Chambumo-ron Lectures & Discussion 5th April 2025 - Session 1/4

So everybody, I'd like to welcome our beloved William to give the lecture about jumpon, which is beginning to become more and more clear to everybody I think and uh I hope that we can understand more deeply today. I'll just open with a prayer. Yeah. Our dearest beloved heavenly parent, true parents of heaven, earth and humankind. We're grateful to be gathered here even a small group this morning to listen to um a lecture about the Champumon which our true mother has uh introduced us to recently

and which we have been uh grappling with. Heavenly parents and uh are beginning to understand more clearly. Heavenly parents, we want to be able to understand everything that you wish us to know about our true mother and our true father's lives and uh to clarify um some of the misconceptions which we've been um uh given to believe until now. Heavenly parents, please uh guide us today and allow us to have an enjoyable and u entertaining as well as interesting uh lecture. I pray this in uh gratitude in my name Jillian Schroeder of the blessed central family. Good morning everyone. Nice to see you here this morning. Thank you

so much for coming. I'm sure there must be a lot more interesting things to do on a nice sunny day like today. But anyway, I carry on where we left off last time. It's taking a long time to go through this uh these lectures to be honest, but found it very interesting myself. And so as just to remind you what discourse means it's a verbal interchange exchange of interchange of ideas formal or orderly and usually extended well this is becoming very extended expression of thought on a subject and a mode of organizing knowledge ideas or experience

that is rooted in language and its concrete context. So that's all sort of interested in how's the language what's the words mean and uh etc. So, I thought I'd mention a little bit about my own background. You might wonder where I'm coming from because, as you may notice, what I teach in the way I teach has always been very different to to everybody else. So, this is my background. I'm Jewish by birth. My mother's mother's Jewish born in uh Jerusalem and uh actually it's my great-grandfather not my great great-grandfather my great-grandfather was a leader of the Hascala in Palestine in the late 19th century early 20th century.

So Hascala is a what they call the Jewish Enlightenment and then but I'm Christian by upbringing. So because my father Anglican Church of England and my great-grandfather was a vicar and there was about 16 Anglican vicers in my immediate uh lineage. And uh this one here, his name was Humphrey Jen. He was the head master, Reverend Humphrey Jensen was the headmaster of uh grammar school in Henley, I think it was. and he wrote this book about Joseph and it's a play for children to do I suppose anyway

and then I went to school a rugby it's a very Christian school gen produced quite a few um archbishops archbishop Kent Temple and quite a few bishops and the head boy when I was there is now the present bishop of either Coventry or Birmingham I can't remember I saw him last a couple of years ago And uh some of you may have come across his book, The Lion Handbook to the Bible. It's a classic, still in print. And one of the editors is my RE teacher. Uh so that was the kind of religious education I received, someone who was the editor of this book.

And then I used to go along every morning to church and also there were lent addresses before um Easter. And so I used to go to those. This is one of the ones I went to given by somebody called David Watson who wrote many books and uh he was he unfortunately died when he's about 50 of cancer. Anyway, he's described as is doubtful whether any other English Christian leader has had a greater influence on the on this side of the Atlantic since the second world war. And again someone called Jr. Packer again a very well-known Christian called him one of the best known clergymen in England

and he was during that time in the 70s 80s uh yeah 60s7s and 80s yeah who he died in the early mid 80s and it's incredibly well-known evangelical uh connected to whimber who's American thing and all that sort of thing anyway so that's my own background but then I'm a mooney by choice so when I met the movement and was introduced to it here Lanster Gate 1975 I realized that the principle made a lot more sense in all the things which I've been brought up to understand and believe up until then and

so I went to terms of education I studied at Manchester University studied philosophy there which is why I'm interested in analyzing ideas and pulling them apart to try to see what do they Mean so I approached the Chungbaron lectures from a very philosophical point of view as I have always approached the principle from a philosophical point of view and that's how I teach it as well. I'm not u trying to indoctrinate people. I'm not an evangelical though I can have been in days gone by. study divinity at UTS along with Julian

and Salian who was also there at the same time as was Chris and a few other people did a PGCE in UCL to become an RA teacher and finally studied Jewish Christian relations at the University of Cambridge. So that's why I teach uh the way I do. Okay. So some picking up some thoughts from last time. If you remember, we looked at this conversation between uh CS Lewis and JR Tolken about myth and uh all that sort of thing. And so the question is then well what's I found interesting again these are things I read decades ago. Why did Lewis write Narnia stories lion the witch in the wardrobe

and all of those? So he said I wrote the fairy tales because the fairy tales seemed the ideal from the stuff that I had to say. So if you remember he said Lewis though now a believer in God could not yet understand the function of Christ in Christianity and could not perceive the meaning of the crucifixion resurrection because he himself even though he's brought up as a Christian he became an atheist because it didn't make sense. So this is why he wrote the Narnia stories which is like a myth. I thought I saw how stories of this kind could steal past a certain inhibition which had paralyzed much of my own religion in childhood. In other words, in childhood just taught this is what you have to believe. This is the doctrine

and it just I understand how he felt that way. Why did one find it so hard to feel as one was told one ought to feel about God or about the suffering of Christ? I thought the chief reason was that one was told one ought to anybody come across that in our own spiritual community. You ought to believe this. You ought to feel this about God. You ought to feel this about father. You ought to feel this about mother. Yeah. Does that has that encouraged our kids? No. Does it encourage us? You get a lot of

that through this particular lecture series to be honest. An obligation to feel can freeze feelings. But supposing that by casting all these things into an imaginary world, stripping them of their stained glass and Sunday school associations, one can make them make them for the first time appear in their real potency. Could one not thus steal past those watchful dragons? I thought one could. And so that's why he wrote the lion, the witch in the wardrobe and all these stories because he thought through

