"The Way Home Or Face The Fire"..

truthseeker said:
May I suggest we start with the question: Do you believe God created the Earth in 6 days and rested on the Sabbath?
No. I am taking that a 'day' means the 24-hour period which it takes the earth to rotate 360-degrees, so that each part of its surface completes the day/night cycle. You CANNOT use it to measure how long it took to CREATE earth, because at the start of such a process there is no such measure as a 'day' - there is no earth to rotate - it is just a nonsensical suggestion.

This concept comes from Genesis, and it may well have something to tell us, but taking it as a superficial literal statment (apart from being nonsensical) would be naive. That is my opinion for two reasons:
1 - the possibility of corruption/ponerisation of the source, or ambiguity over what IS the original source (many many lengthy studies suggest such)
2- much of the bible contains alegory, and archetypal ideas/stories, some openly presented as such, and certainly not intended to be taken in an immediate literal way.

Ok, I see Laura has stepped up to the discussion with a more comprehensive answer, but I'll post this more simplistic response anyway, for what it's worth.
 
sleepyvinny said:
truthseeker said:
May I suggest we start with the question: Do you believe God created the Earth in 6 days and rested on the Sabbath?
No. I am taking that a 'day' means the 24-hour period which it takes the earth to rotate 360-degrees, so that each part of its surface completes the day/night cycle.
Ah, but you did you know there are three kinds of days? There's the solar day, where you measure the earth's rotation with respect to the Sun, there's the lunar day, where you measure the earth's rotation with respect to the Moon, and then there's the sidereal day, where you measure the earth's rotation with respect to the distant stars. So when you say "6 days", are you talking about solar days or what?
 
Does anyone else find the posts from "truthseeker" a bit of a strange coincidence? In light of the fact that this particular author was being dissected in another thread...

Don
 
truthseeker said:
Geez,

Have I walked into the lion's den or what?
Guess I'll have to be more selective with my words.
My understanding of life is based on logic and faith.
May I ask if any of you are prepared to tell me which is the first day of the week.
That would be Friday night, when we all go out drinkin' and dancin'
 
jeez,

I can't even get a straight answer to a straight question.
Would any of you like to explain how we ALL came to be here?

According to the "King James Bible" (Old & New Testaments),
Genesis 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

If you don't believe the very first line of these scriptures then
please explain to me your own version because I'd love to hear it.
 
truthseeker said:
According to the "King James Bible" (Old & New Testaments),
Genesis 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

If you don't believe the very first line of these scriptures then
please explain to me your own version because I'd love to hear it.
If the world had any "straight" answers we would all be stick people. So rather than write a few volumes of how I understand creation let me examine your "straight" KJ version of things.

"In the beginning", "heaven" and "earth", clumps together three vastly different reference systems in one simplistic phrase. To take it literally, is laughable. The "beginning" as an absolute implies the beginning of time, which is the beginning of ALL motion and energetic process through which time is referenced. This is the "beginning" of this and any other Universe and anything preceeding Universes that can be understood in terms of energy and vibration.

"Heaven" includes everything outside the earth. The whole of the Universe, seen and unseen. Earth is the planet upon which we stand. So it is not a matter of believing anything, but a matter that this first line is trying to tell us that the Ultimate beginning, is the same as the beginning of ALL the heavens, and the same as the beginning of the earth upon which we stand. Basically, everything up to the creation of this earth was somehow manifested all at once and THEN time started flowing.

Some African tribes believe that a great being had a bellyache. Other great beings avoided him, so he staggered about until he vomited all creation and felt better. Then the other great beings came down and started sifting through the vomit and putting together various forms. Who created the great beings? The same cause that created God. Maybe it was all an accident, and there is no God or gods. Or just maybe this is a story for children or designed to manipulate people as one manipulates children, and the real one is far more complex and mysterious than we can fathom?

However, you have the advantage. You have condensed all the living complexity of reality into a few words. I do not have such a luxury, because as far as the deeper mysteries of life are concerned, "straight" answers are dead answers. Reality is a paradox, and that simply means it is transcendent to any dogma.
 
