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.

 

The Old Testament God is a Bumbling, Primitive, Idiot?

page: 8
15
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Akragon
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Well again if they read the gospels instead of listening to their preachers they would have always believed in "ghosts"

What did his followers say when they saw Jesus walking across the water in the distance?

lets take a look....

46 And when he had sent them away, he departed into a mountain to pray.

47 And when even was come, the ship was in the midst of the sea, and he alone on the land.

48 And he saw them toiling in rowing; for the wind was contrary unto them: and about the fourth watch of the night he cometh unto them, walking upon the sea, and would have passed by them.

49 But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out:

50 For they all saw him, and were troubled. And immediately he talked with them, and saith unto them, Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid.

So the belief in Ghosts or spirits has always been there... until preachers came along and dismissed it...

The biggest issue with the OT is that people once again... listen to what preachers tell them... these people will NEVER show you the bad things the OT God did... Nor will they ever say anything that might cause doubt.

They strictly avoid all passages that contradict Jesus... and only point towards the prophecy and they bright yummy things the so called "god" of the OT did...

The OT god says he has mercy... he says he is loving and generous... but the words within the book betray that concept.

And speaking of stonings.... Did Stephen have a fair trial?

Why don't you ask Paul?



LOL Akra, you are talking to a Christian who has always believed there are ghosts, and yes, I have used that very verse to show Christians that they did believe in them.

And yes, Paul does not hide that fact, he confessed that he was a persecutor of Christians. And he confessed that he was there. No, it was not a fair trial, of which he does confess.

I have no problem knowing that, because Paul pulls no punches. But Paul also repented of it and I think Stephen would accept his apology. But let's look at this, what world were those ancient Hebrews living in? Their world was different than ours. Everyone was attacking everyone. Everyone did it in the name of their god.

Why did Pharaoh send an army out to kill the very people he just released? Wouldn't you think that's also an extreme thing to do in the name of Ra? Why did the Hittites, Canaanites, Egyptians, Moabites and Ammonites always have wars? They fought and killed in the name of their gods as well. But I'm not hearing that their gods were bumbling and primitive and evil.

Chemosh of the Moabites was a god of war. But I don't hear criticism against him. If we look at the ancient gods, they were a bunch of nasty, mean gods. Come on, who was it that raped Ganymede? Who was it that kidnapped Persephone? Who was it that ate their children? What god again was that?

Historically, belief systems were founded on gods of terror and murder. But to pick on this one, that's just not fair. Let's talk about how these other gods influenced the cultures. And let's not say the one of the Bible has the most influence, because the Greeks didn't think so.

Let's have the intellectual discussion about the ancient gods and their murdering ways. If the God of the Bible is real enough to charge, then let's make these other gods real too.
edit on 11/20/2013 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


This is the point my dear... Until Jesus came to earth... Man did not know the true God of creation...

ALL of these gods were minor deities... some most likely had no basis in reality

The OT god is no different then any of the earlier gods... Just another false god in a long line of false gods.

Jesus came and showed the world God is not a jealous envious wrathful tyrant... He loves all of his children without exception... and knows full well we are messed up as a species.

This is why reincarnation is far more valid then the concept of Heaven or Hell... A spirit can not learn a damn thing if he is condemned to burn in some mythical lake of fire... its pure nonsense

You make your mistakes... You return home for judgement of your life... and are returned to the physical in the body you created for yourself if you have no learned your lessons. This is the only idea that explains everything... It explains why people are born into starvation... it explains rape... it explains murder... it explains why the good die young...

It explains everything...


edit on 20-11-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Or, Akra, could it be that the heart of man is desperately wicked above all else?

That's why out of a wicked heart a person rapes and kills. We don't even try anymore to understand it, we just make excuses for it. We blame God for the effects of our actions, we demand that God be accountable for creating us, and how then could we go back to our parents and tell them "You gave birth to me, with my evil nature, it's all your fault for what I do".

Man calls God an idiot, then man does the very things he accuses and rails on God for. Man calls God evil, and then justifies his own actions by saying "The God that I don't believe in created me to be this way, so blame God". How do you blame a God you don't believe in? But men you can see, men who cry out, "There is no God, but if there is a God then I blame Him for what I am about to do". That is called Machiavellian. Then end justifies the means?