that he could enter the imaginary world of children. And they could develop all these feelings for Alan and for the what was the the white witch? What's she called? White witch. Yeah. And all these they could enter into this imaginary world like walking through the wardrobe and have all those kind of feelings that one was supposed to feel for Jesus. Yeah. And so children used to write lots and hundreds of letters thousands of letters probably were written to him and they've been published from children

and I remember one of the just reading these things one of the one of the letters was written to CS Lewis saying I was brought up a Christian but I fall I love Alan much more than I love Jesus. Is this a problem? [Laughter] And he said, "No, it's no problem." Cuz CS Lewis knew that as this child got older, they would start to recognize, "Oh, that feeling I have for Alan, that's cuz Alan was a symbol in that sense for Jesus when he was being, you know, put to death on that stone. Can't remember what it was called anyway,

that large piece of stone and then came back to life." And so that's why he made such a huge impact. Yeah. And again, as we talked about before, he realized it was a lie, but he's turning into myth and then into story. And then this is a way I don't think we do that. Maybe that's why we don't have so many of our own children involved. So these are the kind of things which interest me and that's why I've been involved in children's education second gen education for many many years telling stories that's all I do when I teach the second I just tell the stories I don't teach them the theology of foundation of faith foundation substant foundation of see the messiah either

that box was ticked or not I just tell the stories so they can find themselves in in the lives of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and Esau and Ra and Leah. Yeah. And then when you find yourself, these are real people. When you can find yourself there, then you can start to make sense of it and believe it. That's all I do is tell stories which annoys regular divine principle lectures because I'm not doing it the way they were taught. But that I think is why I get invited to teach so many workshops for the second gen

but not for the first gen because the way I do it is different. Okay. Another very important uh book I wrote which again shaped my life in many ways was 1984 by George Orwell. Did any of you read it? Yeah. Len read it. I'm sure he must have come on s come on Jillian didn't you? Come on. 1984. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Classic. Okay. So, this again made a huge impression upon me. Huge impression. So, I want to read part of it because a lot of it's about changing myths. Yeah. How does it work? On the sixth day of hate week.

So in this place where uh uh Winston lived, they would have hate weeks after the procession, the speeches, the shouting, the singing, the banners, the posters, the films, the wax works, the rolling of drums and the squealing of trumpets, the of marching feet, the grinding of the caterpillars of tanks, the roar of mass planes, the booming of guns, sort of thing you see in North Korea. Russia even till today after six days of doing this when the great orgasm was quivering to its climax and the general hatred of Eurasia

because in all worlds world there were three basic realms uh Eurasia East Asia and can't remember the other one Oceanana nowadays People talk about America, the EU, and China, sort of thing. So, the general hatred of Eurasia boiled up into such a delirium that if the crowd could have got their hands on the 2,000 Eurasian war criminals who were to be publicly hanged on the last day of the proceedings, they would unquestionably have torn them to pieces at just this moment. If it had been announced

that the Oceanana was not after all at war with Eurasia, Oceanana was at war with East Asia. Eurasia was an ally. There was of course no admission that any change had taken place merely to become known with such extreme suddenness and everywhere at once that East Asia and not Eurasia was the enemy. Winston books about him or written by him about him. Winston was taking part in a demonstration in one of the central London squares. At the moment when it happened, it was night and while faces and the scarlet banners were luridly flood. The square was packed with th several thousand people including a block of about a thousand school children in uniforms of the spies. On a scarlet draped platform, an ortor of the inner party, a small lean man with a disproportionately long arms

and a large bald skull over which a few blank locks struggled was having was heranging the crowd. A little runskinned figure contorted with hatred. He gripped the neck of the microphone and with one hand while the other enormous at the end of a bony arm claw the air menacingly above his head. His voice made metallic by the amplifiers boomed forth an endless catalog of atrocities, massacres, deportations lootings rapings torture prisoners, bombing of civilians, lying propaganda, unjust aggression, broken treaties. It was almost impossible to listen to him without being first convinced

and then maddened. At every few moments, the fury of the crowd boiled over, and the voice of the speaker was drowned by a wild beastlike roaring that rose uncontrollably from thousands of throats. The most savage yells of all came from the school children. The speech had been proceeding for perhaps 20 minutes when a messenger hurried to the platform, and a scrap of paper was slipped into the speaker's hand. He unrolled it and read it without pausing in his speech. Nothing altered in his voice of manner or in the contents of what he was saying.

But suddenly the names were different. Without words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd. Oceanana was at war with East Asia, not Eurasia. The next moment there was a tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the square was decorated were all wrong. Quite half of them had the wrong faces on them. It was sabotage. The agents of Goldstein had been at work. There was an riotous interlude while posters were ripped down from the walls. Banners from the shre shreds for banners formed formed to shreds. Sorry, my eyes aren't good.

and trampled underfoot. The spies performed progies of activity in clambering over the rooftops and cutting the streamers that fluttered from the chimneys who within two or three minutes it was all over. The orator still gripping the neck of the microphone, his shoulders hunched forward, his hand, free hand clawing of the air, had gone straight on with his speech. One minute more and the feral roars of rage were again bursting from the crowd. The hate continued exactly as before except that the target had been changed. Okay. Anything like

that going on with us? Pictures coming down etc. The history being rewritten. I don't know. It's interesting. Who was Goldstein? Wson Smith could never see the face of Goldstein without a painful mixture of emotions. It was a lean Jewish face with a great fuzzy oral of white hair and a small goatey beard. a clever face and yet somehow inherently despicable with a kind of scenile silliness in a long thin nose near the end of which a pair of spectacles was perched. It resembled the face of a sheep

and the voice too had a sheeplike quality. Goldstein was a Jew. Interesting. when somebody asks um Orwell why that and Orwell said or will explain why he chose the name Goldstein. The most likely man to stage a hopeless last revolt against a possible totalitarian regime would be some Jewish intellectual. Any Jewish intellectuals here? That's me. So that's the way it works. It's interesting. So I find all these things really interesting because it helps me to try and make sense of our own spiritual community

and also the world in which we're living which we can see people like Putin and Trump and all these things going on and realize okay these these kind of books help one to make sense of and understand the world in which we're living and what's going on and to be able to have some kind of you know perspective be a bit detached. I tend to be very detached about everything. I remember going along to car conventions in Korea and Japan. Everybody screaming, shouting. I think, how do they get into this? It's like a mob. I can never feel ever like I belong to a crowd or a mob. I'm always very detached. I watch what's happening. Okay.

