reply to post by Lucifer777
First, I thank you for your reply, and also for taking the time to read my article.
You must forgive me that both in my response in this thread, AND on my website, I simply was not able to portray EVERYTHING involved with my beliefs.
For one, there is way too much involved with it to sit down and describe in one article, in its entirety, as I have proven to myself with my attempt
in my article. Second, most of my beliefs are based on an understanding as opposed to an idea. An idea can be described, whereas sometimes an
understanding does not have words. I tried my best, and am ALWAYS willing to elaborate on ANYTHING I've said.
For example, you may not have noticed that my article begins with "The man they called Jesus...." In my article I did not even to attempt to explain
what I meant by that. Since you brought up my mentioning Jesus, whom you perceive to be fictional, I will explain what I think.
His words were real. His message was real. Was his name Jesus, was he the son of God, did he die for our sins? I don't have, nor claim to have the
answer to these questions. I will say that it can be a dangerous idea to invite something into your heart that you don't know. (for example, invite
Jesus into your heart or invite his message and understanding into your heart.) Whether Jesus was an existing man, or god, or whether Jesus was a
parable, the author of the words that Jesus used in the bible understood truth. I have always believed that there was a man, whom some might call a
prophet, who understood the consciousness involved with the universe, who understood that this consciousness lie in everything, right down to every
very atom. I think his message was stolen and put into a book that is part truth, and part lie to enslave humanity. you gotta put some truth in it to
attract the masses right? I don't think the man they called Jesus would have been so egotistical to have asked anyone to worship him, or bow down to
him. this man would not have been so egotistical to have said that the ONLY way to god is through him. Perhaps he would have said that one has to
understand what he means, but he would have been accepting of someone coming to this understanding in their own fashion, NOT only through his words.
The man they called Jesus would not have demanded that people understand the way HE described it. He would have understood that everyone comes to
their own understandings in their own ways. This is why he persistently used parables to ultimately describe the same thing. The man they called Jesus
was a truther, man. Imagine the frustration trying to describe his understanding, when their were no words, and in a time where you could be stoned
for your ideas. (not that the system is much different today ; )
In regards to whether or not it has been "established" that christian prayer does not work, I can't say I've heard that, nor do I deny it's
possibility. MY point was that it was FAITH that makes christian prayer work. MOST Christians don't really believe in their own faith, I'm sure
you'd agree. I was a christian at one point. Though I disagreed with some christian beliefs, like to say animals don't have souls, Ive always had
faith in whatever presence was out there. I have had my own prayers answered, because I had faith, and I had a friend with a broken hip healed,
because HE had faith. I speak from my experience, not necessarily what has been programmed and taught to this world by others. I believe that when you
are open to it, the universe...God...whatever term one prefers, will give that wisdom to you.
I agree that a modern, scientific educated person who interviews a Buddhist, may see the Buddhist as a rambling religious fanatic who is very
"unenlightened". ..but "modern", "scientific" and "educated" are interesting choices of words. Modern does not mean that one uses wisdom and
knowledge and understanding...Scientific does not mean that one thinks for themselves and has an open mind, it mostly means they have memorized
science, which was taught to them from someone who was taught by someone who was taught by someone....and they are bound by whatever regulations their
scientific grant, and government control, allows them.
In regards to atoms forming a sea of consciousness, I can proudly say that some of our most brilliant scientific minds, like Einstein or Tesla, have
more than proven the connectivity of atoms and how they are driven by thought and intention, as well as the consciousness within. since this is an
existing belief within you already, you may like to read some of their work. The Consciousness and connectivity of atoms is also stated in the bible
and the Quran, when one reads them with understanding, it is said that God is in everything, that god is love, that all are within god. (and here
I'll say that I DO NOT like to use the term God, its been blasphemed by our modern world. But since I cant think of any other term, I use the term
god, and I use the term loosely. I've been wrestling in my own head with the fact that I keep hearing that the idea of one consciousness is a new age
philosophy, not that I'm against that. All I can say is that (and this is my belief, which doesn't make it true.) since all in the universe IS one
consciousness, it predates new age philosophy, heck, it predates any religion. Whatever the true truth is in regards to the existence of the universe,
THAT truth predates anything any human could have created.
"It is tempting to choose one of the three main elements (Mass, Energy and Light), or even the element of the observer (i.e., consciousness), and
just claim that this element is the "stuff" of the unverse, but such a position is not scientific."
regarding this quote, are you saying that it is not a scientific fact that everything is atoms, or that its not a fact that atoms are pure energy?
physicists will tell you that it is all three, mass, energy and light, in much the same way a particle is also a beam. Myself, I believe that
everything is thought, and being so, I believe that within every atom exists another universe in which all matter is also made of atoms, and within
those are further universes in which all matter is made of atoms, etc...like a fractal. Perhaps, you missed this section in my article on my web page?
I wouldn't have used the term sermon myself, but if you choose to look at it that way, I wont object. I hadn't made any claim on what it should or
shouldn't be called, just that it is an article. Honestly, anyone who is trying to tell truth as they understand it can/ will come across as offering
I didn't offer that sex without love is evil as being anything picked out of the bible. I believe the bible was written, ultimately, to keep people
from knowing the true "god". (much like EVERY religion today) They stole the messages of a wise man to attract followers. Now, I described how sex
without love is evil in my article, and on this point I will say that if you can't see how that is true, you need to search further within yourself.
If, however, you don't understand because I wasn't clear with my words, and I admit I am often not very clear with my words, then I will gladly
answer any questions.
In the end I will say this. I offered what I offered to this thread because there was a request made...I wasn't really asked to provide proof as much
as invoke thought. If proof were asked for, I may have written my comment differently, and perhaps would not have linked to my site. I hope this
clarifies a little. Again, it is not easy for me to portray my understandings, as sometimes the words just aren't there, sometimes they don't even
exist. Also, I want to go on the record as having said that I understand fully that everything I say is MY understanding, which doesn't make it true
by any stretch. I will say, however, that my understanding derives from 30 years of not just studying, but Emersing myself in the cultures of what I
studied and often learning the hard way.
I thank you for the conversation and invite you to further discussion.
P.S. May I post your response to my article on my website? If you say no, I will honor that.
Peace and One love.