Musing On The Mystic

Discussion of anything to do with the 'why' questions of life.

Moderator: William

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 8604
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 694 times
Contact:

Musing On The Mystic

Post #1

Post by William »

Image

William: You said you think my curiosity and question is tangential to a discussion on the historicity of the Resurrection and would be better served with its own thread. So here we are...nice to see you back at the Fireside My Friend.

Smiling, I reach for a log and place it on the fire. I sip on my brew and then continue.

William: As I explained earlier, since Jesus was an Eternal Spirit, he couldn't actually die, so it had to be the appearance of dying.

Jason: This was part of why I moved your theory out from explanation (2) in step C and gave it the number (10). The typical “apparent death” theory claims that Jesus’ body only appeared to die. You seem to be saying the body did die, but Jesus, as an Eternal Spirit, didn’t. That point alone doesn’t distinguish you from my theory but other things obviously do, which we’ll get to.

I ponder Jason's explanation for a few minutes and then reply.

William: Yes - taken on the premise that all the bible stories are true in relation to the authors data of experience and subsequent points of view, Jesus Human body did die. The explanation for why and how it was made livable again, involves mysticism.

I take another sip of brew and restate something I said earlier.

William: You equated my understanding, to Jesus lying. I explained that Jesus was simply going along with the beliefs of his followers at the time, because his agenda was focused on his overall mission and that it was not a case of lying but of not being able to tell the whole truth because of the belief systems in his followers which prevented them from being able to handle the whole truth.

Jason: First, that was when I thought you were claiming the body didn’t die. But it would still apply to your theory if you think Jesus used a new body and allowed his disciples to believe he resurrected into his previous body. Not correcting a lie is different than not telling the whole truth.

On top of that, I don’t see any benefit in Jesus doing this. The disciples’ belief system was already being blown up by his resurrection. This kind of gnostic ideas already seemed to be around and gained in popularity in the 1st and 2nd centuries. Plus, the Christian movement was committed to the teachings of Jesus to the point that they rejected these gnostic ideas as heresy. Jesus lying about his resurrection seems to be working against what you say his mission was.


Te Ruru sounds off from the nearby trees. Always a signal that things are about to get even more interesting.

William: People are often enough frightened by their imaginations.
I know that seems a random thing for me to say. I say it now though, so that I can refer back to it as examples offer themselves that opportunity for me to do so.

We do not know to what extent Jesus made efforts to correct the beliefs which allowed the followers to lie [to their individual selves through their belief systems] but we do know that there is evidence that he may have done just that...but it is not evidence we can find just by reading the bible.

No two followers reacted to the resurrection event in the same manner. Jesus is dealing with individuals.

As to the Gnostic ideas, I became aware of these much later on into my conversion from the mundane into the mystic - and that process of approach was not viewed by me as "mystical", until many years later, and in that - upon reading some of the Gnostic ideas, I realized that there was some truth to be gained therein because my own experience confirmed that already.

So then, once I embarked upon a more detail study of the evolution of the Christian Church, I had to ask the question as to why that institution chose - not only to exclude the Gnostic information from the authorized version of the truth that institution wanted the world to have - but to make efforts to completely suppress the Gnostic ideas as heretical, and on occasion use that law to legally imprison and murder anyone suspected of being heretic.

So I keep the question "Is this what Jesus wanted his Church to do?" and thus, I commune with Christians in order to possibly uncover the answer.


The fire cracks loudly and a pebble-sized piece of the log I had placed on it jumps out and lands near my feet. I observe how blue the flame appears, and realize it is no ordinary flame...I reach down and pick it up, and it is cold to my touch, as I knew it would be.

William: One thing that I find very interesting in regard to that, is how Gnosticism has survived the 20-odd centuries of active suppression, and its secrets have continued to be shared.

Jason: I need to make sure I understand what you are claiming in your theory. You seem to be saying that Jesus’ body died and then Jesus’ post-mortem appearances were through a different body. Is that correct?

I think I have responded to you on the proposed absurdities that would follow there and you haven’t directly responded back on those points. I will make my positive case after making sure I'm understanding your theory correctly.


As Jason finishes his sentence, a whisper of cool air circulates briefly through the encampment and the small blue flame rises from object I hold. I laugh.

