Whose role is it to save souls ?

I often wonder whether spiritual leaders should now be considered obsolete. We have now moved into the Aquarian Age, where responsibility should be taken by individuals themselves . No more fearing of God and blaming everything on the old scapegoat (the devil)

Religion played a very good part in our development ; giving us qualities such as compassion and empathy and I am grateful for it. However, now we that we are fairly balanced beings (except for the zombies who feed on reality TV and stupid gadgets) we should be ready to go it alone.

I believe not only that life needs to be lived to the full but, in addition , we must strive to remove the layers that hide the truth(apologies to Neil Armstrong for borrowing and twisting the quote).

I submit below my General Theory of the Truth in a nutshell:

-God does not know who he is
-Steps out of himself to have a good look (this is the beginning of the Universe)
-Brings about two opposing forces creating a friction which is the source of manifestation
-Sends probes (MINI-MEs - otherwise known as human souls)
-and so on
-MINI-MEs mentioned above explore and experiment to heart's content and report back
-Some MINI-MEs eventually achive high levels of consciousness (eg Bhddha consciousness; Christ consciousness) and reside in that sector where that pool of consciousness is made available to those who can rise up to it. Meanwhile those masters are still looking up to what is above and busy themselves in trying to understand what is above.
-Above them is other beings of higher consciosness, etc.
-Eventually enough is reported back for the Great one to realise that there is something even bigger that he can now aspire to rise to .
-And so it goes on.

In the process an exciting matrix has been created ; enough to get both spiritual types and scientifuc types amongts us excited. A lot of brave people have already mapped out the spatial environment within which we live. For example , the zone girdling the earth has beings assigned to each of the 360 degrees. There is no disagreement as to names and appearances of these beings. I am not divulging anything here that is not already copiously written about.

So, my point is that we have a duty to examine the environment in which we exist even if it means that we explore the inner world as well.

I am not claiming to know any more that others here do. What I am advocating is that , this being a PHILOSOPHY & METAPHYSIC forum, no one should be scared of submitting their own personal beliefs no matter how weird or original. This is NOT a Religious forum.

Finally - on a lighter note - below is a song from one of my favorite 70's band "Nazareth". This song is called "Holy Roller" and makes fun of the bible-brandishing preachers (Known as holy rollers in Scotland where the band comes from). It tells the preacher to go and save his own soul

a reply to: crowdedskies

Every day I save my soul from obliteration. No body or thing can do it for me because only I can convince myself of truth. Anything else from anywhere else will always come with doubt.

Religion only serves as a distraction from that truth imo which is why people who go to church or pray or worship in some way KEEP doing it day after day rather than spending the time actually doing good. Proof is in the pudding and I've never met a religious person who hasn't got some kind of hypocracy going on.

I am my own god, if others have a god then he's probably happy that THIS bag of meat can sort his own sht out without bothering him constantly.

Nothing weird with what you have said, makes perfect sense. New times make the past seem silly and sad, but I suppose that was the way it was meant to be. Doesnt mean that there wasnt many that slipped away from the piscean con. playing dum.

a reply to: crowdedskies

I really liked your first three paragraphs.

Any progress is good progress, no matter how small or slow it goes.

originally posted by: ancientthunder
Nothing weird with what you have said, makes perfect sense. New times make the past seem silly and sad, but I suppose that was the way it was meant to be. Doesnt mean that there wasnt many that slipped away from the piscean con. playing dum.

Indeed the Piscean age was one of devotion (some would say deception). Well..all ages have their good and bad points.
The start of the Aquarian age is turning us into zombies (facebook, gadgets) but it will get better after the period of adjustment.

originally posted by: geezlouise
I really liked your first three paragraphs.

Any progress is good progress, no matter how small or slow it goes.

Only the first 3 paragraphs were meant to be serious. The rest was pure indulgence on my part

a reply to: crowdedskies

What are we saving souls from anyways?

Hell?

The lake of fire perhaps?

Ancient imagery to scare people into joining the religious clique of our families before us...

Maybe its an effort to save people from returning to this hell hole?

The way I look at it, theres no reason to save anyone from something that never existed in the first place... We all return to God (the source) when our bodies fail...

