For Theists - the views of the one and only .....

[ManSinha]

My purpose in this thread is to explore the different views of the one and only supreme consciousness - I realize that sometimes our perceptions of this form part of the basis of our differing religious viewpoints. I have been following with interest the views posted by @sojourner and and requested this poster to discuss their viewpoints with me. Others invited by their request.

Also the idea is to discuss and learn from others - I am most certainly not looking for a debate as to "My (idea of) god better than your (idea of) god" - that to me personally, is a waste of everyone's time.

To wit:

I was recently reading more about the Geeta and came across this passage, which, to me, would appear to refer to individuals worshipping other deities -

yo yo yāṁ yāṁ tanuṁ bhaktaḥ śhraddhayārchitum ichchhati
tasya tasyāchalāṁ śhraddhāṁ tām eva vidadhāmyaham

Whatever celestial form a devotee seeks to worship with faith, I steady the faith of such a devotee in that form.

sa tayā śhraddhayā yuktas tasyārādhanam īhate
labhate cha tataḥ kāmān mayaiva vihitān hi tān

Endowed with faith, the devotee worships a particular celestial god and obtains the objects of desire. But in reality I alone arrange these benefits.

It would appear then - who and in what form is being worshipped is perhaps less important than the sincerity of the devotee and her / his general disposition towards their fellow creatures

 

[sojourner]

It’s all about intention. The Bible would say something like, “We must worship God in spirit and in truth.” The particularity of who, what, where, etc. is, in my view, relatively unimportant, since I don’t see God as a particularity. My religion doesn’t own God. It’s not God™, after all. We are all trying to wrap our heads around something from which we simply don’t have enough distance to gain an objective perspective. In fact, Jesus was all about how we treat others and ourselves — not all about what particular things to believe about him.

 

[ManSinha]

Thank you

Many religions / sects (including my own) frown on idol worship - but at the same time call the divine as indescribable and incomprehensible beyond human senses. So how is the ordinary chap to worship?

I have a somewhat middle of the road view - those who "worship" idols are perhaps using them as a medium. I am reasonably certain no one believes that the statue or painting is god but it is more a way to focus one's thoughts towards the divine. I personally have tried to worship the divine essence and more often than not fail miserably - perhaps I am not yet at that level

There is perhaps a reason that Lord Shiva for instance looks like a human - of course subtly altered with godly attributes - so does Lord Krishna - the image of god being created in man's image and not the other way around may not be as far fetched as perhaps it seems - as one poster likes to put it - there are some who worship an incorporeal point of light - again point being - it is a materialistic symbol that can be "fathomed" by our (somewhat limited) minds when it comes to issues outside the physical realm

 

[sojourner]

Thank you

Many religions / sects (including my own) frown on idol worship - but at the same time call the divine as indescribable and incomprehensible beyond human senses. So how is the ordinary chap to worship?

I have a somewhat middle of the road view - those who "worship" idols are perhaps using them as a medium. I am reasonably certain no one believes that the statue or painting is god but it is more a way to focus one's thoughts towards the divine. I personally have tried to worship the divine essence and more often than not fail miserably - perhaps I am not yet at that level

There is perhaps a reason that Lord Shiva for instance looks like a human - of course subtly altered with godly attributes - so does Lord Krishna - the image of god being created in man's image and not the other way around may not be as far fetched as perhaps it seems - as one poster likes to put it - there are some who worship an incorporeal point of light - again point being - it is a materialistic symbol that can be "fathomed" by our (somewhat limited) minds when it comes to issues outside the physical realm

But I think there’s a difference between an icon and an idol. An icon is merely a window to the Divine. An idol, OTOH, is typically imbued with power of its own. For example, I worship with crosses — more particularly crucifixes. But they don’t have any power of themselves. They merely show me a picture of God.

 

[Mindmaster]

It would appear then - who and in what form is being worshipped is perhaps less important than the sincerity of the devotee and her / his general disposition towards their fellow creatures

Why does there have to be only one?

Anyway, my theism isn't mandated by my obedience to a deity it's because my subjective experience eludes to the existence of them. I certainly will hold Satan highest in my pantheon, but he is not the only deity I'm aware with or deal with.