OK, then..

Please tell me your theory on how we came to be here.
 
truthseeker said:
jeez,

I can't even get a straight answer to a straight question.
Would any of you like to explain how we ALL came to be here?

According to the "King James Bible" (Old & New Testaments),
Genesis 1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

If you don't believe the very first line of these scriptures then
please explain to me your own version because I'd love to hear it.
Well, since you are asking, may I suggest that you read P. D. Ouspensky's "In Search of The Miraculous" first of all. Then go for William Chittick's translations of, and commentary on, the writings of Ibn al-'Arabi. There are also hundreds of articles on our website that deal with these issues from many different angles. For the moment, I'll just quote from my own book, The Secret History of The World:

The great Sufi Shaykh Ibn al-'Arabi explains that "imperfection" exists in Creation because "were there no imperfection, the perfection of existence would be imperfect." From the point of view of Sheer Being, there is nothing but good. But Infinite Potential to BE includes - by definition of the word "infinite" - the potential to not be. And so, Infinite Potential "splits" into Thought Centers of Creation and Thought Centers of non-being. It can be said that Infinite Potential is fundamentally Binary - on or off - to be or not to be. That is the first "division."

Since absolute non-being is an impossible paradox in terms of the source of Infinite Potential to BE, the half of the consciousness of Infinite Potential that constitute the IDEAS of non-being - for every idea of manifestation, there is a corresponding idea for that item of creation to NOT manifest - "falls asleep" for lack of a better term. Its "self observation" is predicated upon consciousness that can only "mimic" death. Consciousness that mimics death then "falls" and becomes Primal Matter. What this means is that the "self observing self" at the level of the Master of the Universe is constituted of this initial division between Being and Non-being which is, again, only the initial division - the on/off, the yes/no - of creation. You could picture this as an open eye observing a closed eye. It has been represented for millennia in the yin-yang symbol, which, even on the black half that represents "sleeping consciousness that is matter," you can see the small white dot of "being" that represents to us that absolute non-existence is not possible. There is only "relative" non-existence.

These "thoughts of being and non-being" interact with one another - the observer and the observed - like a viewer looking into a mirror. Creation manifests between the viewer and the mirror. It is at once real - because it consists of matter informed by consciousness - and unreal because it is ultimately composed of only consciousness acting on consciousness.

At our level of reality, the understanding that "nothing is real," as has been promulgated by gurus and teachers down through history, is as useless as saying "gravity isn't real." Such considerations are useful only for expansion of perception. They are not useful for practical application since the energies of creation apparently transduce through several "levels" before they meet in the middle, so to say, in our third density reality. Organic life exists at the "crossroads" of the myriad ideas or thought centers of being and non-being. As such, they have the capacity to transduce energies "up" or "down" depending on the "consciousness energy directors" of that unit. And again, there are apparently two broad divisions: directed toward being/ observing, or directed toward non-being/ mirroring. This division manifests across all levels of organic life, including human beings. Human beings exist to transduce cosmic energies of creation via organic life. Our "higher selves" are the directors of this transducing of cosmic energies, and the direction in which the energy "flows" is determined by the activities of these higher selves. Against the opposition of those forces seeking to "capture" energy of consciousness and induce it to the "sleep of non-being," which is gravitational in a certain sense, the energies of consciousness seek to "inform" matter via awakening the self-awareness of those organic units on earth that are capable of resistance to the gravity of non-being.

As self-aware "transducing units," the human being has the potential for going either way - toward intensified being, or toward intensified non-being. In this sense, humans also function very much like a lens that can be "adjusted" like a telescope. It can be dialed to select the viewing range, which can be distant and inclusive of more "space/time," or it can be shortened to only see what is up close and evident in the material world. In other words, our first and most fundamental choice is to choose what we SEE.

