Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 44 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
10/23/19 12:22 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 13
Page 12 of 13 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 >
Topic Options
#28080 - 10/18/08 05:46 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Rev- that is how I myself wish to be remembered. Others may choose differently. And here are some further answers---

a) If I were a 'good' hermit then I would have chosen to isiolate myself from humanity and so would be OK with noone remembering me, in fact I would be happy (in my hermity way).

b) Criminals have people who love them- they may not LIKE the crim much, because I think one can choose whether to like someone or not, but love--- well that's a different story.

c) I have no idea. Odd isn't it? Probably ego of a different sort to the one TT talks about... I am very important to me!

TT- I did remark that they were metaphorical footprints. I like that poem. In spite of the mention of the soul it is a very hopeful point of view, and one I find agreeable. I merely suggest that Longfellow extends the possibility of leaving footprints to us all, not as a mentor but merely by being here, alive, and being entirely human.

Top
.
#28081 - 10/18/08 07:35 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis

TT- I did remark that they were metaphorical footprints. I like that poem. In spite of the mention of the soul it is a very hopeful point of view, and one I find agreeable. I merely suggest that Longfellow extends the possibility of leaving footprints to us all, not as a mentor but merely by being here, alive, and being entirely human.

Being entirely human is subjective isn't it, when it comes to the personal. In the bigger scheme of things as we learn to discover the potential of Humanity those that are seen as adepts or profits abnormal to the common way of thinking may one day be recognized as closer to being the norm.
Often we narrow humanity to examples that fit our ability to comprehend, and those foot steps that fit into that mold. All others seem to be innocuous and transparent.

Man has a habit of building pedestals that fail to hold an icon for more than a few generations. Perhaps with evolution there will be some improvement.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28082 - 10/18/08 02:04 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Ellis, Coberst, in BrainMeta, speaks of the value of the ego as he quotes another writer, Becker
Quote:
The ego makes morality possible. I guess that the ego makes both good and evil possible and it is within the reach of most of us to make the better choice. ... It is the device that other animal do not have and thus they instinctively respond immediately to the world.
I responded: Makes sense to me, Coberst. Thanks!

I warned Coberst to be prepared for the one who thinks he is God's press agent and spinner (Jo &/or TT), to declare us and Ernest Becker to be all wrong.

BTW, Jo &/or TT: Is this the ego-like role you seem to enjoy playing? I have the awareness that my ego is experiencing Jo/TT's comments as coming from so kind of sociopath, who thinks that his opinion in the only Tolle-like and god-like opinion.

If I am wrong, I am always open to be corrected.

I told Coberst that I agreed with him when he seemed to be saying that animals have no idea of what it means to morally good, or evil. They seem to have no concept of what it means "to sin"...they just react, naturally, to their experiences. ... this same kind of behaviour is also true for a some so-called human beings--those who who we call psychopaths and/or sociopaths (animal-like and inhumane beings).

ECKHART TOLLE--GOD-LIKE AND INFALLIBLE? I DO NOT THINK SO. NOR DOES HE EVER CLAIM IT. NOR SHOULD ANYONE MAKE THIS CLAIM
Furthermore, nowhere do I read that ET tells us that he alone has a hot line to any kind of a god and, therefore, that he alone is infallible, or even original. I respect him for his skill as a communicator. Just listening to him and watching him communicate is the best lesson as to HOW to be aware of the NOW.

Keep in mind that, it was two thousand years ago, that the apostle Paul told the readers of his letters to, "pray--that is, connect with, or tune into, all wisdom and power--without ceasing." The semitic languages have no future tense. They affirmed the divine presence in the NOW, not in some distant place in the future. When Jesus "prayed" "Thy kingdom come..." He affirmed it as in the process of coming, NOW--a message I preached often in sermons on the topic.

I respect ET, NOT for his infallibility, or originality, but for reminding us of how the original message of Jesus and others has been so distorted, by all organized religions, in its transmission.


Edited by Revlgking (10/18/08 02:08 PM)

Top
#28084 - 10/18/08 04:56 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Quote:
The ego makes morality possible. I guess that the ego makes both good and evil possible and it is within the reach of most of us to make the better choice. ... It is the device that other animal do not have and thus they instinctively respond immediately to the world.

