Oneness of Being

a reply to: cooperton

Beautiful words cooperton, thank you

a reply to: Nothin

Greetings Nothin, I have been wondering where you be. Yes you have described my experiences exactly. Only last week a relative looked at me quizzically asking me why strangers are coming up to me and talking to me for 15 minutes or so. The harmonic resonating vibes are loud in my ears. If I am successful meditating in morning they remain loud all day long unless my ego-mind does a spell on me. There is something else you havn't mentioned. When its cold I use to wear long johns to keep warm. Now I wear shorts in 4C (40F) temperature without feeling cold at all.

"Perhaps oneness recognizes oneness". That is something I never even considered but does make sense. I have had other experiences that suggest you might be onto something.

May your inner be free to roam the outer, friend.

originally posted by: glend
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I walk a different path to you. I am not saying my path is better, only that its better for me. Blessings.

Situation ethics​—“decide what is right for you”—​is the order of the day.

‘Different religions are simply different roads leading to the same goal. After all, there is only one God, is there not?’ That sentiment is shared by many who feel that although religious affiliation is important, it does not really matter which religion one chooses to follow.

At first glance, this argument may seem plausible, since it is true that there is only one God, the Almighty. (Isaiah 44:6; John 17:3; 1 Corinthians 8:5, 6) However, we cannot overlook the obvious differences​—even contradictions—​among the many religious groups who claim to serve the true God. They differ greatly in their practices, their beliefs, their teachings, and their requirements. The differences are so great that those belonging to one religion or group find it difficult to understand or accept what the others teach or believe.

On the other hand, Jesus said: “God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.” (John 4:24) Does worshiping God with truth allow for a range of contradictory ideas about who God is, what his purposes are, and how he wants to be worshiped? Is it logical to believe that it is immaterial to Almighty God how we worship him?

Christians of the first century at times had different opinions about things. For example, speaking of those in Corinth, the apostle Paul said: “Disclosure was made to me about you, my brothers, by those of the house of Chloe, that dissensions exist among you. What I mean is this, that each one of you says: ‘I belong to Paul,’ ‘But I to Apollos,’ ‘But I to Cephas,’ ‘But I to Christ.’”​—1 Corinthians 1:11, 12.

Did Paul view these differences as of little significance? Was each individual simply following his own path to salvation? Far from it! Paul admonished: “I exhort you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should all speak in agreement, and that there should not be divisions among you, but that you may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought.”​—1 Corinthians 1:10.

Of course, unity of belief cannot be achieved by coercion. It is achieved only when individuals carefully investigate matters and arrive at and accept the same conclusions.

Like-minded people working closely as a group can accomplish a task far more effectively than individuals working independently of one another. For example, Jesus’ parting instructions to his followers were: “Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.” (Matthew 28:19, 20) How could one obey this Scriptural injunction if he tried to serve God independently?

Jesus in a prayer to his God: “I make request . . . that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me.”​—JOHN 17:20, 21.

Jesus was concerned about unity during his last meal with his apostles. When he was praying with them, he said that he wanted his disciples to be one, or united, just as he and his Father are united. (John 17:20, 21) If Jesus’ disciples were united, this would prove to others that Jehovah had sent Jesus to the earth. People would identify Jesus’ true disciples by their love for one another, and this love would make them more united.​—John 13:34, 35.

We can understand why Jesus talked a lot about unity that night. He had noticed that his apostles were not completely united. For example, the apostles argued about “which one of them was considered to be the greatest,” as they had done before. (Luke 22:24-27; Mark 9:33, 34) Another time, James and John had asked Jesus to give them prominent places in the heavenly Kingdom, right next to him.​—Mark 10:35-40.

A desire for more power and authority was not the only thing that could have prevented Christ’s disciples from being united. The people in Jesus’ day were divided because of hatred and prejudice. Jesus’ disciples would need to overcome those negative feelings. What did Jesus do about prejudice? How did he help his followers learn to treat others impartially, or fairly, and become united?

Even Jesus experienced prejudice. When Philip told Nathanael that he had found the Messiah, Nathanael said: “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” (John 1:46) Nathanael probably knew that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, as the prophecy at Micah 5:2 had said. He may have thought that Nazareth was not important enough to be the Messiah’s hometown. Also, there were prominent Judeans who looked down on Jesus because he came from Galilee. (John 7:52) Many Judeans thought that people from Galilee were inferior. Other Jews tried to insult Jesus by calling him a Samaritan. (John 8:48) The Samaritans were from a different nation, and their religion was different from the religion of the Jews. Both Judeans and Galileans had little respect for the Samaritans and avoided them.​—John 4:9.

