It's true that all of mankind had the intuition of higher forces, either good ones or evil ones. And if it has existed throughout mankind's existence it must mean that there is indeed something bigger than us and that our tiny brains cant even begin to understand. Anyway, what i meant to say is that all myths emerge from the truth. S**t, i'm not making any sense am i?

Island_gurl, you’re making perfect sense. There’s great common ground in our religious mythologies, and they are centred around deep spiritual truths, of which the human soul is deeply aware but of which the mind can barely conceive. I’m sure this is why such stories are often portrayed in poetic imagery or childlike metaphors.

I believe there is something more for us after we go, based simply on a gut feeling, rather than any particular doctrine.

Dynamaso, that’s a form of psychic intuition. Some people possess psychic intuition to such a high degree – and in other forms spiritual awareness - that it’s actually “knowledge”. The things I’ve talked about here, and on other threads, aren’t just my beliefs. I know them to be true. I also know that this sounds arrogant, but you’ll have to excuse me. It’s within the human potential to know the Truth. As Jesus said, “Know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”

Not everyone goes to heaven, right? A seriall killer would go to heaven too? A paedophile would go to heaven? A rapist would go to heaven? A greedy man would go to heaven?

A serial killer and a paedophile would indeed go to the same place as us after death, (i.e. to experience life in the hereafter), but their experience of it would not quite be 'Heaven'. The quality of our inner-experience in the afterlife is determined generally by the amount of spiritual wealth we have accumulated on our journey so far. People who have deliberately caused much evil on earth, like Hitler, will experience an inner feeling of darkness and guilt when they arrive in Heaven. They will see the bigger picture and will be aware of the consequences of their actions to others and to their own soul. Their inner-burden will be painful, and oftentimes Higher Forces - with compassionate intentions – will impel these misguided souls to incarnate back to earth, or to another physical planet, in an attempt to `burn off' their negative karma. This is what is meant by “karmic debt”. (It is difficult to balance out negative karma in Heaven, because the challenges don't exist there.) Maybe the paedophile will have to experience abuse as a child, firsthand, in order to balance out their karma. (This doesn’t imply that everyone who is abused as a child was once an abuser themselves, incidentally. There are many reasons why we might choose such challenges. Advanced and spiritually mature souls, for example, often choose such challenges in order to build inner muscle and garner wisdom.)

At the end of the day, the quickest way to advance spiritually and to cultivate positive karma, is to love, and to adhere to principles of goodwill, forgiveness and integrity. (This also includes loving ourself unconditionally, regardless of how 'bad' we think we are, just as God loves all His children unconditionally - Hitler included. Naturally, God's love transcends human understanding.)

if I were to set up a committee to come up with the nicest most reassuring 'wishful-thinking' possible, I'm sure that they would pretty much come up with what you've outlined

But if “God is love”, and if God possesses all power and wisdom, (which is what most of our religions claim, and which is what most theists believe deep down), then what else would we expect? It’s “Good News”, this life lark, as Christianity says.

If all definitions of "god" agree that "It" is the catalyst for all else, then at some point, that thing must have existed alone. If only one thing exists alone, it has no meaningful description. All that is is also it, so all descriptions of a thing are useless without a description of what it is not. For example, if there were only one temperature in the universe, would it be hot or cold? With nothing to compare it to, there is no way to tell

That’s a good point, Ockham. How could God be “love” in the beginning, if there was nothing else? This might explain why God felt impelled to create ‘something other than God’ in the first place. If, by nature, “God is love”, then we would expect God to create, in order for relationship to exist. It would also explain why God permitted evil to exist. As Neale Donald Walsch says in ‘Conversations With God’: “God knew that for love to exist, and to know itself as pure love – its exact opposite had to exist as well. So God voluntarily created the great polarity – the absolute opposite of love – everything that love is not. Only then could love exist as a thing that could be experienced.”

think what ultimately fails to persuade me in your ideas is this notion of life (or a number of recurring lives) as a great celestial obstacle course. Is this, then, the 'purpose' of life?

