Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Reinventing the Sacred

"Life" is a game and it only gets as good as we are able to play it.
Blame and judgment would be your take on it not mine. I don't choose to make victims or reduce God to such a limitation.

By the way it is still all about perspectives. Some use constructive criticism to help elevate those who are stagnating in their own ignorance and too often it is mistaken as judgment and attack rather than love and compassion. But that is what happens when one is living in defense of life rather than really being a part of it. They are forever victims to their own worldly experience.

Some grow with challenges others back down and hide, or live in a narrow existence of boundaries that are created from fear and delusion of separateness from God and ones own creation.

You can always run, but you really can't hide, for wherever you go there you are.

But man is forever a victim to God when his ego is self absorbed in his identity of values and self worth. And when he values those around him according to his personal self created value system, the gravity of his fear and judgments prevent him from rising above the duality of the positive and negative or as Jesus called it, Hell.
For God there is only God. For the victim there is sometimes God, and always, that God is only a best guess.....

Thought I'd throw this in just to refresh your memory of how you have attracted the reflections of your own ideas into manifestation.

You posted this back in February of 2007, in the Philosophy of religions thread.
Gotta be careful what you ask for. God is always a perfect mirror for our thoughts and ideas about what we believe about ourselves.

I probably don't have a love for the fight that you do but I can be a good mirror for some peoples delusions of reality. I can be many things to many people without investing myself in the identity of those projections of self absorption and delusion.

Because you feel judged is not because I judge you. I can't be responsible for the choices you make in feeling something. Your not my puppet, or anyones for that matter. You feel what you do because of your relationship of pneuma and manifestation of pneuma.
In your case your spirit is foreign to your identification of God in everything. Because you don't find your spirit in everything, you make choices to see opposition in reality and choose to fight the very things that are closest to your character. They are called shadows of self and are often invisible to the ego, but recognizable to onlookers who are not invested in the delusions of that particular personality.

In your profile in Brainmeta you made an interesting comment. You said: This followed the comment about finding the best way to live.

I know for a fact that the ego does not believe in eternal life, because it believes in death. I think that if you were to live your life not in preparedness for a fight to the death, that you might open yourself up to greater perspectives than the individual limitations of being Lindsay King octogenarian, victim to bad health and evil doers in public discussions on the internet.

Posters: Can anyone explain to me what the above ambivalent, convoluted, personal and sermon-like comments have to do with the topic?

BTW, I have no objection to having a thread for personal and sermon-like comments, where anyone who chooses to do so can have a go.

(Maybe)You'll excuse me for being one of the posters even if its not one that you were hoping for.

The above is from the link in the very first post by TheFallibleFiend regarding Stuart Kauffman and the lecture he attended.
Your reply was:

And so this discussion is following your interests in the practical value of being aware of this "Creativity"--GØD?

Based on practical values (Either those created by a God that is separate from self or the Self in Union with God) these values must either be conjured by the ego or stand as a rule amongst all of creation without being deviated from.
Since rules can be broken it stands to reason that one would have to make the choice to decide for himself what the rules are and how he would maintain them.

This thread is all about Self created Gods, God the creator and if either is scientific in nature.

It has led up to the validation of your own beliefs and how they apply to your own life based on differing points of view and your ability to remain calm, unmoved, loving and without fear of being wrong.

And it is on topic. God is the subject in question and we are discussing whether it exists scientifically or not. In order to understand the science of God we must understand our participation in God, and our own power of choice in the image of God.
Each person creates their world based on cumulative knowledge, experience and opinion, projecting forth what they see as real. That is what makes the individual. If you rise above the individual and experience the consciousness that every individual is connected to. Then the individuals become as thoughts in one universal mind, alive and taking direction as any thought that is followed in the mind.

You are following your own thoughts about being victimized. You label the games, you attach yourself to the ideas and the feelings you have, and as such are living the manifestation of your beliefs.
Now if God is the universal mind he is not leaving his seat in omniscience or omnipresence to become absorbed in the thought of being Lindsay King, if he did all others would cease to exist and there would only be Lindsay King. Only the ego of Lindsay King is self absorbed in being Lindsay King and all that is Lindsay King feels like it is being abused with the labels that are offensive to his being.
As such being that Lindsay King is not the God that He says exists and has not the power to leave the labels and thoughts alone, then scientifically he is hammering these thoughts into reality and becoming Lindsay King the victim to circumstance rather than Lindsay King the creator.

