Cedar Camps

Metaphysical Ideas

Search Metaphysicals
 

Metaphysical Newsletters

The weekly Metaphysical Newsletter is provided to campers, staff, alumni, friends and the CedarS family at no charge however contributions help defray the costs of running this service.

Click here for more about how you can provide support!
 

Delivered to You FREE!

Available in five languages, get it delivered to your inbox weekly!

Subscribe Now!

Enjoy CC Insights on select citations on “Are Sin, Disease, and Death Real?” (the Christian Science Bible Lesson for Oct. 8, 2017)

B. Cobbey Crisler
Posted Sunday, October 1st, 2017

Warren Huff's (W's) proposed additional application ideas on select citations
from
the Christian Science Bible Lesson about “Are Sin, Disease, and Death Real?” for Oct. 8, 2017
from Bible talks by Christian Science Bible scholar B. Cobbey Crisler

W’s PS#1 — Cobbey Crisler insights on seeing & singing your new ID, healing, Psalm 30:2-5 (Responsive Reading)
“Psalm 30:2 Again, the appointment with the physician, the Great Physician, in the Bible is very often this, “O Lord my God, I cried unto thee.” It does not take our being attuned to God to make the appointment. Just as the prodigal son suddenly decided that his really right place was not in that pig pen when he came to himself [Luke 15: 16-18]. There’s a whole new view of one’s identity. He decided that his father’s house held much more. Then you notice the father did not go to the man with the swine to save the son. The son had to do something. Then the father ran to meet him as he was coming [Luke 15:20]. With your back to the Father, you’re not even heading in that direction. With your face toward the Father you’re looking at the Father’s face, which is part of the cure biblically, [that] is to see the divine nature. Then of course, you want to be nearer the source of your nature. Step by step the light grows brighter around your feet. We know where we’re heading. We may not have arrived yet, but it’s getting brighter, and lighter, and our problems are dropping away, our burdens, and the divine nature is becoming applicable nearer and nearer. “O Lord my God, I cried unto thee; you have healed me.”
“One of our modern hymns [#425] has been made out of verse 5, “weeping may endure for a night, but joy [cometh] in the morning.” That word “joy” in the Hebrew is “singing.” Take weeping as the symptom and notice singing is the remedy. Sing, do we do much singing? It doesn’t have to be even with an audible or perceptible sound. It’s in our hearts, the song…. All the things that Jesus mentioned. They have to make room for the joy. It’s fullness of joy. It’s God’s dosage. Everything else has to be eliminated, removed, uncontained. That’s quite a prescription for depression, adversity. It seems difficult to sing in a trial, in a crisis. The Bible is just saying, try it, you might like it.... Because it might solve any and all issues."

"Leaves of the Tree: Prescriptions from Psalms" by B. Cobbey Crisler

[W’s PS#2 --Cobbey Crisler insights on “In the beginning” John 1:1-3 (B1):
"John 1:1. John starts off unlike any of the preceding gospels. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He starts off, as a matter of fact, as only one other book of the Bible begins. Notice Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. " Do you think the early readers of his gospel would have recognized that? Do you think that was John's intent? That it should be recognized?

“There is something that is a major clue to studying the Bible. That is, when you get the remotest hint of an Old Testament verse in the New Testament, don't ignore it or put it aside. It’s there for a very deep reason. It probably holds the key to the meaning of the New Testament event, or the author would not have included it. By no means make the mistake which Professor Davies, Professor Dodd, Professor Albright and many others of our top New Testament scholars say we often make. That is, when you find a verse in the New Testament which comes from the Old Testament, either an exact quote or a paraphrase, don’t just go back to that verse. Read the context around it. Study the environment; get deeply involved in the thought and intent of the Old Testament passage. You may be more closely at-one with what the author in the New Testament means. In other words, what do you have? You have a blend of the whole Bible that way. You find that Old and New Testaments become inseparable, which is virtually the view, I think, that the authors of the New Testament take. The account of the "Walk to Emmaus" in Luke 24: 13-35 shows how much Jesus and the apostles used the Old Testament to show how much the New Testament fulfills Old Testament prophecies.