It would be one of its purposes, at least. Think about it logically. If we could live in Paradise for all eternity, then the only reason we would choose to leave it in order to experience a shite-hole like this, (and earth is a shit-hole compared to Heaven), then ‘spiritual muscle building’, 'learning', and ‘wisdom garnering’ would be primary reasons.

That the science "eludes traditional scientific methods, because Heaven exists in another dimension" doesn't really help me there, because, to play Devil's Advocate, if one were to totally fabricate a reassuring spiritual viewpoint what could be more convenient than that?

In my opinion, there’s a different between a fabricated story, and a conviction aligned with inner-wisdom and intuition. I believe that God has placed a ‘compass’ within each of our hearts, and that deep down, we all know that there’s deeper purpose to life. The details will become apparent as humanity advances spiritually.

There are many reasons why we might choose such challenges [child abuse]. Advanced and spiritually mature souls, for example, often choose such challenges in order to build inner muscle and garner wisdom

(just wanted to add that this principle can be seen in Victor Frankl's testimony, a survivor of Auschwitz prison camp in Nazi Germany. I described it briefly in post #19 on the following thread: https://forums.joeuser.com/Forums.aspx?ForumID=11&AID=62153#586613 )

some retarded garbage...

Have a nice day.~sarcasm~

It is ironic, but not unexpected that people become so nasty when talking about religion. You obviously saw my robust debate as hostile and answered in kind. Is this a practical demonstration of your buddhism? In fact, all I was saying (read it again)is that you were a bit 'woolly' in your definition of buddhism - what you said could apply equally to hinduism - and that words should have a precise meaning.

I actually find Buddhism really fascinating; just about the most convincing path through the minefield of life of any religion I have come across. Here in Asia I am surrounded by it and I have discovered that there is a huge difference between Asian Buddhism and the new age pick and mix that (some) westerners draw from it.

If you want an example of a compassionate, sensitive, thoughtful and constructive response to a critique of your ideas, look no further than the patient responses of Andy Baker. Take care not to cut yourself with that razor - it's sharp

BTW thanks for the info on the 'taijitu' And here's a little peace offering:

Chak and the razor
Both seeking light in the dark
So why should we fight?

~ gassho ~

So what would i wanna come back for if i couldnt at least put to practice what i learnt before?

Have you ever wondered what makes some folks so wise? That's reincarnation for you. Your physical self may not remember precisely what happened, but your soul, your spirit...that knows.

There are old souls, and there are new souls. Old souls have been around a time or two before, they're more advanced....new souls are on their first go around and are still learning the ropes, so to speak.

I believe in reincarnation. I think it's the divine power's way of recycling.

Chak, I have a question for you: You say that you're in Asia and that you see a different version of Buddhism at work over there...and you then describe the western version as more of a 'pick and mix'. Could it not be that what's being practiced in Asia is so steeped in superstition and intermingled with folklore that it's got a little lost or sidetracked? Is it plausible that what's being practiced in the west is closer to what the Buddha originally intended, that it adheres the general principles and values and doesn't get lost or tied up in itself?

Just a thought.

I'll just a bit here, when I took a class in the Kabalaha the Rabbi spoke of reincarnation and the reason why your soul would return. That there is a destiny for each soul and that destiny must be completed and if you are unable to complete it you return to try it again. It also talks about the energy that is contained in the soul and through life you gain both positive and negative energy and that to achieve the ultimate good energy you have to return many times. It's fascinating and can explain a lot of feeling of I've been here before. De Ja Vu.

It also talks about the energy that is contained in the soul and through life you gain both positive and negative energy and that to achieve the ultimate good energy you have to return many times. It's fascinating and can explain a lot of feeling of I've been here before. De Ja Vu.

Exactly. It would help explain why people feel drawn to certain eras or cultures ans have a natural affinity and knowledge for and of them despite never having experienced them.

I've been here before, and I think that there are a few JU-ers that have been here before too.

Is it plausible that what's being practiced in the west is closer to what the Buddha originally intended, that it adheres the general principles and values and doesn't get lost or tied up in itself?

Yes, it's certainly plausible. My culture and background is entirely western and I can't in good faith abandon that, nor do I want to. Instead I try to understand this eastern philopsophy through western-style rationalism, and in a sense that is "closer to what the Buddha originally intended" than some of the more superstitious manifestations of Asian folk Buddhism...