The Jewish religious leaders also disrespected Jesus’ followers. The Pharisees called them “accursed people.” (John 7:47-49) The Pharisees viewed anyone who did not study at the Jewish religious schools and who did not follow their traditions as worthless and ordinary. (Acts 4:13, footnote) Jesus and his disciples experienced prejudice because people at that time were proud of their religion, their position in society, and their race. This prejudice also influenced the disciples and their view of others. To remain united, they would have to change their way of thinking.

Today, the world around us is full of prejudice. People may be prejudiced against us, or we might be somewhat prejudiced against others. An Australian woman said: “My hatred for white people grew as I focused on the injustice that was inflicted on the Aboriginal people​—past and present.” Her hatred also grew because of the way some had mistreated her. A man from Canada admits how he used to feel: “I thought French-speaking people were superior.” He says that as a result, he did not like those who spoke English.

As in Jesus’ day, feelings of prejudice today are often very strong and hard to change. What did Jesus do about such feelings? First, he never became prejudiced himself. He was always impartial. He preached to rich and poor, to Pharisees and Samaritans, and even to tax collectors and sinners. Second, Jesus taught his disciples and showed them by his example that they should not be suspicious of others or prejudiced against them.

Jesus taught an important principle that is the basis for the unity of his true followers. He told his disciples: “All of you are brothers.” (Matthew 23:8, 9.) In one sense, we are all brothers because we are all children of Adam. (Acts 17:26) Jesus explained that his disciples were also brothers and sisters because they all acknowledged Jehovah as their heavenly Father. (Matthew 12:50) And they had all become part of God’s family and were united by love and faith. That is why the apostles called other Christians their brothers and sisters in their letters to the congregations.​—Romans 1:13; 1 Peter 2:17; 1 John 3:13.

After Jesus told his disciples that they should view one another as brothers and sisters, he emphasized that they had to be humble. (Matthew 23:11, 12.) As we have already learned, at times pride divided the apostles. And in Jesus’ day, people were very proud of their race. Many Jews believed that they were better than others because they were children of Abraham. But John the Baptist told them: “God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones.”​—Luke 3:8.

Jesus taught that it is wrong for people to be proud of their race. He made that clear when a scribe asked him: “Who really is my neighbor?” To answer that question, Jesus told a story. A Jew was beaten by thieves and left on the road. Although some Jews passed by this man, they did not help him. But a Samaritan felt sorry for the Jew and took care of him. Jesus ended his story by telling the scribe that he needed to be like that Samaritan. (Luke 10:25-37) Jesus showed that a Samaritan could teach the Jews what it meant to love their neighbor.

Before Jesus went to heaven, he told his disciples to preach in “all Judea and Samaria, and to the most distant part of the earth.” (Acts 1:8) In order to do that, Jesus’ disciples would have to overcome their pride and prejudice. Jesus had often talked about good qualities in foreigners, and this prepared his disciples to preach to all nations. For example, he praised a foreign army officer who had outstanding faith. (Matthew 8:5-10) In his hometown of Nazareth, Jesus explained how Jehovah had helped foreigners, such as the Phoenician widow from Zarephath and the Syrian leper Naaman. (Luke 4:25-27) Jesus also preached to a Samaritan woman and even spent two days in a Samaritan town because the people were interested in his message.​—John 4:21-24, 40.

a reply to: glend

Thx, that was useful.

Something like there is no inside and outside. I think that was written in the gospel of Thomas.

a reply to: whereislogic

When reading your comment, I was reminded of the Diamond Sutra in Buddhism. The Buddha shared various methods to reach the other shore but throughout the sutra he emphasized that the stated methods are mere abstractions that have no truth in the greater reality. So I can appreciate your point, that it is necessary to adhere to true teachings, to remain on the correct path, as its very easy to stray of the path.

Thank You.

a reply to: Untun

Yes you are right its in gospel of thomas but same terminology is used in hindu circles.

In meditation the other night, a strange thought came to me. My body (outer) is a coffin for the inner. I must open the coffins lid to let the inner out. After meditation I wondered where that had came from. Perhaps a nonsense thought but who knows. Yes there is no inside or outside. But abstractions can be useful until they are not (must be burnt).

Keep well Untun.

