Uber-Mind ?

[headheart]

You say...
What it sees is what it is being taught...by an ubermind intimately connected with the infant device.

Another cosmic surfer said...
Indeed, what it sees is what it learns, that much is evident, but again what is not evident is your assertion of an uber-mind


So UM tell me all about it ?

[headheart]

das Uber-Ich ?

[UrbanMonk]

das Uber-Ich ?

The uber-mind is like an uber "i", yes. It is the "i" of the prodigal Son, whose identity is forged out of the denial that he is the Son of "Our Father"...as in, "I am not the Son of God". This "i" echoes throughout his mind, which makes up all of what we call "the world". So, you can go about in this world and ask anyone if he is the Son of God. And to a man, he will deny it. That is the legacy of the uber-mind. The uber-mind is threatened by anyone who will accept the truth about Sonship. It does not really exist, but by the faith lent it by the Son of God. Yet, while it has been believed in, it rules it's world in competition with the perfect World of God. And what thinks it has "choice" iin this world is just fooling himself. Man is not free. The uber-mind peers through man's eyes, and tells him what to think and do through a router of information place behind man's forehead, called a b.r.a.i.n. A brain and the "mark of the beast" are synonymous. The Son of God accepted to be marked with machinery when he put his faith in another father, that uber-mind I sometimes call the 'prodigal Son'. Man sees only what the prodigal Son would have him see...do what the prodigal Son would have him do. Another word for the uber-mind might be "collective unconscious". Although it may be called "unconscious", it is more conscious than man's apparent consciousness. And through it, all men are 'one and many'...an oxymoron. Yet, because it is one mind, the law of oneness has never been broken, meaning, there is no sin. Self-crucifixion would be insane...if it were true. But the Holy Spirit has judged the uber-mind to be meaningless and non-existent. THAT is why there is no sin. What is left after all this nonsense has been dismissed is the sane Son of God, whose mind seemed to be compromised and then raised up again. Flesh is like a tatoo on the mind of the Son of God. Flesh is the "mark of the beast"...which makes each individual special. It is the acceptance of the gift of specialness that puts us under the rule of the uber-mind.

[headheart]

68735

[UrbanMonk]

68735

This pic is a metaphor for the uber-mind, yes. Slaves of fear. Whereas, we have "nothing to fear but fear itself".

[headheart]

Slaves of fear.

68774

I think that Dr. Freud believed that if the super-ego (in a person) is handed over to one leader, it produces a dangerous kind of mass "falling in love". To take this a bit further, one can witness this sort of devotion to various fringe cult movements. There are certainly enough examples to bear that point out. Such levels of "falling in love" can result in total blindness to the agenda of the leaders of these groups. So much so that they need serious deprogramming to resume a normal life.

Sincerely,
HH.

[UrbanMonk]

68774

I think that Dr. Freud believed that if the super-ego (in a person) is handed over to one leader, it produces a dangerous kind of mass "falling in love". To take this a bit further, one can witness this sort of devotion to various fringe cult movements. There are certainly enough examples to bear that point out. Such levels of "falling in love" can result in total blindness to the agenda of the leaders of these groups. So much so that they need serious deprogramming to resume a normal life.

Sincerely,
HH.

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overmind):

Overmind is a term generally used in science fiction to describe an intelligent being that controls numerous underlings, sometimes through telepathy[1]. It sometimes describes a level of consciousness.

In psychology
In Integral psychology (Sri Aurobindo) the highest of the mental planes of consciousness
The highest level of consciousness in the Eight circuit model of consciousness



Many masses are quite in love with the highest levels of consciousness. Christ is beyond that.

The description you offer does not exempt the kind of mass devotion we've seen toward orthodox leaders...in an attempt to hand over mass power to a kind of leader....egotistical in it's attributes.

[headheart]

Christ is beyond that.


68846

Krishna Consciousness ? (http://www.iskcon.com/)

[headheart]

68847

Or, 'Transcendental Meditation' (http://www.maharishischooliowa.org/) ?

[UrbanMonk]

68846

Krishna Consciousness ? (http://www.iskcon.com/)

As a rule of thumb, whenever there is reference to consciousness, it is a reference to uber-mind. The mind of Christ is beyond this uber-mind, and is working within it to bring it to an end...as it chooses against itself in favor of what mind is true/truth: Christ. Christ consciousness must therefore be a reference to the reflection of Christ within the uber-mind/consciousness...a state of mind which sees only that which reflects the Truth...reflecting the mind that is true: Christ. The uber-mind is a pseudo-mind...made up to manifest all that is ungodly. It is programmed to project...to make manifest what is without/outside....what is not Self/Christ-.

[UrbanMonk]

68847

Or, 'Transcendental Meditation' (http://www.maharishischooliowa.org/) ?

The most authentic roots of HInduism are like the most authentic roots of Jesus' legacy...pure non-dualism. The authentic message is diluted and loses it's power as it is interpreted by dualist minds which interject compromise when it comes to the truth. I'm guessing that Maharishi comes from a dualistic interpretive school of thought, more along the lines of what Vivian and Gatsby are devoted to at this time. Jesus was of a purely non-dualistic state of mind, empowering a lasting legacy of extraordinary exploits. The orthodoxy (the broad road, the popular path) is always going to be dualistic to one degree or another. Pure non-dualism is the road less traveled. An example of a non-dualist (adviata) teacher of eastern roots is Adi Shankara.

[headheart]

Urban Monk states:
'Jesus was of a purely non-dualistic state of mind, empowering a lasting legacy of extraordinary exploits.

The orthodoxy (the broad road, the popular path) is always going to be dualistic to one degree or another.

Pure non-dualism is the road less traveled

An example of a non-dualist (adviata) teacher of eastern roots is Adi Shankara.'



It has to be noted that it is generally considered that for Shankara the Absolute Reality is attributeless and impersonal, while for Madhava and Ramanuja, the Absolute Truth is Vishnu. This has been a subject of debate, interpretation, and controversy since Shankara himself is attributed to composing the popular 8th century Hindu devotional composition Bhaja Govindam (literal meaning, "Worship Govinda"). This work of Adi Shankara is considered as a good summary of Advaita Vedanta and underscores the view that devotion to God, Govinda, is not only an important part of general spirituality, but the concluding verse drives through the message of Shankara:

"Worship Govinda, worship Govinda, worship Govinda, Oh fool! Other than chanting the Lord’s names, there is no other way to cross the life's ocean".

Bhaja Govindam invokes the almighty in the aspect of Vishnu; it is therefore very popular not only with Sri Adi Shankaracharya's immediate followers, the Smarthas, but also with Vaishnavas and others.

