david..im surprised..you/taking..these fables..so seriously
clearly..these writings..*are men..SAYING..*god said it..or god done..*it

<<..God orders..the killing..of innocent people..>>

NO
KNOW..it..was/of..men

<<even after..the Ten.Commandments..said ..“Thou..shall not kill”.>>

david..we both..*know..the IMPORTANCE*..of using
the right-word..in the right..context

[the law..is written..thou shalt..*not MURDER*
[there is..much difference..between murder..and simple killing..[say a beast..to survive]

[as jesus..put it[as a babe]..more blessed..is the lion..
become meat..for a man..than a man..become meat..for beast

<<..For example,God kills..70,000 innocent/people>>>>[men]

two points..innocent..who..accuses..of what?
[im not familiar..with the case..sod-em..?+..gonneria?

<<..(1 Chronicles 21)...>>

ok..satan..wants a census[fair-enough]
satan..wants to.know..numbers..[of jews]..that serve him[for/war]
[the same thing..as the mark/of the beast=satanic controllers..[men]

<<God also orders>>..

hang=on..im reading..the third verse
no..*god saying nuthin..so far..only..[the king]..satan david/and joab]..then..the NUMBER..of fit/fighting-men[..only counted]..thus some/MANS/war thing.

levie and benjamin..class/clan's..not counted
but who..no doubt SAID..god said..[BUT WE KNOW..GOD DIDNT*..say]
cause we..know men..and we know..god/good..thus WOULD/never..say*

[just..mention satan..and folks get funny..
stop thinking..and start giggling..insanely..[BOOGY-frightened]

david even..apolo-guises..to god.:..:'i have.sinned greatly'.
for ab-using..his name..in vain..

[im confident swedenberg would conclude much..the same..but in his own meticulous way[style]

<<(Deuteronomy 3).>>

begin at..2;37..
'nor into..wherever..'god'
[ie..house a priest..of the house.of levie..]..'forbade us'

david..it isnt god/saying do this..do that

recall earlier..we talked of..divining gods will
[we dont''get''..gods will..we get the reply..via demons/who can deceive us..or on occasion..a lower level spirit/ghost or sprite..[from the astral/plane]

NOT EVER..a 'proper' angel..

MATERIAL EYES..cant detect..their inner glow..
[their soulful-light..[de-light]..they yet are all around us..but our material eyes..can never see/them..[only our minds-eye]

[till we find/re-discover
our own inner/way..of seeing

im sorry..i cant finish..your specific points
[there is a lot of light flashing obscuring..my seeing what im typing..[one of them..lightening zig zag flashing things..[like migraines..except no migraine]..i just need refocus..beyond it

your points..they deserve..serious inquiry..
but swedenberg has begun..doing that for us..we must learn..to do it ourselves..[unless someone..seeks doing..it of charity..for other]

anyhow..god IS GRACE/mercy..eternal etc

he dont think..like we do..he is content..
to let us kids..believe..as we chose..to/be KNOWING..
in time..we loose the urge to blame..satan..or the world..or..our own circumstance..or..our sex..[materialism]

and..in time we all..become suns..of the father..
suns of light..sustaining.,..our own..let there be light/moments

[till..the heavens
is full..of the fathers suns..loife sustaining/natural/nurture..

light=..[love/logic/laughter mercy/grace...et al..4all

in reply.to david/quote..re eunuqes

full reply here..[soon]
http://www.celestinevision.com/celestine/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15075#15075

these were my rough notes
to reply..davids/point..re mathew 19;26

http://www.newchristianbiblestudy.org/bible/potawatomi/matthew/19/12
Swedenborg refers to this verse in:

Apocalypse Explained 710

http://eng.newchristianbiblestudy.org/exposition/translation/apocalypse-explained-tansley/contents/7100

<<..Jesus said, All do not receive this word, but those to whom it is given; for there are eunuchs..who are so born..from their mother's womb,

and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of God. He who is able to receive, let him receive" (xix. 3-12).

That there are interior arcana contained in these words is evident from the Lord's saying, that all do not receive these words, but those to whom it is given.

Men have scarcely any understanding of the interior arcanum contained in the above words spoken by the Lord, but all the angels in heaven understand it, because they perceive the words of the Lord spiritually, and the arcana contained therein are spiritual, namely, that there are marriages in the heavens equally as on earth, but in the heavens marriages are of like with like.

For man is born to act from the understanding, but woman from affection, and the understanding with men is the understanding of truth and good, and affection with women is the affection for truth and good;

and as all understanding derives its life from affection,
therefore the two there are conjoined just as affection which is of the will is conjoined with a correspondent thought belonging to the understanding.

