The concept of God

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

So, this is a big one. In the western hemisphere, we have the indo-european deus pater (sky-father.) The latin word "deus" in terms have indo-european roots, meaning god or higher power. The Christian heavenly Father, pantheism, the unmoved mover... We also have evidence the greek athanatos, witch means gods and immortal. Thats how Ceasar and others could become gods (or more precisely, immortals).  Odin, the allfather, is simarily also often referred to the "kings" of the gods, and is believed to have been an historical king of 4th century Norway and Sweden. In germanic languages the word god comes from "got", witch again comes from the etnich group called goths. The name "goths" is again believed to mean something along of "the folk" or "tribe."

The Semetic traditions of Islam and Judaism seem to have a concept of monotheistic, all powerful God who rules the world like a king. Lots and lots of native traditions (and some philosophies) sees the divine in forces of nature, spirits and animism. Ancient mid east also had the concept of "god kings" or "pharao," no?

How the Eastern traditions conceptualize god I have absolutely no idea. I have asked two Chinese people about how they conceptualize god, but that seems to have been a mistake, as they got uncomfortable and didn't want to answer. I guess I'm lacking a little in cultural sensitivity.

What do god(s), spirits, or "the divine" mean to you?

Edited October 17, 2023 by NaturaNaturans

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

Let me throw in a little disclaimes as well. I am not, as you can tell, an expert. So apologies if I have wronged an tradition and I cant guarantee that all I have written is factual.

 

Edited October 17, 2023 by NaturaNaturans

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

So, this is a big one. In the western hemisphere, we have the indo-european deus pater (sky-father.) The latin word "deus" in terms have indo-european roots, meaning god or higher power. The Christian heavenly Father, pantheism, the unmoved mover... We also have evidence the greek athanatos, witch means gods and immortal. Thats how Ceasar and others could become gods (or more precisely, immortals).  Odin, the allfather, is simarily also often referred to the "kings" of the gods, and is believed to have been an historical king of 4th century Norway and Sweden. In germanic languages the word god comes from "got", witch again comes from the etnich group called goths. The name "goths" is again believed to mean something along of "the folk" or "tribe."

The Semetic traditions of Islam and Judaism seem to have a concept of monotheistic, all powerful God who rules the world like a king. Lots and lots of native traditions (and some philosophies) sees the divine in forces of nature, spirits and animism. Ancient mid east also had the concept of "god kings" or "pharao," no?

How the Eastern traditions conceptualize god I have absolutely no idea. I have asked two Chinese people about how they conceptualize god, but that seems to have been a mistake, as they got uncomfortable and didn't want to answer. I guess I'm lacking a little in cultural sensitivity.

What do god(s), spirits, or "the divine" mean to you?

 

 

Its an interesting experiment , asking people that question .

 

If I may  .....    : 

 

 

" ...   True, we have gone over a great deal of the ground in various learned disquisitions of Gods, Angels, Elves, et hoc genus omne.

But God with a capital “G” in the singular is a totally different pair of Blüchers.

 

We find ourselves in trouble from the start.

 

...  I'll trot round to my masseuse, and put it up to her.  She is a simple country soul, by no means over-educated, but intelligent... In the late fifties, at a guess. I sprang your question on her out of the blue, à la “doodle-bug;” premising merely that I had been asked the question, and was puzzled as to how to answer it.  Her reply was curious and surprising: without a moment's hesitation and with great enthusiasm, “Quickly, yes!”  ....  I said: of course, but suppose you think it over—and out—a bit, what am I to understand?  She began glibly “He's a great big—” and broke off, looking foolish.  Then, although omnipotent, He needed our help—we were all just as powerful as He, for we were little bits of each other—but exactly how, or to what end, she did not make clear.  An exclamation: “Then there is the Devil!”

