Kathy, I've been longing for your reemergence on this site.  While I was waiting for you, I needed a nervous substitute for chain-smoking; so I instead created a blizzard of new threadsl 

Albert: "Where does sinful nature come from? If somebody can explain this in a way that makes sense and covers all of the bases, I'll accept the notion of repenting."

One must first recognize that the story of Adam and Eve is more than the story of a Fall; it is the story of the birth of conscience.  In other words, it is the foundation story of the evolution of conscience and the spiritual growth that comes from this development.  Consider Genesis 3:22:

"The Lord God said: See, now the man has become like one of us, knowing the difference between good and evil." 

To grasp this, one needs to recognize 2 positive outcomes of Adam and Eve's disobedience.  First, their disobedience establishes their godlike character and thus actualizes their creation in God's image.  Second, their disobedience enables them to become truly moral creatures because its consequences make them aware of the distinction between good and evil.  The inevitable implication is that it was always God's plan and therefore His will that they would disobey--and that is precisely Paul's point in Romans 11:32: 

"God imprisoned all in disobedience, that He might have mercy on all."

We ultimately have no choice about disobedience of God's will.  God "imprisons" us in this earth system "school."   Why?  For 2 reasons:

(1) We need to be weak because we need to have powerful inclinations to choose evil.  Why?  Because, as I have said, the moral worth of our free choice for the good is a function of our difficulty in making godly choices.  Without these negative inclinations and their incentives, the quality of our moral freedom would be undermined.  God does not want robots whose love results from a programed nature.

That is where the concepts of sin and repentance come in.  "Sin" means "to miss the mark" and refers to the state of separation from God.  "Repentance" means both "remorse" and "a change of mind or direction."  As such, repentance is an essential tool for our progress towards PUL and the resulting progress towards union with God. 

Romans 11:32 also implies a grounds for the atoning death of Jesus, God incarnate, on the cross.  God takes responsibility for our inevitable sin and failure and in this sense Jesus can be understood as bearing all our sins on the cross.  Paul teaches that God set up this school and its resulting journey, so that He could "have mercy on all " on all on the basis of grace, not merit.  Repentance and its resulting virtue of gratitude for divine pardon are signposts of our progress toward PUL and an ever more intimate oneness with God.  In the process, God fulfills the typology of the OT system of blood sacrifice and brings it to an end.  I remind you that God claims in the OT that this was a system He never wanted, but chose to use for an adaptation of spiritual truth to the cultural demands of the Israelites, until He could use Jesus' death and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD to get rid of atoning sacrifices altogether.
[Please consult the relevant post in the "Religions and their Beliefs" section of this site.]

Kathy:

Thank you for your response, what you said makes sense.

Lights of Love wrote on Apr 30^th, 2017 at 11:00pm:

Don,you are indeed a blessing to the forum!

I have some questions/comments about your post inserted below.

Kathy, I've been longing for your reemergence on this site.  While I was waiting for you, I needed a nervous substitute for chain-smoking; so I instead created a blizzard of new threadsl 

Albert: "Where does sinful nature come from? If somebody can explain this in a way that makes sense and covers all of the bases, I'll accept the notion of repenting."

One must first recognize that the story of Adam and Eve is more than the story of a Fall; it is the story of the birth of conscience.  In other words, it is the foundation story of the evolution of conscience and the spiritual growth that comes from this development.  Consider Genesis 3:22:

"The Lord God said: See, now the man has become like one of us, knowing the difference between good and evil".

This implies that man existed in some way before the transformation? What is the meaning of "us."?

To grasp this, one needs to recognize 2 positive outcomes of Adam and Eve's disobedience.  First, their disobedience establishes their godlike character and thus actualizes their creation in God's image. I'm having trouble understanding this. Why does their disobedience equate to godlike character? Second, their disobedience enables them to become truly moral creatures because its consequences make them aware of the distinction between good and evil.  The inevitable implication is that it was always God's plan and therefore His will that they would disobey--and that is precisely Paul's point in Romans 11:32:

"God imprisoned all in disobedience, that He might have mercy on all." Isn't that like the sheriff putting someone in prison so that he could subsequently free him?

