Messages

Rolling Bear-
I just want to say one last thing to you regarding this topic.  First of all, I didn't mean to come off the way you thought I did.  I meant the whole "crackhead" thing to be taken lightly.  Obviously you took it very seriously, and I apologize that I didn't realize how serious you take this topic.

Second, while psychotropic plants can indeed be fascinating in their own right, I concur with the cliche that they are "a dead end".  Study, meditation and prayer are the only true ways to open the doors to truth.  As I admitted earlier, I have studied and expiremented with plant based ethogens and I declare that lucid dreaming and astral projection are SO MUCH more fun and enlightening than any of the experiences I had with mushrooms or LSD.  In fact, I would go as far as to say that psychoactive drugs put me in the lower astral and the main thing they taught me was to stay away from them.

In conclusion, I have no beef with you.  Please don't think I was or am personally attacking you.  You are obviously an intelligent and informed person, and the only thing that has upset me is your highly defensive online personality.

Oh, and by the way, at least you know what "JK" stands for...and I was familiar with this acronym long before I used the net, it's really fairly common.



fides quaerens intellectum

Bear-
First of all, I apologize for being contentious as it never acheives anything, however I stand by the fact that you misquoted me.  Secondly, I did add a reference to the quote from erowid that I posted.

Just for your information, I am not spitting out disinformation.  I have used psylocibin a few times and I must admit that this plant based psychoactive substance did actually teach me something: not to abuse drugs.  

You would be lying to yourself to say that you are not passionate about some of these chemicals:

"Asstray, DMT and beta-carboline compounds (such as in Syrian rue and passionflower) can indeed be useful tools when used in the proper safe, comfortable set and setting, and with the help of experienced human guides. When combined (as in ayahuasca), the DMT and beta-carboline containing plants can produce amazing results..."

or

"There are compelling reasons to believe that mushrooms are "alien" in nature and intelligence. For one thing, they give us an experience of something so completely other that, once you've taken them a few times, you understand what McKenna and others meant by this assertion."

I think there is something to be said for McKennas work, but no one doubts who was passionate about "drugs"...and you seem to know quite a lot about him and you state yourself that you agree with much of what he claimed.  

I think your ideas are interesting...but as you can see, most of the people in here are more interested in more self-sufficient means to gain transcendental experiences.

-Daniel


fides quaerens intellectum

RollingBear-

You know, it's hard to get under my skin, but you have officially succeeded.  Please never mis-quote me again.  If you don't know, the acronym JK stands for "just kidding", that is what I wrote after I jokingly called McKenna a "crackhead".  While Imight have been over doing it a little by calling him that, when you quote me and then leave out the other part it simply makes me look ignorant and mean....and then you took it further by stating, in your own words, that I had done exactly that...

TO make things worse, in your quote you also make it sound like I used DMT, and from my postyou can see that I was quoting someone else.

Please don't let your passion for illegal drugs cloud your mind so much that you twist other peoples words.  


fides quaerens intellectum

I thought I would allow this topic to resurface in the wake of all the things that have gone on recently in Iraq (with the US weapons insepctors, etc.)  I have so many feelings, mixed feelings that is, regarding this whole issue.  

What do you think about recent events over there?  Is the US going to attack?  If they do, what will the result be?



fides quaerens intellectum

Terrence McKenna was a crackhead...JK  I read a lot of his works a while back and the sad thing is that he really thought he was on to something, and you know what..he was just ON something.  I have personally used a number of psychadelic compounds, I studied them...I experienced their effects, and I have OBE'd...and trust me, you WILL NEVER experience, with DMT or any other drug, the true meaning of power and freedom in the out of body state...NEVER!  The doors of perception are flown open but not cleansed.

The following is an expereince by an unknown male subject (taken from www.erowid.org )

  SOME INFO:

DOSE :    smoked 5-MeO-DMT (powder / crystals)

BODY WEIGHT : 190 lb


For a period of approximately 6 weeks, I experimented rather frequently with 5MEO (three or four times a week). Typical doses were in the 5 to 10 mg range, and we would do this perhaps 3 times over the course of an evening using a small glass pipe.

This substance produces a short lasting but extraordinarily intense psychedelic experience. In addition to mental effects which are roughly comparable to the peak of a double digit acid experience, the drug also produces indescribably euphoric physical sensations comparable to orgasm.

The onset of effects is almost instantaneous and the ensuing rush so intense that no matter how many times one has used the substance the first few seconds after inhalation are invariably accompanied by a degree of shock and fear. The drug's principle effects are intensely euphoric and last in general 5 to 10 minutes. During this period it seems as though one has no direct contact with the outside world; as though all stimuli to the brain are emanating from within rather than through the senses. This period of intoxication, which we came to refer to as 'the warp', is sometimes followed by a period which may last as long as half an hour during which the user feels effects quite similar to a large dose of LSD.

At the conclusion of this approximate 6 week period, interest in the drug waned and there was no further experimentation. Starting from perhaps a month afterwards, both myself and my partner in experimentation experienced a variety of disturbing neurological symptoms, such as twitches and occasional feelings of pins and needles and numbness of the extremities.
Occasional disturbances of memory were also noticed. These symptoms continued with decreasing intensity for the better part of a year after the period of experimentation, at which point such symptoms ceased to occur. It was at this time that we noticed, week by week, a sense of increased mental clarity and proficiency. During this same period it became clear to us that our performance at work (software development) had been substandard in the months that followed the period of experimentation. It occurred to us both that the period of chronic experimenation with 5MEO, however enjoyable, seemed to have caused temporary but significant damage to our brains, both cognitively and neurologically. A chilling reminder that substances such as 5MEO are indeed RESEARCH CHEMICALS for which safe levels of use are yet undetermined.

In light of my experience with 5MEO, I urge caution to anyone considering experimentaion with the drug and strongly suggest that such experiments be of a limited nature.


Exp Year: 2000 ID: 5845
Added: Mar 25, 2001 Views: 3540


fides quaerens intellectum

The Real Saint Nicholas
Saint Nicholas is the patron saint of just about everything. He is the national saint of Russia and Greece and churches named after him number in the thousands - more than 400 in Great Britain alone. He is the patron saint of judges, murderers, pawnbrokers, thieves, merchants, paupers, scholars, sailors, bakers, travelers, maidens and poor children. He is known as the friend and protector of all those in trouble.

Saint Nicholas was born in the Middle East about 350 miles northwest of Bethlehem in the fourth century. He grew up to become the bishop of Myra (now Kale), his hometown, Lycia, near the coast of what is now Turkey. Legends tell of his love for children, his kindness and the miracles he brought about.

Perhaps the most famous story of all tells how he helped three unfortunate young sisters who all had suitors but had no dowries because their father, a poor nobleman, could not raise the money. So they could not marry.

