On Enlightenment

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

You are wrong it's right above you... it is an explaination that the earth was created from nothing...

I'm not talking about how to spell soul and spirit.
come on now...

I'm interested in how you believe they differ from one another...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

1 Thes 5:23Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Man is Body, Soul, and Spirit. Its right there in 1 Thes.

Look at how הָיְתָ֥ה is used throughout the OT. It means to become. The earth was created from nothing, was destroyed and then restored in 6 days.

Duplicate

a reply to: 5StarOracleThe Soul is our consciousness. It must be restored in white robes.

The Spirit (which must be born again in Christ) is what connects us with God via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

The Body is the flesh. It must be resurrected after death.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Yes that is an accurate way to distinguish between the two...
I just wanted to see what you believed...

Formless- not yet formed
Void-empty non existing

It was not recreated from a previous version...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

This offers a somewhat decent explanation of the six day restoration of earth. But you can see for yourself if you take a very close look at 2 Pet 3:5-7. The flood in 2 Peter 3 is not Noah's flood, it happened before man was created. That is why God had to separate the "waters from the waters". The word for Heavens "hashamayim" means 'the waters that are divided'. The secondary prefix 'sha' means to divide. "Mayim" means waters.

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Yes that is an accurate way to distinguish between the two...
I just wanted to see what you believed...

Formless- not yet formed
Void-empty non existing

It was not recreated from a previous version...

Jeremiah 4:23 "I looked on the earth, and behold, it was formless and void;
And to the heavens, and they had no light."

Jeremiah uses the same EXACT terms as Gen 1:2 (tohhu wabohhu) to describe the earth's destruction on the Day of the Lord.

Formless does not necessarily mean, "not yet formed". It can mean simply screwed up beyond recognition.

Void does not necessarily mean "vacuum", it can mean that the surface is so desolate that its void of trees, mountains, and cities.

Its all in the context... And Jeremiah 4:26-forward sets the context...Day of the Lord.

Jeremiah 4:26I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness,
            And all its cities were pulled down
            Before the LORD, before His fierce anger.

      27For thus says the LORD,
            “The whole land shall be a desolation,
            Yet I will not execute a complete destruction.

      28“For this the earth shall mourn
            And the heavens above be dark,
            Because I have spoken, I have purposed,
            And I will not change My mind, nor will I turn from it.”

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

That would be devoid...

Jerimiah 4:23 is not the begging of things it is the destruction at the end...

The word here before void is waste not formless...

So this time around it is saying the earth is destroyed and void of life... which should really be devoid...



כג  רָאִיתִי, אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וְהִנֵּה-תֹהוּ, וָבֹהוּ; וְאֶל-הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵין אוֹרָם.23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

 וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, יְהִי רָקִיעַ בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּיִם, וִיהִי מַבְדִּיל, בֵּין מַיִם לָמָיִם.6 And God said: 'Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.'ז  וַיַּעַשׂ אֱלֹהִים, אֶת-הָרָקִיעַ, וַיַּבְדֵּל בֵּין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מִתַּחַת לָרָקִיעַ, וּבֵין הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר מֵעַל לָרָקִיעַ; וַיְהִי-כֵן.7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.

This is saying that it is the land God created which was used to separate the waters, and that there was water above and beneath the land...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

No, the cosmos was filled with water at one point. God separated the waters to create empty space between the atmosphere and the heaven where God dwells. So the Cosmos is the Firmament.

First take 2 Peter 3 and Jeremiah 4 into consideration, and explain both of those, then we can go back to Genesis 1.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Firmament [N] [S]

from the Vulgate firmamentum, which is used as the translation of the Hebrew raki'a . This word means simply "expansion." It denotes the space or expanse like an arch appearing immediately above us. They who rendered raki'a by firmamentum regarded it as a solid body. The language of Scripture is not scientific but popular, and hence we read of the sun rising and setting, and also here the use of this particular word. It is plain that it was used to denote solidity as well as expansion. It formed a division between the waters above and the waters below ( Genesis 1:7 ). The raki'a supported the upper reservoir ( Psalms 148:4 ). It was the support also of the heavenly bodies ( Genesis 1:14 ), and is spoken of as having "windows" and "doors" ( Genesis 7:11 ; Isaiah 24:18 ; Malachi 3:10 ) through which the rain and snow might descend.

www.biblestudytools.com...

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
I imagine enlightenment can come in all forms depending upon the philosophies and cultures you have been brought up in. Some may call it the grace of God others may call it awakening or satori.

I would say. It's a realisation that you are a part of the universe and not apart from the universe. The realisation you are not a separate entity in this universe, but just as much a part of the universe as other galaxies as clouds as trees, but we have been given a false sense of separateness, where we feel like a skin encapsulated ego in a world of other skin encapsulated egos, when the reality is we are all one manifestation of the universe.

You would think with so many variations (alternative thoughts upon god etc) one could take all of the above and come to 'a one happy thought' conclusion; (all is allowed) not: its caused a huge division of partisan (US vs THEM) ideologies instead.

"In the beginning there was nothing, somehow out of this nothing, came everything.
Matter, mind, consciousness emerged."

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

That would be devoid...

Jerimiah 4:23 is not the begging of things it is the destruction at the end...