At the same time, Buddhism in its cultural heartland has a certain integrity that comes from millenia of thinking and practice. For example you speak about 'souls' and yet 'anatta' or 'no soul' is a basic buddhist concept. I think a lot of westerners do sometimes 'pick and mix' a bit of Buddhism here , a bit of Hinduism there and add a pinch of 'new age' to taste. The advantage of this is a self-created religious worldview which fits our personal intuitions like a glove. The huge disadvantage of this ... well, Dogen Zenji once said something to the effect that a religion that doesn't sometimes tell you what you don't want to hear is useless.

Talking about these matters is difficult. You've already seen the anger that arose when I tried to question Ock on something he had written. Perhaps I did it unskilfully and sounded snottier than I meant to. Frankly I'd rather keep silent then create bad feeling.

Still, these things are worth talking about, if we can find a way to listen respectfully. I'll try to remember that when I think I am simply critiquing an 'idea' someone out there may read that as a personal attack and I'll try to be more careful in future.

Could it not be that what's being practiced in Asia is so steeped in superstition and intermingled with folklore that it's got a little lost or sidetracked? Is it plausible that what's being practiced in the west is closer to what the Buddha originally intended, that it adheres the general principles and values and doesn't get lost or tied up in itself? Just a thought

That's an interesting thought. It could be that Buddhism has blossomed on its journey throughout the West, and now holds more wisdom here than it does in the East. That's quite ironic, I suppose, but it demonstrates the flexibility and nature of Buddhism.

I think a lot of westerners do sometimes 'pick and mix' a bit of Buddhism here , a bit of Hinduism there and add a pinch of 'new age' to taste.

I don't believe that any one religion holds a monopoly on the Truth. Our world faiths are really harmonious allies, which together expand human understanding beyond the scope of an individual faith system alone. (That sounds so clinical!) Our religions are a bit like jigsaw pieces, or at least 'maps'.

That there is a destiny for each soul and that destiny must be completed and if you are unable to complete it you return to try it again.

Yes, and this is where the principle of 'unfinished business' comes into play when we arrive back in Heaven. Each of our souls have an agenda, even though our earthly personalities might be completely oblivious to those agendas.

Your physical self may not remember precisely what happened, but your soul, your spirit...that knows.

Absolutely. It's our soul’s awareness that blossoms into full capacity every time we arrive back home. Death is a highly positive experience for the vast majority of souls. It’s like being released from a dark, stuffy room, walking into a breathtaking world of freedom, beauty and light. (Sorry to sound dogmatic there.)

Could it not be that what's being practiced in Asia is so steeped in superstition and intermingled with folklore that it's got a little lost or sidetracked? Is it plausible that what's being practiced in the west is closer to what the Buddha originally intended, that it adheres the general principles and values and doesn't get lost or tied up in itself?

Pretty insightful question/comment Karen!

I'm a bit busy right now, i'll have to come back later to answer the comments! My mind is racing, i cant wait to come back to it!

I want out, period, and as such, the idea of reincarnation terrifies me.

So would Philip Jose Farmer's Riverworld series! That would be your worst nightmare, altho I loved them.

I want out, period, and as such, the idea of reincarnation terrifies me.

I think I'm with you on this one. That's why I find the buddhist idea of rebirth (rather than reincarnation) so intriguing. If I understand it correctly, we do get "out, period". The brain stops working, the body decomposes, there is no 'soul' that continues. The 'I' with which I have identified, a succession of impermanent mind states, habits and sensations stops. In this view, for the individual, death is as final as any atheist would claim. And yet... the teaching is that the unfinished business of karma goes on. Not that 'I' am reborn: 'I'(as a changless essential identity) never really was anyway, but the end of the body does not put an end to 'cause and effect'...

Do I actually believe any of this? It would make no sense to say "yes". What experience or evidence do I have to make such an affirmation? And yet it is an intriguing idea which reveals itself as richer and more subtle the more I look into it, so I don't reject it either: it deserves my serious attention...

