It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Is Yahweh really the prime creator?

page: 9
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 02:33 AM
reply to post by spy66

I have begun to read a very interesting book: “Window of the soul. The Kabbalah of Rabbi Isaac Luria” by James David Dunn (Weiser Books, San Francisco 2008), an am yet only at the introduction, where I read:

“The world continues in the midst of a breach or interruption of the Creator's original intention and mankind must help to bring things right again, since the true world drama of Creation is on hold. … God did not choose to make the world as we know it. But through suc¬cessive crises in the Godhead caused by imperfection inher¬ent in the nature of Creation, all phenomena devolved to a continually emerging struggle between unity (transcendental inner self) and chaos in matter (corporeal beings). The radical fidelity of tikkun - each creature's contemplation of heart and works - and its applications of power upon the inner universes of Creation through successive lifetimes with God will return His image (Shekhinah) to Her true place in unity with God again. The eternal Sabbath will be regained and the realm of matter will be abandoned.
Isaac Luria taught creation under three central themes - tsim-tsum (contraction), shebirath ha-kelim (breaking of the vessels) and tikkun (repair) - but it is tikkun that embodies the essence of his entire teaching. Tsimtsum is the idea that God withdrew upon himself or shrank himself to make a void in which to cre¬ate. Breaking of the vessels is the event that dramatizes the dis¬continuity or imperfection that necessarily exists between the Creator and created in such a void, yet binds them together with the moral imperative that has one supra-ultimate conclu¬sion: tikkun. Creation must be flawed because, if that which was created were perfect, then it would be the Godhead itself. Hence Adam Kadmon, the first archetypical God-humanity, created in the void outside of the absolute, must necessarily be imperfect and yet must also reflect the fullest image of the Divine One. Breaking of the vessels brought catastrophe and discord into the void (tehiru) - a place that no longer contains the Godhead's full presence and that lies outside of his full control. Since the Godhead created Adam Kadmon, it also caused the very imperfection in him that led to his failure. …
Imperfection and evil are a byproduct of creation at the hands of the Perfect Creator: blame can fall on neither the Creator nor the creature, but on the innocence of becoming that separates them profoundly: It is Creation itself. Tikkun is their connection. It is the mystical medium that binds the old harmony with its fallen creatures. “

[Shekinah - female - is “the presence of God” and might be compared to the Holy Spirit and/or, on another level, Sophia.]

As to your diagrams: Do you realize that you repeat drawing a THREE-DIMENSIONAL coordinate system? Try to draw, e.g., a five-dimensional! You cannot – because our MIND is three-dimensional and fails to conceive anything beyond it… that yet will be there… In mathematics we can visualize a three-dimensional function f(x,y,z) but not, e.g., a five-dimensional f(v,w,x,y,z) - but we can calculate with it. In mathematical physics they do and only so do some equations fit, which is an evidence that cosmos has quite a lot more than three dimensions. However, visualizing them is a koan for US.

I still feel that this is a side issue going around in a circle and wonder if it should be continued like this...

[edit on 5-9-2010 by memyself]

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 02:42 AM
reply to post by bogomil

I have a cat too, and I love it. Yet it hurts me when she kills an animal. If I can, I try to save it from her. Luckily, however, she is now a bit old for that.

But have you considered what WE do to animals? We keep lots of them in a kind of concentration camps under miserable conditions, where we give them even less than no love and then slaughter them in an industrialized cruel manner.

And every year, lots of animal species die out (the last of its kind dies) because WE rob nature of land and life.

So I think that we are far worse than the animals are. This is why I eat meat only rarely and basically try to stick to a vegetarian life.


posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 02:48 AM
reply to post by bogomil

So let us introduce some humor (since you miss it):

A man had died and came to heaven. St. Peter showed him around. "There are the Catholics, and there the Jews. There are the Lutherans and their the Buddhists. And there are the Muslims and there the Hindus." And so on, they were all there.

Then they came to a high wall and St. Peter said: "Here we should be quiet." - "Why?" - "Those on the other side belong to a Christian sect and they believe that they are here the only ones here."

[edit on 5-9-2010 by memyself]

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 03:48 AM
reply to post by bogomil

You write: "And that's partly what this thread is about. Critics of 'christianity', such as I, claim that these 'christian' doctrines not only are totally insufficient and tupsy-turvy, but also fabrications, falsifications and emerging from a background of religious and political violence.
They are not only taking away peoples' chance of finding 'reality', they are also encouraging totalitarian social systems."

I do agree, as far as the CHURCHES are concerned. As I have written above, in my view they have put a fake Christ in place of the true on.

