A theological theory for someone to poke holes in.

[bluephoenix010]

hey, this has been swimming around in my head for a short while, just
though i'd post it and see if i can get someone to see where it's
wrong. this is the only place i can think of. it clearly seems to me
a bit crazy, but i sort of wanna put it up. anyway, good to make you
think. nothing to lose right?

anyway, it starts in the midst of physical reality as we know it.
then there is an action performed, a crime say. involving two people
and with medium emotional content. so... a mugging. person a gets
mugged by person b.

there are quotes in seth's teachings, that your current thoughts can
affect and change the past, in fact, constantly do. if i put a
perception forward that every thought we think is powerful and goes
somewhere. then a single thought a person has affects something on a
minute level, and loads of single thoughts starts to change things on
a perceptible level. should it not be so with thoughts going into the
past?

following on from that, say a person heals a specific problem and
changes their thoughts going into the past. it is like when a huge
weight is lifted, when we forgive and surpass a specific
transgression, and our thoughts of that transgression are changed in
a way it's eventually hard to renew the anger. the 'charge is
released'. this past event (and future event as well in some
teachings), is undergoing a dramatic changed and is being physically
transmuted every day by our thoughts.

so two years after the mugging person a begins their awakening, five
years, their spiritual path, ten years, forgiving completely (this is
a strong person) the events involved. now for ten years after that
the persons perception and energy 'sent to' the mugging is so
drastically changed, that it logically follows that twenty years
after the mugging, there is a tangible difference in the actual event.

ok, so this will effect person b as well. who begins their spiritual
path in another lifetime and through a karmic repeat forgives him/
her self for the original transgression, further changing the charge
etc.

as more and more forgiveness and positive energy is sent to the
actual event, the more the physical event will then start to cease to
exist. how can such a clear act of fear and lack consciousness happen
in a place of such sustained love?

as all cuts to the event surrounding it are healed, eventually the
event doesn't exist? eventually it has become simply a white- ish
area of calm or perhaps not so existent in physical time/space. it
simply never happened.

and eventually this will happen with many events, perhaps even whole
wars. perhaps there are times of such anger that pasts are re-shaped
to reflect that. if we run to a theoretical 'time' however (the word
time used sparingly) in the far future, where more is healed and many
more have been on the spiritual path, then whole wars, whole periods
of history can eventually exist as nothing more than pure white
light/love.

and perhaps that is why so much but 'spirit' is called an illusion?
that is why time doesn't exist? because running alongside every event
is the pure light/ love of the healed event. eventually, every
distortion leading back to the first is changed/ healed/ unmade. the
creator knows itself and there is no physical matter that has ever
and perhaps will ever exist.

think on that. where's the hole in the theory.

[Nina]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "bluephoenix010" <1129@...> wrote:
> transgression, and our thoughts of that transgression are changed in
> a way it's eventually hard to renew the anger. the 'charge is
> released'. this past event (and future event as well in some
> teachings), is undergoing a dramatic changed and is being physically
> transmuted every day by our thoughts.
dear blue,
can only share here a practical account of one case fr edgar cayce on
reincarnation by noel langley, chapter "the law of grace." he details
the story of anthony hollis who had several experiences of near
choking along with dream of his strangling woman fr earlier life. the
amazing part is that when he was rushed to hospital when choking,
taken to operating room and under anaesthesia,he confronted a strange
vindictive face framed in yellow hair (same time, another friend had
vision of same demented face and associated it w/hollis).in his
reading there were allusions to karmic debts still to be paid and
encouragement for forgiveness and prayer.he himself dreamed of
strangled woman but this time saw the face of a gal pal that had
jilted him in this life superimposed. he prayed for the strength to
forgive this woman. this was decades after she had jilted him and run
off w/his friend. uncanny that just a few days later, this same woman
called him and asked him if he'd forgiven her for treating him so
terribly. he assured her that he had!
langley shared this reading:
"then, as the entity sets itself to accomplish that which is creative,
it comes under the law which operates between karma and grace. no
longer is the entity under the law of cause and effect, or karma, but
rather, in grace, he may go on to the higher calling set in him.
i'm not hole poking blue - enjoyed your enthusiasm and speculation...
nina