Now the bishop Nicholas was a shy man and did not like to give money directly , so he thought of a way to give it anonymously. When the first daughter was ready to marry, the good bishop tossed a bag of gold into the house at night. Later, when the second daughter prepared to marry, she too received a mysterious bag of gold. When the third daughter prepared to marry, the poor nobleman was determined to find out who had been so generous. So he kept watch and saw the bishop drop another bag of gold into the house. It has been said that Saint Nicholas climbed on the roof and dropped the third bag of gold down the chimney where it landed in a stocking hung to dry, giving us a reason to hang up Christmas stockings today. When the father saw what had happened, Nicholas begged him to keep the secret, but, of course, the news got out. From then on, whenever anyone received an unexpected gift, they thanked Nicholas.

Six hundred years later, the Russian Emperor Vladimir visited Constantinople and heard all the wonderful stories about Bishop Nicholas and decided to make him the patron saint of Russia. The stories even spread to the Laplands - to the people of the reindeer sleds.

The three bags of gold Nicholas gave the sisters made him the focus of merchants in northern Italy. Statutes and pictures had shown him holding the three bags and when taken as the patron saint of the merchants, the bags became gold balls, representing money lenders and today, pawnbrokers.

The anniversary of Nicholas' death, December 6th, either 345 A.D. or 352 A.D., is so close to Christmas that, in many countries, the two merged. But in Germany and the Netherlands, the two remain separate.

The Real Saint Nick
by Ralph F. Wilson
"A vast multitude was imprisoned in every place," wrote an eyewitness. "The prisons--prepared for murders and robbers--were filled with bishops, priests, and deacons ... so there was no longer room for those condemned of crimes."[1]

You'd hardly expect to find old St. Nick in jail. But St. Nicholas is more than a children's Christmas legend. He was flesh and blood, a prisoner for Christ, bishop of the Mediterranean city of Myra.

What do we know about the real St. Nicholas? He was born, ancient biographers tell us, to wealthy parents in the city of Patara about 270 A.D. He was still young when his mother and father died and left him a fortune.

As a teen-ager, Nicholas' humility was already evident. He had heard about a family destitute and starving. The father had no money for food, much less the dowry needed to marry off his three daughters. He was ready to send his oldest girl into the streets to earn a living as a prostitute.

Under the cover of night, Nicholas threw a bag of gold coins through the window of their humble dwelling. In the morning the father discovered the gold. How he rejoiced: his family was saved, his daughter's honor preserved, and a dowry for her marriage secured. Some time after, Nicholas secretly provided a dowry for the second daughter. Still later for the third.

But on the third occasion, the girls' father stood watching. As soon as the bag of gold thudded on the floor, he chased after the lad till he caught him. Nicholas was mortified to be discovered in this act of charity. He made the father promise not to tell anyone who had helped his family. Then Nicholas forsook his wealth to answer a call to the ministry.

At the nearby city of Myra a bishop supervised all the churches of the region. When the bishop died, the bishops and ministers from other cities and villages--Nicholas among them--gathered to choose a successor.

Nicholas was in the habit of rising very early and going to the church to pray. This morning an aged minister awaited him in the sanctuary. "Who are you, my son?" he asked.

"Nicholas the sinner," the young minister replied. "And I am your servant."

"Come with me," the old priest directed. Nicholas followed him to a room where the bishops had assembled. The elderly minister addressed the gathering. "I had a vision that the first one to enter the church in the morning should be the new bishop of Myra. Here is that man: Nicholas."

Indeed they did choose him as bishop. Nicholas was destined to lead his congregation through the worst tribulation in history.

In A.D. 303, the Roman Emperor Diocletian ordered a brutal persecution of all Christians. Those suspected of following the Lord were ordered to sacrifice to pagan gods. Nicholas and thousands of others refused.

Ministers, bishops, and lay people were dragged to prison. Savage tortures were unleashed on Christians all over the empire. Believers were fed to wild animals. Some were forced to fight gladiators for their lives while bloodthirsty crowds screamed for their death. Women suffered dehumanizing torment. Saints were beaten senseless, others set aflame while still alive.

Yet persecution couldn't stamp out Christianity. Rather it spread. Third Century leader Tertullian observed, "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church."

Those who survived Diocletian's torture chambers were called "saints" or "confessors" by the people, because they didn't forsake their confession that Jesus Christ is Lord. Nicholas was one of these.

Finally, after years of imprisonment, the iron doors swung open and Bishop Nicholas walked out, freed by decree of the new Emperor Constantine. As he entered his city once more, his people flocked about him. "Nicholas! Confessor!" they shouted. "Saint Nicholas has come home."

The bishop was beaten but not broken. He served Christ's people in Myra for another thirty years. Through the prayers of this tried and tested soldier of faith, many found salvation and healing. Nicholas participated in the famous Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. He died on December 6, about 343, a living legend, beloved by his whole city.

St. Nick of yuletide fame still carries faint reminders of this ancient man of God. The color of his outfit recollects the red of bishop's robes. "Making a list, checking it twice," probably recalls the old saint's lectures to children about good behavior. Gifts secretly brought on Christmas eve bring to mind his humble generosity to the three daughters.

Yet if he were alive today, this saint would humbly deflect attention from himself. No fur-trimmed hat and coat, no reindeer and sleigh or North Pole workshop. As he did in life centuries ago, Bishop Nicholas would point people to his Master.

"I am Nicholas, a sinner," the old saint would say. "Nicholas, servant of Christ Jesus."


fides quaerens intellectum

"It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues." Abraham Lincoln

"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody" - Bill Cosby

Wisdom comes privately from God as a by-product of right decisions, godly reactions and the application of scriptural principles to daily circumstances. - Charles Swindoll

"Professor Goddard does not know the relation between action and reaction and the need to have something better than a vacuum against which to react. He seems to lack the basic knowledge ladled out daily in high schools." 1921 New York Times editorial about Robert Goddard's revolutionary rocket work.

"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible." A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Fedex Corp.)

"So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us? Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't even got through college yet.'"

--Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and H-P interested in his

and Steve Wozniak's personal computer.

Never hold discussions with the monkey when the organ grinder is in the room. -Winston Churchill

At a speech at the American Sports Awards Banquet Jim Valvono, the former North Carolina State Basketball coach and NCAA champion became aware of the flashing light signaling that he only had 30 seconds to close his remarks. He looked up and laughed and said, "I've got tumors all over my body and I'm going to worry about some guy flashing a message that I've only got 30 seconds?"

"One of the signs of impending mental breakdown is the belief that your work is terribly important."

The major challenges of our times are increasing tolerance to individual differences without damaging the values that have built this nation and preserving respect for the God-given power of authority without infringing upon the rights of the individual. - RCB

A lie is not the truth, but the truth can be made up, if you know how - Lily Tomlin

Do not expect to be applauded when you do the right thing, and do not expect to be forgiven when you err. But even your enemies will respect commitment - and a conscience at peace is worth more than a thousand tainted victories. Bail Organa (Princess Leia's father in Star Wars) words by author Michael Kube-McDowell

On a tombstone: "I TOLD YOU I WAS SICK"

Lederer in Time to Heal states that physicians are a product of the society that we live in. We live in a society of instant gratification. Few if any want to accept responsibility for their actions. Good patient care demands constant vigilance on the part of patient and physician. Often, in the process of good care, doctors and patients will be at odds with one another. I like what Lee Golusinski, MD had to say:

"When patients get upset and say I am being parental and coercive by doing this, I remind them that there are three names on each bottle of medication: the patient's, mine, and the pharmacist. We all have responsibilities on this team, and if one of us is not meeting those responsibilities (such as monitoring INRs for patients on coumadin), I will not take on the risk they bring by not meeting their responsibilities."