This is true in the sense that the ego is the mechanism that translates desire or thought into experience. When the ego is without the impressions of belief, it is the servant to consciousness and it works very well.
When the ego becomes filled with ideas of belief, translation of energy becomes convoluted as it passes through or is filtered through those beliefs and the picture/experience isn't clear.
The picture becomes personal and only the one personality will cling to that one picture.
With the separation of personality no two will experience anything exactly the same way.

So interpretation of the original message of Jesus without a cleared ego, is subjective from the point of view of the ego, as belief projects limited ideas of who or what Jesus was and any messages he had to give.
This would be the reason Jesus spoke in parables, and also why there are so many incorrect translations of scripture. The ego steps into a conversation and approaches words without any innocence or the ability to hear or see clearly.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

If I am wrong, I am always open to be corrected.
The obvious reality of that statement is that if you are unable to recognize reality beyond right and wrong, then change will be subject to the belief that would replace the current belief so that you would look in a different direction.
Until the ego is removed as the controller of vision and experience all interpretations of reality are made from the idea that what you see outside of you is not the reflection of you the personality, but someone or something else.
The NOW is not experienced, only reflections of egoic beliefs in reality.

Willingness then would be subject to any change that fits in the box of ideals. If the change requires stepping out of that box without any experience of what is outside of the box, (God in this case) nothing could be recognized when the mind is so attuned only to what the box has conditioned the eyes to see and the ears to hear.

This was the problem with the Pharisees and Jesus. The Pharisees could only see the man and to them the man was a sociopath and or a megalomaniac.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28085 - 10/18/08 10:09 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
My interest is in talking to Ellis about her opinion of Tolle's work.

Top
#28086 - 10/18/08 10:54 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
My interest is in talking to Ellis about her opinion of Tolle's work.
My interest was in you labeling me a sociopath in your conversation.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
BTW, Jo &/or TT: Is this the ego-like role you seem to enjoy playing? I have the awareness that my ego is experiencing Jo/TT's comments as coming from so kind of sociopath, who thinks that his opinion in the only Tolle-like and god-like opinion.
I figured if you didn't want to include me you would have either kept the conversation in a less public media or not have made the statement without my being able to engage myself in your public declaration. wink
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28087 - 10/19/08 12:52 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
TT- Remember that the most efficient way to learn is from the specific to the universal. And what is more specific than self/ego? It is risky making assumptions about others' reactions when there is not a solid, well-understood personal starting point and a mind open to new ideas. It is the latter that the Pharisees lacked I think!

Rev. I won't comment on Tolle. I did go the the site you recommended however, and read some of it.

Top
#28088 - 10/19/08 12:58 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis
TT- Remember that the most efficient way to learn is from the specific to the universal. And what is more specific than self/ego? It is risky making assumptions about others' reactions when there is not a solid, well-understood personal starting point and a mind open to new ideas. It is the latter that the Pharisees lacked I think!

Rev. I won't comment on Tolle. I did go the the site you recommended however, and read some of it.

The ego is specific to belief not universal objectivity. What you learn from a shallow belief system limits you to the objectivity of being open to new ideas that conflict with belief systems.
If you stand in the universal it is much easier to recognize limits or lines in the sand. Especially if you have come from such specific idealization and have learned to rise above it.

Also it helps to be familiar with the universal.. wink
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28089 - 10/19/08 04:57 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Could not objectivity be seen as the antithesis of belief, as the former is based on reality and the latter on faith? Or are you claiming objectivity can exist in belief?

Top
#28091 - 10/19/08 06:18 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis
Could not objectivity be seen as the antithesis of belief, as the former is based on reality and the latter on faith? Or are you claiming objectivity can exist in belief?
What is reality of it is fragmented in belief and experienced differently from personality to personality.
Why not look at objectivity as a refinement of belief. Without trying to be democratic but by immersing yourself in that which underlies beliefs of personality, then it is possible to experience the variance of perceptions in reality without the attachment to it. It would be the difference in seeing the world from inside the wilderness of the forest and from the top of the mountain with knowledge of both.