For me, much more interesting than metaphysical speculation is the buddhist tradition of meditation. I am off to a zen temple this weekend to stay silent, breathe in and out and stare at the walls. If I find enlightenment, you'll all be the first to know

What that is, I do not know, nor do I care to. I just know I dont want to find myself back here again.

I'm with you on that one too Little Whip. It's horrible down here. But this attitude shows the difference between our finite personality’s view, and our soul’s point of view.

Imagine yourself in a state when you know that you're infinitely secure; you know that you’re loved unconditionally, and there’s nothing at all to fear. Life is full of joy, bliss and security. However, you also know that this sense of joy, bliss and satisfaction can be enhanced and magnified - but only if you embark on another soul-refining journey to a world where challenges and pain exist. (Only by tasting the fruits of good and evil, can the fruits of joy and goodness be fully appreciated and enhanced.) It is from this Heavenly perspective – a state of infinite security – that we choose to leave Paradise in order to experience lives like this. The muscle-building potential is great, and our short lives on earth are merely blinks of an eye in context with our eternal journey. Our so-called ‘crap lives’ are worth every minute. The crapper the better - even if we think we’ve made a complete pig’s ear of it whilst we're down here. Grace and redemption overrides all, and the benefits to be reaped by our experiences are profound and deep, and last for all eternity.

The buddhist idea of re-birth is a little stranger and (to me) more interesting. The first difference is that Buddhists do not believe in a soul. What 'continues' is a person's karma, i.e. the whole round of cause and effect is not interrupted even by death. In this view, 'I' do not continue after death, because, essentially there is no 'I' to begin with. It's worth pointing out the Buddhism doesn't reject the 'everyday' concept of 'I' (after all there's a definite 'self' typing these words and maybe at least one other 'self' reading them), it simply points out that, when you try to locate some unchanging essence of self, it turns out to be impossible.

I understand it correctly, we do get "out, period". The brain stops working, the body decomposes, there is no 'soul' that continues. The 'I' with which I have identified, a succession of impermanent mind states, habits and sensations stops. In this view, for the individual, death is as final as any atheist would claim. And yet... the teaching is that the unfinished business of karma goes on. Not that 'I' am reborn: 'I'(as a changless essential identity) never really was anyway, but the end of the body does not put an end to 'cause and effect'...

This is all very true from an ultimate point of view. From within the context of the ultimate dimension of reality, God is the great “I AM” - the One - and Buddhism correctly teaches that we are not individual “I’s”. This is only true from an ultimate point of view, however, because even though we are “sparks of God”, (i.e. our individual souls are created “in the image and likeness of God”), there is only One Infinite Ground. It’s clear that we are all individual ‘units’, and our individual “I”’s are souls, yet at the deepest level we merge into the Infinite Oneness. Thus, we’re not individual souls at all. It depends on which way you look at it. Christianity looks at it from one point of view, and correctly states that we are individual souls. Buddhism looks at it from another point of view, and correctly sees no individualisation. Both are right at the end of the day.

I'm aware that once our ‘individual’ soul has garnered enough wisdom, growth and learning throughout its eternal journey, it can choose to lose its individuality and enter into the Oneness of God, which is where it came from. Ultimately, God absorbs all, and appreciates all experience and learning for ever and ever. Nothing is ever futile. All so-called negativity is redeemed by the eternality of God's love and goodness.

Much of these Eastern principles transcends traditional Western beliefs, however, so it might not be adhered to much in the West. I hope I'm not too annoying, I think I've gone on too much here. But this stuff is my cup of tea.

I want to go to what I refer to as "The Outside of Everything."

You will. I think that you've been here before....old souls tend to recognize each other...and I think that you and I both might be on our last go-around on this karmic carousel.

Our so-called ‘crap lives’ are worth every minute. The crapper the better - even if we think we’ve made a complete pig’s ear of it whilst we're down here.

Whether people like to hear it or not, crappy lives are spirit-builders. Adversity gives our souls opportunity to learn and grow. Like I keep saying, it's not what happens to you that's important; it;s how you react to and deal with it that really matters.