What happens at that point depends on how one lived their life in this incarnation... so the best idea is to be as good and loving as possible every moment we're here...

A loving creator would not torture his creation (children)

What lies in store for us after we pass only God knows

Hell or said lake of fire only waits for those who believe in it

Satan of course...

Who else gonna punish, and pulverize the souls of the dam, be purified by eternal fire, to make sure they go into Heaven in the next life.

So many souls, so little time.

a reply to: crowdedskies

Your philosophy does not seem to determine what souls are to be saved from, nor how they are saved.

Your 'theory of truth' also seems to me, to have some holes:

An all knowing God would, in the first place, have self-knowledge. Rationally, if God was the prime source of all things, then everything else is defined by God, God is not defined by everything else. It makes no sense to imply that God is not fully self-aware.

The revealed God (in Christian scripture) is already in community (that is, normally portrayed as Triune, but also referred to as "seven spirits", and the Kabalists hold that there are ten 'Emanations' of God). As God is already a loving community, there is no loneliness or isolation and therefore no requirement to seek self definition or to create out of need.

Human souls would not be required to "probe" a reality that is already fully known, having been created by God.

Human consciousness, even of the highest order, would be trivial and inconsequential to God, who because of self awareness and omniscience, would always remain the supreme consciousness.

The most supreme and penultimate consciousness is God. There can be no higher state possible. If a more supreme state or being were possible, then that would be God. If we consider that God would create reality, then alternate 'gods' would create their own realities, which would conflict (as there can only be one supreme reality). Therefore the winner in the escalation of realities would be the most supreme God whose reality would prevent the existence of other realities and the gods that may create them.

Your concept of God seems to hearken more to pantheistic philosophies where gods are not supreme but are subservient to a "realm of the gods" and as such are often in contention with each other. This then allows humans to manipulate the gods by playing one off against the other (as happens in most pantheistic faiths).

originally posted by: Specimen
Satan of course...

Who else gonna punish, and pulverize the souls of the dam, be purified by eternal fire, to make sure they go into Heaven in the next life.

So many souls, so little time.

I see your point and like the avatar.

One guy is supposed to look after us and be benevolent. Yet we see all the evidence of destruction and pain; our dear ones taken away from us brutally.

The other guy is supposed to be the bad guy. But no evidence presented except speculation.

This being a philosophical forum , we should question : what if they got it the wrong way round.

a reply to: chr0naut

You omit to refer to the multiple Trees of Life . I was referring to the God nearest to us in the lowest tree and I am fully aware of the ten emanations. I deliberately stopped at the supernals ( 1,2 and 3 basically - before the abyss)

Whilst I appreciate your post, it is too technical for the purpose of this thread which I wanted to keep open to everyone.

a reply to: crowdedskies

Well that's thing, it really depends on one belief tho, if u look at earlier view of monotheism, like the Hebrew God...he was usually the one held accountable for every misfortune and was the only one who supposedly could forgive...before Jesus.

Like the book of job, where Satan, instigates job trials and tribulations due to him asking God if job is truly faithful to God.

This also hold true to polytheist beliefs as well where cataclysmic events were acts cause by the gods for some transgression.

Really though such believe s are the interpretation of reality....Some are better then others.

originally posted by: Specimen
a reply to: crowdedskies

Well that's thing, it really depends on one belief tho, if u look at earlier view of monotheism, like the Hebrew God...he was usually the one held accountable for every misfortune and was the only one who supposedly could forgive...before Jesus.

Like the book of job, where Satan, instigates job trials and tribulations due to him asking God if job is truly faithful to God.

This also hold true to polytheist beliefs as well where cataclysmic events were acts cause by the gods for some transgression.

Really though such believe s are the interpretation of reality....Some are better then others.

It gets confusing though. The Christian bible comprises the old testament (Hebrew bible - at least extracts of it) and the new testament. Clearly , the scapegoat comes in in the latter part, leaving the All Mighty smelling of roses.

I hope I understood what you meant.

a reply to: crowdedskies

Lol. Only when sacrifical rituals to make it rain dont work is when the lattwr comes in. Come to think of it, even I don't understand what I meant.

