It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New Age "One" Belief = Spiritual Borg?

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


When you take into account that we all believe what we do because our perceptions *admittingly bend or slanted by existing beliefs* tells us that we are correct. Most people can and do claim primacy and have nothing but denigration for others who disagree and claim their own perception as the only possible correct one. I do not and cannot. Smacks to me of hubris....


I am very simple person, Watcher




Most people can and do claim primacy and have nothing but denigration for others who disagree and claim their own perception as the only possible correct one.


Yes, in all areas of life people want to pressure others, That is why the book, Celestine Prophecy, Changed my life.




posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


I would argue the only things you can be 100% sure about are the things that you delude yourself into believing is fact.
I don't mean that as an attack on you though. Please understand.

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Simple is subjective though.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Oh that body that houses you will eventual die. And I think there is a reason there is a rather large amount of confusion as to the existance of a afterlife. It's still a great black unknown. We both strongly BELIEVE there is something beyond it. But how can we ever be truly sure?


Once you experience yourself as not-a-body its not something you question or say "I believe...". Its just so. No big deal.

Its like...you own this computer and you dont really philosohize about it or strongly believe you have a computer or try to justify its existence or tell others about how computers exist...its just so. No big deal.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


I think we get back to the answer posted above this one.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Here's what I believe, and it is a simple conclusion.

We humans, with our strange consciousness, have to exist for a reason,

I want to say more but I can't.



[edit on 033131p://bSunday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
I would argue the only things you can be 100% sure about are the things that you delude yourself into believing is fact.
I don't mean that as an attack on you though. Please understand.


Certainty vs. Uncertainty is an age-old dualistic discussion we could go really deep into, but to stay true to the OP, I´ll refrain from it here...



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


I am not entirely sure but I think it goes all the way back to his polical spectrum thread.

Frankly, I'm not sure why he's so shy (which could be a little white lie).

Well, it could be a matter of not wanting to go on an OT tanget about communism vs. anarcho-capitalism but discussing onenesses of varying natures in order to contrast them seems quite related to the topic.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by wylee
 




On this physical level, life is.... and does what it has to to survive. So if something or somebeing tries to take that away, Are you not going to do anything and everything to survive? This is a pure egotistical desire to be alive. That is programmed in us, so it must mean something.


I wish I could give you more stars.

You made a very, very good point. We all fight for our individuality. That must mean something.

I hear new agers keep on saying that all is one. Like you said, what's the big mystery?

If one person becomes enlightened, then we ALL become enlightened. I had this question even since I learn about their motto "ALL IS ONE".

If we truly are all ONE, then it stands to reason that if one person realizes this, then we ALL will realize at the same time. Buddha was enlightened thousands of years ago. And yet we are here still defending our individuality.

I do not buy all this "all is one" crap. Like L. Ron Hubbard said, we cannot conceive of infinite number of minds. It's simplier to conceive of one God, one ALL, etc and people still worship ONE God.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
Well, it could be a matter of not wanting to go on an OT tanget about communism vs. anarcho-capitalism but discussing onenesses of varying natures in order to contrast them seems quite related to the topic.


Its this thing about trying to stay true to a thread topic for the benefit of future reading generations


But if there is something you`d like to discuss you can always invite to a thread...or even start a Debate.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Enlighten?
Would that he you are speaking about me?


[edit on 18-10-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by wylee
 




On this physical level, life is.... and does what it has to to survive. So if something or somebeing tries to take that away, Are you not going to do anything and everything to survive? This is a pure egotistical desire to be alive. That is programmed in us, so it must mean something.


I wish I could give you more stars.

You made a very, very good point. We all fight for our individuality. That must mean something.

I hear new agers keep on saying that all is one. Like you said, what's the big mystery?

If one person becomes enlightened, then we ALL become enlightened. I had this question even since I learn about their motto "ALL IS ONE".

If we truly are all ONE, then it stands to reason that if one person realizes this, then we ALL will realize at the same time. Buddha was enlightened thousands of years ago. And yet we are here still defending our individuality.

I do not buy all this "all is one" crap. Like L. Ron Hubbard said, we cannot conceive of infinite number of minds. It's simplier to conceive of one God, one ALL, etc and people still worship ONE God.



I was going to post something similar, if we just give up one guru for another guru,

are we really thinking for ourselves?