It's also worth mentioning that what I've found is working with certain godlike characters you tend to imbue more of their traits. Satan leads to much more intellectualism, willpower, and freedom as well as tolerance/understanding. But, working the same way with Hekate would lend you more receptivity to the goings on of the dead or being aware of mystical events in your vicinity. So, there is a difference per the deity you involve yourself with. You sort of learn by proximity what these things mean, but it's honestly nothing anyone can tell you and have you believe without actually just being there.

All that being said I'm not on a mission to find the perfect "one" who must subjugate all others and be the "only answer" as many other people on spiritual paths seem to be compulsively obsessed with. I can love more than one person, so I certainly can love more than one god.

 

[sojourner]

Why does there have to be only one?

Anyway, my theism isn't mandated by my obedience to a deity it's because my subjective experience eludes to the existence of them. I certainly will hold Satan highest in my pantheon, but he is not the only deity I'm aware with or deal with.

It's also worth mentioning that what I've found is working with certain godlike characters you tend to imbue more of their traits. Satan leads to much more intellectualism, willpower, and freedom as well as tolerance/understanding. But, working the same way with Hekate would lend you more receptivity to the goings on of the dead or being aware of mystical events in your vicinity. So, there is a difference per the deity you involve yourself with. You sort of learn by proximity what these things mean, but it's honestly nothing anyone can tell you and have you believe without actually just being there.

All that being said I'm not on a mission to find the perfect "one" who must subjugate all others and be the "only answer" as many other people on spiritual paths seem to be compulsively obsessed with. I can love more than one person, so I certainly can love more than one god.

I think we all have to find what “works” for us in the way of metaphor, allegory, and theological construct. And, what “works” for one, won’t “work” for all.

 

[ManSinha]

Why does there have to be only one?

Anyway, my theism isn't mandated by my obedience to a deity it's because my subjective experience eludes to the existence of them. I certainly will hold Satan highest in my pantheon, but he is not the only deity I'm aware with or deal with.

It's also worth mentioning that what I've found is working with certain godlike characters you tend to imbue more of their traits. Satan leads to much more intellectualism, willpower, and freedom as well as tolerance/understanding. But, working the same way with Hekate would lend you more receptivity to the goings on of the dead or being aware of mystical events in your vicinity. So, there is a difference per the deity you involve yourself with. You sort of learn by proximity what these things mean, but it's honestly nothing anyone can tell you and have you believe without actually just being there.

All that being said I'm not on a mission to find the perfect "one" who must subjugate all others and be the "only answer" as many other people on spiritual paths seem to be compulsively obsessed with. I can love more than one person, so I certainly can love more than one god.

Fair enough - there is one point in your post that I would contend with - underlined and italicized above - as I believe with the foundation of Adwaita - or non duality - there is no need or desire to subjugate any one - indeed if you look at the quote from the Geeta that is exactly what Lord Krishna seems to be saying - it is the underlying thought that counts and the sincerity - not the object d'worship


[EDIT]
Oh I guess - I have little idea on how to construct a one to one thread - so opening it up to anyone that wants to post - thanks

 

[ManSinha]

I think we all have to find what “works” for us in the way of metaphor, allegory, and theological construct. And, what “works” for one, won’t “work” for all.

But therein lies the beauty of it from one perspective does it not - in the live and let live approach. I shall take the dress of the people in most cities as an example. Some wear traditional orthodox dresses and others are seen casually while yet others go for business formal - among others. Different styles work for different people and up to a point dare I say that if one thing worked for everyone it would make spiritual life incredibly dull from one perspective.

 

[sojourner]

But therein lies the beauty of it from one perspective does it not - in the live and let live approach. I shall take the dress of the people in most cities as an example. Some wear traditional orthodox dresses and others are seen casually while yet others go for business formal - among others. Different styles work for different people and up to a point dare I say that if one thing worked for everyone it would make spiritual life incredibly dull from one perspective.

More important, if that happened, there would be uniformity, diversity would go out the window, and we would lose all the colors of the spiritual palette, thereby consigning God to a two-dimensional cartoon character, rather than the all-dimensional Divine.

