As I think about this, my earlier assertion that Kingdom is what you do to access God, is wrong. By striving, we necessarily reinforce dualism. We necessarily express our desire. By being Spirit filled, is it not God's desire manifesting through us? Doesn't it then cease to be our desire and then become God's desire manifesting through us?
I do not know, interesting thought, though.
Kingdom is Unity. You cannot strive for Unity. You can just Surrender into it. But isn't surrender itself a verb? - no it is perfect passivity to let God move upon us. He elects us to surrender to Him.
You (the ego) must die first. Then, you can enter Kingdom. And when you mess it up, you do it all again. You die daily.
This is very difficult. To me, Kingdom is unity, but God is not unity. To me, Kingdom is unity of presence, not essence. Do not get me wrong. I am not claiming that when I am in the Kingdom, that I AM God. I am claiming however that I am united with His presence, and that communication happens more along the lines of direct revelation than language based instruction. It is essentially experiential.
Monday, February 2, 2009
When did it start? When did the theory start that the goal is to get a pile O money between now and 65 and then coast till death? Is this in line with the Kingdom?
Who started this? Is this how the rest of the world does it? Is this how God wants us to do it. What parallels are there between the pile O money we are trying to build and the Kingdom?
What about those that are not wanting to work for the pile, but are leaching onto the others pile?
Is money in any way tied to the Kingdom of God?
My head hurts
Who started this? Is this how the rest of the world does it? Is this how God wants us to do it. What parallels are there between the pile O money we are trying to build and the Kingdom?
What about those that are not wanting to work for the pile, but are leaching onto the others pile?
Is money in any way tied to the Kingdom of God?
My head hurts
Friday, January 16, 2009
Condolences on your family's loss...
At times like this, I am glad the Kingdom is timeless and boundless. I am thankful that it reaches beyond our ability to experience in this life. Though I tend to focus on the here and now, times like this refocus me on the Ultimate Reality. Prayers, support, and warm thoughts to you and yours.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
I just noticed the Verse we are Seeking to Unwind...
Seems to 100% confirm that the Kingdom is a verb you do...
The Kingdom is a Classroom. Teaching methods vary, but are always appropriate. Because the Teacher chooses them.
Once God saves you, His focus changes to teaching you. (I say God - I mean the Godhead).
I liken accessing the Kingdom to a Classroom. I am in a training program. I Have Lessons to learn. When I have perfect lucidity of the Lesson at hand, I can be said to be "Participating In the Kingdom Right Here and Now" But, I believe the process of getting to that lucidity is also part of the Kingdom. Maybe that is the unfolding of the Kingdom. I think we "hook in" in fleeting instances - never for very long, and usually unreliably (though thankfully improving all the time).
Many of my Lessons are warm and fuzzy, like kittens and puppies. They are pleasant and bubble with good emotion.
Likewise, many of my Lessons are black. They are violent. They are harsh, cold, and at the time unpleasant. They also serve an equally valid purpose.
Accessing the Kingdom is not always blissful. But, since God Loves Me, I remain convinced that he would not allow stuff to happen to me that has no value. He will not allow me to needlessly suffer. It always has a purpose, so long as my spirit is willing to learn the lesson.
So, then, does the teaching method really matter? I believe that once Redemption is taken care of, a whole new world of possibilities open up.
We can then learn in ways not possible before. If we can adopt this approach, then almost all our experiences become inputs into the Lesson Plan. This is a very exciting prospect to me.
Think of the Chinese. They have no concept of "chance" Their language does not have an analogue for the word. Instead, they think of what we call "chance" in terms of "Spirit Moving". All that happens is part of the Grand Plan of The Way.
So, take divination, for example. Fundamentalists and evangelicals sometimes bristle at the connotations of that word. But, I say, that if you buy into the "Life as a Classroom where there are No Bad Lessons" approach, one can find important stuff in non-traditional areas.
Take the Chinese iChing. iChing is a system of divination. Trying to understand the will of God (or as they symbolize Him, the Way) iChing has a completely different meaning when one considers that the Chinese consider the "chance" determination of the hexagram that is central to iChing as an example of Divine Intervention in real time. Makes it not quite so pagan, at least to me. How does that fundamentally differ from the judgemental, condemning, wingnut KJV only fundamentalist, sola scriptura believing, committer of bibliomancy who hinges on each and every syllable of the Olde English as canonized by King James in 1611?
