posted November 07, 2007 05:15 AM              

For, in my opinion, if Free Will is a truth, it creates hope and a sense of purpose for us all.
The idea that there is no Free Will, in my opinion, creates melancholy. It makes life appear as if we are merely going through the motions, that we are powerless.

What is God if He/ She is not joy?
What is God if He/ She is not unconditional love?

Would unconditional love subject their children to the kind of suffering we see here on Earth?

My explanation, when people ask, is that God does not make this happen to us.

What happens to the creatures of the Earth, whether it is "sweet delight", or "endless night"......
is something we have all co-created together- only possible through Free Will.

posted November 07, 2007 08:31 AM            

~ The Kybalion

A king is not a common pawn,
yet both king and pawn move at the behest of another Hand;
The pawn, to his sacrifice; The king, to his rule.

That man elects, whom God has elected.

He chooses, who is chosen.

Free will is Divine Intervention.

posted November 07, 2007 10:37 AM            

Sometimes its good to be tired.

To slow down.

I want to thank everyone for keeping me on my toes,
and challenging me to fill in some of the blanks
the gaps I tend to overlook in my intuitive leaps.
I have become even more confident in my views,
having entrusted them to rational analysis,
and had them returned to me in a yet more refined condition
that that in which I lent them.
I could thank you all individually for at least a dozen instances,
in which your intellectual curiousities have piqued my own,
and allowed me to enlarge upon and solidify/manifest
my intuitive and conceptual understanding of universal laws.

I wish I could respond to everyone, point by point.

But I'm tired.
I'm tired, and I feel like I learned a lot.

I definitely felt my Solar Return yesterday.
I came back into alignment with myself.

Petron,
What I said about the deplorable universe, lol.
I stand by it, of course.
The universe is everything, so it is also deplorable.
And, in the context, I was saying that God would have deplorable motives,
but, as you see, I do not believe God has motive.
At least, not God on the level at which I am speaking.

Let me try to explain...

First, when talking about motives,
I speak of motives in the abstract.
When I imagine the godhead in possession of personal characteristics,
I speak metaphorically, because this is the nature of perception.
When I describe human beings as possessing personal traits,
I am being only slightly, relatively, less metaphorical.
We ourselves, remember, are not really autonomous agents,
and our individuality is really just a metaphor;
analogy that proves inconsistent beyond a certain point,
a trick of perception,
which is absolutely true only in the abstract;
as an archetype, a kind of molded idea.

The deplorable motives of an individual are, in themselves,
contingent and explicable; essentially reasonable,
in the sense that they are part of a whole,
and not self-determining.

In the case of a human,
personal motives appear in a context, and, really,
we cannot conceive of motives apart from a context.
So, when we speak of God as having motives, we place God in a context.
This is why we are speaking in the abstract.

As I see it, we can speak of God on a variety of levels,
but when I think of the highest aspect of God I can imagine,
it is beyond the all, and has no motive, in any sense.
So, the God who has motive in an abstract sense,
and who may or may not have motives in a more concrete sense,
is what I would call, "The Creature closest to the Creator".

See, if everything began as dross,
then the motive of the creative act of transmutation
would indeed be an honorable act.

But, on this level, dross would be a prerequisite;
the fundamental and original substance
of the universe, and of the universal mind,
an uncreated something by which "God" is constrained,
and the reason for any motive at all.

So, beyond this "God" there would have to be another one;
A God who decides in favor of dross, as a means to a means.

If dross exists
(and I take it more or less for granted that it does)
and we are imagining a perfectly omnipotent Creator,
then, the alternatives are:
a universe in which there is no dross,
one in which there is more dross,
one in which there is less,
or, no universe at all.
These are the only "possible" universes,
relative to the one that exists.
And, our hypothetical, or archetypal God,
would be choosing THIS universe.

So, if this ultimatle omnipotent God has a motive,
and if you think it is not deplorable,
you must insist that a universe of less dross,
or no dross, is less desirable than this universe,
despite the fact that the purpose of this universe is,
according to your own paradigm, to trasmute dross into gold;
that is, to constantly have less dross.

In other words,
the God whose motive is honorable
has His work cut out for Him
by another, higher God.

If the Higher God were said to have a motive,
it might sound something like this,
"You desire to transmute dross into gold?
I shall bless you with dross enough to last you eternity!
Now you may always be doing the thing you desire to do."

But, for the Lower God,
transmutation is a means, not an end.
For Him, dross is a prerequisite.
Time is mandatory.