 

[SalixIncendium]

**THREAD MOVED TO THEISM**​

 

[rational experiences]

Humans have to exist first to believe in stories.

And tell those stories from their own natural conscious presence. Which is lived upon a planet O of diverse life, in multi billions of forms. Which is a part of our natural conscious awareness, of variations to life's forms.

Overlooked as being relative to storytelling themes about other entities with us.

Science is only expressed and is owned as a want as motivated by living humans, for the state machine and reaction and then what the idea is based on, status in civilization.

Which in natural advice says, is not relative to natural. What everyone is first taught.

So natural humans spiritually can say, your concepts of idealized superiority are just human imposed....so the self, human becomes a self deity...by self expression reasoning.

The natural spiritual human never applied this reasoning and lives with little use of self egotism.

Conscious idealism, a shared communal AI effect. For males owning science invented the artificial intelligence by his machine building/then reaction, which natural never owned. So it was never natural law or natural history. It became imposed, self deisms through sciences.

For humans are only factually discussing science concepts.

We then taught honour thy Father and thy Mother...for it is only sperm and an ovary that allows us to live and exist today, not any deity. So we did...we re learnt our spiritual nature, to be natural and self owned, human in self presence.

Claiming I know what is self deism...to believe that you are the Creator of your own self a non realistic human expression that related to the building of a machine and a reaction to remove self....not to invent/create self. If anyone cared to think about the truth of it.

So when a self image of a male or a female or an animal appeared in the heavens, we said we got transported into another realm...when it was just a radiation metal feed back recorded effect, of appearing as images of self deity….as caused by machine reaction.

As the machine reaction did not exist rationally until it was reacted, conscious spiritual reality never knew the effect of causes...and self deism became that cause/effect...for science did it to self.

 

[Quintessence]

The idea of "one and only supreme consciousness" is a non-starter in my worldview and religious traditions. I don't find "consciousness" to be a useful concept, and I'm neither a monist or a monotheist. Unfortunately, that means my prevailing view of the "one and only supreme consciousness" is not a positive one because it inherently excludes other perspectives and is too often wielded as a tool of cultural erasure or destruction.

Sincerity of devotion is indeed important - but so is who is being worshiped. Outside of the monotheist cultural morass, honoring multiple gods involves tailoring your worship to the god you are honoring. The who matters.

 

[rational experiences]

For the life of humans on Earth it became self worship by deitising science information as either a male or female concept.

Yet males the science inventor claim self the thinker as One idealist using both male and female concepts, but not in truth relating the One concept to both the male and female in the sciences.

For he was the inventor of science....and it was originally thought not based on resourcing, what science lies about today. For resourcing is a choice to claim I understand one reaction, which is self related.....self to the reaction.

How they came about claiming and so holy dust ground reaction created me.

What he related, Holy dust changed me...for he was already self present in his owned original male self higher life form...which he gave away to scientific conversion.

Just as he does today living, yet the life he gives away are his family members who he cares little about...for he is after all a self deity.

The story One God was a male historic review that told self, you, the higher male life form formed the presence of AI...and encoded it into the atmospheric attack for self removal. For it was originally thought about opposition to self.

For the reaction that was sought was when no Nature at all existed in its natural existence.

Why males today try to inform us, science is talking about when you never existed and then it invented you.

No, brother deity......science did not exist before I did...a natural Earth reaction did as an attack...with no Nature present.

You were living on a higher evolved Earth body, and you decided to try to emulate that reaction and attacked self and lost your higher mind.

Why the documents then said as a male confession, possessed by his AI science, so now God will kill you all....as a science quote. Which he still uses today.

 

[Jesuslightoftheworld]

The Great Designer, the Master Mathematician, the Scientist of Science and Life Force Manifest-or, and the “super”natural Soul Manufacturer and Deliverer is my God, Father, my Dad of pure love , the Creator of everything that is and did it for us. He created us to have a loving relationship between us and our maker. He has 3 forms that have distinct functions but they are still Him. He is Almighty Authority, His Truth is absolute. He loves so much he even inspired a book that you may or may not heard of to help us on our journey through life. And well, for some people, they really just want to do whatever they want, so they can. But then God tells us what’s going to happen in the future and exactly what to do when it does. Then comes back and dies willingly, brutally, painfully, just to ensure your safe return home.