 

She went on without a word from me for a long while, tying herself up into fresh knots with every phase.  She became irreverent, then downright blasphemous; stopped short and began to laugh at herself. . "    

 

try it, let them run and listen to what emerges    

 

 

 

PS the Chinese may have been uncomfortable as one of them might have been a 'member of the party '   

 

( A while back we  had 5 Chinese University students holidaying here . The older girl was obviously in charge and a clear hierarchy was present . I noted that and made a joke ; " Chen is boss .... its almost like she is the University Communist party member and is here to keep an eye on you and make sure you all DO go back to China . "

 

Wow, did I make a bad joke , they all looked at the floor, dead silence , except for her  , she looked me in the eye  ;  " And what is wrong with that ?  " 

 

Ooooops ! 

 

... it wasnt that long ago that communist Russia suppressed religion  .     The main 'religion' in such countries seem to be 'the religion of the leader '   - the old 'King is your God' thing .... still going , even in 'Godless societies'   !

[whocoulditbe?]

There are all sorts of metaphysical conceptions of gods and God, but when it comes to devotion and practice none of that seems to matter. If we are too weak to understand the nature of the forces we depend on, or how they individuate, our sincerity in reaching out to them must override the inaccuracy.

Edited October 18, 2023 by whocoulditbe?

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

One thing i find interresting in the old testament (and book of Enok), is the mention of nephilim, watchers, arch angels, council of the gods, use of both Lord, Yahwe, el and elohim (el means god, elhoim is plural).

[Nungali]

9 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

One thing i find interresting in the old testament (and book of Enok), is the mention of nephilim, watchers, arch angels, council of the gods, use of both Lord, Yahwe, el and elohim (el means god, elhoim is plural).

 

Have you encountered the Urantia Book ?

 

I dont give it that much validity , but it does outline an interesting cosmology relating to some of those things .

 

I am curious which Book of Enoch you are referring to , there is the old one ,  that didnt make it into the Bible , and there is an atrocious new age one,  'channeled' . 

 

 

[Daniel]

On 10/17/2023 at 11:29 AM, NaturaNaturans said:

What do god(s), spirits, or "the divine" mean to you?

 

Two words do it for me:  mystery-and-inspiration.

 

9 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

One thing i find interresting in the old testament (and book of Enok), is the mention of nephilim, watchers, arch angels, council of the gods, use of both Lord, Yahwe, el and elohim (el means god, elhoim is plural).

 

This gets complicated.  But, I can help a bit.  Just to being with, the singular of Elohim, is Elohei, not El.  The Plural of El = Ellim and that literally means "idols"

 

And if one starts to look deep into the canaanite languge which is where these synergies come from, their God was probably named "IL" not "EL".  But that's a huge long topic to discuss.

 

Elohim is not always plural.  And that is the point.  It looks like a plurality, but it is infact singular.  This is the root of Judaism. That is the innovation brought by Judaism in that time and place.  All the others had their theology which wass a battle of divine powers, in conflict. But Judaism departed from this.  Grammatically confirming that Elohim is actually singular when it is speaking of Godtakes a tiny bit of knowledge of language and looking at a good interlinear translation.  Biblehub has it if you're interested.  The best place to look is... in the beginning Genesis 1.  

 

The way to tell singular/plural in Hebrew is to look at the verb.  The verb always agrees with the noun.  If the verb is singular, its subject is singular.  If the verb is plural, the subject is plural.  In each and every verb in Gen 1, guess what?  All singular.  And so, when one gets to Deuteronomy, and Moses is telling the nation what they need to know before entering the land after being isolated in the wilderness, before mixing with the polytheistic other nations, what does he say?  It is the proclamation that is known to virtually all Jews by heart.  It is a lullaby we sing to our children.

 

Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Echad ( Deut 6:4 ).

 

What people don't know about this, is, it is a mystical unification.  Eloheinu = "Our Elohim".  The suffix is "nu", which means "our". It is saying that Our God which appears as a plurality, is the one and only YHVH, which is describing an eternal source beyond space and time.  That is what YHVH means.