Or have we ever? ,we have been indoctrinated in one form or another since birth, school, the news, cartoons, commercials, mass media, the internet.
,
mass confusion.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


I am of the opinion our individual serves a higher purpose. It's a degree of seperation, a widening one as we grow "spiritually" but yes like any growing divide it's not complete at first. Like the seperation that occurs between a baby and it's mother as the 9 months elapse. But of course I think we also face a choice in that what we believe to be reality shapes reality. Particularly when we leave this flesh suit. And that being said I HIGHLY value my individuality and any belief that tells you you must and will quench that spark seems wrong to me.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 




are we really thinking for ourselves?


That is a good conspiracy right here. Is the New Age movement a conspiracy itself? OP has a good point here. Dictators do this all the time.



Or have we ever? ,we have been indoctrinated in one form or another since birth, school, the news, cartoons, commercials, mass media, the internet. , mass confusion.


Right.

"They" do not want us to be individuals because then we would challenge them.

I once asked someone who truly believes that there is only one being this question: What is wrong with believing that we are all individual souls that have always been here? If the ONE splitted into many beings, then it was never ONE to begin with. Even people with multiple personalities can't do that.

I know how people feel about L. Ron Hubbard. I don't even like him or his organization. But he said something that struck me as being correct. People can not think of multiple souls. People want to keep things simple They want to follow some mysterious will instead of thinking on their own. They're rather worship one god.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


One tree can produce millions of seeds.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 




I am of the opinion our individual serves a higher purpose.


That's a lofty purpose. We do this all the time. I can be a part of an organization that helps people. Yet I am never the organization.



It's a degree of seperation, a widening one as we grow "spiritually" but yes like any growing divide it's not complete at first. Like the seperation that occurs between a baby and it's mother as the 9 months elapse.


But is the baby mother also? Am I you?



Particularly when we leave this flesh suit. And that being said I HIGHLY value my individuality and any belief that tells you you must and will quench that spark seems wrong to me.


Right. We highly value our individuality. WHY?

New Agers and others keep on saying that ALL IS ONE. What does that mean? Does that mean that I am you? I am my own mother? Father? Everybody?

Funnily enough I wish this would be true so that I could get all the hot women to come to me



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 




One tree can produce millions of seeds.


I can understand that.

Maybe God created millions of seeds (new minds) that are individuals.

But from what I understand, the new age folks are saying that that is not true. We are all ONE God and are never individuals. It just appears that we do have individuality.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


The baby will eventually become a mother. Or, erm, a parent to be more unisexual about it.
It's means that you are my sibling. But not me, not exactly one.


reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


I think the term "created" is a bad term when applied in conversation such as these. In a sense a parent does "create" a child, but also in another sense it does not since it is the continuation of the processes that also brought the parent into being.

And I largely disagree with the "oneness" people. Or better put agree with them up to a point. We are in our current form a part of the reality that we exist in, butI do not believe our ultimate destiny the only thing we really can eventually do is return to source so to speak.

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
Enlighten?
Would that he you are speaking about me?


[edit on 18-10-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


No, it was Skyfloating. I was attempting to address Stormdander777's feeling on "not getting the punchline".

I feel like I'm being subtlely lured into being a topic derailer. LOL.

I was stating that oneness in the context of a system requires that each part take and give freely. If the neurons in the brain only received signals and never fired at a certain threshold the system would shut down. If each fired without receiving signals, that might lead to a siezure or perfect confusion. If each did exactly the same thing, well, that's the point, they don't, but it wouldn't do anything useful. Sometimes parts are out of service and others take the slack during repairs or rest. The differentiation and uniqueness is necessary for the whole to manifest as it does, into something functional. There is no particular individual cell in charge and nothing moves quite to a collective beat. Cells are not entirely cast into a particular role. The brain is not a monarchy, oligarchy or borg collective. It is not anarchy, democracy or a republic. It is individuality within unity.

I find it ironic how that contributes to manifesting something so seemingly unlike how the parts that compose it behave.

Ok, not sure if I won the FAIL of the year or not. I guess this could be harder to explain than I imagined.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 




I think the term "created" is a bad term when applied in conversation such as these. In a sense a parent does "create" a child, but also in another sense it does not since it is the continuation of the processes that also brought the parent into being.


Actually there is no creation here. The "creation" here is the process of using preexisting materials to grow a human being, much like the seeds. It's just a growth.

What is really being discussed here is our minds, souls, individuality, etc. Did our souls start at conception? Or were our souls always there before the conception?

Did God split into many souls or individuals? Or is individuality an illusion and we are really only one being?

So many questions.

I always ask them this kind of questions. They couldn't come up with answers.

What always gets them the most is this question: If one being becomes enlightened, will we all become enlightened at the same time?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join