“It also seems clear to me that Jesus, in his approach to mankind, from his outlook, his acts, his attitudes, his words as well as works, embraced universal humanity. You'll find hints of it passed down from his early students to their students, and so forth. But more than this, Jesus of Nazareth was a Bible student to surpass all Bible students. Therefore, if he knew in his own thought when an event affecting him or others of his period were the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy, or a lesson should be learned from a new/old truth that came out of the reservoir of the Scriptures, then he would so state it.

“But sometimes he allowed it to remain hidden. It would force his hearers, as well as his readers in this century, to become Bible students with him if they wanted to understand what he was saying. He embraces universal humanity. He addresses and communicates particularly to Bible students. As far as Jesus' comprehension of the word "Christian" is concerned, it probably would be fair to say that he would insist that Christians become Bible students just to comprehend what the word meant. What does that say to us today? Does that mean we should be reading these books, this collection, this library called the Bible? Specifically, our focus today is on the New Testament and one of the gospels? Should we be reading it as if it were a novel? Is that how Jesus felt his life and mission should be conveyed?

“Should we weep real tears because of the suffering and the lack of understanding and the persecution that occurred to him? And then wipe our eyes and go about our business because we've read a very deeply moving story, as we might have turned on a televisions set? Is that the kind of surface research that Jesus expected of his followers? When he said in John 5:39, "search the Scriptures,” I doubt you could ever apply that to television. Who wants to search television? There is obviously an object in view which Jesus knew would not benefit him, but would be enormously rewarding. The yield on that kind of investment would leap out of the page into the lives of those who did it. Therefore, "the word would be made flesh,” (John 1:14).

“John 1:1 starts his gospel off, "In the beginning was the Word.” The Greek is, en arche hin ho logos. Does arche look familiar to you? It is the root word in "archeology." It's an exciting word. It doesn't just mean when things begin or when they have started in a human way, so much as, translated by some scholars, as "the first principle" of things.

“For instance, when Jerome, in about 400 A.D. translates the Greek Bible into Latin, here’s how he does those opening words. "In principio," which, of course, is our root of our word "principle," in principio. He could have used another Latin expression which is "ab initio, " which would have meant at the initial phases of things, but instead he chooses a Latin word which has a dual meaning which could be "principle," the first principle, the origin, the basis of things.

“If we choose that particular Greek meaning for the opening of both Genesis and John, then it gives it an entirely different connotation. If, in principle, God created the heaven and the earth, or in principle, was the word, it starts out like many mathematical or scientific textbooks which start out with the statement of principle. Everything else derives from it.

“But then we come to a word which John uses in the first chapter and uses again in successive chapters but never with the same connotation. It stands out in its uniqueness and it is so emphatically important to the author that we have to just dwell on it somewhat and see what it might mean.

“Let me give you a partial history of the word. What automatically occurs to you as the meaning of logos? We take this word, "Word," and identify it with logos. This is likely being written at some point during the 1st century A.D. Way back in the 6th century B.C., Heraclitus at Ephesus was attempting philosophically to explain continuity amid all the flux around him. He resorted to logos as the eternal principle of order in the universe, the kind of reliable, unchanging law and order. This is several centuries prior to John's use of it. (Interestingly enough, people think that the Gospel of John may have been written there.)

“From that period we can trace the word logos through many, many different concepts. Zeno (of Elea, c 490 - c 430 B.C.), a Greek philosopher used it in the connotation of right reason, of reality within the mind, pure thought. Which leads me to what Professor Dodd has said, "It is only in Greek that a term is available which means both thought and word, and that's logos." Only in Greek have you that term that can convey both thought and word. So, when you’re talking about logos, even from the standpoint of word, if we are not giving to it what really is behind it, we're losing something of the message, aren't we?