William: I argue that another body might have been used, which explains the seeming confusion his followers had - depending upon which story one reads about the event - in relation to them not recognizing the form.
Certainly, it did not take too long for them to recognize the Spirit using the form, was that of the one they had followed throughout all those months.


I rise and move toward The Whole. I slide back the stone covering it, and place the object with the blue flame, into it. I replace the stone and then return to my seat at the Fireside.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 8604
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 694 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #21

Post by William »

I direct my attention to the words Aleph had said about my introduction into mysticism.


William: Those of us who chose to examine Mysticism do - One By One evolve from our Cave of Origins bringing with us whatever Energy we project into our reality.
I can suppose this cave can be said to act like a womb, where initial growth of characteristics can be identified in the individuals DNA - and which are then expounded upon after leaving the womb and developing that which does the expounding - the self identity of the individual personality re the reality situation they are born into and experiencing.

What Jesus Messaged is "When Done Say "Done"" - seems to me a realistic statement in regard to that. :)
We do speak our paths into existence...in both the material and the immaterial. Mystics understand this principle to being truth.

I do Love my Life and enjoy the Science involved with that - and applying it to many different tasks.
It does not bother me to understand that I am Watched and those who do the watching have also assisted me in the learning and developing of character and accompanying personality.

Sure I am nobodies victim. The Ancient Entity showed me that, by involving himself in my reality.
At first it was not easy to understand what the purpose of his visit was and I had a lot to think about after the fact.
I had to deal with it and so I did.

Good intentions were at the core of it, and have been ever since - and in that - I recognize even before I came to this realization, good intentions have always been the case.

The idea of working with foresight in a manner that reflects working with hindsight, has best been grasped through letting go and allowing and seeing the working reality of The Mind Behind Creation in relationship to and with the mind of the individual personality.

Adversary is there to Enflame Emotions until one is able to comprehend the adversary's role and redirect ones responses in order to deactivate the adverse so that the role cannot be acted out any longer.

My Communication Techniques have been something of a Roller Coaster Ride - or as an air-craft having to consistently change its approach in order to land safely in productive airfields.

Living Forever In this Universe is not something I desire - it is true. I would rather have the ability to chose where to be, and go there at will. If this universe is the only universe which exists, then it is better than nothing, but from my own experiences, alternate universes have their own appeal and why limit myself re experience, to only one universe?
I have connected with the information and I understand it is because of this connection with my inner 'self' [my 'true self' as you call it] that I think in this way, about that information.

I think Dogmatic Attitude has its place for a time, but only as far as one is investigating intensively and does not want to be distracted from that task. Afterwards, sure - drop it and move on to the next examination.

I agree wholeheartedly with you saying that the process is completed through the combination of what we each see and how we interpret those sights. The knowing of this, gifts us with the ability to do lots more - as things increase [elemental activity] giving one a sense of hope independent of/without any extra need for enhancing chemical substances


I reach for a branch sitting atop a small pile of wood, and place it upon Alephs fire.
I think of my recent trip with my Wife up to Lake Tekapo, where we did some stargazing while enjoying the hot springs - it was magical.
How is it we can bear to witness the enormity of a starry sky and still think of ourselves as something more than just insignificant specks of dust?

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3073
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #22

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: While I view it as a step back from unconditional Love, that doesn’t mean I’m not open to realizing I’m wrong. I could be wrong on two fronts: that unconditional Love is better than conditional Love or that your view is a step back from unconditional Love. I’m open to God showing me my errors any which they exist. What do you think about those two issues? Do you think unconditional Love or conditional Love is better? And is helping only those who have shown themselves a little worthy conditional or unconditional Love?

As I think about unconditional Love, I look up at the enormous starry sky. For a brief moment, I feel like an insignificant speck of dust. Then I think about how that enormous starry sky pales in comparison to the Creator of it all. The gap between the majesty of such a Creator and the finite-ness of myself seems too overwhelming for me.

Yet, that Creator created these specks of dust. And yearns for even the dustiest of dust to be found in Its Love, not because of its own worthiness but because we are Its creations.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 8604
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 694 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #23

Post by William »

I find Jason's reply to be perplexing.

William: I agree with Aleph, who pointed out that the biblical characters appear to be persons of interest when you mentioned that you understood the Creator to be unconditional love.. If you think it the case that it is conditional love which looks for 'worthiness' in persons of interest, then that is your call. I have no particular interest in making that type of judgement myself, as I see no rational reason in doing so.

