"overlaps" - headheart and urban monk only.

[headheart]

Please Note!

This thread is a private discussion between headheart and urban monk to explore overlaps in their different belief systems.

To begin with we will be exploring our individual beliefs and overlaps in regard to the following:

a. God
b. Salvation

IOW. Please stay out this thread as it will be monitored by the Moderators.

Kindly,
headheart and urban monk.

[UrbanMonk]

a. God
b. Salvation

God. Ok thanks for making this space open. As I like to say, *Open mind, open tomb*. It would be good to start with a firm foundation...a good premise. The best premise I can think of is that God is Go(o)d and good beyond imagination. I like to add the missing "o" to emphasize a prime attribute whenever making reference to That which other's have said, "God is Love". Perhaps I am also following philosophical tradition (Platonic) when I agree with Plato to the extent that, the highest goal in all of education is knowledge of "the Good". I am told by good source that Plato's parable of "the Cave" was one of Jesus' favorites. No doubt, reference to "the Good" would not have escaped Jesus' attention. Plato's "Cave" and Jesus' "Tomb" were both parables, referencing the same predicament in which all of mankind finds itself. Stated another way, we are all in "the belly of the whale". To escape either is to "overcome the world". So, first I will discuss Go(o)d, and then I will discuss this other world, how it began, how it ends, and why overcoming it and salvation are the same.

Go(o)d is a whole totality. Another word for whole totality is *holy*. I'm going to explain what holy means from a *oneness* (advaita; non dual) point of view. First, let's compare it to the dualist's interpretation (of holy). A dualist would say that holy means separate from, and somehow better than an(other). This implies that there is a Holy One and others who are somehow different, lesser and/or excluded. To the dualist, what is the Holy One is not the only one. A dualist would say there is more than One, leading to the belief in at least two (or more) different states of Being. In this way of thinking, there are *others*, and they are *different*. This view holds "holy" as an exclusive state, generally at the top of a heirarchy of beings. Such a God is "holier-than-thou", which speaks more to the attitude of the dualist than to the true nature of Go(o)d. To a dualist, there is more than equality. There is, for example, both equality and inequality. And from inequality comes all manner of iniquity.

Better understood, a whole totality (holy) is entirely inclusive of everything. In brief, what is holy is everything. Now I will capitalize Everything because "the Holy One" is a Being comprising Everything (Being Self). Besides what is truly Holy...there exists nothing else. That's why I say, "Holy One". This means there is only Go(o)d. There is not Go(o)d-and-not -Go(o)d. There is no "good and evil".

Go(o)d is "all in all", so-to-speak. What this means is that if there are many, they are all Go(o)d. If they are all the same, can we say that there is more than One? So, the concept of equality is essential to understanding Go(o)d. Jesus understood this, and did not consider it abnormal or "grasping" to be equal to Go(o)d. Only the equal can be "One". This way, Go(o)d can give Everything...and still be One. When Go(o)d gives Everything, Go(o)d give Self. This is Love. Love does not give less than Everything. To give less than Everything is to limit Love. However, Love is not, nor can Love be...limited. The minute Love is limited, Love is not Love anymore.

Salvation. Is it possible for Love to not be Love anymore? This is a very tempting question. The story of salvation begins when a question like this is asked by one of Go(o)d's equals. The answer leads to what we would call "damnation", "condemnation", or as I sometimes say, "self-crucifixion". The answer calls for the sacrifice of Self, which is Love. The answer can never be true, because Love is a Whole Totality. There is no such thing as not-Love. So, if the answer is "Yes, there can be more than Love", or, "Yes, Love can be limited" then the answer must be some kind of "lie". But this is a lie like no other. This kind of lie is told in cosmic proportions because Love's equal is, in scope, the magnitude of the World of Go(o)d (the entire Kingdom of Go(o)d). Conversely, whatever is not Love must be a lie so big it blows the mind.

Lies like this are laughable to That which Knows its Self Wholly (Completely, Omnisciently). But when taken curiously, and then seriously, one step leads to another and pretty soon an otherwise Loving Mind may be captivated (enchanted, bewitched, bedeviled) by ill-concieved concepts contrary to Reality (Self). As it goes further and further into a kind of labyrinth of untruth, a Free Mind may become captivated...snared...trapped..."lost". In exploring the ramifications of unreality (not Self, not Love), such a mind is driven insane, schizophrenically "beside itself". As the Mind is blown, it seems to be knocked unconscious and goes to "sleep". One Mind becomes as if it were two, and another self comes to replace Love's Self. This is where the concept of "dual" comes from. It originates in One Mind split against it's own Mind. Jesus describes this phenomenon in terms of "a house divided against itself". This other "self" is not One. Rather, as it was produced so it produces. It produces other selves, not just two, but legion.

This, then, is the ill-concieved genesis of "the dark side" ruled by confusion. This other self explores the idea of limitation, is limited, and imposes limits on everything it produces. In this way, it never meets the conditions of Love, which never gives less than Everything. Rather, this false "love" gives "things"...and makes every "thing" somehow limited. This is the genesis of *form*. "Man" is just one kind of the many forms this other self makes, making man in its own image, so-to-speak...after its own kind. Both this other self, and it's offspring, man, are limited...and therefore represent the expression of that which is not Love.