Reincarnation is Machiavellian, the end, the last life, justifies every method and means of wickedness perpetrated by people. Does the end justify the means?

What did it take to get you to that last life? Progression of learning one mistake after another? And Nirvana or whatever you want to call it, justifies the mistakes?

Here is an article that is very good...To Wonder Again, Eric S. Cohen, social critic and writer shares his thoughts on our modern culture.


The final revolt is against the very ideas of good and evil; it is the last act in the modern drama of liberation, and Nietzsche is its playwright. Nietzsche’s superman accepts no truth that is not of his own making. He is a creator, a comic poet. He is totally free, bound by nothing except his own imagination, his shamelessness, and his creative transgression. In the end, however, he challenges mortality and loses. He closes the pathway to transcendence, and therefore eliminates the meaning of death—since, at best, he leaves an ambiguous mark on a world that he has defined as transient, arbitrary, and empty. He resents the silence of the universe; he resents the God who doesn’t exist; and so he attempts to become a god himself—and fails.


We all die Akra, and this is what Cohen says about being a revolutionary


The revolutionary is spiritually and metaphysically sick, which explains the desperation of his politics. He cannot accept the fact of human limitation, because he has rejected—or lost—the moral, philosophical, and religious ways of knowing that make limitation bearable and meaningful. He cannot accept the imperfectability of man or the apparent smallness of his own place in the universe. He cannot accept the slow, imperfect business of political reform or the anonymity of altruism; he wants, instead, to be the liberator of mankind. The revolutionary’s soul is hardened; he lacks what G. K. Chesterton called the "wondrous vision of the child." Instead, he wants "peak experiences"—such as acid trips or the momentary god experience of defying death. He has no time for kindness and no gratitude for life’s blessings or even life itself.


We are finite humans, nothing will change in that. Why should we even think we are Prince Machiavelli? Is it God who is the bumbling idiot, or is it man? I say man is, because man has been here this long and can't get his heart right yet by himself.



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 


Hello ,

No, I was born RCC and had my eyes opened in 1987, joined a spirit filled Lutheran church and about 6 months later a messianic synagogue. I was blessed to study with some great Jewish scholars, and realized early on that most Christians miss out on a lot of the bible meanings because they don't understand the Jewish idioms and concepts in the bible, such a Jesus / Yeshua healing 10 Jewish Lepers who were going through the purification ritual to prove they were cleansed which was only something Messiah could do, and that 10 was representative of a minion necessary to represent Israel, and so the message was that the leprosy (sin) of the nation (Israel) was cleaned by the very one hanging on the cross for them.

I am sure they did not miss that message at the temple.



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 



Or, Akra, could it be that the heart of man is desperately wicked above all else?


nah... that's just more garbage the OT teaches... In some cases yes im sure...

Did Jesus not say he did not come to call the Righteous.. but sinners?

Thus there are some decently good people in this world... yet the OT says all men are wicked because of our "fallen nature"... that is a load of... well you know.


We blame God for the effects of our actions, we demand that God be accountable for creating us, and how then could we go back to our parents and tell them "You gave birth to me, with my evil nature, it's all your fault for what I do".


What is this we stuff?

I don't blame God for anything... the so called "evil" in this world is caused by man... Not God


Man calls God an idiot, then man does the very things he accuses and rails on God for. Man calls God evil, and then justifies his own actions by saying "The God that I don't believe in created me to be this way, so blame God". How do you blame a God you don't believe in?


Doesn't make much sense does it... Again, I personally do not blame God for anything... As I've said, the people from the OT did not know God... and even when his son came and showed them the truth... what happened to him?

and WHO were the ones that executed him... the people that followed the OT obviously


Reincarnation is Machiavellian, the end, the last life, justifies every method and means of wickedness perpetrated by people. Does the end justify the means?


What makes you believe there is an end...Oh wait I know... the bible of course


My dear... we are eternal beings "trapped" in a finite body... Its well known that something can not come from nothing... We existed before this life, and we will continue to exist after this life...


What did it take to get you to that last life? Progression of learning one mistake after another? And Nirvana or whatever you want to call it, justifies the mistakes?


Speaking of justification... how does a Just and righteous God toss his children in to a lake of fire?

Do you teach a child by explaining what they did wrong... and show them the error of their ways... or is it better to beat the living snot out of them and hope they learn from their mistakes?


