Spirituality is just another "big shiny box"....

Originally posted by JesusisTruth
Souls grow in this box and become saintly.

Yes, go saints (and all that)!

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 31-1-2010 by Uncle Benny]

Everything is the same, no matter where you go. Its just dressed up differently.

Well put TheRandomUser, we're all the one (one for all, and all for one)!

reply to post by Uncle Benny


Dude, you have no idea what I know or understand. I am not even going to bother responding to your last post, because I moved past that kind of stuff years ago and am light years ahead of this conversation.

I realize you probably don't mean it in such a way, but honestly when you type those things to me like that, it feels like you think I'm like a 5 year old or something.

I need to think about who is the observer? I already know who the observer is. That would be god/the father. I am god and I am arguing with myself.

Some fault of my own I'm sure. I really don't take the time to go in depth about these things to much anymore, because I feel like I've said it over and over etc. And it just usually ends up being some really long post that takes me awhile to type and nobody really reads it, and anyone who might actually read it likely already has.

Here are a couple of posts I wrote little over a year ago.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by badmedia
Dude, you have no idea what I know or understand.

I realise you don't know what you're talking about, but you don't.

I am not even going to bother responding to your last post, because I moved past that kind of stuff years ago and am light years ahead of this conversation.

That's your business, but here's a little story that might interest you -

"The Japanese master Nan-in gave audience to a professor of philosophy. Serving tea, Nan-in filled his visitor's cup, and kept pouring. The professor watched the overflow until he could restrain himself no longer: "Stop! The cup is over full, no more will go in." Nan-in said: "Like this cup, you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup."


By the way I couldn't help but notice in one of your posts below you said -

Originally posted by badmedia
The universe is actually static and time does not exist."

If time does not exist for you then why did you say that you are "light years ahead of this converstaion?"

You do know what a light year is........?

And the universe is not static. Everything is in constant motion, if you really knew who the observer was, you'd be aware of these simple little things.

I realize you probably don't mean it in such a way, but honestly when you type those things to me like that, it feels like you think I'm like a 5 year old or something.

I don't think of you in that way at all. Do you think you're acting like a five year old? Those were your words, not mine.

I need to think about who is the observer? I already know who the observer is. That would be god/the father. I am god and I am arguing with myself.

I never said you need to think about the observer. I said "who" is the observer? You say the observer is god the father - So who is god the father?

I really don't take the time to go in depth about these things to much anymore, because I feel like I've said it over and over etc.

Because you can't be "wrong," right?




[edit on 1-2-2010 by Uncle Benny]

Originally posted by Uncle Benny
I realise you don't know what you're talking about, but you don't.

Not much point in debating opinion I guess.

That's your business but here's a little story you should read -

"The Japanese master Nan-in gave audience to a professor of philosophy. Serving tea, Nan-in filled his visitor's cup, and kept pouring. The professor watched the overflow until he could restrain himself no longer: "Stop! The cup is over full, no more will go in." Nan-in said: "Like this cup, you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup."

Do you consider that perhaps my cup has already been emptied before? The moral of that story is nothing new, and in the bible it is referred to as becoming like a child. A child is that which has an empty cup, which means it has no pre-existing beliefs. As the child is honest in the fact that he doesn't know the answers, he therefore seeks the answers/seeks to fill the cup.

By the way I couldn't help but notice in one of your posts below you said -

Originally posted by badmedia
The universe is actually static and time does not exist."

If time does not exist for you then why did you say that you are "light years ahead of this converstaion?"

You do know what a light year is........?

Ok, let me explain. Lets take a timeline. Lets take for example you walk across a room. If you remove the element of time from that line, then instead of you being in 1 place in that room at 1 point in "time", you would then be in each and all places of that room at the same "time".

Let's expand this line now. While you choose to walk that certain path, there were other paths you could have chosen. So, rather than looking at only the line you walked, lets add in the nearest possible lines you could have walked. To make it easy, lets just make a few parallel lines to your path. So now you are not only look at the single timeline, but also a few parallel timelines next to it.

And you can just keep expanding and expanding on this. Until you realize that all possibilities exist. And if you were to look at all possibilities existing at once, and to know all this information at once, then you would be looking at this universe from a view point where the universe is static and without movement. I used the movie film in the links to show this.

So, if you were to view all the information at once, then the universe is static and without movement. In otherwords, eternal. Time, movement and such are things which result from a limited perspective. Instead of seeing all this information at once, we see a limited amount of information before us. It is the addition of information that we see as movement and "time".