It wasn't that long ago we believed collectively that it was impossible to fly. Until someone decided to push beyond that belief and build a flying machine the world accepted reality as being without man made flight. Similarly the world does not accept those things which are not experienced yet for thousands of years man has had living within society, people who experience life beyond the limitation of ego and death of the body.
What will it take, the 100th monkey of evolution of man and his ability to receive the experience or is it real now?
Man thinks nothing exists until it is experienced or made available to experience, but isn't discovery really the awakening to that which is already possible but not yet allowed to be real until man has reached a level that makes him capable of using such a thing constructively in his life?
We now have the ability to blow ourselves up several times over and man still doesn't yet have the experience to control himself without losing his objectivity to emotional reaction and create wars, cage people who have been nurtured by a society that cares not for its starving and homeless to become desperate enough to try and take what they need from those who have. We as a society limited by ego still hide our heads in the sand to avoid the very things we could eradicate if we were to apply ourselves to something other than our personal ideals and the greed of self satisfaction.
If we really knew how intimately connected we are to each other we wouldn't ignore what we are in those we choose to judge as criminal, or not worth as much effort as we make to please ourselves by focusing on what we think we can't live without, in our retirement funds, our televisions and RV's, and the labels we give ourselves to make ourselves feel good about who we are.
If we were truly objective and without fear of losing what we have in order to take the time to change ourselves, we could change the world.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28094 - 10/20/08 12:30 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
I would have to suggest that in fact belief has to be subjective. I also feel that assuming a lack of belief would not allow for the experience of interconnectedness (!) is an unfounded conclusion. It is also unfounded to assume that everyone else has to experience everything for themselves in order for them to believe. I pointed out somewhere else on this site that I have never seen the Olympic Stadium in Beijing- but I believe it is there. There are millions of experiences and events that I have not experienced and many more that I may, but I do not deny their existence merely because I have not experienced them.

It is however impossible to be objective about such things as belief, without some proof of its reality. They are subjective, but to many people none the less real for that. TT- your universal perception is blindingly apparent to you, but it remains opaque to others who do not share your subjective beliefs. I feel it is possible to confuse belief with opinion when others are denied the possibility of their own ideas.


Edited by Ellis (10/20/08 12:31 AM)
Edit Reason: a bad spelling mistake

Top
#28097 - 10/20/08 03:24 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis
I would have to suggest that in fact belief has to be subjective. I also feel that assuming a lack of belief would not allow for the experience of interconnectedness (!) is an unfounded conclusion. It is also unfounded to assume that everyone else has to experience everything for themselves in order for them to believe. I pointed out somewhere else on this site that I have never seen the Olympic Stadium in Beijing- but I believe it is there. There are millions of experiences and events that I have not experienced and many more that I may, but I do not deny their existence merely because I have not experienced them.

It is however impossible to be objective about such things as belief, without some proof of its reality. They are subjective, but to many people none the less real for that. TT- your universal perception is blindingly apparent to you, but it remains opaque to others who do not share your subjective beliefs. I feel it is possible to confuse belief with opinion when others are denied the possibility of their own ideas.

In the conversations that ensue with subjective belief systems it often seems necessary to come to agreement, but is it possible to understand a belief without studying it from different angles before one can come to agreement? Objectivity comes from looking at something from more than just belief.
What you seem to suggest in this conversation is that the absolute which I refer to, is a belief rather than something other, and so I understand your approach to separate what you call reality with what I call reality.
Obviously you believe the Olympic Stadium exists regardless of belief and regardless of whether you experience it or not.
However your subjective/objective (controlled) point of view is one that is insisting that more (people or mainstream media) substantiate the underlying principle of belief and manifest reality, be visible to the current state of psychic awareness to establish itself in accountability before one can accept it as more than just a belief of mine. This is kind of the approach of scientific repeatability.
This is understandable too. This is the way of the ego. To identify with what it can experience not only in ones self but in others.
The Olympic stadium has been subject to documentation and celebration on the written and broadcast media of radio and Television. To everyone it exists at the physical level of that kind of thinking.

The Absolute has not quite made its appearance into popularity because it cannot be contained in any measure of the media or social mores, it exists regardless of belief or subjective idealism and rationale. In order to approach it you have to withdraw the mind and senses from the outer world and go inside of it. One has to begin to explore the inside of themselves

Once one begins to dedicate their attention to it, there is all kinds of history to document not only the human experience of it, but the relationship of it to all beliefs and manifestations.
The history of the absolute in its relationship to conscious self awareness which is written in Vedic texts dating back some 2500 years and maintained as an oral tradition even before documentation, is the very foundation of Western or Christian spiritual teachings in being "Born Again" and teachings of Eastern spirituality and "Enlightenment."