We are finite humans, nothing will change in that. Why should we even think we are Prince Machiavelli? Is it God who is the bumbling idiot, or is it man? I say man is, because man has been here this long and can't get his heart right yet by himself.


And who wrote the bible again?


edit on 20-11-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


And it's your belief Jesus never came to call you? So that makes you righteous?

I have to ask then, in whose eyes are you righteous? I am sure there are some people in your life who might say you are not quite righteous. But, then again, I don't know the people in your life.

So you would be righteous for Jesus to not call you, if He came for the sinners. And since only two type of people were mentioned, righteous and sinners, then which side do you fall on?

And if you are righteous, then what made you righteous?



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   

WarminIndy
reply to post by Akragon
 


And it's your belief Jesus never came to call you? So that makes you righteous?

I have to ask then, in whose eyes are you righteous? I am sure there are some people in your life who might say you are not quite righteous. But, then again, I don't know the people in your life.

So you would be righteous for Jesus to not call you, if He came for the sinners. And since only two type of people were mentioned, righteous and sinners, then which side do you fall on?

And if you are righteous, then what made you righteous?



Oh yes my dear... I was most definitely "called" by him... I was not always who I am now...

Most definitely I can relate to paul in one way... a chief of all sinners to be sure...

I am by no means righteous... but im trying... I struggle with many of his lessons... Love thy enemies is extremely hard in my case, but again I can only do my best...

I make no claims to be anything but a sinner... IF there is such a thing...




posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Akragon

WarminIndy
reply to post by Akragon
 


And it's your belief Jesus never came to call you? So that makes you righteous?

I have to ask then, in whose eyes are you righteous? I am sure there are some people in your life who might say you are not quite righteous. But, then again, I don't know the people in your life.

So you would be righteous for Jesus to not call you, if He came for the sinners. And since only two type of people were mentioned, righteous and sinners, then which side do you fall on?

And if you are righteous, then what made you righteous?



Oh yes my dear... I was most definitely "called" by him... I was not always who I am now...

Most definitely I can relate to paul in one way... a chief of all sinners to be sure...

I am by no means righteous... but im trying... I struggle with many of his lessons... Love thy enemies is extremely hard in my case, but again I can only do my best...

I make no claims to be anything but a sinner... IF there is such a thing...



So right now, you kind of got Him on call-waiting?

I think maybe you just are trying to find your way with Him, so it's probably best that you let Him get you there.

Do you think there is not such a thing as a sinner? And I'm not talking about children, I'm talking about grown-up adult people who make decisions of their own accord. Do you think sinners are sinner because of what they do or what they are?



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 



Do you think sinners are sinner because of what they do or what they are?


What they are. They do because of what they are. Animalism is sin, I guess. That's what it's always sounded like to me. If you give even an inch to your physical nature, you are sinning. Utter self-denial is the key. You want to transcend your animal heritage and become something unearthly and romantic, blah blah blah.

It's all a bunch of self-defeatist tripe.
edit on 20-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy
 



Do you think sinners are sinner because of what they do or what they are?


What they are. They do because of what they are. Animalism is sin, I guess. That's what it's always sounded like to me. If you give even an inch to your physical nature, you are sinning. Utter self-denial is the key. You want to transcend your animal heritage and become something unearthly and romantic, blah blah blah.

It's all a bunch of self-defeatist tripe.
edit on 20-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)


Maybe we see the outcome differently because I don't see man as an animal.

Animalism carries with it no special qualities, no need for moral reasoning. A man rapes a child, is that his animal nature? He's a sinner, you said that so much yourself. So if he's a sinner, then he can't be an animal. He might act like an animal, but by the very default, by being a sinner, then he's not an animal.

And if he's not an animal, then he must be judged by some moral standard, if he's a sinner. And if he is judged by a moral standard, then that means there is such a thing as righteous. What makes a person righteous? Clearly not by being an animal.

And that's where we have decide, is man an animal or not?



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Animalism is sin, I guess. That's what it's always sounded like to me. If you give even an inch to your physical nature, you are sinning. Utter self-denial is the key. You want to transcend your animal heritage and become something unearthly and romantic, blah blah blah.

It's all a bunch of self-defeatist tripe.


No wonder you're unhappy. You're missing out on all the fun.

“Wherever the Catholic sun doth shine,
There’s always laughter and good red wine.
At least I've always found it so.
Benedicamus Domino!”