The universe is not something coming from nothing, but is instead that which is unlimited limiting itself purposely in order to have the experience.

The amount of all this possible information we see and such is that which determines our perspective. While I'm speaking in big terms here, you can see this on the small scale. Such as only with the single timeline, or in how much of the known universe you can see at any one "time".

We are both obviously in a limited perspective, aka box, and as such we therefore have "time" as a part or our reality. But if you are ever able to see beyond time, then you can understand what I'm talking about.

And the universe is not static. Everything is in constant motion, if you really knew who the observer was, you'd be aware of these simple little things.

Each individual observer is but an experience of that which in the end experiences all things, the father/god. That which is unlimited(god/father) purposely limits itself for the experience. It is only in the realm of that which is experiencing that time and such exists. When I talk about the universe being static, I am talking about in the eyes of that which is all knowing.

I don't think of you in that way at all. Do you think you're acting like a five year old? Those were your words, not mine.

What I mean is that you assume things about me in terms of what I understand - namely that I don't.

I never said you need to think about the observer. I said "who" is the observer? You say the observer is god the father - So who is god the father?

I am that I am.

Because you can't be "wrong," right?

It's not really a matter of right and wrong in this case. All perspectives are valid, just different and consisting of different things. I am just trying to show you that all of that which is of a limited perception(all of us) are in a "box", and the only true way to not be in a box is to just no longer exist separate of the father completely.

If you go deep enough, there is a point where a choice will be made in terms of the "box". If you go beyond that point, then "you" as a individual will cease to exist. You will go back to that which "you" came from - the father. The limited perception(box) required for "you" to exist will be lost. Eventually all will do this, but until that point is up for grabs. The journey back is the entire point.

Originally posted by badmedia
Not much point in debating opinion I guess.

The reason I say you don't know what you're talking about is because you're talking "about" things, you're not getting to the root. People talk about truth, love etc.

Do you consider that perhaps my cup has already been emptied before? The moral of that story is nothing new, and in the bible it is referred to as becoming like a child.

The point of the story is not to latch onto some understanding you can file away in your memory, a moral you called it. What was said about becoming like a little child in the bible is indeed similar.

Ok, let me explain. Lets take a timeline.

You are already after saying that time does not exist for you, but now you want to give me an example of no-time by creating a timeline. Do you see the conundrum here??

Lets take for example you walk across a room. If you remove the element of time from that line, then instead of you being in 1 place in that room at 1 point in "time", you would then be in each and all places of that room at the same "time".

You've forgotten SPACE! Ever hear of the Time/Space Continuum?

If you're going to play with time (and remove it) THEN WHERE IS THE ROOM LOL? You're trying to speak about mulidimensionality (which is commendable) but from a linear perspective.

Let's expand this line now. While you choose to walk that certain path, there were other paths you could have chosen. So, rather than looking at only the line you walked, lets add in the nearest possible lines you could have walked. To make it easy, lets just make a few parallel lines to your path. So now you are not only look at the single timeline, but also a few parallel timelines next to it.

Parallel, lateral, horizontal the whole shebang - IS THERE REALLY A PATH IF YOU EXIST EVERYWHERE?

And you can just keep expanding and expanding on this. Until you realize that all possibilities exist. And if you were to look at all possibilities existing at once, and to know all this information at once, then you would be looking at this universe from a view point where the universe is static and without movement. I used the movie film in the links to show this.

So what you're saying is if you were to look at things from a multi-dimensional perspective and become this god (the father thing) you're talking about, then you would see life as static... You'd be wrong. God, the universe, whatever else you choose to call it doesn't have the slightest notion what you or I are going to do next, that's the beauty of life - IT'S NOT SOME SORT OF LIMITED HUMAN FOOKING COMPUTER PROGRAM that you install. Everything is constantly in flux, altering changing and shifting within the paradigm you're just after describing.

So, if you were to view all the information at once, then the universe is static and without movement. In otherwords, eternal. Time, movement and such are things which result from a limited perspective. Instead of seeing all this information at once, we see a limited amount of information before us. It is the addition of information that we see as movement and "time".

It's a little bit more complexed than that, of course the mind wants to see a conclusion - the multi-dimensional, static, supreme-beingness but it is as unpredictable to "God" as it is to you.

Tell me this - HOW WOULD GOD "BE" IF (S)HE WAS STATIC?