Few have made the transition within each generation into the experience of the absolute due to the collective acceptance in relative belief that something only exists if there is proof and everyone can experience it at the same time. Or to put it simply because of the block in psychic awareness created by the EGO.
True objectivity removes the fear/difficulty from being open so that the experience can become manifest. Ego takes a position that something is difficult. This makes everything subjective rather than objective, so, if it (God/The Absolute) does not make itself apparent to prevent the ego from doubt and its relative thought streams that are relaying information back and forth from memory to the present experience of belief in reality, Ego will not budge from its current programing nor can it consider anything other than the current program.

Tho you would like the absolute to present itself so that it is not so difficult for you to give up your present beliefs to be open to something else, the universe does not, nor will it wait for you, it will continue as it always does without you and your beliefs to be cognizant of all that it is.

It patiently awaits the day when you make the choice to open yourself to more by dropping the disbelief or difficulty in acceptance so that your eyes open to see what has always been there. It is not the fault of God that you do not see or experience God, it is by the habit of your choice that you ignore God in disbelief.

Times are now supporting more and more awakening to the absolute through many teachings that have been resurrected from the past when they were dropped because they were believed to be superstition only. This is because there are more and more people in this generation than there has been in thousands of years who are awakening to the absolute. We are on the threshold of a new awakening in humanity and the refinement of religion that is the clearing of superstition and false perceptions of the ego from reality, to expose the underlying truth.

Whether you accept it or not will not change it anymore than the belief that the world was flat changed the fact that the earth as a sphere spins on its own axis in orbit around the Sun.

I'm sure when Columbus threatened to sail across the ocean without falling off the edge it made those who insisted on maintaining that the world was flat feel like they could not have their beliefs because he was thinking to go regardless of their beliefs. But truth eventually outlives such demands that false beliefs be left intact and egos not be threatened.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28098 - 10/20/08 05:24 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
TT- your universal perception is blindingly apparent to you, but it remains opaque to others who do not share your subjective beliefs. I feel it is possible to confuse belief with opinion when others are denied the possibility of their own ideas.
Amen, Ellis!!!
BTW, way back, TT boasted that he was spiritually mature enough and in the NOW enough so as to be above being hurt by any admonishments--the kind he majors in handing out to others.

Now he whines:
Quote:
My interest was in you labeling me a sociopath in your conversation.
OK, I will gladly remove the label and apologize on condition that, without taking on the air of spiritual superiority, he starts being more transparent and less opaque and respects that we all have the right to our own subjective opinions. I am sure that Tolle makes no claim that he is spiritually superior to others.

Another whine
Quote:
I figured if you didn't want to include me ...

Wrong. My opinion is not personal. I do not know you well enough to be personal. It has to do with having to read so much content and accept your subjective beliefs as if they are God's one and only truth.

If you wish to continue to write as you do now, ego and all, and in complete AWARENESS: I will act on what I wrote in my PM.


Edited by Revlgking (10/20/08 06:06 AM)

Top
#28102 - 10/20/08 05:53 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Quote:
TT- your universal perception is blindingly apparent to you, but it remains opaque to others who do not share your subjective beliefs. I feel it is possible to confuse belief with opinion when others are denied the possibility of their own ideas.
Amen, Ellis!!!
BTW, way back, TT boasted that he was spiritually mature enough and in the NOW enough so as to be above being hurt by any admonishments--the kind he majors in handing out to others.


Now he whines:
Quote:
My interest was in you labeling me a sociopath in your conversation.
OK, I will gladly remove the label and apologize on condition that, without taking on the air of spiritual superiority, he starts being more transparent and less opaque and respects that we all have the right to our own subjective opinions. I am sure that Tolle makes no claim that he is spiritually superior to others.

Thanks for making the attempt to be gracious, but removing the label obviously doesn't change your air of contempt or remove the anxiety. That is what I was referring to as the ego and what sways the intellect from objectivity.
Rather than looking at it as a Whine, I like to look at it as a conscious observation of the obvious.

Obviously I can't take your opinion away from you but if you are so easily threatened by me, and my language, I would have to admonish the rather obvious reality that your opinion is shrouded in fear and conjecture rather than anything substantial if it is so easily threatened by what someone else says about it.

Just because you don't like what I say does not make me the antichrist nor does it diminish your beliefs if you don't have any respect for them to believe they stand on their own regardless of my statements.

You seem to want to make me in charge of your feelings and reactions rather than owning your feelings and reactions yourself.
Do you really believe I can write something here on this forum and by doing so take away your pride and beliefs?
That kind of thinking was an example of the superstition that was empirical during the Puritan Witch hunts.