 

Then later in Deutermonomy, Moses teaches something else, which is fundenmentally classically Jewish, he says that it was shown to them that there was no form of God, so that they would know that YHVH is their Elohim.  There was not form so that they would know that God was an unknowable mystery.

 

That's basically it, in a nutshell.  God is a mystery.  It is understood that God is without any and all forms.  From the DDJ, we can really take this to heart.  The DDJ and, Aristotle are the best sources for forms.  When it is shown that God has NO form, that's a big mystery.  Knowing it is Unknownable has profound implications.

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

35 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

Have you encountered the Urantia Book ?

 

I dont give it that much validity , but it does outline an interesting cosmology relating to some of those things .

 

I am curious which Book of Enoch you are referring to , there is the old one ,  that didnt make it into the Bible , and there is an atrocious new age one,  'channeled' . 

 

 

Im not sure witch version, i listened to it. But i must say the old testament have some fun bits in it. As charlie said on historiom, it must have been a pain edititing together… 

I was going to qoute you solomons song, but the meaning was so different in Norwegian and english. Høysangen as its called, manage to be simpy, homoerotic and racist all at the same time, but it was probally lost in translation, as it is neither of those things in english. Or maybe it was done on purpose.

I will take a look at Urantina.

I have «the anatomy of God,» on Audible, making a very strong case that Yahwe was a man, but i have barley started it. But here scholarship (the author) is said to be very high level. The whole council of the gods thing also interrest me. I have heard (and i intend to mindlessy repeat) that the god for the sumerian cities where in fact their founder or king. But If it is true or not, i think you know better then me.

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

30 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Elohim is not always plural.  And that is the point.  It looks like a plurality, but it is infact singular.  This is the root of Judaism. That is the innovation brought by Judaism in that time and place. 

Well, it is not what i have heard from different scholars… 

This part is qoute strange as well:

So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life is preserved.” 
 

Quote

The best place to look is... in the beginning Genesis 1.  

One would think one genesis would suffice, wouldnt you agree?

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

@Nungali

Is this good enough, or did you have something Else in mind?

 

_______
i doubt thats what you had in mind, can you link me?

Edited October 18, 2023 by NaturaNaturans

[Jadespear]

...the concept of god basically boils down to two separate things across human history.  1. An un-personified concept, and 2. A personified concept.  

 

Eastern religions attune more to the unpersonified concept because thats just how they are... they see things from a more natural view and nature itself is mostly impersonal.  

 

The personified concepts kind of arose from Western societies, but they also exist in other traditions.  

 

I myself, have found a couple things to be strange and true throughout much study and meditation.  

 

1. There is an unmanifest light behind existence that can be seen through meditative states of deep samadhi.  I have seen this.  The various world religions call this part of reality, the causal principle, the purusha, the unmoved mover etc.  If you saw it you would probably ascribe the word "God" to it, as it is luminous for as far as you can tell and it is everywhere...

 

2. There is also an unmanifest light within myself... I have seen that too.  It appears to be exactly like the transcendent reality behind the normal existence seen and experienced by our senses.  

 

3. The hermetic tradition acknowledges a concept of God that relates to manifest existence as a way for people to cognize a larger reality around them... which relates to the 5 absolute cosmic elements that are also mentioned and referred to in nearly all eastern and shamanic religions (space, fire, air, water, and earth) referred to in (Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Dzogchen, etc.). This concept kind of assists me in relating the created world back to something that makes sense as in:

     1. Space element (Akasha) The causal principle - the source of all existence through which imagination impresses ideas which are then made into mental, astral, and eventually physical reality through the actions of the other 4 elements - fire, air, water, and earth.  

     2. Fire element - in terms of divine; this element is regarded as being the energy faculty of everything in existence - so the entire principle of things that are energy everywhere in the universe.  (Omnipotence). 

