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.
I share some similar thoughts, though they diverge here and there. I absolutely agree there's no need of a savior. As I've mentioned a time or 10, I'm leaning towards a similar sort of cosmic consciousness = God scenario. But my sense is, it's not aware of itself as a singular entity. Because it isn't. It's an ever-expanding conglomeration of consciousnesses gathered from every sentient being in the universe.
As the universe expands, as more lifeforms come into being in various galaxies, the CC grows. Since I'm a semi-elderly fart, I'll use an old-fashioned analogy: The CC is like an old telephone switchboard and we can plug in or out. Few can do so at will. I have a hunch some do during sleep, meditation, or other altered states of conciousness. And I suspect/hope we all plug back in after death.
Perhaps to be re-routed elsewhere.
Speculating is fun.
It is. And part of the reason it probably resonates with me is because it does have elements I've heard previously. I recognized some similarity with things you'd said, and Mystic's experience of a collective, among other things, while it also still maintains the foundation of God as love (it makes sense to me that love would be ever-expanding and creating).
What is the difference between "atonement" and guiding us to the correct focus?
For myself, I'd say not much. But, the religion built up around Jesus has distorted it pretty well, don't you think?
Actually, I can see Mystic's view and my "new" view working together pretty well, now that I think about it. The expansion created through Jesus' life could be considered a "tuning fork", but not necessarily more than others who also had a more "enlightened" (for lack of a better word) perspective.
I typed up a post earlier this morning ........ and accidentally deleted the entire thing.
But my little one and I spent some time being super heroes and saving the world, so I think I'm sufficiently energized to attempt it again.
This ^^^^ (the idea that humanity was separated from God and needing fixing) is what I'm picking on.
My view of God for some time has been panentheistic in nature. Essentially, I saw God as the foundational singular consciousness from which all other consciousness have been birthed: God as the cosmic parent, in other words, and we as it's offspring. Our purpose, as I saw it, was to mature into "resonance" with our parent and somehow this physical experience was a necessary part of that. So, the need for a "savior" (someone to bridge the gap and heal the disharmony we create in our immaturity) wasn't out of the realm of possibility for me.
A still panentheistic, but new (for me -- it wouldn't surprise me if this is old news to many) concept, however, is this:
God is not a singular personality, but rather a collective of consciousness. Each singular consciousness within the collective can choose to become "physically focused" as it desires, and has done so numerous times. You and I, and all life forms from the least to the most complex, then, are each a singular consciousness within God, a part of which is physically focused in these bodies, while the larger part of us remains in the non-physical as God [this, to me, would be the Christian concept of "Christ within"].
The reason God wants/needs to be physically focused is that God, being eternal, is always expanding. No expansion would mean death. The physical experience is vital to that expansion because it offers a higher degree of contrast than the non-physical. As many of us who are physically focused at any given point in time are sort of explorers who came forward in order to use the contrast to propel us forward in our evolution and diversity.
Although the creative "energy" of God/love is always flowing toward us when we are physically focused, we are often out of alignment with it [pinched off]. This inhibits us from fully experiencing the expansion that we are creating in the here and now, which is what makes our physical experience varying degrees of enjoyment to suffering. But, we aren't fundamentally broken/in need of fixing. Once we leave these physical bodies behind, we will immediately be in harmony with who we really are again. At that point we will see and experience the collective expansion we are co-creating from the broader non-physical perspective.
Since the "Christ within" us IS God -- and that is who we really are in the non-physical -- this time spent physically focused obviously wouldn't be for the purpose of maturing in order to come into harmony with God. We have a felt sense of separation [and to the degree that we do not overcome that by coming into harmony, it's gonna suck as long as we are here] but it is an illusion created by the physical. Neither God as the collective, nor as our singular non-physical consciousness, is ever judging or condemning us/each other for how we live these physical lives. The focus on us in our physical manifestation is always one of love, appreciation, guidance, acceptance of where we are at, and awareness of what we are creating through our experience of contrast.
No real separation: therefore, no need for savior. So Jesus, if a literal historical figure, was simply a physically focused member of the collective, who in some way had a better grasp of his true nature and purpose (in that lifetime, at least) and attempted to share that knowledge with others.
Okay, squash away.
yup. no squash here either. I don't agree with some of it. Its fits fine with the insightful nature of what we have seen in the past. No need to think this can possibly change that. you have yet squash people because you just disagree with "boogeyman religion" or give people a pass that are on your side because they wear the same color tee shirt..
I typed up a post earlier this morning ........ and accidentally deleted the entire thing.
But my little one and I spent some time being super heroes and saving the world, so I think I'm sufficiently energized to attempt it again.
This ^^^^ (the idea that humanity was separated from God and needing fixing) is what I'm picking on.
My view of God for some time has been panentheistic in nature. Essentially, I saw God as the foundational singular consciousness from which all other consciousness have been birthed: God as the cosmic parent, in other words, and we as it's offspring. Our purpose, as I saw it, was to mature into "resonance" with our parent and somehow this physical experience was a necessary part of that. So, the need for a "savior" (someone to bridge the gap and heal the disharmony we create in our immaturity) wasn't out of the realm of possibility for me.
A still panentheistic, but new (for me -- it wouldn't surprise me if this is old news to many) concept, however, is this:
God is not a singular personality, but rather a collective of consciousness. Each singular consciousness within the collective can choose to become "physically focused" as it desires, and has done so numerous times. You and I, and all life forms from the least to the most complex, then, are each a singular consciousness within God, a part of which is physically focused in these bodies, while the larger part of us remains in the non-physical as God [this, to me, would be the Christian concept of "Christ within"].