That passage in the book of Thomas is different context

It does not consider oneness with God, but understanding the responsibility of ones self, to align to all things

It is about finding equality and equilibrium (El'ohim) to "enter the Kingdom"

The Disciples ask him, "Is it enough for us to simply be as children, to enter the Kingdom"

He answers them telling them, that they need to find the balance within themselves first

To treat the world outside yourself, the same as your treat the inside world of your body

To see women and men as being the same and equal

To have understanding for things you have not experienced, in sympathy (Sabaoth)

To have understanding for those going through things you have, in empathy (Yaldabaoth)

To see the world as others see it, through their eyes (eye in place of eye)

To lend a hand, as would have others lend their hand to you(Sabaoth - hand for hand)

Walk a mile in their shoes (Yaldabaoth - Foot for foot)

It basically tells you, that until you understand these things, and are willing to pay your own price in this world ... You cannot and will not be "saved" or "enter the Kingdom"

Because you do not understand the keys, to be able to enter

It basically that says that belief in love, is worthless, without having learned how to exist within such love, and practice it

Claiming to be children of the Father, or sheep of a Shepherd, is not enough

You cannot become part of something which is beyond your understanding to connect with

You cannot ever connect to the source of creation, or be one with anything, "through" someone else

This is flawed understanding of the lessons that are supposed be learned

You are supposed to be as they were. Do as they did

Follow their example, to become the most you can possibly be, by aligning to the source in the purest way possible

You are not supposed to be saved by Jesus, or submit to being flawed and in need of redemption

You are supposed to redeem and save yourself

Jesuit means, follow the example, not the person

It is the same as what is said in Matthew 16:24-27

24Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 27For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

You are supposed to take up your own cross, and pay your own price

For what is the point of gaining everything (the world, or kingdom to come) if you lose your soul in the process (submit to someone else, or sell someone else out for yourself)

You need to be willing to die yourself, to gain life

Jesus will not "save" anyone, who does not realise they are supposed to save themselves

He represents keys. Not the doorway

He also is completely unnecessary to find the source, regardless of what any Church may wish you to believe, for their own benefit. There are many other keys other than him, that all lead to the same source of creation. Some far, far more effective

If you do not understand principles like this, you will not understand any of the Gospel of Thomas

It speaks of very specific illuminated understanding

A similar passage is given as a riddle to initiates of the Eleusinian mysteries

To see if they understand the purpose of undergoing the mysteries, before they are initiated

"I have fasted, I have drunk the barley drink, I have taken things from the sacred chest, having tasted thereof I have placed them into the basket and again from the basket into the chest."

a reply to: Compendium

Just to add to Compendium post. What he describes was practiced by a spiritual revival movement called the Beguines and Beghards that existed during the 13th to 16th centuries. Resulting in some very spiritual personalities. One of which Marguerite Porete wrote the amazing book "The Mirrors Of Simple Souls".

a reply to: glend

Thanks for that link

I've never heard of them. A pretty interesting read

They seem like beautiful people, but like many others, they seem to have taken things to unnecessary extremes 😂

Balancing your place in this world, should never mean denying your experiences whilst you are here

I will never understand those who cut themselves off to things such as knowing a partner and family

One stone sharpens another

They remove one of the most important keys to knowing and understanding balance. Knowing your perfect reflection and binary, within another

It is one of the main reasons why, though I have always respected Buddhists monks and their simply beauty, I have also found them flawed

a reply to: Compendium

I agree, the purpose of life is to experience life, yes. But one day, we all will reach a point, when there are no new experiences to be had. The only importance then, is the marriage between the inner and outer. Resulting in rebirth into higher realms of existence. Realms with perhaps greater potentials of knowledge. How far that rabbit hole goes, is anyone's guess. But Jesus did say that in the Fathers house exists many mansions.

Buddhism is not an extreme but middle path between extremes. The Buddha did not reject marriage. Only warned that looking for satisfaction outside of marriage, is a downfall. Monks themselves do not reject marriage in itself, merely see it as distraction, from attaining that higher ideal. I believe this might also have been the thinking of Beguines and Beghards.

We were banned to the world to be fools. In our righteous mind we know no better than being right. Ice thinks it's ice forever until the sun rises upon it to bring its warmth. When the bringer of comfort educates us about the pain we do not realise we have we can feel healed. I think everybody agrees we are able to learn, if true it implies there are things unknown to us.

Let no man be deceived into thinking of holding all knowledge, it would make him a god of a man finding destruction. When there's nothing more to learn you are alknowing. Being perfect would be being an extention of an alknowing source.

