Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's the thing. I already know this to be an illusion. However, I believe if we as part of God, have any real power, it is to reshape reality. Yes, currently this is an illusion, and I know it to be such. It is less that I am in denial of the fact, and more that I want the following: I want all humans to attain Enlightenment and become the Goddess. I want the existence we see to become God. When all is said, and done, God and Goddess will be real, and there will be Two where before there was One. Why? Because Primal Existence could have gone on for all eternity with God sitting alone in a Void. But it didn't. Possibly because rather than than "Heaven" sitting alone for all eternity is a rather crappy boring existence. I know it's an illusion. But I want to Make It Real. To finish the experiment of existence, and have it produce an outcome rather than the pointless union with higher consciousness, more a Duality. Yes, we should have a goal of higher consciousness, but I'd like to at the end of all of this have a companion, who is very much a part of me, but doesn't need to unite fully. Because I have literally been alone most of my life so becoming God and having nobody to share life with would just be stupid. This is why we have other religions, because we have a choice about what ultimately happens with God.
It is not right for God to be alone. I shall make him a Helper.
yup. again, the word of the day ... balance. well, as we middle men like to say anyway.
Pahlezze!
What about the 'middle women'??
When it comes to the concept of 'G()D' being 'lonely' it presupposes that G()D is bored with its own company, or perhaps a tad frightened of being alone, or perhaps is in need of 'Mothering' and 'Fathering.'
I think these are valid ideas which can be explored in more detail.
In post number 134 of this thread I touch on this subject using a chart I created for the purpose of examining particular ancient human concepts of 'G()D' and these align quiet well with other less religious-based ideas I have read in relation to 'the evolution of consciousness within the physical universe' and if you take a look at the chart you will notice that before 'G()Ds' there were things known as "Primordial Beings" and these too seem to have split from The One Source Consciousness by developing 'another' to companion itself.
These are understood as 'parental' in nature and the very things which begat G()Ds which of course are the children of the Primordial Parents and are invested into exploring the layers of the various levels within the physical universe which can be explored.
In relation to Earth Consciousness, this is one such Child of the Primordial Parents who - like all the rest - are cast into the firmament in order that the Primordial Parents can - through their Children - get a closer look into 'things' through channeling that data of experience back through the intimate connections they have in relation to their Children.
some of the G()Ds seem to have gone astray and severed the knowledge of the connection (not the connection itself but their awareness of the connection) and this may have lead to further complications.
It even seems in some cases that some of the G()Ds purposefully cut ties with their Primordial Parents in order to 'be gods over their creations' making it up as they went along.
From the perspective of those 'creations' these G()Ds became frightful monsters who require blind obedience, but part of the problem with that was that in order for these G()Ds to have sentient creations they had to invest an aspect of their own consciousnesses into those creations and in order to achieve this they had to suppress any awareness within those critters so that the critters were ignorant that they were actually aspects of the very G()Ds they feared and worshiped blindly.
This is not so much a thing which was propelled by heartless monsters but rather a natural occurrence which can be traced back to the Primordial Parent Entities and to the One Source.
The One Source had the compulsion to have company and the only way that it could was to fragment itself and then have that fragment be so much an individual as to have no idea that it was really the very thing which created it.
Essentially it was not a malevolent thing until it moved deeper into the firmament...
The "problem" with the first Source Consciousness is that It never had parents or anything outside its own conscious existence which was a separate consciousness and which taught it what it was and why it existed and why it was in this physical universe like the proverbial Genie in the bottle.
In effect the whole process from Primordial Parents right through the G()D layer and into the sentient critter layer, is one big ripple effect which shows clearly enough the nature of The Source Consciousness when placed into the bottle and told to 'work itself out'.
'Told to'?
Who or what did the 'telling'?
To be sure, the circumstance itself in relation to that Consciousness, is what does the 'telling' and that story is still very much going on as the fragmented aspects of that Consciousness continues to delve into the environment losing itself in order to try and truly find itself.
...And sometimes frightening the bejesus out of its self in the process...
If I have my eye on anything, it is that which is behind the existence of the Primordial Parents.
If I have my eye on anything, it is that which is behind the existence of the Primordial Parents.
my bad. Middle people.
Think about this. # interactions vs. volume and how it influences complexity per unit volume. Also, we have "emotions" because of these interactions, I see no reason it might not either. As the volume increases and interactions and complexity decrease it begins to have less and less understanding. The max being in the first few years of the universe. And as the interactions decrease the understanding drop may cause some fear.
But who knows, maybe quantum stuff can negate the volume issue, I don't know.
When it comes to the concept of 'G()D' being 'lonely' it presupposes that G()D is bored with its own company, or perhaps a tad frightened of being alone, or perhaps is in need of 'Mothering' and 'Fathering.'
I think these are valid ideas which can be explored in more detail.