[usn_5371]

whoaa, thats some theory you've got there, i was gonna try "poke
holes" in it but you've slightly confused me, lol. so i'll only try
tackle some of it, basicly once something happens its cemented in
time/space space/time or whatever, for ever. im not sure you can
change the "past" from what would seam the "future", would'nt that
change the present?
or would that be change the past and future from the present???
our preception of what time is limted, from the little i know of it
time kinda does and kinda does'nt exsist. we can only move about in
3d, fowards, backwards, side to side and up and down, maybe in 4thd
we could move freely in "time", allowing us to go back to the event
and change it, but that seams too easy.
i suppose you can change how you feel about it now, thereby not
feeding energy into that scenario anymore, helping you to get on with
your life in more positive ways, so infact you do change your
present/future by changing how you feel about the past. but is
everything not energy? including thoughts? im lead to belive that
energy cannot be destroyed, and while im thinking of it that would
mean it cannot be created from scratch either. i suppose everything
is constantly changing, albeit slowly (from our point of view).

i recently read a articale by robert bruce that theorizes? that if an
event is feed enough with thoughts then that event becomes a
permanent feature in the next plane above us. maybe after some (or a
considerable) amount of time the event eventually breaks down into
its basic components (like fungus' breaking down a once mighty tree),
but still recorded into the great hall of records for ever.

just a though here... if the creator is "all knowing" they why did it
need to experince itself? did it do it out of ammusement? or is there
such a thing and the creator is our creation? and its our mind that
is expanding, creating, learning. i only go on first hand experiences
and untill i know for sure which is impossible then i wont belive it,
because seeing is not beliving when your mind can create what seams
to be real life, what if all these experiences (oobe's & etc) are an
illusion of our mind. i like to belive in higher states of exsistance
but im also quite logicall, which often leaves me not knowning what
the hell i belive. noone can know anything for certain can they?


peace & love

chris

[Ed]

blue phoenix said:

and perhaps that is why so much but 'spirit' is called an illusion?
that is why time doesn't exist? because running alongside every
event
is the pure light/ love of the healed event. eventually, every
distortion leading back to the first is changed/ healed/ unmade.
the
creator knows itself and there is no physical matter that has
ever
and perhaps will ever exist.

think on that. where's the hole in the theory.
----------

my reply: very well thought. the only reality is the present moment
and we create (if we choose to) both the past and the future from here
in the present moment. what happened in the past in actual physical
matter, energy and time is off in the akashic records somewhere, but
what is real for you is your own thought creations of memory of what
happened along with whatever meanings you create and attach thereto.

these meanings usually include a labeling of importance, such as "this
really hurt me, i need to keep it to help me not experience it again",
or "this is completely routine and uninteresting, so i'll erase it and
not hang on to it". if you have a past traumatic incident that you
hold on to the memory of in order to avoid repeating the pain, you can
thoroughly examine it and change your labeling to something like "oh,
look at this %^&$ that happened to me, and wow, that was then and this
is now, and i don't need to hang on to it anymore because i'm here in
the now and that event is over and done with forever, and i send my
healing energy to myself and whoever else was back there." then the
event doesn't burden you again, unless you discover new elements of
the situation that you didn't heal and integrate the first time. many
paths of therapies, healing methodologies and meditations all work to
facilitate a person clearing away these sorts of old "stuff" and
eventually you get to a point where you can clear away all of what's
left in a wholesale way. you change the formerly painful past to just
neutral, long gone energy of no importance, just minor dust in the
cosmos.

as you mention, when you forgive someone who hurt you back then, your
change of energy communicates through the ethers to that person and
lightens their burden, as they no longer have the unfinished business
of dealing with your wanting to get revenge or whatever other meaning
they attach.

it's my impression that part of going to 4d is a wholesale freedom to
create past and future without the limitations that 3d culture,
religions, and science hold to so tightly.

all the best, ed

[bjorn_nitmou]

wow, i must say, i think you nailed it!! awesome writing, just in time for
christmas.
im a crazy new ager, but i love jesus and christianity, and i love sellabrating
santas birthday!

seriously though, i think jesus would approve of your theory and we should keep
it in mind
as we enjoy this holiday season!