I do a bible-search in relation to the mention of being worthy and see there are plenty of references. I wonder why Jason feels this type of thing is conditional on the one hand while on the other hand thinks that the biblical God does not view humans in that manner. Or perhaps he was referring to another when he mentioned that he understands the Creator to be unconditional love.

I am unsure as to what you picked up in what Aleph or I said, which makes you think 'person of interest' means 'someone worthy'. You yourself brought the idea into the conversation and even went so far as to say that "Christ died for us.” Although we were unworthy"
Perhaps being 'worthy' in such context as the bible mentions, has a different meaning than judging through the filter of conditional love?


Somewhere in the distance a wolf howls.

William: It seems to me that if someone were interested in connecting with and having relationship with the immaterial "Mind behind the Creation", that in itself promotes a reflected interest from the immaterial to those exhibiting interest in such.

Any apparent 'conditions' related to that, would have to have been placed there by those in the material who are disinterested in such relationship. Their disinterest is the source of the 'conditions' - which is what I have said in the past about why mysticism is hidden. It is not hidden from another's awareness in any other way than through their own disinterest so the conditions are put in place by the disinterested themselves.
Therefore, it is their love which is condition, yes?

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3073
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #24

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: Please take all I say as tinged with curiosity over accusation and correct any mistakes that may color my thoughts in ways that don’t look fair to your thoughts. When I asked you what ‘person of interest’ meant, you said “it was what I was doing which made me a person of interest.” It seemed those things that made you the “odd Human” were positive things that made you stand out as a person of interest. If that isn’t correct, then please clarify what a “person of interest” means.

If that is correct, then I don’t think the Biblical characters are “persons of interest”. God doesn’t seem to me to focus on or choose people because they positively stand out. Paul says Christ died for us while we were still sinners. Jacob was a lying mess of a man when God chose him through which to bring our Messiah.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 8604
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 694 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #25

Post by William »

As Jason finishes, Aleph chuckles.

Aleph: As I said to William, in the grove - Sometimes the line has to be crossed and we felt that due to the circumstance regarding him as a person of interest, we believed that while the encounter we gave him would create some trauma for William to deal with, we saw he was in a correct enough position that he would be able to take on the experience and learn from it - which indeed he has done, albeit that process itself took many years for him to achieve.

Does that sound to you as if we chose to engage with William, because he somehow positively stood out in an outstanding way? Can you give a biblical example of any biblical personality that the biblical Creator found only "positively outstanding persons of interest" in order to be interested in them?


Aleph chuckles once more.

Aleph: Perhaps you have read more into our words than necessary. Do you think mysticism is only something accessible to positively outstanding persons of interest?

William is correct. Mysticism is not hidden from another's awareness in any other way than through their own disinterest. Therefore, the conditions are put in place by those who are disinterested in examining through experience, that which is mystical.
Therefore, it is their love which is conditional love. Not The Creators Love.

You, dear Jason, slipped in the idea of worthiness, and even went so far as to say that humans are unworthy, while at the same time, you argue that unconditional love is what the biblical god is all about...so which is it?

If you do not know, then say so, and we will abandon that line of thinking and refocus upon Mysticism in its broader context.

While you ponder on your reply, I have food to share.


Aleph reaches into his knapsack and retrieves three small fish and three small loaves of bread. He then reaches behind where he sits and brings out a frying pan, which he places above the fire where it appears to be suspended by some invisible means. The effect is amusing to watch.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3073
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #26

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: Aleph, the fish smells great. I need to ask some more questions before I can answer your first one to me. Why was William seen as someone who could deal with it? How did William get into the “correct enough” position, while I didn’t?

You say that the conditions are put into place by those who are disinterested, not the Creator, and I agree people will put conditions on for themselves. But the Creator is still free to respond to that out of Love with or without conditions of Its own. Will the Creator reach out to all, even in spite of their self-inflicted conditions, or will the Creator only reach out to those who haven’t put their own conditions up? Will the Creator’s love be conditioned by the conditions of others? It seems you are saying so.

