The Debate of God.

[Thief]

It's too late to wait until the body dies to 'stand before heaven, this coming up from the body must be realized before bodily death.

The body is like an egg, it contains the spirit 'embryo' that has the potential to be born into spiritual heaven when it is fully developed. However just like the chicken embryo that fails to fully develop inside the egg, if it fails to come out from inside under it's own volition, it will will die inside the egg, so too the 'soul' whose development is not sufficient to realize its true heavenly destiny and leave the body, it will be aborted after the death of the body. (Btw, this is known as the second death as distinct from the first death of the physical body, for this spiritual embryo is made of spiritual vibrational energy which, due to its incomplete development, it can't function in the spiritual domain independently of the bodily womb, it decays over a long period.)

If you try to hang on to your life, you will lose it. But if you give up your life for my sake, you will save it. - Luke 9:24 New Living Translation

If anyone has a spiritual eye, let them go forth from their body to behold the Beautiful, let them fly up and float above not seeking to see shape or colour but rather that from which these things are created, that which is quiet and calm, stable and changeless, that which is ONE, that which issues forth from itself and is contained in itself, that which is like nothing else but ITSELF. - A Hermetic Saying

The highlighted portion I disagree with.

Your opportunity to stand before heaven won't happen until you die.
You are on your own til then.

The development you mention can be influenced by the world around you....
unlike the embryo in shell metaphor you were using.

Spirit contained?....yes we are.

Spirit before heaven?.....we will be.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The highlighted portion I disagree with.

Your opportunity to stand before heaven won't happen until you die.
You are on your own til then.

The development you mention can be influenced by the world around you....
unlike the embryo in shell metaphor you were using.

Spirit contained?....yes we are.

Spirit before heaven?.....we will be.

Oh well then, this is most important understanding that we share, the other may resolve itself with further discussion, but in any event, the actual reality is on the other side of our words anyway and that is the final supreme arbiter.

Concerning pre-physical death leaving of the body, this refers to the natural unfoldment of the sincere and worthy religious devotee's soul that will be evidenced in the dream state initially, flying dreams of a lucid nature, etc.. The child that can walk has had to have gone through the previous pre-requisite stages of crawling and standing development to a required proficiency before being able to function as a walking entity in this physical world.. Similarly, only when the mature and worthy soul of the machine we call the human body has attained a sufficient degree of proficiency of functioning outside the body womb for temporary periods prior to to the death of its womb body, will it be able to function permanently in the spiritual domain when that destiny arrives.

And btw, to be sure you understand what I'm not implying, it is not the ego 'I' of the brain that leaves the body either prior to or at death. Lets say that I had a lucid dream of flying, the I that finds itself later in bed and wondering if it was real or not, was actually not present in the dream, that was soul awareness, but on awakening, the brain 'I' gets to wonder about the residual impressions left in the memory of the out of body experience and sort of naturally thinks it was it that was flying. Iow, soul awareness is not the same thing as 'I' awareness, but in the waking state, 'I' awareness generally obscures the more subtle awareness of the soul.

And yes, concerning soul development being influenced by this world, this is what it's all about. But in the context and purpose of the dominating nature of the ego which obscures intuitive soul awareness in the waking state, this results in the rise of non-essential ego desires for power, glamour, respect, wealth, etc., which helps create the karmic trials and tribulations that in turn helps separate the sheep from the goats,...both within our individual nature as well as the collective humanity.

 

[godnotgod]

Going back to God requires that you first realize you have to go back.
(which means you are now separate)

Let me say that you are not incorrect, but that there are two paths, and the path you are on is what the Buddhists call 'The Long Way Home'. Sure, you will 'get there', but that path is unnecessary. The other 'path' is the one which leads to the realization that one is already Home.

The important thing about your path is to try to understand the basis of what you call the realization of having to return to God. You think you must embark on a return because you have been living in a conditioned state of mind which told you that you are somehow separate from God, when no separation has ever been the case. The only separation is in your belief of separation, not in reality.

And so I continue to ask you: show me the point at which you became separate from God in the first place.

Can you do that?

 

[Thief]

Oh well then, this is most important understanding that we share, the other may resolve itself with further discussion, but in any event, the actual reality is on the other side of our words anyway and that is the final supreme arbiter.