The God beyond time,
who created time, would not do this.
For such a God, there are no means,
and creation is an end in itself.
If transmutation exists, it is for the joy of transmutation,
and not for the increase of gold,
which is an afterthought and a side-effect of transmutation,
and not its purpose.

Remember, this God transcends purpose.
Purely omnipotent, it is bliss.
Purely being, it does not propose to maintain bliss.

But this God,
having neither begining, middle, nor end,
and being a sort of end-in-itself,
is only a Creator in the sense that
the future creates the past,
drawing all things towards it.

But then we are an illusion.
We are the past...
A fading memory of God's past,
God's life flashing before His eyes at the moment of death;
the dying light of a star that has already died.

We ourselves are not in bliss.
So, in order to speak of Creation,
of time, or mortality, as substantial,
we must come down from this too lofty vision,
to a God with purpose, motive.

We cannot speak of mortal things
and speak of the Highest God.
We cannot speak of created things,
and speak of the Uncreated.
We cannot speak of motives,
and speak of the divine.

zanya,

quote:

---

please do not ever limit yourself in expressing your ideas. it's amazing that you share what you do, for everyone's benefit. way cool Stephen.

---

posted November 07, 2007 12:09 PM              

awesome.

posted November 07, 2007 12:39 PM              

"Trust in Allah, but tether your camel first"

posted November 07, 2007 12:42 PM              

AG, "bummed"
Funny word. I'm thinking moonies.

Zanya,
I came across something by Rudolf Steiner when I was looking for things about the souls of animals. I didn't approve of what he had to say, but then this was 100 years ago when things were much different, so viewpoints were much more limited then. I'm sure he has a lot of wisdom in other respects. (This is what I am referring to just for the record):
http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/AniSou_index.html

I'm so confused about the whole issue of Free Will, and whether or not we are "evolving". Will I ever find the answers I seek?

posted November 07, 2007 12:44 PM              

I feel the same way, HSC. My brain is tired. LOL We can always bump this thread up another time and in the meantime I have much reading to do on Determinism vs Free Will. I also have much to re-read on this thread.

Would also like to think everyone here for all they gave to me in way of their thoughts and feelings.

LTT, You and Lialei bring it from the heart as well as the soul and reason when you give your thoughts and that sooooo inspires. Bless you both for that gift you give to us.

In reply I do think that unconditional love ( Agape ) would solve most of the woes and sorrows of humanity and completely eradicate evil in the world.

Some more quotes I like:

All is mystery; but he is a slave who will not struggle to penetrate the dark veil.

Author: Benjamin Disraeli

The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing. One cannot help but be in awe when he contemplates the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure of reality. It is enough if one tries merely to comprehend a little of this mystery every day. Never lose a holy curiosity.

Albert Einstein

Faith is not the knowledge of what the mystery of the universe is, but the conviction that there is a mystery, and that it is greater than us. -- Emmett Brown

When I was young, I said to God, 'God, tell me the mystery of the universe.' But God answered, 'that knowledge is for me alone.' So I said, 'God, tell me the mystery of the peanut.' Then God said, 'Well, George, that's more nearly your size.'

Author: George Washington Carver

The workings of the human heart are the profoundest mystery of the universe. One moment they make us despair of our kind, and the next we see in them the reflection of the divine image.

Author: Charles W. Chesnutt

I would rather live in a world where my life is surrounded by mystery than live in a world so small that my mind could comprehend it.

Author: Harry Emerson Fosdick

We have grasped the mystery of the atom and rejected the Sermon on the Mount.

Author: Omar Bradley

As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more mysterious.

Author: Albert Schweitzer

Mystery is another name for our ignorance; if we were omniscient, all would be perfectly plain.

Author: Tryon Edwards

The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience. --

posted November 07, 2007 01:05 PM              

Stephen

Mirandee, thank you.

I particularly like this quote:

quote:

---

I would rather live in a world where my life is surrounded by mystery than live in a world so small that my mind could comprehend it.

Author: Harry Emerson Fosdick

---

quote:

---

The mystery of life isn't a problem to solve, but a reality to experience. --

Emmett Brown

---

posted November 07, 2007 02:19 PM            

I did clarify that my involvement in this discussion isn't because I'm looking for answers. It's merely a bit of mental exercise. I don't think I rightly belong in the Free Will camp as either idea could be right, and it wouldn't make any difference to me. This is not my quest.

Regarding Determinism, I already forgive people for acting from within the constructs of their personality. I don't need to believe in Determinism in order to do so. People operate from different sets of energies, and most people learn this about human nature over the course of their lives.