--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "bluephoenix010" <1129@...> wrote:
>
> hey, this has been swimming around in my head for a short while, just
> though i'd post it and see if i can get someone to see where it's
> wrong. this is the only place i can think of. it clearly seems to me
> a bit crazy, but i sort of wanna put it up. anyway, good to make you
> think. nothing to lose right?

[M.W.]

snip

> just a though here... if the creator is "all knowing" they why did it
> need to experince itself? did it do it out of ammusement? or is there
> such a thing and the creator is our creation? and its our mind that
> is expanding, creating, learning. i only go on first hand
experiences...

snip

hi, chris

setting aside for the moment that you are an
avowed empiricist may we sit and reason together?

me first! (:>)

the idea that "god", from eternity, decreed all
things and events from beginning to end, is a
feature of orthodox christian doctrine and one
especially emphasized during the reformation --
as featured in the idea of divine pre-destination.

you can imagine how theologians have to fancy-dance
around the gordian knots all tangled up from that
profound idea! and to tell the truth they do trip
over their own feet so very much of the time as
they spin around in circles.

as it turns out the idea of such a rigid god of
absolute unchangeable power and perfection was
picked up from the ancient grecian philosphers,
most notably, aristotle. (the doctrinaire
catholic theologian, st. thomas aquinas,
respectfully referred to aristotle as
"the philospher.")

needless to say, the theological philosophy --
as derived from the law of one -- has a radically
different orientation.


and from any way i look at it i like it a whole
bunch better! what the ra material points to is
what is described as "process theology".

i confess that when i was a "true believer" -- and
holding to the principle of sola scriptura and that
of the faith "once and forever delivered" -- i had
nothing but scathing contempt for such weasel-minded,
misguided bible-unbelieving wimpy process-theolizers


aaagh! now i are one! ( the lord does work in mysterious ways!)

okay, our lives are not just going through fruitless
motions... we don't understand the phenomena of time,
for sure, and there is the mystery of our future
higher-selves able to make a backward pass to help us
in our pilgrimage of discovery ...that of exploring and
disclosing all that is containable in the finite aspect
of the one creator... in fact we are a finite aspect of
god charged with exploring his/her/its finite being...
its pantheistic mode in contrast to that which represents
the infinite (infinite/finite together encompassed by the
essential descriptive term, panentheism.)

please keep in mind that god is the cosmos but the cosmos
is not god. in the same sense, we are god but not god.

as one of our discusion group sages like to point out;
"the only thing pre-destinated by god is the absolute
sureness of our future joy." all is reconciled. that
concept sure as heck beats the idea of an eternal
hell all to hell! (:>)

okay, chris. does that make any sense?

my best, and xmas solstice greetings to all!

billybobwellbutteredcosmos

[usn_5371]

hey bill

first of all i like to say that i enjoy reading your posts, a great
mix of intelligence & humour.


anyway, about the christian thing, im catholic (by default, something
i wouldnt force on any child myself) but i dont believe in it, i see
its beliefs as primitive or distorted to be honest, most of them
anyway, like the afterlife hell thing, thats not cool, get it, sorry
i could'nt resist. i suppose there is "hell" on earth (and "heaven")
from the things people experience, im not so sure about karma either,
maybe you have to belive/acknowledge in it for it to work??? i
suppose there might of been something good to begin with but then the
powers that be decieded to change "the message" to there liking, i
wish the gnostics had there way instead.

i never said our lives are fruitless, and dont belive so either.
about being an avowed empiricist, that not necessarily true,
i have lucid dreams, prophetic dreams & thoughts, quite alot i will
have thought about something only to hear someone metion it or a
message being posted here on asc2k about it, a few times ive even got
that feeling in the stomach area just before something tramatic
happens. that requires unfounded belief.
this is not "gods work" or any of that stuff, just because something
happens which we dont understand, or we're awe struck, does'nt mean a
higher power is involed, i think we should all give ourselfs alot
more credit.
dont get me wrong i do belive in a intelligent universe, which by
that admission i would be part of the universe experiencing itself.
and an life beyond this one, and the idea of many lives. i dont think
my views are correct either, they're just beliefs, always changing as
i live, which are a bit mixed up at the moment, i dont like to think
about these things or anything too much because it only adds to the
confusing, its like repeating a word over and over, its starts to
lose its meaning. my head is a bit cloudy at the moment so sorry if
this is hard to digest.