If it makes you feel any better you can keep the label so you can feel justified in your feelings and accusations. It doesn't matter to me. If it helps you to move thru this and expand beyond this limited idea you cling to more power to you.

C'est la vie
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Another whine
Quote:
I figured if you didn't want to include me ...

Wrong. My opinion is not personal. I do not know you well enough to be personal. It has to do with having to read so much content and accept your subjective beliefs as if they are God's one and only truth.

If you wish to continue to write as you do now, ego and all, and in complete AWARENESS: I will act on what I wrote in my PM.

Well then using your analogy, (without getting into the full context or meaning of the message and making any more assumptions.....) If you believe I do not know you personally then why take anything I say as personal, or as "God's one and only Truth?" Truth Absolute underlies all meanings and messages. Interpretation of any message is going to be subjective and objective based on levels of awareness and maturity of consciousness. It is often necessary to relay information in terms of its entirety rather than to pick words and phrases from a passage to bolster individual belief as a minister does when reading from a bible, picking out phrases and making assumptions to their meaning and intent.

Obviously if you want to run to the moderator because of the above reasons to "tell on me", what other reason would there be other than to express a personal reason for moderation and judgment? Unless you want to present what you say as the voice of God or all posters of the forum. Are you claiming to be the voice of the public in defense of the public for the crimes of TT against public morals and ideals?

C'mon Rev.... You're making all of this extremely personal.
Perhaps you should take a.... "time out"... wink
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28104 - 10/21/08 03:07 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
AT CARTHAGE - DISCOURSE ON TIME AND SPACE


Most of the time en route to Carthage Jesus talked with his fellow travelers about things social, political, and commercial; hardly a word was said about religion. For the first time Gonod and Ganid discovered that Jesus was a good storyteller, and they kept him busy telling tales about his early life in Galilee. They also learned that he was reared in Galilee and not in either Jerusalem or Damascus.
When Ganid inquired what one could do to make friends, having noticed that the majority of persons whom they chanced to meet were attracted to Jesus, his teacher said: "Become interested in your fellows; learn how to love them and watch for the opportunity to do something for them which you are sure they want done," and then he quoted the olden Jewish proverb; "A man who would have friends must show himself friendly."
At Carthage Jesus had a long and memorable talk with a Mithraic priest about immortality, about time and eternity. This Persian had been educated at Alexandria, and he really desired to learn from Jesus. Put into the words of today, in substance Jesus said in answer to his many questions:
Time is the stream of flowing temporal events perceived by creature consciousness. Time is a name given to the succession-arrangement whereby events are recognized and segregated. The universe of space is a time-related phenomenon as it is viewed from any interior position outside of the fixed abode of Paradise. The motion of time is only revealed in relation to something which does not move in space as a time phenomenon. In the universe of universes Paradise and its Deities transcend both time and space. On the inhabited worlds, human personality (indwelt and oriented by the Paradise Father's spirit) is the only physically related reality which can transcend the material sequence of temporal events.
Animals do not sense time as does man, and even to man, because of his sectional and circumscribed view, time appears as a succession of events; but as man ascends, as he progresses inward, the enlarging view of this event procession is such that it is discerned more and more in its wholeness. That which formerly appeared as a succession of events then will be viewed as a whole and perfectly related cycle; in this way will circular simultaneity increasingly displace the onetime consciousness of the linear sequence of events.
There are seven different conceptions of space as it is conditioned by time. Space is measured by time, not time by space. The confusion of the scientist grows out of failure to recognize the reality of space. Space is not merely an intellectual concept of the variation in relatedness of universe objects. Space is not empty, and the only thing man knows which can even partially transcend space is mind. Mind can function independently of the concept of the space-relatedness of material objects. Space is relatively and comparatively finite to all beings of creature status. The nearer consciousness approaches the awareness of seven cosmic dimensions, the more does the concept of potential space approach ultimacy. But the space potential is truly ultimate only on the absolute level.
It must be apparent that universal reality has an expanding and always relative meaning on the ascending and perfecting levels of the cosmos. Ultimately, surviving mortals achieve identity in a seven-dimensional universe.
The time-space concept of a mind of material origin is destined to undergo successive enlargements as the conscious and conceiving personality ascends the levels of the universes. When man attains the mind intervening between the material and the spiritual planes of existence, his ideas of time-space will be enormously expanded both as to quality of perception and quantity of experience. The enlarging cosmic conceptions of an advancing spirit personality are due to augmentations of both depth of insight and scope of consciousness. And as personality passes on, upward and inward, to the transcendental levels of Deity-likeness, the time-space concept will increasingly approximate the timeless and spaceless concepts of the Absolutes. Relatively, and in accordance with transcendental attainment, these concepts of the absolute level are to be envisioned by the children of ultimate destiny.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28105 - 10/21/08 04:11 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
HEALTHY RELIGION INCLUDES INFORMATION ABOUT DIET--HEALTHY FOODS FOR THE BODY AND MIND AS WELL AS THE SPIRIT.
============================================
IT IS ABOUT BEING HEALTHY IN BODY, MIND AND SPIRIT