The universe is not something coming from nothing, but is instead that which is unlimited limiting itself purposely in order to have the experience.

I would just say "the universe is."

The amount of all this possible information we see and such is that which determines our perspective.

Your perspective is formed from how you are focused, change your focus and your perspective alters.

We are both obviously in a limited perspective, aka box, and as such we therefore have "time" as a part or our reality. But if you are ever able to see beyond time, then you can understand what I'm talking about.

When I talk about the universe being static, I am talking about in the eyes of that which is all knowing.

Aren't you just after saying that "we" are both in a limited perspective, - So tell me if you're "in a limited perspective" how can you speak for the Oneness/God or like you said "the eyes of that which is all knowing?"

What I mean is that you assume things about me in terms of what I understand - namely that I don't.

What I've said before, and I'll say it again - You don't know what you're talking about!

I am that I am.

^ Almost on queue - What is the "that" which you're describing??? If you said "who" it would be something, but even if you did, would you have understood what you were saying?

Because you can't be "wrong," right?

It's not really a matter of right and wrong in this case. All perspectives are valid, just different and consisting of different things. I am just trying to show you that all of that which is of a limited perception(all of us) are in a "box", and the only true way to not be in a box is to just no longer exist separate of the father completely.

My point isn't about right/wrong it was to show that you're sure of your position... like the man with the full cup! You better throw out the tea, the cup and a whole lot more besides.





[edit on 1-2-2010 by Uncle Benny]

Some songs/music vids pointing towards multidimensionality -



www.youtube.com...


www.youtube.com...


www.youtube.com...




[edit on 1-2-2010 by Uncle Benny]

Originally posted by Uncle Benny
You are already after saying that time does not exist for you, but now you want to give me an example of no-time by creating a timeline. Do you see the conundrum here??

No, and this is exactly why I'm done with this conversation. If you can't understand what I am talking about and why I did that, then there is no point in even trying to discuss these things.

It's called a critical thinking, or a thought exercise. The entire point of the timeline was to show you how to look at all the positions at once, rather than looking at them seperated with "time". If you are unable to imagine anything beyond your own reality, then I have nothing for you. Especially while you accuse others of being in a box at the same time.

You've forgotten SPACE! Ever hear of the Time/Space Continuum?

If you're going to play with time (and remove it) THEN WHERE IS THE ROOM LOL? You're trying to speak about mulidimensionality (which is commendable) but from a linear perspective.

Do you know what that is? Because that is exactly what I was talking about. Where as time becomes a dimension, and as such if you were talking about a position in space, you would not only use location as we do in the 3d, but also the current time. Thus, your current position in the universe would not be just the location of where you are, but also the "time".

As such, if your address was say 1000 main street Milwaukee Wisconsin. The point in the universe for that address in 1950 is different than the point in the universe in the current year.

And this is what I am talking about with the time line. Where you are in only 1 position at any place in time, I am talking about being able to see/image the entire thing at once, which is the timeline.

Einstein was able to come up with his theories because he was able to see exactly what I am talking about. A universe without time, and from that perspective he was able to understand the nature of time, and it is from that which his theories include. Special and General relativity are all based on taking a look at time in static form, rather than only the current moment.

Parallel, lateral, horizontal the whole shebang - IS THERE REALLY A PATH IF YOU EXIST EVERYWHERE?

The path you take across all possibilities is determined by the choices you make. In otherwords, you reap what you sow.

Ever read a choose your own adventure book? All the possibilities of the book exist all at once, which ones become real depends on your choice. The story is static and without movement in that book, it is only when you start to read it and apply the limited perception on the book and time that the "adventure" comes to life.

It's a little bit more complexed than that, of course the mind wants to see a conclusion - the multi-dimensional, static, supreme-beingness but it is as unpredictable to "God" as it is to you.

Tell me this - HOW WOULD GOD "BE" IF (S)HE WAS STATIC?

And this is just you not understanding that what is spirit is spirit and what is flesh is flesh. I said creation/universe was static and without movement etc.

I would just say "the universe is."

Cop out.

The amount of all this possible information we see and such is that which determines our perspective.

Your perspective is formed from how you are focused, change your focus and your perspective alters.

Duh, as where you focus will be what information is added and so forth.

Aren't you just after saying that "we" are both in a limited perspective, - So tell me if you're "in a limited perspective" how can you speak for the Oneness/God or like you said "the eyes of that which is all knowing?"

