Pass the sick bag...

"The opening statements in the gospel of John is, "In the Beginning there was the Word, and the Word was God, and the Word was with God." (I'm not 100% sure, it's been a while, so feel free to correct me.)"

Of course, in the original Greek, the term we have translated at 'word' is actually 'Logos' which is a far more subtle term, which really translates (clunkily) as 'active creative principle or 'rational active creative principle'

so the above line should really be:

'In the Beginning there was the Logos (rational active underlying principle), and the Logos was God, and the Logos was with God'.

We see that the line you quoted is exactly in keeping with what we have been talking about in this thread about god being a verb, metaphorically speaking. God is 'action', the ultimate expression of 'action' in fact.

Excellent account, thanks for sharing!

Doug

I really don't see the problem with 'idols' in any case. It is obvious that the statue or other representaition is there to represent the deity and provide a focus for the believer, just as a cross does.


I really don't have this odd fixation with finding 'idols' (love the negative terminology) 'evil' or wrong in any way. Its just a different system.

Much of it comes from the lack of understanding that christians have of other beliefs and earlier beliefs.

Many times i hear people brought up on christian bias to say that Greeks and Romans 'believed' that their statues in the temple WERE deities.

er no....
The statue was simply there to represent the deity and provide a focus for devotion. It doesnt mean that the statues actually looked like the deities. Rather they were a visual code for representing the power and function of the deity.

The beauty of a particular statue echoed the beauty of the divine being itself, but was not in any way meant to 'be' it.
Any more than a cross is meant to be Jesus.

Has anybody checked this out yet?
There does not seem to have been much press on it so far.

http://www.thesecret.tv/

Beth_

You've basically said it all!

Doug

Yes MT and Froglet_

I do think these kinds of experiences hint at a much larger world which we seem to interact with yet have no waking knowledge of.

I think this is related to certain things stated by Robert Bruce in his earlier works where he had the distinct impression that parts of our minds are indeed VERY busy during sleep, but we never remember upon waking.

The problems with all these kind of religions is that they are all very self contained with their own self justifying and internally consistent logic, so when seen from the inside looking out as it were, they are very hard to deny (from their own point of view). Unfortunately this is what actually undermines them as warning lights should start flashing once you actually start thinking outside of the box and look at other religions; you begin to see that they ALL operate this way! This is why hard-core believers of various religions can never come to terms with each other as they are all 100% convinced that theirs is the most logical and righteous 'truth', so much so, that to be perfectly honest, even attempting to have any kind debate is ultimately pointless and achieves nothing.

Abraham_ you really need to look at texts that originate OUTSIDE of the Qu'ran and other Islamic religious texts, otherwise everything you read is simply there to confirm what you already believe! Also, to be worried about doing so because such texts may be 'blasphemous' is ridiculous. Can't you see that such pronouncements are there to curb any kind of questioning on behalf of believers? You do not have a problem with this?

I would say, start reading texts that show other perspectives and don't simply disregard them as 'blasphemous' texts. You may find some of them informative. This reminds me of these pointless debates you often get when fundamentalist Christians and Muslims argue with each other about which text is the most historically accurate and factually
based, using the Bible and the Qu'ran as their sole evidence!!!

Sorry Abraham, that just isn't cutting it. You also typically refuse to see the long Hellenistic tradition out of which Islam evolved, yet you continue to tout Islam as 'the religion of proofs', an often used phrase which only serves to underline Islam's approach of utilising rational discourse and logical reasoning which is itself a direct continuation of the Hellenistic tradition!

Abraham_

Take a chill pill mate.

btw I am a pagan and i'm comin 'atcha like a wicker-man on fire!

My Neo-Platonist philosophy & theology allowed for the very development of your religion so put that in a pipe and smoke it!


 

hmm, well imv this level of experience is beyond the symbolic.
the symbolic level of dreams is imv all part of what we call F2 or 'dreamland', but with practice it is possible to break out beyond that into a far more solid and 'objective' reality that is quite different from the symbolic dream realm, athough just to make things confusing, sometimes these two realms can be mixed up in your perception.

That is my take on it anyway.

Doug

I was wondering how many other people have experienced this phenomenon, where you bump into someone or a group whom you instinctively feel you recognise like some long lost friend, yet at the same time you can't for the life of you remember who they are!

This happens to me quite often.

In fact a few nights ago I had an experience where I woke up from a dream state and into a high state of lucidity. I was in some kind of urban, concrete environment. I walked down a side street but stopped when I heard the approach of footsteps coming from around the corner towards me. There were two sets of footsteps, both of which made the familiar 'clunk' sound of high heals.

Before they even came around the corner I felt I would know these two women and sure enough, when they came into sight I recognised them instantly although I don't know from where.

They greeted me and seemed keen to find out what I was doing and how I was finding life 'back there'. They also seemed amused by my clothing, which I guess must have been subconsciously copied from my everyday clothes.

Once again I was struck by the distinctive F3 characteristic of these kinds of experiences where these people act in ways you don't expect them to, and act in a fashion which sets them apart from F2 dream characters. This is something that soon becomes obvious once you have been through a few of these encounters.

Anyway, I spent the next few minutes or so trying to explain to them what I was doing and I also asked them to forgive me if I sounded a bit dumb as this is a common problem when trying to converse from a lucid state when you are not quite 100%. They thought my apologies and my efforts to communicate to be quite amusing, and after a few more seconds I felt myself slip off into dream mode once more, whereupon the experience ended.