― Hilaire Belloc

And don't tell me Catholics don't enjoy marriage. You could always tell the religion of the family with six kids. Go to an Orthodox, or Catholic Latin Mass, with gold and incense, and music. And you should have sat in on one of my Italian grandmother's Christmas meals. Even animals couldn't eat as much as we were expected to. I'd describe it, but you wouldn't believe me.

Our physical nature is part of us, we shouldn't try to pretend it doesn't exist. We love, enjoy symphonies and poetry. We go on amusement park rides for the sheer animal fun of it. The famous Notre Dame football program is based on the animal strength and courage of its players,

Christianity does, or should, blend both the spiritual and physical. We're not supposed to miss out on either.

I know you can't change all your ideas, but please try to change that one. You seem to think we're inhuman. (Every now and then, praise God, we're super-human.)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 05:04 PM
link   

WarminIndy

Akragon

WarminIndy
reply to post by Akragon
 


And it's your belief Jesus never came to call you? So that makes you righteous?

I have to ask then, in whose eyes are you righteous? I am sure there are some people in your life who might say you are not quite righteous. But, then again, I don't know the people in your life.

So you would be righteous for Jesus to not call you, if He came for the sinners. And since only two type of people were mentioned, righteous and sinners, then which side do you fall on?

And if you are righteous, then what made you righteous?



Oh yes my dear... I was most definitely "called" by him... I was not always who I am now...

Most definitely I can relate to paul in one way... a chief of all sinners to be sure...

I am by no means righteous... but im trying... I struggle with many of his lessons... Love thy enemies is extremely hard in my case, but again I can only do my best...

I make no claims to be anything but a sinner... IF there is such a thing...



So right now, you kind of got Him on call-waiting?

I think maybe you just are trying to find your way with Him, so it's probably best that you let Him get you there.

Do you think there is not such a thing as a sinner? And I'm not talking about children, I'm talking about grown-up adult people who make decisions of their own accord. Do you think sinners are sinner because of what they do or what they are?


More assumptions... Geez

I know his words by heart my dear... including those that aren't found in the bible...

DO you honestly believe I need to accept a label to walk with Jesus?

Through his words I found God, and it was God that led me to where I am today... And it was Most certainly was NOT the OT god... So please don't assume I don't know Jesus... or God. You think I would have such confidence in what I say if I was just some clueless dolt?

sigh

And must I define a "the sinner" if we are all qualified?

Assumptions about me are pointless... One does not need to be "Christian" or listen to a preacher babble on about what he thinks he knows about God to understand Jesus... or walk with him.

And the narrowminded view that the gospels only have one interpretation....... Let alone only the "Christian" interpretation is just.... Well wrong.

but as I always say... believe what you will


edit on 20-11-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Well, it's certainly been fun, and informative. We had a little side trip through the Virgin Birth and other aspects of theology, but I couldn't object. Basically, a number of decent people have gotten together to discuss God in more or less polite manner (although we're starting to fray a little bit), and that is quite an accomplishment for ATS. Thank you very much.

I wanted to sum up, for my own purposes if no one else's, what I've picked up here.

God has been described as a vicious killer because of what he told the Israelites to do.

The Mosaic law was claimed to be nonsensical

God was probably an alien.

He should never have made people susceptible to temptation.

He should stop the pain and suffering in the world.

He shouldn't have made us at all, just made souls and brought them to heaven.

God can't be completely described by the human brain.

The Old Testament is largely, if not completely fake.

It seems to be that none of these have been shown to be valid objections to the argument that God, Jesus' Father, was the God of the Old Testament. Further the charges of idiocy, bumbling, bloodthirstiness, and nonexistence have been met with plausible answers and can not be declared to be proven.

While the arguments may not change opinions. It is certainly possible for a Christian to hold to the traditional understanding of the Father without resorting to fantasy, lies, or flawed logic. While I might not be the most unbiased judge, I dismiss Cogito, Ergo Sum's charges as unproven.

Case dismissed without prejudice, the case may be reopened based on further evidence or argument. The court is adjourned.



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Edit:

Charles1952,

Case closed for today....