In exploring the concept of limitation, Love limits everything about itSelf. And so, in this other self, Love tosses away Love's inheritance (Everything) and settles for more than Everything. This is the genesis of the concept of "greed". In seeking to gain more than Everything, Love loses Self. Stated another way, Love sacrifices Self, exchanging the Truth for a "lie". The lie, in turn, exchanges itself for "the truth" and a lie now become "the truth". And this is essentially how "the Son of Go(o)d" - an equal - became that which is born unequal, nemely, "man". This implies that "man" is the expression of a loveless lie. Man's environment is supportive of this lie. Everything man sees, hears, tastes, smells, touches, feels and thinks he "knows"...is a lie. And so, man is said to be "condemned already". That is, man represents (substitutes for) the condemned Son of Go(o)d...Love itSelf.

Salvation is about reversing the Son of Go(o)d's self-induced misfortunes brought on first by curiosity, and then by seriosity (seriousness). Salvation is about salvaging what's savable of a "blown mind". It's about healing a split mind....about bringing peace to a mind in conflict with itself. Salvation is about repairing this mind...about restoring it...about rebuilding it...about unifying a fragmented mind...about making it One again. Finally, salvation is about returning this Mind to its rightful place, to it original pristine condition...to its former "glory". Salvation is about bringing back to Realtiy what walked away from Reality (ie. the "prodigal son", another self). Salvation is about Guiding (ie. Good Shepherd) a wandering mind back to the "fold". Salvation is about finding what has lost its mind and talking some sense into it. Salvation is about waking up from a deep "sleep". Salvation is about reversing everything the lie reversed. And so, salvation is about reversing the way we think. This is the true meaning of "repentance". Salvation is about subtracting what was added to Everything (nothing). And so, salvation is not about sacrifice, but about having mercy on our soul....upon our Self.

Well, I suppose that's enough for starters. If any of this is true, it will lead to questions, perhaps many questions. What questions does not know itself, not knowing Self. Self, on the other hand is certain. Self has sent "Help" to that which questions. Help will answer all questions rightly asked. Ultimately, the correct answer will be "Know thy Self". And that is because the lie is all about know not thy Self. Dualists are those who are still interested in knowing another self. Pure non-dualists will only accept Thy Self as the Answer to a loveless world. Of thy limited self, not one can do anything toward his salvation. But of his Limitless Self, the "selfish" can redeem themselves, and exchange their lies for "the Truth".

Well, that ought to be good for starters. This is how I currently understand "God" and "salvation". If Go(o)d is Everything (Holy), then salvation must end in/with Go(o)d. If Go(o)d is Everything, then salvation must be for Go(o)d. Or, if damnation was self-induced by an equal Son of Go(o)d, then salvation is for that same Self. If Go(o)d has a "Son" named "Christ", then salvation will end when Christ is "all in all". Salvation will be complete when what never was - a "lie" - will be seen for what it is...nothing. And all that will be left will be "Christ", Christ's Savior the "Holy Spirit", and Christ's Father....namely, OUR FATHER. I capitalized Our Father because it emphasizes the Truth of OUR SELF. Our Self is the only begotten Son of Our Father. It's as simple as that.

Again, this opens a can of worms for mind(s) that have trained themselves to think opposite the way Go(o)d thinks. It "takes a little time to turn this Titanic around" (as Amy Grant like to sing). I can respect that there may be much disagreement, resistance, apprehension and even downright fear. But if fear can be successfully dispelled, it can no longer cast a spell over our minds.

That's all i've got for now. Would be most interested in your perspective on this.

May a miracle come our way.
Respectfully,
Urban Monk

[headheart]

Dear Urban Monk,

Before I read what you have written, I am going to respond to the opening post.

Why?