So who is Christ? I consider him to be the LOVE OF THE PRIME CREATOR and call him Christ in lack of a better word, because of his messenger Jesus, who taught us that love, before his teachings became distorted by power-hungry organizations.

And that fits with some Gnostic texts.

Above I quoted Isaac Luria. I have a strong feeling that when he mentions God, he does mean someone above YHWH. In THAT sense there is something "Christian" (according to my view) in his message. And I think that this holds for much in the Kabbalah. They just couldn't speak it out openly because they would face big conflicts if they did.

So keeping the true Christ apart from the fake one, every Hindu, Jew, Muslim or what have you who lives true love for all, independent of creed and faith, is also in the sense in which I mean it a "Christian"... He just doesn't use that expression... Gandhi most certainly was one.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by memyself]

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:56 AM
Re: Memyself

I'll reciprocate:

A sufi died and went to heaven.

Outside the gates he met St. Peter and demanded to be let in.

St. Peter refused this, saying: "Before I can let you in, I must know who you are, and why I should let you in".

"Whoa", said the sufi, "before I answer you, I first must know, if this really is heaven, and you really are St. Peter".

From inside the walls came a voice: "Let him in, he is one of ours".

Working on a post, which will be posted relatively soon.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by bogomil]

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:02 AM
reply to post by pro-all

great post and so well written. Erkhart Tolle also said something about humans need to name things. He said that when we are in the now we are with 'God' as soon as we look at the bird or the tree and then name it we move away from the now into the mental space of theory, naming, thinking instead of being.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:40 AM
reply to post by memyself

This has become my all time favourite thread. Including sacred geometry, my passion at the moment which has became a mural on my bathroom ceiling of sacred geometric designs. Your way with words is brilliant and if its okay with you I will print some of the explanations off to save me stacks of research did it already.

I have also been able to clarify the most wonderful conclusion... I love religion of all topics and faiths, I love spirituality in most forms, I love the idea that we have an open minded site like this to discuss issues that in the past, if in person, may have resulted in blood baths as people fought to justify that their God was the only God and therefore the only creator.

I completely believe that there is a Prime Creative Force and that the demi gods or children of the Prime have created their own playgrounds and in their own laboratories manifested beings like themselves.

Your descriptive writings were perfect for someone like me. The Hindus have Brahman,....the eternal unchanging infinite and from Brahman comes the creator: Brahma, The sustainer: Vishnu and the destroyer: Shiva.
Christianity has the Holy Trinity. Moslims have Allah as their Prime Creator...etc

I believe that The Great Infinite Energy Source is the Prime Creator having no form however manifesting in all forms.

In Genesis 1 God created all the animals then said "we" will now make male and female in our image making us equal.

In Gen 2 the Lord God created man.... then created all the animals...then finally created a female and she was considered a help mate to the male and not equal....she was made after I repeat after all the animals.

I believe on Earth we are witness to a number of creations of human kind by different Gods. One creation believes we are equal and man and woman love and honor each other. Another creation is from the Lord God who believe a woman is less than a man and can be treated even as less in value to an animal and is here to serve a man and be his 'help mate' or slave. Look around it is happening everywhere. Women are sold into slavery sold as prostitutes bashed and beaten compared to the men who love and adore the women in their lives and will protect them.

I would not be at all surprised if we have been interbred with other creations, who knows....

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:03 AM
Re: Memyself

As expected, you are presenting divergent opinions, without giving the impression, that I need to convert to something.

Shortly on the lines of cats etc. I have, by choice, been a vegetarian and environmentalist for 45 years and owning an ecological farm since 1972. All without much ado. Missionary zeal only antagonizes people, let them evaluate the result themselves.

When I earlier criticized 'christian' doctrines, this was mainly directed at OT and Paulinism. OT is stinking of blood, and Paulinism is a hijacking and corruption of the Jesus movement.

I don't mind 'bhakti' manifestations of any religions, as long as they are not exclusive concerning e.g. parallel jnani/intellectual approaches. But all on its own, brotherly and divine love can be somewhat sticky; heavenly candy floss and small fat cherubs. Ever read Yogananda's: 'Selfbiography of a yogi'?

There are some points on the early Jesus movement I would like to take up later, if you agree. Ofcourse Paulus, but also John the baptist and Melchizedek (whom I mentioned at the beginning of the thread). I interpretate Melchizedek's role different from how you did. But maybe more about in another post.

Rabbi Isaac Luria:

The first part of the post about him him is not so different from much of the gnostic-christian material. But I do have some conceptualizing problems with the tsim-tsum part (and then the word 'chaos' seems to be used as 'disorganised confusion' rather than the standard scientific: 'Without order'-enthropy). Using 'chaos' in the scientific way, I believe, that what we speculate on as ultimate reality is dimensionless (as I wrote to spy66) and contraction seems an un-necessary, even impossible, activity.