One third of the FAMILY-LIFE-FOUNDATION sponsored Pneumatology Lecture Series, which I gave--and still do, when asked--all through my ministry, had to do with HOLISTIC HEALTH, including diet. Trained nutritionists and doctors interested in diet gave many of the lectures.
================================================================
CTV (Canada) NEWS, just this evening, headlined the following news about what we eat and how it affects our health. Widely respected anchor, Lloyd Robertson said:

NEW RESEARCH HAS UNCOVERED THE FACT THAT THE TYPICAL WESTERN DIET--RED MEATS, STEAKS, BACON, FRIES AND THE LIKE--INCREASES THE INCIDENCE OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES, INCLUDING HEART ATTACKS, BY 35%. This information comes as the result of a large and science-based study of eating habits of people in many parts of the world, not just in one area.
===============================
Then I checked my e-mail. A friend, who like me, has had a life-long interest in holistic health sent me the following about healthy foods:
http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/11d1d0a8b509a6b9
Was this a coincidence? Or was it spiritually-guided synchronicity?

GOD--Goodness, Order and Design--really seems to be in an through all things, including our best foods.


Edited by Revlgking (10/21/08 04:53 AM)

Top
#28108 - 10/21/08 06:25 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Life Begins in Innocence.

We come into life innocently. We as children live completely in the present moment. We don't worry about tomorrow; we don't regret yesterday. There are no self-defeating beliefs and judgments about life.
If I were to diagram a baby's mind, I could simply draw an empty circle. This is a mind in a state of infinite potential, but not yet actualized. Then I could draw an infinity symbol within the circle, The baby's mind is still in touch with the Infinite, the Unbounded. This is what allows a baby to be completely in the present moment. Because the baby does not attempt to live in the past or the future, the power of the baby's mind is awesome. Consider how quickly the infant masters a complex language.
Adults generally can't learn that easily. And why? Because adults no longer live in the present moment. The adult's mind is caught by self-defeating beliefs and judgments. Where did they come from? One source is our parents. As infants, we only desired love. But perhaps our parents weren't completely ideal and couldn't always give us as much love as we wanted. Perhaps our father came home after a hard day and shouted at us for leaving our toy car in the driveway. Or maybe he shouted at our mother about his dinner and she just didn't have enough energy left to be completely loving to us. What happens? We develop a little program inside that says, "I'm not worthy of love." (Now I could Draw another circle on the board, inside the other one and it would represent a conditioned program of belief) This continues to operate in us as adults on a very deep, quiet level: the result is that when we grow up, we may have a hard time having an ideal relationship. We keep shooting ourselves in the foot, feeling we are unworthy of love. So this is one kind of stress that we have all picked up: stress from our parents.
Even if the parents were absolutely perfect, perhaps the brothers and sisters weren't exactly overjoyed to have a new baby in the house, competing for the parents' attention; this created another program of unworthiness. (Now I'll draw another circle within the circle to represent another internal subconscious program) A friend once told me, "I remember going through our family photo album, counting the pictures of my brother and of me. He, being the elder, had more! Didn't they love me as much? I also remember him sneaking into my bedroom when I was still in my crib and pinching me very hard. Didn't he love me? Of course he did, but he was jealous; I was much too young to appreciate that."
Or even if family life was absolutely ideal, one day we go off to school. It is all based on competition. We learn to compete, not to create. We learn that we don't do as well in math as Bobbie, so we stop doing math. We draw something we think is wonderful and we're told, "Ewww, how ugly." Part of us believes what we're told, that we can't draw; almost all of us stop drawing by the age of six. What if Picasso had been told, "That doesn't look like anything!" and what if he had believed it? Or Monet? Or Dali? The point is that these stresses picked up so innocently by our experiences are freezing our lives into definitions that seem beyond our conscious control.
Many of these internal programs come from our society itself. There is such a thing as the hypnosis of our cultural conditioning: we're all a part of the collective consciousness of our society. (Now I'll draw more circles, representing these underlying programs of thought and belief adding to the thoughts and beliefs that are between the cognitive outer experience of the outer circle or the mind, and the infinite buried under the thoughts) Some of our society's beliefs are useful to us and some are not. Most of us don't need to know how to find water in the desert; so the knowledge given us by our society doesn't often teach us this. Instead, we're taught how to pay water bills on time. But if we were born in the Sahara, our society's knowledge would be very different, ideally suited to our environment. A nomad from the Sahara would not survive well on the Interstate; he'd probably get run over very quickly; we wouldn't survive long in the Sahara.