When we choose what we SEE - and here we do NOT mean with the physical eyes or even psychically, but rather a more inclusive term that suggests whether or not we are capable of objectivity or subjectivity - we are receiving impressions. Impressions can become knowledge if assimilated. Knowledge leads to awareness. Knowledge and awareness then direct emotions, which then energize actions in the organic world. This is the transducing of energies of Cosmic Thought Centers.

Ibn al-'Arabi tells us that Goodness is Being; to which all positive and beautiful attributes or "names" of God belong. Evil is the lack of good, so it is "nonexistence." In other words, at the root, Being dwells in "non-existence" which is evil. Here is the sticking point, the item that is generally omitted from most "systems of ascension." Human beings at our level of reality exist at the crossroads of the Thoughts of Being and Non-being - Good and Evil. Mankind is made in the form of all the names of God - those of Being and Non-being. Assuming the traits of the Names is synonymous with manifesting their properties. The Science of Ascension is to obtain deep knowledge of all the Names and their true properties, the high and the low, the pleasant and the loathsome, the light and the darkness, in differentiated detail, so as to be able to CHOOSE which traits will be assumed. It is only with a full field of vision that a man can discover if what he subjectively thinks is good actually is good and leads to Being, or if it is a deception that induces to Non-being by pretense.

God is the root of ALL Names, noble and base. The task of the seeker of ascension is to bring the Noble traits from latency into actuality and to discover the positive applications of the base traits - even if that application is to "overcome" or transmute. The Shaykh tells us "noble character traits are only those connected to interaction with others." In other words: DOing. If you SEE the illusion of separation, that is certainly the first thing. The lie is smuggled in by suggesting that this is all that is necessary, that if you just "see it" everything will "change" for you.

God creates the good and the evil, the ugly and the beautiful, the straight and the crooked, the moral and the immoral. Between these traits lie the manifold dangers of the path of the seeker of Truth. Many modern day "teachers" and "gurus" tell us "Since there is only One Being which permeates all things, all we have to do is see everything as only light", and that will transmute the darkness, and we will "create our own reality of light." Such a statement ignores the fact that the statement "God is One" describes a reality that is a higher level from which our own "mixed being" manifests. The man who assumes that he can become like God at this level just by thinking it, ignores the facts of Being vs. Non-being which outrays from "God is One" at a level of existence that is clearly several levels above our own.


Evil is REAL on its own level, and the task of man is to navigate the Cosmic Maze without being defiled by the Evil therein. This is the root of Free Will. Man faces a predicament as REAL as himself: he is forced to choose - to utilize his knowledge by applying it - between the straight path which leads to Being, and the crooked paths which lead to Non-Being. Human beings are required to discern between good and evil - consciousness energy directors - at every stage of their existence in this reality. Because, in fact, they must understand that God is consciousness and God is matter. God is good, and God is evil. The Creation assumes all the different properties of the many "Names of God." The Cosmos is full of Life-giving and Slaying, Forgiveness and Vengeance, Exaltation and Abasement, Guidance and Deception. To attempt to assume God's point of view and "mix everything" at this level, results only in STAYING at this level. Therefore, human beings must always separate God's point of view from their own point of view and the fact that all creation assumes the divine Names and Traits.

Thus, the first Divine Command is BE! And that includes Being and Non-being instantaneously. Therefore, the second law is "follow Being or Non-being according to your choice and your inherent nature." All creation is a result of the engendering command. So, in this respect, there is no Evil. But the second, prescriptive law determines to which "Face of God" one will return: Life or Death.

If the engendering command alone is considered, there is no imperfection in the cosmos, since all creatures follow what God desires for them. In this respect, what is normally called "imperfection" is in fact perfection, since it allows for the actualization of the various levels of existence and knowledge. In other words, were there no imperfections - in the sense of diminishment, decrease, and lack - there would be no creation. Were there no creation, the Hidden Treasure would remain hidden. Hence Being would be unseen in every respect. There would be no self-disclosure of the Divine Reality, Light would not shine, and God would be the Nonmanifest but not the Manifest. But all this is absurd, since it demands the imperfection of Being Itself, which by definition is nondelimited perfection. Being's perfection requires the manifestation of Its properties. The effects of the Names and Attributes must be displayed for God to be God. [...]