"Look around the table. If you don't see a sucker, get up, because you're the sucker." Amarillo Slim



fides quaerens intellectum

Santa is fun!  If it's not a tradition you like, ok, don't do it...but kids are only fooled for a little while and then they go along with it because they get what you're doing, it's just part of growing up and realizing your parents love you and want to make the holidays fun.  Let's not over analyze ourselves into boredom....and Frank, many people would tell you the same thing if they heard you talk about OBE...of course that's different, but you know what I mean...

fides quaerens intellectum

Hello Mr. Boo...well, you have made some very valid points.  All in all, it sounds like what you posted wasn't that big a deal...so I don't think we need to make a big deal of it now.  I assume what you posted may have looked ugl, or "evil" and for one reaoson or another they decided to take it off???  Anyway, Adrian seems to have already cleared it up, at least in my opinion.

Best wishes

fides quaerens intellectum

Hey!  Welcome to the forum.  I hope you enjoy the conversations and discussions here as much as we do!
-Dan

fides quaerens intellectum

Don't worry, sounds like energy related sensations....don't worry too much about "attacks" my friend.

fides quaerens intellectum

COngrats!  My wife and I plan on having children in the not too distant future.  Here are some wonderful quotes about the joy and responsibility of bringing new souls to earth:

Children are living jewels dropped unsustained from heaven.
Robert Pollok

Having children makes one no more a parent than having a piano makes you a pianist.
Michael Levine

You want to be a parent? Shut up and do your job.
"Dr. Robert Romano" from "E.R."
(Oct. 18, 2001)

Most of us became parents long before we have stopped being children.
Mignon McLaughlin

Parents are not quite interested in justice, they are interested in quiet.
Bill Cosby

The pressures of being a parent are equal to any pressure on earth. To be a conscious parent, and really look to that little being's mental and physical health, is a responsibility which most of us, including me, avoid most of the time because it's too hard.
John Lennon

Your children need your presence more than your presents.
Jesse Jackson

If you bungle raising your children, I don't think whatever else you do well matters very much.
Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis

Train the parent and spare the child.
Duane Alan Hahn

Children need models rather than critics.
Joseph Joubert

A torn jacket is soon mended; but hard words bruise the heart of a child.
Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Alas! regardless of their doom, the little victims play! No sense have they of ills to come nor care beyond today.
Thomas Gray

What is done to children, they will do to society.
Karl A. Menninger

Children need love, especially when you think they do not deserve it.
Harold S. Hubert (adapted)

Always be nice to your children because they are the ones who will choose your rest home.
Phyllis Diller


Children should be led into the right paths, not by severity, but by persuasion.
Terence

Do not train a child to learn by force or harshness; but direct them to it by what amuses their minds, so that you may be better able to discover with accuracy the peculiar bent of the genius of each.
Plato

Live so that when your children think of fairness and integrity, they think of you.
H. Jackson Brown Jr.

Children need guidance and sympathy far more than instruction.
Anne Sullivan

To bring up a child in the way he should go, travel that way yourself.
Josh Billings

Setting an example is not the main means of influencing another, it is the only means.
Albert Einstein

Children have never been very good at listening to their elders, but they have never failed to imitate them.
James Baldwin

Your children will see what you're all about by what you live rather than what you say.
Dr. Wayne Dyer

fides quaerens intellectum

For those of you willing to sacrifice a few minutes of your time, the following gives a fairly encompassing view of LDS belief with a more philisophical approach.  My interjections are in parentheses( )  If you decide not to read this, at least scroll down to the piece I have indicated in red.

Philosophy: Quotes

Brady, F. Neil. "Ethics." In Daniel H. Ludlow (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mormonism (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
The scriptures affirm that questions of the good and the right are intertwined with questions of the holy and with the primal Jewish-Christian imperative "Be ye holy for I am holy." (1 Pet. 1:16; cf. Lev. 11:44) Daily tensions between the sacred and the secular are part of the ethical dilemma, and Latter-day Saints seek help from the scriptures and classical sources.

Philosophers often distinguish two approaches to ethics: teleology and deontology. The teleological approach appraises the morality of an act by its relation to an end or purpose, while the deontological approach understands morality primarily in terms of duty or response to law. In Christian ethics, these views have proved difficult to reconcile. For Latter-day Saints, however, both obedience to divine imperatives and pursuit of ultimate happiness are correlative elements in the maturation of human beings. The conflict between duty and desire is overcome as one grows closer to God through faith and service and finds joy in upholding divine counsels and commandments.   (So it's not about following blindly or being contrained by rules, it's about true happiness...and it's a an objective truth that by following rules, by putting forth effort, we obtain more freedom and eventually more happiness.  This is one of the toughest thing to teach, because it can't be taught!  One must begin to DO certain things before he or she understands and internalizes it.)

Ethicists likewise contrast performance and motive in the religious life. Rabbinical tradition, for example, emphasizes the continuous study and scrupulous observance of Torah, while Reformation Protestantism stresses motive. Again, Latter-day Saints reject this perennial division; both are crucial in the religious life. "Ye shall know them by their fruits" (Matt. 7:16). Grace transforms men toward a Christlike nature. But purity of heart is manifest in scripture study and vigorous service; thus, mastery of law and inner change go hand in hand as components of discipleship and joyful living.  (I take this as: study all you want, but without actually going out and DOING and LIVING, it will profiteth you nothing.  Behind this you must also have a pure heart, a true desire to love and help...)

Carter, K. Codell. "Epistemology." In Daniel H. Ludlow (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mormonism (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
The Western philosophical tradition, like Western thought generally, emphasizes knowledge in the sense of knowing facts. But this emphasis may not be appropriate, especially from a gospel perspective. Some scriptures teach that other kinds of knowledge may be more important. Thus, Jesus prays, "This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3)  This is knowledge by acquaintance more than "knowledge about." (cf. JST Matt. 7:32-33)  There are also indications that factual knowledge alone is not sufficient for salvation: "But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only." (James 1:22)  At the request of President Spencer W. Kimball, a prophet, the words in a LDS children's hymn were changed from "Teach me all that I must know" to "Teach me all that I must do," because it is not enough just to know; one must do the will of the Lord.