Are not both of them trying to get at determining what is the Will of God? What's the difference? To me, both are divination.
So, what becomes the test of "divination"? Experience. Direct experience of the Holy Spirit of God. The Spirit makes what is an unwholesome practice is the wrong hands into a Lesson for the Seeker.
IMHO, exhortations to avoid divination are more aligned with the commandment "Be still and know that I Am God", rather than they are commentaries on methodology for learning our lessons. To be sure, reading some Eastern writings has oftentimes popped Christian Scripture into much more lucid clarity. Why? Because when you approach it like that, you do not have to wade through the dogma of the Program.
And, Truth is Truth. Regardless of who states it. Even Satan knows and speaks Truth. So why should I not listen to the Chinese when they have a salient comment to make regarding same?
What I am really asking is this:
Does being a Seeker give us "special permission" to think in "different" or "progressive" ways that might not be appropriate for Sheeple?
I obviously think it does. Why? Because our hearts are (attempting to be) pure, our motive is (attempting to be) pure, and our discernment is more well refined.
So, if that is the case, how can any writing hurt me? How can any line of thought hurt me? Am I not invincible, so long as I seek my Source of discernment with no hidden agenda? Can't I trust God to always reveal those Lessons I need and to teach me in the most effective way possible?
Would you please try to give me some insight into what Jesus might think about my line of arguement in this posting?
I liken accessing the Kingdom to a Classroom. I am in a training program. I Have Lessons to learn. When I have perfect lucidity of the Lesson at hand, I can be said to be "Participating In the Kingdom Right Here and Now" But, I believe the process of getting to that lucidity is also part of the Kingdom. Maybe that is the unfolding of the Kingdom. I think we "hook in" in fleeting instances - never for very long, and usually unreliably (though thankfully improving all the time).
Many of my Lessons are warm and fuzzy, like kittens and puppies. They are pleasant and bubble with good emotion.
Likewise, many of my Lessons are black. They are violent. They are harsh, cold, and at the time unpleasant. They also serve an equally valid purpose.
Accessing the Kingdom is not always blissful. But, since God Loves Me, I remain convinced that he would not allow stuff to happen to me that has no value. He will not allow me to needlessly suffer. It always has a purpose, so long as my spirit is willing to learn the lesson.
So, then, does the teaching method really matter? I believe that once Redemption is taken care of, a whole new world of possibilities open up.
We can then learn in ways not possible before. If we can adopt this approach, then almost all our experiences become inputs into the Lesson Plan. This is a very exciting prospect to me.
Think of the Chinese. They have no concept of "chance" Their language does not have an analogue for the word. Instead, they think of what we call "chance" in terms of "Spirit Moving". All that happens is part of the Grand Plan of The Way.
So, take divination, for example. Fundamentalists and evangelicals sometimes bristle at the connotations of that word. But, I say, that if you buy into the "Life as a Classroom where there are No Bad Lessons" approach, one can find important stuff in non-traditional areas.
Take the Chinese iChing. iChing is a system of divination. Trying to understand the will of God (or as they symbolize Him, the Way) iChing has a completely different meaning when one considers that the Chinese consider the "chance" determination of the hexagram that is central to iChing as an example of Divine Intervention in real time. Makes it not quite so pagan, at least to me. How does that fundamentally differ from the judgemental, condemning, wingnut KJV only fundamentalist, sola scriptura believing, committer of bibliomancy who hinges on each and every syllable of the Olde English as canonized by King James in 1611?
Are not both of them trying to get at determining what is the Will of God? What's the difference? To me, both are divination.
So, what becomes the test of "divination"? Experience. Direct experience of the Holy Spirit of God. The Spirit makes what is an unwholesome practice is the wrong hands into a Lesson for the Seeker.
IMHO, exhortations to avoid divination are more aligned with the commandment "Be still and know that I Am God", rather than they are commentaries on methodology for learning our lessons. To be sure, reading some Eastern writings has oftentimes popped Christian Scripture into much more lucid clarity. Why? Because when you approach it like that, you do not have to wade through the dogma of the Program.
And, Truth is Truth. Regardless of who states it. Even Satan knows and speaks Truth. So why should I not listen to the Chinese when they have a salient comment to make regarding same?
What I am really asking is this:
Does being a Seeker give us "special permission" to think in "different" or "progressive" ways that might not be appropriate for Sheeple?
I obviously think it does. Why? Because our hearts are (attempting to be) pure, our motive is (attempting to be) pure, and our discernment is more well refined.
So, if that is the case, how can any writing hurt me? How can any line of thought hurt me? Am I not invincible, so long as I seek my Source of discernment with no hidden agenda? Can't I trust God to always reveal those Lessons I need and to teach me in the most effective way possible?
Would you please try to give me some insight into what Jesus might think about my line of arguement in this posting?
Most of "The Chosen" remain in bondage - i.e. the purpose of Our Suffering
I definitely think there are "saved" (though I really do not like that term because of the dogma connected to it - I like Redeemed) folks who choose to live in bondage. One day they will discover that they never had to do that. Suffering is not to be endured, but embraced, transmuted, and benefitted from. As such, in treating it like that, the Seeker by definition redefines suffering in a way that it is no longer suffering.
Suffering becomes a vehicle for Grace Delivery. Seekers cannot miss that point, in my mind. Sheeple cannot comprehend it, either. This is one very large reason I believe that Sheeple tend to focus on the hereafter, and Seekers are more pragmatic.
Which one bears more fruit? Sheeple or Seekers? Why? Only one is focused on the present moment.
Suffering is just another lesson to be learned. Another step in obliterating egocentrism, which Jesus most definitely advocated. Another installment in the Teaching. Thus understood, suffering becomes just another worldly thing that really does not matter in the eternal sense of things. But proper understanding of it, and proper response to it can help us tremendously in the Here and Now. Suffering is about helping us experience the Kingdom on this plane. It is absolutely not needed for the dispensation of grace regarding the next (eternal) plane of existence.
If you can look at suffering like this, you are hooked into the Kingdom right here and now.
So suffering has a definite "purifying" purpose.
If this is the case, all my life, including its misfortunes has purpose. It is all under the parvidence of the Almightly. All my hairs are numbered.
Now, when my Mom dies, I will probably get a whole new appreciation for how hard that is to actually do, but I know from experience that it is in fact possible to transcend suffering in this life. Isn't that at least part of the culmination of Calvary? Everyone always focuses on the blood redemption, but there is also a great lesson in simply transcending stuff on the physical plane that Jesus taught as well. Most Sheeple are completely lost on this - they want blood - because they wallow in their guilt. So their focus is the Blood.
While I appreciate the Blood, that is sort of past tense to me. It is pivotal, but Jesus' example of transcending suffering is what locks me into the kingdom on a moment by moment basis.
Suffering becomes a vehicle for Grace Delivery. Seekers cannot miss that point, in my mind. Sheeple cannot comprehend it, either. This is one very large reason I believe that Sheeple tend to focus on the hereafter, and Seekers are more pragmatic.
Which one bears more fruit? Sheeple or Seekers? Why? Only one is focused on the present moment.
Suffering is just another lesson to be learned. Another step in obliterating egocentrism, which Jesus most definitely advocated. Another installment in the Teaching. Thus understood, suffering becomes just another worldly thing that really does not matter in the eternal sense of things. But proper understanding of it, and proper response to it can help us tremendously in the Here and Now. Suffering is about helping us experience the Kingdom on this plane. It is absolutely not needed for the dispensation of grace regarding the next (eternal) plane of existence.
If you can look at suffering like this, you are hooked into the Kingdom right here and now.
So suffering has a definite "purifying" purpose.
If this is the case, all my life, including its misfortunes has purpose. It is all under the parvidence of the Almightly. All my hairs are numbered.
Now, when my Mom dies, I will probably get a whole new appreciation for how hard that is to actually do, but I know from experience that it is in fact possible to transcend suffering in this life. Isn't that at least part of the culmination of Calvary? Everyone always focuses on the blood redemption, but there is also a great lesson in simply transcending stuff on the physical plane that Jesus taught as well. Most Sheeple are completely lost on this - they want blood - because they wallow in their guilt. So their focus is the Blood.
While I appreciate the Blood, that is sort of past tense to me. It is pivotal, but Jesus' example of transcending suffering is what locks me into the kingdom on a moment by moment basis.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Question about comments in Blogger
Is there a way for me to send messages of new comments being posted? I am having a hard time getting my head around all your comments since they are buried in other threads. Hard for me to get a continuity of thought. Can we talk about this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)