Whereas I find shebirath ha-kelim (breaking of the vessels) completely understandable and even in accordance with scientific cosmology and my own cosmogony.

The ultimate awareness we percieve as 'nothing' can change to a percieved something: 0 = a + b + c (0 = + 1 + 2 + (-3))
This is a variety of the guna-theory of tantra, which later spread as religious 'trinities' in Europe, Asia and Africa. The one Paulus corrupted by removing the feminine (receptive) element, changing it to male.

It fits well with the scientific universe, especially if the holographic model turns out to be right. The scientific universe consists of differently charged polarities (or rather trialities), existing as fragments of an original, unbroken whole.

Tikkun (repair) must be the harmonizing of the shattered fragments back into a wholeness. Gurdjieff wrote extensively about that, and the star of David, the wheel of life and partly tao'ism presented this in a graphic way. A three axis diagram can represent the same; .... in a cosmology, that is. Not a cosmogony.

It's not, that I want to follow that subject too intensively, but if a three-axis diagram is used, it actually does give six directions (away from the center). Corresponding to the six points of the star of David.

Personally I would like to return to early Jesus movement, but I await your next move.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by bogomil]

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:27 AM
Re: Flashesofblue

A few stray comments on your posts.

As so often has happened, some knowledge/understanding/wisdom has been twisted when arriving to the west. The eternal now has been changed to the mantra 'here and now' resulting in people bumping into each other on the street, because they are so occupied with the inner mantra-mumbling, that they are practically sleepwalkers.

I've had some weirdo experiences of some entities similar or identical to archons. They took indigenous non-corporeal slaves from earth and functioned through human agents with sex-trafficking on the physical level.

That's the possible mad part of me. Disregard it, if it's undigestable.

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:57 AM
reply to post by bogomil

“When I earlier criticized 'christian' doctrines, this was mainly directed at OT and Paulinism. OT is stinking of blood, and Paulinism is a hijacking and corruption of the Jesus movement. “
I agree!

“I interpret Melchizedek's role different from how you did.”
I didn’t interpret his role, I only gave some references. I know very little about him.

“Rabbi Isaac Luria: The first part of the post about him is not so different from much of the Gnostic Christian material.”
That’s why I quoted it!

“But I do have some conceptualizing problems with the tsim-tsum part (and then the word 'chaos' seems to be used as 'disorganised confusion' rather than the standard scientific: 'Without order'-enthropy).”
As I wrote, I also consider chaos to be primordial energy in some “substance” that can be called light, and not disorder.

“Using 'chaos' in the scientific way, I believe, that what we speculate on as ultimate reality is dimensionless (as I wrote to spy66) and contraction seems an unnecessary, even impossible, activity. “
According to tzim-tzum, that primordial energy, that is God, contracted to leave an empty space where there is nothing (yet), even not that energy.

“Tikkun (repair) must be the harmonizing of the shattered fragments back into a wholeness.”

“It's not, that I want to follow that subject too intensively, but if a three-axis diagram is used, it actually does give six directions (away from the center).”
And yet they describe a 3-dimensional space. Try adding a 4th or even 5th axis at right angles to each of the other (each additional axis can be seen pointing in two directions). Then you see the problem. It is impossible for a 3-dimensional mind to conceive it. A multidimensional entity will find it strange that we hit our limits that way…

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 04:35 PM
To memyself

"And yet they describe a 3-dimensional space."

Each dimension (or better: axis) mirrors itself symmetrically in the zero-point. I.e. each axis has a plus and minus side. If my semantics aren't too stupid, I could say, that the three axis are the three gunas, and the six directions will be manifested emanations. It's my thought, that at a rather early level of creation, such an emanation could be a dimension to us. We're still at pre-matter existence here. Thus six dimensions.

Zero is the balance point.

In the star of David, six points mirroring each other two and two (and often with a center-point added).

Sorry, am not pursuing this subject and can change any time, if you wish.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by bogomil]

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:29 PM
reply to post by bogomil

Archons? are they like demi-gods or so called Lords..... Michael Tsarion I think he talks of such with the reptilian theories and the links with ancient Egypt.

If you have time would you be able to elaborate. Also I may have misunderstood your post, but how can people bump into each other if they are in the now? I would have thought by being conscious of the present moment then there is an awareness of events around us, it was only in the mind when thinking of other stuff that we bump into people etc. One morning i thought I was so conscious, I was impressing myself. Mopping my floors and being aware of my pets and the sun shinning...I knew my son had a sleep over at home and would appear soon... I was in the now...not! He came into the sunroom greeted me and I nearly had a heart attack with the shock/scare. So where was I? I had drifted somewhere because I thought if I was in the now I would have heard his foot steps.