Because I know the father. But what does that matter? If you can't understand the simple things I talk about, no chance at that which is greater.

What I've said before, and I'll say it again - You don't know what you're talking about!

Or, you don't know what I'm talking about.

^ Almost on queue - What is the "that" which you're describing??? If you said "who" it would be something, but even if you did, would you have understood what you were saying?

Geez dude, the entire phrase in is reference to the fact that there is nothing physical that can be attached to it, and is part of the reason why it's not of the universe itself, and that it just is.

My point isn't about right/wrong it was to show that you're sure of your position... like the man with the full cup! You better throw out the tea, the cup and a whole lot more besides.

Surely you are not so ignorant as to think the reason behind emptying the cup is to keep it empty.

Good Riddance.

Originally posted by badmedia
No, and this is exactly why I'm done with this conversation.......

It's called a critical thinking, or a thought exercise. The entire point of the timeline was to show you how to look at all the positions at once, rather than looking at them seperated with "time". If you are unable to imagine anything beyond your own reality, then I have nothing for you. Especially while you accuse others of being in a box at the same time.

- Critical thinking is the purposeful and reflective judgment about what to believe or what to do in response to observations, experience, verbal or written expressions, or arguments. Critical thinking involves determining the meaning and significance of what is observed or expressed, or, concerning a given inference or argument, determining whether there is adequate justification to accept the conclusion as true.

This thread has NOTHING to do with finding meaning - That's what I'm continuously pointing out to you. But you don't listen, you keep warbling on full of your own self-importance! If I wanted to start a thread on effective thinking I would have done so highlighting people like de Bono.

Einstein was able to come up with his theories because he was able to see exactly what I am talking about.

With all due respect Einstein had other things to do than point out peoples expressive shortcomings.

Ever read a choose your own adventure book? All the possibilities of the book exist all at once, which ones become real depends on your choice. The story is static and without movement in that book, it is only when you start to read it and apply the limited perception on the book and time that the "adventure" comes to life.

There are two elements to be considered here - the actual story itself and the book.

A story never stays the same because it is always down to the interpretation/perception of the reader and the teller (in this case a writer).

Looking at it linearly, a book never stays the same because over "time" it fades, weakens and fragments. If you paint a wall and come back in ten years time do you think it's the same wall you are looking at? The paint will have faded due to particles (atoms and molecules) leaving the wall. In fact from "moment to moment" a wall is never static, but we don't notice it.

Any scientist today will tell you when you take a microscope and focus on what seems to a solid surface (like a wall or a book) it is hard to know where the book ends and space begins because of the amount of tiny particles coming from the book. Even rocks are eventually eroded by the wind and sea. Do you see now, nothing is ever static it only seems that way if you don't pay attention and observe life.

And this is just you not understanding that what is spirit is spirit and what is flesh is flesh.

NO - this is you STICKING A LABEL ON EVERYTHING THAT MOVES!

- YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT A SPIRIT IS, you THINK you know!

- YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT FLESH IS, you THINK you know!

Your perspective is formed from how you are focused, change your focus and your perspective alters.

Duh, as where you focus will be what information is added and so forth.

Duh... yourself, read what you initially said - "The amount of all this possible information we see and such is that which determines our perspective."

"Information.... determines perspective" - Are you for real, seriously???


Like the story says, go and "wash your bowl" -

A new monk came up to Joshu. “I have just entered the
brotherhood and I am anxious to learn the first principle of Zen,”
he said. “Will you please teach it to me?”

Joshu said, “Have you eaten your supper?”

The novice answered, “I have eaten.” Joshu said, “Now wash your
bowl.”




[edit on 2-2-2010 by Uncle Benny]

Originally posted by Uncle Benny
This thread has NOTHING to do with finding meaning - That's what I'm continuously pointing out to you. But you don't listen, you keep warbling on full of your own self-importance! If I wanted to start a thread on effective thinking I would have done so highlighting people like de Bono.

Spirituality is about finding meaning and gaining understanding of things, which is what you decided to bash in this thread.

Einstein was able to come up with his theories because he was able to see exactly what I am talking about.

With all due respect Einstein had other things to do than point out peoples expressive shortcomings.

What does that have to do with his ability to look at things beyond the perspective and limits of time? Nothing.

Do you see now, nothing is ever static it only seems that way if you don't pay attention and observe life.

I see that it is impossible for you to take a look at things without the factor of time involved.

