Spiritual Reorientation 4: Eternal Life is Eternal Death

Spiritual Reorientation 4: Eternal Life is Eternal Death

1.

The doctrines of the pop-religions promise us eternal life, but that we must first give them our faith, and die to receive it. To believe this, one must butcher his own reason, and allow paradox to govern him. However, if we are to retain our gifts of reason and discernment, and thus, in their eyes, submit ourselves to be called heretics, we find that this incentive and reward paints an evil picture of humankind, no longer heralds of life and nature, but of death and the supernatural.

2.

There is nothing sacred about their teachings, and all they revere is that which has stolen their power of making things sacred. When they preach eternal life, and that we must first die to achieve it, following without criticism their saccharine speech and empty promises, we begin to see a doctrine of death. How they clamour and conduct their lives for this promise, and how they cannot wait to sit on the throne of death, to reign as dead kings with dead crowns. That is their reward; and one might wonder why they do not rush to receive it.

Perhaps it was better that they were not born at all, these nihilistic ones, who have yet to make sacred anything in the world but their symbols and stories. Perhaps they are unable to become human, so they pretend that they are not, and wander around as the living dead. Life for them is meaningless, suffering, futile and transitory—not worth our love—so say their symbols and stories. Everything is predetermined, law, written down already, concluded, including themselves. How they struggle to remain in those barriers, rather than break free of them. To reign in death is the only reward for such a struggle.

3.

Or perhaps they’ve done away with the pop-religions, under a certain guise of freedom, yet they still retain their most precious doctrines and words, hiding beneath their costume the same lies as countless have done before them. Still, they have yet to find anything more sacred than these lies, so they clutch them dearly, lest the world and their reason take them away. Only the living dead refuse to make everything sacred, thus they worship nothing.

4.

Eternal death is what they preach hidden behind eternal life. Eternal death and the dead are sacred to them, while life is but a means to such an end. “Wait and see,” they tell me. “You will be surprised”. They’ve learned this speech from their doctrines: “Wait and see,” they have been told already, and they are easily convinced thereby.

Long ago they have already stolen the spirit, which used to be the breath of life, and in its place they give us something else to worship: the death of life.

It is difficult to discern whether you are writing about those who are spiritual, or those who are not. Seems like in many spots in your thesis, they are interchangeable.

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" - it just comforts people (mostly those unable to think for themselves, whether because they've been so indoctrinated or if they're just ignorant) to think that if they live their lives "by the book" that death, for them, will just be another word for "life everlasting".

originally posted by: cosmikDebris
"Religion is the opiate of the masses" - it just comforts people (mostly those unable to think for themselves, whether because they've been so indoctrinated or if they're just ignorant) to think that if they live their lives "by the book" that death, for them, will just be another word for "life everlasting".

But at what point do we have the right to tell someone what they are allowed to take comfort from? At what point does it stop being thought-policing and start being education? Where is the difference between the two?

a reply to: AfterInfinity
Personally I don't care what anybody takes spiritual comfort in as long as everyone can live harmoniously despite differing "comforts" regarding the imponderable questions about who we are and where we're going.

a reply to: AfterInfinity

It is difficult to discern whether you are writing about those who are spiritual, or those who are not. Seems like in many spots in your thesis, they are interchangeable. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I believe everyone is inherently spiritual. I am questioning what it means to be spiritual, and if those who claim that they are and others are not are being truthful. It is in my mind that the etymology of the word "spirit" has changed over time due to its misuse, and somewhere along those lines, a spiritual mutiny has occurred. I wish to bring it back to its rightful place, so that it is available to all, and especially to those who have never considered themselves spiritual.

I agree the construct of spirit has become(and always has been) meaningless because of peoples religion.The main problem is everyone is religious so it's impossible to avoid!.It is the nature of mankind that everyone's experiences from their faith in their Belief System which is "their religion".

The meaning of spirit has gone through so many transformations by translations and transliteration the core meaning has been lost.For clarity sakes(and truth) in a logical argument terms must be clarified and find preferably as succinctly as possible.

I think the most comprehensive definition that is devoid of the "mystical" is spirit means Life.I don't see Yahoshua using it in any other context because that just wasn't his nature to make things "mystical" even though the majority of people think he was.

There are MANY that "say" unless you "believe such and such doctrine and perform such and such acts you will not receive eternal life(spirit).That is patently false .Neither Yahoshua nor any of the new testimony scriptures state that.It is purely an extrapolation of "religion" that MANY believe ...nothing more.Yahoshua said there would be many saying just that.

"In that day MANY will come in MY name saying THEY are christ and will "deceive" many".

...and they have..deceived many(themselves) and anyone else they have convinced of those lies.Yahoshua clearly stated his WHOLE purpose was proclaiming the Good news of the coming of the Kingdom of the creator God THROUGH salvation.The name Yahoshua in Hebrew means Yahweh (the creator God ) IS salvation(which means deliverance).That deliverance is from the realm of death that ALL of mankind will "pass through".The physical realm is the "valley of the shadow of death" that is the path.