Regarding Determinism beyond the argument of forgiveness (or acceptance or understanding), I believe there's more or less. There could be something even greater than simple Determinism that accounts for the accidents that we take lessons from. My scenario of the person that was kept in traffic and thereby missed the fatal situation at their meeting place indicates that regardless of people acting out their nature there could be an even greater divine orchestration going on, which I don't believe Determinism accounts for. On the other hand, on the less-than-Determination side, my spilling-the-wine scenario makes for a situation devoid of Determinism as sometimes things happen without a person's personal nature dictating what they do.

Regarding Free Will, regardless of whether we have it or not my personal feeling is that a life lived deliberately is more desirable than the alternative. This struggle towards discipline is a source of triumph, happiness, and fulfillment.

We could go into: people feeling that they are free whilst actually being slaves to something beyond their comprehension. I guess the thing there would be the perception of freedom, and how that makes life tolerable for the slaves. For the entity keeping the slaves it is more handy for the slaves to believe in their freedom, than it is for them to believe in their slavery.

"Dross" and multiple layers of Gods don't interest me. Doesn't seem provable, therefore I won't even consider it's plausibility. Not that it couldn't be true. I just don't see the point of the speculation.

posted November 07, 2007 03:33 PM            

This saying comes from a small story. A master was traveling with one of his disciples. The disciple was in charge of taking care of the camel. They came in the night, tired, to a caravanserai. It was the disciple’s duty to tether the camel; he didn’t bother about it, he left the camel outside. Instead of that he simply prayed. He said to God, “Take care of the camel,” and fell asleep.

In the morning the camel was gone–stolen or moved away, or whatsoever happened. The master asked, “What happened to the camel? Where is the camel?” And the disciple said, “I don’t know. You ask God, because I had told Allah to take care of the camel, and I was too tired, so I don’t know. And I am not responsible either, because I had told Him, and very clearly! There was no missing the point. Not only once in fact, I told Him thrice. And you go on teaching ‘Trust Allah,’ so I trusted. Now don’t look at me with anger.”

The master said, “Trust in Allah but tether your camel first–because Allah has no other hands than yours.” If He wants to tether the camel He will have to use somebody’s hands; He has no other hands. And it is your camel! The best way and the easiest and the shortest way is to use your hands. Trust Allah–don’t trust only your hands, otherwise you will become tense. Tether the camel and then trust Allah.”

You will ask, “Then why trust Allah if you are tethering the camel?”–because a tethered camel can also be stolen. You do whatsoever you can do: that does not make the result certain, there is no guarantee. So you do whatsoever you can, and then whatsoever happens, accept it.

This is the meaning of tether the camel: do whatever is possible for you to do, don’t shirk your responsibility, and then if nothing happens or something goes wrong, trust Allah. Then He knows best. Then maybe it is right for us to travel without the camel. It is very easy to trust Allah and be lazy. It is very easy not to trust Allah and be a doer. The third type of man is difficult–to trust Allah and yet remain a doer. But now you are only instrumental; God is the real doer, you are just instruments in His hands

http://saffrondoor.wordpress.com/2007/10/16/trust-in-allah-but-tether-your-camel-first-2/

------------------
~
What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world is immortal"~

posted November 07, 2007 05:49 PM            

Thanks for that clarification, juniperb!

posted November 08, 2007 12:31 AM            

quote:

---

"Father, Father, Why hast thou forsaken me?"

---

"It was the only way to get you to do it yourself."

posted November 08, 2007 02:55 AM            

I AM...
the artist putting the finishing touches on his masterpiece,
unable to leave it alone.

I AM...
the gauge that completes the statue
and splits it in two.

I am Creature, Creator, Void.

posted November 08, 2007 02:58 AM              

for creation simultaneously exists and does not exist.
How could that not be in a mind that is Infinite?
thus God holds no one accountable--
especially Himself -- at All.

If you had a dream in which someone broke into
your house and stole a certain object,

would you, upon waking and finding that item,
call the constable?

not if you were in your right mind.
and whenever God wakes in us

His/our thinking becomes clear--
nothing is missing.

and how could He not forgive, then,
what never really happened,

and/or -- what He
caused?

Thomas Aquinas

Ducking

More significant than any act is the power,
the impetus behind it.

An ocean fish may gather enough momentum to leap
into the air and may even fall into a boat
and bite someone;

but tracing that act to its source reveals the Ocean
as the cause.

our thoughts leap out of God;
Creation took flight from his bow.

behind every act is the Beloved. He is the cause.
the child blames others for their woes.

no one can change the course of His arrows.
That does not mean that one should
not become adept at
ducking.