The Will of God

[whitecoast]

There is considerable emphasis within religious circles concerning the will of God. Aligning ones own will with with that of God's is encouraged almost universally.
The rub is in defining what the will of God actually is. Of course, this is where the church usually steps in to conveniently explain exactly what that will is.
My own belief is somewhat different. I figure if God gave us free will, then any imposition on that freedom would contradict this law.
In addition, if we are all part of "The One", and there is no real separation, then my will is an extension of God's will, no matter what it is.
If I leave things to "Gods Will", like many people do, who's to know what entity is going to step in and take charge of the situation. The lizzies may define themselves as gods and interpret any surrender of will as an open invitation to intervene.
I need some perspectives on this.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Mashie, but it sounds like you're just saying that "objective reality exists" (what else could you characterize "will of God" as?) and we can either participate in objective reality and be part of it as co-creators by learning to Do ("then my will is an extension of God's will, etc.") or just dwell in will-less subjectivity and default on our creative potential ("If I leave things to God's Will [sic] who's to know what entity is going to step in and take charge of the situation.")

I don't think that anyone would disagree with that characterization of reality here, but, why dress it up in monotheistic terminology and such? Like you said, so much confusion abounds with the notions of God and free will in major religions. Using that type of language does not actually increase our understanding. Maybe it would for some people (after all, depending on one's level of development truth can only come in the form of lies), but not here. Here, that more closely resembles poetry and word-garnish, for what it's worth.

 

[Alada]

Much of the work we do here is about confronting our subjective beliefs and opinions in order to objectively see the world as it is. This is a painful process that involves being honest with the self so as to see the lies we tell ourselves and subsequently develop the ability to stop. Stopping and internally questioning is more easier said than done at times because in doing so, one must 'pay' with the currency of one's own dearly held beliefs and ideas about the self.

I agree, it is only through the long and difficult process of applying Work ideas to one’s self that any true measure can be achieved, both of their validity and value, and of one’s own subjective thoughts and opinions.

Many prefer to collect and hoard the things that are cheap, rather than suffer working for anything of true value.

 

[Laura]

I think you both misunderstood my intent. I am not advocating blind acceptance to the will of God, quite the opposite actually. I just wanted to get a discussion going.

Why would you want to get a discussion going about a totally imaginary concept? That's like wanting to get a discussion going about pokemon.

Have you read any Gurdjieff?

If I didn't know better, I might think you are trying to pick a fight with me. ;)

The moderators do not "pick fights", they moderate according to the forum guidelines. That is, you are being guided to the purpose of the forum. If that does not suit you, find another forum.

What's so imaginary about this concept? The concept of the "will of God" is very real for a majority of the people on this planet and is at the root of some very serious misconceptions.

As far as the work on this forum is concerned, we don't care about what the majority of the people on the planet believe except insofar as studying it as a psychopathological phenomenon. If you were to ask the question: "Why do the majority of people believe in god and that s/he/it has a will and they must find and conform to that will", then that might be an interesting question. However, it is actually already covered in the cognitive sciences section quite adequately. You may wish to read the work of psychologist Bob Altemeyer: "The Authoritarians" and "Amazing Conversions" for insight. Also Wilson's "Strangers to Ourselves" and Schumaker's "Corruption of Reality." Then, of course, there is Martha Stout's "The Myth of Sanity."

I have read Gurdjieff, but do not take what he has to say as gospel by any means.

Fine. However, since this forum is partly based on the work of Gurdjieff, and there is plenty of cognitive science to validate him, either get onboard and get with the program, or find another forum.

I have read countless books on philosophy and religion and they all have a different take on this reality. I've learned to develop my own opinion as a result.

Then find another forum where people are interested in noisy discussions of opinion as opposed to what can be factually demonstrated or defended.

Perhaps you would care to provide me with a list of topics acceptable to you, so we can avoid any further rancor.

Read the forum guidelines.

 

[Mashie]

Wow, the piling on here has been remarkable. It’s like, “come on everybody, we have a psychopath cornered over in the religion section!”
I’ve been on discussion boards for many years. I was a member of a conservative political forum about the same time I started digging into 911. I had a lot of what I considered friends there. When I started raising questions about the official story, and how many glaring holes it had, it quickly became apparent I wasn’t welcome there anymore. People I had admiration and respect for showed me the other side of who they really were. You don’t really know someone until you get into a good scrap with them.
Boards have a tendency to become inbred over time. Any deviation from the accepted dogma is considered noise. The moderators become the priests of the church and strictly enforce the official doctrine. The end result is stagnation.
Before I go, I would like to thank Laura for all her hard work, and for making this fascinating material available to the public. It’s opened my eyes in many new ways.
I also apologize if I’ve offended anyone, which was not my intent. I expect people to have the same thick skin I do which is not always the case. My wife likes to call me “blurt 'n hurt”.
Anyway, carry on…

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Wow, the piling on here has been remarkable. It’s like, “come on everybody, we have a psychopath cornered over in the religion section!”

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous. Good job on casting yourself as victim and us as a lynch mob, though...

Boards have a tendency to become inbred over time. Any deviation from the accepted dogma is considered noise. The moderators become the priests of the church and strictly enforce the official doctrine. The end result is stagnation.