“Why does the additional concentration on thought add to the definition of word? When you go behind the word to the thought, you're dealing with ideas, concepts, and the meaning. It is where all human languages finally give up their fragmentation and meet, and become one, in a Pentecostal day of infinite communication. The "word" is but an instrument which we must meet at the thought or at the meaning. Then, no barriers, especially language barriers, can stand between us and comprehension of one another, of the universe, its laws, and the source of those laws.

“Dodd continues: "In Origen’s commentary on the 4th gospel which is being written, again very early in the history of the Christian church. In reading Origen's commentary, there are interpretations in there, in the Greek that he's writing, which absolutely depend upon taking logos not only in the sense of word, but it alternates without warning with the other sense of rational principles. So, the continual indication of this word principle is something that is significant."

“Do you know where we use logos in the English language? Biology, physiology. Logos is the one that has been used to define the sciences in the English language. This was the comprehension at least of the lexicographers who developed our own language of the Greek term. Look how it's lasted even in our language. We use it all the time without realizing it, taking it for granted. Is there a scientific connotation, then, that "In the beginning,” "In the first principle of things,” there is a scientific unvarying, inalienable, order that's ruling. And that it's not only being uttered as an expression or word, but behind it is the immense thought that also must be based on the same principle. Notice in Verse 1of Chapter 1 that it all related with and to God.

“John 1:3 continues with a statement that is quite absolute, "All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. " Is there any reservation for qualifications? "All things were made by him. That is [an] enormous commitment to make at the beginning of a book. The theology of this book is therefore committed right squarely on what principle if we're now defining the theological principle on which the Bible is based? Not only oneness of God, but the fact He's one, also means He's all. "All things were made by Him.” Everything is created by Him. That also poses problems, because all we have to do is open our eyes and look around us. And what we see, we'd rather not think was created by God. But as of now, we've just started the book. So, let's see what the style of the author is and his theological commitments. "All things were made by Him.”

“He doesn't leave it there. The very next sentence adds, “Without him was not any thing made that was made." Why is he saying that? Why y Him,” doesn’t that take care of the other part? What is the difference? What’s the distinction that he is implanting in his readers' thought right at the beginning of the book? "All things were made by Him.” What would you call that? That kind of statement is an absolute, but is it also an affirmation. It's a real solid plus. This is a plus of the theological view of John. "All things were made by Him."

“What have we got now? Denial. Here is how we're going to deal with the minus element. The minus element is without Him, "without him was not any thing made that was made.” Any hint of a minus existing after the all-things-were-made-by­ him being declared, is removed, because it is the other side of the same coin.

“The plus, the minus, the affirmation, the denial is a mathematical approach. Dealing with the plus, dealing with the minus and ending up with one, not dualism. One, so there’s no doubt that the key to the gospel is monotheism. It challenges the reader’s thought to see if he’s there at that altitude before he continues any further in the gospel. It forces the reader to get to that height in order to remotely communicate with what's in the gospel.”
"Book of John, A Walk with the Beloved Disciple," by B. Cobbey Crisler.

[W’s PS#3 --Cobbey Crisler insights on “for ever... to all generations” Psalm 33.11 (B2):
"Psalms Chapter 33, Verse 11, "The advice or counsel of the LORD stands" for how long? "For ever." What good is that, if we aren't there forever to receive such advice? "The thoughts of his heart to all generations." What good are God's thoughts unless those are the potions we are supposed to be taking, imbibing, ingesting. God's thoughts, His potions. Take them, eat them up, drink them in. That makes the Bible a pharmacopoeia which is a word the dictionary says describes "preparations issued by official authority and recognized as a standard."... Pharmacopoeia, which is a word that in its ordinary meaning without uplifting it to what the Bible would require of the term anew would just simply be an authority to which one would turn to know where the remedies all are."
"Leaves of the Tree: Prescriptions from Psalms" by B. Cobbey Crisler