Thank you for being so congenial. Akra, much love to you.






edit on 11/20/2013 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by WarminIndy
 



people sat around pre-ATS and wanted to find some mystical meaning for their worldview. While I offered to say the cultural context, you then offered something about Kabbhala. That's not the original cultural reference the Bible was written in, Kabbhala came in the Middle-Ages.


No, that's incorrect, Indy. King Solomon used the Qabbala. It was ancient alchemy in those times.

Also, btw, your other off topic post regarding reincarnation (in the first paragraph) to Unified...made it sound like you might be admitting reincarnation is a possibility. Just wondered. The tone later changed, but that statement made me wonder....

But, this thread belongs to Charles, and it has been deftly derailed (although the exchange has been very amusing and good reading), and we've got away from the bumbling, primitive idiot who failed to provide a reasonable number of chances to the people he "chose", but killed them all, several times over, murdered entire cities, flooded the earth....and is so unstable he might toss your butt in hell.....just because you forgot to cross yourself WHILE the preacher was witnessin'.

THAT bumbling idiot.
Remember?

The one who was too shortsighted and impatient to see how well reincarnation would work to serve the purpose? He couldn't fathom that, if he wants us to develop in the short time of this flesh-mobile, he didn't design us sufficiently to perform at that speed? And since we can't possibly get it in one lifetime (woops! His bad), we instead OUGHT TO HAVE LOTS of those lifetimes and experiences to go through? As many as we need? Bumbling. Maybe he was an intern at that point!


We pass the lesson of that session, we pass to the next level. If we fail to grasp the lesson, we return to try it again, or, if we didn't quite accomplish the task at hand, we may have a NDE and be sent back...
A study at your own pace concept, with an advisor.

And he might say something like "why didn't you think to evacuate your bladder before departure?" Back you go. Try it again. Sandra Bullock: "I crashed the simulator every time." Clooney: "It was a simulator. It's supposed to do that. It's not rocket science. You power the soft-landing jets, aim it at Earth, and go."

It's not rocket science, ffs.

It's parenting. It's nurturing. It's guiding and teaching, and allowing your child to make mistakes so they can LEARN from the experience. We defective humans don't demand that our babies mature in one month, and fling him into hell when he fails to meet our standards!! No...even we losers know that we created this individual, that it will take many decades for it to fully mature.

Now, what bumbling idiot creates a faulty product, but, not wanting to start over from scratch, can't figure out that he needs to adjust the ethereal (adjustable) part that is The Product's Divine Spark?

WHO DOESN'T FIGURE OUT TO DO A RECALL! "Bring 'em back, then, team...we'll spend some debriefing time, have a review, and decide on a plan for the next round, that we all agree to. The lessons are established....and once born again, the memory will be dim but an 'instinctive' knowing what to do...
pass the ordeal well? You move to next level."

If we, we humans, we lowly, miserable, defective "mistakes" can figure out remedial (after-market) improvements for a product, and determine that it needs upgrades/versions/generations...what bumbling, primitive, idiot CAN'T?

That's what we were talking about. 'member that?




edit on 11/20/13 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


I object!

On the grounds of pre-mature dismissal of said case...

And put forth the arguement that John, being one of the most important figures in said book... stated definitively "God is love".... Of Which the so called OT "god" does not show knowledge of in any sense of the word

Further more i bring forth evidence of killing women and children on numerous occasions in his book... Which is NOT something any "loving entity" be it godly or human could do and still claim to "be love"




posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Sustained. You may lower your hand, counselor.




posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

Dear wildtimes,

How wonderful of you to come to the defense of the thread. But, I didn't think the thread was being attacked.

It seemed to me, and I'm w-i-d-e open to correction on this one, that the charges against God had been made, rational answers had been provided, and Cogito, Ergo Sum's claims were defeated for failure of proof. If people want to turn the thread to respectfully deal with some other topic related to God or Spirituality, i won't object.

I like your example of someone getting retrained after a disastrous effort, but I don't like it as a model of reincarnation. I might be misunderstanding, but it seems like you're saying that we do life over and over and over and over again, until we hit on the right combination of behaviors.

Do we return from our first life with no knowledge of our past? Then what's the point?

If we return from our life having learned valuable lessons concerning what the "Spirit Guide" wants us to learn, then eventually, everybody will know everything, and no one will do anything wrong. Society should be getting better and better every day. I would not want to argue that that's true. Everybody on earth has probably received at least a dozen lessons on how to behave towards each other and the planet. Frankly, i don't see it.