Courtesy of the Wikipedia (( read more (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adi_Shankara)))


Krishna Consciousness ((( listen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48h6XiEWHPQ&feature=PlayList&p=32750863F9282CBE&index=0&playnext=1) )))


Urban Monk states:
The uber-mind is a pseudo-mind...made up to manifest all that is ungodly. It is programmed to project...to make manifest what is without/outside....what is not Self/Christ-.


From 'A Course in Miracles ~ Workbook Lesson 1 - "Nothing I see means anything"...


“Nothing I see in this room [on this street, from this window, in this place] means anything.”

( read more (http://courseinmiracles.com/workbook_lessons/part_1/lesson1.htm))


Transcendental Meditation ((( listen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7ajEzVsuhg&feature=PlayList&p=95217D01C8E4DB41&index=0&playnext=1) )))


Urban Monk states...

'Many masses are quite in love with the highest levels of consciousness. Christ is beyond that'


Is this Christ you refer to 'personal' or 'impersonal' ?

[headheart]

Pure non-dualism is the road less traveled.

Would you please explain what you mean by 'pure non-dualism' ?

Would you please explain what you mean by 'a road less travelled' ?

Sincerely,
HH.

[UrbanMonk]

Would you please explain what you mean by 'pure non-dualism' ?

Would you please explain what you mean by 'a road less travelled' ?

Sincerely,
HH.


Pure non-dualism sounds like this: God is. There is nothing else besides God. If it is not God...it ISN'T. So, is "the world" God? If not...it ISN'T. ISN'T = does not exist. The question then becomes, how can what appears to be real not exist? Jesus focused on this question and got an answer from the "Spirit of truth". It is explained, in detail, in the gospel/book you mention.

Every learner goes through four phases of learning described as follows:

Dualism
Semi-dualism
Non-dualism
Pure non-dualism

The orthodoxy is generally stuck in dualism (ie. "heaven AND earth")
Gatsby and Vivian are between semi-dualism and non-dualism.
Jesus embraced only pure non-dualism (ie. only heaven...NOT earth, "my Kingdom is not of this world").

A semi-dualist, might, for example, reject the notion of an evil god, of evil/sin in general, or of the devil. And so it seems that perception is rallied around the "good", or, the "love". However, in accepting form as part of reality, as reality, and/or as God, they are actually rallying around dualism. This especially applies to the acceptance of multiplicity, differences, unique and/or special states of being. They are confused, and unaware to what extent they are compromising the Truth. They are, however, tending to open their minds to be less influenced by certain schools of dualistic thought. And yet, they are as much bound to a school of thought as before...one staffed by the shrewdest of personas.

Jesus understood that form is neither God nor is it godly. In order for "God IS" to be the only Truth, Jesus had to interpret what appeared in front of his face...as he listened within to the Spirit of truth. His interpretation is explained in detail in the gospel/book you mention. HIs interpretation has been suppressed by a dualistic orthodoxy which makes real and godly what Jesus makes unreal and ungodly. How can what is as complex as the cosmos (the world) be unreal and ungodly? Only as it is an "insignificant dream" in the mind of a yet, more powerful Being. As Jesus identified with this Being, he dismissed the dream as "insignificant"...and thereby transcended (overcame) what his mind proposed as "real"...but which really wasn't.

This, briefly, sketches out the "way" he went. And unless we go the same way, we will not arrive at the same state of mind he arrived at...a mind that knows only the Truth, knowing itSelf as the Truth....and nothing else. If it is not the Truth, what is it? This is where the Spirit of truth must be summoned to help redeem our perception...to "reframe" what appears to be in front of our face.

Pure non-dualism is the road less traveled, referencing the "narrow road" Jesus spoke of...for obvious reasons. You can look around and verify this for yourself. Perhaps one in ten thousand follow this "way".

God is. If it's not God, it is not.

[JimL]

The uber-mind is like an uber "i", yes. It is the "i" of the prodigal Son, whose identity is forged out of the denial that he is the Son of "Our Father"...as in, "I am not the Son of God".
UM, you never quite explain exactly what or who this uber-mind of yours is. If God as you say is all that is, then who or what is the son of God or prodigal Son or the uber-mind? According to you, since God is all that is, it can only be God himself?



This "i" echoes throughout his mind, which makes up all of what we call "the world". So, you can go about in this world and ask anyone if he is the Son of God. And to a man, he will deny it. That is the legacy of the uber-mind. The uber-mind is threatened by anyone who will accept the truth about Sonship.
And if my reply above is correct and the uber-mind is the mind of God since God is all that is, then in your scenario here God is schizophrenic, not only in dividing himself but also in denying himself. Since there is no world, no other reality, then all of this takes place only in Gods own mind.

It does not really exist, but by the faith lent it by the Son of God.

This quote makes no sense. What does not really exist? The uber-mind, which seems to be synonomous with the son of God, who also seems to be synonomous with God, God being all that is? This seems to be a convoluted way of saying that God is dreaming and experiencing his dream as, or believing it to be, reality.


Yet, while it has been believed in, it rules it's world in competition with the perfect World of God.
So God believing in his dream is in competition with himself?

And what thinks it has "choice" iin this world is just fooling himself.
Because of course all choices are made by God through his dream, the dreamt or dreamee's being merely images fulfilling the unconscious thoughts of his dream state.

Man is not free. The uber-mind peers through man's eyes, and tells him what to think and do through a router of information place behind man's forehead, called a b.r.a.i.n. A brain and the "mark of the beast" are synonymous.
So God sees the world of his dream through the eyes of man and causes his every move and thought. But why does his dream image or man need a brain in his head if the mind that moves him belongs to God? I'm sure that the images I dream up in sleep don't have brains of their own.


The Son of God accepted to be marked with machinery when he put his faith in another father, that uber-mind I sometimes call the 'prodigal Son'.
I know that you probably do not mean this when you say that God put his faith in another God, but it is what your saying since you claim that God is all that is.


Man sees only what the prodigal Son would have him see...do what the prodigal Son would have him do. Another word for the uber-mind might be "collective unconscious".

Another word for it might be God?

Although it may be called "unconscious", it is more conscious than man's apparent consciousness. And through it, all men are 'one and many'...an oxymoron. Yet, because it is one mind, the law of oneness has never been broken, meaning, there is no sin.
Well if there is sin taking place it is apparently God himself who is committing it, if only in his dreams.

Self-crucifixion would be insane...if it were true. But the Holy Spirit has judged the uber-mind to be meaningless and non-existent.
Now how will you explain this holy spirit? Is it another character within the dream of God or again is it just another term for all that is or God himself?

