what woman?
"2nd Coming" & "Resurrection of the dead" through reincarnation?
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
I don't know about the rest of the recent couple of posts, but I'll give you another, less biased view on this theology:
Christ is Christ, the Promised RAM, or Lamb (obviously, as anyone can discern, from ARIES, pre-Piscean Oannes & Fisherman, pre-Aquarian Water-Bearer) ...
... and we are the Bride, all of Humanity.
Sure, the Church is a part of this; I'd never deny it.
I just don't like interpretations skewed toward any one group that considers itself MORE special and MORE equal than everybody else.
Naturally, the vision lends itself to the particular and the personal; EACH of us, for example, is a potential bride to the Heavenly Bridegroom. In such a case, the Christ becomes the Soul or Christ within, the Hope of Glory. And back to the thread topic:
It takes a LONG time for us all to reach the Goal, set before us by God.
Christ is Christ, the Promised RAM, or Lamb (obviously, as anyone can discern, from ARIES, pre-Piscean Oannes & Fisherman, pre-Aquarian Water-Bearer) ...
... and we are the Bride, all of Humanity.
Sure, the Church is a part of this; I'd never deny it.
I just don't like interpretations skewed toward any one group that considers itself MORE special and MORE equal than everybody else.
Naturally, the vision lends itself to the particular and the personal; EACH of us, for example, is a potential bride to the Heavenly Bridegroom. In such a case, the Christ becomes the Soul or Christ within, the Hope of Glory. And back to the thread topic:
It takes a LONG time for us all to reach the Goal, set before us by God.
I don't know about the rest of the recent couple of posts, but I'll give you another, less biased view on this theology:
Christ is Christ, the Promised RAM, or Lamb (obviously, as anyone can discern, from ARIES, pre-Piscean Oannes & Fisherman, pre-Aquarian Water-Bearer) ...
... and we are the Bride, all of Humanity.
Sure, the Church is a part of this; I'd never deny it.
I just don't like interpretations skewed toward any one group that considers itself MORE special and MORE equal than everybody else.
Naturally, the vision lends itself to the particular and the personal; EACH of us, for example, is a potential bride to the Heavenly Bridegroom. In such a case, the Christ becomes the Soul or Christ within, the Hope of Glory. And back to the thread topic:
It takes a LONG time for us all to reach the Goal, set before us by God.
I am who I am: you as males are all like JESUS as his I AM. He is the bridegroom. All brides are females.
Like charting ley-lines, one can derive correspondences beyond number, but they don't speak of the Principle, and often lead to confusion.
Yes ... that's what Scripture says.
Oooh, you fibber!
That's not an argument, that's just sour grapes.
Divine Grace is open to all, everywhere, all the time — that's what Immanent Presence means — whether we choose to open ourselves to it, is another matter.
No ... you still get it wrong cos you still insist on putting the contingent above the absolute.
We are not the bridge ... Christ is.
Again, logically, the hope is ours, not God — God does not live in hope.
You're confusing the self with Christ, always a risk when we appropriate Christ to ourselves by saying 'the Christ within' ... the soul is not big enough to contain Christ, the Infinite cannot be contained by the finite, the contingent cannot contain the Absolute.
This change of heart, this metanoia, which puts Christ first, and we in Him, not He in us, is the first step in spiritual realisation.
Not really ... it happens in less than a moment ... it takes a long time to get over ourselves however, to let go and let be.It takes a LONG time for us all to reach the Goal, set before us by God.
God bless,
Thomas
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
I realize this will sound confused and confusing. "That if Gyd Within" is a piece of not-here-and-nowness (the absolute if you prefer) that is the fire around which our life flutters. "The Light Within" is a piece of our existence that is not-here-and-now.
Loving-kindness flows down from the not-here-and-now (the absolute, the divine, the beyond) and love surges up from here-and-now to other heres-and-nows and up unto the not-here-and-now).