So I am a drifter in an ocean of thoughts attempting to connect with the cosmic consciousness of creation. After reading these posts I am distracted at the concept that chaos may be a by product of creation and that the mantras Ive been taught like..I am attracting the madness or if only i believed in peace it would happen or ....etc. I feel relieved and released by this wonderful post to offer me such a wonderful resource of thought/food supplements to enjoy and savor.

All the best with your life and to all who are contributing to this link...Im so excited to be alive in a world that generates such magnificient minds and enlightening debates that tantalize the taste buds of my mind

Love and light to all of you

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:12 AM
reply to post by memyself

First i have to say something about dimensions.

What i have tried to display is the infinite dimension with the black image. The one that all dimensions must exist within. Even the 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and so on.

Your 5th dimension must exist within the infinite. There is a reason for that. You can measure it, You can measure all the sides and the volume of it. You have ID a specific dimension within the infinite. You have ID a finite dimension the 5th.

The three lines which i put "INSIDE" the black dimension makes up more than 3 dimensions. But the clue is i had to create the lines within the black dimension.

I also said that my three lines are there to GIVE the black dimension a impression of depth. Because there is no way you can see depth without them. Now that is also a clue.

If the the Black image is the infinite one. All other dimensions 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 and so on must be created to be able to exist within the black dimension. Because the black dimension is infinite. It can not be measured. If you zoom in on the black image you will observe darkness for ever. You will never find anything but darkness.

If i ask you: what dimension is the black image if it is infinite in all directions. And what is the volume of it?

Question 2. Can the black image have a volume without other dimensions present within it?

If i can get you to understand this. I can prove to you that the stories are only myths. And not facts.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:23 AM
reply to post by bogomil

To readers who are not familiar with these conecpts:
The three gunas or trigunas (sattva, rajas and tamas) are concepts discussed in one of the greatest philosophies in the world, being the Indian Samkhya (described by great minds like Kapila and Ishvarakrishna).

Samkhya begins with a description of creation.
First there was only Purusha or Atma, who we can compare with the prime creator.
His energy was mula-prakriti, basic matter, which we can compare with the light that was in the binning. Purusha just wants (thinks), and then it is there. That is how he creates.
From that issued a creation in which three basic principles are sattva = being, existence, consciousness, light, that which really is, radiating; rajas = energy, moving; and tamas = inertia, darkness, enveloping (covering). The first stage was buddhi = prime consciousness (in which sattva dominates), the second was ahamkara = self-consciusness, I-consciousness (in which rajas dominates) and the latter split up in three parallel lines of continued creation that follow:
- Sattvika ahamkara lead to formation of manas = mind and then to conscious beings, the side of the subject.
- Tamasika ahamkara lead to formation of matter, the side of the object.
- Rajasika ahamkara = energy moving creation on through the various following stages.

Now, to relate this to the three dimensions diagram seems to me to be a little far fetched, since the trigunas were there as principles already in the beginning, before there were any material worlds and in a certainly multidimensional stage being far beyond our limited three dimensions.

By the way, these concepts are certainly also discussed in tantra, but what is tantra? It is grossly misunderstood by many in the West to be a kind of “sexual yoga”. In reality, tantra is a science of ALL that there is, a natural science, a spiritual science, physics, chemistry, biology and what have you. Within tantra there is ALSO a sexual science, within which a kind of “sexual yoga” developed, which seems to attract much more attention to Western minds that the whole and much much bigger rest of tantra as a general science…

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:24 AM
reply to post by flashesofblue

The Anunnaki are described as reptilians.

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:28 AM
reply to post by spy66

The 5th dimension isn't mine, it is something the creator made...
And I don't know to where this discussion is supposed to take us...
At least off the main subject into a side issue that may turn out to be a "dead-end lane"?
What for?

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:40 AM
reply to post by memyself

If i can get you to understand about dimensions i can prove to you that the stories are only myths.

That is the point i am trying to make.

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:55 AM
You wont find the truth about the myths by reading the myth. You have to figure it out on your own separate from the myths.

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 04:01 AM
reply to post by spy66

Your posts don't prove that to me...
Do they to anyone else?

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 04:06 AM
reply to post by spy66

"Myths" are not only thoughts by early thinkers, but also INSPIRATIONS through the Epinoia in us (see above what that is). Read, contemplate, compare, understand and try to separate the chaff from the wheat. "Myths" are certainly not only chaff!

If you want to start from scratch, you will have along way to go... until you have created your own myth...

new topics

top topics

<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in