > > > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > > > > > Dear Richard, when you wrote on Monday [12-06-2006 13:38:15] to >Stephen, > > > > ?the importance of understanding the Circle of Life in ourselves, >and > > >how it > > > > relates to the Ascending Line and Descending Line of the Priesthood, >you > > > > couldn't be more right,? well, technically, I think one could be >more > > > > correct. I think you have missed some things from earlier on in the > > >REFORM > > > > dialogue. I will admit that what follows is MY technical correction, >but > > >the > > > > ?Ascending Line? has no relation to the priesthood whatsoever as >such. > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: Organization and government issues > > > > >Subject: Re: [reform] regeneration... proceeds from the external >man > > > > >totheinternal (Ascending Line) + return to the >externalman(Descending > > >Line) > > > > >Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:38:15 +0000 > > > > > > > > Stephen: As far as seeing the importance of understanding the circle >of > > >life > > > > in ourselves and how it relates to the ascending Line and Descending > > >Line of > > > > the Priesthood you couldn't be more right. I don't see it relating >to > > >the > > > > sequence of churches, however. I don't see that sequence as proper >to > > >the > > > > individual only as proper to the Lord and to the masses of >individuals > > >from > > > > our planet Earth. I'll only encourage you to coninue investigating >that > > > > topic. >Richard C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > > >From: "Stephen D. Burleigh" > > > > > > > > > >Hi Richard, > > > > > > > > > >Divine Providence says: > > > > >"[3] There is in all things of the human mind this circle of love >to > > > > >thoughts [Descending Line?] and from thoughts to love from love > > >[Ascending > > > > >Line?], a circle which may be called the circle of life. " > > > > >(Divine Providence (Dick and Pulsford) n. 29) > > > > >In Arcana Coelestia 10057: > > > > >"Such is the circle of things out of the world through the natural >man > > >into > > > > >his spiritual man [Ascending Line], and from this again into the >world > > > > >[Descending Line - from spiritual man into the natural man]. But be >it > > > > >known that this circle is instituted from the will, which is the >inmost > > >of > > > > >man's life, and that it begins there, and is from this >accomplished; > > >and > > > > >the will of a man who is in good is directed from heaven by the >Lord, > > > > >though it appears otherwise. For there is an influx from the >spiritual > > > > >world into the natural, thus through the internal man into his > > >external, > > > > >but not the reverse; for the internal man is in heaven, but the > > >external in > > > > >the world. [3] As this circle is the circle of man's life, >therefore > > >during > > > > >man's regeneration he is regenerated according to the same, and >when he > > >has > > > > >been regenerated, he lives and acts in accordance with it. >Therefore > > >during > > > > >man's regeneration the truths which are to be of faith are >insinuated > > > > >through the hearing and sight, and ! > > > > > these t > > > > >ruths are implanted in the memory of his natural man [Descending >Line - > > > > >truths as seeds are implanted in the memory of the natural man]. >From > > >this > > > > >memory they are withdrawn into the thought that belongs to the > > > > >understanding, and those which are loved become of the will >[Ascending > > > > >Line] ; and insofar as they become of the will, they become of the > > >life, > > > > >for the will of man is his very life; and insofar as they become of >the > > > > >life, they become of his affection, thus of charity in the will and >of > > > > >faith in the understanding. Afterward the man speaks and acts from >this > > > > >life, which is the life of charity and of faith; from charity which >is > > >of > > > > >the will goes forth the speech of the mouth and also the act of the > > >body, > > > > >both by way of the understanding, thus by the way of faith. From >all > > >this > > > > >it is evident that the circle of the regeneration of man is like >the > > >circle > > > > >of his life in general; and that it is in like manner instituted in >the > > > > >will by means of an influx out of heaven from the! > > > > > Lord. > > > > >[4] Hence also it is plain that there are two states in the man who >is > > > > >being regenerated, the first when the truths of faith are being > > >implanted > > > > >and conjoined with the good of charity, the second when he speaks >from > > >the > > > > >good of charity by means of the truths of faith, and acts according >to > > > > >these; thus that the first state is from the world through the >natural > > >man > > > > >into the spiritual, thus into heaven [Ascending Line]; and the >second > > >is > > > > >from heaven through the spiritual man into the natural, thus into >the > > >world > > > > >[Descending Line]. As said above, the spiritual or internal man is >in > > > > >heaven, and the natural or external man is in the world. This >circle is > > >the > > > > >circle of the regeneration of man, and consequently is the circle >of > > >his > > > > >spiritual life (concerning this twofold state of the man who is >being > > > > >regenerated, see the places cited in n. 9274). " > > > > >(Arcana Coelestia (Potts) n. 10057:2-4) > > > > >So it appears that Divine Providence 29 starts the circle of life >with > > >an > > > > >angelic state since it is taking about angels [from internal man?]. >And > > >the > > > > >order presented here is from the love to thought, which might be >the > > > > >Descending line and then from thought to love from love, which >might be > > >the > > > > >Ascending Line. > > > > > > > > > >AC 10057 starts the circle in the natural man thus in an >unregenerate > > >state > > > > >unlike Divine Providence 29 and proceeds to the spiritual man >[heaven]. > > > > >Also AC 10057 speaks about the Lord's glorification of His Human >which > > >also > > > > >starts in an unglorified state thus in the Ascending Line. > > > > > > > > > >I wonder if this might explain how these two numbers although > > >apparently > > > > >different are in agreement with one another. > > > > > > > > > >It is not clear to me what to make of the three advents you refer >to in > > > > >your email. > > > > >What I have noted in my mind is that the circle of life starts in > > >chapter > > > > >one of Genesis in the Arcana as the Ascending Line followed by the > > >seventh > > > > >day [the end of the Ascending Line and the beginning of the >Descending > > > > >Line]. The history of the Most Ancient Church is spoken about here > > > > >beginning of the seventh day, the second chapter of Genesis. I see >this > > >as > > > > >the beginning of the Descending Line. > > > > > > > > > >Since the purpose of the Lord's Word is not to teach us history, it >has > > > > >been seen in the church that this second chapter of the Arcana is >about > > >the > > > > >first perception of the Divine given to a person in the church as > > >described > > > > >on page 9 in the Handbook as: > > > > >1. The presence of the Lord through the perception of His Divine in >the > > > > >Word, and the acknowledgment of His Omnipotence, Omniscience and > > > > >Omnipresence. > > > > >It should be noted here that the Formation of the Church starts >with > > >the > > > > >Descending Line (from the internal man to the external man). In Mr. > > > > >Groeneveld's class in 1955, he refers to the Pre-Adamic state, >which > > >would > > > > >be an Ascending Line preceding this perception of the Divine. > > > > > > > > > >If one views the first perception of the Divine as an Adamic State, >is > > >it > > > > >not clear that this perception and the ordering preceding this > > >perception > > > > >is out of the Divine Human of the Lord? Since this is all out of >the > > > > >Divine Human of the Lord, the Word of His Divine Human, the Third > > > > >Testament? > > > > > > > > > >The state of peace after Noahic flood for a corresponding state in >the > > >New > > > > >Church, is it not also out of the Divine Human of the Lord? > > > > > > > > > >So from my perceptive the circle of life never ends, and today with >the > > > > >revelation of the Third Testament all corresponding states in a New > > >Church > > > > >person with the spiritual histories in this Third Testament are out >of > > >the > > > > >Lord's Divine Human. I am not able to see anything beyond this >today. > > > > > > > > > >With warm regards, > > > > >Stephen D. Burleigh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: reform-bounces@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >[mailto:reform-bounces@novahierosolyma.org] On Behalf Of > > > > >arcam1970@comcast.net > > > > >Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 8:36 AM > > > > >Subject: Re: [reform] regeneration... proceeds from the external >man to > > > > >theinternal (Ascending Line) + return to the external >man(Descending > > >Line) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Stephen: > > > > > > > > > >Good references. I trust you meditate on Divine Providence n.29 as >a > > > > >strong reference for another aspect of the "Circle of Life". > > > > > > > > > >I take special note on this section of Genesis/Arcana Coelestia >you've > > > > >quoted as I see a refinement of the traditionally understood Advent >of > > >the > > > > >Lord to save all mankind. My view involves three events: the > > >Flood/Deluge, > > > > >the Incarnation, and the Last Judgment/Following Advent. The Lord > > >actually > > > > >extended Himself discretely more in the middle event (all the way >into > > >the > > > > >material world), the Incarnation; yet the complete >Advent/Glorification > > >was > > > > >not possible without all three events. Thus three levels of heaven >and > > > > >three levels of hell are formed with the three events of the > > > > >Advent/Glorification. > > > > > > > > > >Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > > > > > > > > > >By the way, I like: levels over degrees > > > > > heavenly over celestial > > > > > marital over conjugial > > > > > advent over coming > > > > > following over second > > > > > > > > > >I could give you the reasons later for my choice of English words >over > > >the > > > > >ones traditionally used for the Latin words used by Swedenborg if >you > > >like. > > > > > But let this suffice for now. > > > > >-------------- Original message -------------- > > > > >From: "Stephen D. Burleigh" > > > > > > > > > >Dear Reformers, > > > > > > > > > >In the following numbers, the Lord teaches us that regeneration > > >proceeds > > > > >from the external man to the internal. Here we can see the >progression > > > > >from a state in which our external man rules in our natural mind >until > > >our > > > > >internal man rules over our external man at which time the evil >spirits > > > > >revealing, exciting our hereditary evil affections depart and we >come > > >into > > > > >a celestial paradise. Here are the numbers (These numbers are in >the > > >first > > > > >chapter of Genesis in the Arcana Coelestia): > > > > >"62. The times and states of man's regeneration in general and in > > > > >particular are divided into six, and are called the days of his > > >creation; > > > > >for, by degrees, from being not a man at all, he be! comes a t >first > > > > >something of one, and so by little and little attains to the sixth >day, > > >in > > > > >which he becomes an image of God. > > > > > > > > > >63. Meanwhile the Lord continually fights for him against evils and > > > > >falsities, and by combats confirms him in truth and good. The time >of > > > > >combat is the time of the Lord's working; and therefore in the >Prophets > > >the > > > > >regenerate man is called the work of the fingers of God. Nor does >He > > >rest > > > > >until love acts as principal; then the combat ceases. When the work >has > > >so > > > > >far advanced that faith is conjoined with love, it is called "very > > >good;" > > > > >because the Lord then actuates him, as His likeness. At the end of >the > > > > >sixth day the evil spirits depart, and good spirits take their >place, > > >and > > > > >the man is introduced into heaven, or into the celestial paradise; > > >concer > > > > >ning which in the following chapter. > > > > > > > > > >64. This then is the internal sense of the Word, its veriest life, > > >which > > > > >does not at all appear from the sense of the letter. But so many >are > > >its > > > > >arcana that volumes would not suffice for the unfolding of them. A >very > > >few > > > > >only are here set forth, and those such as may confirm the fact >that > > > > >regeneration is here treated of, and that this proceeds from the > > >external > > > > >man to the internal. It is thus that the angels perceive the Word. >They > > > > >know nothing at all of what is in the letter, not even the >proximate > > > > >meaning of a single word; still less do they know the names of the > > > > >countries, cities, rivers, and persons, that occur so frequently in >the > > > > >historical and prophetical parts of the Word. They have an idea >only of > > >the > > > > >things signified by the words and the names. Thus by Adam in >paradise > > >they > > > > >perceive the Most Anc! ient Ch urch, yet not that church, but the >faith > > >in > > > > >the Lord of that church. By Noah they perceive the church that >remained > > > > >with the descendants of the Most Ancient Churc! > > > > > h, and > > > > >that continued to the time of Abram. By Abraham they by no means > > >perceive > > > > >that individual, but a saving faith, which he represented; and so >on. > > >Thus > > > > >they perceive spiritual and celestial things entirely apart from >the > > >words > > > > >and names. > > > > >Here we can see the Ascending Line in the circle of life. > > > > > > > > > >Concerning this Ascending Line, we see another description of it in >the > > > > >following teaching in the Second Chapter of Genesis: > > > > >"164. The Own (proprium) of man, as before stated, is mere evil, >and > > >when > > > > >exhibited to view is most deformed, but when charity and innocence >from > > >the > > > > >Lord are insinuated into the Own (proprium), it then appears good >and > > > > >beautiful (as before observed, n. 154). Charity and innocence not >only > > > > >excuse the Own (proprium) (that is, what is evil and false in man), >but > > >as > > > > >it were abolish it, as may be observed in little children, in whom >what > > >is > > > > >evil and false is not merely concealed, but is even pleasing, so >long > > >as > > > > >they love their parents and one another, a! nd thei r infantile > > >innocence > > > > >shows itself. Hence it may be known why no one can be admitted into > > >heaven > > > > >unless he possesses some degree of innocence; as the Lord has said: > > > > >Suffer the little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not, >for of > > > > >such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, whosoever shall >not > > > > >receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter > > >therein. > > > > >And He took them up in His arms, put His hands upon them, and >blessed > > >them > > > > >(Mark 10:14-16)." > > > > >So in the Ascending Line of the circle of life, the end is to have > > >charity > > > > >and innocence into our proprium so that it hereditary evils and > > >falsities > > > > >are pushed from the center to the circumference. > > > > > > > > > >In the Third Chapter of Genesis we see that in the circle of life >after > > >an > > > > >Ascent to a celestial state, the circle of life must continue with >the > > > > >Descending Line: > > > > >234. THE CONTENTS. The subsequent state of the church down to the >flood > > >is > > > > >here described; and as at that time the church utterly destroyed > > >itself, it > > > > >is foretold that the Lord would come into the world and save the >human > > > > >race. > > > > > > > > > >235. Being unwilling to believe anything that could not be >apprehended > > >by > > > > >the senses, the sensuous part which is the "serpent" cursed itself, >and > > > > >became infernal (verse 14). > > > > > > > > > >236. Therefore to prevent all mankind from rushing into hell, the >Lord > > > > >promised that He would come into the world (verse 15). > > > > > > > > > >237. The church is further described by the "woman" which so loved >self > > >or > > > > >the Own as to be no longer capable of apprehending truth, although >a > > > > >rational was given them that should "rule" (verse 16). > > > > > > > > > >238. The quality of the rational is then described, in that it > > >consented, > > > > >and thus cursed itself, and became infernal, so that reason no >longer > > > > >remained, but ratiocination (verse 17). > > > > > > > > > >239. The curse and vastation are described, and also their ferine > > >nature > > > > >(verse 18). > > > > > > > > > >240. Next, their aversion to everything of faith and love; and that > > >thus > > > > >from being man they became not men (verse 19). > > > > >Concerning this Descent from a celestial state in which our >internal > > >man > > > > >rules over our external man to a state in which our the external >man > > >rules > > > > >over all the goods and truths in our natural mind ("from being man > > >(homine) > > > > >they became not men (homines)"), we read: > > > > >"267. Verse 17. And unto the man He said, Because thou hast >hearkened > > >unto > > > > >the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I >commanded > > > > >thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it; cursed is the ground for >thy > > >sake, > > > > >in great sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. By >the > > >"man > > > > >hearkening to the voice of his wife" is signified the consent of >the > > >man > > > > >[vir], or rational, by which it also averted or cursed itself, and > > > > >consequently the whole external man, denoted by "cursed is the >ground > > >for > > > > >thy sake." To "eat thereof in sorrow" mean! s that the future state >of > > >his > > > > >life would be miserable, and this even to the end of that church, >or > > >"all > > > > >the days of his life." > > > > > > > > > >268. That the "ground" signifies the external man, is evident from >what > > >was > > > > >previously stated concerning "earth" "ground" and "field." When man >is > > > > >regenerate, he is no longer called "earth" but "ground" because > > >celestial > > > > >seed has been implanted in him; he is also compared to "ground" and >is > > > > >called "ground" in various parts of the Word. The seeds of good and > > >truth > > > > >are implanted in the external man, that is, in his affection and > > >memory, > > > > >and not in the internal man, because there is nothing of one's Own >in > > >the > > > > >internal man, but only in the external. In the internal man are >goods > > >and > > > > >truths, and when these no longer appear to be present, the man is > > >external > > > > >or corporeal; they are however stored up in the internal man by the > > >Lord, > > > > >without the man's knowledge, as they do not come forth except when >the > > > > >external man as it were dies, as is usually the case during > > >temptations, > > > > >misfortunes, sicknesses, and at! the ho ur of death. The rational > > >belongs > > > > >also to the external man (n. 118), ! > > > > > and is > > > > >in itself a kind of medium between the internal man and the >external; > > >for > > > > >the internal man, through the rational, operates on the corporeal > > >external. > > > > >But when the rational consents, it separates the external man from >the > > > > >internal, so that the existence of the internal man is no longer >known, > > >nor > > > > >consequently the intelligence and wisdom which are of the internal. > > > > > > > > > >269. That Jehovah God (that is, the Lord) did not "curse the >ground" or > > >the > > > > >external man, but that the external man averted or separated itself > > >from > > > > >the internal, and thus cursed itself, is evident from what was > > >previously > > > > >shown (n. 245). > > > > > > > > > >270. That to "eat of the ground in great sorrow" signifies a >miserable > > > > >state of life, is evident from what precedes and follows, not to > > >mention > > > > >that to "eat" in the internal sense, is to live. The same is >evident > > >also > > > > >from the fact that such a state of life ensues when evil spirits >begin > > >to > > > > >fight, and the attendant angels to labor. This state of life >becomes > > >more > > > > >miserable when evil spirits begin to obtain the dominion; for they >then > > > > >govern the external man, and the angels only the internal man, of >which > > >so > > > > >little remains that they can scarcely take anything thence with >which > > >to > > > > >defend the man; hence arise misery and anxiety. Dead men are seldom > > > > >sensible of such misery and anxiety, because they are no longer >men, > > > > >although they think themselves more truly so than others; for they >know > > >no > > > > >more than the brutes of what is spiritual an! d celes tial, and >what is > > > > >eternal life, and like them they look downward to earthly things, >or > > > > >outward to worldly ones; they favor only their Own! > > > > > (propr > > > > >ium), and indulge their inclinations and senses with the entire > > >concurrence > > > > >of the rational. Being dead, they sustain no spiritual combat or > > > > >temptation, and were they exposed to it their life would sink under >its > > > > >weight, and they could thereby curse themselves still more, and > > >precipitate > > > > >themselves still more deeply into infernal damnation: hence they >are > > >spared > > > > >this until their entrance into the other life, where, being no >longer > > >in > > > > >danger of dying in consequence of any temptation or misery, they >endure > > > > >most grievous sufferings, which likewise are here signified by the > > >ground > > > > >being cursed, and eating of it in great sorrow. > > > > > > > > > >278. That by "returning to the ground whence he was taken" is >signified > > > > >that the church would return to the external man such as it was >before > > > > >regeneration, is evident from the fact that "ground" signifies the > > >external > > > > >man, as previously stated. And that "dust" signifies what is >condemned > > >and > > > > >infernal, is also evident from what was said of the serpent, which >in > > > > >consequence of being cursed is said to "eat dust." In addition to >what > > >was > > > > >there shown as to the signification of "dust" we may add the >following > > > > >passages from David: > > > > >All those who go down to the dust shall bow before Jehovah, and >those > > >whose > > > > >soul He hath not made alive (Ps. 22:29). And in another place: > > > > >Thou hidest Thy faces, they are troubled; Thou takest away their > > >breath, > > > > >they expire, and return to their dust (Ps. 104:29), which means >that > > >when > > > > >men turn away from the face of the ! Lord, t hey expire or die, and > > >thus > > > > >"return to the dust" that is, are condemned and become infernal. > > > > >The circle of life never ends...Ascend from the external man to the > > > > >internal and then Descend from the internal to the external man >again, > > >the > > > > >Ascend from the external man to the internal ...... > > > > > > > > > >Affectionately, > > > > >Stephen D. Burleigh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Stephen D. Burleigh" > > > > >To: "'Organization and government issues'" > > > > >Subject: Re: [reform] regeneration... proceeds from the external >man > > > > >totheinternal (Ascending Line) + return to the >externalman(Descending > > >Line) > > > > >Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 02:41:19 +0000 > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > >reform mailing list > > > > >reform@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/reform > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > > >reform mailing list > > > > >reform@novahierosolyma.org > > > > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/reform > > > > > > > > > > > > From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 15 13:52:19 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:52:19 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] simply hiding complexity In-Reply-To: <061520061343.14831.449163F000086987000039EF2207022933CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Message-ID: Since you have chosen to share our private dialogue with everyone on Lucerna, I think you owe it to me and them to explain this apparently simply but actually complex response in some detail. Alan >Subject: Re: the ?divine? priesthood?>Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:43:14 +0000 Alan, why did you ever become a priest? Richard C. Richard, you write, ?priests of the New Church both represent and communicate with the Lord and thus perform a divine function.? I don?t understand your use of the word ?divine? in any of this. Also, to ?communicate with the Lord,? is this in any way like the Catholic priesthood as intercessors between man (the laity) and God? What exactly is ?a divine function?? Although priests represent the Lord?on that we agree?how do they do anything that is ?divine?? When they administer the Holy Supper, are they part of the process of conjunction with the ?Divine?? Speaking of the Lord, how precisely does ?His Divinity? act through the priesthood? Alan > > >Subject: Re: more technical correction (<;> > >Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 >23:18:05 +0000 What I see as the"divine institution" of the Priesthood may be what it is to become in my mind and not what it is now in reality outside of my mind. In my mind, priests of the New Church both represent and communicate with the Lord and thus perform a divine function and their collective is a divine institution. Good priests and bad priests participate in this divine institution which serves divine uses not the least of which is to teach us all divine lessons. What the Priesthood actually is right now, or what its state is, I don't know and out of fear almost don't wish to know. I have faith that the Lord will bring up humanity with the Priesthood of His New Church from His Divinity acting through it, but how, I don't know yet. Richard C. From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 15 14:35:00 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:35:00 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] no less a devil? (<;l Message-ID: Well, Richard, you have not addressed what the Nova Hierosolyma "one person principle" may mean in relation to understanding what is written in the Third Testament. Also, I did not DENY the existence of ancient churches (plural) nor the fact that participants from these churches populate the Heavens at this day. I was questioning trying to associate the idea of the Most Ancient Church with a specific (or general) population in time and space. I am familiar with what is written about the Most Ancients and their place in the Grand Man. (Consider, though, that the expression "the Grand Man" is a symbol and representative of the form of the Heavens and in that sense is an expression OPEN TO US in order to see something of how Heaven can be formed within us. That is attempting to apply the "one person principle.") You spoke, as I recall it, as hoping to take advantage one day of the ability to communicate with those of the Most Ancient Church. However, if their quality is of such a different character than ours--because they went to Heaven before so much else happened on earth--is it clear what the nature of that communication would be? The point I'm making is, why would it be important to have interaction with them as far as one's personal development goes? >Subject: Re: no less an angel >Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:56:14 +0000 The Most Ancient Church fell only on this planet as it had to fall somewhere. If there never was a Most Ancient Church as you say is possible, leaving it to be a made-up history in the letter of the Word, there only as a representative of a beginning state of our regeneration, then the Grand Man would have no heart as the heart of the Grand Man is composed of those souls who have been from heavenly/celestial Most Ancient Churches from all other planets in the natural universe. Your guess, Alan, as to when and where that Church existed is just as valid as mine, but if you say it never existed in reality, your guess is not as valid. Richard C. -------------- Original message -------------- >Ok, that is fair enough . . . but I suggest that we not try to confirm From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sun Jun 18 01:32:12 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 21:32:12 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] Anointing of Jehu and what makes a true Priest In-Reply-To: <2d4.8de0bc0.31c0f79f@aol.com> Message-ID: >My favorite ordination is documented in 2 Kings, " And Elisha the prophet >hath called to one of the sons of the prophets, and saith to him, `Gird up >thy loins, and take this vial of oil in thy hand ... and see thou there >Jehu >...and said, Thus said Jehovah, I have anointed thee for king unto >Israel... >Greg, you have just described the ordination of a king, not the ordination >of >a Priest as Moses was commanded to do. It appeared that earlier you were >criticizing New Church ordinations because they were not performed >according to >the law of Moses. Hugh, the Lord as King is represented in the different descriptive states of the 'anointed'. Jehu is a king in the Word who is 'anointed.' Jesus is the 'Anointed'. > >On 6/9/06 you said: "My studies further prove without question that the >priesthood must be >'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses." > >The ordination and sanctification of Priests according to the law of Moses >is >described in Leviticus chapter 8. Jehu, an Israelitish chief was not >anointed >according to the law of Moses. You are having trouble reading the Word. Jehu is 'anointed' according to the Word. > >Further, you have placed great emphasis upon being anointed with a holy oil >made according to the formulation given in Exodus 30:23-25, which contains >5 >ingredients -- myrrh, cinnamon, cane (KNH), cassia, and olive oil. This oil >was >to be used for anointing the holy articles used in worship (see Exodus >30:26-29) as well as Aaron and his sons (Exodus 30:30). That it was used as >the Lord >commanded Moses is clear from what is said in Leviticus chapter 8 (see also >Exodus 40:9-16). > >Jehu could not have been anointed with such holy oil because it was >forbidden >that this oil be poured upon any "layman" or "stranger". (Exodus 30:33) >From the Arcana Coelestia 9954 (1) ?It is of interest to know what is implied in all this, since anointing has remained in practice from ancient times down to the present day (monarchs are anointed), and anointing is held to be holy today in just the same way as it was in former times.? 9475, 9954, 10249 & 10267 > >But again, if it is insisted that Priests be ordained according to the law >of >Moses (as Moses was commanded to do) then the prescribed clothing and >sacrifices must also be carried out. (Consider the fate of Nadab and Abihu, >who >offered strange fire which the Lord had not commanded them. {Lev. 10:1,2}) Early Christian history documents the teaching of the Lord to the Apostles. The Christian era began with these teachings and they are available for any serious student of the Word and Church doctrine. > >According to the law of Moses, Priests were to come from the tribe of Levi >(Deuteronomy 18:1; Numbers chapters 3 and 4). Priest forever after the order of Melchezidek EL KNH God the possessor. This mystery is beyond those who don't know. > >That the Lord was anointed with oil is described in Matthew 26:6-13; and >Mark >14:3-9. It is said that the oil was very expensive spikenard or pure nard, >that the anointing was for Jesus burial, and that the anointing was done by >a >woman. Jesus was a descendent of David of the tribe of Judah and not a >Levite. >There is no record that the Lord was anointed according to the law given to >Moses. > >Yet the Lord is called a Priest and also a King. You just admitted to the fallacy of your own argument. > >That the Lord is called a Priest is not because he was anointed with the >holy >oil or because he was of the tribe of Levi -- it is because He is the >Divine >Good united to the Divine True in His Human and that Divine Good is >represented by a Priest and the Priesthood. The excersize that we are engage in this subject is the literal Word. You have drifted off point. > >While it is said in several places that a Priest is to be inaugurated into >the Office by the laying on of hands, and that the Priesthood represents >Divine >Good, what makes a person a true Priest comes from the love for the >salvation >of souls and from honestly, justly, and faithfully carrying out the uses of >the priestly office. A Priest is a true Priest from the love of and >faithfulness >to the Uses of the Priesthood, and not solely from the ritual by which the >person is inaugurated into the Priesthood. The Lord set the example in >this. The Swedenborg quote above from the Arcana and the earlier post on this subject specifically addressed these questions. Without the representative the priest is said to 'hold the office of priest' but not 'adjoined to the office of priest'. I was once blessed by a Roman Catholic priest. Extremely elevating and impressive event. The point that needs to be understood is that the true 'New Church' the Heavenly City New Jerusalem is still not 'adjoined to the priesthood'. I do have the 'Office of Holy Oil' of the Coptic Orthodox Church. This Divine Liturgy will be modified to enable the 'ordination' and 'sanctification' of the those Swedenborgian priests who are called. Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sun Jun 18 02:05:22 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 22:05:22 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] "who are called." In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dear Greg, you wrote (see below) "those Swedenborgian priests who are called." What is this meant to signify? Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [lucerna] Anointing of Jehu and what makes a true Priest >Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2006 21:32:12 -0400 > > >>My favorite ordination is documented in 2 Kings, " And Elisha the prophet >>hath called to one of the sons of the prophets, and saith to him, `Gird up >>thy loins, and take this vial of oil in thy hand ... and see thou there >>Jehu >>...and said, Thus said Jehovah, I have anointed thee for king unto >>Israel... > >>Greg, you have just described the ordination of a king, not the ordination >>of >>a Priest as Moses was commanded to do. It appeared that earlier you were >>criticizing New Church ordinations because they were not performed >>according to >>the law of Moses. > >Hugh, the Lord as King is represented in the different descriptive states >of the 'anointed'. Jehu is a king in the Word who is 'anointed.' Jesus is >the 'Anointed'. >> >>On 6/9/06 you said: "My studies further prove without question that the >>priesthood must be >>'ordained' and 'sanctified' according to the law of Moses." >> >>The ordination and sanctification of Priests according to the law of Moses >>is >>described in Leviticus chapter 8. Jehu, an Israelitish chief was not >>anointed >>according to the law of Moses. > >You are having trouble reading the Word. Jehu is 'anointed' according to >the Word. > >> >>Further, you have placed great emphasis upon being anointed with a holy >>oil >>made according to the formulation given in Exodus 30:23-25, which contains >>5 >>ingredients -- myrrh, cinnamon, cane (KNH), cassia, and olive oil. This >>oil was >>to be used for anointing the holy articles used in worship (see Exodus >>30:26-29) as well as Aaron and his sons (Exodus 30:30). That it was used >>as the Lord >>commanded Moses is clear from what is said in Leviticus chapter 8 (see >>also >>Exodus 40:9-16). >> >>Jehu could not have been anointed with such holy oil because it was >>forbidden >>that this oil be poured upon any "layman" or "stranger". (Exodus 30:33) > >>From the Arcana Coelestia 9954 (1) ?It is of interest to know what is >implied in all this, since anointing has remained in practice from ancient >times down to the present day (monarchs are anointed), and anointing is >held to be holy today in just the same way as it was in former times.? >9475, 9954, 10249 & 10267 >> >>But again, if it is insisted that Priests be ordained according to the law >>of >>Moses (as Moses was commanded to do) then the prescribed clothing and >>sacrifices must also be carried out. (Consider the fate of Nadab and >>Abihu, who >>offered strange fire which the Lord had not commanded them. {Lev. >>10:1,2}) > >Early Christian history documents the teaching of the Lord to the Apostles. >The Christian era began with these teachings and they are available for any >serious student of the Word and Church doctrine. >> >>According to the law of Moses, Priests were to come from the tribe of Levi >>(Deuteronomy 18:1; Numbers chapters 3 and 4). > >Priest forever after the order of Melchezidek EL KNH God the possessor. >This mystery is beyond those who don't know. >> >>That the Lord was anointed with oil is described in Matthew 26:6-13; and >>Mark >>14:3-9. It is said that the oil was very expensive spikenard or pure nard, >>that the anointing was for Jesus burial, and that the anointing was done >>by a >>woman. Jesus was a descendent of David of the tribe of Judah and not a >>Levite. >>There is no record that the Lord was anointed according to the law given >>to >>Moses. >> >>Yet the Lord is called a Priest and also a King. > >You just admitted to the fallacy of your own argument. >> >>That the Lord is called a Priest is not because he was anointed with the >>holy >>oil or because he was of the tribe of Levi -- it is because He is the >>Divine >>Good united to the Divine True in His Human and that Divine Good is >>represented by a Priest and the Priesthood. > >The excersize that we are engage in this subject is the literal Word. You >have drifted off point. >> >>While it is said in several places that a Priest is to be inaugurated into >>the Office by the laying on of hands, and that the Priesthood represents >>Divine >>Good, what makes a person a true Priest comes from the love for the >>salvation >>of souls and from honestly, justly, and faithfully carrying out the uses >>of >>the priestly office. A Priest is a true Priest from the love of and >>faithfulness >>to the Uses of the Priesthood, and not solely from the ritual by which the >>person is inaugurated into the Priesthood. The Lord set the example in >>this. > >The Swedenborg quote above from the Arcana and the earlier post on this >subject specifically addressed these questions. Without the representative >the priest is said to 'hold the office of priest' but not 'adjoined to the >office of priest'. I was once blessed by a Roman Catholic priest. Extremely >elevating and impressive event. The point that needs to be understood is >that the true 'New Church' the Heavenly City New Jerusalem is still not >'adjoined to the priesthood'. > >I do have the 'Office of Holy Oil' of the Coptic Orthodox Church. This >Divine Liturgy will be modified to enable the 'ordination' and >'sanctification' of the > >Your brother in the Anointed, literally "Greg" From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Mon Jun 19 12:06:46 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:06:46 +0100 Subject: [lucerna] MAC Message-ID: <001801c69398$f7d34cd0$ba8b87d9@riley> I agree with Alan, the MAC did not fall. The people of that Age had to regenerate...It is of interest to note that Chap 2 of Gen in AC is divided into two sections.. The first deals with the perception they and we have before regeneration can take place;; what the goal of life is. So when it is said it would not be good for man to dwell alone... since if man remained in the perception, he would feel himself to be regenerate, while the loves of self and the world, would still remain........Who can say they have not eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or in other words felt that what they were doing was from self...but out of what had been perceived, the voice will be heard.. What have you done?...then repentance can take place... the shame....The Two Kingdoms formed before the Lord's coming as Redeemer,, are the two ruling loves, Love in the Lord the Celestial, and Love towards neighbor (0r our!)the Spiritual. these were and are formed when the evils out of Proprium are shuuned by the truth in the External ..the Lord then removes the lusts in Internal,, and forms the ruling loves...The Lord came as\ Redeemer, not because of what mankind had done or not done, but to make possible what they and us could not do..Meet the Proprim itself, in order to have a new External or human. This was what was involved in the words of the Angelic host to the shepherds when the Lord came.. Glory to God in the highest,,, the ruling love of Internal... Peace on earth,,, that they of those Ages could have a new External.. in agreemen with their Internal.. that is why it is said that the Lord came also to redeem the Angels... ( I might add the closing words are not goodwill to men,,, but to those of a Good Will......(.to put it simply) We are celebrating the 19thof June... The sending forth in the Universal Spiritual world,,, the Good and Truth from the Divine Human (sig by the 12 disciples)to gather together the elect... All those throughtout the Ages,, who had regenerated.. the one fold with One Shepherd... Norman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Mon Jun 19 18:21:28 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:21:28 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] MAC References: <001801c69398$f7d34cd0$ba8b87d9@riley> Message-ID: <00e301c693cd$396f44d0$6700000a@lukene181ef1c1> Happy 19th of June Norman and Maureen. We read your 19th of June message for Thursday night doctrinal class. We enjoyed it. Thank you very much. All is well here and we had a wonderful first time daybreak 19th of June service under the hemlocks. 24 people came - Some Gen Ch.=== We had a violinist playing before and after with the birds joining in. Its been a very happy day and the tables are all set up for the banquet. SOOOOOOOO wish you were here with us. Our love and prayers are with you. Dawn and Luken ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 8:06 AM Subject: [lucerna] MAC I agree with Alan, the MAC did not fall. The people of that Age had to regenerate...It is of interest to note that Chap 2 of Gen in AC is divided into two sections.. The first deals with the perception they and we have before regeneration can take place;; what the goal of life is. So when it is said it would not be good for man to dwell alone... since if man remained in the perception, he would feel himself to be regenerate, while the loves of self and the world, would still remain........Who can say they have not eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or in other words felt that what they were doing was from self...but out of what had been perceived, the voice will be heard.. What have you done?...then repentance can take place... the shame....The Two Kingdoms formed before the Lord's coming as Redeemer,, are the two ruling loves, Love in the Lord the Celestial, and Love towards neighbor (0r our!)the Spiritual. these were and are formed when the evils out of Proprium are shuuned by the truth in the External ..the Lord then removes the lusts in Internal,, and forms the ruling loves...The Lord came as\ Redeemer, not because of what mankind had done or not done, but to make possible what they and us could not do..Meet the Proprim itself, in order to have a new External or human. This was what was involved in the words of the Angelic host to the shepherds when the Lord came.. Glory to God in the highest,,, the ruling love of Internal... Peace on earth,,, that they of those Ages could have a new External.. in agreemen with their Internal.. that is why it is said that the Lord came also to redeem the Angels... ( I might add the closing words are not goodwill to men,,, but to those of a Good Will......(.to put it simply) We are celebrating the 19thof June... The sending forth in the Universal Spiritual world,,, the Good and Truth from the Divine Human (sig by the 12 disciples)to gather together the elect... All those throughtout the Ages,, who had regenerated.. the one fold with One Shepherd... Norman. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ lucerna mailing list lucerna@novahierosolyma.org http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 22 19:19:41 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 15:19:41 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] one's "personal" not another's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Perhaps some might say that I personally am >not worthy to do it, but I don't see any body else stepping up to the >plate. > >Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net > Richard in response to this observation I must say that your intention is well but . . . What you are seeking will be made available soon. Yesterday, the Universal Othodox Church was established in the record when the Chief Clerks for the Fulton County Superior Court accepted the Oyez Oyez the Great Commission with attendant documentation for filing. The ordination and sanctification of your brother Gregory Karl Davis was officiated by Reverend Paul A. Ready with the Veterans for Christ in June 19th. He travelled here from Arkansaw for this mission and was blessed in the Lord. This blessing came from the hand of Abba Tsige Dengle at Saint Gabriel Ethiopian Orthodox Church in Decatur on June 18th. This elevation from the office of prophet to Bishop this New Church is an accomplished fact. The documentation on the revelation of the LITERAL WORD will be made available after receiving the originals back from the Fulton County. The documentation for the establishment of the priesthood 'adjoined' to His New Church through the Doctrine of Divine Truth will be made available in about 3 weeks on a CD. The blessed 'oil' will be made available through this office in service to Him. Your brother in the Anointed, literally Rt. Rev. "Greg" _________________________________________________________________ On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Mon Jun 26 21:42:07 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 17:42:07 EDT Subject: [lucerna] David vs Goliath Message-ID: <522.1c7154f.31d1aeaf@aol.com> Dear Alan, Whoa! I was not expecting this! You have a babe in arms here, expected to fight with a Goliath of the church! Okay, if I must. So to respond: "I must say, David Chambers, that I am somewhat troubled when you castigate Stephen Burleigh for exhibiting reservations about Leon, saying "and then deny (through implication) that Leon isn't regenerated, I wonder if you realise that you are actually deciding for the Lord who is in genuine truths, and therefore claiming His Divinity for yourself?" While that is what you say about Stephen's negative stance, what about your own POSITIVE stance by claiming for yourself to judge that Leon IS regenerate: is that not "actually deciding for the Lord who is in genuine truths, and therefore claiming His Divinity for yourself?" No, (and I'm surprised to have to remind you of this): AC2588 [2] There it was stated that there are two basic attitudes of mind from which people think, the negative and the affirmative; also that they think from a negative attitude who believe nothing unless they are convinced by rational considerations and by facts, and indeed by sensory evidence, whereas those people think from an affirmative attitude who believe that things are true because the Lord has said so in the Word and who thus have faith in the Lord. To which I quote Stephen's own quote from the Writings: Henceforth the spiritual sense of the Word will be imparted solely to him who from the Lord is in genuine truths I take, from an affirmative attitude, that the spiritual sense of the Word will be imparted to someone "because the Lord has said so in the Word and who thus have faith in the Lord". I haven't decided for the Lord who is in genuine truths, and therefore claimed His Divinity for myself, because I stated quite clearly in my penultimate posting: "and then examine it closely for validity". But has any of us done this yet? Instead, we have prejudged it not to be the truth, because as Stephen claims: "Everything I colorized, bolded, and underlines applies to all of us in my mind... The Divine Truths in the Lord's Word of the Third Testament apply to everyone as I see it, including the angels of heaven.", leaving no one, not ever, able to fulfil the prophecy of the Lord: Henceforth the spiritual sense of the Word will be imparted. Dead centre in the forehead, I think, Alan? David R. Chambers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Tue Jun 27 07:07:29 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 03:07:29 EDT Subject: [lucerna] [reform] turnabout's fair play Message-ID: <485.37d381b.31d23331@aol.com> Dear Alan, I'm glad to see you took the 'David & Goliath' analogy in the good humour that I intended it. I thought it was apt, since I felt overwhelmed by an intellect that I consider much, much greater than my own. However, you said that I was doing the very thing that I was accusing Stephen of (claiming the Lord's Divinity for oneself), so I tried to demonstrate that by having an affirmative attitude, it doesn't claim the Lord's Divinity for oneself, but that having a negative attitude does (because it never allows the possibility of the Lord's prophecy ever to be fulfilled). I agree that acceptance of this spiritual sense is subjective to the receivers, and I'm not castigating anyone for this, but I do object to passages from the Word being used to do damage to what might be the truth, and perhaps blocking others from seeing it also. Claiming that no one ever, may be in genuine truths, does this. Warm Regards, David R. Chambers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 28 14:13:07 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:13:07 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] discrediting credit In-Reply-To: <3f0.4adcfdd.31d3aee5@aol.com> Message-ID: Dear David Chambers, I want to be sure we are not talking passed each other (what Gerald Hurst has referred to as ?a dualogue?). What you have written here today (below) and elsewhere is a truly eloquent testament to your experience in coming to the New Church Movement and finding Leon James? ideas and so forth. It is also perfectly understandable that you would want to share this experience and insight with others (as Brother Greg and Richard Campbell wish to share theirs). From my perspective, it is similarly understandable that Stephen Burleigh would react to Leon James? ideas as he has, coming from the background and experience he has. We cannot expect to model each others? background and experiences. It is even understandable that you would want to debate Stephen and me and anyone: call to our attention the need for a positive bias; want us to examine Third Testament numbers of your choosing; even spend some time reading what Leon James has written. All this makes sense to me. However, when you write ?your tendency was to dismiss or discredit [Leon] by providing numerous search engine quotes (sorry Alan, I know you don't like these),? I think your tone is a disservice to your intentions. It is one thing to challenge another?s ideas: it is something else to give the appearance of divining?I intentionally chose this verb?another?s motivations. On the Lucerna site I have cautioned Brother Greg that his TONE is counterproductive to his intent of alerting New Church people to problems he sees. Choosing words like ?discredit? in speaking of what another has written does not do CREDIT to your argument. That?s my point. Alan >Reply-To: Organization and government issues >To: reform@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [reform] turnabout's fair play >Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 06:07:33 EDT > >Dear Stephen, > >Well, I'm reluctant to because as I stated at the beginning, my intention >was to simply provide my observation and leave it at that. > >Leon, has in fact explained the point far better than I can, in his >previous >e-mail today (Re: [reform] turnabout's fair play), but in case that >doesn't >answer your question precisely: > >when presented with Leon's declaration of a new doctrine from the Lord, >your >tendency was to dismiss or discredit it by providing numerous search >engine >quotes (sorry Alan, I know you don't like these) to the effect that only >someone who is in genuine truths from the Lord can be imparted the >spiritual >sense. Although an unarguable statement in itself, used to respond to >Leon's >offering of the DOW, etc., the only impression one could assume from it, >is that >you don't consider him (or anyone, for that matter) to be in genuine >truths, >so the DOW must be false. When yet, only the Lord can decide who is, and >who >is not. > >Also in Leon's reply today, he clearly demonstrates that such spiritual >insights can only come through others (and always given the benefit of the >doubt, >that they are indeed in genuine truths from the Lord) to be confirmed >personally by us when we have that 'Aha!' moment by the Lord. But not to >negatively >prevent others from perhaps being enlightened, with Scriptural quotes to >the >contrary, when we don't yet see something ourselves. > >As a newcomer to the NC, perhaps I may provide an example from personal >experience how this works? > >If so; before I discovered the Writings