For the understanding is different with every one
just as the truths from which the understanding is formed are different.

but already..i have used my limit
these refer..to the reply

Arcana Coelestia 394,
http://eng.newchristianbiblestudy.org/exposition/translation/arcana-coelestia-elliott/gen-4/3940

2740
http://eng.newchristianbiblestudy.org/exposition/translation/arcana-coelestia-elliott/gen-21/27400

Conjugial Love 156
http://eng.newchristianbiblestudy.org/exposition/translation/conjugial-love-acton/contents/1560

http://www.magister.msk.ru/library/bible/comment/swedenborg/swedenb1.htm

continued at
http://www.celestinevision.com/celestine/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15075#15075

Dear oug,

Of course I don't take those fables seriously, and the God described in those fables is evil. However, that excuser of evil, Swedenborg, takes those fables seriously and tries to explain away the evil. God is anything but love if one takes the fables seriously. If you don't take them seriously where do you get your info about God? Why do you post Swedenborg's nonsense?

God, Satan, angels and all the rest of the nonsense exist nowhere but in the human mind.

david..the latest of my..many teachers/quote..<<that excuser..of evil, Swedenborg,..takes those fables seriously>>

not in the material-sense
but into..the spiritual sense..[internal/sense..of the words]
even..going onto..the celestial sense of the word..of form/function..[uses].words

<<and tries..to explain away..the evil.>>

as children..we get the simple story
[like at christmass..the giving of gifts annon
but in time its realised..that themgifts..came from..our parentals


thinkhow unjust..you judging god
as spurious..because of..mere words of men?
or because he isnt..like we expected..him to be?

the god of the bible..<<..God is anything but love>>
is a thing we said re santa/claws..when..*he didnt give..the gift our parents couldnt afford

i..mention..the satan clause..
because to..a large extent..that fiction too..has built up..the faulse god like omnipotent presence..[know-it-all..[but judges]

..GOD DONT JUDGE*

<<..If you..don't take them seriously
where do you get your info..about God?>>

jesus..the 13 commandments
life..and by editing out that i know is faulse
[like god judging..like god wrath..its alllies of men..whoidnt grasp..the very miracle..of their ownliving

<<..Why do you post Swedenborg's nonsense?>>

he speaks EXTENSIVELY..in..latin
you seem conversant..with..that dead tongue
he was a scientific mind..a mathematician..FOR..this specific topic to exclude him..is a great dis-service..

to all..of you [of science bent]
who have comprehension..of the defined definitive point..yet still able to grasp..the infinite..[of spirit]..plus word skills toexplain..plus leaders

it just felt right

we nearly agree on most things
except..<<god..Satan,..angels>>

satan..is an...embodyment of evil..[made flesh]
god and angels is true..yet they dont have wings..[there is a reason..against imagery

and..all the rest..>>

ALL..<of the nonsense exist..nowhere but in the human mind.>>

i completely..agree..presently..
any revision..will/be here
http://www.celestinevision.com/celestine/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15072#15072

Dear Banjo,

Perhaps we talk past each other.

I certainly do “leave science a free hand to carry out whatever investigations it deems necessary in order to attain its objectives”, every scientist - theist or atheist - does.

This has nothing to do with assuming anything about reality. You cannot talk about anything without first assuming something, mostly but not always tacitly.

I assume the sun will rise tomorrow, you assume that science can explain everything, including conscience, in a way convincing to everybody (like it did with explaining the movement of planets). The first assumption is obvious, everybody will share it, the second one is not shared by everybody, notably not by those who believe there is an ultimate reality outside the reach of science.

Assuming the existence of reality beyond the reach of science does not contradict leaving science a free hand to carry out its investigations. Like, starting from where you are now (in France), you can “have a free hand” to walk and explore the world, and I cannot tell you what you will find. I only know you will never reach Australia, not because somebody wants to restrict you, but because that restriction is built into the nature of just walking. Whatever the value of this metaphor, I simply believe that similarly, there are restrictions built into the very nature of (natural) science.

You - and many others - do not share this belief. or assumption, about the nature of reality, fair enough. But you have to live with the fact that there are those of us, including many scientists, who do. As I wrote before, often those, who are insecure in their acceptance or rejection of this assumption are trying to sell their option as the only one reasonable.

(ctd)

(ctd)

>> It sounds like you have absolutely no faith in the ability of god to find some way of providing convincing scientific evidence of his existence (reality).<<

Irrespective of what you mean by god (it sounds here like Dawkins’ delusion of a god), you still have not suggested what you would want that god do to provide a convincing (to you and other atheists) evidence of his existence.

>>If he is all you say, he'll find a way.<<

I never said anything about this god, but if you assume that he should be able to do self-contradictory things (like using science to prove that he is invisible to science), then he indeed is a strange god.

I think there is no point in playing this ping-pong. One can try to understand the other side and hence improve the understanding of one’s own side across the worldview divide, without trying to convert others or imputing conversion intentions to others. We can agree to disgaree and at the same time be grateful for the insights provided from the opposite perspective.