THAT is why there is no sin.
So there is no sin because it is all a dream which takes place in the mind of God who being all that is can not sin against himself?

What is left after all this nonsense has been dismissed is the sane Son of God, whose mind seemed to be compromised and then raised up again.
As I stated before you have never explained who or what the son of God is, except to say that God is all that is and therefore you are insinuating that Gods mind seemed to be compromised, which is what happens when one dreams, but when was it raised up again since the dream apparently continues?


Flesh is like a tatoo on the mind of the Son of God. Flesh is the "mark of the beast"...which makes each individual special. It is the acceptance of the gift of specialness that puts us under the rule of the uber-mind.

I thought flesh nor brains nor anything else really existed. None of this UM, if there is any truth to it at all, are you making very clear or sensible.

[headheart]

Pure non-dualism is the road less traveled, referencing the "narrow road" Jesus spoke of...for obvious reasons. You can look around and verify this for yourself. Perhaps one in ten thousand follow this "way".


The path which "Emmanuel" (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+1:23&version=KJV) walked was entirely unique. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+10:18&version=KJV)
Before He came, there were certainly those who walked a unique path (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2011&version=MSG). ( both Jews (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%201:1-3&version=MSG) and Gentiles - (secular sources, to many to link :lol: )
Jesus Christ is the main event (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+1:15&version=KJV): the first (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+1:18&version=KJV)of a race of new creations (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+8:29&version=KJV): which are born not as a result of inheritence, or as a result of their own unique path, (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+1:13&version=KJV) but as a result of simple trust (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+18:17&version=KJV) in the completed work (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+10:11-13&version=KJV)of Christ and him crucified (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Corinthians+2:1-3&version=NIV). (The Gospel - 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 )
In Jesus dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2:9&version=KJV) and (those who are His (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+8:9&version=KJV)) drink of the same Spirit (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Corinthians+12:13&version=KJV)and being joined to Him are ONE SPIRIT. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Corinthians+6:17&version=KJV)
This oneness (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+17:22&version=KJV), does not melt the character of a person, but actually brings it to a full expression (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Colossians+2:10&version=KJV); whereby we are influenced to love our neighbours and to do what is right, as oppossed to what is wrong or evil. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%205:22-23&version=KJV)
The world which Jesus spoke out against was (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+8:44&version=KJV)neither the Cosmos, nor the people of our planet (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm+24:1&version=KJV)whom God loves ( John 3:16 ) but 'the world' or 'organized evil energized by the demonic" (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+6:10-12&version=KJV)

Sincerely,
HH.

[headheart]

Edit add:

The path.... (http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=truth+life+way&searchtype=all&version1=45&spanbegin=1&spanend=73)

[headheart]

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overmind):
Many masses are quite in love with the highest levels of consciousness. Christ is beyond that.


Is this Christ you refer to 'personal' or 'impersonal' ?


The description you offer does not exempt the kind of mass devotion we've seen toward orthodox leaders...in an attempt to hand over mass power to a kind of leader....egotistical in it's attributes


These exist in every walk of life both religious and secular, not just in those caught in cults.

68968

68969

68970

[UrbanMonk]

Is this Christ you refer to 'personal' or 'impersonal' ?

What is the difference, to you, between the words personal and impersonal?

[UrbanMonk]

UM, you never quite explain exactly what or who this uber-mind of yours is. If God as you say is all that is, then who or what is the son of God or prodigal Son or the uber-mind? According to you, since God is all that is, it can only be God himself?

The prodigal Son is a concept. The Son of God is a reality. The prodigal Son must be a concept within the mind of the Son of God who encompasses the mind of God.


And if my reply above is correct and the uber-mind is the mind of God since God is all that is, then in your scenario here God is schizophrenic, not only in dividing himself but also in denying himself. Since there is no world, no other reality, then all of this takes place only in Gods own mind.

Yes for the most part. A split mind is a concept. When believed (wished for), it yeilds an experience. Wishing, itself, may be a concept.

This quote makes no sense. What does not really exist? The uber-mind, which seems to be synonomous with the son of God, who also seems to be synonomous with God, God being all that is?

As a concept, the prodigal Son substitutes for all that is God, utterly usurping reality with its own...which does not exist but to what believes in it (wishes for it).

This seems to be a convoluted way of saying that God is dreaming and experiencing his dream as, or believing it to be, reality.

Perhaps. It is meant to explain it in a way that what is sleeping may awake from it's dream.

So God believing in his dream is in competition with himself?

Theoretically, yes, because the dream competes with reality.

Because of course all choices are made by God through his dream, the dreamt or dreamee's being merely images fulfilling the unconscious thoughts of his dream state.

Yes, all choices are made by the dreamer. The dreamees are tied to the dreamer in a convoluted kind of way that seems to reverse cause and effect. The dreamee has the choice to end the dream, to end his dreaming, but not to change what the prime dreamer has already decided about dream scenarios.

I've run out of time. I will tend to your questions in more detail tommorrow. Thanks for asking.

[headheart]

The orthodoxy is generally stuck in dualism (ie. "heaven AND earth")


This is a view of Orthodoxy that has a dim view of spirituality, as it is expressed in the teachings of the apostles and the early church fathers. You are going to have to substantiate your claim.


Gatsby and Vivian are between semi-dualism and non-dualism.

I think it would be correct to say, that you need to substantiate your claims with examples that support such and accusation.


Jesus embraced only pure non-dualism (ie. only heaven...NOT earth, "my Kingdom is not of this world").


Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm."

Jesus also said, ...

"And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will be brought down to Hades!"


James 1:26-27 (Message)

26-27Anyone who sets himself up as "religious" by talking a good game is self-deceived. This kind of religion is hot air and only hot air. Real religion, the kind that passes muster before God the Father, is this: Reach out to the homeless and loveless in their plight, and guard against corruption from the godless world.

*)NET Bible Notes - 'world'(*

1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government 2) ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Peter 3:3 (http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=&chapter=3&verse=3) 3) the world, the universe 4) the circle of the earth, the earth 5) the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family 6) the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ 7) world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly 7a) the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ 8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort 8a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews ( Romans 11:12 (http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=&chapter=11&verse=12) etc) 8b) of believers only, John 1:29 ; John 3:16 ; John 3:17 ; John 6:33 ; John 12:47 (http://net.bible.org/passage.php?passage=%201:29;3:16;3:17;6:33;12:47)1 Corinthians 4:9 (http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=&chapter=4&verse=9) ; 2 Corinthians 5:19 (http://net.bible.org/verse.php?book=&chapter=5&verse=19) Synonym : See Definition 5921 (http://net.bible.org/verse.php?id=5921)




So which world is it that you think we should 'gaurd against corruption' from ?