Again last night, I became lucid and found myself at some kind of dinner party with some other women I recognised but didn’t know! They seemed surprised to see me appear there but knew who I was and were curious to know how I was getting on. And once again, when I apologised for my slightly groggy state due to lucidity they thought this was pretty funny!

These two latest experiences are typical of something I have come across many times. I wonder who these people are and how do I know them? Thanks to lucidity problems, I always tend to forget to ask the obvious questions like  'HOW do I know you?', or 'where do I know you from?'.
All I know is that when you tell these people you recognise them, most likely with a rather confused look on your face, this seems to generate a certain amount of hilarity on their part!

I aim to find out in the near future!

Doug

A fantastic encounter Heather, I'm still not quite sure what to make of it!

Thanks for sharing though.

Doug

well, lets just say religous concepts like belief in a deity.

pagan
1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion.
2. One who has no religion.
3. A non-Christian.
4. A hedonist.
5. A Neo-Pagan.

A sadly out of date list of definitions.
Nowadays people are more aware of other religions like Hinduism and Buddism, Sikhism, Shintoism, etc and most would not term these as 'pagan' simply because they did not originate in the Middle-east.

You see, people are more educated nowadays and have become aware that actually there are other religions in the world apart from the three that sprouted from the Middle-east, although most *western* dictionary entries are still lagging behind in addressing this and are still stuck with old fashioned definitions, as are people who reside in the bible belt, some of whom only head about Islam after 9/11!

As for someone with no religion being a 'pagan', that definition is just plain wrong, it may be in the dictionary due to it being used as a more informal derogotary term  for someone with no religion (an athiest) but it is still, in fact, wrong.

As for being a hedonist, well anyobody can be a hedonist, so that definition is also wrong.

As for paganism refering to a believer in a polytheistic religion, well this definition is only true in part: sure many pagan religions WERE polytheistic, but i can also point to several pagan religions, both ancient and modern, which are actually monotheistic in nature.. Mithraism, Zoarastianism and Neo-platonism being three examples, the last of which is actually advanced pagan theology.

Egyptian religion was actually monotheistic in its refined theology, although many today dont realise this.
In fact by around 1500bc , Egyptian theologians had come to the conclusion that all gods were manifistations of 'Amun' - the unknowable First Cause. Because of this unknowable nature, he/it manifested itself to the world via myriad forms, but they were all ultimately aspects of the One.  Of course, this subtle realisation was not of interest to the common people who were happy to continue worshipping all the various gods, even if the educated elite knew them to be aspects of Amun/the One.
 In fact the elite/priestly caste fully supported worship of the gods/aspects of Amun as they believed  them essential for us to contact him/it, as in his pure form he/it is of course unknowable.
Only one pharoh, akehnaten, tried to ban veneration of the aspects of Amun, ie the various gods, and to worship Amun directly, but his experiment was short lived and viewed as heretical by the prestly cast, who promptly reinstated the various gods/aspects again after the pharoh's reign.
It should be noted that Egypt in fact developed its distinctive monotheistic theology way before the Jews. In Egypt, this had reached its fully developed form around 1500bc, and although the Hebrews may have begun worshipping only one god, the Jealous God, around 1500-1200 bc or before, this was in fact a form of henotheism and they did not actually develop the concept that this god was the ONLY god, until 800-600bc.

The name 'Amun' was often added to gods names to reflect the fact that they were in fact aspects of the One.
For example, the sun god Ra, became known as 'Amun' Ra: The One in his aspect as the Sun.

btw this is pretty much the view of later Neo-platonism also, which was basically the final theology of hellenistic paganism, which sought to justify the worship of all the various gods, by maintaining that they were all in fact ultimately aspects of the Unknowable One, but therefore still essential.

Finally then we arrive at Jesus, who can be seen as a refined development of this theology, where he sits as the only aspect, through which people can contact the Unknowable One. When you view the Christian religion in the context of everything before it, it should be quite clear that the theology of jesus (whether or not such a man ever existed or not) is an evolution of ideas that goes way back; that is, the theology of jesus and christianity does not in fact appear like a bolt from the blue but should be seen as evolving from a long train of philosophical thought.

Islam, following Judaism,  tries to do away with the aspect concept, the middle man as it were, which is why i don't like it that much, but each to their own.



Anyway, I've completely gone off course and apologies, ah well.... I got possessed by Thoth Hermes, the Thrise Great............aaarrrghhhhh

It is now becomming clear that it is fundamentalist clerics themselves who are responsible for creating this uproar.  
It recently emerged that the cartoons were previously published in Egypt (a Muslim country) way back in October, and nothing happened.

So clearly there has been an extremest hand in this, and sure enough it has now emerged that radical clerics in Denmark not only took the pictures, they ADDED a couple of more offensive HOAX pictures to the ones already published and then took the whole lot to the middle-east and used them to whip up an anti-Danish and by extension, anti-european frenzy.

When are moderate Muslims going to wake up and smell the coffee and deal with these radial extremests who form a minority of global Islam yet get the loudest voice? Moderate Muslims have been to afraid to stand up as yet, as they don't like to be seen as being critical of other Muslims, but they have to realise that these people are not true Muslims, they are very sick people and their actions should be condemned and condemned 100%

Moderate Muslims of the world: It is time to ACT!