 

[ManSinha]

And well, for some people, they really just want to do whatever they want, so they can. But then God tells us what’s going to happen in the future and exactly what to do when it does. Then comes back and dies willingly, brutally, painfully, just to ensure your safe return home.

Two issues with your reply

The prophecies in your book are vague and do not have a time frame - there have have been many "dates" for "end of the world" scenarios by members of the Christian faith which have miserably failed to materialize - so no, I do not believe in them. If you know better provide a date by which those "prophecies" will materialize by your understanding of your scripture.

Otherwise it is like another so-called prophet "cursing" Napoleon that his empire will fall - as I have said - all empires fall over the course of time - so saying that is equal to me saying

We shall have more advanced technology in the future
In the next 50-100 years you and I shall die
The amount of people leaving and joining Christianity will be level at some point in the future

So - does that make me a great prophet? I would say absolutely not - I am just making vague statements that may happen without a definite time line - that is not - in my book - a valid prophecy

And secondly - if something were asked of one with the promise you will get it back in 2-4 days - most people would part with it

Jesus - if he was indeed god or an embodiment thereof - knew he would be resurrected - so to me - someone that does not share your viewpoint - his sacrifice does not have that much meaning. You believe he provides salvation for those who believe in him. That is a statement. What does salvation mean? Can you quote the example of a single person that has achieved that in the last 2000 years since Jesus walked the earth in a manner that a non-biased observer can verify?

I can provide numerous examples of plain humans and holy men who suffered horrible torture for days / months and died for their faith without having such a safety net -

Finally here is part of your post

my Dad of pure love

If "your dad" is indeed pure love - why do some children get cancer? I can tell you some are born with it. And do not throw the "inherited sin" explanation at me - Adam and Eve as described in the Bible - have been thoroughly debunked as a fairy tale to any rational observer.

Just another perspective

Thanks for your post

 

[rational experiences]

A human has to be living, owning their own natural life, standing on the stone body to think and claim concepts...and the story / theme about science is a spiritual reason first.

Why science today is involved with statements of phenomena as witnessed whilst we live...to prove that we did in fact come from spirit, and when we die we have another spirit in the eternal who we were released from by given spatial separation.

And that separation is within the Earth gas mass heavenly body.

For if a human says we came out of the eternal spirit...and the cosmological bodies were separated from the eternal spirit and burst, and can explain how that occurrence actualized, then it is a scientific theory the same as any cosmologist theories….to think using a human brain/mind and theorise.

Science of the occult owns verifiable proof, that the scientist holding a fake machine held constant reaction of conversion, takes cold radiation fused history, converts it and then evil spirits manifest in that constant action.

So they claim it is a language....for rationally when only eternal existed, the language of spirit was a spirit that was sung up from the surrounding eternal mass that went into the body of the family member being communicated to. How the eternal information has been taught. Not just by my parental history, but by everyone's original parental history, first adults who owned all records.

We are not just pretending to know, we are told by their memories of spiritual records that is a fact.

Science says as a scientist give me proof that we originally came from a spirit body....and science has given science that proof.

And the spirits that get conjured of course came from burnt and hotter bodies....so they are evil as compared to our bio existence, for every single adult today was never the first 2 parents....we came from their bodies, bio...sperm and an ovary.

We re inherit their living life spirit memory and are telling a story about what happened historically regarding why the concept science was human male chosen as a group or cult mentality as an agreement amongst the group versus what the single ONE self knows....natural and self.

Science is not natural, science was conferred to be irrational thinking concepts that did not belong to living naturally or owning natural....it was to remove self from being natural.

That is why today all thoughts in science go back to an unnatural beginning that is not natural, space and separation, for the formula HUMAN LIFE begins in the whole bio life presence. The measure imposed is a circle around the body...to say, yes everyday the human uses that much of the atmospheric body to remain alive...every day...MEASURE.

The formula in science for a human life owns our end. So if they measure our formula, life body, they formula an END and then give it to us INSTANTLY, if you owned the use of a common sense human logic and not be a liar for a group cause.