A related gospel theme is that knowing comes from doing. "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." (John 7:17)  The Prophet Joseph Smith taught, "We cannot keep all the commandments without first knowing them, and we cannot expect to know all, or more than we now know unless we comply with or keep those we have already received." (TPJS, p. 256)

In formal philosophy, "knowing," in the sense of knowing facts, is often defined to mean true belief together with good reasons. In other words, a person knows some statement X if and only if that person believes X, and if X is true, and if the person has good reasons for believing X. The European-American philosophical tradition recognizes two kinds of reasons that support the claim to know: rational argument and empirical evidence. Within the Church these are tacitly accepted as sources of knowledge, sometimes even of religious knowledge. For example, after reviewing the traditional arguments for the existence of God, James E. Talmage observed that some were "at least strongly corroborative" of God's existence. (AF, p. 29)

However, there is a continuing tradition, based on the scriptures and reinforced by modern Church leaders, that specifically religious knowledge requires a different and distinctively spiritual source. "We believe that no man can know that Jesus is the Christ, but by the Holy Ghost. We believe in [the gift of the Holy Ghost] in all its fulness, and power, and greatness, and glory." (TPJS, p. 243; D&C 76:114-16)  It is widely accepted by Latter-day Saints that gospel knowledge must ultimately be obtained by spiritual rather than exclusively rational or empirical means. (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:3)  Thus, in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, there is no clear counterpart to the Roman Catholic tradition of natural theology.  (This is the greatest thing about the truth....everyone must come to it on their own.  In other words "Never take my word for it".  That's why the "preachy" attitude is so ineffective, belitting and ignorant.  I know that if I really want someone to see what I see, then I must simply point out the right way and they must go through it.  For example, the first time you obtain "astral sight", it is breathtaking, shocking, revealing, etc.  I can explain it to someone all day and night and they still will NEVER really know what it's like until they experience it for themselves.  This is precisely the reason I never discount or write off what someone has to say unless I either have experienced it[ or never want to (ie. murder or something evil like that. /red]

One of the most suggestive and frequently cited scriptures in LDS teaching makes the point: "And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." (Moro. 10:4-5)  This scripture is usually taken to apply to all knowledge. This suggests that both rational argument and empirical evidence, the two traditional approaches to knowledge, can be either supplanted by or encompassed within spiritual knowledge. Of course, the scripture does not say that knowledge comes only by the Holy Ghost. Yet, within the Church, it is often held that what might be thought of as secular learning, for example, modern scientific knowledge, is directly associated with the restoration of the gospel and is rooted in divine inspiration throughout the world.   (In other words, all knowledge comes from the SOURCE, the ETERNAL NOW...we just get it trickled down through the dimensional levels because, for whatever reason, it's important for us as indivudals or as a whole for our spiritual progress.)

Hancock, Ralph C. "Reason and Revelation." In Daniel H. Ludlow (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mormonism (New York: Macmillan, 1992).

LDS teaching encourages a distinct openness to the intrinsic as well as instrumental goodness of the life of the mind, an openness founded on the continuity between the human and divine realms. The full exercise of human reason under the direction of revelation holds a high place among the virtuous and praiseworthy ends to be sought by the indivudal (A of F 13), for the scripture promises that "whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection," and the more "knowledge and intelligence" one gains through "diligence and obedience," the greater "the advantage in the world to come." (D&C 130:18-19)  This emphasis on intellectual development in human progress toward godhood accords with the fundamental doctrine that is the official motto of Brigham Young University--namely, that "the glory of God is intelligence." (D&C 93:36)  

Equated with "light and truth," such intelligence by nature "forsake that evil one." (D&C 93:37) It cannot be simply identified with conventional measures of "intelligence" or with the Greek philosophic idea of a pure, immaterial, and self-directed intelligence, a concept that was very influential in medieval theology. For Latter-day Saints, the attainment of intelligence must be integrated with the labor of shaping the material world and binding together families and generations, for "the elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy." (D&C 93:33)  To the doctrine that "the glory of God is intelligence," one must add God's statement to Moses that "this is my work and my glory--to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man." (Moses 1:39)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those of you who care (is there anyone?) I will add some personal comments to everything below later )
Rasmussen, Dennis. "Metaphysics." In Daniel H. Ludlow (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mormonism (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
TENTATIVENESS. LDS metaphysics stands apart, because the Church has not developed a traditional metaphysical theology and does not aspire to one. It has not been much influenced by philosophical thinking. LDS faith springs from two sources, scripture and ongoing religious experience. The absence of any systematic metaphysics of the Church follows from the belief that scripture, as the record of divine revelation, may be supplemented by new revelation at any time. A metaphysical system, to be true, must be all-inclusive. But faith in continuing revelation precludes the certainty that such a system exists. Thus, LDS metaphysics remains incomplete, tentative, and unsystematic, subject to revision in the light of things yet to be revealed by God. This tentativeness about metaphysical ideas has saved the Church from the crises that can arise when a religion's beliefs are tied to philosophical ideas which are later abandoned or discredited. The Church's lack of a systematic metaphysical theology has prompted some students of its doctrines who are used to such theology to assert that it has no theology at all, but it would be more accurate to say that its metaphysics and theology are not systematically formulated.

MATTER AND SPIRIT. In the absence of a metaphysical system, the LDS faith still displays some characteristic metaphysical ideas. Latter-day Saints regard matter as a fundamental principle of reality and as the primary basis for distinguishing particular beings. The import of this view reveals itself most strikingly in the doctrine concerning the material embodiment of God: "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's; the Son also." (D&C 130:22)  This is not to be understood crassly; the matter of exalted bodies is purified, transfigured, and glorified. LDS teachings draw no ultimate contrast between spirit and matter. Indeed, "all spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure." (D&C 131:7)  This position avoids traditional difficulties in explaining the interaction of spirit and body.

The reality of matter implies the reality of space and time. Scripture speaks of the place where God dwells and of "the reckoning of the Lord's time." (Abr. 3:9)  So God himself exists within a spatial and temporal environment. In accepting space, time, and matter as constitutive of reality, Latter-day Saints take the everyday world of human experience as a fairly reliable guide to the nature of things. But this acceptance is no dogma, and their belief remains open to the possibility that these three ideas, as presently understood, may be auxiliaries to more fundamental ideas not yet known.

PLURALISM. LDS thought clearly emphasizes the importance of the fundamental plurality of the world, with its continuing novelties, changes, conflicts, and agreements: "For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things." (2 Ne. 2:11)  The world is not static but dynamic, not completed but still unfolding. This unfinished and future-oriented aspect of things provides the basis for growth and improvement. A monistic world or universe in which all differences are finally absorbed in a higher unity is viewed as impossible. The LDS Church has been less inclined than some other religions to regard the world of common experience as an inferior order of that which must be distinguished from a higher and altogether different realm. Heaven itself is regarded as offering the hope of endless progression rather than the ease of final satisfaction.