at 17 years old, I use to read the >bible, completely isolated from any church influence. As I said in my >brief >biography, I was the only one in my family with any 'religious' tendency. >Consequently, in those formative years, I read the Word and understood it >with >only a 'personal' relationship with God for understanding. As a result, >(and as >you can imagine) my interpretation of it was with a very 'Jewish' or OT >mentality (even to becoming a practising 'jew' for a short while!) >However, by discovering Swedenborg, I was provided through this 'other >person' (a man, like any other man) a spiritual sense to the OT & NT. >If however, I had read your assertion that no one is in genuine truth from >the Lord, then I would have dismissed Swedenborg's revelations instantly. >I >had to have the positive bias that Swedenborg was in genuine truths from >the >Lord, for it to benefit me in any way. > >However, since that tender age and up until recently (and still in >isolation >from any Church), I've had the present GC idea that the Writings were >speaking about the spiritual sense of the OT & NT, not that it also >applied to the >Heavenly Doctrines. It was all I could know; no one had enlightened me to >the >contrary. > >So, once again, this new insight had to come through someone else; Leon >James. And, had I not positively assumed him to be in genuine truths from >the >Lord, I would have dismissed this spiritual sense as from his own >self-intelligence. Now however, that I've discovered through others (DHL, >LNC) that they >too have positively accepted a spiritual sense to the Writings, I'm taken >to >another level of understanding which I hope will continue to eternity. > >I consider this next step to be the DOW and Theistic Psychology, because >my >'personal' relationship with the Lord now, is in the new understanding >that >His Mind is the true Heaven, and to enter that 'Mind', I have to align my >mind >with His (what we refer to as regeneration, or being in the Lord's >Proprium). >The spiritual sense of the Writings (in other words, Theistic Psychology) >helps me to achieve this because I now realise instead of the Lord being >'out >there' in the form of the Spiritual Sun, that He is constantly working >inside >of me as a Divine Psychologist actively healing my mind/proprium by >closing >and opening various societies from the heavens and the hells in my >thoughts, >as I co-operate with Him by shunning evils, doing good and extracting the >spiritual doctrine of the Writings. And in the meantime, sharing any >insights I >may receive (like my Theistic Astronomica pages) to the degree that I too, >acquire genuine truths from the Lord. (Which I also hope will be received >with a >positive bias, but still closely examined for their validity.) > >In other words, I don't believe we have to be totally perfected in genuine >truths from the Lord, before we can begin to impart this information to >others. There will be things about the DOW that are right, and things >about it that >are wrong (which Ian Thompson and I have already expressed to Leon), but >we >don't reject it entirely simply because Leon may have not reached a state >of >perfection yet. Instead we confirm those truths that are revealed to us, >and >place aside the others that haven't, for another day. > >(Sorry this is so long, but I think I've said all I can say on the matter >now.) > >Warm regards, > >David. > > >_______________________________________________ >reform mailing list >reform@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/reform From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 28 15:28:14 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:28:14 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] 'neo-stone age spirituality Message-ID: Dear David R. Chambers, I am going to attempt an approach to the subject we are discussing from a different angle (perhaps an angle Richard Campbell will appreciate). In describing the Most Ancient Church, the Third Testament suggests that these people were in a higher state of perception than we are, and could see spiritual things represented in natural things. (An example of this from a scientific point of view may be found in Rachel Levy?s Ph. D. thesis 'Religious Conceptions of the Stone Age,' popularly published as 'The Gate of Horn' [1948], in which she interprets the cave paintings from Lascaux and Altimira and other such Stone Age things.) It is fair to surmise that Stone Age peoples may have been involved with their natural world in entirely different ways than we are today. Indeed, we know that the Tree of Knowledge refers to spiritual science, but it can also stand in for the vast array of natural scientific knowledges that inform and control our lives at this day, and do much to block our ability to develop spiritual life or awareness (the ?materialism? card). Certainly the Stone Age people did not enjoy natural life to the degree we do, and I think there are few at this day who?d wish to go back to a Stone Age existence. The Stone Age people were only scratching the surface of understanding the natural world, and I posit it as analogous to where we are at this day in relation to scratching the surface of understanding spiritual life. Thus, when you write, ?I don't believe we have to be totally perfected in genuine truths from the Lord, before we can begin to impart this information to others,? I think the perfecting process goes on to eternity. To say, ?Leon may have not reached a state of perfection yet,? is not the central point, but it may explain reserved caution. Certainly we attempt ?to impart [our] information to others,? but I think it is perfectly natural that others will receive information cautiously (without that being negativity). To adopt this cautious approach, to have a reserved ?affirmative attitude,? is NOT the same thing as ?never allow[ing] the possibility of the Lord's prophecy ever to be fulfilled.? I feel you ?protesteth? too vigorously. Alan >Reply-To: Organization and government issues >To: reform@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: Re: [reform] turnabout's fair play >Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 06:07:33 EDT > >Dear Stephen, > >Well, I'm reluctant to because as I stated at the beginning, my intention >was to simply provide my observation and leave it at that. > >Leon, has in fact explained the point far better than I can, in his >previous >e-mail today (Re: [reform] turnabout's fair play), but in case that >doesn't >answer your question precisely: > >when presented with Leon's declaration of a new doctrine from the Lord, >your >tendency was to dismiss or discredit it by providing numerous search >engine >quotes (sorry Alan, I know you don't like these) to the effect that only >someone who is in genuine truths from the Lord can be imparted the >spiritual >sense. Although an unarguable statement in itself, used to respond to >Leon's >offering of the DOW, etc., the only impression one could assume from it, >is that >you don't consider him (or anyone, for that matter) to be in genuine >truths, >so the DOW must be false. When yet, only the Lord can decide who is, and >who >is not. > >Also in Leon's reply today, he clearly demonstrates that such spiritual >insights can only come through others (and always given the benefit of the >doubt, >that they are indeed in genuine truths from the Lord) to be confirmed >personally by us when we have that 'Aha!' moment by the Lord. But not to >negatively >prevent others from perhaps being enlightened, with Scriptural quotes to >the >contrary, when we don't yet see something ourselves. > >As a newcomer to the NC, perhaps I may provide an example from personal >experience how this works? > >If so; before I discovered the Writings at 17 years old, I use to read the >bible, completely isolated from any church influence. As I said in my >brief >biography, I was the only one in my family with any 'religious' tendency. >Consequently, in those formative years, I read the Word and understood it >with >only a 'personal' relationship with God for understanding. As a result, >(and as >you can imagine) my interpretation of it was with a very 'Jewish' or OT >mentality (even to becoming a practising 'jew' for a short while!) >However, by discovering Swedenborg, I was provided through this 'other >person' (a man, like any other man) a spiritual sense to the OT & NT. >If however, I had read your assertion that no one is in genuine truth from >the Lord, then I would have dismissed Swedenborg's revelations instantly. >I >had to have the positive bias that Swedenborg was in genuine truths from >the >Lord, for it to benefit me in any way. > >However, since that tender age and up until recently (and still in >isolation >from any Church), I've had the present GC idea that the Writings were >speaking about the spiritual sense of the OT & NT, not that it also >applied to the >Heavenly Doctrines. It was all I could know; no one had enlightened me to >the >contrary. > >So, once again, this new insight had to come through someone else; Leon >James. And, had I not positively assumed him to be in genuine truths from >the >Lord, I would have dismissed this spiritual sense as from his own >self-intelligence. Now however, that I've discovered through others (DHL, >LNC) that they >too have positively accepted a spiritual sense to the Writings, I'm taken >to >another level of understanding which I hope will continue to eternity. > >I consider this next step to be the DOW and Theistic Psychology, because >my >'personal' relationship with the Lord now, is in the new understanding >that >His Mind is the true Heaven, and to enter that 'Mind', I have to align my >mind >with His (what we refer to as regeneration, or being in the Lord's >Proprium). >The spiritual sense of the Writings (in other words, Theistic Psychology) >helps me to achieve this because I now realise instead of the Lord being >'out >there' in the form of the Spiritual Sun, that He is constantly working >inside >of me as a Divine Psychologist actively healing my mind/proprium by >closing >and opening various societies from the heavens and the hells in my >thoughts, >as I co-operate with Him by shunning evils, doing good and extracting the >spiritual doctrine of the Writings. And in the meantime, sharing any >insights I >may receive (like my Theistic Astronomica pages) to the degree that I too, >acquire genuine truths from the Lord. (Which I also hope will be received >with a >positive bias, but still closely examined for their validity.) > >In other words, I don't believe we have to be totally perfected in genuine >truths from the Lord, before we can begin to impart this information to >others. There will be things about the DOW that are right, and things >about it that >are wrong (which Ian Thompson and I have already expressed to Leon), but >we >don't reject it entirely simply because Leon may have not reached a state >of >perfection yet. Instead we confirm those truths that are revealed to us, >and >place aside the others that haven't, for another day. > >(Sorry this is so long, but I think I've said all I can say on the matter >now.) > >Warm regards, > >David. > > >_______________________________________________ >reform mailing list >reform@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/reform From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jun 28 17:12:17 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 13:12:17 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] 'neo-stone age spirituality In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Alan you agreed with David that: >Certainly we attempt ?to impart [our] information to others,? but I think >it is perfectly natural that others will receive information cautiously >(without that being negativity). To adopt this cautious approach, to have >a reserved ?affirmative attitude,? is NOT the same thing as ?never >allow[ing] the possibility of the Lord's prophecy ever to be fulfilled.? I >feel you ?protesteth? too vigorously. Alan > You will agree that the discussion goes to the mystery, "57. III. That genuine truth, which will be of doctrine, does not appear in the sense of the letter of the Word to others than those who are in illustration from the Lord. [...] The Divine Truth is the Anointed One. The Divine Goodness is Jesus. Until one understand that there is a genuine truth that literally provides support to this Divine Truth the revelation of the Second Coming cannot be comprehended. And neither can the hidden spiritual meaning of the Writings in their depth. This discussion has been active in the 'New Church' since the '30s and still the literal Word is hidden. The most frustrating of all my encounters with 'New Church' priests is the attitude that the literal Word is understood or if not then the literal Word can never be comprehended. The most basic fundamental literal truth is not known. "Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed by thy name" ...Jesus Christ... In Matthew, "If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of His household? Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed; and hid that shall not be made known." x. 25, 26. Interesting prophesy isn't it? But on point and comprehendable when one understands the literal, genuine truth of the name; Jesus the Anointed, and then acts upon the literal, genuine truth of His name. Unless a man learns, that is, receives truths, good cannot flow in, so that the man cannot become spiritual, no. 3387 Further in the Doctrine of the Sacred Scriptures: 56. It may be supposed that the doctrine of genuine truth can be acquired by means of the spiritual sense of the Word which is obtained through a knowledge of correspondences. Doctrine, however, is not acquired by such means, but only illustrated and corroborated. For as was stated above in No. 26 no one comes into the spiritual sense of the Word by means of correspondences unless he is first in genuine truths from doctrine. You received the Doctrine of Divine Truth. Are you in the Doctrine of Divine Truth and thereby in genuine truth? Can anyone possibly be in the Doctrine of Genuine Truth without acknowledging and understanding the literal, genuine name of God? In Jesus the Anointed who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit now and forever and ever. Amen. Your newly 'ordained' and 'sanctified' by the command of the Lord Jesus the Anointed on June 19th, and thereby elevated from being adjoined to the office of prophet, your humble servant, Rt. Rev. Gregory Karl Davis Universal Orthodox Church for the Georgia diocese United States of America _________________________________________________________________ Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 29 07:13:10 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 21:13:10 -1000 Subject: [lucerna] [reform] - Made Up History?... tumbling down earthquake country References: <01d201c69b26$683b0a00$6400a8c0@your81f40af718> Message-ID: <004f01c69b4b$7aaf5040$fc05a8c0@local> Good find, Stephen! And speaks to the idea that "historical" does not mean "factual," at least not in the TT. And, my particular heresy is that in some fashion, ALL statements in ALL testaments will be found to be accurate on every level of understanding--I'm not sure it's even correct to assert that there will never be a city of gold landing on the Minnesota cornfields, an image that one of my GC friends uses to disparage a literal take on the book of Revelations. Who can say? And, it might not look like that to our contemporary eyes, but when it ever, if it ever, happens, the folks when it does will say, Hey, look at that! City of gold! And it will seem obvious to them that this phenomenon is that to which John was referring. Especially if we grant him poetic license and the use of metaphor in his predictions. And of course, Carlie Simon thinks that it's already "landed," in New York--has anyone heard her song, New Jerusalem, which was the themesong to Working Girl a while ago (Melanie Griffin, Harrison Ford)? Beautiful song; the movie was kind of sad. Poignant now, to watch the opening shots of NYC with the twin towers shining in the sunlight. Governance! That's supposed to be the theme on reform! (Has the committee come up with anything that speaks to how decisions will be made, who will be in charge of them, and what the focus of the church's efforts will be over the next several years? 