We ultimately have no choice about disobedience of God's will.  God "imprisons" us in this earth system "school."   Why?  For 2 reasons:

(1) We need to be weak because we need to have powerful inclinations to choose evil.  Why?  Because, as I have said, the moral worth of our free choice for the good is a function of our difficulty in making godly choices.  Without these negative inclinations and their incentives, the quality of our moral freedom would be undermined.  God does not want robots whose love results from a programed nature. This truly strikes home. I can relate this to everyday experience. Before I retired I was an Office Director in a large DC federal agency. Three Division Directors with employees totaling about 130 reporting to them and the DDs in turn reporting to me. The most valuable Director was the one who challenged my policies. Not for the sake of being disruptive but by making me rethink. And he always presented his reasoning and offered options. In contrast, the other two agreed with almost everything. No question as to which one I valued the most.

That is where the concepts of sin and repentance come in.  "Sin" means "to miss the mark" and refers to the state of separation from God. So this means that we didn't consciously choose to separate, we were separated by God upon our creation? But if so, our sinning is essentially the result of God having separated us? "Repentance" means both "remorse" and "a change of mind or direction."  As such, repentance is an essential tool for our progress towards PUL and the resulting progress towards union with God.

Romans 11:32 also implies a grounds for the atoning death of Jesus, God incarnate, on the cross.  God takes responsibility for our inevitable sin and failure yes, since it was God who separated us in the first place? and in this sense Jesus can be understood as bearing all our sins on the cross.  Paul teaches that God set up this school and its resulting journey, so that He could "have mercy on all " on all on the basis of grace, not merit. So God set up the system of separation so that He could, via grace and having Jesus bear our sins on the cross, none of which would have occurred had God not separated us in the first place? Repentance and its resulting virtue of gratitude for divine pardon again, we wouldn't need divine pardon if God didn't separate us. Isn't that a bit like stacking the deck? are signposts of our progress toward PUL and an ever more intimate oneness with God.  In the process, God fulfills the typology of the OT system of blood sacrifice and brings it to an end.  I remind you that God claims in the OT that this was a system He never wanted, but chose to use for an adaptation of spiritual truth to the cultural demands of the Israelites, until He could use Jesus' death and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 70 AD to get rid of atoning sacrifices altogether.
[Please consult the relevant post in the "Religions and their Beliefs" section of this site.]

Don, I hope you'll understand I'm not trying to debate or challenge, I truly am having problems understanding some of this.

R

  One of the more fascinating Readings found in the Cayce work, which addresses these and other issues:

"TEXT OF READING 5749-14

This Psychic Reading given by Edgar Cayce at the office of the Association, Arctic Crescent, Virginia Beach, Va., this 14th day of May, 1941, in accordance with request made by the self - Mr. Thomas Sugrue, Active Member of the Ass''n for Research & Enlightenment, Inc.

P R E S E N T

Edgar Cayce; Hugh Lynn Cayce, Conductor; Gladys Davis, Steno. Thomas Sugrue and Gertrude Cayce.

R E A D I N G

Time of Reading 4:10 to 4:35 P. M. Eastern Standard Time.

1. HLC: You will have before you the enquiring mind of the entity, Thomas Sugrue, present in this room, and certain of the problems which confront him in composing the manuscript of THERE IS A RIVER. The entity is now ready to describe the philosophical concepts which have been given through this source, and wishes to parallel and align them with known religious tenets, especially those of Christian theology. The entity does not wish to set forth a system of thought, nor imply that all questions of a philosophical nature can be answered through this source - the limitations of the finite mind prevent this. But the entity wishes to answer those questions which will naturally arise in the mind of the reader, and many of the questions which are being asked by all people in the world today. Therefore the entity presents certain problems and questions, which you will answer as befits the entity's understanding and the task of interpretation before him.