The words and the conceptualizations (both being interpretations) are the problem. I believe (call me a niave cock-eyed optimist) you are both indicating the same thing (even with radically differing interpretations).
Again, just my 2 cents worth.
Loving-kindness flows down from the not-here-and-now (the absolute, the divine, the beyond) and love surges up from here-and-now to other heres-and-nows and up unto the not-here-and-now).
The words and the conceptualizations (both being interpretations) are the problem. I believe (call me a niave cock-eyed optimist) you are both indicating the same thing (even with radically differing interpretations).
Again, just my 2 cents worth.
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
Radarmark, I have always - and will always argue, that it is mostly down to semantics. Thomas is a Catholic, through and through. I will never be; these twain shall not meet!
That doesn't mean we don't both essentially agree, however. In the hereafter I suspect we might find that we actually see more eye to eye than Thomas wants to admit.
Christ I expect to reappear in our current lifetime. The quote from Revelation in the OP must be interpreted symbolically, however. So this business about judgment and 1000 years of peace doesn't mean at all what most Christians seem to believe. Not in my book.
We shall (continue to) have millions of confused devotees ... but then, history is replete with Harold Campings. That's nothing new. Christ's return, nevertheless, is predicted by Christ Himself. And some of us saw this a good number of decades ago, exactly as according to GOSPEL.
That doesn't mean we don't both essentially agree, however. In the hereafter I suspect we might find that we actually see more eye to eye than Thomas wants to admit.
Christ I expect to reappear in our current lifetime. The quote from Revelation in the OP must be interpreted symbolically, however. So this business about judgment and 1000 years of peace doesn't mean at all what most Christians seem to believe. Not in my book.
We shall (continue to) have millions of confused devotees ... but then, history is replete with Harold Campings. That's nothing new. Christ's return, nevertheless, is predicted by Christ Himself. And some of us saw this a good number of decades ago, exactly as according to GOSPEL.
That's why the language of metaphysics demands precision.
Sorry, but here I would question, purely for the sake of the aforementioned precision.
If God is Absolute, then God cannot be 'not-here-and-now', as being Absolute, God is not subject to any determination. So I hold the dichotomy, without confusion, that God is absolutely other (the Transcendent) whilst simultaneously absolutely present (the Immanent) ... which I think is something with which you would probably agree.
The theology of the Logos and the logoi puts this into a metaphysical context, supported by Scripture 9as in the Hymn of Colossians).
The Logos of God is God; the logoi are the 'ideas' of each and every existing thing, it is not the thing as such, but its exemplar. The logoi then do not exist as things do, rather one could say they exist as ideas in the mind of God, but as such they are the ideal of each and every existing thing, and they are the image that everything tends towards as its perfection and its rest.
Agreed. Creation is, as we declare, a gratuitous act — God creates for no other reason than he chooses to, God is under no compunction to act or to create.
That is why Christianity has such a strong referrant in the gratuitous act, the Gift of Being, and adheres to the idea of (created) nature and (Uncreate) Grace — which draws man 'up' and 'out' of himself into the Divine Life ...
I would say the distinction, as I see it, is that many assume divine union is something inherrent in created nature, or rather there is something about created nature that is inherently divine — something that the Abrahamic, the Brahminic and the Buddhist Traditions (and the Perennialists) reject most vigorously.
It is this somewhat cock-eyed notion that has, since the Romance Movement which lies at the root of so much sentimental thinking, led man to think of himself as in some wise divine, or that there is something about 'me' that is divine, and is mine ... whereas the reality is that a created nature is not and cannot be divine by definition (the divine is Uncreate) but in can participate in the Divine, because the Divine is always and everywhere Immanently Present to it ... and this we call Grace, and this, as far as the Theosophers here represent it to me, they do not believe.
Again, the assumption is that man can work his own salvation, regardless of God, and this then leads man to declare he can do it on his own terms, and God will applaud him for it.