A man thinking to know everything is a fool to the one who knows everything.

Almightiness implies limitlessness. Limitlessness could make a burito so hot it can't eat it and eat it, make colors you haven't seen before, a square circle, you name it and it will never doubt its limitlessness.

Move a mountain.

Command a tree to uproot itself and walk away.

Fake video or not, what it shows is possible to something that would be limitless or almighty.



Yet all of existence like a grain of sand to a sea is also possible to limitlessness.

Luke 12:7

7 God knows how many hairs you have on your head. Do not be afraid. You are worth more than many small birds.

They named it "God".

When an alknowing limitless source exists with a love for people then everything will turn out ok.

a reply to: Untun

I certainly agree. Discussion allows introspection of our beliefs which isn't a bad thing. But the true source of knowledge comes from within. Just this morning during meditation a doubt entered my mind - "am I doing this right". Suddenly my consciousness exploded into a dream. I was at a self serve car wash. The car wash had no instructions. But when I turned to look at my car. It was too far away from the car wash. That be the real problem. My inner guru telling me I don't need instructions. All I need is to be closer to the absolute. He will do the rest.

Can God enter a rigid mind that defines God as this or that. Or does our mind have to be like little children (Matthew 18:3) that is more fluid in its nature. If Gospel of Thomas be sourced from Jesus sayings, then that is answered in following verse...

Jesus said to his disciples, “If you were to compare me to someone, who would you say I’m like?”
Simon Peter said to him, “You’re like a just angel.”
Matthew said to him, “You’re like a wise philosopher.”
Thomas said to him, “Teacher, I’m completely unable to say whom you’re like.”

Jesus said, “I’m not your teacher. Because you’ve drunk, you’ve become intoxicated by the bubbling spring I’ve measured out.” He took Thomas aside and told him three things. When Thomas returned to his companions, they asked, “What did Jesus say to you?” Thomas said to them, “If I tell you one of the things he said to me, you’ll pick up stones and cast them at me, and fire will come out of the stones and burn you up.”

edit on 28-5-2023 by glend because: (no reason given)

Fighting the hectic from being me.

May a cloud of love assist us again today.

A salvation by the hand of a resurrection requires a certain death.

originally posted by: glend
Can God enter a rigid mind that defines God as this or that. Or does our mind have to be like little children (Matthew 18:3) that is more fluid in its nature. If Gospel of Thomas be sourced from Jesus sayings, then that is answered in following verse...

Jesus said to his disciples, “If you were to compare me to someone, who would you say I’m like?”
Simon Peter said to him, “You’re like a just angel.”
Matthew said to him, “You’re like a wise philosopher.”
Thomas said to him, “Teacher, I’m completely unable to say whom you’re like.”

Jesus said, “I’m not your teacher. Because you’ve drunk, you’ve become intoxicated by the bubbling spring I’ve measured out.” He took Thomas aside and told him three things. When Thomas returned to his companions, they asked, “What did Jesus say to you?” Thomas said to them, “If I tell you one of the things he said to me, you’ll pick up stones and cast them at me, and fire will come out of the stones and burn you up.”

That verse is about the foolishness of the individual believing they can know, or define things within this world, which are by their nature, unknowable

It is one of the first tests of illumination, before initiation

I'll give you a modern updated version:

When people first encounter strange unseen entities, voices, or manifested beings of light, they are faced with the perplexing question about "who" or "what" these entities and voices are. If they had to tell others about "who" or "what" these things are, "who" or "what" would they say they are?

Many, submit to things such as this immediately, believing that they could only be divine. They believe them to be something like God, Jesus Christ, or some form of divine angel or entity.

Many others, believe them to be some type of higher spiritual conscious manifestation, or technologically advanced species. Those with a greater understanding of the workings of this world, and its wisdom. Or perhaps, just those with incredibly advanced technology, beyond our understanding

Then there are those who understanding, that an answer on "who" or "what they are, cannot be given or taught to us, as we exist in this world. Therefore there is no point in considering such things, or even trying to answer the questions

The answer cannot be given or taught, because even if you were to experience them in all their brilliance, experiencing everything they have to offer, in all of its glory, you still could not know them as any type of certain, in the same way that you know yourself

This is why the "illuminated" seek out those who within the 3rd category

It is pointless trying to teach these things to the other two, because they believe they already have the answers. A belief which consumes them. Until it comes to define them

Things which are defined to them by others. Becomes things which are defined to them by self. Which become things which define them