NO - this is you STICKING A LABEL ON EVERYTHING THAT MOVES!

- YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT A SPIRIT IS, you THINK you know!

- YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT FLESH IS, you THINK you know!

First off, labels are all people have in the form of communication. Of course they are labels, how else do you expect to express such a thing without labels?

In the bible, it is said that god gives not as men give. What that means is that god gives without the labels. The father will simply give you the understanding and such itself, devoid of any labels.

Yet, we as humans in our form of communication have to label such things in order to express them. Take the word "Love" for example. That is nothing more than a label on a feeling. Does it mean that feeling does not exist because a label is being expressed to talk about it? No. But of course, for the person who has never experienced love, they would never really understand the label itself.

At any rate, how do you know what I do and don't know? What you mean to say is that YOU do not know what those things are and such, and that you assume that I don't know either. Which is nothing more than typical human behavior, as we deny in others what we ourselves lack. As you do not understand that, you think it impossible that others can as well.

Such is just foolishness on your part.

Can you define yourself without naming a possession? That is the difference between spirit and flesh. The spirit is that which possesses, the flesh is that which is possessed.

reply to post by Uncle Benny


Bill Hicks happens to be my favorite comedian of all time. And it's kind of funny you posted that video, since what he is talking about is the same thing I've talked about.

Life is but a ride? You mean like an experience? What do you think determines the ride/experience you have?

I have a bible form HarperCollinsPublishers

Matthew 17:20 It was because you haven't enough faith, answered Jesus. I assure you that if you have faith as big as a mustard seed, you can say to this hill, Go from here to there! and it will go. YOU COULD DO ANYTHING!.

Matthew 17:21 IS NOT THERE

So in fact they deleted Jesus words how to drive this demons out and say there is no way to drive them out.

Matthew 17:21 But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.

Collins is one of the 13 satanic bloodlines.

So why are they hiding this facts if it is just hoax.

reply to post by Uncle Benny


First off, thanks for posting the lyrics so I didn't have to listen to the whole freaking thing

Secondly, you're probably thinking of new age spirituality. In that case, you are correct. The new age movement is the same as all the other religions, just different practices and idols.

It's impossible to really label true spirituality as spirituality. It's more like "nothingality". If that makes sense.

But yea, most spirituality (like a huge portion that we witness here on ATS) is just another teeny tiny box.

reply to post by badmedia

Spirituality is about finding meaning and gaining understanding of things, which is what you decided to bash in this thread.

That's philosophy. Spirituality is about getting closer to God.

I see that it is impossible for you to take a look at things without the factor of time involved.

Philosophy and physics. Not spirituality.

In the bible.....the label itself.

^^reduced about 4 paragraphs in the above quote, to avoid a massive quote box

Did you just go on for 4 paragraphs about labeling? You said the same thing over and over again.

Why do you keep talking philosophy, and now linguistics, when this thread is about spirituality?

At any rate, how do you know what I do and don't know? What you mean to say is that YOU do not know what those things are and such, and that you assume that I don't know either. Which is nothing more than typical human behavior, as we deny in others what we ourselves lack. As you do not understand that, you think it impossible that others can as well.

Ahhhh. More vague talk from you "spiritualists". Making some sense, but being vague enough so people think you know what you're talking about. And then you boost your own ego (spirituality is against the ego BTW) with comments such as "typical human" and "lack of understanding".

LOL

The spirit is that which possesses, the flesh is that which is possessed.

What does the spirit possess, exactly.

And what is possessing the flesh?

Because, I could say "The spirit is that which is possessed, and the flesh is that which possesses" and I could VERY easily explain it in your "spiritual terms" in order to give meaning to the phrase.

:bnghd:


I'm not against you, ok? You just need to rethink your own labels and stance on such issues. Rethink what it really means to be spiritual, since you seem to be quite confused.

[edit on 30-3-2010 by SirPsychoSexy]

Hi Everybody

In answering our calling from God, we answer to God, not man.While great truths are found in all the great religions, God’s truths continue to grow in ways that often do not fit the dogma or structure of a particular spiritual organization and cannot, therefore be limited or defined by such organizations.If want more information ministerialseminary.com... can help you.

which form of spirituality are u on about, christian spirituality, hindu, wiccan, pagan, shaman (of which country or tribe), druidic, native american, scandinavian, new age, etc, etc, plz be specific or we are lost when tryin to work out wot u on about

[edit on 15-6-2010 by thegreatestone]