Wierd feeling: Being one with the Universe

"nothing is what it seems" that makes complete sense. everything is still real you just don't know what it "really" is.

even if time turned out to be completely in our own heads. 10 years later scientist might come out and say. "oh here's a new discovery that proves time is in fact real"

James,

Although I suspect that you and I see eye to eye (for the most past) WRT the nature of existential reality, I prefer to call the conscious oneness “the Universe”. Don’t get me wrong; I’m not an anti-theist by any stretch of the imagination. It’s just that, from my perspective, there’s so much negative baggage associated with the term “God”, it hardly seems worth the effort of carrying it. Besides, as I see it, not all aspects of this being we comprise (and which comprises us) are worthy of the designation of a ‘benevolent deity’ (the only sort of ‘God’ I’d even consider lending any credence).

…There is no past...only memory and imprints (impressions) upon the physical world. There is no future...only choice. There is only Now...and it is ALWAYS Now.

I think you’re on the right track, but in my view, the distinction between the three aspects of time (past, present, and future) should be understood in light of the empirical fact, that while all of them are conceptual constructs, only one of them is perceptually ratified -- that being the present. The past and future have no reality in the realm of perception, so theirs’ is purely the stuff of conception; which is not to say that they don't exist. To the contrary, they're very real and widely influential in the realm of thought. I think you're right, in holding that the present moment isn’t fleeting. It must be recognized, however, that our perceptual experiences of that eternal presence …are. And that's what gives rise to our notions of the past and future.

And before someone brings it up, the photo album that is the night sky is just that: a collection of snapshots of the past. But viewing those “snapshots” is not to be confused with directly perceiving the past. After all, whatever was transpiring on and around those distant stars at the respective times in which their light departed toward Earth is no longer happening when the light finally reaches us in the here and now. Accordingly, when we look into the starry sky at night, we’re not seeing the past; we’re seeing *a picture* of the past taken by our cameras (so to speak) at the instance of perception. -- Big diff!

[edit on 6-12-2008 by Icarus_Fallen]

reply to post by Icarus_Fallen


I agree on that...I don't like the word "God" because it is misleading and deceptive. I prefer "The Infinite" or "The All" or "Consciousness" or simply "that which is".

We see the present through the filters of our past, and in that sense, the past is very real...I don't think we disagree on that.

I like your words about looking into the night sky...a true and obvious observation...and I like obvious, although I define obvious as obvious with regards to available knowledge...but that's just me.

Nice thread.

--J