So let's have a look at the reason why God was called father. So that's coming back to the lecture here. Um Raymond, I'm going to I want to play a YouTube. Is it going to work? Um no. So what what do we need to do? I would need to be Sorry. I I need file. Okay. Shall I shall I just do that? Give it to you. Yeah. So, what's the best way to give it to you on a on a thing or email it to your Do you have it you have it on a file? Um, or is it a link? No, I have the file. Okay. So, I you could put it on this then. Okay. Just a second. I need to I need to find it. Would you know how to do

that to locate it? There should be a way if we right click maybe. video. Yeah, that's the question. How to find it? Okay, I suppose if you just put the PowerPoint on here, I can maybe grab it out of that. Okay, I'll just I'll just have a look. I have a feeling when I know when I got this computer updated then it's lost lots of things how to find things not my brain's not working well enough at the moment to be able to do that. Um okay so just save onto yours. Yeah, let's try that. Oh yeah, you can just say save or or Yeah, let's try that.

And then so where are you? That's it. Yeah, just on the just there. Okay. Let's hope that that does the trick. Yeah. And then just stitch. Oops. That's interesting. It's not what I intended. You want to take you finished with that? Yeah. And then maybe it's still saving. I don't know. Let's see. That's it there. That's how I usually exit it. Uh, you know what? Um, it's probably because this is now open. Okay. So, I closed this. I need No, it's okay. No, it's okay. I need to just do that. Yeah. Have I done anything to it? No. Possible. Yep. Yeah. There you go. That's why I just have to reopen it on yours. Right. Thanks. Let me try this. Okay, I'll carry on

and then soon there'll be a video which uh Rayma will put up. Why is God called father? Well, this is this is a traditional uh biblical view or Jewish and Christian view of the Bible. God is not a or of God. God is not a sexual being either male or female. something that was considered to be true in ancient neareastern religion. So in the ancient near east they say you have a a god male god and a goddess. He even speaks specifically against such views. So this is um Moses he even speaks specifically against which we'll look at such a view in book of numbers where the text has bum saying god is not a man. Deuteronomy again we'll look at

that soon in which he warns against creating a graven image in the likeness of male and female but though he's not a male the formless deity which we'll look at that verse again soon has chosen to reveal himself largely in masculine ways and so this is from the journal of biblical manhood and womanhood. So the question is okay so why in the Bible is God largely revealed as father in a masculine kind of way? This is a a good question. So, we'll have a look now at this. So, can you Yeah, I'm just I'm just I've got it. I just have to switch the the pro the

um Just one moment. Okay. Sorry, I should have sent it to you. Okay. I'll give it a go. Okay. Oh, yeah. One of the criticisms many people make against the Bible is that it depicts God in male terms. The most obvious example is God is referred to as he. Why did the Bible do this? Well, here's the answer. Because the Bible is preoccupied with making a kinder, less violent, more just world. If you share these goals, and I suspect you do, then you'll have to agree the Bible made the right decision. Before I explain, however, I need to add an obvious caveat. The God of the Bible is neither male nor female. God transcends gender. What I'm talking about here is why God is depicted in male terms in the Bible. Gender- wise, the Bible had three choices. Masculine, he, feminine, she, or neuter, it. We can readily rule out neuter. For one thing, neuter nouns don't exist in Hebrew, the language of the Old Testament, which after all first introduced this god to us. For another, the biblical God is a personal God to whom we can

and must relate and we cannot relate to, let alone obey or love an it. Aside from the language issue, the Bible depicts God in masculine terms because one, the Hebrew Bible's primary concern is making a good world. Two, a good world can only be achieved by making good people. And three, the people who commit nearly all the world's violence are males. Therefore, it is in both men's and women's interests to depict God in the masculine. Here's why. Without a father or some other male rulegiver, young men are likely to do great harm. If there is no male authority figure to give a growing boy rules, it is very difficult for him to control his wilder impulses. As President Barack Obama told an audience in 2008, children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty

and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of school, and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. Commenting on that speech, Dr. Alvin Busant, a psychiatrist with Harvard Medical School, confirmed these statistics. The absence of fathers corresponds with a host of social ills, including dropping out of school and serving time in jail. In other words, if one's primary goal is a good world, specifically a world with far less murder, child abuse, theft, and rape, a god depicted in masculine terms, a father in heaven, not a goddess, a mother in heaven, must be the source of moral commands such as do not murder

and do not steal. If the father figure/rulegiver that boys need is not on earth, a morally authoritative masculine god can serve as an effective substitute. Any discomfort you might feel with a masculine depiction of God is not comparable to the pain we will all feel if boys are not civilized into good men. To transform a wild boy into a good man, a male role model is as necessary as a male rulegiver. So when the Bible depicts God as merciful, compassionate, and caring for the poor and the widow, it is not

so much interested in describing God as in providing a model for humans, especially males, to emulate. If God were depicted as female, young men would deem traits such as compassion, mercy, and care for the downtrodden as feminine and would not identify with them. But if God, their father in heaven, who is strong on occasion, even a warrior, cares for the poor, and loves justice, mercy, and kindness, then these traits are also masculine and to be emulated. The argument that girls equally need female role models to avoid violence is objectively not true

because the problem of mayhem and violence is overwhelmingly a male one. Of course, girls need female role models, but not to avoid violence. And like boys, girls are more likely to obey a male authority figure. A report released by the Minnesota Psychological Association concluded in a study of female inmates, more than half came from a father absent home. It is therefore ironic that some women are attempting to render the god of western religious morality less masculine because if their goal is achieved, it is women who will suffer most from lawless males. We have too many absent fathers on earth to begin to even entertain the thought of having no father in heaven. I'm Dennis Prager. Thank you for watching this video to help keep PragerU videos free. What do you think about that? I agree with it. Yeah, that's if you want to make a good world, you need to have good people.