In other words, Imperfection is demanded by existence itself. To be "other than God" is to be imperfect. ...But it is precisely the "otherness" which allows the cosmos and all the creatures within it to exist. If things were perfect in every respect, they would be identical with God Himself, and there would be nothing "other than God." But then we could not even speak about the cosmos, since there would be no cosmos and no speakers. ...So, imperfection is a kind of perfection. [Chittick]
At the particular stage of existence in which man finds himself, he is equally "receptive" toward the Two primary Faces of God: Being and Non-being. The Shaykh tells us that whatever property, or trait, any human being ultimately "chooses" is what it originally possessed in its state of immutability. The task of the Seeker is to discover what is immutable within, and to purify and amplify it. This is the development of Will. Will is a relationship, which follows knowledge while knowledge follows the object of knowledge. In the process of "ascension," the object of knowledge is YOU. Knowledge, in and of itself, has no effects. YOU, however, the seeker, can give to knowledge what you actually are, in yourself, thereby displaying YOURSELF in knowledge by your actions in concert with your knowledge.

As noted, there are many Names of God that call to us in our present state of existence. But you are not required to answer every one that calls. The fact that human beings are, in general, ignorant of their own true "essence" gives them the illusion of freedom. And the fact is, all paths come from God, and all paths Lead back to God, but again, it can be via different faces. As the Shaykh says: "Unto Allah all things come home, and he is the end of every path. However, the important thing is which divine name you will reach and to which you will come home?"

And this brings us to what the Shaykh calls "perspicacity." This is the special development of the "eye of insight," or "seeing the unseen" that is crucial to the Seeker. Just as the physical eye, with the refraction of light from the Sun, can discern between the large and the small, the beautiful and the ugly, colors, the moving from the still, high and low, the ability to see the unseen is a property of an "inner light." This light reveals to the seeker things about external objects that are NOT apparent to the five senses. It reveals to its possessor when a choice that may appear to be benevolent, is a step on the path of Evil. It reveals when a choice that may appear to human estimation as negative is actually a difficult step to felicity for all involved. The Sufis tell us that some individuals have achieved such a level of "seeing" that - upon seeing a person's footprint on the ground, even if the person is not present - they are able to say whether he is following a life of felicity or wretchedness.

The light of perspicacity seems to be a gift that not everyone has, and those who do have it, may not have developed it to the same degree. What is evident is that those who have it possess an immutable nature of Being which is able to "see" good and evil - they do not see "only good." Thus, they are able to discern between the "calls" of Nonbeing and Being, and therefore, are able to strengthen their Will along the path of intrinsic Being. It then follows that individuals who are not able to see - or who choose not to see - both Good and Evil, are formed in the mold of subjectivity, which is the human expression of the Call of Non-being.

A human being whose immutable nature is that of Being can strengthen the light of perspicacity by "assuming the traits" of the Names of Being. This does not mean that a person comes to possess traits that do not already belong to him. It means that these traits are amplified and "cultivated." The Ruling property of an individual is determined by what Face of God is disclosed to him, and this is determined by his preparedness. Felicity can only be disclosed when Evil has been turned away from, rejected; which can only be achieved by a long period of "testing" or being challenged to SEE and then to choose Being over Non-being in order to grow the Will or alignment to Being in a feedback loop. As the Seeker travels this path, he must not see these traits as his own, but rather that he is a locus of God's manifestation of an ontological attribute.
People imagine that they believe in God when, in fact, what they believe always takes the shape of the receptacle. The old saying is that the water takes on the color of its cup. The deeper implication of this is that a person will only be in disequilibrium if his conscious beliefs are not in conformity with his own immutable nature. In other words, a person whose intrinsic nature is aligned toward Being, will experience disequilibrium, struggle, and even illness by attempting to assume those traits that do not exist in him. In this sense, careful observation of the physical state - even the physical environment - can act as a guide as to whether or not the whole being is coming into alignment.