The construct of "spirituality" is nothing more than "mysticism" and a form of delusion .Man is not "A" spirit and neither is the creator God….The creator God IS spirit…LIFE….Man is a soul which is a body that is animated by "spirit"(life)The life all mankind live is the "spirit of man".It is temporal and leads to physical death.

The "life" Yahoshua spoke of is not the temporal "shadow" life of man (the 1st Adam) it is of another "age, world or realm" which is the word "aion or aeon"in Greek translated "eternal".It does not mean endless time.Time has a beginning and an end it can't be eternal.

The physical realm"life" in the valley of the shadow of death is just part of the infinite process of growth which is salvation…deliverance from life/death to life.It is in effect a conception of a seed to a zygote to a embryo to a fetus to birth(delivery) to LIFE…

There is absolutely NOTHING anyone can do to cause any of it.It is a process(experience) that is happening TO you not BY you.There is no "mysticism" of "spirituality" involved unless you believe the natural process of life is mystic which is only belief not truth.

a reply to: Aphorism

I believe everyone is inherently spiritual.

Before I ask you about that belief I would just like to say...I enjoyed that OP. Well written, intelligent and insightful. I think you have summed up pop-religions quite nicely. Life is a death sentence...and death is a life sentence.
When I think of spiritual people, at least those that I meet or perhaps those followers of the mainstream religions. I always think, in my own simple way, those people have everything back to front and upside down.

Anyway just a short question...how do you define 'spiritual' in the context of that statement.

Thanks.

a reply to: midicon

Thank you for the kind words.

I always think, in my own simple way, those people have everything back to front and upside down.

I completely agree. This has been going on for thousands of years.

Anyway just a short question...how do you define 'spiritual' in the context of that statement.
- See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I use the original meaning of the word, its origins, where it was still untouched by religious rhetoric. Spirit was "the breath", which ather than signify ghosts and spirits, should signify life, living etc. And spirituality, in my mind, is the way of life.

originally posted by: Aphorism
I use the original meaning of the word, its origins, where it was still untouched by religious rhetoric. Spirit was "the breath", which ather than signify ghosts and spirits, should signify life, living etc. And spirituality, in my mind, is the way of life.

When death happens to the body - the last thing to happen - is the breath comes out of the body.
The breath of life does not stay in the body.
If you ever see someone die notice that they do not breath in when dying.

Is 'breath' a thing of substance? Can one see 'breath'? Breath is the air. All things appear in the air.
The body is capable of movement when breath is going in and out of it - when the pulse of the in and out of breath stops the body no longer functions.

a reply to: Aphorism
Would you say that you are the body or would you say that you are what animates the body?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Aphorism
Are you the body or are you what animates the body?

I believe Aphorism covered that in the previous chapter.

Spiritual Reorientation 3: You are your body

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Aphorism
Are you the body or are you what animates the body?

I believe Aphorism covered that in the previous chapter.

Spiritual Reorientation 3: You are your body

I believe I asked aphorism a question. I have also changed the question by editing my post.

originally posted by: Aphorism
And spirituality, in my mind, is the way of life.

Breath happens always presently and is life itself. The mind cannot ever speak of present happening - the mind speaks of before and after. The mind misses the presence because thought is concerned with other. Mind is concerned with doing right and not doing wrong - it wants better and does not want worse.

a reply to: AfterInfinity
Aphorsim has stated that 'spirit' is breath.
Perhaps you could answer whether he believes he is the breath or the body the breath moves?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AfterInfinity
Aphorsim has stated that 'spirit' is breath.
Perhaps you could answer whether he believes he is the breath or the body the breath moves?

The historical etymology of the word 'spirit' is easily accessible to those with even an amateur knowledge of the internet.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

originally posted by: AfterInfinity

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Aphorism
Are you the body or are you what animates the body?

I believe Aphorism covered that in the previous chapter.

Spiritual Reorientation 3: You are your body

I believe I asked aphorism a question. I have also changed the question by editing my post.

I think you'll find I really don't care who you were asking.

a reply to: AfterInfinity
That seems to be a bit of a cop out.(oh, you have completely changed what you said it the post)
When the body appears to be dead and is pronounced dead the breath has stopped entering it but the breath (which Aphorism has stated is 'spirit') has escaped the body.

originally posted by: AfterInfinity
I think you'll find I really don't care who you were asking.

Aphorism has written a thread which you directed me to, which you believe will answer the question I asked Aphorism. I think what he states in this thread about 'spirit' being 'breath' opens a new can of worms.
I believe it might bring new meaning to the idea of 'spirit'.
Maybe we should wait and see what answer Aphorism has.