Concerning pre-physical death leaving of the body, this refers to the natural unfoldment of the sincere and worthy religious devotee's soul that will be evidenced in the dream state initially, flying dreams of a lucid nature, etc.. The child that can walk has had to have gone through the previous pre-requisite stages of crawling and standing development to a required proficiency before being able to function as a walking entity in this physical world.. Similarly, only when the mature and worthy soul of the machine we call the human body has attained a sufficient degree of proficiency of functioning outside the body womb for temporary periods prior to to the death of its womb body, will it be able to function permanently in the spiritual domain when that destiny arrives.

And btw, to be sure you understand what I'm not implying, it is not the ego 'I' of the brain that leaves the body either prior to or at death. Lets say that I had a lucid dream of flying, the I that finds itself later in bed and wondering if it was real or not, was actually not present in the dream, that was soul awareness, but on awakening, the brain 'I' gets to wonder about the residual impressions left in the memory of the out of body experience and sort of naturally thinks it was it that was flying. Iow, soul awareness is not the same thing as 'I' awareness, but in the waking state, 'I' awareness generally obscures the more subtle awareness of the soul.

And yes, concerning soul development being influenced by this world, this is what it's all about. But in the context and purpose of the dominating nature of the ego which obscures intuitive soul awareness in the waking state, this results in the rise of non-essential ego desires for power, glamour, respect, wealth, etc., which helps create the karmic trials and tribulations that in turn helps separate the sheep from the goats,...both within our individual nature as well as the collective humanity.

I don't see that we are all that different.

But I say this world is more than casual.

I prefer the metaphor of clay....because for now....we are.

When the clay stiffens it heralds the pending end of movement in this world.
When the the mold cracks.....we (what we really are) comes forth.

That this world shapens our mind and heart is known to all.
And what we become will stand before heaven.

 

[Thief]

Let me say that you are not incorrect, but that there are two paths, and the path you are on is what the Buddhists call 'The Long Way Home'. Sure, you will 'get there', but that path is unnecessary. The other 'path' is the one which leads to the realization that one is already Home.

The important thing about your path is to try to understand the basis of what you call the realization of having to return to God. You think you must embark on a return because you have been living in a conditioned state of mind which told you that you are somehow separate from God, when no separation has ever been the case. The only separation is in your belief of separation, not in reality.

And so I continue to ask you: show me the point at which you became separate from God in the first place.

Can you do that?

See my previous post.

 

[godnotgod]

I don't see that we are all that different.

But I say this world is more than casual.

I prefer the metaphor of clay....because for now....we are.

When the clay stiffens it heralds the pending end of movement in this world.
When the the mold cracks.....we (what we really are) comes forth.

That this world shapens our mind and heart is known to all.
And what we become will stand before heaven.

The analogy between the clay of the pot that is 'made' by a 'maker' and humans is inappropriate. What is made is an artifact. We are not made. We are grown, organically, by the universe. We emerge from the universe and return to it in a transitional continuum. There is no beginning or end as with an artifact. You are still attached to form.

Try again.

 

[Leftimies]

Debate of God, huh. How does one define God...for some he is one, for others he is universe manifesting itself through several deities. And anything in between and beyond. For pete's sake bear was a God of some sorts for ancient Finns.

From what basis should we be debating?

 

[godnotgod]

Debate of God, huh. How does one define God...for some he is one, for others he is universe manifesting itself through several deities. And anything in between and beyond. For pete's sake bear was a God of some sorts for ancient Finns.

From what basis should we be debating?

One suggestion is simply to respond to the various ideas of God as they arise in the discussion. In other words, speak to others in the language they are using to define God. If someone believes in a creator-God, speak to them within that context, etc.

 

[starlite]

I agree, but what makes him holy distinct ? Food for thought. What makes him God as apposed to other gods?

The word “God” or “god” is commonly used regarding a superhuman object of veneration.[FONT=Arial, sans-serif] The title [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]’Elo·him′[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] draws attention to Jehovah’s strength as the Creator. It appears 35 times by itself in the account of creation. [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Isaiah wrote:[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]“He the true God, the Former of the earth and the Maker of it, He the One who firmly established it, who did not create it simply for nothing, who formed it even to be inhabited.”[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif] I[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]s[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]aiah then quoted Jehovah’s words: [/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]“I am Jehovah, and there is no one else.” (Isaiah 45:18) [/FONT] He did more than just form, or make, things. He gave life to all creatures. “With you is the source of life,” the Bible says of Jehovah. (Psalm 36:9) We owe our lives to him, not only because he created man, but also because he has allowed mankind to continue on till now and has provided the means for sustaining life. (Acts 14:16, 17) More than that, he allowed his Son to become the Redeemer of the human family, buying it with his own precious lifeblood.