We've been "enlightened" by going through numerous "retraining" sessions, yet we're fouling up in the same ways we always have. If the training sessions improve us, the planet should be better than it is. If they don't improve us, the effect is the same as being born for the first time.

Re-incarnation may be comforting, but I guess I just don't understand it yet.

With respect,
Charles1952

(Perhaps the 1952 stands for the number of times I've been re-incarnated. In that case I should be pretty darn near perfect by now. I assure you, I'm not.)



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 



Do we return from our first life with no knowledge of our past?

No, we return from our 'first life' with innate knowledge that is 'veiled' from us....so that we feel "drawn" towards (or "thrust into") specific circumstances that will challenge us. BUT, our soul - our "Higher Self" knows what it is. So, as if blindfolded but remembering having SEEN the "map" (which we saw between 'incarnations') we "seek out" the correct situations and relationships to learn the lesson at hand. (Explore the territory. Because we all know: THE MAP IS NOT THE TERRITORY.)


Then what's the point?
To experience a new lesson, or review a previous lesson. To remember where the treasure is buried. Our success each go-round depends on how well we remember the map from last-time around.


If we return from our life having learned valuable lessons concerning what the "Spirit Guide" wants us to learn, then eventually, everybody will know everything, and no one will do anything wrong.

Precisely!! But, see, we don't return HERE...we are elevated to reunion with the Divine. THEN, we can

a) decide to come back and help teach others (like Jesus did), or,

b) move on to another plane of soul evolution.


Society should be getting better and better every day.

Once everyone has figured out the truth and learned the lessons, yes, it should. THAT is "the kingdom of heaven on earth". But since we aren't all at the same 'learning level', YET, there are discrepancies.

I would not want to argue that that's true. Everybody on earth has probably received at least a dozen lessons on how to behave towards each other and the planet.
Over how many lifetimes?

Frankly, i don't see it.

Perhaps, dear Charles, because you're not looking at it from a progressive 'learning curve' point of view in terms of 'ethereal eternity'?? "At least a dozen lessons" over what time frame? A dozen years? Decades? A dozen lifetimes? A dozen lessons during our first month of infancy? We have many times more than a 'dozen lessons' while we are here....but there are STILL lessons yet to be learned. Once we've learned ALL of the lessons, by living them, we are ready to rejoin the ethereal realm of gnosis, reunion, our Divine Nature's source. You have to remember that NOT ALL SOULS are the same age.

Some have been around the block DOZENS of times...others are 'new'. It's a "Teaching University". First an applicant: then a student (undergrad)....x number of 'years' (lifetimes)....then you're an intern....a few years (lifetimes)...then, a resident for a couple years (lifetimes)....THEN you get your license as a full-fledged practitioner (advanced/doctorate level soul). Once you get there, you can choose to TEACH, or to move on to new areas of interest.


We've been "enlightened" by going through numerous "retraining" sessions, yet we're fouling up in the same ways we always have. If the training sessions improve us, the planet should be better than it is. If they don't improve us, the effect is the same as being born for the first time.

Again, re-read the above paragraph.


Re-incarnation may be comforting, but I guess I just don't understand it yet.


It is comforting, yes. And reassuring, and gives people confidence (not 'faith', not 'hope', not 'temerity') that they can, AND WILL, eventually graduate. Some humans we run across are 'applicants' - others are post-doctoral experts....and everywhere in between.

Hope that helps.


edit on 11/20/13 by wildtimes because: clarity x 3



posted on Nov, 20 2013 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Pinke
 




Is interesting question for me to ask you, but would you consider that unifying force as God? Or is it just a thing?


I don't think that God is person or an entity with a personal interest in humanity. I do think that we are all spiritual beings, and that there is a spiritual hierarchy. The universe is filled with spiritual beings of all levels of "beingness" and spiritual aptitude. I believe in the concept of "As above, so below".

My definition of God is still developing, but, the way I see it, if we are drops of water, God is the ocean.

Perhaps God is better explained by positing that we are all part of the "body of God", and God's body, like ours, has numerous working systems, that work together for a common goal, existence. I believe that God's body is the entirety of the universe, and everything that exists is a manifestation of God, arising from the body and the thoughts of God.

Perhaps, we only exist in the dream state of a sleeping God.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join