So it is that different paths can produce different effects for different individuals according to their immutable nature within. Those whose intrinsic nature is toward Being, follow the path of the developing the ability to SEE and to choose alignment with infinite potential of creation, thereby being conduits of Being as GOD chooses to manifest through them. They not only see that limitation is illusion, they consciously ACT - they utilize that knowledge to generate energy and light.

Those whose intrinsic nature is toward Non-being, follow the path of limitation of Infinite Being by assuming that they, in their state of ignorance and subjectivity, know better than God how Creation ought to be fixed. They pray for change, they perform rituals, they chant mantras and repeat endless visualizations of "magickal forms" that are supposed to "change" reality. They bomb others with "Love and Light," (their subjective version of it, of course), and they seek to fix the world "out there" by projecting their subjective view of reality onto the infinite wisdom of Creation. This "consciousness energy direction" even includes the assumption that just knowing that all division is illusion will accomplish the goal of "Ascension," and that is the most cunning lie of all.

Each approach "ties a knot" in the heart of the believer and fixes him on a path, the object of his belief being the end of the path. All beliefs are equivalent in that God - of one sort or another - is their ultimate objective. But each belief is different in that it leads to a different name of God, or Thought Center. Even materialistic skepticism is a "belief" and leads to "matterizing" of the consciousness that follows this belief. What is more difficult to discern are the many mixed up "spiritual" paths that twist and distort the concepts of Being to engage the seeker on a path to Non-Being.
So indeed, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God... and through the Word God created the Heavens and the Earth... and without the Word was not anything made that was made. And the Word is light and the light is the life of men. And the light shines on in darkness, and darkness comprehends it not."

This is both absolutely clear and true, but the details are important as well. A person can either understand it as a child, taking only milk and simple expressions to convey deep and complext truths that the child's mind is not yet ready to comprehend, or they can begin to grow up so as to be able to understand those things about God which are made plain in and through the things that are made.

As it says in Romans:

1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
...
1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. ...

1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, ....
You can understand these words as a child, or as an adult...

I Corinthians: 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
Notice that all we have of the New Testament is the "milk" mentioned above. There are 17 references in the New Testament to Jesus teaching "in secret." Those secret things are contained, to some extent, in the Gnostic gospels, the books that were excluded from the Bible by those who sought to turn Christianity into a religion that would aid politicians in controlling large masses of people. There is much more that has been preserved in an esoteric oral tradition within the original Christian Church - the Eastern Orthodox Church. You can find hints and clues about the earliest Christianity in Boris Mouravieff's three volumes of Gnosis.

But if, as Paul wrote in Romans, you don't think God worth the knowing by learning all you can about His invisible nature that is revealed in and through the created things, which you must study to know Him, there's nothing anyone can explain to you in 25 words or less. Obviously, God intended for man to study nature, to learn everything he could about all that exists in order to "know God." But very few people take this seriously. Instead, they make up chisldish religious ideas with beast or humans (including the figure of Jesus) as the focal points.

CONSCIOUSNESS is all there is. We, ourselves, are consciousness units. We exist as "organs of God," if you will. When we speak or act, we are speaking or acting as one part of the Whole, of God. And the whole of God has many parts, and many faces. We can speak or act as one of the Beautiful Names, or as one of the Base Names. As Ark is fond of saying: those that follow that part of themselves that is Great, become great men; those that follow that part of themselves that is small, become small men.

And, as the C's say:

Life is religion. Life experiences reflect how one interacts with God. Those who are asleep are those of little faith in terms of their interaction with the creation. Some people think that the world exists for them to overcome or ignore or shut out. For those individuals, the worlds will cease. They will become exactly what they give to life. They will become merely a dream in the "past." People who pay strict attention to objective reality right and left, become the reality of the "Future."
 
geez,

What's the matter with you all?
Can't I get a straight answer?
I'm not asking about anyone else's opinion, I'm asking for yours!