It is simple. I would like to introduce you to my process.
First and foremost, I am a poet. I began writing poetry in my early teens. In 1972, I began learning the guitar and in 1976 I wrote my first psalm. It was titled, "Heading In The Wrong Direction" which I recorded in 2004. It appears in first place on and album titled, "The Nazarene" which is one of 8 albums.
During the early part of the 2nd Millennium, I turned my hand to writing. My first book was titled, "Witchcraft" and is an attempt at an expose of it. As with all first attempts, it was naive, cute and badly researched. I was far too influenced by my preconceptions.
Feeling confident in my ignorance, I decided to address my fears directly. To me at the time, the arguments presented by the Bible Students ( Charles Taze Russell ) and the Jehovah's Witnesses were the greatest threat to my beliefs about the deity of JesusChrist. In short, they made me sweat fear drops in my armpits, and so I researched and wrote my first expose of the Jehovah's Witnesses, titled ''A Play On Words"
During this time, I found the second part of a tiny booklet by an unknown author called, "Can A Christian Be Damned?" Though once again pretty naive, as to the complexity of Christian Theology and being a double-headed predestinarian ( and unbeknown to me at the time, a Calvinist, with a splash of Arminian thinking in there too somewhere ) I assembled the book for online reading. It was a mixture of Calvinist and Arminian ideas and leaned more towards the former than the latter.
At this time, I had begun reading two small pamphlets by Dr. Max Wertheimer. He was a rabbi. He lived in America and converted to Christianity in the early nineteen hundreds. The first was a personal testimony, and the other was a book about the Trinity from a Jewish perspective. When finally I got to read the short story about his life, he explained that as he was reading through the book of Isaiah, he was suddenly confronted by passages, which led him to conclude that his God and Jesus of Nazareth were one and the same. He continued read Isaiah and eventually accepted Jesus as his Messiah. Whereas previously he had spent many years presenting Judaism to Christians, he spent the next 20 years preaching the unsearchable riches of Y’shua HaMassiach.
On the cover of this same book, was the title of another book, which he had written and eventually after searching all over the Internet, I came in contact with his great great grandson: Reverand Stephen Pribble of Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church. I asked him if he knew of this book. He did some asking around, and eventually some of the Auntie’s uncovered a unprepared manuscripts in box, with all the pencil marks. So with great joy it landed on my table, to be edited and prepared for the Internet. The title was "S A T A N" (Due to a gradual shift away from dogmatic KJVO thinking, and embracing a broader textually critical approach to the Scriptures, I discovered that his two primary passages were somewhat badly chosen. It was still a great honour to work on something which otherwise might have remained hidden in a box.)
Simultaneously, I worked on the second part of the expose of the Jehovah's Witnesses, examining the matter of the next world. Their doctrines about the next world were a result of bad bible study, and even poorer hermeneutics. I was beginning to become quite a thorough researcher, by that time having read hundreds of papers about the subject of election, reprobation and predestination and of course the next world. Eventually though, I was felt a strong compulsion ( from GOD) to read and study the entire New Testament, on the subject of next world. Eventually what emerged was a book titled, "It Is Written", which also challenged the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ use of the New World Translation and included a thorough presentation of the alternative destinations in the next world, focussing primarily on the matter of Hell, and the Lake of Fire. While I was compiling my research to assemble the book for the Internet, I was challenged ( by GOD) to study the Old Testament from beginning to end. It was an experience I will never, ever forget. Not only was I stripped of all my preconceptions about GOD, but I also was drawn into the closet alone, with GOD.
These two experiences have made me what I am today.

In this time, which continues everyday, I was pulled on one side by theological correctness, and experience of the deity we have named GOD on the other.
Now whereas I might have unpacked the details of who GOD is and what salvation is, I discovered during this radical change of perspective, that all along the way, I had been assembling my thoughts in a far more cohesive form in the numerous psalms, hymns and spiritual songs I have been inspired to write. These I hope will more effectively communicate to you my thinking in regard to GOD and salvation.

:

I love you.

Well, I know you been flying to the sun
And I know you been crying lonely one

Chorus
You been hiding in the dark too long
You been trying to find this song
But it only plays when you're dreaming'
And it only lasts for a while
Then it's gone.
Then it's gone
Then it's gone

Well I know you been searching for too long
And I seen you been trying to sing this song

Repeat chorus

But it's all a game you keep playing
And you never hear what he's saying

I love you.

*)(**)(**)(*



The Non-Mystery of Golgotha

You can climb up to the stars
On a ladder to perfection
You can sit in solitude
As you practice meditation

But I don't think you'll get much closer than the cross
I think you'll get much closer at the cross

Connect the Lord to your Kabala
And pretend to call Him Abba
Tarot, I-ching , 8 fold banana
Labyrinth, silent secret mantra

repeat chorus after each verse.

Enlarge you mind, escape you ego
While you chakrify your lotus
Celebrate your thoughts of oneness,
Wrapped in theosophical mucous

Well they laid a firm foundation
Long before their creation
The Lamb of God He sits enthroned
Above an infinite procession

And His flesh it was a veil
That was torn to uncover
And His blood upon the cross
Opens Heaven's gate beloved

beloved

be loved.

*)(**)(**)(*

Climbing Ladders

In the heart of man
There's a lust for power
An with silver wings
They build their golden towers

Chorus:
Why spend your whole life in the shadows
Wishing on rainbows and climbing ladders
Climbing ladders
Climbing ladders

How the Spirit comes to dwell in man
Is a mystery, no one can understand
No one can understand.

Repeat chorus.

*)(**)(**)(*

Sincerely,
headheart ( Eric John Sawyer )

[UrbanMonk]

Dear Urban Monk,

It is simple. I would like to introduce you to my process.
First and foremost, I am a poet. I began writing poetry in my early teens. In 1972, I began learning the guitar and in 1976 I wrote my first psalm. It was titled, "Heading In The Wrong Direction" which I recorded in 2004. It appears in first place on and album titled, "The Nazarene" which is one of 8 albums.

I started playing guitar in 1973 and by 1977 I played in a band that played the high school prom. That year I was 15. By 20, i was about to launch into music full time when I was interupted by an epiphany i experienced after reading a book and saying the "sinners prayer" at the end. It lit a fire in me to find my "home". The experience made it clear to me, without words, that this was not my home. The impression it gave me was that my home was beyond the stars, but I had no clue what that implied. For days a walked around in a kind of euphoric dreamstate...everything seemed very dreamy. I played one more engagement with my heavy metal cover group and within a week, I had quit both my bands. It changed the course of my "life". I wanted to find out more about what I was feeling. Since the experience seemed to key off of that prayer I said, I began my search by trying to find out more about Jesus from a biblical perspective. I surrounded myself with bible-believers, bought study aids (ie. Strongs Concordance, ect) and became an amateur bible scholar for a couple of years. Except for singing in the choir, my music career was put on hold.

During the early part of the 2nd Millennium, I turned my hand to writing. My first book was titled, "Witchcraft" and is an attempt at an expose of it. As with all first attempts, it was naive, cute and badly researched. I was far too influenced by my preconceptions.