I'm aware that once our ‘individual’ soul has garnered enough wisdom, growth and learning throughout its eternal journey, it can choose to lose its individuality and enter into the Oneness of God, which is where it came from.

This is what I believe too. I think that there is a divine power....that some faiths individualize and personnify it whilst others are happy to just regard it a a big mass of power....and that we are all fragments of this divine power. When our physical bodies die, our souls can return to this divinity from where we came.

What i've gathered lately is that we are souls all part of God somehow. We choose to live the lives we're living right now, and we are all entitled to eternal life. If the earthly life was lived full of hardsips and that we deal with it properly we gain positive points in the afterlife. If we dont, we gain negative points and are very bitter about the earthly life we've led in the afterlife...

And all the bad exists so that the good would be even better. That makes sense. After all it is when we are sick that we appreciate being healthy, when we're poor that we appreciate being rich and so on.

So... It sounds great doesnt it? It's like we build our own paradise and our hell really. Since we dont have all the same concept of paradise and hell (i'm sure "my" paradise would be very different from other people's paradise) we get what we've imagined in our earthly life once we die? I guess that's a different thread...

Hmm, thought I had replied to this...

You've already seen the anger that arose when I tried to question Ock on something he had written.

Misinterpretted anger. I thought your suggested parallel between Nazi's and Buddhists was retarded garbage. I still think so. I don't mean YOU are. Feel free to ask me if I'm angry before stating it as fact, and I will try to use words that more accurately describe situations like the one my "retarded garbage" statement was in reference to. In that case you presented something as parallel to what I had said, and it was not really parallel. I was exactly as angry at the statement as you were trolling with it. I assume you were not trolling at all, but were "unskillful" as you say. I don't know you well enough to be disappointed in you, and disappointment is all that angers me.

Have a nice day.~sarcasm~

When I say "Have a nice day," I mean it. I say that at the end of many posts regardless of topic (or things similar). Please do not quote me and include WITH the quote your editorial comments of ~sarcasm~. It makes it look like that's part of the quote. Since you *seem* sensitive, I feel it necessary to say here that I am not angry with you about it, I am simply asking you to please not do that. I find it disrespectful to be labelled in the ways you have labelled me without a discussion about it first. I am hoping you will understand my point of view. If you don't, that's ok too.

So would Philip Jose Farmer's Riverworld series! That would be your worst nightmare, altho I loved them.

Haha...I have a character in every MMORPG I play named "Aphra Behn." I didn't particularly identify with the character or the real life Aphra, I just like the name

Fun books.

Nice dialog here, Island_gurl12. Thanks for the thread.

So... It sounds great doesnt it? It's like we build our own paradise and our hell really. Since we dont have all the same concept of paradise and hell (i'm sure "my" paradise would be very different from other people's paradise) we get what we've imagined in our earthly life once we die? I guess that's a different thread...

Have you seen the film 'What Dreams May Come' with Robin Williams? It's an interesting film that's aligned with what you've just said there Island_gurl. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but whoever wrote it is an enlightened person, in my view.

Whether people like to hear it or not, crappy lives are spirit-builders. Adversity gives our souls opportunity to learn and grow. Like I keep saying, it's not what happens to you that's important; it;s how you react to and deal with it that really matters.

Too right Dharma. Kabbalah teaches these principles also, and I think it would be great if more Christians adopted that attitude too. It's slowly sinking into the popular mind, and we're realising that accumulating material wealth isn't all that we're here to do. To build up spiritual wealth and wisdom is much more important, and we take it past the grave to boot.

Since you *seem* sensitive...

No, just sentimental. I really believe that it's more important to be kind than to be smart. Disappointing to be shown that I am neither...

Later this morning taking the bus to the temple, so a last chance to let it drop...

I really believe that it's more important to be kind than to be smart

Definitions of kindness vary. Most people on the receiving end of tough love don't feel like they've been kind to until later - if at all.

Disappointing to be shown that I am neither...

That wasn't my intention at all.

Later this morning taking the bus to the temple, so a last chance to let it drop...

Drop what?