about the higher-beings, why do i, as i higher-being need to help me
now? cant i just sit back and relax? lol. otherwise it would be never
ending, which kinda sucks. and if in those higher densitys you have
group souls would'nt that mean there interfering in my free will &
life? that doesnt make sense, if not because were all one then how
can there be karma?


happy solstice to you too.

peace and love

chris




---------------------------------------------------------------------




--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "m.w. (bill )gieskieng" <skykieng@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> please keep in mind that god is the cosmos but the cosmos
> is not god. in the same sense, we are god but not god.
>
> as one of our discusion group sages like to point out;
> "the only thing pre-destinated by god is the absolute
> sureness of our future joy." all is reconciled. that
> concept sure as heck beats the idea of an eternal
> hell all to hell! (:>)
>
> okay, chris. does that make any sense?
>
> my best, and xmas solstice greetings to all!
>
> billybobwellbutteredcosmos
>

[M.W.]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "usn_5371" <cjhayden@...> wrote:
>
> hey bill
>
> first of all i like to say that i enjoy reading your posts, a great
> mix of intelligence & humour.
>
>
> anyway, about the christian thing, i'm catholic (by default,
> something i wouldn't force on any child myself)

bg:hi, chris. i have a long-distance friend who is very dear to me.
she is what is known as a "traditional catholic". she belongs
to a group that objects to changes in the church that came with
vatican two back a half-century ago. through her i got a good idea
of the catholic mind-set -- an experience i missed in my own
"christian" dunking. geri would consider it horrifying that i would
be discussing religion with you as she considers me demonically
possessed -- after all i sat in seances back in the 60's and that
automatically opened the door to demons. out of respect to her i
want to warn you of that possibility, so don't be tricked by me or
my doctrines of demons.

i have gained respect for many aspects of religion that i have
casually ignored in the past. the role of tradition and ritual can
have a very powerful effect on one's spiritual life. from llresearch
much is made of the fact that millions praying over the years do
create a vast spiritual reservoir of entities interested in those
following the same established rites. so, perhaps if you are not
too disaffected you can tap in. for me? i would most likely
receive a bolt of lightening! (last week a woman came by the
store and during our discussion she asked me if i "knew jesus"
i was tempted to reply, "not personally, but i know his mother,
the virgin mary, quite well." but i kept my mouth shut. geri
sent me a protective scapula which i respectfully keep by my
bedside. if you haven't checked it out, llresearch has some
interesting data in response to queries about the lady. and
on the origin of the old testament and the two "jehovah's"
involved in creating it.

snip (some editing for clarity, bg)

> its beliefs are primitive or distorted .... powers-that-be decided
>to change "the message" .... wish the gnostics had their way
instead.

bill g yes. a surprising amount was incorporated from mithraism--
its main rival at one time. much in the new testament seems to
be designed for crowd control through demanding unquestioning
obedience to authority, or else. geri would say that the true core
doctrine comes down unscathed despite the flaws and failures
of church figures. that claim does shut down any argument
directed to charges of doctrinal corruption.

whoa! the gnostics had some strange ideas themselves! gnosticism
seems better suited to small groups rather than as a full-blown,
full-fledged world-wide highly complex organization such as the
catholic model.


> i never said our lives are fruitless.......
>about being an avowed empiricist, that not necessarily true,
> i have lucid dreams, prophetic dreams & thoughts ... i
> have thought about something only to hear it mentioned later, or
see it
> in a posted message on asc2k . .... or i get a feeling in the
stomach
> just before something traumatic happens. that requires unfounded
belief.

bill g. okay, and okay. seems you have some psychic sensitivity.
i don't think such experiences require unfounded belief or not.
you just have such whatever. the question is what you do in
response, shut them down, or accept them, is the determining
question.