(Revelation 4:11) “You are worthy, Jehovah, even our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they existed and were created.”

 

[Thief]

The analogy between the clay of the pot that is 'made' by a 'maker' and humans is inappropriate. What is made is an artifact. We are not made. We are grown, organically, by the universe. We emerge from the universe and return to it in a transitional continuum. There is no beginning or end as with an artifact. You are still attached to form.

Try again.

Now you are mincing words to avoid the discussion.

Organic we are....dust we are...clay we are...

God's creation?....yeah.
Separate?....yeah.

Your pesistance in denail proves it.

 

[godnotgod]

Now you are mincing words to avoid the discussion.

Organic we are....dust we are...clay we are...

God's creation?....yeah.
Separate?....yeah.

Your pesistance in denail proves it.

Excuse me. Do you understand the difference between making something and growing something?

Separate? That is only a concept running 'round your brain. Once again, show me the point at which man and God became separate. So far, it is YOU who is avoiding the discussion.

 

[Thief]

Excuse me. Do you understand the difference between making something and growing something?

Separate? That is only a concept running 'round your brain. Once again, show me the point at which man and God became separate. So far, it is YOU who is avoiding the discussion.

You keep insisting on using the word 'YOU'...while denying such existence!!!!!!!!!!!

And do 'YOU' know the difference between making something and creating.

 

[godnotgod]

You keep insisting on using the word 'YOU'...while denying such existence!!!!!!!!!!!

I've already explained that to you several times!!!!!

I use 'you' as a matter of convention. It's like the word 'river'. There is, in reality, no such thing as a 'river'; there is only waterflowing.

Likewise, there is no such entity you can locate called "I"; there is no thinker of thoughts; there is only thinking itself, without a think-er.

Get it?

And do 'YOU' know the difference between making something and creating.

That is not the issue right now.

You are not answering my question: what is the difference between growing something and making something?

 

[Thief]

I've already explained that to you several times!!!!!

I use 'you' as a matter of convention. It's like the word 'river'. There is, in reality, no such thing as a 'river'; there is only waterflowing.

Likewise, there is no such entity you can locate called "I"; there is no thinker of thoughts; there is only thinking itself, without a think-er.

Get it?


That is not the issue right now.

You are not answering my question: what is the difference between growing something and making something?

I did answer the question.
You simply didn't understand the response or didn't like it.

 

[bhajanradio1]

For me there is one supreme power, which rule whole universe.
You can argue on this. But its impossible that the universe is not driven by some force. i.e. its driverless. Impossible.

Somebody is definitely driving the universe to its position

 

[godnotgod]

For me there is one supreme power, which rule whole universe.
You can argue on this. But its impossible that the universe is not driven by some force. i.e. its driverless. Impossible.

Somebody is definitely driving the universe to its position

Have you ever considered that it being driverless may be a characteristic of it's supreme intelligence? Like a blade of grass can do something as complex as photosynthesis without a brain, while a human with a brain cannot.

'The geese, flying over the still pond do not INTEND to cast their image upon its surface; the pond does not INTEND to reflect their images"

...and yet, their images are both cast and reflected, without intent or effort to do so!

 

[godnotgod]

I did answer the question.
You simply didn't understand the response or didn't like it.

No, you clearly did NOT answer this question; instead, you responded to it by asking me if I understood the difference between making something and creating it.

I am perfectly willing to answer YOUR question, but mine was on the table first. So if you can address that, we can go on. If not, we can always terminate our discussion.

 

[godnotgod]

Somebody is definitely driving the universe to its position

...or maybe it's just being dreamed.

 

[Thief]

No, you clearly did NOT answer this question; instead, you responded to it by asking me if I understood the difference between making something and creating it.

I am perfectly willing to answer YOUR question, but mine was on the table first. So if you can address that, we can go on. If not, we can always terminate our discussion.

My...my...my....

Well then...making something and growing something?...the difference?

How about?..... God made Man.
No.
Too many people think that was an act of creation.

How about? evolution....growth....birth....change of form....
Too many people leave God out of the discussion that way.
Even though I believe He is behind the action.

Let's see now.....how to answer a wordplay question without circumventing....

the debate about God?

 

[YouOnlyScienceOnce]

For me there is one supreme power, which rule whole universe.
You can argue on this. But its impossible that the universe is not driven by some force. i.e. its driverless. Impossible.

Somebody is definitely driving the universe to its position

Now why is that impossible? WHat evidence do you have that there HAS to be a driver?
+ science never claimed there is no power or force behind it, but why does it HAVE to be a god?