NATURAL AND SUPERNATURAL. Latter-day Saints see a continuity between the traditional categories of natural and supernatural. They do not deny the distinction, but view it as one of degree, not of kind. God's creative act, for example, is not, as traditionally conceived, a creation ex nihilo, but an act of organizing material that already exists. (Abr. 3:24)  And creation is not a single, unique event, but an ongoing process that continues through the course of time: "And as one earth shall pass away . . . so shall another come." (Moses 1:38)  God acts upon matter within the context of space and time. In comparison with human attributes, God's attributes are supreme and perfect. But the difference between God and mankind remains one of degree. God seeks to provide the guidance and the necessary help for human beings to overcome the differences and become like him. The injunction to be perfect "even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect" (Matt. 5:48) is taken to mean that mankind may indeed become like God by faithfully following his commandments. The principles or laws of goodness that underlie these commandments have their own abiding reality. God exemplifies them but does not arbitrarily create them.

FREEDOM AND PERFECTIBILITY. Nothing is more central to LDS metaphysics than the principle of freedom. The weaknesses of humanity that lead to error and sin are acknowledged. But the claim that human nature is totally depraved is denied. The LDS Church affirms that ideally "men are instructed sufficiently that they know good from evil" and that "men are free according to the flesh, . . . free to choose liberty and eternal life . . . or to choose captivity and death." (2 Ne. 2:5, 27)  Human experience has as its final goal the development of virtue and holiness in a world that is not totally the product of God's will. Reality itself poses the challenge to overcome obstacles and achieve greater good. Everyone's life is a response to this challenge.

Riddle, Chauncey C. "Philosophy." In Daniel H. Ludlow (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mormonism (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
Latter-day scriptures do not present a philosophical system, but they do contain answers to many classic philosophical issues. These scriptures preclude ex nihilo creation, idealism (immaterialism), a chance theory of causation, and absolute determinism. They affirm the eternality and agency of the individual person, the necessary existence of evil apart from God, a nonrelativistic good (righteousness), and the doctrine that all mortals are the offspring and heirs of God. God is affirmed as a perfected physical being who governs all things in pure love and who continues to communicate with his children on earth by personal revelation.

Observers of the LDS position have ascribed philosophical labels and tendencies to it, but that position usually will not fit neatly into the stock answers. It is empirical, yet rational; pragmatic, yet idealistic; oriented toward eternity, yet emphasizing the importance of the here and now. Affinities are found with the Cartesian certainty of personal existence, the positivist insistence on sensory evidence, the Enlightenment emphasis on elimination of paradox, and the postmodern respect for the "other." The ultimate standard for all being, truth, and good is Christ himself.

Warner, C. Terry. "Truth." In Daniel H. Ludlow (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mormonism (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
The LDS conception of truth does not fit any of the categories in which it has been discussed in the Western philosophical tradition. For Latter-day Saints, truth is found in living the type of life exemplified by Jesus Christ.

In the Western philosophical tradition, truth is the characteristic or quality of an idea or statement that justifies belief in it. What this characteristic might be has been the subject of long-standing philosophical debate; some have said it is the correspondence with reality that true statements possess; some, their "tie-in" or coherence with other statements; some, their consequences or practical usefulness. So devastating have been the attacks upon each of these theories that in recent times many philosophers have abandoned altogether the traditional assumption that a firm or absolute kind of truth is possible. These philosophers say that because our knowledge of the world is heavily conditioned by the peculiarities of the particular language in which it is expressed, it is an interpretation at best; we have no basis for claiming we can ever know "how things really are," they argue, and therefore, whatever truth exists is relative to the speaker's language, culture, and situation. Absolute truth, thought of as a property of ideas or statements, is a concept that has fallen on hard times.

Commonly it is supposed that for Latter-day Saints truth is absolute in a way that makes it vulnerable to the relativist's arguments. But for Latter-day Saints, as their scriptures and everyday discourse reveal, truth is not primarily a matter of the correctness of ideas or statements, and consequently their view is not to be found among the traditional alternatives or any combination of them. Though they do speak of the truth of statements, they most often use the word "truth" to signify an entire way of life--specifically, the way of life exemplified, prescribed, and guided by Jesus Christ.

. . .
Because Christ perfectly embodies the virtue of being true and faithful (in his case, to the life his Father required of him), there is a crucial sense in which he himself is the truth. "I am the way," he said, "the truth, and the life." (John 14:6)  He "received a fulness of truth." (D&C 93:26)  His cosmic influence, called "the Light of Christ," is also the light of truth, giving life to everything and enlightening human minds. By means of this light, he is "in all and through all things" (D&C 88:6), a permeating presence. Given this sense of the word "truth," it is not odd, as it otherwise would appear, to say, as does a key doctrinal revelation, that "truth shineth." (D&C 88:6-13)

. . .
For Latter-day Saints, salvation is a matter of growing in truth and particularly in knowledge of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Joseph Smith taught that "a man is saved no faster than he gets knowledge" (HC 4:588) and that "it is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance." (D&C 131:6)  In context these statements mean that one cannot be saved in ignorance of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Latter-day Saints who recognize that truth is not merely a property of language but is central to a life of obedience to the Savior do not interpret these passages to mean that the learned--the scholars and scientists--have a better chance of being saved. Gaining knowledge and becoming more godlike are two aspects of a single process, which helps explain the Latter-day Saint emphasis on education and personal scriptural mastery as well as on righteous living.

Yarn, David H., Jr. "Some Metaphysical Reflections on the Gospel of John." BYU Studies 3, Autumn 1960, pp. 3-10.
As one reads John's Gospel with the metaphysical concepts in mind it is most revealing to see how completely everything is oriented in the Lord. For example, some of the categories one might consider are being, becoming, relation, potency, unity, duality, teleology, change, process, and causation. Let me offer three brief illustrations and some general observations [on "Being," "Relation," and "Duality"].

* Yarn, David H., Jr. "'Wisdom' (Philosophy) in the Holy Bible." BYU Studies 13(1), Autumn 1972, pp. 91-103.
For the student of philosophy, perhaps it is most interating and directly relevant to attempt to determine what constitute the full content of the meaning of the word wisdom from it use in the Bible . . .

Predominantly, wisdom denotes instruction in morals, knowledge of God (specifically Jesus Christ), and righteousness of life. Consistent with this meaning, we are told that wisdom is of greater value than silver or fine gold, more precious than rubies, and that all things that can be desired are not to be compared to it. (Proverbs 3:14-15.) Heavenly (God's) wisdom is distinguished from earthly (man's) wisdom, and men are warned against trusting in their own widsom and knowledge. Finally, the higher wisdom, that which can be known only through the Spirit and power of God, is "peaceable, gentle, easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality (wrangling), and without hypocrisy" (James 3:17-18); and gives happiness, peace, freedom from fear, sleep that is sweet, and is life unto the soul. (pp. 92, 102-103)



fides quaerens intellectum

That's right Jacara....most people don't know that.

fides quaerens intellectum

The following info is taken from the website www.whyprophets.com,
a site created by an LDS individual and some of his friends.  I am posting this because I think most of this is, frankly, the truth:

"Warning!
This page is very basic. It aims at finding a common point of agreement by avoiding religious terminology. It is abstract and generalized. Please do not think that Mormons normally speak this way! I can already foresee emails saying "this proves that Mormons worship a race of sci-fi space aliens!" No. This is simply abstract speculation, based on current ideas of reality. This is not official LDS doctrine. It is not based on revelation. It is simply my own understanding. I take responsibility for any errors.