So in short, what I consistently resist is the sin of Adam, the declaration that what belongs to God, and what is offered as a gift, is somehow mine by right.
God bless,
Thomas
If you truly understood the Gospel, you'd realise that He never left ...
God bless
Thomas
P
Princely
Guest
Anyone who hears my words and has faith in the One who sent me possesses eternal life, he does not come under condemnation but has passed from death to life.
All those who do right and walk in the ways of the Lord, hear my words, are resurrected from death and abide in the land forever.
All those who do right and walk in the ways of the Lord, hear my words, are resurrected from death and abide in the land forever.
taijasi
Gnōthi seauton
One, I assert that I understand the Gospel better than you do, in the ways that matter. Prove otherwise. Btw, I do not have a Divinity degree, simply a BA in Philosophy, class of 1994. I hated western philosophy, save for the Greeks. And I never did get to really tackle the Eastern stuff, although I have done this on my own since age 17 or so. I may have written my thesis on `Teilhard de Chardin's Vision of the Future of Humanity,' but you can thank my ex-Jesuit professor for some of the guidance and inspiration. And it certainly didn't make a Catholic out of me.
When it comes to vocation, then, I am a computer geek, a jack of all trades. I have NO schooling I wish to tout, but neither do I represent any particular instutition. I read the Gospels the way I believe they are meant to be read: With as open a mind and heart as I can manage, yet also with the discretion which I know MUST be applied if we are going to get past literalism. I look for symbolism, allegory and the notion that each Parable has MANY (more likely than simply two) levels of meaning.
I will not drag out a lengthy church treatise, or ANYONE else's, in attempting to explain what I believe. Yet I have no defense when I share with you the whisperings of my own Conscience, the Voice of my own experience and Reason, or the insights that I have been privileged enough to have ... over the years. In many cases, I was certainly aided by standing on the shoulders of Giants; in many cases, Thomas does not believe that such giants have had aught to say worthwhile, thus your little pebbles bounce from upon their chests ... and They are not bothered in the least by your rebuffs. If I am, it shows my imperfections, not theirs.
So Thomas, no, I will not cast before you my pearls, as we well know where THAT leads, and frankly, I've seen enough mud for one day. It's raining, but I know that to be a cleansing, refreshing experience ... and with all due respect, my posts here - when I notice you challenging my personal insights and intuitions - lead to anything but a cleansing, refreshing experience. Perhaps on occasion I am reminded of something, yet often as not this is not because you have dazzled me with Patristics, or wowed me with your expert knowledge of Church Doctrine.
I do not oppose the Church; I simply reject the burdens of a theology which is trying to patch up its own errors thoughout the centuries. This is not because I don't believe I may even own (or need to own) some of the responsibility for helping to clarify all the muck. And for certainty, this task falls only to SOME, not to any Christian who happens to pick up a Bible, or warm the pews on Sundays and Wednesdays.
I don't pretend that all we need to do is rewrite the Bible with a new *Andrew*-authorized version, however glib that may sound, even though I do feel that I have some clarity to add. I have never read Jefferson's version, but unless it's 90% tongue in cheek then I might not want to. I am more interested in FreeMasonry than either Deism or Roman Catholicism ... but I was *raised* a Lutheran, and I do not reject out of hand the Teachings as I find them in the Gospels.
Interestingly, I am about finding meanings that work for me, and if they happen to work for you, then great. In the past, I have certainly overstepped my bounds. Now, Thomas, will you pretend that it's not your business to be here telling people WHAT they should believe (as Christians), HOW they should interpret their Bibles, and WHY the RCC thinks this is the only sure way to Salvation?
You will either accept it all, or YOU are the one in error. You do this, you do so presume, and you do it consistently, if anything. I happen to know - or at least believe - that this is not so much your `true self' as simply one arm or branch of your chosen Path of Service. I have reasons for why I believe this, as also for why I happen to think you are about something you should be about ... even if/though I do not always agree with the methods, or even the outcome.