Self-Destructive Habits Cripple Effectiveness, Enjoyment and Health.

The problem here is that some of the beliefs we've adopted are useful, some of the habits and internal programs serve us, but many do not. It's useful to remember how to drive our car without having to re-read the owner's manual every time we sit behind the wheel. It's useful to remember which house we live in without having to ring all our neighbors' doorbells and ask them, "Hello, do I live here?" It's useful to recognize your wife or husband when you get home. But so many of these internal programs are not serving us in any useful way. So many of them are damaging.

Have you ever tried to break a habit and failed? Most of the habits we don't like are operating at a level just slightly beneath our conscious awareness. It is very, very difficult to break any habit through effort. Ask any psychoanalyst, you will be told that to root out the source of any destructive behavior is quite complicated and takes a very long time -- and costs a very large amount of money!
Most of us have no problem desiring good things: ideal relationships, ideal jobs, ideal health, and a happy, fulfilling life. But the problem comes when we undermine or defeat these desires by these pernicious and quiet internal programs that say, "You don't deserve that!" or "Get real, you can't have that!" or "Come on, be serious, you're not good enough for him!" So many times, if you're quiet enough to notice these little voices, they sound exactly like your mother or your father or maybe a teacher you once had. These people could all be long dead, but they live on in you: criticizing, condemning, and causing you to fail even before you begin.
When the mind works against itself like this, your ability to succeed in any area is greatly diminished, as is your ability to be happy or even healthy! How much of disease is psychosomatic in origin? Some doctors say almost all of it. The mind is literally out of control in the average adult person. What is left of the baby's innocent, silent mind? Have you heard from psychologists a figure, how much of the minds potential for creativity is being used by the typical adult? Only 5% to 10% of the mind is all that's left! And what is the rest of the mind doing? Thinking, incessantly thinking, chattering away, never ever stopping for a rest. Scientists at Stanford Research Institute have estimated that the average person thinks 100,000 thoughts per day! That's a lot of thoughts. But it's not that we're sitting around thinking up new Mozart symphonies or writing new Shakespeare plays. What are we thinking about? "What's for dinner?" Or, "Why did he say that to me!" Or, "Why did I marry him!" The same thing we thought yesterday and the day before and the day before that. Over and over and over again, pointlessly chattering. Thinking constantly, tiring the body, going nowhere, creating nothing but fatigue.

You see the baby's silent mind is coherent. It experiences the present moment. It isn't regretting the past or worrying about the future. It's simply here and now. Have you ever seen a cat jump for a bird and miss? What does it do? It doesn't think, "If I'd only had tuna for breakfast instead of Alley Cat!" It doesn't think, "If only I'd worked out last week!" It doesn't think, "It wasn't worth catching anyway!" It doesn't think, "I'm trying to cut down anyway." No, what does it do? It turns around twice, yawns, and falls asleep. When it wakes up, it is ready to jump again for another bird, fully awake, fully alive, fully in the present moment. That is skill in action.
But we humans somehow have developed this organ up here (the brain) to think all the time. We've given it dominance over everything. And you don't have to look very far in the world to see how well the dominance of the 10% mind has worked. The human race is like a wildly multiplying cancer, destroying everything it contacts. The ozone is being depleted. The lakes, rivers and seas are drowning in garbage. In spite of all our wonderful advances in the past hundred years, we still have a billion people starving to death at this very moment. Let's face it: this 10% mind is not very bright. It keeps us ineffective at best and highly damaging at worst; it keeps us suffering, lonely and unhappy; it even makes us sick.

Scientific Research Demonstrates the Supremacy of the Mind.