I'm gonna respond just to this, and then separately to the rest of the thread.
When exploring existential theory, the most reliable way of doing so is to see how it stacks up to logic, personal experience, etc.
In terms of personal experience, I have seen my own life mirror this sense of loneliness. I am okay on my own, but not really happy without a sense of someone other than myself even if it is a lie.
In terms of logic, we have the Earth which for at least one eternity, effectively stayed a Void with just God. But, as you can see, this current world is doing its best to present the otherwise. This suggests that God does not want to remember this fact. Also, the idea or merging back with God is distinctly cyclic (read: pointless) since this is where we came from. It makes zero sense that God would set events in motion, making life, galaxies, etc. only to have everything collapse in on itself. I believe in the concept of purpose (although, we as humans can make decisions including just to be okay with how things are).
Quote:
In post number 134 of this thread I touch on this subject using a chart I created for the purpose of examining particular ancient human concepts of 'G()D' and these align quiet well with other less religious-based ideas I have read in relation to 'the evolution of consciousness within the physical universe' and if you take a look at the chart you will notice that before 'G()Ds' there were things known as "Primordial Beings" and these too seem to have split from The One Source Consciousness by developing 'another' to companion itself.
These are understood as 'parental' in nature and the very things which begat G()Ds which of course are the children of the Primordial Parents and are invested into exploring the layers of the various levels within the physical universe which can be explored.
In relation to Earth Consciousness, this is one such Child of the Primordial Parents who - like all the rest - are cast into the firmament in order that the Primordial Parents can - through their Children - get a closer look into 'things' through channeling that data of experience back through the intimate connections they have in relation to their Children.
some of the G()Ds seem to have gone astray and severed the knowledge of the connection (not the connection itself but their awareness of the connection) and this may have lead to further complications.
It even seems in some cases that some of the G()Ds purposefully cut ties with their Primordial Parents in order to 'be gods over their creations' making it up as they went along.
From the perspective of those 'creations' these G()Ds became frightful monsters who require blind obedience, but part of the problem with that was that in order for these G()Ds to have sentient creations they had to invest an aspect of their own consciousnesses into those creations and in order to achieve this they had to suppress any awareness within those critters so that the critters were ignorant that they were actually aspects of the very G()Ds they feared and worshiped blindly.
This is not so much a thing which was propelled by heartless monsters but rather a natural occurrence which can be traced back to the Primordial Parent Entities and to the One Source.
The One Source had the compulsion to have company and the only way that it could was to fragment itself and then have that fragment be so much an individual as to have no idea that it was really the very thing which created it.
Somewhere early in, there's some mention of a Lucifer Experiment (something similar to this). It is true, without being connected to Unity, you will literally have to sustain all existence yourself. But what I'm talking about is not to cut oneself away, so much as to fragment the whole while still making it aware. Diversity within Unity. To be able to make the nature of God into Yin and Yang. Both are the whole, and yet while opposite, not actually separate.
Also, where did this story come from? It's straight out of Lovecraft.
Somewhere early in, there's some mention of a Lucifer Experiment (something similar to this). It is true, without being connected to Unity, you will literally have to sustain all existence yourself. But what I'm talking about is not to cut oneself away, so much as to fragment the whole while still making it aware. Diversity within Unity. To be able to make the nature of God into Yin and Yang. Both are the whole, and yet while opposite, not actually separate.
Also, where did this story come from? It's straight out of Lovecraft.
Unity is the key underlying factor in specie survival/prosperity/enlightenment.
The reason I am pointing to the G()D map is to point out that Unity became an issue way before Human Form was created.
It would seem that part of the reason for incarcerating Spirit into Human Form was to deal with this very issue.
As a result the notion of G()D as 'Yin/Yang' was explored (is still being investigated) and for all intent and purpose is not really as well balanced as one perhaps should expect it to being.
This seems largely to do with the human position taking sides on things as they attempt to work it out.
The Whole is fragmented because of this search for what amounts to 'Who Am I' in relation to the Source.
It is like the question being asked resulted in this happening as Consciousness goes within itself to explore it many 'parts' in order to see if by doing so it might work itself out.
Diversity is fine unless it lacks the desire for unity. If not, all hell breaks loose.
Enlightenment if it is to be a monolith, however, is Sectism, not really Enlightenment (see the model earlier, and my thoughts on it). The model goes from community consciousness to universal consciousness, yes. But it also moves from dependence on the will of others to increasing free thought and higher consciousness. This means, the goal of existence would be to move into a higher state of consciousness. If we all agree on what that looks like, that's almost like imagining Heaven only to say:
You can have Heaven and it is wonderful... Only no Jews. No gays. No blacks. Just white people go to White Heaven.
Erm, yea. This is what comes of thinking in a distinct term of Unity as an absolute for Enlightenment. From my experience, Enlightened people realize separation is an illusion, but they also embrace differences.