In short, I know we will disagree, but I also would defend to the death the idea that you mean well. Something Voltaire-like, I suppose, and I DO live in a once-great DEMOCRACY, modeled after one of the greatest. Yes, we've gone downhill, I know, but we're still trying, and I have never given up. Not on America, not on me, not on you, not on Hitler, not on ANYONE. When our planet is strewn between the spaces of Venus and Mars, just as has occurred in that space between Mars and Jupiter, THEN you will find me affirming that our planet has been - in the current run - a failure. But I affirm the Law of Rebirth, and NONE in Cosmos escapes this LAW. Not Buddhas (or Christs), not planets, not Stars or Galaxies. What's true for the goose, works pretty damn well for the gander. As above, so below. Kind of Hermetic, eh? Yeah, yeah, I am used to a new, Thomas-spin on pretty much ANY utterance not found in the Church's Canons. I am learning, fast, to go for the NaCl whenever I hear these.
Christ never left, and He has also already appeared again, and it apparently makes little difference to our discussions of the exoteric. Yes, I can be easy sometimes. I can, or could, shorten this:
Agreed; I never actually said he DID ... I simply said RE-APPEAR.
Yes, it APPEARS that Christ might not be present; we've probably all thought this, at least on occasion, and I mean even you. So what? We're human, we're imperfect. It's hard sometimes, when you know that what you're affirming may not come to pass as we would all, or mostly have it, for several 100 years. But again, we HOPE ... and that's not blind, not vain, not profitless. Nor is Christ PROPHETless, although some of us are none the Wiser.
What does it matter? Give the BENEfit of the doubt. I think we know why, as well as that - this is important. Cease doing so, and your world will shrink, Hope along with it.
What/why are we doubting? Even sometimes when we may otherwise know better?
I dunno, YOU tell me. I'm not asking you to do the dirty work here; I'm leaving the best part for anyone who wants to MAKE THE POINT ... and it's the only thing that really matters outta this post. After all, whether or not you believe in Jesus isn't that critical, surely not if you haven't "accepted him as your Lord and Savior," the usual mumbo jumbo. I would argue that till my dying breath, IF it might help someone. The point is, it's HOW we live our life, BASED ON what we believe, that God is most concerned with.
Yes, you can take THAT one to the bank, as well. You will find all of these, and a bunch more, at your local branch (VERY local) of the ALAYA V. ... and long after the money you've earned in this life has turned to rust or dust, those same deposits will still shine with the same lustre as quite a few million years ago.
WHY should we give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to our daily affairs? WHY, within reason, should we do this, rather than anything else? I'd really like to hear - from *anyone* - why they believe it ... IF you do, as do I. There really is no wrong answer. And that's part of the Beauty of it.
Perhaps that sounds heavy-handed, Thomas. I won't respond to certain things, but I do at least feel like clarifying that imho, Christ certainly never left ... although my views are also quite unconventional, and not at all in alignment with those of mainstream Xianity, let alone RC. The point I would emphasize, is that I don't reject the Message, nor even the Medium; I simply maintain a view of the latter which makes the former *intelligible* and logical, imminently practical and Intuitive, for my mind ... and apparently I'm not alone.
I would suggest that Christ is present within the world, every day, and even that many millions of people know this by now. Nor are they all Christian; in fact, I sometimes wonder ... if many of them are at all.
yes yes, go get huffy ... I don't mind that, but I'd like my question about the benefit of the doubt answered. Not by anyone in particular. Just:
WHY does it possibly matter?
Thanks in advance,
~andrew
Hi Andrew —
BTW — I wrote my thesis on Christian Cosmology, and offered a defence of Teilhard's vision along the way. If de Chardin had known St Maximus, he might not have got himself into the pickle that he did.