And the people that do most of the harm, which we can see going on in Russia, Ukraine, Gaza, and elsewhere in the world, in Africa, it's men, violent men. Yeah. What are what's going back to myths? What are the north the Norse myths? Yeah. Uh sign my mouth doesn't work very well anymore because of all the chemo. You remember the Norse myth, Thor, the god of war. So the Greek and the Norse myths, Tutonic myths too are full of men being warriors. It's all about violence. It's all about strength. It's all about war. It's all about killing people. Those are the myths. Yeah. which influence huge numbers of people. If you want to change that, you need to present God, a male masculine god in a different light as emphasizing compassion, looking after people, etc., etc.

So, this is something important to take into account when we think about the theological changes taking place within our own community. Yeah. First, the idea that the God in the Bible is just masculine and that leads to patriarchal societies. It's not true and lots of things. Okay. Anyway, so let's move on and let's see how God is portrayed in the Bible. Again, the idea that God in the Bible is not portrayed as being a a parent figure or a father, which again you get from some people teaching the jung is not correct. This is God as present in the in the Bible as father. Have we not This is from Malachi. Have we not all one father? Has not God created us? Yeah. God didn't give birth to us literally as in only begotten created us. Why

then are we faithful, faithless to one another, profaining the covenant of our fathers? And again in Isaiah, yet oh Lord, you are our father. We are the clay, you are the potter, we are the work of your hand. And in Psalms, father of the fatherless and protector of the widows is God in his holy habitation. So again, that's the vision of what men should be, what fathers should be. They should take care of the widow. The widows and the f and people who are orphans etc etc should be caring and compassionate

and looking after people. You can see that very much in Jesus because Jesus was just a Jewish man, typical Jewish man, which is why he cared about people and that you may be the children of your father who is in heaven who makes his son to rise upon the good and the bad and reign upon the just and the unjust. So again, that's Jesus teaching there that God doesn't take sides. God isn't on this nation's side or that race's side or whatever. God is the God of every single human being. He's a father of every single human being. Which is why he cares about everybody, every single individual.

And again, and and again, call no man your father on earth, for you have one father who is in heaven. See what kind of love the father has given to us that we should be called children of God. And so we are again that's in the letter written by John. So again over and over again many many times in the Bible the Old Testament and the New Testament we find God presented as a father who cares who loves but also God as mother. This is from Deuteronomy. Who wrote the book of Deuteronomy? Moses. The last speech, well, not speech, the last workshop he gave was the book was written down

and that's a book of Deuteronomy. It comes from there just before they went into Canaan. He said, "You are unmindful of the rock that bore you. You forgot the God who gave you birth." Yeah. So again, it's God as mother. God gave birth to all human beings. Not literally, but metaphorically, of course. And again, like the eagle that stirs up its nest and hovers over its young, God spreads wings to catch you and carries you on pinions. So again, God is mother. And again, Isaiah, many times it comes up in the prophets, the emotional depth of God's heart. Can a mother forget the baby at her breast

and have no compassion on the child she is born? Though she may forget, I will not forget you. So again, many many times through the prophets, God is presenting himself using the metaphor of I'm the mother. I have that kind of commitment, that kind of care for every single human being. Just like a mother, I would never walk away or forget people. And again, Hosea, like a bear robbed of her cubs, I will attack them and tear them aunder. You know what bears are like? Mother bears alike. You know, if you look, if they feel like their their what do you call little ba little offspring are going to get cubs? Sorry, cubs. Cubs. That's right. Thank you for that. Cubs are going to get attacked or in danger. They really attack very viciously to protect their cubs.

And swans do the same. I remember once when uh my grandparents they had a they had a river at the bottom of their garden and uh there were two swans that used to come back every year and they laid these eggs and they they hatched and became what do you call them again? Signets. Signets. Signets. Thank you. Signets. And so I went down to the the edge of the river and uh you know to look and then of course the mother swan put out her wings and looked like she's going to attack me. My grandparents said, "Run away." Yeah. It's just the way it is.

And that's how God sees himself in the same way. As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you and you'll be comforted over Jerusalem. Yeah. God, that's how God the other aspect. Did I bring you? Did I bring do I bring to the moment of birth and not deliver it and and not give delivery? Says the Lord again. Mother, do I close up the womb when I bring to delivery? Do I close up the womb when I bring to delivery? Says says your God. And again, when Israel was a child, I loved him and out of Egypt I called my son. Again, that's the language. That's the kind of way in which a mother would speak.

And so that's interesting. The Bible, you have this imagery of God as both masculine and feminine, mother, father or mother and father. And even from one verse to the next, this is from Isaiah again. The Lord will march out like a champion, like a warrior. He will stir up his zeal. A very masculine kind of God here, warrior. And the next verse, and with a shout he will raise a battle cry and will triumph over his enemies. The next verse. For a long time, I have kept silent. I've been quiet and held myself back.