There is Always Something Greater:
There are few (if any) limits to scale in this universe. Whatever you think of there is always something smaller, or bigger, or stronger, or weaker, or nearer, or further. Whenever someone says "this is all there is," it is a safe bet that they will ultimately be proven wrong. So, it is probably arrogant foolishness to assume that the humans we see are the most intelligent and powerful beings in the universe or beyond. The numbers in cosmology and metaphysics are mind-boggling. If there is one superior race, then given all the billions of planets in each of the endless galaxies, in endless history and infinite possible universes, there must be vast numbers of such races.


There must be vastly superior beings:
So, it is reasonable to assume that there are more intelligent beings than us somewhere. How much more intelligent? Well, just look at the present acceleration of progress in our technology. If a task is sufficiently important, how long does it take to find a solution? A year? A hundred years? A thousand? One obvious task is "overcoming death." Like time travel, if only a single intelligent race solves this one, the potential for accelerated development is fantastic. Another obvious task is "increasing intelligence." Somewhere in the infinite possibilities of reality, this has almost certainly happened. If we see "the big bang" as the boundary of time and space, then another obvious task is to somehow overcome that as well.


Can a superior being progress?
A suspicious reader may be saying "this is approaching blasphemy – he is going to say that God is an evolved and evolving (i.e. limited) being." No. I am not. I am simply saying at this stage that there must be vastly superior beings. No more, no less. But there is the question of "What do you do if you can do anything?" Some people might take this as an argument for pessimism – that life must be ultimately pointless. But that is not a rational conclusion. Just as (from our perspective) there is always some greater intelligence, so there is always some greater purpose. Supreme beings would have their own view on what was needed.


What is meant by progress?
Does progress in this context mean "getting better" or "doing more things"? The idea of a superior being "getting better" is plainly false (see the next point). But the idea of progress as "achieving more and more things" is unavoidable. Intelligence, by its definition, means making things better. And this is probably the clue. A supreme being cannot make himself or herself better. But they can make inferior beings better.


They Are Infinite and Eternal:
Do vastly superior and deathless equate to infinite and eternal? Yes:


To all intents and purposes, how could we tell the difference? For us to worry over a vastly superior being is illogical – our mental concepts just cannot cope. Whenever you double your intelligence, you radically change how you see things. Imagine doubling your intelligence a thousand times. For you or I to judge such a being is foolish in the extreme.
The very idea of limited intelligence is probably a bi-product of our own limited intelligence. This is a big topic, so I will just leave it at that.
If someone's development is accelerating continually, it is absurd to speak of them in terms of limitations. Compare intelligence to velocity. Once you approach the velocity of light, all the normal assumptions either break down or become irrelevant. To say a vastly superior being could make a mistake is like saying that someone traveling at the speed of light might be overtaken by someone else. They won't.


What is Intelligence?
Up to now, I have not defined intelligence. I will now do so. (Note to LDS readers: I mean "intelligence" as an attribute of living things, not as life itself.) Intelligence means the efficient use of resources where a) "efficient use" means resources can be used for more – to go further, create more, obey our will more closely, or whatever and b) "resources" mean pretty much anything that can be used – objects, knowledge, or whatever. If two people have the same information, the more intelligent one makes better use of it. So, for example, where you or I see random chaos, a more intelligent being sees a pattern and can predict its future behaviour. Where you or I can make flour and eggs and sugar into a nice cake, a more intelligent person can make the most delicious thing you have ever imagined, or use it to attract and develop a wild bird colony, or treat it chemically to create a life saving drug, or rocket fuel, or whatever.


One Supreme Being or Many?
At this point we should maybe stop using the plural. The most intelligent beings will of course work together in perfect harmony (because conflict is inefficient). Also, an intelligent being will not have two leaders where one will do (because duplication is inefficient). So, from our point of view, we need only refer to one supreme being. N.B. Those brought up in a market economy may answer that conflict and duplication are essential to competition, and competition is essential to progress. But a little thought will show that competition is only a useful strategy where knowledge (and hence choices, desires, etc.) is limited. This is another big topic, so I will leave it for now.


A White Male Supreme Being?:
This level of detail is irrelevant to the big issues, and cannot be predicted purely from logic. If a supreme being chooses to reveal his or her presence as male, female, white, black, or blue with three heads, that does not change their nature as supreme. It is tempting to say that "a supreme being is beyond such things, even if they choose to reveal themselves as human that does not mean they really are." But that position is not logical. There is no rational reason for believing that an abstract force is somehow superior to a being with a fixed form. If a supreme being chooses to reveal himselves as a certain form, then by definition that is the intelligent thing to believe. If a supreme being does not reveal such details, that is the end of the matter.


The Supreme Being Has a Plan For Us:
We cannot say exactly what a vastly superior being would do, because we do not see things as they do. But we can draw some general conclusions.


First, destroying is far easier than creating (and has less potential), so it is fair to assume that superior beings would tend to create rather than destroy.
Second, manipulating lifeless forces is no big deal. To achieve even more (e.g. to be more intelligent) they must work with other intelligent beings.
Third, if being intelligent is itself intelligent, then so is making others become more intelligent.


So, supreme beings probably create, they deal with other intelligent beings, and they help these others to become more intelligent. But are they interested in us? Of course. By definition, an intelligent being does not waste resources. Humans have potential and are therefore a resource.


The Supreme Being Loves Us:
Given that a supreme being could choose to do anything, they must enjoy what they do. And they choose to help us to become intelligent like them. Think about that. They are happy. They want us to be happy. They are very interested in us. Making us happy makes them happy. Sounds like a good definition of love.


The Logic of a Saviour
See also – Reasons for the Atonement of Christ

We Are Subject to Error and Death:
This is self evident. We all die. We all do things that are destructive and do not achieve good things. Given our limited intelligence, there is not much we can do about this. Errors are particularly problematic. Errors are not just abstract. Wrong decisions, by definition, have bad results. Who picks up the pieces?

How Can a Supreme Being Communicate With Us?
It is all very well recognizing there is a supreme being, but how does such a being communicate? If they just appeared in a flash of light, there would be no development of intelligence. There is no intellectual stretching when we just do what is blindingly obvious (e.g. whatever the supreme being says). Even if they left us with freedom, we would likely be too scared to take any chances. So, does the supreme being leave intellectual clues? Maybe, but that's not the whole story. Our intelligence is currently limited, so it is quite likely that we would make a mess of this. Any intellectual test has a threshold that some well-meaning mortals will not pass. The only practical way to teach us is to send another human who does it right. The intelligent ones will recognize this to some extent (or at least have the tolerance not to condemn this teacher for some illogical reasoning).