Christ is present in the Liturgical Rites, above all in the Eucharist ... if you truly understood the Gospel, you'd understand that.
I'm not saying He's not present otherwise, He is, always, everywhere, but in the Eucharist, and in the Mass, He is present with us, and we with him, in a unique form. I've cited Augustine in full, as an esoterist, I'm sure there's stuff there to whet your apetite ...
What you see on God's altar, you've already observed during the night that has now ended. But you've heard nothing about just what it might be, or what it might mean, or what great thing it might be said to symbolize. For what you see is simply bread and a cup - this is the information your eyes report. But your faith demands far subtler insight: the bread is Christ's body, the cup is Christ's blood. Faith can grasp the fundamentals quickly, succinctly, yet it hungers for a fuller account of the matter. As the prophet says, "Unless you believe, you will not understand." [Is. 7.9; Septuagint] So you can say to me, "You urged us to believe; now explain, so we can understand." Inside each of you, thoughts like these are rising: "Our Lord Jesus Christ, we know the source of his flesh; he took it from the virgin Mary. Like any infant, he was nursed and nourished; he grew; became a youngster; suffered persecution from his own people. To the wood he was nailed; on the wood he died; from the wood, his body was taken down and buried. On the third day (as he willed) he rose; he ascended bodily into heaven whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. There he dwells even now, seated at God's right. So how can bread be his body? And what about the cup? How can it (or what it contains) be his blood?" My friends, these realities are called sacraments because in them one thing is seen, while another is grasped. What is seen is a mere physical likeness; what is grasped bears spiritual fruit. So now, if you want to understand the body of Christ, listen to the Apostle Paul speaking to the faithful: "You are the body of Christ, member for member." [1 Cor. 12.27] If you, therefore, are Christ's body and members, it is your own mystery that is placed on the Lord's table! It is your own mystery that you are receiving! You are saying "Amen" to what you are: your response is a personal signature, affirming your faith. When you hear "The body of Christ", you reply "Amen." Be a member of Christ's body, then, so that your "Amen" may ring true! But what role does the bread play? We have no theory of our own to propose here; listen, instead, to what Paul says about this sacrament: "The bread is one, and we, though many, are one body." [1 Cor. 10.17] Understand and rejoice: unity, truth, faithfulness, love. "One bread," he says. What is this one bread? Is it not the "one body," formed from many? Remember: bread doesn't come from a single grain, but from many. When you received exorcism, you were "ground." When you were baptized, you were "leavened." When you received the fire of the Holy Spirit, you were "baked." Be what you see; receive what you are. This is what Paul is saying about the bread. So too, what we are to understand about the cup is similar and requires little explanation. In the visible object of bread, many grains are gathered into one just as the faithful (so Scripture says) form "a single heart and mind in God" [Acts 4.32]. And thus it is with the wine. Remember, friends, how wine is made. Individual grapes hang together in a bunch, but the juice from them all is mingled to become a single brew. This is the image chosen by Christ our Lord to show how, at his own table, the mystery of our unity and peace is solemnly consecrated. All who fail to keep the bond of peace after entering this mystery receive not a sacrament that benefits them, but an indictment that condemns them. So let us give God our sincere and deepest gratitude, and, as far as human weakness will permit, let us turn to the Lord with pure hearts. With all our strength, let us seek God's singular mercy, for then the Divine Goodness will surely hear our prayers. God's power will drive the Evil One from our acts and thoughts; it will deepen our faith, govern our minds, grant us holy thoughts, and lead us, finally, to share the divine happiness through God's own son Jesus Christ. Amen!
Sermon 272
God bless,
Thomas
As you're no doubt aware, I have my own views on that ...
Knowledge doesn't make Catholics ... true religion is not about knowing, it's about doing. Shame you didn't get to why your two inspirations were Jesuits.
BTW — I wrote my thesis on Christian Cosmology, and offered a defence of Teilhard's vision along the way. If de Chardin had known St Maximus, he might not have got himself into the pickle that he did.