My perspective these days is that a world of earth, wind, water and fire is the product of magic that is superceded by the power of a pre-post magical Truth.

Feeling confident in my ignorance, I decided to address my fears directly. To me at the time, the arguments presented by the Bible Students ( Charles Taze Russell ) and the Jehovah's Witnesses were the greatest threat to my beliefs about the deity of JesusChrist. In short, they made me sweat fear drops in my armpits, and so I researched and wrote my first expose of the Jehovah's Witnesses, titled ''A Play On Words"

Jehovahs Witnesses, by coming to the door, indirectly challenged me to do some biblical research on the Trinity in order to have some sort of apologetics basis with which to contradict what my bible freinds said was a mistaken interpretation on their part. I was not able to make much headway and came up with more questions than answers. There isn't anything in the bible that directly, clearly explains the relationships between these three. Once, I heard the pastor's wife using the old ice/water/steam explaination. I don't think I ever settled on a definite opinion, as much as I wanted to believe my friends. What I did is I studied the bible more and more till I had doubts about how my bible-believing freinds were interpreting it on various issues, specifically in regards to "the tablernacle of David". I started to bring my concerns to the elders and once to the pastor who was a fast talker who could pull bible quotes out of thin air and tell you the verse number too. I brought my bible to church with me every Sunday. One Sunday, a missionary old gent that everybody worshipped came to boast about how the church was growing in South America and how they always carried their bibles with them to church. That was probably the first Sunday I didn't have my bible with me. And he said, "In fact, if you're not carrying a bible to church, you're probably not a Christian anyway". And then he told everybody to turn in their bibles to a certain verse. As they were turning their pages, I got up from the second row, and walked down the middle isle out of the church. On the way out the door, I overheard the missionary comment on my exit. "What's he afraid of?" I walked out and never returned. Actually a walked away from a lot of fear (mongering) that day and never regretted it.

During this time, I found the second part of a tiny booklet by an unknown author called, "Can A Christian Be Damned?" Though once again pretty naive, as to the complexity of Christian Theology and being a double-headed predestinarian ( and unbeknown to me at the time, a Calvinist, with a splash of Arminian thinking in there too somewhere ) I assembled the book for online reading. It was a mixture of Calvinist and Arminian ideas and leaned more towards the former than the latter.

Are you saying that Calvanism and Arminianism still influence your thinking today?

At this time, I had begun reading two small pamphlets by Dr. Max Wertheimer.

I remember reading this author popular in bible-believing circles, Francis Schaffer "How Do We Now Live"? I tryed to be impressed with it. But I have to admit, even he was not able to explain to me clearly what was not making sense deep down in my psyche. I often scratched my head when reading P(s)aul. It was very irritating, like a grain of sand. I'd like to think that, like an oyster, I took these irritations and made them in to a string of pearls. I do not allow any authors to indimidate me anymore. They need to sing well, or they get kicked out of the band (my library). This goes even for channeled type material that alledgedly comes from "God" or from "Jesus". People think that maybe I'm overly impressed with some of my preferred textual references because of the way the messages were delivered. But i've rejected more authors/authority than I've accepted, whose messages have come to us in equally impressive ways. I've done this on the basis of doctrine, and how it jives with what within me won't settle for anything less than the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

On the cover of this same book, was the title of another book, ... The title was "S A T A N"

What was so great about this book/author?

Simultaneously, I worked on the second part of the expose of the Jehovah's Witnesses, examining the matter of the next world. Their doctrines about the next world were a result of bad bible study, and even poorer hermeneutics.

Imo, the JW's are not better or worse (interpreters) than just about everybody else who uses the bible as a primary text to base a belief-system upon. Merely to select such a text as a basis to be swallowed whole indicates a kind of misguidance. By making it out to be something its not, each one's hermeneutical hubris helps to hammer out hellish interpretations that amount to not much more than spell-casting as from a grimiore.

I was beginning to become quite a thorough researcher, by that time having read hundreds of papers about the subject of election, reprobation and predestination and of course the next world.

Where I'm at these days with the "next world" theme is that its not about the future because salvation is not time dependent. Yes, it may take a long time, perhaps a million years. But the Truth is true now this very moment, and won't get any truer as time progresses. What I mean is that the World of Go(o)d is the Truth, and any other world is some kind of lie. We can accept the World of Go(o)d - now - in exchange for the world we made of an ill-will. As each accepts, the world we made is transformed, getting better, until eventually time serves no more purpose...and the world we made passes away. The reason is because there was never a world better than the World of Go(o)d, and never will be. So why should we maintain a world of time when the World of Go(o)d is Perfect/Better than anything we could possibly imagine (make by magic)? Not only that, the World of Go(o)d is our home...now...not in the future. The future is brought to an end as we accept what is true...now.

Eventually though, I was felt a strong compulsion ( from GOD) to read and study the entire New Testament, on the subject of next world. Eventually what emerged was a book titled, "It Is Written", which also challenged the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ use of the New World Translation and included a thorough presentation of the alternative destinations in the next world, focussing primarily on the matter of Hell, and the Lake of Fire. While I was compiling my research to assemble the book for the Internet, I was challenged ( by GOD) to study the Old Testament from beginning to end. It was an experience I will never, ever forget. Not only was I stripped of all my preconceptions about GOD, but I also was drawn into the closet alone, with GOD.
These two experiences have made me what I am today.