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: crowdedskies

What are we saving souls from anyways?

Hell?

The lake of fire perhaps?

Ancient imagery to scare people into joining the religious clique of our families before us...

Maybe its an effort to save people from returning to this hell hole?

The way I look at it, theres no reason to save anyone from something that never existed in the first place... We all return to God (the source) when our bodies fail...

What happens at that point depends on how one lived their life in this incarnation... so the best idea is to be as good and loving as possible every moment we're here...

A loving creator would not torture his creation (children)

What lies in store for us after we pass only God knows

Hell or said lake of fire only waits for those who believe in it

I do not believe in this type of 'God', I believe 'he' is man made, an amalgamation of various primitive beliefs conjured up for mans own agenda and control. The various threats of eternal hell and fire only reinforce that notion, it's basic bribery but on a much more selfish scale and it's all completely man made.

That said, maybe I misread your post but it would be a sad world indeed if people only loved and cared through fear of what 'God' may do to them in eternity. I would like to think one does not need God in order to be a kind & loving human being. If fear of your own eternity is making 'you' ( not you personally ) be more loving to others, can it be considered genuine?

a reply to: crowdedskies

How about saving 'souls' from being specieated and enslaved by 'souls' who deceive others?

Hasn't all of civilized history up until even right #ing now been driven by slavery?
Whether elite forms within elite and enslaves the oblivious, or man employs a horse to pack his gear, SLAVERY has pretty much been the driver of all machinations within human society.
Isn't this 'Age of Aquarius' stuff supposed to be about people 'waking up'?
Here's a waking call: ITS 2015, AND SLAVERY IS STILL IN FULL SWING FOR THE HUMAN RACE

I say, as a soul who is aware of souls that need saving, it's your obligation to alert people to the truth that under many guises, slavery is running rampant, even in 'free' places like the U.S. We can't all stay dumb forever and let someone suck every effort and emotion from us and sell it back with interest. Saving souls is waking other people up.

Whose role is it to save souls?

Are we lost that we need saving or is the destination less important than the journey. Clearly no one can save us but ourselves.

originally posted by: crowdedskies
Whose role is it to save souls ?

First, what makes you think that 'Souls' need to be 'saved'?

this being a PHILOSOPHY & METAPHYSIC forum, no one should be scared of submitting their own personal beliefs no matter how weird or original. This is NOT a Religious forum.
Sorry, but 'beliefs' are NOT philosophy!
Philosophy is original critical thought!
'Beliefs' are an infection of the imagination, the ego, symptomatic, pathological!
Emotional, rather than rational.

you offered some pretty imaginative stuff, but beliefs are imagination.
But so is good theory, one being supported with evidence and logic.
Logic is only used to service/feed a belief, and the greater the belief, the more that logic is twisted and masticated to feed the belief.

Religion is the congregation of those infected with the same strain of belief!
The perfect place for an exposition of your 'beliefs'.

a reply to: namelesss

The Opening Post was really a snipe at all the preachers who throw scripture at us. I made it clear throughout that each one of us is responsible for his/her own soul. The title of the post was merely to identify the target : the "holy rollers" out there.

Philosophy leads to belief systems. People such as Kant, Plato, Socrates did have their own belief systems which always start from imagination combined with rationality as you state.

Unlike science, Philosophy does not require scientific proof and objective evidence. It only requires arguments to be put forward which cannot be disproved (or proven) but appear to make sense from a rational point of view.

Whilst Beliefs may require a combination of imagination and logic, I am far more interested in "faith". I am not talking about faith in the sense of someone's regilion but "faith" in the sense of an original insight that you are willing to take on board despite having no rational basis for it. Here is where it makes all the difference. Faith is far more powerful because it involves a new factor - the interplay of the will. For example, If you are walking a tight rope high above the ground, it is faith (=will) that is the big player - not skill or knowledge.

That has given me an idea of a new post about Belief, Faith and Expectation and why they are completly different from each other.

originally posted by: crowdedskies
a reply to: namelesss
Philosophy leads to belief systems. People such as Kant, Plato, Socrates did have their own belief systems which always start from imagination combined with rationality as you state.