Christ is present in the Liturgical Rites, above all in the Eucharist ... if you truly understood the Gospel, you'd understand that.
I'm not saying He's not present otherwise, He is, always, everywhere, but in the Eucharist, and in the Mass, He is present with us, and we with him, in a unique form. I've cited Augustine in full, as an esoterist, I'm sure there's stuff there to whet your apetite ...
What you see on God's altar, you've already observed during the night that has now ended. But you've heard nothing about just what it might be, or what it might mean, or what great thing it might be said to symbolize. For what you see is simply bread and a cup - this is the information your eyes report. But your faith demands far subtler insight: the bread is Christ's body, the cup is Christ's blood. Faith can grasp the fundamentals quickly, succinctly, yet it hungers for a fuller account of the matter. As the prophet says, "Unless you believe, you will not understand." [Is. 7.9; Septuagint] So you can say to me, "You urged us to believe; now explain, so we can understand." Inside each of you, thoughts like these are rising: "Our Lord Jesus Christ, we know the source of his flesh; he took it from the virgin Mary. Like any infant, he was nursed and nourished; he grew; became a youngster; suffered persecution from his own people. To the wood he was nailed; on the wood he died; from the wood, his body was taken down and buried. On the third day (as he willed) he rose; he ascended bodily into heaven whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. There he dwells even now, seated at God's right. So how can bread be his body? And what about the cup? How can it (or what it contains) be his blood?" My friends, these realities are called sacraments because in them one thing is seen, while another is grasped. What is seen is a mere physical likeness; what is grasped bears spiritual fruit. So now, if you want to understand the body of Christ, listen to the Apostle Paul speaking to the faithful: "You are the body of Christ, member for member." [1 Cor. 12.27] If you, therefore, are Christ's body and members, it is your own mystery that is placed on the Lord's table! It is your own mystery that you are receiving! You are saying "Amen" to what you are: your response is a personal signature, affirming your faith. When you hear "The body of Christ", you reply "Amen." Be a member of Christ's body, then, so that your "Amen" may ring true! But what role does the bread play? We have no theory of our own to propose here; listen, instead, to what Paul says about this sacrament: "The bread is one, and we, though many, are one body." [1 Cor. 10.17] Understand and rejoice: unity, truth, faithfulness, love. "One bread," he says. What is this one bread? Is it not the "one body," formed from many? Remember: bread doesn't come from a single grain, but from many. When you received exorcism, you were "ground." When you were baptized, you were "leavened." When you received the fire of the Holy Spirit, you were "baked." Be what you see; receive what you are. This is what Paul is saying about the bread. So too, what we are to understand about the cup is similar and requires little explanation. In the visible object of bread, many grains are gathered into one just as the faithful (so Scripture says) form "a single heart and mind in God" [Acts 4.32]. And thus it is with the wine. Remember, friends, how wine is made. Individual grapes hang together in a bunch, but the juice from them all is mingled to become a single brew. This is the image chosen by Christ our Lord to show how, at his own table, the mystery of our unity and peace is solemnly consecrated. All who fail to keep the bond of peace after entering this mystery receive not a sacrament that benefits them, but an indictment that condemns them. So let us give God our sincere and deepest gratitude, and, as far as human weakness will permit, let us turn to the Lord with pure hearts. With all our strength, let us seek God's singular mercy, for then the Divine Goodness will surely hear our prayers. God's power will drive the Evil One from our acts and thoughts; it will deepen our faith, govern our minds, grant us holy thoughts, and lead us, finally, to share the divine happiness through God's own son Jesus Christ. Amen!
Sermon 272
God bless,
Thomas
Bhaktajan II
Hare Krishna Yogi
- Messages
- 2,277
- Reaction score
- 115
- Points
- 63
Now that's what I've been talking about!
Share the nectar.