As to humans being unworthy and God having unconditional love, why do you think those are mutually exclusive? The Creator of all is worth us reflecting back perfection. Anything less is unworthy of Who the Creator Is and does. Yet, still, the Creator won’t let our imperfect reflection stop his love. The Creator won’t condition who she loves by our actions, only sending it out to some and not others.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 8604
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 694 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #27

Post by William »

As Aleph dishes out the food, I take the opportunity to chime in.

William: The information was given to me in the grove and you Jason, were the happenstance ear-witness to what was conveyed.

Aleph explained that to you when he said that I was interested in Mysticism, and had been involved with engaging with Mysticism prior to the visitation and subsequent OOBE I received through that experience.
It has been explained to you why I was seen as someone who could deal with it, because I was in a “correct enough” position.

I can share in more detail - bullet points at least - the events leading up to the visitation, but I cannot answer your question as to why you didn’t have - or rather - haven't had such an experience. I think it is only something which the individual can answer for themselves, but perhaps Aleph can help you with that?


I thank Aleph for the food and then get about eating it.

William: This has got to be the best fish I have ever tasted!

Aleph: I agree with William both, about the fish and that it is left up to the individual to find their own answers to such questions Jason. We are not robots, so have such ability so need use that ability accordingly.

We finish our meal in silence and then Aleph continues.

Aleph: As to your other concerns, The Creator is not distracted by which 'love' is 'true love', and is indeed still free to respond to all situations and circumstance out of Love with or without conditions of Its own.
Therefore it does not matter how The Creator responds re the individual, or even if The Creator does not respond to the disinterested. It is love, in all regards to The Creators response or lack of response.
The Creator is naturally more likely to get results in regard to response from those seen to be interested, which is what makes those types "persons of interest".

It is not that The Creator is disinterested in those who are themselves disinterested. It is more the matter of The Creator allowing for the disinterested to remain disinterested, by not interacting with them in the way William was interreacted with, and the way that you - apparently as yet - have not been interreacted with.

I suppose that this is describing The Creators use of Unconditional Love re the disinterested.

I agree with you unconditionally re as The Creator of All is worth us reflecting back perfection. Any less an image is unworthy - in that sense - of Who The Creator Is and Acts.

Certainly The Creator won’t let our imperfect reflection stop The Creators love for all of us. I dear say that you do not think that The Creator loves you less than William, just because William showed an interest in that "Mystical side" of The Creator and reflected it back perfectly enough to The Creator?
I certainly hope that is not what you think of yourself. I caution you not to interpret The Creators interest in William as superior or inferior to your own. Indeed I would caution anyone not to compare themselves with others, but simply reflect their interest in The Creator from where they are currently situated.


William: I think that was what you meant when you said earlier that, it is the individuals love which is conditional love. Not The Creators Love.


Aleph: Yes. As Jason remarked, The Creator certainly doesn't condition who The Creator loves sorely by their actions, only sending it out to some and not others. The Creator does not force Love - conditional or not - onto the disinterested...that type of idea is in itself, not a perfect enough reflection of The Creator.

even so, a disinterested personality is not loved any less by The Creator.

But in terms of usefulness - even as a device for communion with The Creator and The Creator with the individual, disinterest on the individuals part, cannot practically make connection and engage with that, for the obvious reason. The "disinterested" part being the obvious bit.


William: Which is not to say that The Creator is disinterested in the disinterested, right?

Aleph: Correct. Indeed, that is exactly how The Creator understands the process - Examining the disinterest without 'losing sleep over it' as the saying goes.

Just as Aleph finishes, my tablet tells me I have incoming. I open it and laugh. I don't know how appropriate it is to our conversation, but I think it is funny anyway, so share it with the others.

Image

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3073
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #28

Post by The Tanager »

[Jason: While I always welcome hearing another’s story, I’m not expecting specific details on why you put yourself in the correct enough position, William, and I haven’t. My point is about having to put one’s self in the correct enough position in the first place. I don’t understand why that isn’t one person being worthy enough (by putting himself in that position) to be exposed to mystic truths, while the other isn’t worthy enough.

I would see hearing the specific details leading up to the event as a separate thing from my question here. I would welcome it for its own sake, but it wouldn’t address this question. Unless, of course, it wasn’t yourself who put you into that position, but you were put there by another.