How does our mind make us sick? There has been some fascinating research over the past fifty years which shows just how closely connected our minds are to our bodies: our habitual thoughts determine the state of our health and even our longevity.
One of the earliest and most interesting studies was performed on some rabbits at Ohio University in the seventies. The scientists were attempting to prove the relationship between a toxic, high cholesterol diet and hardening of the arteries. They thought that if they fed the rabbits' high cholesterol food, they should logically develop high blood pressure, hardening of the arteries and the other symptoms we have learned to associate with heart disease, which is still the largest killer in the Western world. The experiment was going along very well, with most of the bunnies developing the expected symptoms, except for one group of rabbits that were not having the expected results. The scientists just couldn't understand it -- they were feeding the rabbits in this group the same high cholesterol food, but the rabbits just weren't developing any of the predicted symptoms. No high blood pressure. No hardening of the arteries. No hypertension. Nothing.
Fortunately for the study, and unfortunately for the rabbits, the technician who was feeding that particular group of rabbits fell ill. Almost immediately, her rabbits started developing the expected symptoms! Naturally the scientists were curious as to why and asked her what she had done differently. "Why nothing," she said, "I fed the rabbits the food as you told me to. I took them out of their cages, held them, stroked them, and sang to them, fed them. Wasn't this right?"
It was the same food, but the rabbits' minds turned the high cholesterol food into other channels, which protected their health! The scientists were amazed. They thought they were studying hardening of the arteries; they were really studying the effects of love. They tried this over and over again and found that rabbits that were loved simply wouldn't fall ill as readily. Isn't this amazing? And this was just rabbits, not even people! How can love change the effect of food? So the moral is: if you're going to eat Big Macs, sit on your boyfriend's lap while you're eating it.

Taking in account the brief descriptions of the psychological approach to life and to everything that is in it, we have become dependent on authority to tell us what is good for us in body and mind. This authority is living in the same psychological conditioning as is described in the brief outline above, thinking with internal programs and beliefs trying to do what is best with the 5%-10% potential of mind to approach what is necessary to maintain a healthy mind and body.
Truth is we can just about eat anything we want to in portions that meet the body's needs. It is the way we use food to mask psychological undercurrents of stress that becomes unhealthy.
Food when used to create feelings to cover up another feeling often leads to obesity.
It's not the food so much as how we think and what we think.

A person with a heavily influenced psychological program that is filled with conflicting ideas and beliefs causing stress in every area of concern can eat the healthiest diet in the world and not survive the psychological conditioning.
On the other hand someone who is perfectly happy and without any stress in the nervous system living perfectly in the now could eat all of the bad foods on a nutritionists list and live a healthy happy life.

There was a study done on identical twins. One exercised every day, ate only a vegetarian diet, the other ate what she wanted whenever she wanted, never exercised and they both had exactly the same body weight and were both healthy. Obviously it wasn't the food, but the state of the mind which had dominance over the body and its condition.

So the question is asked how do you remove stress from the body and mind so as to rise above the beliefs that condition our experience of ourselves and our life?
The answer is to give the mind something that is more expansive and real to focus on than these conditions of belief. To remove ourselves from false authority that we become so reliant on, and to return ourselves to the knowledge and understanding of ourselves so that we can make wise decisions based on Truth rather than relative beliefs of understanding doled out by those who claim authority without being of clear mind and body, and without the capacity to be living in the NOW.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28109 - 10/22/08 02:08 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Any posters actually have the patience to read through the last post by TT? Or is it Jo?

If so, I would like to hear from you and have your summary. I make this request simply out out curiosity--for no other reason.

Top
#28110 - 10/22/08 02:22 AM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Any posters actually have the patience to read through the last post...
If so, I would like to hear from you and have your summary. I make this request simply out out curiosity--for no other reason.

Isn't that the way most misconstrue the meaning of religion, or of any philosophy, by not having the patience to learn about it but to make assumptions based on summaries written by critics?

Obviously this is why we were having the discussion regarding knowledge and experience of Tolle, Scripture and God, made from conjecture or immersion into the study of said subject.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#28117 - 10/22/08 04:38 PM Re: Philosophy of religion: Yours, MIne and Ours.. [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Tolle is a communicator--in the written and spoken word. His communications are mostly transparent, consistent, to the point and a joy to read. He also speaks with the same clarity.

Top
Page 12 of 13 < 1 2 ... 10 11 12 13 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.