But now, like a woman in childbirth, I cry out. I gasp and pant. Yeah. One verse, God is presenting himself as masculine father, warrior. And the next verse, God is presenting himself as a mother. So within God then is a unified harmonious being of masculinity and femininity, fatherhood and motherhood. It's not that the two gods are just one God with both these different dimensions and aspects. If you want to know what God is like, this is a good book I've been reading. Uh Graham gave it to me. What is God? Somebody called Jacob Needleman who's a very famous

uh Jewish philosopher. Okay, so let's move on then. So that was looking back at what we talked about before. God's relationship with the universe. So it's what it says here. The relationship between God and the universe is defined according to the recip to the reciprocal relationship. What does that mean? Well, what is a reciprocal relationship? Sorry. Recipal is give and take. Yeah. So let's have a look. This is a reciprocal relationship involves a mutual exchange of support, emotional investment, care

and love. Reciprocity in a relationship is characterized by each partner feeling able to share their needs. A willingness to meet the needs of the other person. Open and honest communication. Is that what the relationship between God and the universe is like? Should be. Can it be? I mean, is a physical universe ever going to be able to communicate with God nature planets stars? No. That's why we have human only through human beings. So, here it says it's the whole universe. Well, I think it's a bit odd to say the relationship God has with the natural world, the physical world apart from us is like that. not what it says in the divine principle book. The relationship between God

and the universe is defined by a nature of masculine subject and the form of feminine object. However, this does not mean that God only has the nature of masculine subject. Nor is implied the universe exists solely in the form of feminine substantial object. This is similar to the parent child relationship which defines a subject object relationship. Anyway, anyway, it's what it says in the divine principle book which is explains these things much more clearly I would say and uh much more precisely

because God exists as subject partner having the qualities of internal nature, masculinity, he created the universe as his object partner with the qualities external form and femininity. So how does that work? Sometimes people talk about mother earth. Okay, that seems to fit with that. But it's kind of curious you know this idea. Uh so what it's doing is just describing the relationship the subject object relationship in summary God is a subject in whom the dual characteristics of original internal nature

and original external form are in harmony. So God is just a harmonized being. is not uh yeah at the same time God is a harmonious union of masculinity and femininity which manifests the qualities original internal nature and original external form respectively in relation to the universe God is a subject partner having the qualities of internal nature and ex and masculinity. So the universe is has everything in the universe as it says in the principle every entity has has dual characteristic of internal external

and dual characteristics of yin and yang or masculinity and femin every entity and also God has internal nature and external form and masculinity and femininity. But when you actually try to look at okay how can we look at the relationship between God and the universe well it's like more like this. So it's just a a way of uh in relation to the universe that's all. Okay. So God's relationship with the universe, the relationship between God and the universe is one of causal and resultant existence continued through eternity. In other words, God created the universe. God gives first

and the universe receives first. Represents a causal relationship and the subject object partner relationship is a vertical relationship that remains eternally unchanged. Um, it's a bit like trying to say it's like a reciprocal relationship. Personally, you we're creating the image of God, but the rest of the universe is like the symbol of God. God can't have the same depth of relationship with a frog that he can have with a human being. I don't know as far as I that's what I think anyway. So, it's a bit

uh God's relationship with the universe. However, the subject object partner relationship between the heavenly father and the heavenly mother is a relationship of horizontal and complimentary harmony. I come to this in a second. Therefore, neither heavenly father nor heavenly mother pre-exists the other. So, why does this idea come from that one pre-exist? suggests they're two different beings. You wouldn't even ask that kind of question. So there's a problem here. So the language is what we call bitheism. It's not dualism, which is usually when people talk about dualism, talk about good god

and evil god. So we're not talking about that here. The word is bitheism because it assumes a heavenly father and a heavenly mother as if they were two distinct entities. So that's why I getting into this sort of problem of and again and again Chong Ron lectures are claiming no we're not dualistic. Well the only reason why people have been saying they're dualistic is a way in which the language has been framed used. That's the problem. Language assumes a heavenly father and a heavenly mother as if they were two distinct entities. It would be better to say the relationship between God's fatherly

and motherly aspects is complimentary and harmonious than the question of pre-existence of or otherwise doesn't arise because you say there's just a fatherly go fatherly aspect of God a motherly aspect of God but soon you say heavenly father and heavenly mother as I talked about last time father and mother are nouns heavenly is an adjective so you got two nouns means you got two entities which means you got two gods So it's the language of this of these lectures is it causes all kinds of problems. Sorry I'm just a philosopher just analyze this stuff.

So that's a problem I would say. So the characteristics of and uniqueness of God. God is a personal being with heart and the attributes of emotional intellect and will. For the one God to establish a personal relationship with humans he must reveal himself as a personal being. Yeah. Well, God has always done that. Revealed himself as a personal being in the biblical tradition anyway. Right from page one of Genesis, human beings refer to either male or female. There's no such thing as a genderneutral human. I don't know what

that sentence is doing there. You know what I mean? Where why do they talk about being general neutral? Any ideas? Let's see when the book comes out if we can. I cannot relate with that for a very simple reason. In fact, in nature, it is a fact that I rather prefer the power principle where in every man there's also a feminine aspect. every human is also a masculine aspect and sometime for whatever reason there's a little bit more of the one which does not reflect it external form a little bit more even even you get some kind of hybrid people you know

and there's nothing wrong about that it's just the way things are like principle to reflect that aspect yeah yeah I talked about this last time about you and it showed you that thing. It's just scientific studies of these sort of things. Yeah. Anyway, I just can't understand why they put this sentence here. It's a bit of a mystery to me what they're doing. So, the impression I get is by saying there's a heavenly father and a heavenly mother. Yeah. Either you're one or the other. I think it's somehow got involved in the whole woke thing. You don't need to know don't need to go

and redefine what God is like just to get involved in uh the culture wars about woke which is what a friend of mine who wrote a book thinks we need to do. Donald Trump doesn't sorry Donald Trump doesn't think so. No he doesn't. Uh no but uh any we'll see when the Chonga Ron textbook comes out. uh what's going on here because somebody who I know who was involved in writing that said the reason why we're redefining everything I said you know there's a anyway there's a book which has come out recently which says every entity is either yin or yang the divine principle says every entity has dual characteristics of yin

and yang so this new book which has come out see if it is going to continue with that is every end is either yin or yang Yeah, which is not the way that it is in the natural world. But the reason why this person said he was rewriting the principle in that way was to a way of fighting against the gender wars. Yeah, he thinks that's not the right way. Oh, I agree completely. Anyway, it's just sheer ignorance. You know, as I said last time, emasculine XY feminine XX really unfair. Women should have more DNA than men.