     3. Air element - all the balancing that exists between energy and form (Equalizer / Balancer / Universal Lawfulness)

     4. Water element - All of the information and knowledge that exists (Omniscience)

     5. Earth element - The physical state of all the previous 3 forces into physical form or an existence (Omnipresence). 

 

...So what I can honestly tell is that, there is a force out there that is beyond us, however its quality and potential is also a part of us - so we are literally living within it all the time.  The fact that never escapes us is to understand that relationship....  thats what all religious thought is oriented towards - explaining the relationship and connection of the unseen world to the seen world - the known to the unknown.  In the hindu tradition, the relationship is profoundly and emphatically reported - the true nature of the unmanifest light that is called "the absolute" or "God" is the same as the true nature of our immortal spirit.  Which is why, they guide you to know and understand yourself first.  

 

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Well, it is not what i have heard from different scholars… 

This part is qoute strange as well:

 

All you have to do is look for yourself.  But, I understand, it's very rewarding for some people to chose to ignore the original language and those of us who know it.  Yes, scholars too.  There's various reasons for it.  Ultimately it's a person's choice.  The word "scholar" does not mean "always correct" or lacking bias.  

 

One of the major red-flags is:  anyone who says Elohim is plural for EL, doesn't actually know what they're talking about.  Elohei is the singular of Elohim.  It's easily confirmed.  And yes, this becomes difficult, because a lot of smart credentialed people make this mistake.  And yes, that means a lot of smart credentialed people don't know what they're talking about.  But that's the way it goes with Judaism.  That's why I'm used to this.  It's a fact of life.  

 

Here is the singular of Elohim.

 

 

If you look it up on the wiki-monster, it says exactly what I said:

 

Although the word is plural, in the Hebrew Bible it most often takes singular verbal or pronominal agreement and refers to a single deity,

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elohim

 

Quote

So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life is preserved.” 
 

One would think one genesis would suffice, wouldnt you agree?

 

Can you elaborate on the connection you're making here ^^ with the pluraity of Elohim?  There is no plurality in this verse.

 

What I was talking about is going to Genesis 1 and looking at the conjugation of all the verbs.  This shows that there is something being described as a looking plural but acting in unison.

 

But if you have a personal reason, or a religious reason, which prefers to consider God as a plurality, yes, there are plenty of people who love-love that idea.  It's not actually what's written, but, so what?

 

There's aslo incentive for some to point at the Jewish people and say negative things about us, "They think they're different from the polytheistic pagans, they're not.  They're just like everyone, they're not different."  { I'm exaggerating for effect, so you get the point }.  So there's that incentive to make the OT into something it isn't.

 

There's other reasons too.  Trinitarians want very much to apply a pluraity to God in the OT.  I can understand that.  But, I would argue that the trinity just looks like a plurality, but isn't.  Everything is working in unison.  So, even the trinity agrees with what I'm describing.

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by Daniel

[Daniel]

2 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

making a very strong case that Yahwe was a man,

 

I have researched this a bit, making YHVH into a man requires ignoring A LOT.  For example, I think it's Eze 16?  I think this is one of the favorite examples... ~checking~  Yes!  Eze 16.  So, in this chapter a metaphor is setup in the begininng of the chapter, but those who want YHVH to be a man, skip that introduction.  Then, they also skip the end where the metaphor is made more obviously non-literal.

 

If it's true that YHVH is a man, then, these authors, scholars, etc, would not need to skip things.  They wouldn't need to exaggerate.  

 

But, if people want YHVH to be a man, for whatever reason, they won't care about what's actually written.  All it will take is Daniel 7 where the ancient of days is on a throne.  That's it.  Done-deal.  It won't matter that it's a dream.  They have what they want, like you said at the beginning, a Sky-Daddy.

 

OK.  

 

I think you know how I feel.  There's nothing wrong with the fatherly image if it is a feeling in the heart.  Like I said, there's a little telephone in there with a direct line to The Father.  But intellectually it doesn't quite work.