AndyBaker: It is from this Heavenly perspective – a state of infinite security – that we choose to leave Paradise in order to experience lives like this. little-whip: No disrespect intended, Andy, but I did not "choose" to leave Paradise, Heaven, Hell, Valhalla, Bumfuque Egypt or the Void itself to come to this cesspool in order to learn some shallow lesson in pain designed to make me a better....what?

Hehe...I think Andy and I have gone a few rounds on this before (rounds of posts, not blows).

However, you also know that this sense of joy, bliss and satisfaction can be enhanced and magnified - but only if you embark on another soul-refining journey to a world where challenges and pain exist.

This implies that a soul desires/needs improvement. Is a soul (if you believe in them) not perfect? Why not?
Bear with me on this ramble.

How is it that imperfection springs from perfection. How is that logically possible?

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

If (A higher Power exists) and (a higher power created all that is) = TRUE  Then

   For all time T < Beginning of Creation, Higher Power is a unity and is all that exists.



If the Set T < Beginning of Creation is a Null set, then Higher Power is still a unity and is still all that exists.

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



If (Higher power is all that exists) Then

   Higher Power's state of perfection is an irrational concept.  'There's nothing to compare a unity to



'We will choose Higher Power = Perfect by default for hypothesis sake.



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



Suppose

 ((Higher Power exists) and (Higher Power = perfection)) = TRUE



  If Creation by perfect higher power != perfect Then

     Either

        Higher Power deliberately created imperfection Thus

        All Imperfection is then caused by higher power ultimately

     Or

        The creation of higher power is actually perfect as is

  End If

End Suppose



I'm not attached to any of this.  Just threw it up here for discussion.

Have a nice day.

No disrespect intended, Andy, but I did not "choose" to leave Paradise, Heaven, Hell, Valhalla, Bumfuque Egypt or the Void itself to come to this cesspool in order to learn some shallow lesson in pain

No disrespect taken Little Whip. We all have different points of view, which is what makes life so rich, (and it also makes conversations like this tastier.)

to make me a better....what? A better person? If I wasnt such before I chose this journey, that makes no sense. A better angel? Again, its nonsensical if you believe the traditional description of angelic creatures, they are already perfect. So the question remains...a better what?

A better soul.

The word “better” is slightly misleading, however, because it implies being more valuable, as such, which isn’t true. We always possess the same level of value, regardless of whether we incarnate or not. Generally speaking, the difference between a soul before and after its cycle of incarnations is that afterwards it will be stronger, wiser and more learned.

Consider the difference between a three-year old and a twenty-three year old. Which one would be ‘better’ or more perfect than the other? Would it be the three-year old, who dribbles food down his chin and falls over when learning to walk? Or would it be the twenty-three year old, who eats with knife and fork and runs in good stead? The answer is neither. They’re just at different levels of growth. This same principle applies to soul-advancement.

At the end of the day, after an incarnation we can become "better" developed, more learned, and wiser.

This implies that a soul desires/needs improvement. Is a soul (if you believe in them) not perfect? Why not? Bear with me on this ramble. How is it that imperfection springs from perfection. How is that logically possible?

If (A higher Power exists) and (a higher power created all that is) = TRUE Then For all time T < Beginning of Creation, Higher Power is a unity and is all that exists. If the Set T < Beginning of Creation is a Null set, then Higher Power is still a unity and is still all that exists. ------------------------------------------ If (Higher power is all that exists) Then Higher Power's state of perfection is an irrational concept. 'There's nothing to compare a unity to 'We will choose Higher Power = Perfect by default for hypothesis sake. ------------------------------------------ Suppose ((Higher Power exists) and (Higher Power = perfection)) = TRUE If Creation by perfect higher power != perfect Then Either Higher Power deliberately created imperfection Thus All Imperfection is then caused by higher power ultimately Or The creation of higher power is actually perfect as is End If End Suppose

Okcham, those observations are profound, and there’s some good answers to your questions.

Regarding the principle of ‘imperfection’, it depends on your point of view, and also depends on your definition of imperfection. For example, a world in which famine, earthquakes, tsunamis, and evil exist etc., might actually be “perfect” from within the context of the bigger picture and the Divine Plan.