This insight is practically verbatim from myown tradition as a vaishnava yogi.
Augustine the vegetarian practicing daily Zen contemplations on the "mysteries"
In my school of orthodox yoga, such practicing of both interpersonal "etiquette" towards to Lord, and, whilst doing that, to also contemplate the Defacto Lessons wrought forth.
It's an example of Perfect zen presence of mind . . . in the mellows of Christ pastimes and opulences and bendictions while he appeared on earth.
I was a vegan. I am going back to that slowly. I believe its the gentle path and way to ultimate enlightenment. I have to find some friends who are vegans though. Its hard to maintain when everyone around you is carnivirious.
Symbolism
- Indicate the achievement of the material power.
- Being considered as the "final" number of the emanation, it represents the Incarnation completed, according to Abellio.
- According to R. Allendy, it represents "the role of the Karma 6 in the cosmic unit 10. This role consists in creating a current of evolution (1 + 6 = 7) but towards two opposite directions, so that, by itself, 16 even number, is unable to choose." As a product of 2 x 8, it is the positive evolution leading to the karmic liberation, or the negative evolution leading to an increasingly tight sequence in the cycles of nature.
- For J. Boehme, this number represents "the Abyss", or the hell, opposed to the nirvana.
- According to Creusot, it symbolizes the construction and the destruction.
- According to Guy Tarade, it is the number of Lucifer.
- The Old Testament counts 16 prophets and the New Testament counts 16 apostles and evangelists.
- Joash reigned sixteen years on Israel to Samaria. (2 K 13,10)
- Uzziah had sixteen years when the people of Judah chose him as king in succession to his father Amaziah. (2 K 14,21)
- Jotham, son of Uzziah, reigned sixteen years to Jerusalem. (2 K 15,33)
- Ahaz, son of Jotham, reigned sixteen years to Jerusalem. (2 K 16,2)
- Sixteen classes of priests were formed with the heads of the family of son of Eleazar. (1 Ch 24, 4)
- It is the number of years in inside of which the four Gospels were written, according to visions of Mary Agreda.
- Difference of age between the Virgin Mary and his Son Jesus, according to visions of Maria Valtorta.
- The sixteen petals of the Visuddha Chakra located on the front of the throat.
- Ahura-Mazda, according to the Avesta, created for its people 16 places of habitation.
- The Jains have 16 goddesses.
- The sixteen guardians of the Great Work of Templar.
- The sixteen geomantic figures.
- In the Hindu religion, an Avatar is an extraordinary being, the miraculous incarnation of the Divine in a human form, for the well of the humanity. By definition, the Avatar has sixteen particular gifts: the ability to materialize objects at will; qualities of omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence; the capacity to transmit a pure love current, inexhaustible; the possibility to transcend all conditions of the Karma which appears by his capacity to transform miraculously the life of a person by an act of divine will.
- Some roses of cathedrals have sixteen rays.
- The antiquity recognized sixteen plant sacredness: catmint, plant of the vitality; centaury, enchantments; chelidonium, triumph; mistletoe, salvation; heliotrope, sincerity; jusquiame, dead; tongue of dog, sympathy; lily, manifestation; melissa, comfort; nettle, bravery; periwinkle, fidelity; rose, initiation; sage, life; serpentaria, fluid; vervain, love; virgo pastoris, fruitfulness.
- Sum of the four first odd numbers (1+3+5+7=16) which, by theosophical addition, gives 1+6=7, the sacred number.
- The magic square using the first sixteen numbers is associated to the Jupiter planet and has for sum 34.
- The Jupiter planet has 16 satellites.
- Anniversary of marriage: weddings of silverware.
- The number 16 is used 21 times in the Bible.
- The number 80 is used 16 times in the Bible.
The number 16 can be a coming of age.
P
Princely
Guest
They can be found in the OT and book of John.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Chazz, you do not have PM yet (or you hav it turned off). See post #31 on my new thread.