'Cause that's what I thought reform was addressing!) Which is why I've re-addressed this message to lucerna. Warm regards, Lorin ----- Original Message ----- To: "'Organization and government issues'" Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 4:47 PM Subject: Re: [reform] - Made Up History?... tumbling down earthquake country > Hi Alan and Leon, > > I just started reading a number from the Third Testament after reading the > email below from Alan about the styles in the Word. Here is what the Third > Testament says about the first chapter of Genesis: > > " [4] Be it known that by the creation of heaven and earth in the first > chapter of Genesis, in the internal sense, is meant and described the new > creation, or regeneration, of the man of the church at that time, thus the > setting up of a celestial church; and that by the paradise are meant and > described the wisdom and intelligence of that church, and by eating of the > tree of knowledge its fall in consequence of reasoning from > memory-knowledges about Divine things. That such is the meaning may be seen > from what has been shown on this subject in the explications at those > chapters. > > For all the things contained in the first chapters of Genesis are made up > historical things, in the internal sense of which, as before said, are > Divine things concerning the new creation or regeneration of the man of the > celestial church. > > This method of writing was customary in the most ancient times, not only > among those who were of the church, but also among those who were outside > the church, as among the Arabians, Syrians, and Greeks, as is evident from > the books of those times, both sacred and profane. " > ( Arcana Coelestia (Potts) n. 9942 ) > > So this number explains that the first chapter of Genesis is "made up > historical things". Yet this does not detract from Its Divinity. > > With warm regards, > Stephen D. Burleigh > > > -----Original Message----- > From: reform-bounces@novahierosolyma.org > Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 9:15 PM > To: reform@novahierosolyma.org > Subject: [reform] tumbling down earthquake country > > Leon, you ask me [end below], how do you see the teaching that the Word in > its historical parts is accurate? The famous number on this score is Arcana > Coelestia 66[2], which says: The second style is historical . . . It goes > on to say: The third style is the prophetical one . . . which . . . is not > in connected and historical form . . . The fourth style is that of the > Psalms of David. I am a trained historian, Leon, and to me the key word in > all of these is style. The second style is historical, but it is not > strictly speaking history. The style is that of the historical or storical > narrative: but in my mind it was never intended to be a genuine reporting of > actually events. (Indeed, the is one fellow I know who thinks the Lord > ordered the historical events to happen so that they could be writ-ten to > reflect their correspondences, but that is too deterministic for me. > > There are too many examples stretching history to name, but as Joseph > Bronowski says about Joshua and Jeri-cho in The Ascent of Man: Did Joshua > finally destroy the city? And did the walls really come tumbling down? . . . > > Yes, you might say in the accurate sense that the tribes of Israel were > fighting to get into the Fertile Cres-cent  [and Jericho] they had to > conquer, and they did about 1400 BC. However, the Bible story was not > written down until perhaps 700 BC;  There is no archeological evidence on > this site that suggests on the one hand that a set of walls one fine day > really fell flat. On the other hand, this is earthquake country. There are > tremors here every day. And there is a Bronze Age period here where a set > of walls was rebuilt at least six-teen times. For me, what I once heard a > Jewish couple say on TV captures it: the Old Testament is the record of a > peoples angst. And it is to that degree historical and accurate, and it is > to that degree representative and significative. It is as the internal sense > of the Third Testament may touch on our angst at this day. > > Emanuel Swedenborg was not a trained historianno one in his day wasbut I > do not think he was using the expressions historical the way I would use > it to describe my work. Further, to the degree that Swedenborgs > interactions in the world of spirits were beyond time and space, it is to me > questionable to describe the events as strictly speaking historicalsave > for his act of writing them outor factually accurate. This is parsing the > mean of historical and factually accurate, I know, but in answer to your > question, I think we must, just do it. And, I still am unsure of what you > meant by No one here has denied anything from the literal sense. Alan > > >Reply-To: Organization and government issues > > > >To: Organization and government issues > >Subject: Re: [reform] deny me three times > >Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 12:53:53 -1000 (HST) > > > >On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: > > > > > Leon, this phrase [founf below] is a little ambiguous to me: No one > >here > > > has denied anything from the literal sense. Let me use Davids > > > example > >of > > > 'Earths in the Universe.' As I would imagine it, your sentence is > > > NOT > >saying > > > whatever is written in the literal sense must be taken literally, as > > > for example applying it to the observable universe. Rather, as I > > > imagine it, > >you > > > ARE saying that no one has nor should deny the words of the literal > >text, > > > since these are the context in which the spiritual or inner sense is > > > immersed. A little clarification would be welcomed. Alan > > > >Hi Alan, > > > >This is a conundrum that broke my head more than once, so I don't know > >if it can be clarified fully at this point. > > > >The Writings say that the all historical parts of the Word are accurate > >and factual -- historical and scientific. The Memoralble Relations, > >including EU, and a few selected passages here and there where Sw. > >tells something about himself, are historical parts of the Word, and > >therefore, are accurate, factual, and scientifically correct. > > > >Hence, when Sw. says, I spoke to this spirit, it is factually accurate. > >Or, I visited this society. Or, this took place in the world of spirits > >on this date. Or, I spoke to so and so by name. These I take to be > >factual and therefore we can take them in the literal sense to be true. > > > >Of course, these passages also have a spiritual and a celestial inner > >sense, since they are written in pure correspondences and appearances > >of truth. The angels know nothing about the person, the place, the > >moon, Mercury spirits, etc., as they read the passages correspondeing to > EU. > > > >Somewhere it is written (we need to find the place, not easy), that EU > >and Memorable Relations are written "according to the appearances of > >the senses" In SE 3427 it lists "APPEARANCES ACCORDING TO WHICH IT IS > >PROPER TO SPEAK, BUT NOT TO THINK." And this one: NJHD 262: "The sense > >of the letter of the Word is according to appearances in the world. And > >is adapted to the capacity of the simple" > > > >Yet there is a warning: NJHD 262: "Innumerable heresies arise from the > >sense of the letter without the internal sense, or without true > >doctrine from the Word. (remember the plagues I was telling Stephen > >about) > > > >And we have this from DP 220: "Now since all the uses, that is, the > >truths and goods of charity, that a man does to the neighbour may be > >done either according to appearances or according to the truths > >themselves in the > >Word: if he does them according to appearances confirmed in himself he > >is in fallacies; but if he does them according to truths he does them > >as he ought." > > > >This is a critical pssage, hard to interpret at first. > > > >And this in De Conjugio 82. "They who read the Word without doctrine > >cannot but fall into many fallacies from the sense of the letter which > >is according to appearances with man, and at the same time they have > >acquired many falsities and confirmed themselves in them, and at the > >same time are thence in the pride of their own intelligence" > > > >By the way, this is one reason I suggested that drawing forth doctrine > >is a commandment, and if you ignore it, you fall into the plagues of > >the literal sense. It is not necessary to fall into these plagues just > >because we are regenerating. Stephen seems to think that we cannot > >both regenerate and avoid the plagues. > > > >Now this: AC 9424: "But they who are in the genuine doctrine of truth > >from the Word, and in enlightenment when they read the Word, see > >everywhere truths that agree, and nothing whatever that is opposed; for > >they do not dwell upon what is said therein according to appearances, > >and according to the common apprehension of men, because they know that > >if the appearances are unfolded, and as it were unswathed, the truth is > laid bare." > > > >Those who say that we cannot take EU literally in this modern world of > >moon and Mars landings, must therefore show how it is that we are to > >read the assertion that all historical events in the Word are factual, > >historical, scientifically accurate. Justifying this departure from the > >Letter COMES BEFORE the rationale that there are no people on the moon. > >If you can justify this departure (I doubt that one can, but I remain > >open), then one can go on to the next step, what we found in our moon > >landings, etc. Perhaps AC 9424 (above) might be a method of > >approaching this rightly! > > > >Alan, what is your take on EU, and how do you see the teaching that the > >Word in its historical parts is accurate? > > > >To pacify Michael -- I do think this topic is relevant to Reform and > >its focus, such as it has evolved. > > > >Aloha, > > > >Leon > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >reform mailing list > >reform@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/reform > > > > > _______________________________________________ > reform mailing list > reform@novahierosolyma.org > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/reform > From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 29 15:34:26 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 11:34:26 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] [reform] - Made Up History?... tumbling downearthquake country In-Reply-To: <004f01c69b4b$7aaf5040$fc05a8c0@local> Message-ID: Leon you quoted and wrote: > > >Now this: AC 9424: "But they who are in the genuine doctrine of truth > > >from the Word, and in enlightenment when they read the Word, see > > >everywhere truths that agree, and nothing whatever that is opposed; for > > >they do not dwell upon what is said therein according to appearances, > > >and according to the common apprehension of men, because they know that > > >if the appearances are unfolded, and as it were unswathed, the truth is > > laid bare." > > > > > >Those who say that we cannot take EU literally in this modern world of > > >moon and Mars landings, must therefore show how it is that we are to > > >read the assertion that all historical events in the Word are factual, > > >historical, scientifically accurate. Justifying this departure from the > > >Letter COMES BEFORE the rationale that there are no people on the moon. > > >If you can justify this departure (I doubt that one can, but I remain > > >open), then one can go on to the next step, what we found in our moon > > >landings, etc. Perhaps AC 9424 (above) might be a method of > > >approaching this rightly! > > > > > >Alan, what is your take on EU, and how do you see the teaching that the > > >Word in its historical parts is accurate? > > > > > >To pacify Michael -- I do think this topic is relevant to Reform and > > >its focus, such as it has evolved. First there is a historical record for the confirmation that the walls of Jerico did fall down. I suppose I still have this book in my library somewhere but at this time cannot quote it as I haven't arranged them from my move here. The story also relates how a rock slide in that area created a natural historical dam that stopped up the river Jordan so the they could cross over. The event is even dated. But this assertion is not really important. The real problem of importance for Swedenborgians is the Earths in the Universe. My study of the Writings purposely left off this mystery until I had accomplished reading and studying all of the other works. I had first gathered the literal and genuine truths (KNH) and by an act of Divine Providence was in the Doctrine of Divine Truth before commencing reading the Arcana. During this study I was in a state where the world was not of intruding in any way. Knowing and understanding this mystery unlocked the Word and the spiritual meaning of the Writings. After doing this study I decided it was time to look into the Earths of the Universe and the answer is simple. Ultimate truth always is so simple a child can understand. First look to the Writings on the mystery of mysteries and you will see why things are hidden: >From Apocalypse Expained 375. ...Hence it is that profaners after death are not spirits in human form, as others are, but they are mere fantasies, and seem to themselves to flit hither and thither without any thought; and at length they are separated from others, and cast down into the lowest hell of all; and because they do not appear in a human form as other spirits, therefore, they are no longer called he or she, but it, that is, not man; but more may be seen respecting the profanation of good and truth in the Doctrine of the New Jerusalem (n. 169, 172). [5] Because such a lot awaits those who profane the interior goods and truths of heaven and the church, therefore, the internal or spiritual sense of the Word, in which these are contained, was not opened to the Jews, because if it had been, they would have profaned it; and, therefore, neither was it opened to Christians, because these also, if it had been opened, would have profaned it. Hence also it was concealed from the latter as from the former, that there is any internal or spiritual sense in the sense of the letter, which is the natural [sense] of the Word. And in order that they should be ignorant of it, it was provided that the science of correspondences, which was the chief knowledge with the ancients, should be lost, so that the nature of correspondence should be entirely unknown, and, consequently, the nature of the spiritual sense of the Word. For the Word is written by pure correspondences, therefore, without this knowledge, the nature of the spiritual sense could not be known. This was provided by the Lord, lest genuine goods and truths themselves, in which the higher heavens are, should be profaned. [6] But the reason why the internal or spiritual sense of the Word is at this day opened, is, because the Last Judgment is accomplished, and hence all things in the heavens and in the hells are reduced into order, and thus it can be provided by the Lord that profanations may not take place... Now that you can see why things are hidden you can understand this statement that I have come to make in regard to the mystery of the Earths in the Universe. Men need to be able to dismiss the Writings as not truth of doctrine. The Earths of the Universe are the 'hard candy shell'. The Earths of the Unverse is an act of Divine Providence to keep the spiritual meaning of the Word hidden from those who want to be able to reject the Writings. Inside the Writings are revealed the spiritual sense of the Word. For men to first be confronted by an obvious difficult mystery of the 'man from Mars' gives them a quick painless obvious reason to dismiss the Writings as bogus. This protects men from profaning themselves. The Writings have been hidden in a strange la la land among what I term 'the Church of the librarians'. Those of us who have accepted the Writings as revelation or the Third Testement can see that the world will be transformed by these works but it is not understood how. The 'librarians' have set up stringent requirements for anyone who wants to be able to publically proclaim these Divine Truths. All of the 'librarians' have seminaries that require a college degree before they are allowed to attend. The end product are seminary trained theologians with a background in memory knowledge. This type of training is specifically warned against in the Writings. These theologians know Hebrew, Greek and Latin from standard reference materials and are not capable of thinking 'outside of the box'. When the annoucement of Rev. 14: 6, 7 and the literal and spiritual understanding thereby occurs men will need to be able to dismiss the Writings and the Word. They will need to be able to say, 'a new bogus religious movement has begun'. Another interesting concept along these lines is that when this announcement is made men will need to be able to flee to a New Church that can provide for them. Within the 'five branches' I don't really see this for them. It is my prayer to be able to take part in providing them the New Church home that they will need. It is my prayer that those Swedenborgian priests who recognize 'Truth of Doctrine' will answer to this call. The Writings themselves state that you cannot take the term calam* literally because it means, 'falsity sustaining'. My background is different from you all and comes from a completely different direction from those who are classically trained. My training is based upon living and acting upon natural truths and trying to comprehend the spiritual truths that are hidden within them so that I can escape my profanity. I have experienced some of the most incredible celestial experiences mankind has known. And also, the most horrifying states of profanity and death. From out of His Divine Mercy, I have been in the 'illumination' and 'illustration' from the Lord alone and can categorically state, 'you all just don't get it, yet. But you will.' Your brother in the Anointed, literally Rt. Rev. "Greg" Gregory Karl Davis Universal Orthodox Church diocese of Georgia, United States of America _________________________________________________________________ Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jun 29 16:07:19 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 12:07:19 EDT Subject: [lucerna] [reform] - Made Up History?... tumbling downearthquake country Message-ID: <264.ca7eb42.31d554b7@aol.com> Dear Greg, I must admit, that in general, I agree with your view over EU and the 'Church of the librarians'. (This seems to mirror what I said about the quality of 'Mercury' being the present psychological state of the NC.) "For men to first be confronted by an obvious difficult mystery of the 'man from Mars' gives them a quick painless obvious reason to dismiss the Writings as bogus. This protects men from profaning themselves." Which is also my thoughts on the matter, precisely; a form of 'cherubim', to protect AC. I will still continue to believe the literal of EU, because the Lord says that it so, (and then use all rational means to confirm it) while casting aside all that does not agree, with the Word/Writings. Warm regards, David R. Chambers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 30 11:09:43 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:09:43 +0100 Subject: [lucerna] EinU Message-ID: <000901c69c35$d6696930$d6b287d9@riley> I agree with those who say that, the Word has not been given to teach science nor history, or for that matter anything about the Natural world,which