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.
What about it? Cryptic doesn't really work on a forum...btw, I love Christian Science...
I need to visit there more often. Thanks for the reminder.
To help others that may have the book on a shelf...page 55.
Mystic has indicated that from what he has seen Jesus was the first to achieve full "resonance," though the Buddha came close and said that someone else would (reference to Maitreya). How each of us may grow into that resonance is a matter for our personal development.
Exactly, what I bolded...see, I say something different.
That being: there were, indeed, others 3-5000 years before Jesus achieved this resonance to
use Mystic's terms.
Rama and Krishna...not the sons of God ...but avatars here, being manifestations of Lord Vishnu Himself.
(Part of the trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva...A rose is a rose by any other name...)
Avatar is a manifestation of the Divine on earth.
Buddha, well, we don't know what he achieved. We can not say, close or spot-on ...but I will say, 'Wow', with great respect.
My take is different ...but this is Mystic's thread, with respect...I could start one if I wanted.
I just don't find much harm thinking Jesus was the first one...whatever.
But it does, then, promote the belief that the Doors to Heaven were closed before that ..I say...
'Nope, they weren't'..Just a story made up..
Changes the idea we have developed of God as a Game Player, which He is not: making us jump through hoops...there were never any hoops...never.
....ok I'll keep quiet. Just stories made up...
Exactly, what I bolded...see, I say something different.
That being: there were, indeed, others 3-5000 years before Jesus achieved this resonance to
use Mystic's terms.
Rama and Krishna...not the sons of God ...but avatars here, being manifestations of Lord Vishnu Himself.
(Part of the trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva...A rose is a rose by any other name...)
Avatar is a manifestation of the Divine on earth.
Buddha, well, we don't know what he achieved. We can not say, close or spot-on ...but I will say, 'Wow', with great respect.
My take is different ...but this is Mystic's thread, with respect...I could start one if I wanted.
I just don't find much harm thinking Jesus was the first one...whatever.
But it does, then, promote the belief that the Doors to Heaven were closed before that ..I say...
'Nope, they weren't'..Just a story made up..
Changes the idea we have developed of God as a Game Player, which He is not: making us jump through hoops...there were never any hoops...never.
....ok I'll keep quiet. Just stories made up...
We all have different perceptions of the same thing that we express in different ways because we have not all had the same experiences, culture, capabilities, etc
I had the experience of light, peace and being in the moment when I was quite young but I also have a mind that needs to understand how and why
Exactly, what I bolded...see, I say something different.
That being: there were, indeed, others 3-5000 years before Jesus achieved this resonance to
use Mystic's terms.
Rama and Krishna...not the sons of God ...but avatars here, being manifestations of Lord Vishnu Himself.
(Part of the trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva...A rose is a rose by any other name...)
Avatar is a manifestation of the Divine on earth.
Buddha, well, we don't know what he achieved. We can not say, close or spot-on ...but I will say, 'Wow', with great respect.
My take is different ...but this is Mystic's thread, with respect...I could start one if I wanted.
I just don't find much harm thinking Jesus was the first one...whatever.
But it does, then, promote the belief that the Doors to Heaven were closed before that ..I say...
'Nope, they weren't'..Just a story made up..
Changes the idea we have developed of God as a Game Player, which He is not: making us jump through hoops...there were never any hoops...never.
....ok I'll keep quiet. Just stories made up...
The door to Heaven was never closed. It is not a destination. Heaven is a state of mind and prior to Jesus no human achieved that state of mind. Prior avatars came close.
The door to Heaven was never closed. It is not a destination. Heaven is a state of mind and prior to Jesus no human achieved that state of mind. Prior avatars came close.
I beg to differ; I agree the door is never closed, however, I disagree that Heaven is only a "state of mind" and "not a destination." My Bible here says Heaven is a place too. Also, I refuse to identify and acknowledge my Jesus Christ as just another "avatar" who was better than the others. Christ is the "Son" of One God, my family, head of house-hold, brother, sister, father, mother, anyone who I love and is dearer than dear to me on a a very human level. Avatar is too cold a name to call our Dearest Jesus Christ and Comforter. Beloved One.
Last edited by glenninindy; 06-25-2019 at 12:19 AM..
The door to Heaven was never closed. It is not a destination.
Heaven is a state of mind and prior to Jesus no human achieved that state of mind. Prior avatars came close.
Thanks for getting back ...That's fine that you say that ...but...
how can you say this, Mystic? What I mean is...you could not possibly know.
I do agree Jesus is special...to the point that He and the Father are like one in heart and mind.
I will never lessen Jesus...and his 'position'.
I understand Heaven being a state of mind, of course...and when we cross over there are
many places we can go to 'hang out' in; even Jesus said in John 14,
"In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you.
I go to prepare a place for you."
Just because a heavenly place is in another dimension, doesn't mean it is not a place.
To say it isn't...would be like saying this place doesn't exist, it is a state of mind only
(I actually would agree to part of that, just not to the 'only'....)
It would be saying where my deceased loved ones are doesn't exist...that there is nothing unseen...
it's just all in our minds.
I've seen where my mom is...it was no 'state of mind'.
I understand frequencies, very much...we resonate in a certain vibration and so we dwell in that place.
Well, wait till you see...there really is a City on the Other Side....there ARE places, more real than here,
I might add...I've seen them. (Similar to NDEers)
These places and Heaven are actually real places and also a state of mind....ya don't hang out
in particular places unless your state of mind (the level of frequency you have reached) allows.
That's my input.
Miss H, you ask, "How can you say this?" That was the purpose of my question about how the others that you mentioned communicated their insights. Let's take "the Golden Rule" for instance: the NT iteration of "DO unto others what you would have them do unto you" is the only PROactive statement I have seen that takes into account the needs of the recipient of the concern. I will grant that thoughtless people will argue that a person would do to them what the person wants himself rather than what the recipient wants or needs, but they don't think it through: would you in the place of the recipient "HAVE" them do what they like, or what you as recipient want or need? It's a silly objection. The point is that the basis in concern for everyone in any situation is clearly communicated by Jesus no matter how the various religions built around Him obfuscate that concept.
Miss H, you ask, "How can you say this?"
That was the purpose of my question about how the others that you mentioned communicated their insights.
Hi, Lemme see if I understand...you had a ques about the others...
how Rama, 5100 bc and Krishna, 3200 bc, Buddha 500 bc communicated their insights?
Need to be sure.
Let's take "the Golden Rule" for instance: the NT iteration of "DO unto others what you would have them do unto you" is the only PROactive statement
I have seen that takes into account the needs of the recipient of the concern.
I will grant that thoughtless people will argue that a person would do to them what the person wants himself rather than what the recipient wants or needs, but they don't think it through:
*would you in the place of the recipient "HAVE" them do what they like, or what you as recipient want or need? It's a silly objection.
The point is that the basis in concern for everyone in any situation is clearly communicated by Jesus no matter how the various religions built around Him obfuscate that concept.
* It would be great if they were sensitive enough to do what I, as the recipient, would like...which is pretty much simple...kindness...manifesting in no judging, being gentle, being compassionate and patient...offering help?
Is that what you meant?
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.