Please tell me someone... "ANYONE"..

How did you and I come to be here?
 
truthseeker said:
geez,

What's the matter with you all?
Can't I get a striaght answer?
I'm not asking about anyone else's opinion, I'm asking for yours!

Please tell me someone... "ANYONE"..

How did you and I come to be here?
'Geez' -- you have just been given one of the 'straightest' answers you've probably ever received about anything -- please -- read, learn and try to understand. If you simply cannot do this, or do not want to do this, them please realize that this forum may not be 'for you'.
 
Sorry but .. you lot have got your heads so far up your own arseholes that you're never likely to see the light. And I think your right.. this forum is definately not for me.

We've all been instructed on "The Way Home Or Face The Fire", and you still won't have it. As far as I'm concerned, this book is the updated version of God's word spoken in today's language so that the message cannot be misunderstood. If you can't see it then.. God help you...

The most annoying thing is that you haven't even read it.

Anyway, good luck to you all and goodbye. Amen.
 
truthseeker said:
geez,

What's the matter with you all?
Can't I get a straight answer?
I'm not asking about anyone else's opinion, I'm asking for yours!

Please tell me someone... "ANYONE"..

How did you and I come to be here?
It is a valid question. But there's no point getting frustrated.
My answer to you is: I don't know. still looking. still learning. A simple question doesn't necessarily have a simple "easily digested" answer. Perhaps I am here in order to discover as much of that answer as possible? Perhaps the whole answer is beyond my ability to comprehend?

edit: noticed that you got your post in first. oh well, that's that then :-)
 
Simply put, "truthseeker": No one, and I mean No One who takes the meaning of existence seriously at its deepest levels will submit to a request to provide it in 25 words or less, unless they are a "master" whereupon they would rap you over the head with a stick and tell you "THAT'S WHERE WE CAME FROM".

The reason is the meaning behind the statement "Taking the Lord's NAME in vain". It is the Divine NAME, the WORD that is not really a designator, but the very vibratory substratum of all that we are. So when you try to confine THAT inside a grade-school essay format, you are effectively blaspheming in the truest and deepest sense of the word.

And those who ask for such explanations do so to pick them apart and impose their own versions of 25-words-or-less bare-bones storylines. You ever hear of Gnosis, the Revelation that answers your question in a way that goes beyond words? Sure, such a thing could be transmitted, but for such a transmission to occur both the transmitter and the receiver must be ready. And then it just happens. And if and when it does, the receiver realizes why the transmitter avoided short and to the point "explanations".

If you have ANY understanding of God beyond the doctrinal storylines you seem to support, then you will understand my point. Otherwise all you want is to stoop to the level of the inane doctrinal "debates" the church has always passed off as "theological", and used as an excuse to confiscate properties, torture and murder the innocents they labeled as "heretics".

And the fact is, and rightly so, that ANY essay on how we came to be here can be picked apart, because all such essays are false. So why give you falsehoods, just so you can claim at best that yours is as good an explanation as any other?

Gnosis goes beyond conceptualization, and when its truths are scaled down to word approximations and stories, they are done with the understanding of the limitation of such words, and a respect for the truth they can only hint. Otherwise, one may have to learn the often hard lessons that come with throwing "pearls before swine". Don't put us all in the position of swine with your demands for oversimplification.

And if you insist, I'll give you the best oversimplification I can, without falling into doctrines, of how we came to be here in just two words: WE ARE.
 
EsoQuest said:
Simply put, "truthseeker": No one, and I mean No One who takes the meaning of existence seriously at its deepest levels will submit to a request to provide it in 25 words or less, unless they are a "master" whereupon they would rap you over the head with a stick and tell you "THAT'S WHERE WE CAME FROM".
Oh god... Belly hurts of the laughter attack this has provoked on me!
Anyway, truthseeker has gone because all of us have our heads way up our assets..... go figure.
EQ reiterate to truthseeker where we come from, please! :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom