God is Light and Love : New Thought meaning ?

[vagusnerves]

From a metaphysical, non-dualistic NEW THOUGHT perspective, what is meant when we say that God is :

1. Light
2. Love

[NoY]

positive energy not negative energy


:NoY:

[NoY]

i know you said non dualistic but the universe is waves

lightwaves
soundwaves
emotions
consciousness
gender

all are made of + and -

:NoY:

[Szaxx]

Hi,
Love and light also means a perfect harmony. No discord or impurities.

[Xanth]

From a metaphysical, non-dualistic NEW THOUGHT perspective, what is meant when we say that God is :

1. Light
2. Love

god is a metaphor for all that is... we are all one.  We are gods... we create and we experience what we create.
We are the architects of our own existence.  We are light, we are love... well, we're supposed to be Love, but some people have forgotten that.

They'll remember eventually. 

[Bedeekin]

The above ^

[Mini stapler]

positive energy not negative energy

Hi,
Love and light also means a perfect harmony. No discord or impurities.

god is a metaphor for all that is... we are all one.  We are gods... we create and we experience what we create.
We are the architects of our own existence.  We are light, we are love... well, we're supposed to be Love, but some people have forgotten that.

They'll remember eventually. 

So If I understand this right, god is positive energy not negative energy? So god is everything, but god is also only the positive half of everything?

God is the metaphor for everything, one... So 'everything is positive energy not negative energy...' so god being everything, this says negative energy does not exist, but positive & negative are intrinsically entangled, they define each other, no? so what we are saying when we say 'God/everything is positive energy' is that 'everything is energy' 'God is energy'. The word 'positive' seems to be being used in a meaningless & misleading way here... ?

Xanth I'm with you on the bold text in your quote - We are 'love & light'? So we are god, one, everything, but we are also 'love & light' what ever definition we give that phrase, (other than another metaphor for everything/god) makes it only one aspect of everything... So this is saying we are both god/everything/one but also only one aspect of one... 'love & light'? Is this not as much of a separate identity as say, my own personality is? & the opposite of what we say 'god' is... everything/one?

I am only prodding in hopes to understand... school me...

[Szaxx]

Hi,
It could be said that the part of you thats positive is god the other parts not positive are in chaos or transitioning positive. If the positive is to god the rest COULD be in transition OR negative. It doesn't mean if not positive then its negative.
Look at the absolute value. Its +1, 0 or -1.
To add a twist, that in which is god could transition away too.

Love is positive,
Light is positive.
Taken from the initial post how would you interpret the boundaries?
Grey is light but not as much, or does quantitisation not apply?
Love being an emotional and subjective character has too many variables at this intersection. Ill leave that one for now.
Lets not forget equilibrium...

[Mini stapler]

Hi,
It could be said that the part of you thats positive is god the other parts not positive are in chaos or transitioning positive. If the positive is to god the rest COULD be in transition OR negative. It doesn't mean if not positive then its negative.
Look at the absolute value. Its +1, 0 or -1.
To add a twist, that in which is god could transition away too.

So is that saying God is in fact not everything?
I see what you're saying, and that makes sense to me when god isn't being used as a metaphor for everything, & more like, God is not everything, God is X, and what is in 'existence' now is not all X, now we have X Y & Z - Y = X/Z in transition to being Z/X ... ?

In that sense, everything that is Y & Z needs to transition into X to be God (When does Y stop being Y & start being X or is it a continuation of the same one thing? How do we interpret those boundaries? outside of dualistic thinking subjectively creating a separateness) but using that logic, we can't say god is everything & god is only the positive parts & not the negative in the same sentence, can we?

So you can see the way I'm looking at it... if we use a coin as the metaphor rather than god... it has heads, tails and circular edge between -

Heads = positive
Tails = negative
Circular centre edge = the transition aspect between + & -

Are all aspects of the coin, from heads to tails and every degree between, not as much a apart of the coin as any other? does the tails need to transition into being the heads, to become a part of the coin...

The way I'm seeing it is that God is everything, & every aspect within god, is a slightly different expression of god, but no less god than any other aspect...

if god is everything, than why would the negative need to transition into being positive to become god? That just makes no sense at all to me...

Love is positive,
Light is positive.
Taken from the initial post how would you interpret the boundaries?
Grey is light but not as much, or does quantitisation not apply?
Love being an emotional and subjective character has too many variables at this intersection. Ill leave that one for now.
Lets not forget equilibrium...

The perceived boundaries? Light to Dark - I understand it as a continuum of one thing? pick out any section of the continuum, note its attributes in relation to the rest of the continuum & give it a label... Is this not how we understand something, we relate it to something else? In a non-dualistic way, we couldn't could we?? That is how I understand it anyway.

That being said, How can we say god is love & light if god is everything? & love and light only one aspect of everything... My understanding is no clearer...

Sorry if I'm missing your point Szaxx, I really am trying to understand! Sorry I don't know what you mean by 'or does quantitisation not apply' 'or lets not forget equilibrium'...

[Xanth]

Bud, don't get caught up in metaphors... you seem to be hooked on a certain aspect of this discussion which doesn't exist. 

Your original question isn't really one you can ask people and get a direct answer from.  Your personal answer is always going to trump whatever anyone else tells you.  Just go with what *YOU* think, because nobody can answer this... nobody can even give an opinion... nobody can even begin to provide an opinion.

[Mini stapler]

You started the metaphor Xanth, I just carried on with it as it seemed the quickest way to articulate what I meant.

No you misunderstand, my questioning was not an attempt to gain an idea of what I should be thinking from someone else. My line of question was me being curious & showing an interest in others ideas & more importantly why & I only said I didn't understand, & explained the reasons why I didn't understand so any replies could address my perceived view of inconsistencies, I wasn't dismissive or disrespectful.

"you seem to be hooked on a certain aspect of this discussion which doesn't exist  "  Ok my turn to make an observation! erm You seem to liberally use invalidation statements followed by smiley faces or winks to cut down peoples comments that arouse your insecurities...

The beauty of observations is they are often not accurate, being the subjective nature of observing, wouldn't you agree?

But more seriously, I was just asking questions on the topic in question, I'm lost on what's wrong with that.

[Szaxx]

Hi,
I tend to give insight to problems in general and the next course of communication is based on the answer given.
Its a basic intellectuality quotient assessment.
Given the posed question is of two items only for discussion the answers are based on this. The equilibrium comment was to enlighten the fact that say death is looked upon as negative generally, yet its an essential part of life. Take growing food as a prime example. The questions asked dont cover this aspect of the whole which is god.
Personal interpretation of god also differs between individuals let alone race or creed.
I address this by saying "the universal one" in agreement with all pertaining to a discussion on this subject. Its accepted as the religious differentiations can provoke war like attitudes.
Your initial question has been answered by some posts, then you further the questioning by adding more than that origionally posed. This in general should be addressed by another question or quote at the start.
You've done nothing wrong but the line of questioning on this subject always ends in disaster. Its an inherent challenge on the individuals belief system and religious discussions are always firey.
There's more to life than we know. If you look at parts then ask questions of other parts the heat instantly sets itself on high.
Would you like to ask another question bearing the above in mind?

[Mini stapler]

First, I apologize for my out of turn comment Xanth, though some times I have perceived some of your one liner comments as having a directed negative undertone, & I will call it how I see it, but that's down to the way I think, & I'm guessing 99% of that's not your intention at all, I was being touchy as I felt a bit covertly attacked, but that's down to me. So I apoligise for my snipey comment.

No Szaxx, I can appreciate your comment, I think I'll leave my questions for now though  & I'll bare the way I put together my questioning in mind in the future. cheers for the reply!

[Xanth]

First, I apologize for my out of turn comment Xanth, though some times I have perceived some of your one liner comments as having a directed negative undertone, & I will call it how I see it, but that's down to the way I think, & I'm guessing 99% of that's not your intention at all, I was being touchy as I felt a bit covertly attacked, but that's down to me. So I apoligise for my snipey comment.

It's all good MS. 

No apologies required... ever. 

[Mr.Flip]

Light as well as Love are natural forces..

one would say love and light are dualistic words for their opposites are hate and dark

actually there is no such thing as hate or darkness, just the actual lack of Love and Light

God/::--Chaos=Dark=Bad=Hate=Evil/Devil----Merely the lack of God/Light/Love and not actual beings..

[Xanth]

actually there is no such thing as hate or darkness, just the actual lack of Love and Light

BAM!  Exactly. 

[O.O.P]

[majour ka]

So If I understand this right, god is positive energy not negative energy? So god is everything, but god is also only the positive half of everything?

God is the metaphor for everything, one... So 'everything is positive energy not negative energy...' so god being everything, this says negative energy does not exist, but positive & negative are intrinsically entangled, they define each other, no? so what we are saying when we say 'God/everything is positive energy' is that 'everything is energy' 'God is energy'. The word 'positive' seems to be being used in a meaningless & misleading way here... ?

Xanth I'm with you on the bold text in your quote - We are 'love & light'? So we are god, one, everything, but we are also 'love & light' what ever definition we give that phrase, (other than another metaphor for everything/god) makes it only one aspect of everything... So this is saying we are both god/everything/one but also only one aspect of one... 'love & light'? Is this not as much of a separate identity as say, my own personality is? & the opposite of what we say 'god' is... everything/one?

I am only prodding in hopes to understand... school me...

What Xanth said.

But in answer to mini stapler,  consider that when "God" wanted to manifest matter and form out of stillness and space then he/she had to create duality for form of spirit to take a temporary form as matter: matter that will ultimately decay and disintegrate and return to whence it came, so that duality being of a positive nature and a negative nature means all is balanced...all that is created into form also carries with its blue print of decay and from the moment it manifests. So god created duality in order that love, light and intelligence could experience form and limitation. What a wonderful opportunity to grow spiritually 

[KarmicBeats]

Light as well as Love are natural forces..

one would say love and light are dualistic words for their opposites are hate and dark

actually there is no such thing as hate or darkness, just the actual lack of Love and Light

God/::--Chaos=Dark=Bad=Hate=Evil/Devil----Merely the lack of God/Light/Love and not actual beings..

That is a question I have maybe I will start a thread on it.  Is evil a thing in it's own right or is it merely the absence of good?

[Szaxx]

Hi,
Put it in perspective.
To do this a base is required. To form a suitable base you'll need to know everything that is.
I see a problem...

[Mr.Flip]

That is a question I have maybe I will start a thread on it.  Is evil a thing in it's own right or is it merely the absence of good?

there is no actual evil just the lack of good

[Xanth]

there is no actual evil just the lack of good

There is no evil or good... there are only subjective interpretations of moral and ethical decisions.