only affects the bodily life. These can be discovered by man. What cannot be known from man, are the things pertaining to spiritual life. We therefore we read ,"Without a Revelation from the Divine, a man cannot know anything concerning eternal life, or even concerning God; and still less can he know anything concerning love and faith in Him.." (New Jerusalem and its Heavenly Doctrine 249). With regard to Earths in the Universe, (not worlds in outer space,which is not what the Lord said) it deals solely with the qualites of human life. Dealt with in Arcana Coelestia, at the end of each chapter in Exodus, the subject is the development of that life, in relation to the External mind, the planets, and the Internal ,the earths in the starry heavens. In relation to the latter, we note that six are mentioned, whereas in the book EinU, there are only five. By six is signifed temptations, which take place during regeneration, as in the six days of creation.. When we look at the contents of the book itself, we therefore, note five planets and five earths in stary heavens. As said, these refer to the External mind and the Internal. By the moon is signified the faith formed in the human as the reflector of love. The reason the Lord was born on our earth, in relation of our life, is in keeping with the teaching, that all things proceed from Primes,through Ultimates to Intermendiates... From the Lord into the Knowldges formed from the Word, in us, to the forming of the Spiritual mind; the new Understanding and the new Will. Yours Norman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jun 30 19:52:23 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 09:52:23 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] Earths in the Universe In-Reply-To: <000901c69c35$d6696930$d6b287d9@riley> References: <000901c69c35$d6696930$d6b287d9@riley> Message-ID: The Lord gives us revelation to inform us about spiritual reality. What Swedenborg wrote is, for the most part, an account of an experience that he had. As an account of an experience, I would say that it is part of science and part of history. When we wonder whether to accept a revelation like that given through Swedenborg, one question that immediately comes up is one of "admissibility of evidence." First, can we believe ANYONE who reports this kind of experience, and second, should we believe this particular report? Should I consider this report as valid data, or not? That is a scientific question. Are God and the spiritual world part of reality, or not? That is a scientific question, about what is real and what is not real. If we accept the report, there are, of course, many further questions, like how to interpret specific items, and what conclusions to draw from the whole. The further questions may continue forever. As an example of such a question, I would bring up the fact that Swedenborg reports experiences that include naming people who were Biblical or otherwise historical figures in this world, such as "David" or "Paul" or "Karl XII of Sweden," and naming groups of people, such as "the English" or "Jews" or "inhabitants of Mercury." In other passages, we read that the mention of a specific person in revelation refers to something on a spiritual level that exists, actually or potentially, in every person. I think the question of what is meant by the naming of a person or group of people in revelation should remain alive a while longer. Aloha, Michael --------------------------------- P.S. passages: 6653. [...] For a concentration of the mind on any people in particular, or on any person in particular, narrows and restricts their ideas, and deprives them of a perception of the full range of the subject from one edge of it to the other. What applies to 'people' applies in a similar way to other terms, in that in the internal sense they mean entities unlimited by anything else, as is the case with nation (meaning good), king (meaning truth), prince (meaning a leading truth), priest (meaning good), son, daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother, sister, father, mother, and very many others. (Arcana Coelestia 6653 (tr. Elliott)). 5095. [...] When the historical sense mentions a number of persons - as when Joseph, Pharaoh, the chief of the attendants, the cupbearer, and the baker are mentioned here - various things are indeed meant by them in the internal sense, yet only as all these exist in one person. (Arcana Coelestia 5095 (tr. Elliott)). 5225. [...] the idea of a person is converted in the internal sense into that of some reality. For example, the idea of a man, husband, woman, wife, son, daughter, boy, or girl is converted into the idea of some truth or form of good. (Arcana Coelestia 5225 (tr. Elliott)). --------------------------------- P.P.S. responding to: > Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 12:09:43 +0100 > To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > Subject: [lucerna] EinU > I agree with those who say that, the Word has not been given to > teach science nor history, or for that matter anything about the > Natural world,which only affects the bodily life. These can be > discovered by man. What cannot be known from man, are the things > pertaining to spiritual life. We therefore we read ,"Without a > Revelation from the Divine, a man cannot know anything concerning > eternal life, or even concerning God; and still less can he know > anything concerning love and faith in Him.." (New Jerusalem and its > Heavenly Doctrine 249). With regard to Earths in the Universe, (not > worlds in outer space,which is not what the Lord said) it deals > solely with the qualites of human life. Dealt with in Arcana > Coelestia, at the end of each chapter in Exodus, the subject is the > development of that life, in relation to the External mind, the > planets, and the Internal ,the earths in the starry heavens. In > relation to the latter, we note that six are mentioned, whereas in > the book EinU, there are only five. By six is signifed temptations, > which take place during regeneration, as in the six days of > creation.. When we look at the contents of the book itself, we > therefore, note five planets and five earths in stary heavens. As > said, these refer to the External mind and the Internal. By the > moon is signified the faith formed in the human as the reflector of > love. The reason the Lord was born on our earth, in relation of our > life, is in keeping with the teaching, that all things proceed from > Primes,through Ultimates to Intermendiates... From the Lord into the > Knowldges formed from the Word, in us, to the forming of the > Spiritual mind; the new Understanding and the new Will. P.P.P.S. Hi Norman. I find WHITE SPACE and paragraphs very helpful in organizing and presenting a thought. --MVD -- Michael V. David ---------- http://mvdavid.com E kaup? aku n? i ka hoe a k? mai. From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jul 5 19:33:25 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:33:25 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one Message-ID: Hi Doctrine Lovers, What do you make of this? ======== SE-WE 237. But because the Jewish Church, in itself, must be one and the same with the Church truly Christian, as was the earliest or infant Church, therefore, so that that Church might be portrayed as an inner one, Abraham depicts a belief that makes one righteous. The fact that belief was accounted to him because he had believed the promise concerning Isaac, who was to be the promised son [Gen. 15:4-6], could not have made Abraham righteous, unless at the same time he had believed that by the promised son was meant the Messiah, Who was to be born, and Who is the One Only promised Son. (SE-WE 237) ======================= The apparent anti-semitism in the Writings is counterbalanced by statements like the above, which asserts that the Jewish Church must be the same as the "Church truly Christian" which is a reference to the New Church (TCR). So the NC and the Jewish Church form a one. How are we to interpret this (a) literally, and (b) spiritually? Aloha, Leon From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jul 5 21:33:12 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 17:33:12 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC Message-ID: Since this is on Lucerna, even though I don't want to confuse the issue, there is something here that takes me back to Greg's CONCERN about being very clear about specific words like "CALAM*". Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one >Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:33:25 -1000 (HST) Hi Doctrine Lovers, What do you make of this? SE-WE 237. But because the Jewish Church, in itself, must be one and >the same with the Church truly Christian, as was the earliest or infant >Church, therefore, so that that Church might be portrayed as an inner one, >Abraham depicts a belief that makes one righteous. > The fact that belief was accounted to him because he had believed >the promise concerning Isaac, who was to be the promised son [Gen. >15:4-6], could not have made Abraham righteous, unless at the same time he >had believed that by the promised son was meant the Messiah, Who was to be >born, and Who is the One Only promised Son. (SE-WE 237) >======================= > >The apparent anti-semitism in the Writings is counterbalanced by >statements like the above, which asserts that the Jewish Church must be >the same as the "Church truly Christian" which is a reference to the New >Church (TCR). So the NC and the Jewish Church form a one. How are we to >interpret this (a) literally, and (b) spiritually? > >Aloha, > >Leon >_______________________________________________ >lucerna mailing list >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jul 6 01:42:22 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:42:22 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: > Since this is on Lucerna, even though I don't want to confuse the issue, > there is something here that takes me back to Greg's CONCERN about being > very clear about specific words like "CALAM*". Alan Hi Alan, I'm not completely sure what you mean exactly. I'm not offering it as "hair-splitting" semantic issue (to use Barrie's language about what we are doing on Relform). Why would I do that? You know my interests and level of thinking. The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact the New Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is handled. Have you seen my (partly auto-biographical) article on the issue of anti-semitism in the Writings? Anti-semitism and Holocaust Theology http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj//anti-semitism.htm Aloha, Leon > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one > >Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:33:25 -1000 (HST) > > Hi Doctrine Lovers, What do you make of this? > > SE-WE 237. But because the Jewish Church, in itself, must be one and > >the same with the Church truly Christian, as was the earliest or infant > >Church, therefore, so that that Church might be portrayed as an inner one, > >Abraham depicts a belief that makes one righteous. > > The fact that belief was accounted to him because he had believed > >the promise concerning Isaac, who was to be the promised son [Gen. > >15:4-6], could not have made Abraham righteous, unless at the same time he > >had believed that by the promised son was meant the Messiah, Who was to be > >born, and Who is the One Only promised Son. (SE-WE 237) > >======================= > > > >The apparent anti-semitism in the Writings is counterbalanced by > >statements like the above, which asserts that the Jewish Church must be > >the same as the "Church truly Christian" which is a reference to the New > >Church (TCR). So the NC and the Jewish Church form a one. How are we to > >interpret this (a) literally, and (b) spiritually? > > > >Aloha, > > > >Leon > >_______________________________________________ > >lucerna mailing list > >lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > > > _______________________________________________ > lucerna mailing list > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna > From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jul 6 17:47:05 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 13:47:05 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] nothing "substantive," always "socially sensitive" Message-ID: I said I did want to be a distraction: I guess it was my knee-jerk reaction to seeing the discussion shift to Lucerna. I really intended nothing and should have remained silent. Best wishes, Alan >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word<> >To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >Word >Subject: Re: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC >Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:42:22 -1000 (HST) On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: >Since this is on Lucerna, even though I don't want to confuse the issue, >there is something here that takes me back to Greg's CONCERN about being >very clear about specific words like "CALAM*". Alan Hi Alan, I'm not completely sure what you mean exactly. I'm not offering it as "hair-splitting" semantic issue (to use Barrie's language about what we are doing on Relform). Why would I do that? You know my interests and level of thinking. The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact the New Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is handled. Have you seen my (partly auto-biographical) article on the issue of anti-semitism in the Writings? Anti-semitism and Holocaust Theology http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj//anti-semitism.htm Aloha, Leon > >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin > >Word > >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > >Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one > >Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:33:25 -1000 (HST) > From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Thu Jul 6 17:52:31 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 13:52:31 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] didn't! didn't! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I DIDN'T want to confuse the issue. Sorry. Alan >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >Subject: nothing "substantive," always "socially sensitive" >Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 13:47:05 -0400 I said I did want to be a distraction: I guess it was my knee-jerk reaction to seeing the discussion shift to Lucerna. I really intended nothing and should have remained silent. Best wishes, Alan > > >>Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word<> >>To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >>Word >>Subject: Re: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC >>Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:42:22 -1000 (HST) >On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: >On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: > >>Since this is on Lucerna, even though I don't want to confuse the issue, >>there is something here that takes me back to Greg's CONCERN about being >>very clear about specific words like "CALAM*". Alan > >Hi Alan, I'm not completely sure what you mean exactly. I'm not offering it >as >"hair-splitting" semantic issue (to use Barrie's language about what we >are doing on Relform). Why would I do that? You know my interests and >level of thinking. > >The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact the New >Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is handled. > >Have you seen my (partly auto-biographical) article on the issue of >anti-semitism in the Writings? > >Anti-semitism and Holocaust Theology >http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj//anti-semitism.htm > >Aloha, Leon > > > >> >Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin >> >Word >> >To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org >> >Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one >> >Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:33:25 -1000 (HST) >> > > From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jul 7 11:14:43 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2006 07:14:43 EDT Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one Message-ID: <52f.2ec66e3.31df9c23@aol.com> Hi Leon, You asked: "What do you make of this? ======== SE-WE 237. But because the Jewish Church, in itself, must be one and the same with the Church truly Christian, as was the earliest or infant Church, therefore, so that that Church might be portrayed as an inner one, Abraham depicts a belief that makes one righteous. The fact that belief was accounted to him because he had believed the promise concerning Isaac, who was to be the promised son [Gen. 15:4-6], could not have made Abraham righteous, unless at the same time he had believed that by the promised son was meant the Messiah, Who was to be born, and Who is the One Only promised Son. (SE-WE 237) ======================= The apparent anti-semitism in the Writings is counterbalanced by statements like the above, which asserts that the Jewish Church must be the same as the "Church truly Christian" which is a reference to the New Church (TCR). So the NC and the Jewish Church form a one. How are we to interpret this (a) literally, and (b) spiritually? " My interpretation would be: a) That the New Church forms a one with the Jewish Church as merely preservers for posterity of the Third Testament, thus with no concept of an interior sense to them. b) The NC beliefs are accounted righteous, but only if at the same time it believes the Writings are the Lord in His promised Second Coming. Close? Aloha, David. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jul 7 19:17:23 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 09:17:23 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] Jewish Church and the LNC are to be one In-Reply-To: <52f.2ec66e3.31df9c23@aol.com> References: <52f.2ec66e3.31df9c23@aol.