2. EC: Yes, we have the enquiring mind, Thomas Sugrue, and those problems, those questions that arise in the mind of the entity at this period. Ready for questions.

3. (Q) The first problem concerns the reason for creation. Should this be given as God's desire to experience Himself, God's desire for companionship, God's desire for expression, or in some other way? (A) God's desire for companionship and expression.

4. (Q) The second problem concerns that which is variously called evil, darkness, negation, sin. Should it be said that this condition existed as a necessary element of creation, and the soul, given free will, found itself with the power to indulge in it, or lose itself in it? Or should it be said that this is a condition created by the activity of the soul itself? Should it be described, in either case, as a state of consciousness, a gradual lack of awareness of self and self's relation to God? (A) It is the free will and its losing itself in its relationship to God.

5. (Q) The third problem has to do with the fall of man. Should this be described as something which was inevitable in the destiny of souls, or something which God did not desire, but which He did not prevent once He had given free will? The problem here is to reconcile the omniscience of God and His knowledge of all things with the free will of the soul and the soul's fall from grace. (A) He did not prevent, once having given free will. For, He made the individual entities or souls in the beginning. For, the beginnings of sin, of course, were in seeking expression of themselves outside of the plan or the way in which God had expressed same. Thus it was the individual, see? Having given free will, then - though having the foreknowledge, though being omnipotent and omnipresent - it is only when the soul that is a portion of God CHOOSES that God knows the end thereof.

6. (Q) The fourth problem concerns man's tenancy on earth. Was it originally intended that souls remain out of earthly forms, and were the races originated as a necessity resulting from error? (A) The earth and its manifestations were only the expression of God and not necessarily as a place of tenancy for the souls of men, until man was created - to meet the needs of existing conditions.

7. (Q) The fifth problem concerns an explanation of the Life Readings. From a study of these it seems that there is a trend downward, from early incarnations, toward greater earthliness and less mentality. Then there is a swing upward, accompanied by suffering, patience, and understanding. Is this the normal pattern, which results in virtue and oneness with God obtained by free will and mind? (A) This is correct. It is the pattern as it is set in Him [Yeshua].

8. (Q) The sixth problem concerns interplanetary and inter-system dwelling, between earthly lives. It was given through this source that the entity Edgar Cayce, after the experience as Uhjltd, went to the system of Arcturus, and then returned to earth*. Does this indicate a usual or an unusual step in soul evolution? (A) As indicated, or as has been indicated in other sources besides this as respecting this very problem - Arcturus is that which may be called the center of this universe, through which individuals pass and at which period there comes the choice of the individual as to whether it is to return to complete there - that is, in this planetary system, our sun, the earth sun and its planetary system - or to pass on to others. This was an unusual step, and yet a usual one.

9. (Q) The seventh problem concerns implications from the sixth problem. Is it necessary to finish the solar system cycle before going to other systems? (A) Necessary to finish the solar cycle.

10. (Q) Can oneness be attained - or the finish of evolution reached - on any system, or must it be in a particular one? (A) Depending upon what system the entity has entered, to be sure. It may be completed in any of the many systems.

11. (Q) Must the solar cycle be finished on earth, or can it be completed on another planet, or does each planet have a cycle of its own which must be finished? (A) If it is begun on the earth it must be finished on the earth. The solar system of which the earth is a part is only a portion of the whole. For, as indicated in the number of planets about the earth, they are of one and the same - and they are relative one to another. It is the cycle of the whole system that is finished, see?

12. (Q) The eighth problem concerns the pattern made by parents at conception. Should it be said that this pattern attracts a certain soul because it approximates conditions which that soul wishes to work with? (A) It approximates conditions. It does not set. For, the individual entity or soul, given the opportunity, has its own free will to work in or out of those problems as presented by that very union. Yet the very union, of course, attracts or brings a channel or an opportunity for the expression of an individual entity.

