posted October 30, 2007 01:01 PM         

Yes, we are all Connected. We Are One. But what is the nature of this BE-ing at this level? This is certainly a topic of great speculation, since we can't ever REALLY Know, can We? We must at some level... but is it within our capacity to even start to understand this Great Mystery?

Please feel free to submit short questions to be considered by our speakers, and save arguments for the end of this conference when we can open the floor to debate over the material presented. Feel free to applaud points made by both speakers at any time.
If you have a hard time following or understanding the flow of the conversation and you wish to know more on the topic, Google search keywords "LindaLand free will" and "Lindaland free will determinism" for a great deal of background information and reading.

Gentlemen, I understand you both have lives and aren't always inspired to discuss and/or debate. I think now, during the time of year when the veil is thinnest between physical and astral, might be an excellent time to begin the discussion.

May the HOly Spirit enter into both of your minds, bodies, and souls during this discussion and may we all dwell within the Holy Spirit as we participate in this experience. God bless us, everyone.

posted October 30, 2007 01:28 PM         

*I have my own thoughts but... I would love to hear yours. Also... this would be 'easier' answered by someone who believes God exists because if he doesn't then the question is void*

So... 1) "if" God exists, what is his/her purpose?

posted October 30, 2007 01:42 PM         

My first comments:

"God is and is not" - The Upanishads

When you realize that an Idea can be just as real, and just as effectual, as any conscious entity, you begin to think spiritually, and to understand how there can be a God. But first you have to let go of everything you thought you knew about God. God is not a mold you try to pour your experience and understanding of reality into. I'm not trying to give you another one of those. Rather, we begin with what we personally experience and understand of reality, and, from there, we seek to fashion a kind of Idea of God. "How can you seek to understand heavenly thinhgs, when you have not understood earthly things?... Know what is seen, and what is unseen will be revealed to you." Attempting to do it the other way is backwards, and explains most of our misconceptions and difficulties with "the whole God thing".

Thanks for listening.

posted October 30, 2007 02:03 PM         

Sending you love and light

posted October 30, 2007 02:05 PM         

1) "if" God exists, what is his/her purpose?

I don't know.

I do not assume God has a purpose.

(Sometimes,
I am inclined to spiral off on this,
and just entertain speculations,
but for clarity's sake,
and for our present discussion,
I would prefer to stick closer to my understanding.)

2)"If" God exists, who are we, relative to him/her? (i.e. what is our purpose relative to him? )

Excellent question.

We are emanations and manifestations of "His" Will.

We are cells in the body of the universe,
or, as some have termed it, "the body of Christ".
We share an instinctual link with the One Mind,
performing its operations as if they were our own.

Our purpose is to learn the basic laws
and principles which govern life in the universe,
and to make use of these laws and principles,
so as to harmonize our hearts, minds, and actions,
with the higher power, to which we are subject.

I believe there is an instinctive wisdom in the universe,
which some have called "The Tao", or "The Way",
and which corresponds to what others have called "The Zero Point Energy".

I believe that the highest thought is "no-thought",
and that the ultimate way to align ourselves with this instinctual wisdom,
is not to try very hard in one direction or another,
but to allow the universal wisdom to speak thru you;
to inspire you to go with the flow,
and not be attached to any one mode of seeing or being.
Those who have accomplished this are called "enlightened".
For them, there is no conflict,
and no distinction between themselves and God.

I believe this instinctive wisdom is elusive
on account of its being absolutely accessible.
I believe it is complicated,
on account of its being simple beyond words.

posted October 30, 2007 02:05 PM         

I liked HSC opening this debate with a line from the Upanishads. One of my favourite books.

posted October 30, 2007 02:11 PM         

As HSC pointed out, God is and is not! God is that which is everywhere and in everything, yet cannot be contained within anything.

And purpose pf God? Well, purpose of God is to Just Be.

posted October 30, 2007 02:22 PM         

Well don't worry about those people can you.
Its enough if you understand it.

See heres the point: The part can never describe the whole unless the part is in love with all parts.

Sorry Sattvic I hate it when some people use adjectives to humilate others.

posted October 30, 2007 02:31 PM         

Well, here goes......

posted October 30, 2007 02:46 PM         

Where`s Petron

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

posted October 30, 2007 02:54 PM         

BTW: Petron doesnt get home from work until around 6. And he's a single father. I'm sure he'll show up here eventually. I look forward to reading the discussions of this thread later. Gotta run now.

posted October 30, 2007 02:55 PM         

quote:

---

Well, basically for some of the people who considers God as a "person" might be having the biggest difficulty in comprehending this discussion.
-Sattvic

---

posted October 30, 2007 02:57 PM         

***edited to add****

Thank you 26T! Yes, I anticipated a kind response either way from both of these gentlemen.

posted October 30, 2007 03:09 PM         

quote:

---

the ultimate way to align ourselves with this instinctual wisdom,
is not to try very hard in one direction or another,
but to allow the universal wisdom to speak thru you;
to inspire you to go with the flow,
and not be attached to any one mode of seeing or being.

---

posted October 30, 2007 03:10 PM         

We cannot even begin to unravel all the mystery of what God actually is.

posted October 30, 2007 03:57 PM         

Now, for the purposes of the discussion, I shall play the Devil's Advocate (I will hold on to my thoughts still) and ask...

