Musing On The Mystic

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

Moderator: William

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 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: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #31

Post by William »

[Replying to The Tanager in post #30]

Aleph: Thank you for sharing your understanding of conditional and unconditional Love, Jason.

I can identify no differences in that process as a whole, and William's process as an individual which has you reacting in this way and questioning William in the way you have been doing.

If your point was that, without William meeting the condition - knowingly or not - of getting into the correct enough position, that he "would not have been helped" - how is that different from the points you make about your own process...

(1) William does X, then

(2) The Spirit encouraging William into the life he was made for, then

(3) There being certain conditions he met which have been referred to as being 'in the correct position' that we also helped work out with him, because of Our love - engaging with his love.

What is your overall point regarding this process which has you apparently protesting Williams walk?

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3204
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #32

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: Aleph, it seems you misunderstood what I was saying about Christianity in comparison to the mystic process you and William are talking about. You rightfully put William in the 3-step process, where the Creator’s actions towards William are conditional upon him first doing X (whether knowingly doing so or not). Christianity teaches the 2-step process, where the Creator’s loving pursuit towards us is not bound by the precondition of us doing any X. In Christianity, every person is a “person of interest” by the mere fact of being a person, because the Creator is love.

Now, in all that, I’m not protesting William’s walk in one sense. It has been part of my walk, too. I used to think there was a 3-step process, although not a mystical one. My ‘X’ was moral goodness. Later on, however, I embraced the 2-step process of traditional/orthodox/Biblical Christianity (labels come with so much baggage yet there are true distinctions needing to be made). What I’m protesting is the conditional Creator the 3-step process logically leads one to. I’m protesting that on the grounds of true love being unconditional in its act of pursuing others and my belief that the Creator is unconditionally loving.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #33

Post by William »

Aleph: You are protesting a difference which you apparently see but still have not explained Jason.

Imagine a different scene.


Aleph moves his forearms in small circular motions, the tips of his fingers flickering with quick movement.
The scene begins to change rapidly from the pleasant fireside under a spectacular night sky, into one where we are now inside a room - a court room. I find myself sitting at a table, and look around to see Jason sitting at a similar table across from me, to my right.

Aleph is standing beside me. He turns to Jason and continues to speak.


Aleph: This is the situation most appropriate to your protest Jason. Shall we continue? If so, then please call William to the witness stand.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3204
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #34

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: What are you expecting me to ask William? Why do you think this different scene is fitting for my protest, but different than what I’ve been doing?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #35

Post by William »

Aleph: So - in this setting you do not want to ask William those same questions you asked him at the fireside?
You are protesting a difference which you apparently see but still have not explained Jason.
Nor have you acknowledged the answer we gave you and in that, lies the reason you protest.
That is why I thought a court setting would be the more appropriate place to battle this out.

Do you want to ask William to the witness stand, then do so now. If not, we can resume our companionship beside the fire.

And if we go back to the fireside, we will not be repeating our unacknowledged answer to your question about Love - conditional or unconditional.

So - for the final time, I will say this again. William is noted by Us as a person of interest. He was involving himself in preliminary investigation of Mysticism and in the course of those events he came to be in a correct position for Us to engage with him in the way that we did so.

We do not judge conditional love to be - how you put it - how you judge it yourself. A "misnomer." Love is love and operates in each given circumstance in order to express what it is - into each given circumstance.

If there are conditions involved re a circumstance, or if there are no conditions involved re a circumstance, that itself is not what makes love 'conditional' or 'unconditional' so if one is to say that "conditional love" is an inaccurate designation so too is "unconditional love".

It did not surprise me that you did not offer any example of biblical characters in the bible in which the biblical god does not place conditions on.

But the example you did give as claimed by you to be "according to Christians", also had conditions involved with it...the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus on our behalf.

Conditions are simply part of ones experience. For any spirit entity who deems to interreact in love with any entity involved with the experience of being Human, those conditions have to - naturally - be factored in.

Your attempt to protest - protesting on the grounds of, so-called "true" love being unconditional in its act of pursuing others "because the Creator is unconditionally loving" doesn't appear to take into account why The Creator is doing the 'pursuing' because the act of pursuing must have to be motivated by the condition of possible 'catching the attention of' and that has always been the answer We gave you.


Aleph looks at me, as I sit at the defendants bench. He reaches down and picks up a document and continues.

Aleph: If it pleases the court, I will now read out a statement William made to Jason, regarding his position on this matter.

Aleph clears his throat and reads from the document.

Aleph: 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 conditional, yes?


Aleph turns to Jason.

Would you like to call William to the witness stand and question him in relation to what I just read out?

If not, then I move the motion to dismiss the protest on the grounds it is founded on an inaccurate designation to begin with, and we can dismiss the case accordingly, and get back to the fireside and discuss Mysticism in more detail.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3204
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #36

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: Okay. William, I call you to the witness stand.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #37

Post by William »

The Judge addresses Jason.

The Judge: Mr. J, you will please address the court with your request, not the witness.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3204
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #38

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: May it please the court for me to call William to the witness stand?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #39

Post by William »

The Judge: Very well. I remind the prosecutor - Mr.J and and the defender Mr. A, that this is a pre-trial event, in order to allow me to ascertain if there is a case to be made on behalf of the prosecution against the defendant.

The Judge looks to the document which is open before her on her bench and reads the contents to herself. After this, she continues to speak.

The Judge: It is the courts understanding by the document before me, that there is protest from the prosecutor against the defendant in relation to the defendant being in a relationship based upon "conditional love", which - according to the prosecutor, is not "true love."

It is not for the court to proclaim what or what is not "true love" but for the prosecutor to ague his case against the defendant and convince the court that the protest is justified.

It is also understood by the court that the prosecutor - Mr. J - was offered the opportunity to withdraw the protest, and declined to do so.

Will the court Clerk, please call the witness.


The Clerk stands and makes the announcement.

The Clerk: This pre-trail sitting calls William to the witness stand.

Aleph turns to me and quietly advices me.

Aleph: You are not required to give evidence William, if you choose not to do so.

I shrug and reply.

William: Well I would rather be at the fireside investigating Mysticism, but it is what it is Aleph. I will take the stand.

I stand, and make my way to the witness box, the small door held open by the court Clerk...I step up into the box and sit as the small door is shut behind me.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3204
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: Musing On The Mystic

Post #40

Post by The Tanager »

Jason: Upon further thought, I'll just meet back up at the fireside, if you want to share more about mysticism with me.

Post Reply