In relative terms, that which we call “perfect” can only be fully appreciated as perfect if it’s placed in relation with that which is so-called ‘imperfect’. When we look at imperfections in the world, we're actually looking through a narrow scope at a ‘contrast’ in the bigger picture. As is the case with all epic pageants, the full picture would not be as rich or beautiful if it were not for the deeper shades and contrasts of life. From God’s point of view, the Whole Picture is perfect. (Bear in mind, the existence of suffering, pain and imperfection is only temporary. It’s not the real thing, and it won’t last forever.)

The above principles can be understood more fully when we consider Einstein’s statement that “the distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, however persistent.”

Science has revealed that space and time only exist ‘inside’ a closed-system of the universe. Therefore, from a ‘God’s-eye’ perspective of the universe, (and the Whole Universe includes the Heavens and the earth – they’re just in different dimensions), then from ‘outside’ the Universe there is no time, and everything has already occurred. This is what the highest state of God’s Mind (the Godhead) sees always - nothing but perfection and completeness – forever and ever.

So it all depends on our point of view. From a certain point of view, there's no such thing as imperfection. Life is so rich because we all have different points of view, (especially whilst we’re in this physical realm), and that's not a bad thing. Incidentally, soul-advancement and spiritual growth increases the quality of one’s inner-experience. As we're all sparks of God, God has already seen and experienced Everything from the highest point of view; and what we're experiencing now is a necessary 'snippet' of Infinity, outplaying something that's already occurred. (Weird!)

All of this simply implies that God is totally fulfilled, totally joyful, totally grateful, and totally accepting – always and always. What a divine state to be in!

So it all depends on our point of view

If you look at it closely, you'll see that perspective is summarily removed from the logic by removing the thrid frame of reference.

No matter how you cut it, in a unity, 1 = 1. It isn't good, it isn't bad, it's just 1. If you believe my original statement that God created the universe, then you have to admit that at some point God was a Unity - alone by itself. Time frame or none, if God existed and the universe did not, then God was a unity.

Even with a 1' to compare 1 to, there is no way for either entity to describe the state of the other without a 3rd frame of reference (one of the kernels of wisdom in Relativity)

All of this simply implies that God is totally fulfilled, totally joyful, totally grateful, and totally accepting – always and always. What a divine state to be in!

I fail to see how it implies anything. It could just as easily imply that God is totally alone, totally miserable, and totally rejecting - always and always. You choose what you choose for some positive reason, which is very warm and fuzzy, but as you see in the early part of my logic:

We will choose Higher Power = Perfect by default for hypothesis sake.

I could have as easily chosen the opposite and drawn the following logic:

If (Higher Power != Perfect) = TRUE Then
Universal imperfection stems from this.

I still find it irrational to pick perfection or imperfection.

Science has revealed that space and time only exist ‘inside’ a closed-system of the universe.

As the husband of a research biologist, I have been warned many times. Science cannot prove anything to be true - ever. Not even 2 + 2 = 4. It can only prove things to be false. Please cite the evidence you have that science has revealed what you state. I'm not calling you out, and I don't disagree with the philosophy - in fact I'm inclined to agree, but I don't believe science has revealed this to be fact in any kind of empirical fashion, and if you have info I do not, I'd like to see it.

You could say 9 out of 10 scientists agree...but ask that same 9 out of 10 about the shape of the world in 1492 and what would you get?

I fail to see how it implies anything. It could just as easily imply that God is totally alone, totally miserable, and totally rejecting - always and always. You choose what you choose for some positive reason, which is very warm and fuzzy,

Ockham, if we attempt to comprehend the Infinite using the finite capacity of our intellect, then we’ll inevitably fail, especially if we adhere to scientific formulas and methods. The conclusions I’ve drawn aren’t wholly based on intellectual principles. They're fused with psychic intuition, spiritual awareness, and religious wisdom. Of course, to a scientist, this will cut no mustard at all, (and we’ve already discussed this issue many times on other threads, so I won’t labour it all again here.)

My point is that there’s a difference between the cleverness of the head and the wisdom of the heart. My basic premise has been that deep down, we possess God’s divinity within, (“the Kingdom of God is within”, as Jesus said, and this is a principle shared by most religions). When we get in touch with the wisdom of our heart, then we can better understand the nature of the Infinite. We can also get a better gauge of our purpose here, (which is a loving, positive purpose, as opposed to a negative, spiteful one.)