ONE:

quote:

---

I do not assume God has a purpose.

---

You do not know, but if you had to decide whether God does/does not have a purpose, you would be inclined to think that God has no purpose.

Is that what you are saying with regards to the above statement?

And then you said, in answer to my 2nd question...

TWO:

quote:

---

2)"If" God exists, who are we, relative to him/her? (i.e. what is our purpose relative to him? )

Excellent question.

We are emanations and manifestations of "His" Will.

We are cells in the body of the universe,
or, as some have termed it, "the body of Christ".

---

and you also said

THREE:

quote:

---

Our purpose is to learn the basic laws
and principles which govern life in the universe,
and to make use of these laws and principles,
so as to harmonize our hearts, minds, and actions,
with the higher power, to which we are subject.

---

So... 1) God does not intrinsically have a purpose.
2)We are the body of God, a part of a whole.
3)We have a purpose to learn Universal Laws.

If this is the correct summary of what you said, then I have a few questions to ask.

Q1: If God has no purpose, why would we have a purpose, since we are his body? If God just IS, would not he be composed of What just IS too?

The above statement is reminiscent of Genesis, Chapter 1, verse 27, which says:

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

It is echoes Aristotle's theory of the Unmoved Mover, the Created Creator, and the Divine Dichotomy.

Q2: Anything that "has to be done" like learning laws in order to fulfill something like enlightenment, goes against freedom, and/or free will. It also sounds like a 'conditional' state of being. Therefore, is it correct to assume that, if we have a purpose, then we have no free-will?

I ask because, once an entity has a purpose, such as "learning", it means that it was created for a reason, hence it can no longer 'just BE'.

If that is the case, then it means that we are not created in Gods image, for reasons mentioned above (God has no purpose. Humans have a purpose).

Also, it means that we have no free-will, if we are not created in Gods image (if we have a purpose for existing) because we are the way we are by design, therefore our actions happen by default, not by choice; just the same way a car can not fly unless it was designed to fly.

Q3: So, is it not more logical to assume that we humans have no purpose, just like our God, because...

i) If we have a purpose, and God doesn't, then what is the point of us having a purpose?

ii) If we have a purpose then we are not free souls but tools designed for a certain reason, that only God knows.

iii) And if our purpose was to "learn..." to harmonize with the system, then why don't we?

posted October 30, 2007 04:45 PM         

The blind person is persuaded by the testimony of others that there is a visible world, but those with eyes can see for themselves. Likewise, in order to perceive metaphysical truths, one requires the sense of abstract reasoning; the alternative is to take things on faith, reject them outright, or remain undecided. A person without this sense, or with this sense underdeveloped, will not be able to comprehend metaphysical logic even when it is clearly expressed. Say la vie! Spiritual communities and cultures have always depended on the seers, those with strong Sagittarius, Jupiter, and 9th house placements, to investigate this realm of experience, and to teach their gleanings to others. People like Jesus, and many not as adept as them, have appeared in the world claiming to know something about God. We try to understand them. If we cannot, we may accept their teachings on faith, reject them, or remain undecided. That is the choice. But it seems to me pressumptuous to reject them without understanding, and to conclude that these things cannot be known by anyone. I find it particularly disturbing and ironic that this opinion is being expressed by Mirandee, a self-proclaimed devotee of Jesus; someone who claimed that, not only does knowledge of God exist, and may be apprehended by a person with the proper tools, but that he was such a person, sent to reveal precisely that sort of knowledge to others. This may be unflattering to some, but what is unflattering is not necessarily untrue.

It is politically correct, - one might say it is in vogue, - in the times we live in, to assert that everyone has a direct personal link to universal wisdom, that we are all equal (in a holistic sense, and, especially, in this particular respect), and that nobody can tell anybody anything. We are all humble enough to confess that we havent all got a talent for painting, or performing physics equations, but God forbid anyone should suggest that we are equally untalented in philosophical, theological, or spiritual matters. I suspect it is true that the power to grasp metaphysical realities may exist in everyone, latent or not. But that everyone can and will develop this capacity and find these truths without provocation or assistance from another seems, to me, a very dubious position. The only thing recommending it, really, is that it is so popularly held. And really this is more a point against it than in favor. Even a superficial aquaintance with human history ought to inform us that what is popularly held is, not only frequently, but generally, mistaken.

It is almost a matter of course, in a forum like this, that when any person speaks up and admits to having an understanding, and not merely an opinion, belief, or theory, concerning spiritual matters, that this person will be accused of arrogance and shortsightedness. Although this is often the case, it is not always so. Face it: Every spiritual teacher you ever paid homage to claimed a kind of understanding. It is easy enough to recognize them when their words are in print, and history has sanctioned them to some degree. Hindsight is 20/20. Why is it so hard to accept the possibility that someone with understanding might be here now; someone who looks like us, sounds like us, but doesnt parrot all the same self-patronizing New Age sophisms that are so commonplace with us, and which it is so taboo to contradict?

"Verily, I tell you,
a prophet is never accepted in his own country."
~ Jesus Christ

I do not claim to have a great heart.
I often speak pointedly rather than gently,
because it is difficult for me to be gentle
while still firmly expressing unflattering truths.
There are many virtues I cannot claim.
Many people here can outdo me in any number of ways.
If you wish to find my imperfections,
you will not have to look hard.
But I must insist that this is an area of talent for me.