The thing your are talking about is not the Yin-Yang. In general, the Taoists I've met appeared to be very mellow and relaxed, and the religion seemed more about Unity while still having a Dualism, than about dichotomies. It's about balance. There are Enlightened Taoist masters. They neither believe in Unity as the Buddhists perceive nor... what you just said, which is very unbalanced and very much not the Tao.
Dividing and unifying is what the soul can do, this is fine. The actual problem is assigning notions of good or evil to things (Moralism) or separating the nature of God from humanity (Perceived Transcendence, coined by me).
There are plenty of problems with moralism, but the latter I want to talk about more. Perceived transcendence, is not the same as transcendence, the state of moving past the purely physical reality to be closer to God. It is basically seeing God as somehow different from his creation, as Lord, rather than what we call God because there is no other appropriate way to sum up this thing that is all of us, and yet appears outside of us.
Perceived transcendence is placing God on a pedestal. The idea is that humans are just creations and not part of God. This is very dangerous, because it allows people to be devalued as slaves, or worse. It also allows people to kill one another.
There are, as far as I know, two working models of existence:
Duality as Equals (popularized by Taoism, Wicca, and certain pantheism/animism types)
Unity Consciousness (Held by Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism)
Duality as Equals sees the world around us, and we who live as both part of God. It does not inherently need to bind into Unity, provided both halves are free from moralism and from seeing only themselves (narcissism) or the other (pedestal worship) as part of God. This is okay. This is reality as a partnership, and this is a model that can definitely work. As long as people know the difference between this and duality consciousness. This is based on a relationship, like lovers. In fact, in Christian tradition, we have the Church mentioned as the bride of Christ.
See? Oneness, but we have Christ and Church as a marriage. Taoism generally (except for those trendy necklaces) doesn't split into Yin and Yang but rather stays as two parts of one whole. Even in the case of the necklaces, it is an understood that this person is supposed to be "your other half."
Unity Conscious is the closest model to the traditional model of Enlightenment, but as I am trying to put across, it doesn't need to be the only one. The goal of Enlightenment is harmony, and this cannot happen if other ideas are swept aside.
Duality Consciousness is different from the above. This has a distinct split between Heaven and Hell, God and Humans. The disjoint means that either the person in question believes God is out there but humans are powerless servants (kinda like Islam and Zoroastrian tradition). There is no sense of Oneness here, and as you can see, Islam is among the most violent models of existence imaginable.
Primal Families basically this is what the gods and goddesses thing was about. Self was not only split but cut off, cut away from the Unity to form its own pocket existence. This generally ends up screwed up.
Nihility basically asserts that souls and other stuff don't exist, and when we die there's no goal. Not even all atheists believe in this one. With good reason, it's a depressing model.
Nihility basically asserts that souls and other stuff don't exist, and when we die there's no goal. Not even all atheists believe in this one. With good reason, it's a depressing model.
It is not inherently nihilistic and despairing to think that souls don't exist and death is the end. It is only despairing to those conditioned to be dependent on thinking "that way lies madness".
I find the finite nature of my existence quite comforting actually. Open ended existence with various constraints on interest, attention and novelty, would be its own hell. We're not built for eternity. We like to think we are, but we can't even conceive of it, much less live it.
We're not built for eternity. We like to think we are, but we can't even conceive of it, much less live it.
our physical bodies are not built for eternity, but our souls are.
the soul knows it is eternal.
the constricted human mind may have trouble grasping this, but the expanded human mind is fine with it
It is not inherently nihilistic and despairing to think that souls don't exist and death is the end. It is only despairing to those conditioned to be dependent on thinking "that way lies madness".
I find the finite nature of my existence quite comforting actually. Open ended existence with various constraints on interest, attention and novelty, would be its own hell. We're not built for eternity. We like to think we are, but we can't even conceive of it, much less live it.
Read more carefully. Alot of atheists are actually Unity or Duality consciousness. The dismissal of soul is only part of it, the dismissal of POINT is the key portion. Alot of atheists are okay with other people, it is the ones that took it to the logical extension that are depressing.
I think our world is reflection of God's purpose based on the following assumptions. Before the universe, there was only the spiritual world of heaven where everything related to two Gods (both together inside a sphere). The two Gods created beautiful angels to enjoy their holiness, glory and power.
In the universe, Satan's prison, God created paradise on earth for his pleasure. Creatures were made to enjoy God, each in its own way communicating joy and adoration.
In paradise, physical creatures were in God's spiritual universe (heaven). Since the fall of paradise creatures have retained those traits and characteristics allowing them to exhibit joy and adulation in the presence of God. In short, humans and all other creatures are what remains of God's original plan for paradise. If all of God's creatures, excluding Satan, were in paradise, you would see the original purpose of God's plan.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Middle people. 
