Welcome to COOL!

Of course I'm speaking generally. I realize that there are individual contradictions to what I'm saying. I try not be "too logical" when it comes to religion. It is my last retreat of hyperbole and conjecture.

Peace to you my friend.
I have to leave for work now.

 

If it were truely GOD, would you think it would be unisexed, I mean, does GOD have a gender. That would like make things biased.
Since GOD is a HE, would that not make Men better, or closer to GOD, if so where does that leave Women, servents to GOD like Men. Isnt that the way we got in trouble and divived the sexes in to higher and lowly.
Is it true that we are sexless in the Spirit and only become genderlated when we are concived into a human being.

Do we have sexes in Spirit form. Or are we all the same inside.

Without the Mother there can be no offspring. To say GOD is a HE and we are HIS children, then there has to be a SHE to produce off spring. Yet She is not mentioned.

I have studied several "Religions" I belong to none. I have found that thay all have a bit of the truth, but none have the whole truth. I think this may be bc we each have our own truths to bare, each our own purpose.

If there was a True Religion that held the answers, that would be universal and all would belong to it.

We are equipted with what we need to know on this planet. Each holds their own purpose for which they came.

We are under grace, yet we clammor and gnash our teeth to have it our way. The only thing we have commonly is LOVE LOVE LOVE, we all LOVE something or someone. It's universal

No one really knows anything. We all just speculate about it and make it up as we go along. No one has ever come back from death to tell us what the hell is going on and why we are here.

We needed a 'Manager' ( religion) to tend to us. Something we could clearn our conscience with. We devised a GOD to be our deliver'er and pay our pentance to so we could walk away clean.

Being under Grace we are being given a chance to redeem our humanity. I think before we try to fathom GOD we should first try to fathom what it is to be a HUMAN BEING. When we figure that out we will know GOD.

I thought I knew God and why we were Created. I was smug even, thinking I was precious in HIS eyes. Then I read The 12th Planet by Zacharia Stichen and it changed my whole concept on our purpose for our creation, and who in fact created us.

There is just so much evidence to support Stichen's concept pointing to outer planetory intervention. 'The writing is on the wall' They are digging it up every day. Even the bible supports this theory to some extent.

Theology is only an idea, it's not solid fact. Untill science and threory are matched we can only speculate.

Then there's the emotional heart of the human being. Where does this spark come from. The soul of mankind. The heartbeat of unity in kind. We LOVE, we Care, we feel pain/joy.

This emotion relates us together and brings us to common ground which unites us a 'Tribe' We are basicly all the same, we even think the same thoughts. We are also basicly good and kind beings, bc we love.

Love is like a link to bind us to the same 'lot', a chemistry reaction or vibrational pull that triggers impluses to the brain causing us to react in a certain manner. We bond to this reaction bc it connects us to something familiar, something that is comforting and soothing to our nature.

We let EGO get in the way of what we should be doing and create negitivity which interferes with our vibration (frequency) and throws us off balance. We create groups and think ourselves eliete, better and more surpream. Which is counter-productive to LOVE, were all is equeal and in balance. When our harmonic balance is disturbed it creates static, like on the raido when your between stations. We lose our connection with the all and go haywire.

Being dis-connected from the all leads us to make our own discissions ourselves. Thus, we think only of ourselves and create EGO. Then another dis-connected one comes along and thinks his ego is the best and thus, creating war between the egos. Losing LOVE in the event of clashing egos.

I don't even know all the questions yet but I do know the answers are found when in the state of love and tranquility. In the state of the collective All.

As I grow I learn more, as we all do. We see our mistakes and make our peace with ourselves. We forgive ourselves and carry on. We strive to be better and try to find the answers to the questions that have been asked for a million years. Where did we come from and why are we here. Is there really a GOD and does he still remember us.

I don't know if I will ever know the real truth, but it helps me get through the day believing that we are bound in love and that the human condition will evolve into a more perfect spieces as our love grows.

I also must add to make it clear. I do belive in The Source, what ever that may be, a cosmic energy force or a supernatural being. We are programed from some where bc we all think alike (our basic needs).

If we be still and listen with our spirits we find the answers from within, a built in connection we have in common with the all of things. A reasoning factor that keeps us on the the right track, a conscience if you will. Our guilt we punish ourselve with.

I don't know if what I feel inside is the truth or just ego, but it's all I have and I try to do what I feel inside is right or wrong by the level of guilt I feel about what I think or the way I act or re-act.

Do I believe another man/woman and follow or do I make my own choices and do what my heart has less guilt over. Guilt=Compassion.

I suppose that's about all I can think of right now, but I'm sure there's more. When it flows it flows. When it's over it's over

Brightest Blessings
sh



We created religion for our own comfort, an unloading place to store our guilt.

 

Skip, I do believe you are on the right track.

 

Myself I use 'He' in reference to God only as a convention. Personally, I'm very into the idea of the femminine divine, but ultimately the absolute - whatever name you give to it - is obviously beyond human gender.

 

I bet you love it that caring is both a verb and a noun.
'God cares' does not equal 'God is care'.

Here is a rephrasing of my (original) reply: Yes, God is caring <the verb> right now as you read.