I see quite the opposite!
Philosophical 'original critical thought' poisons the ground for a belief infection to take hold.

"The great snare of thought is the uncritical acceptance of irrational assumptions!" - Will Durant

We catch 'beliefs', we spread beliefs, but we never sit and rationally choose to have a belief any more that we rationally sit around and choose to be black or white or gay or whatever we are!
Beliefs are like Zombie thoughts, something accepted as "Truth" (tm) to be defended and validated/fed and spread, constantly, once infected!
These are 'thoughts' that are no longer available to philosophical scrutiny, and behavior is pathologically symptomatic, ranging from the construction of strawmen and attack/retreat, right up to killing you over these threatened beliefs!

No good philosopher has anything to do with 'beliefs'!
That is the vanity of religion!
Philosophical thought is a living, ever growing and examining creature, that is the opposite of an untouchable, emotionally powered Zombie 'belief'! *__-

Unlike science, Philosophy does not require scientific proof and objective evidence.

You do not understand what philosophy is.
All sciences are feeder branches on the tree of philosophy, all avenues of human knowledge are feeder branches!
No real philosopher is not cutting edge and beyond of any science!
One philosophical thought can predict the failure of the next ten years of research on a project, saving billions of bux! Scientist doesn't do that, because he's no philosopher!
And if you had any clue of science, you would never mention an impossibility as 'objective evidence'.
There is 'evidence', and that's it.
And science NEVER 'proves', it disproves!
And if it cannot disprove (and the tests never cease), it tentatively accepts! Far from the 'facts/beliefs' of 'religion'!

"New study of the brain shows that facts and beliefs are processed in exactly the same way."

www.newsweek.com...

It only requires arguments to be put forward which cannot be disproved (or proven) but appear to make sense from a rational point of view.

Logic trumps/subsumes 'empiricism'!
If it cannot logically be, it cannot be. No matter who 'believes', and sux tax money year after year in the vain attempt to 'build one'!

A Playful Look at Attempts to Solve the Problems of Paradox and Self-Reference

singlenesia.com...

"Logic trumps empiricism, and so does praxeology. ..."

Whilst Beliefs may require a combination of imagination and logic,

Logic is as much imagination/thought as 'beliefs'.
The difference is the pathology.

I am far more interested in "faith".

Though my studies of 'beliefs' have always been as an observer (vanity/ego = imagination/thought), I have found that beliefs are all 'conditional', being a 'mind/ego' product.
Now 'Faith' is something completely different!
'Faith transcends all imaginary logic/definitions because Faith is an "unconditional" Virtue of unconditional Love, completely transcendent of all 'definition/concepts'!
The unconditional cannot be 'understood, it can be Known/experienced!

True, unconditional Love is ALWAYS recognized by It's unconditional Virtues; Compassion, Empathy, Sympathy, Gratitude, Humility, Charity (charity is never taking more than your share of anything, ever!), Honesty, Happiness, Faith...
ALWAYS!
(Now you can tell the real thing from the 'conditional cheap thrills' offered by the ego! *__- )

I am not talking about faith in the sense of someone's regilion but "faith" in the sense of an original insight that you are willing to take on board despite having no rational basis for it.

Yeah, that's more an 'after the fact' description of a 'belief' (taking credit for making a 'choice'; vanity)!
You've just been infected! Rationalization/validation begins Now!

Here is where it makes all the difference. Faith is far more powerful because it involves a new factor - the interplay of the will.

Exact opposite of the 'vanity' of 'will'!
("Who's Will B Done?)
Faith is an unconditional Virtue of unconditional Love!
The insanity of vanity is healed, all 'duality' is healed into One, in unconditional Love/Enlightenment!

For example, If you are walking a tight rope high above the ground, it is faith (=will) that is the big player - not skill or knowledge.

Perhaps, sometimes...

That has given me an idea of a new post about Belief, Faith and Expectation and why they are completly different from each other.

Ain't THAT the truth! *__-
And yet, they are all One and the same Reality, all 'distinctions' being merely a matter of Perspective!
Like Heads and Tails both describe the same coin!

"The acceptance and understanding of other Perspectives furthers our acquaintance with Reality!"