PS#4--Cobbey Crisler insight on the tares and wheat parable in Matthew 13.24-30 (B10)
“What a classroom [… an audio-video environment] it must have been, for a Master to teach his prime students in, and those who would listen! They could look around to see the lessons. […like at CedarS Bible Lands Park] They could hear every word he said. But then he tried to uplift that vision up and uplift that sense of listening to a higher spiritual category...
Parable number two is the tares and the wheat beginning in Verse 24. When I had our high school students over there, we actually experimented with details of the parable where the tares are very difficult to pull up. They bring the wheat right up with them because the wheat has a softer root, and this fits in exactly with the details of the parable as Jesus gave it.”
"Book of Matthew, Auditing the Master: A Tax Collector’s Report," by B. Cobbey Crisler

PS#5--Cobbey Crisler insight on the remedy "for international discord" Ps 67:2 (B13)
“Verse 2 of Psalm 67 is the prophecy that "God's way will be known upon earth," and this is what we all said together at the beginning of this session. "Thy saving health among" what? A limited number? ''All nations." No wonder the Bible could not close without that magnificent reminder that the leaves of the tree were not just for healing individuals but for all nations. The medicine for international discord is on that tree.

Just as it is for our own relationship problems. What's a relationship problem [other] than a disease? Something's not relating in our body. Look to our thought. Have we left relationship problems unsolved? Do you know that Jesus would not accept worship from his Christian followers if we brought a gift to the altar? If you remember ought that you have against your brother or vice versa,' don't even bother to give your gift in the environment of church. Church stands for healed relationships. No relationship problems. All things working together for good. Leave the gift. It's imperfect. It's incomplete. Go solve the relationship problem with your brother, then bring your gift to church. That shows that healed relationship problems are the only satisfactory gift to church endorsed by the founder of the Christian Church.”
“Leaves of the Tree: Prescriptions from Psalms” by B. Cobbey Crisler

W's PS#6--Cobbey Crisler on an issue of blood healed Mark 5.25-34 (B16)
A woman, hemorrhaging 12 years, was healed by touching the “wings” of Jesus’ garment.
(Cobbey Crisler (CC) on the version in Luke 8:41) “The woman… is at the absolute desperate end of a rope. Here we find receptivity. Blessed are those are in this state. Happy are those because this state of mind can be changed. “This radical change of thought was in the presence of the Christ-correction that Jesus was exercising in the mental realm. It’s going to be sufficient and the woman feels that it will help her. She’s lost all her money on physicians. [No health insurance…] Mark even tells us that she’s worse because of that choice. [Mark 5:26] All she does is touch the border of his garment. The issue of blood, the continuous hemorrhaging, had occurred for twelve years, had kept her out of the temple, kept her out of worship and made her as unclean as the lepers, …

(CC on version in Mark 5:34) Verse 34. Jesus calls the woman, “Daughter.”… Jesus is using daughter in an entirely new way… The woman’s problem is blood. He even lifts the term “daughter” out of a blood relationship and defines a divine relationship… The dignity of womanhood is demonstrated.”
(CC on version in Luke 8:48) “Daughter, be of good comfort” (Verse 48). Look at how he’s addressing the thought of that woman. Not only the precious relationship to God, but the comfort. She hasn’t experienced that in twelve years. She’d lost all her money. She was about to be thrown on society. There was nowhere to go when you were thrown on society. That may have happened to the woman who had been a sinner. Prostitution was the only open career for many women when they were simply thrown out and discarded from normal humanity…
Jesus refuses to allow that woman to walk away from the scene thinking that physical contact with his robe had anything to do with the healing. He says, again, “Your faith hath made you whole.” The word “whole” and the word “heal” in Anglo-Saxon have the identical root. It implies that disease is something less than wholeness, that it is a fragmentation of our being. Healing is the condition of being made whole.”
"What Mark Recorded" and "Luke the Researcher," both by B. Cobbey Crisler