[headheart]

What is the difference, to you, between the words personal and impersonal?

You said:
Many masses are quite in love with the highest levels of consciousness. Christ is beyond that.

Again...

Is the Christ you refer to personal ( Deity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity) to be worshipped - absolute truth (http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/absolute-truth-video.htm) - GOD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God) ) or impersonal (a religion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion), or philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy) - a truth, or truths - knowledge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge) ) ?

Sincerely,
HH

[headheart]

The prodigal Son is a concept. The Son of God is a reality. The prodigal Son must be a concept within the mind of the Son of God who encompasses the mind of God.


Your 'UBER-MIND' is encompased by a reality called the Son of God in which the concept of prodigal son is found.

Is that correct ?

[JimL]

The prodigal Son is a concept. The Son of God is a reality. The prodigal Son must be a concept within the mind of the Son of God who encompasses the mind of God.
Okay, now what do you mean when you say the Son of God since you have already stated that God is all that is? Do you mean that the Son of God is another term for the mind of God or is he another being altogether in relationship with God ? If the latter then what do you mean when you say that he encompasses the mind of God ?



Yes for the most part. A split mind is a concept. When believed (wished for), it yeilds an experience. Wishing, itself, may be a concept.
So was I correct in that you believe God to be schizophrenic and that the existence or illusion of the world is the result of a delusional God ?


As a concept, the prodigal Son substitutes for all that is God, utterly usurping reality with its own...which does not exist but to what believes in it (wishes for it).
But the only being that can actually believe in a concept is a being that actually exists. Or is it your belief that the phantoms in your dreams like ourselves have brains in their heads and ergo, minds of their own?


Perhaps. It is meant to explain it in a way that what is sleeping may awake from it's dream.
It seems that I am on track about your belief being that it is God who is dreaming ( not the Son of God or the prodigal son or the uber-mind ) and that the world is his dream which would, with all its horrors, disappear, if only God would awaken. Is that right ?


Theoretically, yes, because the dream competes with reality.
So when you get right down to it your whole philosophy is that God is dreaming this whole terrible mess and you want him to awaken so it will all go away ?


Yes, all choices are made by the dreamer. The dreamees are tied to the dreamer in a convoluted kind of way that seems to reverse cause and effect. The dreamee has the choice to end the dream, to end his dreaming, but not to change what the prime dreamer has already decided about dream scenarios.
How do the dreamees so to speak have any choice but to act in accordance with the mind of the dreamer ? How can something that does not even exist be the cause or mover of that which does exist ?


I've run out of time. I will tend to your questions in more detail tommorrow. Thanks for asking.[/QUOTE]

Okay, your welcome.

[UrbanMonk]

Your 'UBER-MIND' is encompased by a reality called the Son of God in which the concept of prodigal son is found.

Is that correct ?

Pretty much, yah.

[UrbanMonk]

So which world is it that you think we should 'gaurd against corruption' from ?

The "ungodly world". The ungodly world expresses all that is ungodly...all that is unlike the World of God. God IS the World of God. God doesn't just have a throne in some sector of the World of God. The World of God is the Throne of God. It's the same thing. The "ungodly world" competes with the World of God as a concept in the mind of the Son of God. It is the throne of the "prodigal Son". Just as God IS the World of God, the prodigal Son IS the ungodly world.

Here is a sample list of Godly attributes belonging to the World of God:

Everything has everything.
Everything IS everything.
Everything lives eternally.
Everything is the same.
Everything stays the same.
Everything is one.
Equality
Eternity
Changeless
Unlimited. No limits.
Freedom
Communion (perfect communication)

Here is a sample list of ungogly attributes belonging to the world of hurt of the prodigal Son:

Nothing has everything.
Everything is nothing.
Nothing lives forever.
Everything is different.
Nothing stays the same.
Everything is separated.
Heirarchy
Time
Change
LImited. Limits.
Slavery
Words (communication blockers, miscommunication)

As you can probably see by now, the world of hurt (the world of the prodigal Son) is a SELF CONCEPT, because it takes everything that is godly and reverses it. For this reason it may also be understood to be "anti"-god, or, "antichrist". That is why it is "ungodly". That is why "a freind of the world (of the prodigal Son) is an enemy of God". That is also why the "seed of Adam" (man) is at "enmity" with the "seed" of God (Christ). They can never be reconciled. At best, they can be separated (ie. sheep from goats) so that the mind of Christ may be saved from the concept of anti-christ that was invited within. It is saved when what is anti-christ is disinvited...dismissed...in the name of Christ.

So, fyi, the world of hurt (the world of the prodigal Son) includes the following:

Time (past-future), mass, distance,speed, gravity
Matter, physical, body, flesh
Newtonian physics, particle physics, metaphysics, quantum physics, math, geometry
Energy, perception, consciousness
Imagination, concepts, symbols
Differences, names/naming, persons/personalities, people, angels
Childbirth, accidents, random chance, fate, happenstance
Carnal...carnation...incarnation...re-incarnation. "life-AND-death"...."life-cycle".
Guilt (ie. wrongdoing, sin), fear
Words, speech, sight, hearing, smell, taste

[UrbanMonk]

Okay, now what do you mean when you say the Son of God since you have already stated that God is all that is?

"God" is inclusive, meaning all that has created, all that is created, all that co-creates, all that will be created. This includes the "Father", the "Son", the Son's Son...ad infinitum. God describes the Perfection that is shared from Creator to Created...what is given from Cause to Effect...which in turn gives as Cause to Effect ad infinitum, constantly, always, unchanging. The entirety of God is given to what is "created". This is more like EXTENSION, rather than addition or multiplication or learning or growing. It is best described as sharing, communication, creation, extension or being.

The term "Son of God" is a metaphorical distinction made for the purpose of salvation...saving his mind from a self-concept of himSelf. It lets us know that there is an order in the World of God. It describes a Loving Cause, and a Beloved Effect, Creator and Created. It means that there is not more than one Son of God per Father of God.

These are important distinctions to make, especially as you consider that a self-concept reverses the order of the World of God....reversing cause and effect. Thus, in a world-of-hurt (self-concept), things seem to happen to us. So it seems there is a cause and we are an effect. But actually, we are the cause of what happens to us. It is only as the "Son of God" are we "Lord" over all circumstances that seem to happen to us. In brief, the reversal of cause and effect permeates the world of hurt (self-concept) from top to bottom. It is for this reason that we can rightly say that we made the world...even thought it appears the world made us.


Do you mean that the Son of God is another term for the mind of God or is he another being altogether in relationship with God ?

I want to be careful to point out that, thought the Son of God may be "another being", there is not difference between Father and Son except that one is the Creator, and the other is the Created. Because there are no differences, they do not really think of themselves as "another being" in the same way we do through our "ego" minds. There is nothing to be gained from thinking of Creator as another, since it is given to the Created to encompass the Creator in such a way that if anything every happened to the Created (Creation), the same would happen to the Creator. What is done, conceptually, to the Son, is done to the Father, and visa versa. That is why an attack - hypothetically speaking - on the Son is an attack on "God".

If the latter then what do you mean when you say that he encompasses the mind of God ?

Yes, the Son encompasses the Mind of God...encompasses the Spirit of God...encompasses all that is God's. Likewise, the Father also encompasses the Mind of the Son, the Spirit of the Son, and all that is the Son's. When God creates, God gives SELF. Thus, the inheritance of the Son of God is the entirety of God, to have and to BE...as SELF.


So was I correct in that you believe God to be schizophrenic and that the existence or illusion of the world is the result of a delusional God ?

Technically you may be said to be correct. But actually, the schizophrenia of god is a concept. And what believes in this concept experiences this concept. I merely echo what Jesus said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand". It "cannot stand" means that whatever is this concept, it will pass away and be gone. In other words, time cannot overtake eternity. Time can't last forever, so-to-speak.

The concept of divine schizophrenia is articulated in the story of the prodigal Son. It is the concept of dividing, splitting, leaving, departing, saying good-bye, being separate, maintaining separate existences, and different worlds.

What believes in the concept of the prodigal Son is backed by the power of God. It is not so much given as it is taken. God does not limit, so, God does not stop what wishes to believe in what the prodigal Son represents. What wishes and believes must be overcome by delusion...for it is a path leading away from reality into all that is not real or true. And yet, the power of belief manifests a world that is all that the World of God is not.


But the only being that can actually believe in a concept is a being that actually exists.

Yes. Whom believes the concept is the Son of God. And this is said to be YOU.

Or is it your belief that the phantoms in your dreams like ourselves have brains in their heads and ergo, minds of their own?

Salvation is for what actually exists...for what believes...NOT for what it believes. "Minds of their own" is an example of what is believed. The "brain" is symbolic...symbolizing the belief in "minds of their own".

It seems that I am on track about your belief being that it is God who is dreaming ( not the Son of God or the prodigal son or the uber-mind ) and that the world is his dream which would, with all its horrors, disappear, if only God would awaken. Is that right ?

I prefer to say that inasmuch as the Son of God is "another being", it is the Son of God that is dreaming. Nothing is actually happening, so, nothing is actually happening to God. Perhaps this is best described as multitasking. It's not so much about a sleeping God as it is about the concept of a sleeping God, and what believes in this concept. What believes is taking it's power from what always gives (God). The concept is not the will of God. But by the power of God, it is made manifest for that which has empowered itself to recieve through believing. What believes is what concieves to split off from the mind of God, in whom belief is not natural. What splits from the mind of God concieves to take from the mind of God, as if it could take "self" from what it encompasses. If this were possible, it would destroy the World of God. This is the basis of the feeling of guilt. Since it is not possible, there is no guilt. There is merely a trance-like state of mind that believes, and feels according to it's beliefs.


So when you get right down to it your whole philosophy is that God is dreaming this whole terrible mess and you want him to awaken so it will all go away ?

I would say that what has been given the power of God has used it to conjure up a world of hurt. I would say that I have been given the power of God to do so. And I would say that I have set it up so that I cannot escape but for the help of God. I am echoing the kind of responsibility-taking that gave Jesus the reputation as the "maker of all things seen and unseen". This is pre-requisite to "waking up" (symbol: resurrection), so that when "I" wake up, I find that I am the Son of God, unchanged, unfazed, and unhurt by my own dreams/delusions/deceptions.

How do the dreamees so to speak have any choice but to act in accordance with the mind of the dreamer ?

Correct. For the most part, their fate is sealed, and the die is cast. This is how "slavery" is executed in the world of hurt (the world of the prodigal Son), conceptually opposite the freedom of the World of God. However, the fate of each dreamee can be traced back through a decision tree, back to a "time" when their soul was sold down the river, back when a "deal with the devil" was struck, back when the die was cast. I have heard anectodal evidence of mind tracing this decision tree back to the beginning in a flash of revelation/insight. The moral of the story is that we are exactly where we decided to be, to the extent that we could argue that we are the maker of our own experiences and that nothing really happens by chance. The good news is that the dreamees have been invested with the power to choose one more time...to either remain a character in a script fulfilling a role(s)...or, to completely escape altogether, and awaken from the dream. Having been stripped of power, according to the concept of slavery, the dreamee has no other "power" than this. All other choices are the appearance of choice...in fact, the illusion of choice. That is why it comes down to "two masters". The dreamee can continue with the master puppeteer, or change his mind and begin to think with the Master of freedom. The Master of freedom represents Self, and must be invited, welcomed and accepted...as Self.

How can something that does not even exist be the cause or mover of that which does exist ?

Belief is the prime mover and shaker in the world of hurt (of the prodigal Son). What is concieved and believed is "achieved"...until the mind that believes is ensnared by its beliefs, stuck in its own psychological labyrinth...cornered.

[headheart]

Pretty much, yah.

68988

Say no more. :blush:

[UrbanMonk]

68988

Say no more. :blush:


Sin no more.

[headheart]

:lolo:

[UrbanMonk]

:lolo:

Dude, get a clue. What is the scope of the mind of Jesus? How are you supposed to join with him unless your mind is of the same scope? How can Christ be in you unless your mind encompasses Christ? Why do you even bother calling yourself a Christian if you won't comprehend even the basics? It's very simple. Christ in you. Think about it. This changes who/what you must think you are. When you impose limits on Christ, you "sin" against yourSelf. Go and sin no more.

[UrbanMonk]

This is a view of Orthodoxy that has a dim view of spirituality,

? What was just said?


as it is expressed in the teachings of the apostles and the early church fathers. You are going to have to substantiate your claim.

"heaven AND earth"..."god AND man" are all the evidence I'm going to give you concerning the duality of the orthodoxy...which is always the most popular path...the proverbial "broad road". Most people want to believe that what is not true is true...including the apparent "reality" of the "earth" or "man" and "sin".

A pure non-dualist would state the truth: There cannot be both truth and sin. Likewise, there cannot be both truth and earth and man.

[UrbanMonk]

Again...

Is the Christ you refer to personal ( Deity to be worshipped - absolute truth - GOD ) or impersonal (a religion, or philosophy - a truth, or truths - knowledge ) ?


See the lists I made above describing the World of God vs. the world of hurt of the prodigal Son. The World of God is Christ. Whenever Jesus says, "Me", he is speaking as Christ, in the first person...representing the World of God. Therefore, the World of God is a Being. This being is the totality of the Self that Jesus called "Me". This is also our Self. So, I would say it's personal. But it is not personal in the way we think of "persons". The person of Christ comprises the totality of the World of God...which is EVERYTHING. The world of the prodigal Son symbolizes a MASK or VEIL upon the face of Christ. Baptism unmasks the mask, and reveals what was added to the Perfection that is Christ.

[UrbanMonk]

So God believing in his dream is in competition with himself?

What believes in the dream believes it with the power of God, which grants what is asked. But what is granted in dreams is not real...though it appears to be...for reality could never be granted to unreality....neither truth be granted to what is untrue. What believes is theoretically in competition with God. This is why it is said, "He who is a freiend of the world is an enemy of God". In actuallity, God has no enemies because...drumroll please...they don't exist.


So God sees the world of his dream through the eyes of man and causes his every move and thought.

Yes. But what does this blasphemes God...controlling every detail of it's ungodly universe.


But why does his dream image or man need a brain in his head if the mind that moves him belongs to God?

Jim, it's to keep up appearances that the body has some kind of autonomy. Unfortunately, rather than thinking, the brain functions more like a router that is thought through. This is echoed in JJ Hurtak's "Book of Knowledge" which states that "man is a thinking membrane between star intelligences". The brain is a mechanism of illusion...something to be influenced...something that responds to the strings of the master puppeteer. Jim, when I say that the body is a mechanism for self-deception, I'm not kidding. It's an eleven dimensional assembly of nothing.

I'm sure that the images I dream up in sleep don't have brains of their own.

Maybe you haven't looked close enough. Have you ever tryied to do a dream autopsy? You'd probably be surprised.

I know that you probably do not mean this when you say that God put his faith in another God, but it is what your saying since you claim that God is all that is.

Yes, God is all that is. So what believes? What believes in something else? I'm trying to explain this as best I can. I'll keep trying. All I can say is that the mind of God is unlimited and omniciently powerful. And what believes as it borrows power from the mind of God....get's what it wants...so-to-speak. And whatever it wants, it wants it to be "real". So, it seems to be. Let us congratulate ourselves on such an impressive mistake. The good news is that it can never be real...and can disappear when we withdraw faith from it.

Another word for it might be God?

?


Well if there is sin taking place it is apparently God himself who is committing it, if only in his dreams.

Technically, yes. But sin isn't ultimately true. It too, is utter illusion...the appearance of guilt...the impression of insanity.

Now how will you explain this holy spirit? Is it another character within the dream of God or again is it just another term for all that is or God himself?

The Holy Spirit is awake, and represents that which awakens that which sleeps. The Holy Spirit IS "the savior", who saves the dreamer from his dream. The Holy Spirit represents our true desire...our good will...to be what we ARE, and not what sleeps and dreams.


So there is no sin because it is all a dream which takes place in the mind of God who being all that is can not sin against himself?

Yes. What appears to be irreversable - sin - is reversable. There is really no sin.


As I stated before you have never explained who or what the son of God is, except to say that God is all that is and therefore you are insinuating that Gods mind seemed to be compromised, which is what happens when one dreams, but when was it raised up again since the dream apparently continues?

From an eternal perspective, time is finished and the dream is over. It's continuation is an illusion. Time waits for each of the dreamees to decide to waken. Then time is finished for that dreamee.


I thought flesh nor brains nor anything else really existed. None of this UM, if there is any truth to it at all, are you making very clear or sensible.

They don't really exist. It is the power of belief, borrowed from the power of Christ/God, which gives "reality" to what does not exist.

[JimL]

"God" is inclusive, meaning all that has created, all that is created, all that co-creates, all that will be created. This includes the "Father", the "Son", the Son's Son...ad infinitum. God describes the Perfection that is shared from Creator to Created...what is given from Cause to Effect...which in turn gives as Cause to Effect ad infinitum, constantly, always, unchanging. The entirety of God is given to what is "created". This is more like EXTENSION, rather than addition or multiplication or learning or growing. It is best described as sharing, communication, creation, extension or being.
Let's just term it being then, since it seems to be synonymous with God or all that is
The term "Son of God" is a metaphorical distinction made for the purpose of salvation...saving his mind from a self-concept of himSelf.
Okay, its purpose is salvation, but what is it a metaphor for, what is it representative of. No matter how you define the world, illusion, unreal, ungodly, or sinful, It always comes back to God as the cause no matter what aspect of god you wish to attribute it to. Its as if your saying that the ungodly, sinful world that we experience is nothing but a fault in the distinctive or divisive nature of God himself. How can the effect make whole that which was divided even before the effect came into being ?


It lets us know that there is an order in the World of God. It describes a Loving Cause, and a Beloved Effect, Creator and Created. It means that there is not more than one Son of God per Father of God.
Aren't you describing the same world of opposites in God ( cause and effect, creator and created, God and Son of God, which in this world you dismiss as an illusion?
These are important distinctions to make, especially as you consider that a self-concept reverses the order of the World of God....reversing cause and effect.[QUOTE]
Its still all about God, if their is a reversing of cause and effect it is God who causes the reversing as well. God is in fact, both cause and effect. No?


[QUOTE]Thus, in a world-of-hurt (self-concept), things seem to happen to us. So it seems there is a cause and we are an effect. But actually, we are the cause of what happens to us. It is only as the "Son of God" are we "Lord" over all circumstances that seem to happen to us. In brief, the reversal of cause and effect permeates the world of hurt (self-concept) from top to bottom. It is for this reason that we can rightly say that we made the world...even thought it appears the world made us.
I understand that you believe us to be God and we ( as the mind God ) created the world which in reality exists only as an illusion in our mind, being that we are God.



I want to be careful to point out that, thought the Son of God may be "another being", there is not difference between Father and Son except that one is the Creator, and the other is the Created.
But it can not be another being. Since God is all that is, can he truly create anything, including a Son, that does not already exist in the all that is himself ?




Because there are no differences, they do not really think of themselves as "another being" in the same way we do through our "ego" minds. There is nothing to be gained from thinking of Creator as another, since it is given to the Created to encompass the Creator in such a way that if anything every happened to the Created (Creation), the same would happen to the Creator. What is done, conceptually, to the Son, is done to the Father, and visa versa. That is why an attack - hypothetically speaking - on the Son is an attack on "God".
That's what I'm saying, they are the same being. It looks like your Son of god is no more than the mind of God which does the creating.
If the latter then what do you mean when you say that he encompasses the mind of God ?

Yes, the Son encompasses the Mind of God...encompasses the Spirit of God...encompasses all that is God's. Likewise, the Father also encompasses the Mind of the Son, the Spirit of the Son, and all that is the Son's. When God creates, God gives SELF. Thus, the inheritance of the Son of God is the entirety of God, to have and to BE...as SELF.
Which again is no more than to say that they are one and the same. There is no dichotomy, no division of self, other than for the purposes of explanation.



Technically you may be said to be correct. But actually, the schizophrenia of god is a concept. And what believes in this concept experiences this concept. I merely echo what Jesus said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand". It "cannot stand" means that whatever is this concept, it will pass away and be gone. In other words, time cannot overtake eternity. Time can't last forever, so-to-speak.
Yes but the conceptualizations as well as the belief and experience of them all belong to God. According to you it is God who is divided against himself.
The concept of divine schizophrenia is articulated in the story of the prodigal Son. It is the concept of dividing, splitting, leaving, departing, saying good-bye, being separate, maintaining separate existences, and different worlds.
And again who else but God himself, who is both the cause and the effect, can be said to be the prodigal son?
What believes in the concept of the prodigal Son is backed by the power of God. It is not so much given as it is taken. God does not limit, so, God does not stop what wishes to believe in what the prodigal Son represents. What wishes and believes must be overcome by delusion...for it is a path leading away from reality into all that is not real or true. And yet, the power of belief manifests a world that is all that the World of God is not.
Maybe you begin to see why I need for you to explain more clearly. I don't understand how you can claim on the one hand that God is all there is and yet his functions, if you will, you ascribe to others. Why do you say the Son of God or the prodigal son or the holy spirit rather than God is responsible for such and such, while claiming at the same time, that God is all that is?



Yes. Whom believes the concept is the Son of God. And this is said to be YOU.
Yes, and the Son of God whom believes the concept and who you claim to be me and yourself is really only God. Ultimately everything is Gods doing.


Salvation is for what actually exists...for what believes...NOT for what it believes. "Minds of their own" is an example of what is believed. The "brain" is symbolic...symbolizing the belief in "minds of their own".
And so salvation is for God, because it is all about God. God is the dreamer, God is the believer.


I prefer to say that inasmuch as the Son of God is "another being", it is the Son of God that is dreaming. Nothing is actually happening, so, nothing is actually happening to God. Perhaps this is best described as multitasking.

But the Son of God is not "another being", can not be another being, being that God is all that is. God is doing the dreaming the conceptualizing the believing the creating of the illusion whether you prefer to attribute it to other beings or not.

I have to run. I will try to get back to this tomorrow.

[headheart]

Dude, get a clue.

This will be the 2nd time I am explaining this, and the last.

The Christian faith is not focussed upon a mystical experience of Christ in us (which is the hope of glory) but upon 'Christ and him crucified.'

Your way leads to the struggle against dualism, something that I worked through in my teenage years, and resolved at the foot of the cross.

Seeing as you do not receive the 'didache' of the apostle Paul, claiming to have found greater light in your own 'grammata', I can see we have reached the crossroad (pun intended), and so it is time to part ways, though I shall not be more than a pm. away should you want to chat.

Fondly,
HH

69005

[UrbanMonk]

The Christian faith is not focussed upon a mystical experience of Christ in us (which is the hope of glory) but upon 'Christ and him crucified.'

What does "mystical" mean to you? Faith leads us to the real experience of "Christ" in us as Self in us. All other experience is mysterious, strange, illusive, symbolic, confusing...unreal.

You don't know what Christ is. So how can you even understand what "Christ crucified" means?

Your way leads to the struggle against dualism,

My ways lead to vigilance against dualism. It need not be a struggle because it is vigilance for what exists (is true) against what does not exist (is not true).


something that I worked through in my teenage years, and resolved at the foot of the cross.

Many teenagers resolve their problems at the foot of a vending machine that puts out a bottle of Mountain Dew for a dollar. How is your resolution different? It resolves to exchange shekels for blood-money, with which one may purchase his way into the Kingdom of God.

Seeing as you do not receive the 'didache' of the apostle Paul,

Seeing as how P(s)aul did not recieve the didache of Stephen...

claiming to have found greater light in your own 'grammata',

...who claims to have found greater light in his own grammata...

I can see we have reached the crossroad (pun intended), and so it is time to part ways, though I shall not be more than a pm. away should you want to chat.

Go in peace.

Yours,
Urban Monk

[UrbanMonk]

Let's just term it being then, since it seems to be synonymous with God or all that is

Ok

Okay, its purpose is salvation, but what is it a metaphor for, what is it representative of.

Father and Son is a reference to Creator and Created...a Loving Cause and a Beloved Effect. It is not a reference to gender. It's a reference to what is the SAME. At the same time, it is a reference to ORDER. A father "creates" a son. A son does not create itself. This is an important distinction to make. The world of the prodigal Son is a world in which the son makes himself...and so reverses the order of cause and effect that he is imprisoned within his own confusion. Jesus understood that the restoration of power depended on understanding true order. He chose to be second to the Father in order to gain all power. This is somewhat of a paradox. Dependancy leads to the restoration of all power in heaven and earth.

No matter how you define the world, illusion, unreal, ungodly, or sinful, It always comes back to God as the cause no matter what aspect of god you wish to attribute it to.

Yes. That's why I've often said, the anti-world is a kind of blasphemy against God as it seems to come from God and seems to describe God.

Its as if your saying that the ungodly, sinful world that we experience is nothing but a fault in the distinctive or divisive nature of God himself.

I prefer to think of it as an amazing expression of freedom. A mistake? Perhaps. But a perfect mistake inasmuch as a storm can be perfect. Perfectly disfunctional. It is the perfect answer to a silly question, "What am I?". Such a question can only be answered in the negative because the Son of God already knows what the Son of God is.

How can the effect make whole that which was divided even before the effect came into being ?

Which effect? The World of God or the imagined anti-world of the prodigal Son? The World of God is whole, and includes the Son of God in a way that completes it. It would not be complete if the Son of God were absent. A lack of communication is a kind of absence. I'm saying that the issue of division is being treated as a lack of communication. The "Holy Spirit" is for restoring "communion" (the kind of communication that builds and maintains the World of God).