13. (Q) Does the incoming soul take on of necessity some of the parents' karma? (A) Because of its relative relationship to same, yes. Otherwise, no.

14. (Q) Does the soul itself have an earthly pattern which fits back into the one created by the parents? (A) Just as indicated, it is relative - as one related to another; and because of the union of activities they are brought in the pattern. For in such there is the explanation of universal or divine laws, which are ever one and the same; as indicated in the expression that God moved within Himself and then He didn't change, though did bring to Himself that of His own being made crucified even in the flesh.

15. (Q) Are there several patterns which a soul might take on, depending on what phase of development it wished to work upon - i.e., could a soul choose to be one of several personalities, any of which would fit its individuality? (A) Correct.

16. (Q) Is the average fulfillment of the soul's expectation more or less than fifty percent? (A) It's a continuous advancement, so it is more than fifty percent.

17. (Q) Are hereditary, environment and will equal factors in aiding or retarding the entity's development? (A) Will is the greater factor, for it may overcome any or all of the others; provided that will is made one with the pattern, see? For, no influence of heredity, environment or what not, surpasses the will; else why would there have been that pattern shown in which the individual soul, no matter how far astray it may have gone, may enter with Him into the holy of holies?

18. (Q) The ninth problem concerns the proper symbols, or similes, for the Master, the Christ. Should Jesus be described as the soul who first went through the cycle of earthly lives to attain perfection, including perfection in the planetary lives also? (A) He should be. This is as the man, see?

19. (Q) Should this be described as a voluntary mission [of] One Who was already perfected and returned to God, having accomplished His Oneness in other planes and systems? (A) Correct.

20. (Q) Should the Christ-Consciousness be described as the awareness within each soul, imprinted in pattern on the mind and waiting to be awakened by the will, of the soul's oneness with God? (A) Correct. That's the idea exactly!

21. (Q) Please list the names of the incarnations of the Christ, and of Jesus, indicating where the development of the man Jesus began. (A) First, in the beginning, of course; and then as Enoch, Melchizedek, in the perfection. Then in the earth of Joseph, Joshua, Jeshua, Jesus [it was hinted that there were other expressions of the Christ Disk/Spirit, and even once implied that total there was some 30 lifetimes/expressions from this one].

22. (Q) The tenth problem concerns the factors of soul evolution. Should mind, the builder, be described as the last development because it should not unfold until it has a firm foundation of emotional virtues? (A) This might be answered Yes and No, both. But if it is presented in that there is kept, willfully, see, that desire to be in the at-onement, then it is necessary for that attainment before it recognizes mind as the way.

23. (Q) The eleventh problem concerns a parallel with Christianity. Is Gnosticism the closest type of Christianity to that which is given through this source? (A) This is a parallel, and was the commonly accepted one until there began to be set rules in which there were the attempts to take short cuts. And there are none in Christianity!

24. (Q) What action of the early church, or council, can be mentioned as that which ruled reincarnation from Christian theology? (A) Just as indicated - the attempts of individuals to accept or take advantage of, because of this knowledge, see?

25. (Q) Do souls become entangled in other systems as they did in this system? (A) In other systems that represent the same as the earth does in this system, yes.

26. (Q) Is there any other advice which may be given to this entity at this time in the preparation of these chapters? (A) Hold fast to that ideal, and using Him ever as the Ideal. And hold up that NECESSITY for each to meet the same problems. And DO NOT attempt to shed or to surpass or go around the Cross. THIS is that upon which each and every soul MUST look and know it is to be borne in self WITH Him."

* Hugh Lynn and/or Tom Sugrue got this part a bit off. It wasn't that Uhjltd went to Arcturus after his life, but after Ra Ta lived his human life, he went to Arcturus. Uhjltd, a later incarnation (after Ra Ta), came into this human experience from the Arcturian, or rather, Arcturus, the golden level of Love dimension/consciousness was the strongest within his Soul when he was born. But, Uhjltd ended up dying in anger/wrath towards some humans who had betrayed and murdered him and his beloved wife.