You cannot pour a serving unto a cup which is already full

Just as you cannot lead a person along a path towards understanding, when they believe they have already arrived at the destination of knowing

If they believe they are experiencing God. Then all they will ever be are subjects to that God

If they believe they are experiencing a higher consciousness. Then all they will ever be is subjects to something greater than themselves

The simplified version of this understanding is given commonly as YHWH

Meaning "I am, what I am

The correct meaning of this, is that "who" or "what" they are, is irrelevant. It does not matter

They are what what they are

This has been corrupted in both religion and spirituality, with people subscribing to entire systems of belief, which are actually diametrically opposed

Religion, saying that "I AM, WHO IS", means that he is the one true God, when this could not be further from the case

It means, "Who I am, is not as important, as what I can offer you"

Whilst the mind is busy trying to define who or what "God" is, arguing with others about their varying versions, they overlook the fact, that nothing is being advanced

Nobody is gaining the understanding offered, because they are too busy being concerned about the nature or validity of that which offers it

It is a trap, designed to keep those who are not ready to know and understand such things, from finding them

Only those who are prepared to look past them, see the questions that need be asked

More so, they are the only ones who are prepared to ask them in such a way, that they will gladly dispute that which does not make sense, or seems wrong

Spirituality, has their own corrupted version with the "I AM" conscious

Something which is commonly believed to be an understanding of the awareness of self. Or realisation of who you are as a person

When this could not be further from the truth

The "I AM" consciousness, is the understanding that:

I am who I am
You are who you are
Ain't nothing gonna change it

It's understanding, that we lose ourselves, when we over-examine ourselves, or set out to "find ourselves"

Beyond this, everything is love, pain and experience

They all try to make things too complicated, when the answer is very simple

If you think you have found God, through Jesus? You are actually as far from understanding the nature of creation as anyone could be

The one answer to everything lays within yourself as the one able to ask it. Not within another, as one who would be chosen

You need not choose. You are already the chosen one. By the fact that you "You are" and "You exist"

a reply to: Compendium

Thank you Compendium. I think you practice something like what the Buddhist call milam and from those experiences you have witnessed the limitations of your minds labeling within those bardo realms. I agree with your points.

But I do wonder if mind's labeling of phenomena was the primary issue in Gospel of Thomas. Or whether it was moreso "desires" within the apostles minds that ruled their definition of Jesus. Whereas Thomas, free of desires, could not, nor needed to, define Jesus as anything.

a reply to: glend

From the best I can understand ...

Books such as the book of Thomas, and other apocrypha, were intentionally written using the corrupted language, and translations of words, that were used to "encode" the canonised Bible

The people who wrote these texts, knew the original teachings, and knew that the Bible was not corrected translated. And thus intentionally used the same terminology and corrupted language, to write "keys" which pointed out flaws in the corrupted Biblical translations, written in the exact same language they used to corrupt the texts

As far as I'm aware ...

The "original" Christians were Gnostics, not the other way around as they have changed history to have us believe

The theology was written, replacing the individual characteristics, within named people, and the 3 parts of the "individual", within a trinity of other people

The reason they mirrored these things in such a way, and changed words for characteristics of people, to being the names of people, was so that they could make people subject. Rather than realising their own individual power

So that "Conscience" could be replaced with "Church"

It took instinct away on things of right and wrong, and placed themselves there as those who should be consulted

The emotional tri-manifestated (Hermes Trismagistus) individual, was replaced with a trinity of people outside of self

Which is why people always argue about whether these "3" are one-in-the-same

They are ...

Because they are you

The world is a reflection. Which is why their system works for many people

They are merely looking at it from the wrong side of the mirror

a reply to: Compendium

I do know Compendium that highly spiritual people in today's age have visited the realm between worlds and have witnessed many confused souls that believed they were to achieve salvation. They will be trapped in that realm until those desires be burnt off.

I don't know if that is because of canonical gospels themselves or today's interpretation of the gospels. The way of (external) devotion is a recognized path in many other religions (hinduism=Bhakti). That allows one's love for the lord to overcome one's ego. So I personally don't see that as a problem in itself.

Why do you think Jesus said in Gospel of Thomas "I’ve cast fire on the world, and look, I’m watching over it until it blazes.”?. If the purpose of creation is to experience enlightenment through our sensations then Jesus be like a quickening. Not an escape from its purpose. Those that are ready to exit will be guided by their inner guru to know what is right when they ready.