According to a scientist, this will be a ‘cop-out’, of course, which is all well and good. I’m not trying to prove anything. I’m just sharing my humble point of view, and telling things the way I see it. (That's what we're all doing.)

It isn't good, it isn't bad, it's just 1. . . . It could just as easily imply that God is totally alone, totally miserable, and totally rejecting - always and always

The religious revelation that God is “good” cannot be proved one way or another, at least from an intellectual point of view. It might satisfy, or ‘strike a chord’, with the heart, however, but that depends on our degree of spiritual awareness and psychic intuition. In a nutshell, it depends on our level of spiritual growth. (You don’t need to be very old, spiritually speaking, to possess a basic intuition that God is good, incidentally.)

It could just as easily imply that God is totally alone, totally miserable, and totally rejecting - always and always

The same principle as above. The fact that most religionists believe that God creates, and that God enters in ‘relationship’ of kinds, and furthermore that “God is love”, all-powerful and all-wise, then it wouldn’t be very logical for a religionist to conclude that God is lonely and miserable.

At the end of the day, these conclusions have little to do with the intellect. As I’ve stated many times on these threads before, the Truth can be found through nothing more than a ‘child-like faith’, as Jesus taught. This means that regardless of our intellectual capacity, we can comprehend ultimate truth with childlike simplicity and humble trust in God.

Science has revealed that space and time only exist ‘inside’ a closed-system of the universe. Please cite the evidence you have that science has revealed what you state

It's a basic premise adhered to by most good scientists. Like many other deeper philosophical issues, it can’t be scientifically “proved”, but it makes logical sense, when placed in context with other scientific theories, (such as the theory of relativity.)

No matter how you cut it, in a unity, 1 = 1

This is what our Eastern religions have been teaching us all along. We are One. In fact, it's what our Western religions teach too. As Jesus said (to the Father): “I pray that they may be one, just as you and I are one. … May they be in us, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they be one … in order that the love you have for me may be in them, and so that I also may be in them.” (John 17.11, 21, 23)

"The Kingdom of God does not come visibly. No one will say 'Look, here it is!' or, 'There it is!'; because the Kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17.21)

I think that sometimes it's best to stay mute about these things, especially if it means not sounding so dogmatic and arrogant. I've just re-read those last posts and I'm starting to sound like a pompous clinical twat again. It’s true that I use JU to express my views and give vent, but I get the feeling that it’s sounding too dogmatic and pompous. I don’t breathe a word about any of this in the ‘real world’. Instead I try to walk the path rather than talk it. That seems to work. I think that sometimes the highest form of wisdom is to remain silent, as God does most of the time. God’s got nothing to prove, even though He’s overflowing with ‘psychic knowledge’. I don’t know what to do with mine, apart from striving to express it non-verbally in the real world, and occasionally writing about it in chat forums like JU. I’ve had a few to drink tonight, and I’m sitting here emptying my feelings onto a keyboard. Hell, the message I’ve given isn’t bad news. If people are ready to hear it then it will strike a chord. If not, then there will be other experiences in store, from which God can later teach the truths I’ve already shared here. There I go again, sounding all dogmatic and pompous. But hey, this is the way it is, at least from my point of view. My God, I’m going to read this tomorrow and shake my head again. If I was anyone else I’d read my posts and think, “What a tosser!. Fuck off!” At least I would in another lifetime. Anyway, I’m drunk, and I’m going to bed now. This world is beautiful, you know. Our purpose here and everything around it. It’s good stuff. We’re all infinitely secure, believe it or not. The truth can give us a warm feeling inside. Love is all around. Even though I'm all alone in this house, I've got no girlfriend, and there's nothing going on, I know that love is all around. Thank you, God, for giving us this life. It gets even better, especially when we get back Home. In the meantime, we can hand all our cares over to God. We can find a bit of peace, regardless. The light is always there. It's all so wonderful,

** shakes head **

how cringe worthy. (But true!)