And that's why there's so much better in many different ways. But that's just the way it is. It's just XX and XY. You know, don't need to go and redefine the theology to deal with that. This emphasis regardless of whether God is expressed as heavenly father or mother. The unity of masculine and feminine attributes remains and God is ultimately understood as heavenly parent. Okay. Next. From the time Jesus proclaimed God as father, people began to recognize God personally as a parent. Well, that's not true. The whole of the Hebrew Bible presents God as father.

So many quotes, not just the ones which I brought up, there's so many quotes where fathers presented as personal being. As Prager was saying, you know, God is a personal being. That's why it's either he, she can't have it. and as a parent fatherly aspect it's all there it's not something that Jesus introduced Jesus was just saying what all Jews believed and knew however since the only begotten daughter was unable to be born due to the failure of the prepared foundation God could not manifest as mother

but again in the Hebrew Bible God does manifest as mother and God does present himself in using that kind of metaphor metaphoric using that kind of language as Well, so again, that's not a correct statement here. So, does God show does the Bible show God's personality? Well, God, as I say, God has always been present in the Bible as a personal being. That's why it's he or she, not an it. Genesis, parent of Adam and Eve, and a personal conversation that God had with Adam and Eve in the gardens. A very personal, intimate conversation. God reveals to Noah

that he's brokenhearted. It's all there. God said, "I'm brokenhearted." God was griefstricken by all the things that were going on before the flood took place about the way his children treat each other. God hates violence. Again, as we got from Prager there, that's a real problem. Again, God had a personal relationship with Abraham and Sarah. God talked to Abraham and Sarah. really intense conversations about, you know, whether to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. God spoke to Sarah as well about her being

and gave her promises to God spoke to Isaac and Jacob and etc. And Moses incredibly personal relationship that God had with Moses and you can read the conversations that they had with each other. It's all recorded. It's a personal relationship. Yeah. Moses and all the prophets. Again, I had a few quotes there from some of the prophets. Again, God revealing his heart, you know, and how he feels about what is going on and what he wants to do. And so, again, God introduc Oh, yeah. So, God introduced himself to Moses as the God of Abraham, Isaac,

and Jacob. God didn't introduce himself at the burning bush as the creator of the universe. That's not what's most important for God. He's a personal relationship. And he called Moses his friend. And so yeah there also as I said God manifested himself as mother many times through the prophets. So I'm not quite sure why whoever composed the Chong Bon just treats the Hebrew Bible with such disrespect and ignorance and lack of knowledge to claim that something is new which never been thought of before.

Uh excuse me revealed three or 4 thousand years ago. Everyone's going to know the Bible, do they? No, they don't. [Laughter] Welcome. Nice to see you, Victor. Okay, so characteristics of God. For God to establish a personal relationship with humans as a heavenly parent, the birth of the only begotten daughter is essential. That's a statement, but there's no reason or evidence to support it. It's just a statement. Is it true or not? Well, God has always had a personal relationship with human beings. You know, for the whole of human history, people are able to form a personal relationship with God

and always have been able to. In order to avoid falling into dualism, where heavenly parent is understood as being separated to heavenly father and heavenly mother is entirely the language problem. The manifestation of the true parents must occur. Why? The Bible's not dualistic. didn't need true parents in order to avoid falling into jewelism because the Hebrew Bible has never been dualistic in the first place. It's the problem of language which we're getting coming from Korea which is the problem. Better just use better language. That's all which did I talk about

that last time? I think did I did I can't remember? I'm sure I did. I can't remember anything these days. I'm sorry. Anyway, so the ch the problem is the language of the chungbar leads to dualism. Okay, without the foundation of the unity of God and humankind and true love through the true parents of heaven, earth and humankind, there's a risk of dualism. Really, you know, Jews are Muslims. They're not jewelists. They're monotheists. Therefore, God has to be understood solely as God the father in order to maintain his personal nature

and legitim and uniqueness. Therefore, God had to be understood solely as God the father in order to maintain his personal nature and uniqueness was incorrect. You know as Prague was explaining the reason why God is depicted depicted that's the important word that depicted as heavenly father is to provide a role model for what men should be like uh you know how they should what they should become. So again this is incorrect. God's femininity was concealed because the only begotten daughter female entity was not born.

But was it concealed? You can find it throughout the Hebrew Bible. You don't find it much in the New Testament and that's a real problem and you don't find it much within Christianity historically. Again, that's a problem. It's not a problem of the Hebrew Bible. So, was it concealed from Genesis 1? The femininity of God is stated, accepted, and explored. God created man in his image and likeness. Male and female he created them. That's page one in the divi in in the Bible. always been understood in

that way and explored and explained in that way. Though humanity was ignorant, it was only through Jesus that they adopted they were adopted as children and could become to know God as father. Again, that's not correct. The whole Hebrew Bible and Jewish people see themselves been sons and daughters of God because that's what it teaches and they've always understood themselves in that way. True parents of mankind are manifested and ushered in an era when we can meet heavenly father and heavenly mother as the true parents of heaven

and earth. So our heavenly father and heavenly mother the true parents of Adam and Eve. I don't know bit kind of I just find a lot of this language very obscure. True father the lord of the second advent and true mother the substantial holy spirit. So we're going to look at that in a moment. I think we looked at last time bit. True mother, the substantial Holy Spirit and only begotten daughter, manifested as the true parents of humankind through the marriage supper of the lamb. True father and true mother embodying the divine characteristics became true parents of heaven, earth,