Appendix: Classical Proofs of the Existence of God
Classical arguments for the existence of God do more harm than good. First, they are so weak that they just provide ammunition for atheists. Second, they avoid the only real source of proof – direct revelation. In contrast, the approach outlined on this page has the following advantages over the classical arguments:

This makes sense, and they do not.
It leads directly to personal revelation (pray and find out for yourself), the only way to really know for sure.
This is based on common observations, not abstract tricks. Although this proof is only as strong as those assumptions, the alternative is to talk of theoretically perfect and infinite concepts. I see no evidence that any of us really understands the concepts of "perfect" or "infinite," hence the errors in previous "proofs." In contrast, if we are certain of anything, we are certain that, for example, there is always something bigger.
Augustine's Attempt at a Logical Proof

Eternal truths (e.g. geometry) can only be understood by illumination from God. Therefore there is a God:
Unfortunately, it is possible to arrive at some eternal truths (e.g. that 1 + 1 = 2) without any apparent inspiration, but simply by counting. Now I personally believe that inspiration (of some kind) is essential, but I do not see that Augustine has demonstrated that. I doubt that it could be demonstrated in a simple yet also watertight fashion.

Anselm's Attempt at a Logical Proof

There must be an absolute, final, greatest, self-existent thing:
This depends on two basic premises: (1) a person can conceive of something perfect, and (2) physical is more perfect than conceptual. Perhaps both are true but I think there is plenty of room for doubt.

Aquinas' Attempts at a Logical Proof

There has to be a prime mover – an ultimate cause:
Even if this could be logically demonstrated, it does not do much good, as it pushes God so far back in time that he becomes irrelevant.

The universe is so well organized that it must have had a creator:
This has some appeal, but was never a very good proof. If we compare the universe to an animal (which is also well designed), we can imagine that another universe could have given birth to it, and so the original creator could be an exceedingly long way away.

Scotus' Attempt at a Logical Proof

He suggested a complex variation on the "prime mover" idea, placing secondary causes between us and God:
But the more stages there are to a proof, the more likely that one of them is mistaken, and the less useful it is to the ordinary person. Scotus' proof (though I have not studied it in depth) seems too similar to those that have gone before.

Descartes' Attempts at a Logical Proof

We can conceive of perfect being, and we must have got the idea from somewhere:
I am not convinced of the premise. Do we really conceive of a perfect being? Or just a being who appears perfect to us? A reliance on logical proofs can prove only one thing: that these great theologians did not have much confidence in God's ability to reveal himself directly. They are evidence that the church of their day was in apostasy, and did not have the gifts of the spirit.

The Bottom Line
The gospel of Jesus Christ is rational. Indeed, when looked at logically, it becomes inevitable."

A Supreme Human Example:
What would this ideal teacher do? The only practical way to show that death can be overcome is to do it. The only practical way to show that perfection is possible is to be perfect. It is no good sending a teacher who is just "pretty good." They have to be perfect. Otherwise, we may see the good, and (in our ignorance) copy their faults.


Hope and Evidence:
Being intelligent means making the best use of what we have (see above). In other words, we do not wait until things are handed to us – we are hungry for truth. This means taking chances, but not too many chances. It means balancing the evidence (which we may misunderstand) with our hopes that it means what we think (which hopes may be unfounded). Intelligence means balancing hope and evidence. That (in my opinion) is the most useful definition of faith.


fides quaerens intellectum

Sometimes the objectivity, open-mindedness, intelligence and general "goodness" of the members of this site can be, uh.... shocking.  You must admit that I took a risk with this post.  I have been around here a while and I have associated myself with non-religous but spiritually aware people for many years, therefore I fully understand what kind of commotion a post like this CAN make...but I also understand that if someone is truly tolerant, intelligent and open then they will not only allow but appreciate the contributions of ever poster.

Some may label me as a "Christian-mystic" or might even just write me off as someone who has discovered that there's more to reality than dogmatic religous beliefs but just can't let go of all of it.  I don't really consider myself to belong to either of these categories....although I wouldn't be offended if someone were to call me a Christian-mystic because in many senses that fits me.  What I really want to be called, besides a desciple of Christ, is a TRUTH SEEKER.

I want to thank those individuals in here, namely Frank and Cainam, for their kind and objective comments.   I know these two guys most definetly don't consider themselves to be religous, but they are two of the most spiritually minded people I have ever had the opportunity to exchange ideas with and I know they (like almost everyone else here) are trudging up the path of truth and enlightenment (<--is that a word?)
-------------------------------------------------
Ok- if you are sick of this thread, you can stop reading here, because I am about to dive back in....

First of all, I cannot impress upon anyone how incredibly frustrating it is to be a "religous" person who actually despises the word "religous" for a myriad of reasons.  It really frustrates me when I do something selfless or kind and a co-worker or peer says, "Oh, I get it...you did that because you are "religous"..."  I want to shout at them and say, "NO!  I did it because it was the RIGHT thing to do."  Religion?  What does that mean anyway.  Catholic?  Mormon?  Astral Projector?  What?!!!  None of that means much to me.  What means something is TRUTH.  I believe in TRUTH.  I believe that there are many dimensions, many perspectives, etc.  but there is an OBJECTIVE REALITY...and the best way to find it is to find yourSELF and to know the NATURE of GOD.  

We are all at different points in our progression...."religion", "belief systems" are mostly social institutions that have some underlying metaphysical truth(s) to them.  Unfortunately most people, especially leaders, use them as vehicles of control, deception, etc.  That's why it's so hard to be religous, especially Christian, because you turn on the TV and see Christianity being used as a vehicle of capitalism...or war.  




fides quaerens intellectum

"?" ?

To clarify, I am in a race, ethnics and gender class and wanted to talk about the fact that many people don't see racism as much of a problem, although it clearly is in most of the world.

fides quaerens intellectum

Reality fluctuations occur often during OBE.  I don't know much about remte viewing from personal experience, but I would imagine it's quite  similar.

The feat of guessing the suits could be a fluke...but I would lean the other way.  Sounds like you are off to a good start.  Keep studying and practicing and always have a meaningful goal...

Best wishes!

fides quaerens intellectum

Thank you.  I really mean that.  In the future I will make it a point to, when I paste things into posts, give my personal ideas about it.


fides quaerens intellectum

Mobius-
You're a great person and I always enjoy your thoughts.  It's great that people with different ideas and beliefs can interact through technology and I think it provides the possibility to learn and grow.  Although we may differ in some big ways, I think we do agree on many things...


fides quaerens intellectum

Listen to Frank, he knows what he is talking about...http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/images/icon_Smile_approve.gif" border=0>

fides quaerens intellectum

You are well on your way to conscious projection...and no matter what books you read you are going to have to make "the break through" on your own, but I highly recommend Astral Dynamics...also check out the plethora of info on the internet...some of it is better, actually A LOT better, than other stuff, but it's all informative.   Best wishes!

fides quaerens intellectum

James:
I didn't know two pages was a lengthy dissertation!  Anyway, I do know what you mean...and although I hope no one is judging me personally by the things I choose to share or say in this forum, I do realize that the meaningful interactions can indeed lead to personal growth.
----------------------------------------------------------
To all:
I would love to share my personal thoughts about this post, the only I reason I haven't up to this point is that I have been terribly busy with work and my education....but I am going to take the time out now to do so, albeit a summarized version of what I would like to say.