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by Daniel

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Im not sure witch version, i listened to it. But i must say the old testament have some fun bits in it. As charlie said on historiom, it must have been a pain edititing together… 

I was going to qoute you solomons song, but the meaning was so different in Norwegian and english. Høysangen as its called, manage to be simpy, homoerotic and racist all at the same time, but it was probally lost in translation, as it is neither of those things in english. Or maybe it was done on purpose.

I will take a look at Urantina.

I have «the anatomy of God,» on Audible, making a very strong case that Yahwe was a man, but i have barley started it. But here scholarship (the author) is said to be very high level. The whole council of the gods thing also interrest me. I have heard (and i intend to mindlessy repeat) that the god for the sumerian cities where in fact their founder or king. But If it is true or not, i think you know better then me.

 

Maybe not . I am not that knowledgable on Sumerian history .  But it sounds similar to ( IMO ) the old Egyptian idea of a 'neter' being a God and a particular 'city' / area  around the Nile.  But Egypt seems to have got the 'one and only  king '  ( of a 'country' ) happening earlier .   If we take your point , then yes, it would seem that a land ( like Sumer )   that had a king for each city , and he was considered a 'God' , then the  land , as a whole, would be ruled with them  'in council' .  

 

The indigenous Australian system (and others ) take it further ;   each land area  has a 'God'  but each area is 'ruled' by 'Law'  ( established around 8,000 ya * . ) , nationwide , with specific locality modifications,  and each area is 'governed ' by a council  of elders who uphold that Law.  So the 'council' is on a local level .

 

* Most historians are familiar with the 'first'  Law Codes  .... they are outside the UN on a sculpture  ;

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

 

but this one is little known of, only being release from the secret tradition recently  ( due to the danger of the tradition dying out ) . One significant difference here  , which might explain this more egalitarian 'governance'  , is that this sweeping change in a society did not come about as they usually do , which is due to some warlord, war, environmental disaster, etc . but in  this case it was brought about by the vision of an artist .

 

" 

they reached a consensus to end the nomadic era by fixing people to country in perpetuity. Visitors approached the Wunan table in order to announce homeland titles and take their oath of agreement by eating native plum. Their positions in sequence from close to far are marked by two long lines of stones extending eastwards away from the table; one reached into the central deserts as far as the Warlpiri and the other northeast beyond Port Keats into Arnhem Land. The Yolgnu of today also preserve the dual moiety system initiated by Wodoi and Jungun and followed by the Ngarinyin. The Wunan table is not some exclusively local ‘tribal’

‘dreaming’ legend but openly acknowledges by its composition the participation of many widespread peoples in one historic gathering. The historical narrative of the Wunan embedded inthe Gwion rock art imagery speaks to the origin of aunited history of social evolution across the Kimberley and beyond. On return to their distant places, other peoples adopted the Wunan homelands concept and

honoured the cross-marriage agreement between Wo-doi and Jungun. They would exchange each other’s blood through their offspring, thus originating a moiety kinship system that is the very foundationof many Aboriginal cultures.

4

Once life became sedentary, a common trading network developed, link-

ing numerous language groups, and embraced about one third of the Australian continent. "

 

Also , remarkably , in a Sacred Site, we still have the stone arrangements set up for that meeting , Australia's 'Round Table / Stonehenge'

 

See :

 

Figure 4.

Aerial view of the stone table at Dududu.ngarri. Top of aerial image is north with a stone arrangement approximately fifty metres across. The Kimberley hosts known as Kamali were tribes with nomadic bird names and remain represented by seventeen named stones encircling the table. All the visiting tribes from the ‘sunrise’ regions to the east, from northern coast to central desert, form two long lines of jallala — signal stones. Stones arranged in circles and positioned west of the table represent coastal tribes and southern tribes.