and humankind in perfect unity of love centered on God. Okay. So let's look at the Holy Spirit. So what's the gender of the Holy Spirit? In some languages, words have a gender. Example, nouns in French are either la or la. Don't ask me why. It used to drive me nuts when I was trying to learn French as a child. My goodness, why is it so complicated? I've got to learn. Every single noun is either a or why can't it just be the noun? English is so much easier from that point of view. I guess are other European languages like

that as well or is it just French? German as well. Portuguese. Portuguese. Yeah. Okay, Spanish and Italian have every noun is either masculine or feminine. So my question I could never understand well why do they choose to call this a ship female as opposed to and why do they so for me that was a question I was always thinking when I was studying French why do you choose to call this and that that's with words in French for example you would say a sheep masculine but is a type of sheep because it finish with e

uh so that's why many family Okay. Doesn't make sense to me. The type of is it okay? That's that's Anyway, I as I said, it just drove my head in when I was a child and just turned me off learning foreign language. Sorry. It's a mystery. I I don't Yeah, for me it's a mystery. I'm not interested in mysteries. I want to understand why. And nobody could give me a good explanation. Why do they do this? A calling every noun either masculine or feminine. And B, why do they choose love for this noun and love for

that one? Don't know. Anyway, in Hebrew, ru which means spirit is feminine. In Greek, numina, how do I pronounce it is neuter and in Latin spiritus is masculine. So you know the words are just feminine, neuter or masculine. So what is the Holy Spirit in Judaism? Did I talk about this last time? Can't remember if I did or not. Anyway, so in Judaism, Jud Jews are all monotheists. Monotheism means one. You believe there's only one God. God is one. God is not a divided being, one God. And God is a harmonized being, one God.

And Jesus was a Jew. And Jews are not allowed to use God's name. uh which is uh Moses God introduced himself to Moses as Yahweh. The Hebrew for Holy Spirit raadesh refers to the spirit of Yahweh. So because they couldn't use the word Yahweh, they would just say it with the spirit of God, Holy Spirit. That's just a way of being able to talk about God without using God's name. the way God works in the so it's understood this uh Holy Spirit in the Hebrew Bible is the way God works in the world descending on prophets blessing people

so when people feel that God has descended and speaking through a prophet they don't say it's God Yahweh who's doing that they say it's the Holy Spirit who's descended upon this prophet and he starts prophesying and saying things or God the Holy Spirit descends upon people and they receive God's blessing you so that's that way of just describing the way that God works works in the world is God is working as a Holy Spirit. But it's not that it's two gods, God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. It's just one. There's different ways of working. It's also connected to the word she shakina which is the idea of

um yeah the dwelling or settling of the divine human the divine feminine presence or on aspects or aspects in the cabala. So the cabala is um sort of Jewish mysticism and talks here about the shakina god descending and they use it is like in a feminine kind of way and uh also coming along at the the Sabbath. So that's the holy spirit in Judaism in Christianity. So again it says he the holy spirit has spoken through the prophets. That's a nyine creed. the nine cre was originally written in Greek

but then it was translated into Latin. So in the western world it became um a he and so most Christians believe God the father, God the son, and God the holy spirit and they're all masculine. Again, it's just a language thing. So again, it talks about the Holy Spirit descending at Pentecost. So again, that's the Jewish understanding of the Holy Spirit descending on Pentecost and speaking through the people, reviving their hearts, their spirits, their souls. They all became like prophets and blessing them. The Holy Spirit

then and Christianity is not a person or a human being. Okay? It's not a person or human being. It's the third person of the Trinity. So the the term Holy Spirit in the Bible means something different to what it means in the unification tradition. Forget that last sentence. Come to that another time. Okay. So this is something interesting. The earliest Christians, all of whom were Jews spoke of the Holy Spirit as a feminine figure. So it's not a figure. It's just uh because it's not separate to God the creator. The present article which is

so I think I've read it's a article in a journal discusses the main proof texts ranging from the gospel according to the Hebrews which is not in the Bible uh to a number of testimonies from sec the second century. The ancient tradition was in particular kept alive in east and west Syria up to and including the 4th century. Macarios and or Simon Simeon who even influenced modern Protestants such as John Wesley and the Moravian leader Count von Zinorf. So Wesley himself um became born again through going to a Moravian church in London. It has concluded better appreciation of the fullness of the divine.

So again that's uh a lot of this is going on now in modern theology. The femininity of God and the Holy Spirit. Look at the Holy Spirit in the in the in the principle. The Holy Spirit comes as a true mother. Okay. So here you have coming as a human being. So that's very different to what you find in the Hebrew Bible Christianity. the Holy Spirit as a human being. This is why Jesus told Nicodemus that no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he's born a new through the Holy Spirit. So yeah, definitely the feminine aspect of God.

Uh but not as a human being. There are many who have received the revelation the Holy Spirit is feminine. So I talked about that in the last slide. This is because the Holy Spirit comes as the true mother or second Eve. Again, that's a different way that the principle understands the word holy, the term holy spirit to the biblical understanding where the holy spirit is not a human being. Since the holy spirit is a feminine aspect of the divinity without first receiving her, we cannot go before Jesus as his brides. Being feminine, the holy spirit consoles

and moves the hearts of people. She cleanses people's sin thereby thereby atoning for the sin which Eve committed. So again that's a unification understanding connecting the Holy Spirit with Eve. It's not the the biblical understanding at all. Jesus the masculine Lord works in heaven. Yang while the Holy Spirit his feminine counterpart works on earth. Again this idea of it being a counterpart again is a a new thing. Should should not there also have come the true mother of humankind the second Eve. The one who has come as a true mother to give rebirth to fallen people is a holy spirit. I said the holy spirit in the bible is not a person or or a human being whereas the divine principle for whatever reason makes