[Warren’s added background note: In Numbers 15:38-40, God tells Moses to have Hebrew men attach fringes to the wings of their prayer shawl garments —like the one pictured in Download 1—to remind them to abide by God’s commandments and to ‘be holy unto your God’ (Numbers 15:40). The woman healed of her 12-year issue was rewarded for exercising her faith that Christ Jesus was fulfilling this prophesy in Malachi: “But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; (Mal. 4:2). Many others in Jesus day were also rewarded for exercising their faith in Jesus being the fulfillment of the scriptural promise of the healing power connected to the keeping of God’s law represented by the 10 Commandment fringes on the borders of his garment... Mark 6:56 records of Christ Jesus’ healing that “whithersoever he entered, into villages, or cities, or country, they laid the sick in the streets, and besought him that they might touch if it were but the border of his garment: and as many as touched him were made whole.” (or “perfectly whole” in the account in Matthew 14:36) Here’s to perfect wholeness for you in your faithfully following of the science of the Christ and in expounding and fulfilling God’s laws.]

W’s PS#7—Cobbey Crisler insights on Nain widow’s dead son raised Luke 7:11-16 (B20) “Were it not for Luke, we would not have had preserved for us one of three recorded times that Jesus raised someone from the dead (Luke 7:11-17). There is a significant fact about the accounts of raising the dead in the Bible. They are not all in the New Testament. The significance is that not all healings made a sufficient impact at the time to have impressed upon human memory the location where it occurred. This is why you will find statements mentioning when Jesus went to a particular village.

However, in every case of raising the dead, from the Old Testament all the way through the New Testament, the human mind was startled by seeing what it accepted as the impossible, occur. This is what is in common about Zeraphath. Shunam, Nain, Capernaum. Bethany, Jerusalem, Lydda, and Troas. They didn't forget where it happened. The details of the healing are particularly sharp.

In this case we have a city called Nain, probably a village as it is today. There is still an ancient cemetery outside the gate. There was a lonely widow at the head of this procession. Jesus, detecting thought again, saw her entire situation at one glance. He came to her and said, "Weep not" (Verse 13). He dealt with the heavy weight of grief on thought, touched the coffin (Verse 14), strictly forbidden under Jewish law, and then said, "Young man.”
Notice the radical nature of that. The only one supposedly there who could not hear was the one Jesus addressed. He must have expected that man's faculty of hearing to be normal. "Young man, I say unto thee, Arise." He doesn't help him either.
Dominion over death is part of that unqualified dominion God gave to man. As a matter of fact, dominion, as a word, as a concept, simply can't be qualified. If it is, you no longer have dominion. (Verse 15,) "He that was dead sat up, and began to speak. Ile delivered him to his mother. "
Also, it might be interesting for you to recall that of the three times Jesus raised the dead, womanhood played a prominent role every time. It was Jesus' compassion and awareness of the thought of this woman that lead him to raise her son. In the case of Lazarus (John 11:1-46), Mary and Martha urgently had requested Jesus to come. In the case of Jairus it was his twelve-year-old daughter (Luke 8:41, 42, 49-56).
These things don't just happen. If Jesus is dealing with mentality, if he is requiring much out of the patient's thought, then there must be receptivity in order to get a result. I think that we can derive a certain conclusion about the receptivity of womanhood, especially on the subject of resurrection. For if you move ahead a few chapters in your thought right now, you will recall there was no man anywhere near the tomb, including those who are reputed to have been Jesus' closest disciples. But the women were there and receptive to
resurrection.”
“Luke, the Researcher” by B. Cobbey Crisler

**You can buy your own transcripts and audio recordings of most of Cobbey’s 28 talks at a new website: www.crislerlibrary.co.uk Please email your order or inquiry to office@crislerlibrary.co.uk, or directly to Janet Crisler, at janetcrisler7@gmail.com]

Metaphysical

This is the day the Lord hath made! - ... examples in the third, fourth, and fifth sections...
Latest Lesson Application Idea

Newsletters

Get free weekly uplifting newsletters (available in English, Spanish, French, German and now in Portuguese!)
Subscribe or Update Subscription

Facebook

Find CedarS on Facebook for the latest news, heart-warming fruitage, facility upgrades and more!
Go to the CedarS' Facebook Page