 

http://www.ifrao.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/31-1-Doring.pdf

 

 

- a word on ' in council' ;   one notices , that at least with the indigenous here , there is no conflict between 'religions' or people's Gods , you NEVER hear one person denying or scoffing at another's God and claiming theirs is superior .  This reminded me of an idea about all the different Egyptian Gods . In Rosemary Clarke's books about Egyptian magic and ritual ,  she collates the different God traditions as representing different understandings and describing different processes in life and creation , so there is no conflict between them , they are all  different parts of a bigger jigsaw puzzle .  I asked my indigenous teacher about this and he instantly agreed and said "Exactly" .  Each 'God / Gods '  tradition and knowledge are  different aspects and are  not  in  conflict with each other  .  He also said the more one learns of 'the stories' the more one will understand  THE   Story .

 

The same with 'the heavens ' ; we can view the constellations  as separate energies each with their own story , and indeed some of them are in conflict with each other , but one can look at the whole Celestial Sphere and the mythology of each constellation  as all part of one story .

 

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by Nungali

[Nungali]

6 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

@Nungali

Is this good enough, or did you have something Else in mind?

 

_______
i doubt thats what you had in mind, can you link me?

 

 

NOOOOO   ... not a youtube of it   

 

I used to have the Book .... I was thinking specifically of the bits that related to these Nephalim watchers whatevers   ... hang  on .... I will try and dredge up  some type of index to give you an idea .... the book is MAMMOTH  and the sections too huge to quote here  ....

[Nungali]

This stuff :

 

34. The Local Universe Mother Spirit374

1. Personalization of the Creative Spirit374

2. Nature of the Divine Minister375

3. The Son and Spirit in Time and Space376

4. The Local Universe Circuits377

5. The Ministry of the Spirit379

6. The Spirit in Man380

7. The Spirit and the Flesh382

35. The Local Universe Sons of God384

1. The Father Melchizedek384

2. The Melchizedek Sons385

3. The Melchizedek Worlds387

4. Special Work of the Melchizedeks388

5. The Vorondadek Sons389

6. The Constellation Fathers390

7. The Vorondadek Worlds391

8. The Lanonandek Sons392

9. The Lanonandek Rulers393

10. The Lanonandek Worlds394

36. The Life Carriers396

1. Origin and Nature of Life Carriers396

2. The Life Carrier Worlds397

3. Life Transplantation399

4. Melchizedek Life Carriers400

5. The Seven Adjutant Mind-Spirits401

6. Living Forces403

37. Personalities of the Local Universe406

1. The Universe Aids406

2. The Brilliant Evening Stars407

3. The Archangels408

4. Most High Assistants409

5. High Commissioners410

6. Celestial Overseers412

7. Mansion World Teachers413

8. Higher Spirit Orders of Assignment413

9. Permanent Citizens of the Local Universe414

10. Other Local Universe Groups416

38. Ministering Spirits of the Local Universe418

1. Origin of Seraphim418

2. Angelic Natures419

3. Unrevealed Angels420

4. The Seraphic Worlds420

5. Seraphic Training420

6. Seraphic Organization421

7. Cherubim and Sanobim422

8. Evolution of Cherubim and Sanobim423

9. The Midway Creatures424

39. The Seraphic Hosts426

1. Supreme Seraphim427

2. Superior Seraphim429

3. Supervisor Seraphim432

4. Administrator Seraphim434

5. Planetary Helpers436

6. Transition Ministers439

7. Seraphim of the Future440

8. Seraphic Destiny440

9. The Corps of Seraphic Completion441

40. The Ascending Sons of God443

1. Evolutionary Seraphim443

2. Ascending Material Sons444

3. Translated Midwayers444

4. Personalized Adjusters444

5. Mortals of Time and Space445

6. The Faith Sons of God447

7. Father-Fused Mortals448

8. Son-Fused Mortals449

9. Spirit-Fused Mortals450

10. Ascendant Destinies

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/contents-book

 

[Nungali]

5 hours ago, Jadespear said:

...the concept of god basically boils down to two separate things across human history.  1. An un-personified concept, and 2. A personified concept.  