that kind of innovation. That's all I can say. It's a new kind of theology, a new This is a second gen pastor in the United States of America wrote to me a few months ago when he first heard these lectures about uh Chamboomer and which you'll find in the first at least the first edition and maybe the second edition of the Chamboomer slides. It's been taken out of the current uh slide presentation. But anyway, he said, "I'm really disheartened by the use of terms like whoever blasphemes the Holy Spirit is unforgivable." Or, "If we doubt, we're like the Jewish people who doubted Jesus

and sent him to the cross." This kind of rhetoric stopped and how we can respond and create something meaningful. This is what people have been told in the Shamboo lectures that if you commit if you don't believe the Shamboo lectures, you're blaspheming the Holy Spirit and you're just like the Jewish people who doubted Jesus and send him to the cross. This is a heavy thing to put upon people. A heavy thing to tell people if you don't agree with me, you're going to hell. Basically that's what it is. You don't agree with these lectures

and these talks and what where does that why did this idea come from it comes from here. Jesus said I tell you that every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven but blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. Whoever speaks again a word against the son of man will be forgiven. So he describes himself as a son of man, not the son of God or whatever. Always presents himself as a son of man. He's a human being. But whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven either in this age or in the age to come.

So that's where this thing comes from. It's taking a piece of the new a few verses New Testament and using them to enforce and impose a certain kind of doctrine. That's not healthy. But it goes on anyway. So here it is. God forgives sins against God but not against people or conscience. So if ask the person you sin against to forgive you. This is traditional uh Jewish and Muslim teaching, not Christian teaching, traditional Jewish and Muslim teaching. So before Yam Kipur uh which is the beginning of the Jewish new year when they fast for 25 hours, they have a certain amount of time I can't remember how much time

now a month and they have to go around and they have to think about every single person who they might have offended or harmed or sinned against during that year. and they're supposed to go around and and see every single person who they think they sinned against or hurt or offended during that year and apologize have to apologize to every single person. And it's the same within Islam because they can't say, "Well, I bumped into this old lady and knocked over her, you know, knocked drove on the pavement

and etc." He can't say, "God, please forgive me for doing that." God will say, "Didn't do it against me. Go and apologize to that old lady. Oh, I stole something. Please forgive me. Didn't steal it from me. Go and apologize to the person you stole it from." That's Jewish and Muslim. Muslims say the same. God won't forgive things that you've done against other people. You have to go and apologize to them. So this whole Christian idea of the forgiveness of sin is it doesn't matter what we murder people, God will forgive you for murdering somebody. That's

um not the Jewish or Muslim understanding. You have to go and ask forgiveness. Well, it's difficult to do that. And so that's why you get this I don't know if you're aware of this, but interesting conversations. Christians sometime say to Jews, please forgive me. I apologize for the Holocaust. Do Jews forgive a person who comes and says that to them? Why not? Could you say I can't forgive you? And Christians get really upset. why can't you forgive me? And the Jews said, "Why? You didn't do it to me. I'm not dead. You know, you haven't offended me. You haven't sinned against me." You know,

so Jews don't forgive people for the Holocaust because they weren't the people who were put to death. That makes sense. That's interesting. They only forgive people who actually offended them personally. They don't get upset and resentful and angry about somebody else get, you know, getting mugged or murdered or anything else because it's not doesn't happen to them anyway. So God forgives sins against God. Yes. So if you sin against God, so what is what does it mean to sin against God, but not against people or conscience? They'll come to

that in a minute. So ask a person you sin against to forgive you. And so it says here, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is conscious and hardened opposition to the truth because the spirit is truth. So it's not about speaking against a human being. It's about going against one's conscience. So God can't forgive you if you go against your conscience. Who has to forgive you? Yourself. You have to sort it out for yourself. You have to say, "I'm really That's what it is. God won't forgive you if you go against your conscience. Only you will have to sort it out for yourself

and forgive yourself and come to terms with yourself. Yeah. Because it's an internal thing. And so when Jesus says you, you know, if you speak against the Holy Spirit, in other words, if you go against your conscience, either you won't be forgiven either in this world age or the age to come. One has to have a pure heart and a clear clean conscience. That's it. And you can't get that just by saying, "Well, I'm sorry I, you know, I killed this person. I'm sorry I stole that or whatever." It's you have to sort it out. Okay.

So that's a problem then which is a problem a lack of understanding what the Bible actually says and what the Bible means and using certain verses in the Bible for what I would say uh the wrong purpose. One of the commandments is thou shalt not take what does it say take God's name in vain. That's why Jews won't say God's name. Don't take God's name in vain. This is, you know, when people say, "If you don't do what I tell you to do, then you will go to hell." That's taking God's name in vain. It's using God's name in order to control

and manipulate other people. And we've had a lot of that within Christian history where the pope says, "I'm the vicer of Christ. Therefore, I have the authority, the legitimate authority to decide whether you go to heaven or you go to hell when you die. I can excommunicate you. That is taking God's name in vain. It's God using God's name for one's own purposes to manipulate and control other people. Yeah. There's a lot of that going on. Okay. So, that's why I shouldn't do that. You know, if you think somebody's something's wrong, use reason

and evidence. Don't say, "Oh, you're blaspheming against the Holy Spirit. Therefore, you're like the Jews who betrayed Jesus, etc., etc." But that's not nice to speak to people and treat people like that. And unfortunately that goes on in our own community. Anyway, possible trinity. Interesting. Okay. So, moving on. Have any parent wishes to take on a It's 11:2. What time? Yeah, if we can have a break, it would be a good idea. That's a good idea. Great. I like good ideas. Okay, let's have a break. Thank you. Any qu Oh, up until now. Any questions or thoughts? No. Okay, let's have a break. Thanks.

And how many minutes or how we how long are you breaking for? I can't remember now. Um, should we be back by 45? That's 11:45. What time? How How long is that? Uh, a little bit. 20 minutes basically. 20 minute break. Okay. Anybody online, go and have a coffee. See you in 20 minutes or you'll see me anyway. Coffee just outside of the landing. Yeah. And I know N's explained about the the rules here. Right.