The reason God wants/needs to be physically focused is that God, being eternal, is always expanding. No expansion would mean death. The physical experience is vital to that expansion because it offers a higher degree of contrast than the non-physical. As many of us who are physically focused at any given point in time are sort of explorers who came forward in order to use the contrast to propel us forward in our evolution and diversity.
Although the creative "energy" of God/love is always flowing toward us when we are physically focused, we are often out of alignment with it [pinched off]. This inhibits us from fully experiencing the expansion that we are creating in the here and now, which is what makes our physical experience varying degrees of enjoyment to suffering. But, we aren't fundamentally broken/in need of fixing. Once we leave these physical bodies behind, we will immediately be in harmony with who we really are again. At that point we will see and experience the collective expansion we are co-creating from the broader non-physical perspective.
Since the "Christ within" us IS God -- and that is who we really are in the non-physical -- this time spent physically focused obviously wouldn't be for the purpose of maturing in order to come into harmony with God. We have a felt sense of separation [and to the degree that we do not overcome that by coming into harmony, it's gonna suck as long as we are here] but it is an illusion created by the physical. Neither God as the collective, nor as our singular non-physical consciousness, is ever judging or condemning us/each other for how we live these physical lives. The focus on us in our physical manifestation is always one of love, appreciation, guidance, acceptance of where we are at, and awareness of what we are creating through our experience of contrast.
No real separation: therefore, no need for savior. So Jesus, if a literal historical figure, was simply a physically focused member of the collective, who in some way had a better grasp of his true nature and purpose (in that lifetime, at least) and attempted to share that knowledge with others.
Okay, squash away.
No squash from me either. I agree with your view and have an answer to your objection. I said we were deficient, but not because we were made that way or were inherently deficient. Evolution is the operative mechanism for all life and it poses two issues in the spiritual arena - evolving the spiritual capacity from one generation to the next while maturing the use of the evolved capacity during each generation. As you can imagine that is extremely problematic in the spiritual arena especially early on when the evolved capacity is minimal. That is what I was referring to about our deficiency. To use my orchestra analogy, we had to evolve the ability to play our various instruments and we had to learn to play on key and in the proper Key. Jesus said that the fields were ripe for the harvest, meaning that by His generation we had evolved the skills to play our spiritual instruments using self-control but we had to learn to play them in the key of love. As you insightfully noted, Jesus was our tuning fork. Prior to Jesus, our ancestors had played their spiritual soul songs with minimal skill and in the wrong key. Humans were essentially not allowed to sit in the Cosmic orchestra. Jesus brought our collective human spiritual orchestra on key and our imperfections were subsumed under His perfect resonance and made harmonic.
No squash from me either. I agree with your view and have an answer to your objection. I said we were deficient, but not because we were made that way or were inherently deficient. Evolution is the operative mechanism for all life and it poses two issues in the spiritual arena - evolving the spiritual capacity from one generation to the next while maturing the use of the evolved capacity during each generation. As you can imagine that is extremely problematic in the spiritual arena especially early on when the evolved capacity is minimal. That is what I was referring to about our deficiency. To use my orchestra analogy, we had to evolve the ability to play our various instruments and we had to learn to play on key and in the proper Key. Jesus said that the fields were ripe for the harvest, meaning that by His generation we had evolved the skills to play our spiritual instruments using self-control but we had to learn to play them in the key of love. As you insightfully noted, Jesus was our tuning fork. Prior to Jesus, our ancestors had played their spiritual soul songs with minimal skill and in the wrong key. Humans were essentially not allowed to sit in the Cosmic orchestra. Jesus brought our collective human spiritual orchestra on key and our imperfections were subsumed under His perfect resonance and made harmonic.
I'm not seeing in that way (the bolded), I don't think. We are and always have been "playing in the orchestra". Collectively, humans evolved to the point where a Jesus (and a Siddhartha and a Confucius and a Lao-Tzu and a Socrates and a Rumi and a Ghandi and a St. Francis and a Martin Luther King Jr. and on and on) were able to become who they were. So, it wasn't one person who "saved" us, but rather it is that these people embodied, to some degree, the culmination of the collective expansion to that point, and who were then able to push the expansion further.
I was actually expecting a lot more pushback on the idea that there is not one singular consciousness that is the basis of all the rest (no Parent/offspring). It is that idea that intrigues me the most because, in my mind, it answers the problem of (as you call it) "red in tooth and claw" -- something that I have struggled with, for sure. If all creatures collectively, as non-physical consciousness, are God, and choose to partake of this physical existence and it's "contrast", then there's no need to be all angst-y about the question of why God allowed death and suffering. To me, it is a very empowering thought that this was not chosen or designed for us by some outside entity.
Ps. To the person who anonymously informed me that they are proud of me when I think for myself and don't act as Mystic's protégé, you may want to examine this fixation you have with Mystic and why you are projecting that onto me.
Well, Pleroo, that is as good an explanation of "spirit" as I have seen. Whether it was in place from the beginning as a desideratum to be gained through experience (evolution?) may be argued.
Well, Pleroo, that is as good an explanation of "spirit" as I have seen. Whether it was in place from the beginning as a desideratum to be gained through experience (evolution?) may be argued.
Argue it, if you please, because I'm not exactly sure I know what you mean. What is "it" that may or may not have been in place from the beginning? The collective? I think I see what you mean: It may have started as a singular consciousness and, as Trout says, perhaps more and more of us come into being, but still, we CHOOSE to take part in the physical experience. Is that what you're saying?
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.