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 Coronis44@aol.com wrote: > My interpretation would be: > a) That the New Church forms a one with the Jewish Church as merely > preservers for posterity of the Third Testament, thus with no concept of an interior > sense to them. > b) The NC beliefs are accounted righteous, but only if at the same time it > believes the Writings are the Lord in His promised Second Coming. Hi David, OK, sounds interesting. It also suggests tha the Jews do not have to convert to the NC since they are already part of it, in the interior. All they need to do is to acknowledge and honor that interior. Like I have done, being a Jew. This means that there is a Jewish heaven, as there are Islamic heavens. But in my case I have married in the Christian Church after baptism in the Episcopal Church. So I expect to be in a True Christian heaven, not Jewish. In its spiritual sense the "Jewish Church" also means a transitional state in the NC mind. Aloha, Leon From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jul 7 19:23:41 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 15:23:41 -0400 Subject: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: > > > Since this is on Lucerna, even though I don't want to confuse the issue, > > there is something here that takes me back to Greg's CONCERN about being > > very clear about specific words like "CALAM*". Alan > >Hi Alan, > >I'm not completely sure what you mean exactly. I'm not offering it as >"hair-splitting" semantic issue (to use Barrie's language about what we >are doing on Relform). Why would I do that? You know my interests and >level of thinking. > >The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact the New >Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is handled. > >Have you seen my (partly auto-biographical) article on the issue of >anti-semitism in the Writings? > >Anti-semitism and Holocaust Theology >http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj//anti-semitism.htm > > > Hi Doctrine Lovers, What do you make of this? > > > > SE-WE 237. But because the Jewish Church, in itself, must be one and > > >the same with the Church truly Christian, as was the earliest or infant > > >Church, therefore, so that that Church might be portrayed as an inner >one, > > >Abraham depicts a belief that makes one righteous. > > > The fact that belief was accounted to him because he had believed > > >the promise concerning Isaac, who was to be the promised son [Gen. > > >15:4-6], could not have made Abraham righteous, unless at the same time >he > > >had believed that by the promised son was meant the Messiah, Who was to >be > > >born, and Who is the One Only promised Son. (SE-WE 237) > > >======================= > > > > > >The apparent anti-semitism in the Writings is counterbalanced by > > >statements like the above, which asserts that the Jewish Church must be > > >the same as the "Church truly Christian" which is a reference to the >New > > >Church (TCR). So the NC and the Jewish Church form a one. How are we to > > >interpret this (a) literally, and (b) spiritually? > > > > > >Aloha, > > > > > >Leon > > >_______________________________________________ Leon, You wrote in the meaning of ?Jews? in the New Church mind: ?Religious rituals, religious prayers, religious sacrifices, fastings, meditations?none of it can prevail. Only what can prevail is a reformed character in daily willing and thinking for the sake of God and religion (LIFE 1). No one has the power to attain this. But anyone can turn to the Lord and ask Him to do it, for He can. And He has laid out in His Word what we must do in order for Him to regenerate us. This He does to anyone from any religion with any background universally. In heaven there are no religions, but only conscious life in accordance with the Word (AR 918).? The references you quoted from the Writings follow at the end of these observations. The following answers the questions on how we to understand the literal and spiritual meaning of the Word and its 'oneness' with the Israelite and Early Christian Church in the desending New Church. You state that because there is no Church in Heaven therefore it seems no Church in the world except in the capacity as an individual. In this world the life of the Church is in its religious rituals, religious prayers, religious sacrifices, fastings and meditations. These practices conjoin the individual to Heaven as I can tell you from much experience in life and through my attendance at the Ethiopian and also Coptic Orthodox Churches. Oriental Orthodox practices are beyond the understanding of those who have never experienced this life of the Church. Therefore, it follows from your statement: Those who have the Writings don?t need to engage in spiritual practices that were taught by the resurrected Savior to the Apostles and earlier to the Ancient and Israelite Churches. Odd how the justification of this ignorance develops, wouldn?t you say? And yet at its basic this is the founding theology of the 'five branches' of the New Church Movement. The first Christians were Jews who worshipped at the Temple in Jerusalem for over three decades and the first Divine Liturgy of James the Just is retained in the Orthodox practices. What I have found is that the Writings explain or open the understanding when these Church practices are adhered to. I have been asked many times. How come you attend our Church if you do not understand the teachings, which are in Amaharic at the Ethiopian or Egyptian when attending the Coptic? I tell them it is the symbolism and the blessings of the priests. The Divine Liturgy is given in English on a projector, I should note. But this brings us to another interesting point in your observation of the Church practices you dismiss; the blessing from the hand of the priests. You state ?in daily willing and thinking for the sake of God and religion?. And also, ?This He does to anyone from any religion with any background universally.? Do you attend a Church? Is it Swedenborgian with its ?20 minute sermon?? Does it follow the in and out the door practice in under an hour? Who are the Machiavellians? What is the New Church militant in your New Church mind? My experience in the opening of the Word through the Writings and the literal and spiritual understanding was overwhelming and still is extremely difficult. Being able to understand at a deeper level than the ?Swedenborgians? who claim these doctrines as the Third Testament is a lonely vigil. I did not know this at the time, but my education in the Writings was based upon the formula stated in Lucerna for the correct study of the Writings. By the way, you may recall that it was you who introduced me to www.heavenlydoctrines.org four years ago. The Lord alone ?illuminated? and ?illustrated? for me this experience after I learned that the priests of ?one of the branches? rejects the literal Word. It was during this time at an Ethiopian Orthodox Church that a spiritual experience was given to me. My subsequent experiences at an Ethiopian Orthodox Church allowed me the capability to continue with these discoveries. At the close of the service the priest administers an individual blessing and then the congregant is given a drink of Holy water. The influx at the time was immense and uplifting. Being able to delve into these mysteries became doable. It is in the worship experience and life of the Church that opens the spiritual mind to enable these mysteries to take hold and become translucent. It is this conjunction in the spirit, which enables the man to know and do the ?will of God? at a celestial level. In Rev., "And He showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb." xxii. 1. One of the favorite phrases in the LNC is, ?Now it is permitted to enter with understanding into the mystery of the faith.? This quote is used to mean that the mysteries are now understood. Or even that the ?New Church? priests alone understand, when in actuality the Writings are not understood at all in their depth. This phrase is misused with deleterious effect and closes the mind. The revealing of Joseph to his brothers is absolutely astounding in its significance when the literal Hebrew Word is accepted as physically true and understood from out of the Writings. The focus upon the ?Jews? and the ?Holocaust? and the anti-Semitism of the Writings you assign this importance, ?The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact the New Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is handled.? The Ethiopian Orthodox Church traces its history back to the founding of that Israelite Church by Solomon. And even earlier to the Ancient Church as they retain the Book of Jasher in their Cannon. It was the priests of this Israelite Church that caused the uproar for they are the wise men from the east. Any theological student should know that the ?Jews? are not going to be in an uproar over anyone from outside their religion. The Ethiopian Israelite Church has now and had then the Ark of the Covenant. This is the celestial Church where the literal Word is understood and worshipped as Holy and so is the Divine Man. In Matthew, ?Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem. Saying, Where is the He that is born the King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where the Anointed should be born.? ii. 1. ? 4. Here are two sites that really will engage the mind on this subject: http://www.meta-religion.com/Archaeology/Israel/scholar_says.htm This site documents the use of the blessed 'oil' by John the Baptist in the Sacrament of Baptism. http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_new/notes/?page=AncientSymbol This site documents the use of the blessed 'oil' by James the Just in the Sacrament of Baptism. In Genesis, "And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness." xv. 6. In your earlier question it was directed to what do we think of a passage in the Writings. In this quote is the phrase, ?the promised son was meant the Messiah?. The ancient prophesy that God would walk the face of the earth, as a man is what Abram believed and that he would found the race from out of which this Divine man would manifest. This promised son is identified as the ?Messiah? in Hebrew or the ?Anointed? in English. When you are able to comprehend what this term means literally then the Writings and their explanation of the Word will begin to open and you will be able to ?see? the Lord Jesus the Anointed as the Divine Human. It is this literal understanding that will be made manifest physically in the future of His New Church. This literal and spiritual understanding is now closed. It is CERTAIN that there is no other term ?like CALAM*? (Alan) AE 627. This term means in the Writings both ultimate truth and falsity sustaining. When this falsity is no longer sustained in the translations of the Writings then you and the world will ?see? Him in the clouds with a sickle in hand, wearing a golden crown. Rev. 14:14 Your brother in the Anointed, literally Greg Doctrine of Life 1. ALL RELIGION HAS RELATION TO LIFE, AND THE LIFE OF RELIGION IS TO DO GOOD Every one who has any religion knows and acknowledges that he who lives well will be saved, and that he who lives wickedly will be condemned; for he knows and acknowledges that he who lives well thinks well, not only concerning God but also concerning the neighbour; but not so he who lives wickedly. The life of man is his love; and what a man loves he not Only does willingly but also thinks willingly. The reason, therefore, why it is said that the life [of religion] is to do good is, because the doing of good unites with the thinking of good; and unless they act in unison in a man, they do not form part of his life. But these things will be demonstrated in what follows. 918. [verse 22] 'And I saw no temple therein, for the Lord God Almighty is the temple thereof, and the Lamb' signifies that in this Church there will not be any external separated from what is internal, because the Lord Himself in His Divine Human, from Whom is everything of the Church, is the Only One being approached, worshipped and adored. By 'I saw no temple therein' is not understood that in the New Church, which is the New Jerusalem, there will be no temple, but that in it there will not be what is external separated from what is internal. This is because by 'a temple' is signified the Church as to worship, and in the uppermost (supernus) sense the Lord Himself as to the Divine Human, Who is to be worshipped, as may be seen above (n. 191, 529, 585); and because everything of the Church is from the Lord it is therefore said 'for the Lord God Almighty is the temple thereof and the Lamb', by which is signified the Lord in His Divine Human. By 'the Lord God Almighty' is understood the Lord from what is eternal, Who is Jehovah Himself, and by 'the Lamb' is signified His Divine Human, as frequently above. _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee? Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Fri Jul 7 22:54:07 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 12:54:07 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Greg, No, I did not remember that you had corresponded with me four years ago. I went back to our correspondence and I now realize you started your study of Swedenborg through my books and articles on the Web. I am happy to see that you continued your interest and even intensified it, it seems, from your messages to Lucerna. I'm sorry if I cannot share your enthusiasm and conviction regarding physical objects like oil in anointing or worship, other relics and rituals, flags next to altars, etc.. I can honor these things in the name of those who believe in their sacredness and in their necessity, and I myself may have felt that way prior to my familiarity with the Writings. But now I see all external forms of worship as not essential, though useful for religion in many circumstances -- and I support them for that important use. There is only one thing that is essential for the salvation of a New Church mind and for being close to the Lord. That is the practice of good and truth in our daily regeneration in accordance with our enlightenment from the Lord regarding the spiritual sense of the Word. Aloha, Leon On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, Gregory Davis wrote: > Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2006 15:23:41 -0400 > Reply-To: Discussion on doctrine drawn out of the Latin Word > > To: lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > Subject: Re: [lucerna] [L] RE: Jewish Church & LNC > > >On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Alan Longstaff wrote: > > > > > Since this is on Lucerna, even though I don't want to confuse the issue, > > > there is something here that takes me back to Greg's CONCERN about being > > > very clear about specific words like "CALAM*". Alan > > > >Hi Alan, > > > >I'm not completely sure what you mean exactly. I'm not offering it as > >"hair-splitting" semantic issue (to use Barrie's language about what we > >are doing on Relform). Why would I do that? You know my interests and > >level of thinking. > > > >The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact the New > >Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is handled. > > > >Have you seen my (partly auto-biographical) article on the issue of > >anti-semitism in the Writings? > > > >Anti-semitism and Holocaust Theology > >http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj//anti-semitism.htm > > > > > Hi Doctrine Lovers, What do you make of this? > > > > > > SE-WE 237. But because the Jewish Church, in itself, must be one and > > > >the same with the Church truly Christian, as was the earliest or infant > > > >Church, therefore, so that that Church might be portrayed as an inner > >one, > > > >Abraham depicts a belief that makes one righteous. > > > > The fact that belief was accounted to him because he had believed > > > >the promise concerning Isaac, who was to be the promised son [Gen. > > > >15:4-6], could not have made Abraham righteous, unless at the same time > >he > > > >had believed that by the promised son was meant the Messiah, Who was to > >be > > > >born, and Who is the One Only promised Son. (SE-WE 237) > > > >======================= > > > > > > > >The apparent anti-semitism in the Writings is counterbalanced by > > > >statements like the above, which asserts that the Jewish Church must be > > > >the same as the "Church truly Christian" which is a reference to the > >New > > > >Church (TCR). So the NC and the Jewish Church form a one. How are we to > > > >interpret this (a) literally, and (b) spiritually? > > > > > > > >Aloha, > > > > > > > >Leon > > > >_______________________________________________ > > Leon, > You wrote in the meaning of ?Jews? in the New Church mind: ?Religious > rituals, religious prayers, religious sacrifices, fastings, meditations?none > of it can prevail. Only what can prevail is a reformed character in daily > willing and thinking for the sake of God and religion (LIFE 1). No one has > the power to attain this. But anyone can turn to the Lord and ask Him to do > it, for He can. And He has laid out in His Word what we must do in order for > Him to regenerate us. This He does to anyone from any religion with any > background universally. In heaven there are no religions, but only conscious > life in accordance with the Word (AR 918).? > > The references you quoted from the Writings follow at the end of these > observations. The following answers the questions on how we to understand > the literal and spiritual meaning of the Word and its 'oneness' with the > Israelite and Early Christian Church in the desending New Church. > > You state that because there is no Church in Heaven therefore it seems no > Church in the world except in the capacity as an individual. In this world > the life of the Church is in its religious rituals, religious prayers, > religious sacrifices, fastings and meditations. These practices