The Ocean of Tao
Cannot be called an ocean
For there is nothing else to give it name.
There is no sky above it,
No earth below it,
No shore that surrounds it.
And so it "is".
And yet, "it" is not.
For what is "it" if there is nothing else?
And so there is only "one".
And yet, there is not.
For "one" to be, there must be "two".
And there is not.
There is only entire.
And yet, there is not.
For to be entire Is to measure complete.
And can there be measure Of what has no beginning or end?
Void of name; Void of substance; Void of measure.
Such things define nothingness-
But only if such things "are".
And, since the "are" not, What is?
Everything and Nothing-
The Ocean of Tao
That can not be called an ocean,
or even Tao.
look into that ^
2006-07-12 09:35:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rylan N 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Having Jesus be 'unspoken of' would seem to be a comparatively new rule made about 2000 years ago when He gave Himself for our sins. And the movement didn't die out but became even more powerful... you see when false prophets die their movements die with them, that is what the Sanhedrin was hoping for, when this did not happen (then even when one of their own elect became a follower) they started instituting the rule that His name is not even spoken of. Although He is more than 'one great guy' the 'anti-Semitic' view of Jews is because Jews sent Him to die in the first place. They are the ones who convicted Him to death. The Romans who carried out the Crucifixion didn't care one way or another about the whole thing.
I would have to say since you are Jewish you more than anyone has the right to say He's 'one great guy' considering He came first to the Children of God to fulfill the promise that G-d first made to His people. Just be aware that many are still waiting for what already came- I guess in a way it's like standing at the bus terminal for the bus that left 2000 years ago. BUT there is always time to get on it...
About your fornicating and sodomite associates... if they were not practicing religious Jews and knowingly committing sin Jesus would not be harsh to them... only if they were acting like they were righteous in their manner would He correct them harshly. If not He was gentle and loving Jesus was beloved of the people but not the ruling class because He was a threat to their power (their money.)
NOTE about CEM's answer... the descendants of Cain would have died in the Flood only the descendants of Shem lived past the Flood .About the other crap (incestuous relationship) between satan and Eve? There was no family relationship between Eve and satan for one thing and incest didn't occur until the law of Moses. Marrying your relative was the only option available. Abram (Abraham) was married to his half sister Sarai (Sarah) do more Bible Study because you are uninformed
2006-06-30 13:15:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by xwordxclr 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no such thing as anti-Semitic. Anti means instead of. I don't go around saying I'm anti-Semitic because I'm French.
This is just another tool that the Nationalized Jews (Kenites) used to try to control people.
NOTE: Kenites are decendents of Cain through the incestuous relational between Satan and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Stay alert and informed!
2006-06-30 13:10:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by CEM 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not anti-Semitic at all. It means absolutley no disrespect to Jews.
Honestly, no offense intended,I feel their problem with Jesus is that He came to establish a new way. They hated Him and persecuted Him and His followers in Biblical times, too. I think this is because with Jesus went out the Levitical reign and the chosen race of Abraham (Jews) What most Jews don't consider is that with Jesus came love and liberty for all who will accept Him.
2006-06-30 13:08:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
jesus was a great tzaddick and the division between jews and so called christians, mossiachians?, is an illusion made by humans.
We all are called by the one who is beyond Kether, the un-shem-ed divine unmanifest , to get back by working the divine sparks putting our goo will on this side of existence .
Saying jes is a great guy is very ´semitic´.
by the way i have seph blood froma my moth side.
2006-07-01 05:04:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by yaguar 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
God became nonetheless married to the Jews on the go. If the residing house of Judah had seen they might nonetheless be in there sins. In different words they might have been cheating on God. They have been blinded. era. that's merely as you're saying human beings that declare to be Jews and are not JEWS. The observe Jew ability a Judean somebody from Judea. the residing house of Israel became not from Judea however the residing house of Judah, Benjamin, and Levi have been. merely as paul suggested i'm a Jew from the kin of Benjamin. Jeremiah 3:8 the residing house of Israel became divorced from GOd in six hundred-seven hundred bc. Jesus suggested I come not yet for the lost sheep of the residing house of Israel.
2016-12-08 14:27:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeshua was a good man. A great guy? Perhaps a more contemporary way of saying a good man. I suppose what you really must ask yourself is why do you say such things and in what context do you say it? Do you say it to upset others? Do you say it in the hopes of converting others? Do you say it with zeal? Do you say it in a matter of fact way? Does your voice ring of a challenge when you say it? Certain statements will offend no people no matter how you say them.
2006-06-30 13:15:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by practical thinking 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why would it be antisemitic to say something nice about Jesus? After all -- he was Jewish. He was not only a Jew, he was an observant Jew.
2006-06-30 13:00:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Ranto 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
John 3:16-18
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
only Gen 22:2
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God
2006-07-10 06:19:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by Carol M 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Some Jews have a misconception that it is being antisemetic to speak well of Christ because he was somewhat of a "heretic" in those days. It isn't antisemetic simply because it is not speaking badly of Jews unless it is generalizing blame for his death (which is dumb because it was one small group of people).
2006-07-08 17:47:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Songbird 2
·
0⤊
0⤋