Aleph, I agree the Creator is free to respond with or without conditions but we were talking about which way is more loving. I originally thought you were saying unconditional love is the perfect way, but here you seem to be saying that they are equally perfect. Do I understand you correctly here?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 8604
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 694 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #29

Post by William »

William: It wasn't the case at all that I identified what was "the correct position" Jason, and then went about getting into that position.
As Aleph said - It was he/they who identified that I was in a correct-enough position for the visitations and OOBEs to occur. There was no conscious deliberation on my part re that.
I made choices and subsequent events happened - so there was no conscious choice from me as to 'having to put myself in a correct position.


Aleph nods.

William: The first exposure to mystic truths was experienced by me, in answered prayers. That leads to being exposed to other mystic truths through experience, including visions and OOBEs.
Your question is being addressed as I continue to attempt to remind you of things I have shared recently.
Was I 'put' in that position by another? Ultimately it involves serendipity and synchronicity, and being in a position whereby I was open to investigating these things re - experiencing reality on Earth.
The Creator is naturally more likely to get results in regard to response from those seen to be interested, which is what makes those types "persons of interest", as well as I understand it.
Of course, the more one moves into mysticism, the freer one becomes in placing themselves in positions useful to that purpose - supporting and being supported by that.

I did not think of it in terms of being worthy [and thus others being unworthy] - in those early initial stages of the transformation of my understanding. It was more along the lines of...


I search for a suitable expression, and Aleph chimes in.

Aleph: Almost accidental.

William: Yes. It took me many years to understand the deeper complexities of immaterial influence.

Aleph focuses his attention onto Jason.


Aleph: I was not talking about which was more loving - conditional or unconditional Love. The Creator is not distracted by which 'love' is 'more loving', and is indeed still free to respond to all situations and circumstance out of Love with or without conditions.
Therefore it does not matter how The Creator responds re the individual, or even if The Creator does not respond to the disinterested. It is love, in all regards to The Creators response or lack of response.

Do you have any specific examples from the bible that you identify with the expression of unconditional love coming from the biblical god, which you can share with us?

For that matter, do you have any specific examples from the bible that you identify with the expression of conditional love coming from the biblical god, which you can share with us?

Can you answer the question that was put to you in regards to your saying that to you, the God of the Bible is unconditional Love?

I myself agree with William. If you think it the case that it is conditional love which looks for 'worthiness' in persons of interest, then that is your call.
You say that you don’t think the Biblical characters are “persons of interest” to the Biblical God. Why do you think that is the case? Is it perhaps, because there is no detailed background regarding how the relationship of each character-personality formed with that god?

Can you perhaps identify a biblical character-personality who is said to have been disinterested in the biblical god but was still a person of interest whom that god engaged with?

Perhaps therein your apparent confusion might end?


Aleph takes a moment to look all around and then continues.

Aleph: Are we three not persons of interest to one another? Does this somehow equate to each of us seeing in the other, something worthy of such interest?

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3073
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #30

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: William, I didn’t mean to imply that you identified the correct position and then tried to get into that. My point was that without you meeting that condition (whether knowingly or not) of getting into that position, that you would not have been helped.

Aleph, you asked for examples of conditional love and unconditional love from the Bible. While trying to understand your position, I tried to keep the terms more open, not limiting them by my own worldview. But, with your request, I think I need to clarify how I view conditional “love” and unconditional love. I think conditional love is a misnomer. I do think one’s love can lead to conditions being put on something, for their good, but I see that as different.

So, the ultimate example of the unconditional love of God for us, according to Christians, is the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus on our behalf. That’s the quote from Paul I’ve shared a couple of times (I think) about Jesus dying for us while we were still sinners. After rebelling against God, with no idea of turning back, God pursues us anyway, trying to woo us. It would be conditional for God to say “I will seek your good and pursue you as soon as you do X but not until then.”

Now, having that unconditional love to pursue us, God can then say “here are the conditions that are needed for you to live the abundant life,” but that is different than a conditional love.

So, the process is:

(1) God’s unconditional love of, say, Jason that calls me into the life I was made for for my own good and

(2) there are certain conditions to meet that kind of life (that God also helps work out in me because of His love).

The conditional “love” I’m saying is less loving (and really not love at all) would have the process of

(1) Jason do X, then

(2) God calling me into the life I was made for, then

(3) there are certain conditions to meet that kind of life (that God will also help work out in me because of His love).

Post Reply