conjoin the > individual to Heaven as I can tell you from much experience in life and > through my attendance at the Ethiopian and also Coptic Orthodox Churches. > Oriental Orthodox practices are beyond the understanding of those who have > never experienced this life of the Church. Therefore, it follows from your > statement: Those who have the Writings don?t need to engage in spiritual > practices that were taught by the resurrected Savior to the Apostles and > earlier to the Ancient and Israelite Churches. Odd how the justification of > this ignorance develops, wouldn?t you say? And yet at its basic this is the > founding theology of the 'five branches' of the New Church Movement. > > The first Christians were Jews who worshipped at the Temple in Jerusalem for > over three decades and the first Divine Liturgy of James the Just is > retained in the Orthodox practices. What I have found is that the Writings > explain or open the understanding when these Church practices are adhered > to. I have been asked many times. How come you attend our Church if you do > not understand the teachings, which are in Amaharic at the Ethiopian or > Egyptian when attending the Coptic? I tell them it is the symbolism and the > blessings of the priests. The Divine Liturgy is given in English on a > projector, I should note. > > But this brings us to another interesting point in your observation of the > Church practices you dismiss; the blessing from the hand of the priests. You > state ?in daily willing and thinking for the sake of God and religion?. And > also, ?This He does to anyone from any religion with any background > universally.? Do you attend a Church? Is it Swedenborgian with its ?20 > minute sermon?? Does it follow the in and out the door practice in under an > hour? Who are the Machiavellians? What is the New Church militant in your > New Church mind? > > My experience in the opening of the Word through the Writings and the > literal and spiritual understanding was overwhelming and still is extremely > difficult. Being able to understand at a deeper level than the > ?Swedenborgians? who claim these doctrines as the Third Testament is a > lonely vigil. I did not know this at the time, but my education in the > Writings was based upon the formula stated in Lucerna for the correct study > of the Writings. By the way, you may recall that it was you who introduced > me to www.heavenlydoctrines.org four years ago. The Lord alone ?illuminated? > and ?illustrated? for me this experience after I learned that the priests of > ?one of the branches? rejects the literal Word. It was during this time at > an Ethiopian Orthodox Church that a spiritual experience was given to me. My > subsequent experiences at an Ethiopian Orthodox Church allowed me the > capability to continue with these discoveries. At the close of the service > the priest administers an individual blessing and then the congregant is > given a drink of Holy water. The influx at the time was immense and > uplifting. Being able to delve into these mysteries became doable. It is in > the worship experience and life of the Church that opens the spiritual mind > to enable these mysteries to take hold and become translucent. It is this > conjunction in the spirit, which enables the man to know and do the ?will of > God? at a celestial level. In Rev., "And He showed me a pure river of water > of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the > Lamb." xxii. 1. > > One of the favorite phrases in the LNC is, ?Now it is permitted to enter > with understanding into the mystery of the faith.? This quote is used to > mean that the mysteries are now understood. Or even that the ?New Church? > priests alone understand, when in actuality the Writings are not understood > at all in their depth. This phrase is misused with deleterious effect and > closes the mind. > > The revealing of Joseph to his brothers is absolutely astounding in its > significance when the literal Hebrew Word is accepted as physically true and > understood from out of the Writings. The focus upon the ?Jews? and the > ?Holocaust? and the anti-Semitism of the Writings you assign this > importance, ?The issue is substantive and socially sensitive. It will impact > the New Church for centuries to come -- depending on how that issue is > handled.? The Ethiopian Orthodox Church traces its history back to the > founding of that Israelite Church by Solomon. And even earlier to the > Ancient Church as they retain the Book of Jasher in their Cannon. It was the > priests of this Israelite Church that caused the uproar for they are the > wise men from the east. Any theological student should know that the ?Jews? > are not going to be in an uproar over anyone from outside their religion. > The Ethiopian Israelite Church has now and had then the Ark of the Covenant. > This is the celestial Church where the literal Word is understood and > worshipped as Holy and so is the Divine Man. In Matthew, ?Now when Jesus was > born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came > wise men from the east to Jerusalem. Saying, Where is the He that is born > the King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the east, and are come to > worship Him. When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, > and all Jerusalem with him. And when he had gathered all the chief priests > and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where the Anointed > should be born.? ii. 1. ? 4. > > Here are two sites that really will engage the mind on this subject: > http://www.meta-religion.com/Archaeology/Israel/scholar_says.htm This site > documents the use of the blessed 'oil' by John the Baptist in the Sacrament > of Baptism. > > http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_new/notes/?page=AncientSymbol This > site documents the use of the blessed 'oil' by James the Just in the > Sacrament of Baptism. > > In Genesis, "And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for > righteousness." xv. 6. > > In your earlier question it was directed to what do we think of a passage in > the Writings. In this quote is the phrase, ?the promised son was meant the > Messiah?. The ancient prophesy that God would walk the face of the earth, as > a man is what Abram believed and that he would found the race from out of > which this Divine man would manifest. This promised son is identified as the > ?Messiah? in Hebrew or the ?Anointed? in English. When you are able to > comprehend what this term means literally then the Writings and their > explanation of the Word will begin to open and you will be able to ?see? the > Lord Jesus the Anointed as the Divine Human. It is this literal > understanding that will be made manifest physically in the future of His New > Church. This literal and spiritual understanding is now closed. It is > CERTAIN that there is no other term ?like CALAM*? (Alan) AE 627. This term > means in the Writings both ultimate truth and falsity sustaining. When this > falsity is no longer sustained in the translations of the Writings then you > and the world will ?see? Him in the clouds with a sickle in hand, wearing a > golden crown. Rev. 14:14 > Your brother in the Anointed, literally > Greg > Doctrine of Life > 1. ALL RELIGION HAS RELATION TO LIFE, AND THE LIFE OF RELIGION IS TO DO GOOD > Every one who has any religion knows and acknowledges that he who lives well > will be saved, and that he who lives wickedly will be condemned; for he > knows and acknowledges that he who lives well thinks well, not only > concerning God but also concerning the neighbour; but not so he who lives > wickedly. The life of man is his love; and what a man loves he not Only does > willingly but also thinks willingly. The reason, therefore, why it is said > that the life [of religion] is to do good is, because the doing of good > unites with the thinking of good; and unless they act in unison in a man, > they do not form part of his life. But these things will be demonstrated in > what follows. > 918. [verse 22] 'And I saw no temple therein, for the Lord God Almighty is > the temple thereof, and the Lamb' signifies that in this Church there will > not be any external separated from what is internal, because the Lord > Himself in His Divine Human, from Whom is everything of the Church, is the > Only One being approached, worshipped and adored. By 'I saw no temple > therein' is not understood that in the New Church, which is the New > Jerusalem, there will be no temple, but that in it there will not be what is > external separated from what is internal. This is because by 'a temple' is > signified the Church as to worship, and in the uppermost (supernus) sense > the Lord Himself as to the Divine Human, Who is to be worshipped, as may be > seen above (n. 191, 529, 585); and because everything of the Church is from > the Lord it is therefore said 'for the Lord God Almighty is the temple > thereof and the Lamb', by which is signified the Lord in His Divine Human. > By 'the Lord God Almighty' is understood the Lord from what is eternal, Who > is Jehovah Himself, and by 'the Lamb' is signified His Divine Human, as > frequently above. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee? > Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > > From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jul 15 05:29:31 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 19:29:31 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] randomness Message-ID: AC 3833 the man who reasons concerning the Divine Providence, as to whether it is only universal, and not in the singulars, cannot possibly know the innumerable arcana of Providence, which are as many in number as are the contingencies of everyone's life from first to last, and from the creation of the world to its end; nay, even to eternity. (AC 3833) Hi Scrutators, The above passage means that the Lord makes the random curve come out random, and not that it is random because the Lord is not managing its orderliness. To me this means that the Lord manages my eye movements and the sequence of my thoughts. Also, the eye movements of a lion hunting in the night, or the molecular movements within the cells of my stomach. The Lord manages the computer that makes the bets come out when you play at a casino. The Lord manages what headlines the Wall Street Journal carries every morning, as well as its contents. The Lord manages the bank criminal and the cop that catches him, or not. The Lord manages every 911 call and its outcome. The Lord manages the acts of those on either side of a battle or war. The Lord manages the events taking place in sun spots in the sun. Do you agree, or not, and why. Aloha, Leon From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Sat Jul 15 10:09:23 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2006 06:09:23 EDT Subject: [lucerna] randomness Message-ID: <570.21e5076.31ea18d3@aol.com> Hi Leon, Yes, I agree. My reasons for 'why' are numerous (especially as an ex-astrologer), but just this one Number confirms what you have stated: DP212. Who does not speak of fortune? Who does not acknowledge it, since he talks of it and knows something about it from experience? But who knows what it is? That it is something, because it exists and presents itself to view, cannot be denied; and a thing cannot exist and present itself without a cause; but the cause of this something, that is, of fortune, is unknown. Lest fortune, however, should be denied merely from ignorance of that cause, take dice or playing cards and play, or consult players. Does anyone of these deny fortune? For they play with it and it with them in a wonderful way. Who can do anything against fortune if it opposes him? Does it not then laugh at prudence and wisdom? When you shake the dice and shuffle the cards does it not seem to know and dispose the turns and twists of the hand and wrist to favour one player more than another, from some definite cause? Can the cause have any other source than the Divine Providence in ultimates, where by means of things constant and changing it works in a wonderful way along with human prudence, and at the same time conceals itself? [2] It is well known that the Gentiles in days gone by acknowledged Fortune and built a temple to her, as did the people of Italy at Rome. Concerning this fortune, which is, as has been said, the Divine Providence in ultimates, it has been granted me to know many things that I am not permitted to make public. From these it was made clear to me that fortune is not an illusion of the mind, nor a sport of nature, nor something without a cause, for this has no reality; but that it is ocular evidence that the Divine Providence is in the most individual things of man's thought and action. As the Divine Providence presents itself in the most individual things, so insignificant and trifling, why should it not do so in the most individual things, not insignificant and trifling, such as matters of peace and war on earth, and matters of salvation and life in heaven? Aloha, David. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Mon Jul 17 21:41:29 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 21:41:29 +0000 Subject: [lucerna] randomness Message-ID: <071720062141.28787.44BC04090003DFF8000070732200762302CFC9C7CE030E0C9D0E@comcast.net> Leon: I agree although I really don't have time to explain why other than the Word says so! Richard Campbell arcam1970@comcast.net P.S. It's good to be back on LUCERNA again. This is the site where I believe the best and most relevant doctrinal discussions are occurring. -------------- Original message -------------- > > AC 3833 the man who reasons concerning the Divine Providence, as to > whether it is only universal, and not in the singulars, cannot possibly > know the innumerable arcana of Providence, which are as many in number as > are the contingencies of everyone's life from first to last, and from the > creation of the world to its end; nay, even to eternity. (AC 3833) > > Hi Scrutators, > > The above passage means that the Lord makes the random curve come out > random, and not that it is random because the Lord is not managing its > orderliness. > > To me this means that the Lord manages my eye movements and the sequence > of my thoughts. Also, the eye movements of a lion hunting in the night, or > the molecular movements within the cells of my stomach. > > The Lord manages the computer that makes the bets come out when you play > at a casino. The Lord manages what headlines the Wall Street Journal > carries every morning, as well as its contents. The Lord manages the bank > criminal and the cop that catches him, or not. The Lord manages every 911 > call and its outcome. The Lord manages the acts of those on either side > of a battle or war. The Lord manages the events taking place in sun spots > in the sun. > > Do you agree, or not, and why. > > Aloha, > > Leon > _______________________________________________ > lucerna mailing list > lucerna@novahierosolyma.org > http://novahierosolyma.org/mailman/listinfo/lucerna -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jul 19 06:45:49 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 20:45:49 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] Nunc Licet Message-ID: I was reading again an article by J. H. Ridgway at Durban on 19th of June 1935 (Sixth Fascicle in DHL p.91). He points out that "nunc" refers to time, and therefore its spiritual sense is a mental state. He says that we ought not to think of Nunc Licet as merely a reference to NC history, namely, now that the Lord has made His historical Second Coming in the Heavenly Doctrines, it is permitted to know the spiritual sense of the Word. Mr. Ridgway reminds us that we should be thinking about the journey towards the inner sense of the Word, and that when we are in the right mental state ("nunc"), we can enter into the inner sense at a deeper level, over and over again. Thus not a history of Churches, but a biography of our regeneration. In case it is relevant here, I discuss the 6 stages of progressive entry into the spiritual sense in this article, with two diagrams: http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch5.htm#acquisition Aloha, Leon From lucerna@lists.newearth.org Wed Jul 26 18:55:13 2006 From: lucerna@lists.newearth.org (Lucerna Discussion) Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 08:55:13 -1000 (HST) Subject: [lucerna] avoid that bump on the head Message-ID: Hi Scrutators, The thought for the day about what happens to us when we remain in the literal sense of the Writings: ==================== SE 1624. Moreover, when I apprehended only the literal sense of the Word, there was a closing up, as it were, of the way to the understanding of interior things. Accordingly those who inhere only in the literal sense of the Word have the brain hardened and [its functions] so clogged that the way is not opened to an interior [interiori], much less to a more interior [intimiori] sense, and in this way a kind of crust or shell is induced, which is conglutinated from the corporeal or sensual things of the external man. The case is otherwise when a way is opened to the sense of interiors, or to the spirit, which way is opened by the Lord alone. While the mind dwells in the literal sense without penetrating beyond, then if it attempt to open a way from itself to interiors, continual scandals are present, which I am able to confirm from abundant experience. But such a man does not perceive what is implied in his opening a way to interiors, for he supposes that this is the only way in which it can be done; and accordingly he who is not led by the Lord can by no means perceive this and similar things, and therefore cannot believe it; which may appear from the case of spirits who lack that kind of perception. - 1748, March 21. ======================== So if you don't want your brain to harden and lose functionality, flee from the literal sense of the Writings and chase its spiritual sense like an enthusiastic child chases an elusive but beautiful butterfly. Aloha, Leon