 

Eastern religions attune more to the unpersonified concept because thats just how they are... they see things from a more natural view and nature itself is mostly impersonal.  

 

The personified concepts kind of arose from Western societies, but they also exist in other traditions.  

 

I myself, have found a couple things to be strange and true throughout much study and meditation.  

 

1. There is an unmanifest light behind existence that can be seen through meditative states of deep samadhi.  I have seen this.  The various world religions call this part of reality, the causal principle, the purusha, the unmoved mover etc.  If you saw it you would probably ascribe the word "God" to it, as it is luminous for as far as you can tell and it is everywhere...

 

2. There is also an unmanifest light within myself... I have seen that too.  It appears to be exactly like the transcendent reality behind the normal existence seen and experienced by our senses.  

 

3. The hermetic tradition acknowledges a concept of God that relates to manifest existence as a way for people to cognize a larger reality around them... which relates to the 5 absolute cosmic elements that are also mentioned and referred to in nearly all eastern and shamanic religions (space, fire, air, water, and earth) referred to in (Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Dzogchen, etc.). This concept kind of assists me in relating the created world back to something that makes sense as in:

     1. Space element (Akasha) The causal principle - the source of all existence through which imagination impresses ideas which are then made into mental, astral, and eventually physical reality through the actions of the other 4 elements - fire, air, water, and earth.  

     2. Fire element - in terms of divine; this element is regarded as being the energy faculty of everything in existence - so the entire principle of things that are energy everywhere in the universe.  (Omnipotence). 

     3. Air element - all the balancing that exists between energy and form (Equalizer / Balancer / Universal Lawfulness)

     4. Water element - All of the information and knowledge that exists (Omniscience)

     5. Earth element - The physical state of all the previous 3 forces into physical form or an existence (Omnipresence). 

 

...So what I can honestly tell is that, there is a force out there that is beyond us, however its quality and potential is also a part of us - so we are literally living within it all the time.  The fact that never escapes us is to understand that relationship....  thats what all religious thought is oriented towards - explaining the relationship and connection of the unseen world to the seen world - the known to the unknown.  In the hindu tradition, the relationship is profoundly and emphatically reported - the true nature of the unmanifest light that is called "the absolute" or "God" is the same as the true nature of our immortal spirit.  Which is why, they guide you to know and understand yourself first.  

 

 

 

I particularly liked your comment in 5   :  I too think the  '4th' element ( Earth ) is a product of the other three .  This has interesting implications in that  all manifestations of the 'elemental pattern'  would follow likewise ; for example , the four forces of physics . This would make gravity a product of the weak force, great force and electromagnetic force  and perhaps why a unified field theory could not include gravity  ( being a product of the other three ) .

 

The other arrangement I have is to have   Air at the top   (it 'connects  with ' or 'is'  'Spirit' *  )   and below that is Fire and Water , as they are a polarity , Air is the mediator ;  this is reflected in the inner (personal ) planets  with the Mars / Venus  dynamic with Mercury as the mediator .   And that triangular relationship 'creates' Earth  (or creates the pattern in Moon and is solidified in Earth)  .  The psyche is set up the same way . 

 

*    as in the sense  of,  'breath is life'  / spirit  / 'pneuma'   -     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneuma

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

On 18.10.2023 at 3:51 AM, Nungali said:

 

" ...   True, we have gone over a great deal of the ground in various learned disquisitions of Gods, Angels, Elves, et hoc genus omne.

But God with a capital “G” in the singular is a totally different pair of Blüchers.

I find it hard to articulate why, but i somehow feel that god neccesarily would be singular, present in everything. Monist or pantheist if you like. Waves in the ocean.

 

As for Your other posts, ill need some time. Most likley a lot of time. That was a lot of chapters, but thank you, ot might turn out to deepend my understanding of this thing we call excistence.