I respect the experiences people say they have. I've had an epiphany-like experience. I just am very wary of where the guidance is coming from, given the scope of the self-deception we are all suffering with. Just to give you some idea, imo, man's maker is our primary source of self-deception. So if guidance is coming from my maker - as a man - then I would be very vigilant for the truth against self-deception. What I did, eventually, after leaving the catholic church after five years, was to keep an open mind. I developed what I call "back burner theology". If I wasn't feeling sure about some alledged fact, I would put it on the back burner of my mind to simmer. I did not demand an answer conform to any preconcieve notions. In this way, I floated for perhaps ten years without formulating any strong opinion about Jesus or the one he called Our Father.

What I notice is that you had an encounter while you were set in your ways. You had interpretations that you felt were better than the JW's. I can't assume too much here, but i get the feeling you were trying to be supportive of biblical text and several of the themes it induces us to believe in. And in my way of thinking, this is like a prayers asking for misguidance. I'm a believer in answered prayer. It's just that we need to be careful what we are asking for. I believe this whole thing we call "world" of time/mass/diversity is a form of answered prayer. We get what we ask for because of who we are as the Son of Go(o)d. And if Go(o)d won't give it, we can take it (power)...or believe we can. The net result is this massive self-deception we fondly call "the world" and our "home". Even so, it's not the will of Go(o)d, and so it won't last forever (because our will is ultimately the same as Go(o)d).

I don't mean to disparage your encounters. But such guidance/experience is well within the scope of the kind of guidance this world has experienced since its inception, notwithstanding the guidance given Muhammed.

In this time, which continues everyday, I was pulled on one side by theological correctness, and experience of the deity we have named GOD on the other.

Was your guidance not aligning with what you had learned up to that point? Was it theologically new in some way? Again, I'm pro-guidance. I believe we need it, and it needs to be very direct, as from the Spirit of Truth who stands in for Go(o)d in a godless world. Their are two opposing guides who would like our attention at any given moment. And misguidance will always present itself as what we think authoritative, ie God.


Meanwhile, I've got to run. More later. I prefer to be encouraging, and will work on that in the next post.

Urban Monk

[headheart]

Urban Monk,

Everything up to this last stanza from (1st comment), was a summary of my experiences.

'Now whereas I might have unpacked the details of who GOD is and what salvation is, I discovered during this radical change of perspective, that all along the way, I had been assembling my thoughts in a far more cohesive form in the numerous psalms, hymns and spiritual songs I have been inspired to write. These I hope will more effectively communicate to you my thinking in regard to GOD and salvation.'

Sincerely,
headheart

[headheart]

urbanmonk,

My beliefs are about GOD and salvation are expressed in 'I love you', 'The Non-Mystery of Golgotha' and 'Climbing Ladders', the first being more about GOD.
Though there are elements of my beliefs about GOD in the remaining two, these express my beliefs about salvation.

So have you found any "overlaps" in our beliefs yet ?

Sincerely,
headheart.

[UrbanMonk]

Hi HH,
I feel as if this thread is heading into a labyrinth. There's a couple of flags about it right from the beginning. 1.) It's in the "Unorthodox" (wrong belief) section of these forums. 2.) It's exclusive. 3.) I'm not sure what its about.

The thread is about?
A.) Go(o)d/God and/or salvation.
B.) Where do our belief systems coincide ("overlap").
C.) Deciphering your belief system based on a few song lyrics.
D.) The process by which we arrived at our present understanding.

I usually charge $60hr for this! :)

Re: Your first song/lyrics. The words are ambiguous. I like them as is. I wouldn't change any of them. I can invest them with meaning. But the meaning I give them and the meaning you give them might be worlds apart.

Re: Your second song/lyrics. These words are less ambiguous. You are restating your position against oneness/advaita. You contradict what Jesus recommended "Be ye perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect". You recommend camping at the cross instead of joining Jesus in the resurrection.

Re: Third song/lyrics. You recommend that the Spirit come to us, and that it is unknown how that can happen. Rather, we recieve guidance by invitation, which comes to lead us out of the psychological labyrinth we've led ourselves down. Spirit is for leading us out. When we get out, we will discover that we are not humans at all, but Spirit...just like Jesus. Till then, we cannot claim to be saved.

Honestly, I'd guess we are not overlapping at all because the kind of salvation you are interested in is, imo, the opposite of the kind of salvation Jesus enjoyed and recommended. Jesus said if we try to save our own life we will lose it. But if we lay down our life for the Life of Christ, we will save it. Most of the world is trying to save a life not the Life of Christ. Such is not truly a life, and always ends in radical change (traditional death scenarios). We sometimes use the same words. So we overlap in vocabulary, but not the meaning of the words. I give the words meaning that lead one way, and you give the words meaning that lead another way. It's popular nowadays to think that the Spirit is going to come indwell humans and make them super human. This is the most popular brand of salvation. It appeals to our egoic sense of "self". Elves probably are hoping that the Spirit will come and indwell them too, and make them super elves. Unfortunately, elves don't exist. For that matter, neither do humans, according to the Word of Go(o)d. So, that scenario, imo, is not what salvation is all about. Salvation is about following the Guidance of the Spirit out of a world that does not exist. The Spirit will show us what does exist so we can compare it to what doesn't, and make a choice. In this way, we follow Jesus. One clue is that Jesus is not dwelling among us as a Spirit indwelled superhuman. When he followed the Spirit, he layed down any investment in humanhood (layed down his "life" so-called).

Just some thoughts. Would be glad to hear what you think. Meanwhile, may a miracle come our way.

Respectfully,
Urban Monk

[headheart]

urbanmonk,

Hi HH,
I feel as if this thread is heading into a labyrinth.

Into, from or through? - the object of this thread is about harmony and understanding.

There's a couple of flags about it right from the beginning.

1.) It's in the "Unorthodox" (wrong belief) section of these forums.

I think you will discover that this thread is in the right place.

2.) It's exclusive.

Exactly.

3.) I'm not sure what its about.

Q & A time.

The thread is about?

"Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood." The Animals

A.) Go(o)d/God and/or salvation.

GOD and salvation.

B.) Where do our belief systems coincide ("overlap").

Exactly!

My present thinking is that if you are a Non Dualist, then there is certainly an overlap as regards to (a)

C.) Deciphering your belief system based on a few song lyrics.

They accurately express my thoughts about (a) and (b)

D.) The process by which we arrived at our present understanding.

Now that is a seperate subject, but certainly one that we can discuss later.

I usually charge $60hr for this! :)

You are blessed.

Re: Your first song/lyrics. The words are ambiguous. I like them as is. I wouldn't change any of them. I can invest them with meaning. But the meaning I give them and the meaning you give them might be worlds apart.

Thank you. Shall we dance?

"I love you" - Explained:

I used to be a very aggressive meditator.
At the end of 8 months of meditation, my Lord came to me and spoke these threee words to me. I have not been able to find words to describe my Lord's words. The song is and attempt to do that.
I have spent some time reading about Non Dualism, as it relates to (a) and I am confident to state that there is a significant "overlap"
If you desire, I shall attempt to explain this free of charge.

Re: Your second song/lyrics. These words are less ambiguous. You are restating your position against oneness/advaita. You contradict what Jesus recommended "Be ye perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect". You recommend camping at the cross instead of joining Jesus in the resurrection.

"The Non-Mystery of Golgotha" - Explained:

Returning along the pathway where I had first heard my Lord speak to me. I sat quietly and waited. I anticipated an immediate audience and eventually grew impatient. I began walking back down the pathway and the sky was as grey as my mood. I sighed at the skies and cried out, "GOD why are you so far away? Why are you so distant?"

It was in that question, that my answer came. The song is the expression of that answer.

It is a celebration of the unity and intimacy which was established out of time, and within time, thus reconciling all things in one to GOD.
To accomplish this GOD had to enter time and build the bridge. The bridge is first the blood of cross, and secondly the offering of the blood by the eternal Spirit to GOD. Because it was accepted, He poured out His Spirit upon all flesh.

This leads to "Climbing Ladders"

Re: Third song/lyrics. You recommend that the Spirit come to us, and that it is unknown how that can happen. Rather, we recieve guidance by invitation, which comes to lead us out of the psychological labyrinth we've led ourselves down. Spirit is for leading us out. When we get out, we will discover that we are not humans at all, but Spirit...just like Jesus. Till then, we cannot claim to be saved

.

"Climbing Ladders" - Explained.

I returned home, somewhat startled by what I had learned. After years of research and study, I felt like the journey had just began. Knowledge rushed at me with considerable force and demanded that I build a bridge to GOD. At first I entered into it, and attempted to idenitify myself with a particular Creed or Cathechism, or Confession. I steadlily grew more frustrated as I found that they were all so contradictory.
One morning as I lay in my bed, I groaned at GOD. Then in my confusion, I understood that He is in me already. This is the Creed, this is the Cathechism, this is the Confession I live by.

Christ crucified, and Christ in me the hope of glory.

The first links GOD to me, and the second links me to GOD.

Sincerely,
headheart

[headheart]

Add: "Our Father" Appreciation Thread

urbanmonk,
As I do not have time for more than one discussion, I wanted to share with you my own thoughts on that matter. I think it will harmonize nicely with (a)

I believe that we who are brothers and sisters of GOD out of time, are able to identify that to some degree in time.

Sincerely,
headheart

[UrbanMonk]

Dear Headheart,

I'm getting conflicting messages (from you). I asked what is the purpoe of the thread. I suggested that maybe it is about the process by which we arrived at our present understanding. I said,

D.) The process by which we arrived at our present understanding.

You said....

Now that is a seperate subject, but certainly one that we can discuss later.

But that's not what you said before when you said....

Before I read what you have written, I am going to respond to the opening post.
Why?
It is simple. I would like to introduce you to my process.

Can you see the contradiction?

First and foremost, I am a poet.

And you seem to be explaining to me how you, as a poet, are inspired to believe what you believe, and express your beliefs in terms of song/lyrics.

If your inspiration is coming from the Spirit of Truth, then you will the sooner understand the truth. It its not, you are simply being given the kind of experience you are asking for...for something to confirm what you already want to believe so that it may be more believeable to you.

Either way, you get what you want. So where do I fit in? What does my V/voice represent to you? Do you want me to help you disbelieve what you are almost deadset in defending? Do you want another point of view so you can compare? I can do that, but you will need to be more explicit. Currently, your belief system is headed in the opposite direction.

Where do we overlap? We are merely ghost figures in a labyrinth of our own making. I'm heading out of the labyrinth. You are still heading it, imo. We pass like ships in the night. In the dark, I can barely make out the name of your ship, "Titanic". And the lyrics to that Amy Grant song come to mind, "It takes a little time to turn this Titanic around". The Titanic is our beliefs systems, built up over millenia through declaration, wishing, judgmentalism, imagination, hope, denial and ignorance. I have been as much involved in this as you, which explains why our ships pass in the night. But as I mentioned, they are, for now, going in the opposite directions.

It takes a little time to turn our Titanic beleif systems around. I could tell you a little more about my process if you wish...how I've been able to turn my own "Titanic" around in the past 30 years. But what you seem to be telling me is that your process is valid to you, and will steer you clear of icebergs. Whether it is or isn't, you are free to have an experience based on your beliefs in how your scholarship has been validated by some kind of inspiration. I'm simply pointing out that what inspires us is generally in answer to the direction we have already set by the shallow keel of our wishful thinking (ie. hope, faith), or the deep keel of our will as it is one with the will of Go(o)d. What inspires us will not disagree with what we have already set as the course at some level of intent. Our intent will be deep, or very very deep. Our deepest intent is true. But our shallow intentions are false, and merely direct our minds to take us on a trip.

Your guidance system has you solidly encamped at the foot of the cross, inventing an exchange system that validates your existence as a human. Elves are probably doing the same thing. The "son of god" tranformed himself into elflesh (elf flesh) in order to offer elf god some good efl blood. Being pleased with the offering, elf god decides to empower believing elves with something ("spirit") to validate their existence, and improve their elfish performance (behavior).

While you think this way, the cross is going to have the meaning you give it. I have a completely different understanding of the cross because I am not camping there, nor do I hope to (use it to) validate my existence as a human (with it).

I think that summerizes fairly well, in a poetic sort of way, where we are at this juncture of time/mass/diversity.

May a miracle come our way,

Urban Monk

[headheart]

Can you see the contradiction?

urbanmonk,

Process A - Those events which led up to ...

Process B - 8 months of aggressive meditation etc.

I could tell you a little more about my process if you wish...how I've been able to turn my own "Titanic" around in the past 30 years.

Aye Aye Captain.

"...with baited breath and muffled oar"

[headheart]

Add 1:

Based on the following comments ( here ) I believe it time for us to discuss this matter of 'the atoning sacrifice', or what is classically referred to as "propitiation"
I believe that there is a way of understanding this without doing harm to the beliefs of someone who holds to the ideas of Adviata.


(C) The Atoning Sacrifice


Sincerely,
HH

[UrbanMonk]

Adviata is about the truth of oneness. Sacrifice is about the lie of multiplicity (the opposite of oneness). All sacrifice is about the sacrifice of advaita (non-duality).

*Atoning sacrifice* is an oxymoron, like smart bomb. It's like an apple right off *the tree of the knowledge of opposites*; tempting indeed. It's right out of dualism's libelous playbook. There is zero overlap between sacrifice and atonement just as there is no overlap between mercy and cruelty. Go(o)d does not sacrifice anything...Being Everything. Nor can it be shown - even from your preferred textual reference - that anything was sacrificed in the painless cross>>tomb escape>>ascension sequence.

The resurrection is the symbol of the atonement. The cross represents the sacrifice of the oneness of the truth....what would happen if it were possible to sacrifice the truth of oneness. The resurrection of Jesus states that it's not possible to sacrifice the truth of oneness, and that what appears to be fragmented (separated, many different) will know itself as one again. It also states that whatever is the truth can't be killed or otherwise contradicted. It means that "a house divided against itself cannot stand". The cross is the symbol of "a house divided against itself". Every *one* in death (this) world is complicit in the sacrifice of advaita/oneness. And so, each carry's a cross. Jesus cross stood for all crosses.

Jesus painless crucifixion and his walking out of a tomb after a little time had passed...were miracles for teaching/learning purposes. Those who interpret the sequence incorrectly just don't learn anything. Learning is a change of mind. Learning - correctly - and repentance are the same. So those who misinterpret symbols (teaching aids) are just finding excuses not to repent as of yet.

Those who have yet to repent believe in the efficacy of sacrifice...because they still believe/value a world built on the sacrifice of the truth of oneness. They love a world of multiplicity where each exists separate from one another and all are unique. This is accomplished through the sacrifice of the truth of oneness in favor of the *many different*. Anyone with a vested interest in inequality will value sacrifice. Likewise, they will also value the misinterpretation of teaching aids meant for the restoration of the truth of oneness to the awareness of our one mind.

Jesus taught the way of mercy, not sacrifice. Jesus had mercy on himself on the cross, despising (refusing) pain. This is only accomplished as one allows one's mind to be one with the mind of Chr(I)st. That same oneness disallows traditional death scenarios. So, Jesus popped up days later unharmed and happy.

People think Jesus sacrificed his life. No, manhood was not his life...nor was it anything of value to Jesus. So laying it down was not a sacrifice. In fact, no one can lay down his life until the whole idea of personhood has no more value at all. This is actually the truth about personhood: it has no value. The way of mercy would ask us to exchange nothing for everything. And that's what Jesus demonstrated (taught) through the painless cross>>tomb escape sequence. His "resurrection" (awakening) stands for all resurrections (to follow).

The cross is a symbol of the whole world of time>mass>diversity>death. Such a world is built on the sacrifice of the truth of oneness. Jesus states that it is impossible to change the truth, so, what we think we have done (sacrificed the truth of oneness) is not true. Therefore, we are not guilty of what we think we've done. This is important to the re-at-one-ment process that begins when one rightly interprets Jesus' teachings, and begins to practice them (ie. "love your neighbor as your self"). By showing us that he was unharmed by the experience, Jesus is stating that the Son of Go(o)d is unharmed by the cross we put on his shoulders (our beloved world of time>mass>diversity>death).

Chr(I)st is not a man. This is rule number one for those interested in atonement. Chr(I)st is a whole totality (holy). Man is not part of a whole totality, symbolizing, conversely, a fragmented partiality.



Urban Monk

[UrbanMonk]

Here's another way of thinking about "atoning sacrifice".

Translation: The atoning relinquishment of the ego.

This is how anyone achieves atonement (re-one-ment). Jesus set the example and asked everyone else to "follow" (his example). The "ego" is another word for our "life". This is the "life" Jesus asked us to "lay down" (relenquish).

The ego is not alive (living). And yet, around it is built the entire "existence" of mankind. The ego animates death (the) world of man. So, to man, the ego is extremely valuable. Without it, man cannot exist. Rather, without it, man would realize that man does not exist (in truth).

The ego is what makes man believe he is separate, autonomous, different, unequal, special and unique. Indeed, it is what makes man believe he his "alive" (when, in fact, he's not really). For that matter, the the ego is what makes vampires believe they are alive (when they're not). The ego is a thought system built around a belief in everything that is not true. This is man's premise...what man is founded upon (a lie).

So, the relinquishment of "ego" is equated to "sacrifice" in the egoic minds of men. They need it to *survive*. It is our prime defense against the truth.

The way to lay down the ego is to see it as valueless. One must count the cost of maintaining egoic defenses against the truth. The cost is huge. In maintaining egotism, each little "i" is sacrificing Everything...for nothing.

Jesus teaches us to exchange nothing (ego) for Everything (Go(o)d). The exchange is made when we rightly choose between what's True...and what is false. This is accomplished through "repentance", or, the learning of what's right (true). More importantly, it is accomplished through the acceptance of what's right (after you've learned what's right). It is in acceptance that the exchange is made.

Repentance may take a while because egoic thought resists the truth. It resists because it's own "life" is at stake...or so it thinks. The right thinker realizes that the ego does not exist. And in so learning, his mind is free to embrace oneness (atonement, advaita) again.

The symbol of resistance is the story of the Garden of Gethsemane. To lay down one's ego, one must be *vigilant*. Few of us are vigilant. Most of us are *sleeping*.

Laying down ego may feel like the last thing anyone (ie. human) would every want to do. Some would prefer to be crucified then lay down the ego. It may feel like "dying". Those who are successful are those who realize that the ego is what crucifies us. And so, the "cost" of maintaining egoic thought systems is positively a negative net "gain". The ego is what motivates us to "gain the whole world"...at the expense of our "soul".

One could say that this is the whole message of Jesus, and why the painless cross>>death defying sequence is central (important) to understanding what salvation is all about. It is a parable, which, if interpreted rightly, can "save" (heal) the mind which embraces (accepts) it's principles.

Salvation is not a sacrifice anymore than getting off the cross is a sacrifice. It's only the *ego* that would tempt us otherwise (to stay on the cross). The ego would convince us that salvation has something to do with pain and suffering. No, it doesn't, which is why Jesus despised (refused) to suffer on the cross, prompting a roman guard to comment, "Surely this was the Son of God". As long as we associate salvation with pain and suffering, we are *sleeping*, and passively condoning the maintenance of that which crucifies us (egoic thought systems). We are not repenting at all (while we promote suffering or protect it's egoic stronghold).

The cross represents what the ego is doing to the Son of Go(o)d - to us - as represented by Jes(us). So, we must either relinquish it, or it will continue to insult us, and Our Father. The cross is a poetic statement. We are all crucified by the cross of the ego (in our mind). And laying it down may feel to some like "death". But only as we "die" to egoic thought systems...only then are we set free of its condemnation upon our soul.

In this process, its important to understand that Jesus did not consider it to be a sacrifice because he did not value anything (temptations) the ego had to offer him (ie. manhood, personhood, autonomy, specialness, inequality, limitation, flesh etc). Conversely, Jesus considered what he was doing to be "mercy". To lay down the ego is to have mercy on your own soul. So, it's also important to understand that Jesus refused to suffer on the cross, which he converted into the symbol of laying down (relinquishing) the ego. Laying down the ego is what leads us away from pain and suffering, because the ego is what causes us to suffer pain (by turning our own thoughts against us).

We are all called to lay down our crosses, and take up our lives through "resurrection" >> Divine Awakening.

Urban Monk

[headheart]

urbanmonk,

In your grasping for "Oneness" through "pure" nondualism you have ignored basic human rights and justice. Before we even begin to discuss these ideas, or for that matter (C), your information about JesusChrist and your preconceptions about GOD are matters that you will have to sort out.

What I propose is that we explore (B), under a subheading:

(B) Salvation:
(i) Sin

Sincerely,
headheart