By the way were still on topic in case you are still self absorbed in your feeling of self injustice and in your plea for someone to take your side in the delusion. Rather than coming to grips with your own creation you are become more and more disoriented from the very seeds you have planted and nurtured.

Fellow posters and readers:

For your information, I enjoy being with myself, in the NOW--even when we (my ego and me) dialogue and express our fears and doubts. In this current incarnation, I have lived with myself since 1930.

Furthermore, with the Golden Rule in mind, I enjoy being with others--those who enjoy being, and dialogging, with themselves.

How about you? Do you enjoy being with yourself and others?

In my humble opinion, all experiences thus lived, can be of value in the now, and in the eternal now. Nameste!

Tutor Turtle:
Your posts are verging on insults and personal attacks. This is not permitted in this forum. IF it continues I will be forced to edit your postings and you may be banned from the forum. Please amend your ways. It is one thing to dialogue, quite another to attack another poster personally.

You have been warned.

Amaranth

Sorry but I don't follow your accusation.
I think this discussion dives purely into the psychological aspects of personality and attachments to perspectives.
I would hope that a moderator would be more objective.

By the way has someone complained or did you just come up with this on your own? I'm genuinely curious and would like you to show me where I have been abusive so that I can see where I have to limit myself in expressing what I see and experience.

There was a complaint. On looking into your recent posts I detected an ongoing air of insolent superiority and disregard for others.

Amaranth

I have only the best interests of humanity in mind and I am no better than anyone else.

I would rather continue to pursue expansion of conscious awareness and potential than limit it by reinforcing fear and limitation.

But then not everyone thinks life could be any better than they themselves can imagine it.

So as a wise man once said: "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."

I won't engage the Reverend anymore, he doesn't really hear what is being said anyway.

ARTISTS. ARE THEY INVENTORS OF THE SACRED IN NATURE?
====================================================
Ah, yes! THE DOG METAPHOR.
Over the decades, I have had the good fortune to know dogs which were/are mostly friendly. This includes Dee (part pit bull). Until his peaceful death, caused by old age, he guarded my daughter(52),and my son-in-law--both artists.

They live on a floating house--actually it's a floating complex of buildings, including gardens. It covers nearly an acre of water. Near Tofino, BC, itt attracts many tourists who are interested in how some artists can invent new ways of living--and even thrive--in the wilderness.

When my daughter, Catherine, and her husband, Wayne, travel ashore, black bears and cougars can be dangerous. Not long before his death, Dee defended my daughter from a cougar attack. She was exploring for plants in the area. Thanks Dee!

Dogs close to home: My neighbours--a young couple with no children--have two dogs. One is a beautiful (lazy) Black Labrador Retriever; the other is a Golden (dynamically active) Labrador. When they need help, we dog sit for them. Fun!

BTW, it seems to me that dogs and pigs, in Jesus' day, did not have a good press.

This prompts me to talk about ambivalence. I wonder: Why, at another time, did he say that we ought to love our enemies? Hmmmmm!

THE PIG METAPHOR?
I have never met a pig I did not like, in more ways than one.
Born in a partially-barter economy, the King family survived by keeping pigs, goats and hens, cutting each others hair, boat building, gardening and mending things. For cash, we worked as miners. O yes! We also hunted and fished.

==================================
AS TO MY FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS
============================
I find that, providing we can agree to disagree, agreeably, I can get along with most of my fellow human beings. Most of the time we actually agree.

TT, as I said in my PM to you: Nameste!!! Another way of saying, "Let us agree, in agape, to disagree ..." And keep in mind: Without malice, I simply asked our good moderator to take a look. I hope you, and others are paying the same attention to my posts. If the moderator chides me, I always have the option to apologize, which, when necessary, I am always happy to do.

NAMESTE--I bow in respect to all of you.

BTW, if anyone wants me to post a copy of the post which I sent to the moderator, I will. It was not a bitter complaint; it was mostly in the form of a question: Take a look, moderator, please. What do YOU think of ...? I left the judgment-call to the moderator.