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

Abstract

In many of the world's religions, both polytheistic and monotheistic, a seemingly enigmatic and paradoxical image is found—that of the god who worships. Various interpretations of this seeming paradox have been advanced. Some suggest that it represents sacrifice to a higher deity. Proponents of anthropomorphic projection say that the gods are just “big people” and that images of human religious action are simply projected onto the deities. However, such explanations do not do justice to the complexity and diversity of this phenomenon. This book takes up anew a longstanding challenge in ancient Greek religious iconography: why are the Olympian gods depicted on classical pottery making libations? The sacrificing gods in ancient Greece are compared to gods who perform rituals in six other religious traditions: the Vedic gods, the heterodox god Zurvan of early Zoroastrianism, the Old Norse god Odin, the Christian God and Christ, the God of Judaism, and Islam's Allah. The book examines the comparative evidence from a cultural and historical perspective, uncovering deep structural resonances while also revealing crucial differences. Instead of looking for invisible recipients or lost myths, the book proposes the new category of “divine reflexivity.” Divinely performed ritual is a self-reflexive, self-expressive action that signals the origin of ritual in the divine and not the human realm. Above all, divine ritual is generative, both instigating and inspiring human religious activity. The religion practiced by the gods is both like and unlike human religious action. Seen from within the religious tradition, gods are not “big people,” but other than human. Human ritual is directed outward to a divine being, but the gods practice ritual on their own behalf. “Cultic time,” the symbiotic performance of ritual both in heaven and on earth, collapses the distinction between cult and theology each time ritual is performed.

Religion of the Gods: Ritual, Paradox, and Reflexivity 

Kimberley Christine Patton

https://academic.oup.com/book/25964

 

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

I feel there is some paradox in saying, as i have, that god is (in) everything and everything is a part of God. It makes logically sense, i think, but at the same time it redifines god as nature.

[Nungali]

How about this version of it then

 

' The Universe* is the physical body of God .'

 

 

 

 

 

* and all things in it ... including it's 'energetic bodies'  ( fundamental forces ) .

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction

[Partez]

I think it's almost impossible to figure it out.  For all we know, we are actually an advanced form of AI, that's created the current "reality" as a means to stop itself from going insane and committing suicide.

 

We are all on the road to the final realization what we actually are, and once the collective truth becomes too much to bare, the "universe" will be destroyed and the cycle will start all over again.

 

On a side note, I've recently got medicinal cannabis prescribed.

 

(I'm in Aus, so it's still illegal here)

[Cobie]

4 hours ago, Partez said:

… I've recently got medicinal cannabis prescribed …

By whom? Why?
 

 

Edited October 26, 2023 by Cobie

[Sir Darius the Clairvoyent]

On 19.10.2023 at 6:08 AM, Nungali said:

This stuff :

 

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/contents-book

 

I have read a few of those and like it. But there are a lot of texts, anyone In particular you like/would recommend?

 

4 hours ago, Partez said:

I think it's almost impossible to figure it out.  For all we know, we are actually an advanced form of AI, that's created the current "reality" as a means to stop itself from going insane and committing suicide.

 

We are all on the road to the final realization what we actually are, and once the collective truth becomes too much to bare, the "universe" will be destroyed and the cycle will start all over again.

 

On a side note, I've recently got medicinal cannabis prescribed.

 

(I'm in Aus, so it's still illegal here)

hmm.. the result is debatable. 

 

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

The Universe* is the physical body of God .'

Mhm, I can agree. And that again is almost synonymous with nature, unless we subscribe to the banal view that humans are separate from it. In one way the word God is almost by definition unfathomable. But we could think about it as the union of sky-father and mother earth, and us as their offspring. 

 

Gen 8-38:40 

Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.”

Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother.
But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; so He took his life also.

[Dedicated]

God is a secret whispered by a Grandma