 

I think that is a twisted view of what love is. When we love another, we love them for being their own self. "I love Skip" is not the same as "I love God in Skip", I am actually talking about the individual soul that I call Skip. Yeah, God acts through us as well, and we can love God for acting through another at the same time as we love the soul that God acts through.

This universe is not a lonely one. Loving is something we (God, you, I, Bill, and other people) do to others, it is not simply God masturbating.

 

Wow - I actually agree here K.

Just a further point is that people who don't love God, even materialist atheists still love other people.

 

I just think you're wrong.

Love: strong affection for another arising out of kinship or personal ties;
affection based on admiration, benevolence, or common interests;
unselfish loyal and benevolent concern for the good of another

Love is not God acting through us (although Love may be the motivation behind God's acts through us).

Love might motivate God's actions, but it isn't what God is. God Loves <verb>. God feels love <noun>. God's actions are motivated by love <noun>.

I really think you aren't using language correctly when you say "God is Love". I've argued against it before with other people on the forums.

Love requires 2 beings (one being loves another). God, as an individual being, cannot fulfill the requirements of love. We can love God, love eachother, etc. God can love us.

Anyway Skip, if you can't explain it better, I am not going to understand it. I look up words in dictionaries if I have a question about their (words) usage, and it doesn't look to me like your usage of the word 'Love' is correct (unless you are a Christian Scientist who calls God Love (perhaps as a term of endearmeant?)).

Love is a feeling one has for another. As God is a being, I love God. My love of God is not God though, that's just a feeling I have about God. And it's my nature to feel that way when I do, not God's.

You should. There is no reason for God to masturbate when God has so many potential lovers.

BTW, I said "Loving is something we (God, you, I, Bill, and other people) do to others, it is not simply God masturbating." which means "Loving is not God masturbating." It takes 2 or more to love, otherwise it would be masturbation.

Our worth lies in our ability to love. We do this act our selves (with help from God). Just love. Don't pretend everything is God. Don't pretend other souls are simply pawns that are moved around so God can love God's self. God doesn't love God, God can't love God. God can only love others (like me, it's pretty easy for God to love me, even though God claims to hate me).

 

Part of the problem here is that the english language has only the one word 'love' to designate so many different meanings.

I think probably, it's a mistake to try to define too closely what love is, and certainly a mistake to do the same with 'God'.

To love oneslf would imply, to use Gurdjieff's phrase, 'separation of oneself from oneself'.

Also, self-love is seen by many paths as an obstacle on the way, because it reinforces the ego.

 

I agree!

Personally, I believe that it "cheapens the gift" to attempt to explain love as a concrete operation through some "evidentiary" process. The beauty of love, (IMO) is it's abstract quality. How it exists even in the most oppressive environments. How it exists without volume or mass. How it just IS.
Even in the shadow of great tragedy, it still finds a way to be. You see examples of people dying, (in mind-numbing pain) and yet somehow with their last words they might say.....tell ____ that I love him/her. To me, love transcends a need to be explained with empirical data. Do we really need to disect it? Can't we just have acceptance of it without quantifying or qualifying it?
Even in the absence of a concept of god, we can still find the presence of love.
To me, something so powerful deserves to inspire awe, not scientific method.

Just an opinion.



"Nobody has ever measured, even poets, how much the heart can hold."
Zelda Fitzgerald

 

I understand that even our beloved Sri Ramakrishna defined different types of love. I hope everyone understands that I do not intend to disrespect such wisdom. I just believe that we try to examine the "mechanism of love" too much at times. (when we should be just enjoying the incredible spendor of it)

 

I think the problem here is linguistic, and to do with definitions. 'Self love' can be used to indicate conditions which are polar opposites.

If one's ego has crumbled to nothing though, it isn't the self, at least the self as designated by the word ego you'd be loving.
The ego-less state can be defined as love but not self love, in my opinion.
But it's more than love - it is satchitananda.

Also, this higher love isn't anything to do with our subjective emotions in the usual sense. All of that is conditioned, and this higher love is un-conditioned and un-conditional.

The way I see it, sexual love - not just sexual desire but love - and other forms of human love, are like so many channels through which love flows. In each manifestation it is conditioned in a different way. But the essence is the same.

 

I'm sure there are others here who understand what is meant.
It's not easy to get beyond the ego - even psychedelics don't work for some people. To have experienced just a drop of that love we're speaking of, is a precious thing. 'A pearl beyond price' - And sadly, in this world, a rare thing.

The thing is though that as soon as we start talking about all this, people come in with their different definitions and so on. The ego has it's own agendas.............So I think part of the challenge in making this work will be to arrive at forms of words upon which a consesus can be built up.

Maybe one concept that should be introduced into the overall COOL agenda is some idea that what is needed is a flexible attitude that is prepared to go beyond what the mind knows at this stage - not to cling too much to any set of definitions, because that can be a block to opening to a higher energy.

 

What I mean really is like Bob Marley said "emancipate yourselves from mental slavery" - in that people cling to narrow definitions and so on which literally imprison them in ego with all its limitations.


I agree absolutely that discussion is the way to go with this. So far, I'm finding it very good!

 

Some of us may have a belief system comprising elements of many disciplines, but still enjoy listening to those of you that have an even broader field of experience. So, it appears (at least to me) that the eclectic approach is an opportunity for many to learn. The very environment that we are in suggests that open-mindedness leads to harmony.