I find it interesting. It's usually only after having their thinking/assumptions/sacred cows questioned that ex-members of this forum come to see it as dogmatic/stagnant/inbred. Before that, they think it's a fine place to be. Reminds me of a passage from Gurdjieff...

I also apologize if I’ve offended anyone, which was not my intent.

I highly doubt anyone was offended.

 

[truth seeker]

Wow, the piling on here has been remarkable. It’s like, “come on everybody, we have a psychopath cornered over in the religion section!”
I’ve been on discussion boards for many years. I was a member of a conservative political forum about the same time I started digging into 911. I had a lot of what I considered friends there. When I started raising questions about the official story, and how many glaring holes it had, it quickly became apparent I wasn’t welcome there anymore. People I had admiration and respect for showed me the other side of who they really were. You don’t really know someone until you get into a good scrap with them.
Boards have a tendency to become inbred over time. Any deviation from the accepted dogma is considered noise. The moderators become the priests of the church and strictly enforce the official doctrine. The end result is stagnation.
Before I go, I would like to thank Laura for all her hard work, and for making this fascinating material available to the public. It’s opened my eyes in many new ways.
I also apologize if I’ve offended anyone, which was not my intent. I expect people to have the same thick skin I do which is not always the case. My wife likes to call me “blurt 'n hurt”.
Anyway, carry on…

All of the above is basically playing the victim, rationalization and parting shots. Interesting how people who think of themselves as having a 'thick skin' are usually the ones with the thinnest.

 

[Esote]

... Any deviation from the accepted dogma is considered noise. The moderators become the priests of the church and strictly enforce the official doctrine. The end result is stagnation.

AFAIK, there is no dogma or doctrine here, but research and learning towards the work on oneself into the Fourth Way challenges, particularly about false personalities and awakening to our true Self.
If you come to ask for opinions about "The Will of God", it's no wonder why it's considered like deviation and noise in this forum, as you have noticed through the answers given to you. A small twist in your question would be quite different, as Laura suggested:

... If you were to ask the question: "Why do the majority of people believe in god and that s/he/it has a will and they must find and conform to that will", then that might be an interesting question. However, it is actually already covered in the cognitive sciences section quite adequately.

The end result isn't stagnation, it is learning, always...

 

[Alada]

Boards have a tendency to become inbred over time. Any deviation from the accepted dogma is considered noise. The moderators become the priests of the church and strictly enforce the official doctrine. The end result is stagnation.

I find it interesting. It's usually only after having their thinking/assumptions/sacred cows questioned that ex-members of this forum come to see it as dogmatic/stagnant/inbred. Before that, they think it's a fine place to be.

Is is remarkable isn't it, how people read threat when it isn't there. We really don't know our own minds but have multiple built in defense systems to mask that truth from us, how to get that point across to someone with the above pov? Tricky eh!

What sometimes helps me when I'm feeling threatened by a post or mirror is to try and read the post to myself again in a soft, kindhearted tone. Think of your favorite person and have their voice in your head gently reading it to you, as if they care and every word is there to help you. Its quite amazing what that can do to calm things down, get past the internal chatter, concentrate on the true meaning of the content.

But, this is hard and needs to be done consciously, always there is an easier way. ;)

 

[clerck de bonk]

... My wife likes to call me “blurt 'n hurt”.
Anyway, carry on…

Maybe You should think about why that is so?

IMO Your passus was more of a "squirt".

Edit, spelling

 

[amisingh]

if somebody really wanna know about the "Will of God" then can visit _http://www.granthsahib.com . You actually know who is "God" or if somebody want see then you can also visit "PUNJAB"INDIA"ASIA. Dhan-Dhan guru Nanak Dev sahib ji

 

[Esote]

if somebody really wanna know about the "Will of God" then can visit _http://www.granthsahib.com . You actually know who is "God" or if somebody want see then you can also visit "PUNJAB"INDIA"ASIA. Dhan-Dhan guru Nanak Dev sahib ji

Not sure this was wise of you to post here...

First sentence of the website : "One Universal Creator God. The Name Is Truth. Creative Being Personified. No Fear. No Hatred. Image Of The Undying, Beyond Birth, Self-Existent. By Guru`s Grace"...

 

[mkrnhr]

True, and one can find the same twisted nonsense as in other authoritarian religions.

 

[irjO]

Why would you want to get a discussion going about a totally imaginary concept? That's like wanting to get a discussion going about pokemon.

Anart you made my day with that coment hahaha
I know is seriosly but i couldn't help it!

 

[Nawd]

That also cracked me up. :D

Why would you want to get a discussion going about a totally imaginary concept? That's like wanting to get a discussion going about pokemon.

Anart you made my day with that coment hahaha
I know is seriosly but i couldn't help it!

 

[electrosonic]

That also cracked me up. :D

Why would you want to get a discussion going about a totally imaginary concept? That's like wanting to get a discussion going about pokemon.

Anart you made my day with that coment hahaha
I know is seriosly but i couldn't help it!

While i agree that Mashie was off topic in the concept he was trying to convey, and certainly could of worded his question a little differently, was there really any need for the mutual back-slapping and self admiration show afterwards?

Please note: The volume of posts definitely does not corrospond to the volume of awareness of an individual ..... sadly, that works in both directions.


* ... looks around for a back to slap ... *