Aren't you describing the same world of opposites in God ( cause and effect, creator and created, God and Son of God, which in this world you dismiss as an illusion?

No, these aren't opposites. A cause is not opposite it's effect if the intent is for the effect to be the same. Do you think an effect is intrinsically opposite it's cause? Explain please.

Its still all about God, if their is a reversing of cause and effect it is God who causes the reversing as well.

Yes, it's always all about God. But I would discern between what is all God, and what is a story about God.

God is in fact, both cause and effect. No?

In the world of the prodigal Son, the son is his own cause. He literally (as in tells a story) makes his own father! Jim, you ask good questions. Mind you, what has banished itself to a world not the World of God can scarcely remember where he comes from, let alone how the World of God is built. Is it not enough to be given information that says that God is always creating, and that what is created does not create itself? For if it did, sharing would be a farce. Rather, sharing is real in the World of God.

I understand that you believe us to be God and we ( as the mind God ) created the world which in reality exists only as an illusion in our mind, being that we are God.

You catch on quickly.

But it can not be another being. Since God is all that is, can he truly create anything, including a Son, that does not already exist in the all that is himself ?

Normally and naturally, we co-create with God knowing everything about how the World of God is built. and when we create, we create BEING equal to SELF, itself able to co-create. So, to imagine another world opposite the World of God...how hard can this be? Another world cannot be more than a SELF-CONCEPT, since this BEING is all that is. What is a self-concept, really?

That's what I'm saying, they are the same being. It looks like your Son of god is no more than the mind of God which does the creating.

I just want to say that, unlike so many other legends about what is the Son of God, the Son of God is not an aspect or part or function of a Supreme Being. The Son of God is not like steam is to water, nor like a hammer to a carpenter. The Son of God is more like a whole from a whole, an equal being. I understand it is challenging for what has forgotten to fathom how a Being can give the totality of everything away, and still keep what it gives, as if to create another SELF.

If the latter then what do you mean when you say that he encompasses the mind of God ?

I mean the Son encompasses everything God has or is. Does God have a mind? Is it unlimited? Then the Son has a mind that is also unlimited. Is God Spirit? Then the Son is Spirit. Is God perfect? Then the Son is also perfect. Is it possible for God to be "within" anything? If so, God must be within what is like God...namely, the Son of God. This means that the Son of God is so expansive, so all-inclusive, so infinite that the Son of God would encompass God if God could be encompassed.

Which again is no more than to say that they are one and the same.

Jim, just sit with this for 30 minutes and ask the Spirit of truth to help understand what is the same versus what is impossible relative to the "Father" and "Son" paradigm. Imagine giving everything away...everything you have...everything you are. Imagine that you are everything to begin with...and you give it all away. If you are everything, how are you going to give it away? To whom? This is where "creation" comes in. You must somehow create a being able and willing to recieve all you have to give. Is this possible? Not in this world. But in the World of God, things are different from this world. What seems impossible here is possible there, yeah, normal and natural. And, if what you have to give is so perfect that there is no reason to change anything, why would we argue about whether the being that is created is the same or different?

There is no dichotomy, no division of self, other than for the purposes of explanation.

In one of my sources HERE (http://www.forholyspirit.org/), the "Holy Spirit" explains that in the parable of the prodigal Son, the "Father" is represented by "Holy Spirit", which represents SELF. And salvation is about coming back to SELF as SPIRIT and as HOLY (inclusive), rather than self-concepts made of fragmented abodes of autonomou - exclusive - flesh. HOwever, as I understand it, once we return to our SELF as SPIRIT and as HOLY...we have readied our SElf to return to our "FATHER". I am maintaining this distinction because it was important to Jesus in his campaign to return HOME.

Yes but the conceptualizations as well as the belief and experience of them all belong to God. According to you it is God who is divided against himself.

"A house divided against itself" must be God divided against God...unless division is a concept and not a reality. They are an experience that can only be had by what is God...or what seems to be God, yes. Essentially, you are asking me how David Copperfield manages to pull off some of his most secreted tricks. And I couldn't tell you how illusionists - or even how a Tesla - manages to perform magic. I'm mainly saying that an unlimited mind seems to have managed to fool itself through various illusions that make the impossible seem possible, and make what is unreal appear to be real.

And again who else but God himself, who is both the cause and the effect, can be said to be the prodigal son?

And so, we must forgive God, for what God seems to have done. And in so forgiving, we will forgive ourselves for what we think we have done. The one who truly forgives is the one who is willing to question whether or not God has really done this...or whether it is something we have done to ourselves in the name of God.

Maybe you begin to see why I need for you to explain more clearly.

I understand. And I don't blame you. And as long as you keep asking for clarity, I will keep asking and will keep attempting to offer as much clarity as I have been able/willing to recieve as of this milestone in what amounts to a complete reeducation as to what IS, and what we have believed to be true.

I don't understand how you can claim on the one hand that God is all there is and yet his functions, if you will, you ascribe to others.

To others? You mean like the "ego", or to supercomputers, or pseudo-minds, or self-concepts? I'm saying it's ok to take ownership for all of these "others" as what has proposed they are true or real or "other". I'm just saying, let us be careful about taking blame. I advocate taking responsibility in the name of God...but not the kind of responsibility that casts blame or imputes guilt. If we blame God, we will only end up blaming ourselves, and the problem of illusion won't go away. If we blame our self, we will end up blaming God, because we are so intertwined in oneness. We must be willing to accept "God's judgement", which says that nothing has happened. What seems to have happened is merely an expression of the power of our mind...an apparent ability to hallucinate, imagine, make things up, pretend, fake it...or otherwise self-decieve.

Why do you say the Son of God or the prodigal son or the holy spirit rather than God is responsible for such and such, while claiming at the same time, that God is all that is?

I would prefer to say that God is responsible for dispelling any and all notions we ever held in our mind that we are responsible for what we've imagined to be true which isn't. I prefer to think that God is innocent of this, and that I, being like God, am innocent as well. How can this be unless what I have imagined to be true about God...just isn't true at all? How can this be unless the way I've imagined has never truly been unfair? What if it's not true that there can be any such thing as a victim? What if it's not possible to really lose? I merely make a distinction between God, and what imagines all that is not God to be true. Am I guilty for what I have imagined? And if I am God, does it make God guilty? What do you think?

Yes, and the Son of God whom believes the concept and who you claim to be me and yourself is really only God. Ultimately everything is Gods doing.

Yes. Ultimately everything is God's doing...unless it has not really been done. Isn't that what defines "illusion"?


And so salvation is for God, because it is all about God. God is the dreamer, God is the believer.

Yes. Salvation is for God, the Son of God.