The word here before void is waste not formless...

So this time around it is saying the earth is destroyed and void of life... which should really be devoid...



כג  רָאִיתִי, אֶת-הָאָרֶץ, וְהִנֵּה-תֹהוּ, וָבֹהוּ; וְאֶל-הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵין אוֹרָם.23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was waste and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

what you are reffering to is known as the creation of the new heaven and new earth near the end of revelation, after all things in the universe pass away to become the void again. Much like the big freeze or big crunch theory.

Pray to be Saved thru His Grace and you will be enlightened
a reply to: Belcastro

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

well the people are fools for blindly believing such people.
They are almost as much at fault as the charlatans in my opinion. As they want an easy way to happiness or out of some troubles so they pay someone for an "easy fix". And charlatans enjoy to play games with fools ... : )

I can understand your thinking UniFinity, but it isn't that simple and experience shows that such people aren't necessarily fools. Misguided perhaps. The "charlatans" themselves sometimes appear to believe it (delusion?) and not all of them crave wealth.

The "fools for blindly believing" could apply to the overwhelming majority of people on our planet who do exactly that. Have a look at some of the quotes of scripture in this thread, for instance. There are literally billions of people with such beliefs.

originally posted by: [post=20401518]enlightenment means the realization that there is only one thing. the Self. Infinite and eternal.

Quite a claim.

This notion must be very comforting to those who want themselves to be more than a collection of bacteria, viruses and various cells, with a nervous system. To help allay the fear that at the end, they will be no more.

There has been quite a successful (in terms of followers) philosophical belief for millennia that the "self" is the very thing that creates our illusion.

No idea if that's true (re "enlightenment"), but science is also finding that the (psychological) "self" is simply an illusion, a trick of the brain (a useful one, in an evolutionary sense). Not difficult at all to see what they are getting at either, for anyone who takes notice. Which would make the "eternal self" idea nothing more than a misguided belief based on a temporal illusion. Not very convincing.

At any rate, why would one recent particular species of ape have an "eternal self" any more than a mosquito? What if the whole thing is nonsense?

Inspect the true saints in the past and how they were living and teaching. You should notice the difference with ease. It is like day and night.

IMHO

Would that require a "blind belief" in such people?

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Void does not necessarily mean "vacuum", it can mean that the surface is so desolate that its void of trees, mountains, and cities.

I get the idea that you might be on to something that void and vacuum is not the same. If I do think of it like a 3D probability surface where reality is perforated ready to receive energy it will be a mold for creation not yet manifested waiting to be filled. It is not a vacuum=non perforated probability surface. And energy (water) is needed to fill the perforations/surfaces so particles are manifested on a quantum level.

a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

You seem of an opinion that experiences in meditation and dream mind states are false and everything is only blind belief?
Well at least this is normal for a lot of people on ATS to think, I am sorry if I am wrong to say that about you.

But in any case, I respectfully disagree with that opinion. They are real in some sense, just like waking state is fake in some sense as you already hinted at in your post when you mentioned psychological "self".

BOTH can be a great tool for learning about the Self. If you would experience other mind states in meditation you would probably understand and realize that. Science relies only on our waking state, ignoring the rest. Well, we as humans should not depend on science but on our intuition and insight developed by meditation in my opinion. Our mind and brains are "the best machines" already. if we want to discover the real inner workings of the universe, it is only natural we use the best tool available to us and made by nature itself - our Selfs and not science made by us.

And wonderful point about blind beliefs. But personally, I don't do that and don't wish for anyone to do that. Blind belief is bad! Read my first post in this thread, maybe you will understand better what I am pointing to... It is all in experiance. Blind beliefs of any sort are wrong and should be rid off sooner or later.

But it is advisable in my opinion, to read materials from true saints, and they are in all religions and absorb their teachings to expand imagination in the utmost abstract way, but nothing to do with blind beliefs. If one get caught in that, that means there are expectations and that is far from good.
Why cannot one just read a spiritual book and contemplate it without any attachments at all?
Contemplation should be mastered until this is possible.

Only our EGO has expectations and attachments and this is the part we want to get rid of in this context. So please don't confuse my typing as something which is coming from just blind beliefs. No, I am a regular meditator with few years of experiences and I have build my image of the real nature from them and also with the help of reading.

So with more experiences you learn to get less (or after sometime not at all) entangled with blind beliefs and start making educated guesses - the difference is that if they are right or wrong does not matter, experiences and learning from them should be the only guide and teacher and not blind beliefs.

Everything is a process and can be experienced, don't just believe but try it for yourself!
This is also what ALL true saints are teaching.

imho.

originally posted by: UniFinity
You seem of an opinion that experiences in meditation and dream mind states are false and everything is only blind belief?

I suppose that all depends on how one sees the word false.

One definition of the word is "deliberately made or meant to deceive".

Meditation fits that description perfectly, which is why I mentioned on page 1 that new age spirituality is just another trap.

Enlightenment and meditation are both counterfeits and they are both meant to deceive.

The fact that Satanists use meditation to communicate with demons is just one red flag of many.

The fact that it opens up doorways for demonic spirits to pass through has been confirmed by many right here on ATS.

I was also curious about your comment about true saints.

Can you elaborate on what you are talking about or how you define it?