The following is a very summarized version of my beliefs, which of course I view as the truth.  I do not know all things and therefore I do not profess to understand all truth....if you have any questions or comments I would love to share them (please forgive any grammatical errors):

I believe in God...the perfect being who organizes matter and intelligence.  The being that resides in the ETERNAL NOW that Robert Bruce talks about.  The being that commands us to grow and become perfected.  I believe this being is *Eloheim, which is the name for God that originally appeared at the beginning of the Old Testament.  Eloheim means "Gods"- therefore I believe we have a God of this world/universe, and I worship Him but I know there are other Gods.

I believe this God knows and loves each and everyone of us, and while He knows all things, from the beginning to the end, he has and is giving us experiences to test us and allow us to gain knowledge that we may one day become perfect...and create worlds and intelligences, just like He does.  I believe God is a perfected man and that Jesus Christ, our elder brother if you will, was the most advanced spirit in the pre-existence.  By pre-existence I mean that I believe that this life is a continuation of another life, and in the life before this one, we had only our subtle body, our spirit body, and then we chose to come to this planet and receive a physical body.  

We are here, in the "school of hard life experience", as Bruce puts it, in order to experience duality and to know the bitter from the sweet.  Christ, being the only man who ever lived a perfect life, after having taken upon himself all the mistakes and pain that man caused by sinning (sin= without God, separation from God) was re-united with a perfected physical body.  I believe that we will all be re-united (resurrected) with a perfected physical body because of what Christ did for us.  (And it is my personal belief that we can use this physical body in ways we cannot now, ie. travel instantaneously, etc. like we do in the astral, only that we can transcend and descend through any dimensional level...anyway, I don't want to get off track here).

Therefore everyone is "saved" regardless of whether they believe in Christ or not, there is NO HELL in the traditional sense for sinners and non-believers.  Everyone is eternal and besides a select few, almost no one really, all will experience a wonderful existence, one so wonderful we cannot imagine (unless you have transcended to the higher dimensional levels and had a glimpse at them).

BUT there is a difference between being saved and gaining ETERNAL LIFE.  Eternal life is the way God lives, in the eternal now.  Although He, and dare I say She (we believe in eternal companionship) are perfect and all powerful, the Gods never cease to grow in glory and power and happiness and knowledge because they continue to organize intelligence and matter, both subtle matter and the physical matter we know, in order to create worlds for future beings like us...to test and try them, and to give them the chance to become perfect through their decisions.

I understand that many of you might be saying "man, this guy is crazy", but I can tell you this much: I have had experiences, not lectures or theological B.S. that lead me to not only believe, but to have knowledge of these things.  I guess I can put it this way, if you believe that what people belief is their reality, then I like my reality.  I think you get what you want out of life/existence.  

I love to think about the eternities.  I know we live forever.  I have lived outside my body, and I have had glimpses of what it's going to be like when I leave this corruptible body for the last time and move on.  We all move on, we just have to ask ourselves why and to where.

I don't know you all, but I love you all.  We are all one, yet we are all individuals...and will be forever, that's part of the way it is.  There are certain laws of existence that even God didn't make up, but I believe He governs and organizes perfectly because He is perfect.  All human beings, regardless of sex and creed and race are His children and can become like Him.

Thank you for respecting my beliefs.
-Daniel

-------------------------------------------
*The Gods are Eloheim
J.S. circa 1830
"The word comes from Ancient Hebrew, and needs some explanation.
"Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many; and that makes a plurality of Gods, in spite of the whims of all men. Without a revelation, I am not going to give them the knowledge of the God of heaven.
You know and I testify that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods. I have it from God, and get over it if you can. I have a witness of the Holy Ghost, and a testimony that Paul had no allusion to the heathen gods in the text. I will show from the Hebrew Bible that I am correct, and the first word shows a plurality of Gods; and I want the apostates and learned men to come here and prove to the contrary,  if they can. An unlearned boy must give you a little Hebrew. Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aushamayeen vehau auraits, rendered by King James' translators,
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." I want to analyze the word Berosheit. Rosh, the head; Sheit, a grammatical termination; the Baith was not originally put there when the inspired man wrote it, but it has been since added by an old Jew. Baurau signifies to bring forth; Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God, in the singular number; and by adding the word heim, it renders it Gods.
It read first, "In the beginning the head of the Gods brought forth the Gods," or, as others have translated it, "The head of the Gods called the Gods together." I want to show a little learning as well as other fools
The head God organized the heavens and the earth. I defy all the world to refute me. In the beginning the heads of the Gods organized the heavens and the earth. Now the learned priests and the people rage, and the heathen imagine a vain thing. If we pursue the Hebrew text further, it reads, "Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aashamayeen vehau auraits"     "The head one of the Gods said, Let us make a man in our own image."
I once asked a learned Jew, "If the Hebrew language compels us to render all words ending in heim in the plural, why not render the first Eloheim plural?" He replied, "That is the rule with few exceptions; but in this case it would ruin the Bible." He acknowledged I was right.
I came here to investigate these things precisely "


----------------------------------------------------


fides quaerens intellectum

Thanks so much everyone!  I am going to be using this info, especially the info regarding racism, etc. in a panel that I am going to be on on Thursday.  If you have filled out the survey but didn't indicate your race and are willing to, please do.  Thanks again!


fides quaerens intellectum

Mobius, my friend, thank you for your opinion.  First of all, I am not forcing or trying to force anything on anyone...and if anyone here put up a thread that said "We look to the astral" I would be the first to read it with interest and enthusiasm.  People in here talk about their beliefs and experiences all the time and that's what keeps me coming back.  Also, the astral chat IS the thread that is open to all kinds of "chat"- and that's why I didn't go post this in the OBE Topic, if I did that then I think I would be guilty of what you are saying I do.

I am sorry if you find the 10% of what I post, about my beliefs, is not interesting or worthwhile and I invite you not to read that percentage.  According to you I do a pretty good job of letting you know exactly what my post is about in the subject line, eh?  And besides, "The Lord is my Light" post(s) are some of the most read and  replied to topics in the forum and generated a lot of fascinating and meaningful debate and conversation.  

I respect you and all other members of this forum, and that is why I post things so dear to my heart.  Thanks for your input, I have and will continue to evaluate carefully the things I post before I post them.
---------------------------
TOM-
What you say IS SO TRUE.  I find that the majority of people's concerns towards Christianity stem from the bone-head (for lack of a better term) things that many have done and continue to do in the name of Christ.  I am glad that you recognize this fact.  Thanks for pointing it out.

-Love and Peace to ALL!

(I think I am going to post something under the title "Looking to the Astral"...)

fides quaerens intellectum