> this is not "gods work" or any of that stuff, just because
something happens which we don't understand,

bg. why isn't it? don't forget the rumor that god works through
mysterious means. (actually i think that it is god's spiritual
agents that deal with our lives

>or that we're awe-struck, doesn't mean a higher power is involved, i
think
>we should all give ourselves a lot more credit.

bg: or blame? (:>)

> don't get me wrong, i do believe in an intelligent universe, which
by
> that admission i would be part of the universe experiencing itself.
> and a life beyond this one, and the idea of many lives.

bg: chris, it seems that you are having an argument with yourself.
you have to stop and think about the implications within the idea of
the law of one. our smallest incidental experience causes a
ripple across the entire cosmos -- because we are all hooked
together! shock! this is a holographic universe! do a search on
postings of the subject on asc2k. i think a large part of your
problem
is that you are still dragging along the "normal" conception of the
isolated relationships of god/man/dead rocks. you gotta kick
yourself upstairs a few levels to get a better view. have you taken
the time to actually study and absorb the ra material, the law of one?
...explore the vast subject/material so kindly available on
llresearch?

note ( llresearch is having a contribution drive. until the end of the
year a kindly couple are matching incoming funds! )


> i don't think my views are correct either, they're just beliefs,
always
> changing as i live, and these ideas are a bit mixed up at the
moment,

bill g "there is no hope for a satisfied man" the only difference
between you and me is that occasionally i do think for a period of
time that my view happens to be correct -- then of course after
awhile i have to wipe the slate clean and start over. (:>)



>i don't like to think about these things or anything too much
because it only
> adds to the confusion, its like repeating a word over and over,
after awhile
>it starts to lose meaning. even now my head is a bit cloudy.

bg: don't burn yourself out. there is no urgency so back off. i
would suggest that you say a prayer at night asking for specific
help. q'uo and crew are always glad to help out -- and if nothing
else they can help lift up your spirits in a positive manner (even if
it means just helping to dump of old stuff)just make sure you ask
for help only from those who come in the "christ spirit".
that is the challenge that carla uses to forestall those of negative
polarity.




> about the higher-beings, why do i, as a higher-being, need to help
me
> now? cant i just sit back and relax? lol. otherwise it would be
never
> ending, which kinda sucks.

b.g: well, suck away! in your present incarnation you are not coming
into this 3-d experience as a "higher being". you came in like a
baby being parachute-dropped into the amazon jungle. your memory is
blocked by the "veil of forgetfulness" that we all have to varying
degrees. you came for a particular purpose without being borne down
by excess baggage ...such as being distracted by being a celebrated
mathematical genius or concert pianist -- the struggling hispanic
grape-picker might be einstein coming back to fill in a few
overlooked parts in his experiences.


> and if in higher densities you have group souls wouldn't that mean
> they are interfering in my free will & life?

b.g: well, who are you? " and what is free will? higher density
social complexes avoid influencing you in a manner that will cheat
you of your needed and prized experiences in learning... "let me do
it mommy!" is a legitimate request to be respected and honored. see
for instance the many times that the ra declines to provide an easy
answer.



>that doesn't make sense, if not because were all one then how
> can there be karma?

b.g. chris, i can't make sense of that statement. we are all
ultimately one, but at this level we are under the illusion that we
are separate entities and thus come about life's little
turmoil's...and then there is the element of divided polarity that
doesn't get worked out until much higher levels.

i hope this is some help. thank you for the opportunity to express my
take on the subject!

best, bill g


>
>
> happy solstice to you too. chris
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>
>
>
> --- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "m.w. (bill )gieskieng" <skykieng@>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > please keep in mind that god is the cosmos but the cosmos
> > is not god. in the same sense, we are god but not god.
> >
> > as one of our discusion group sages like to point out;
> > "the only thing pre-destinated by god is the absolute
> > sureness of our future joy." all is reconciled. that
> > concept sure as heck beats the idea of an eternal
> > hell all to hell! (:>)

[amilius2001]

> dear blue,
> can only share here a practical account of one case fr edgar cayce on
> reincarnation by noel langley, chapter "the law of grace."

nina,
cayce mentions, as mr. laqngley observes, the law of grace on
several occasions without explaining exactly what that law is. i
recently figured it out. i had to come up with a definition of grace
that accomodates the many ways in which it has been applied. grace is
the awareness that choice might align potentials with outcomes within
circumstances for appreciation. gracious is the demonstration of this
awareness.
this is the law of grace: all choice generates benefit for
purposes of appreciation.
gracious choices generate benevolence for sharing.
ungracious choices generate instructive consequence that remind
one that a more gracious choice was missed in the taking.
both benevolence and instructive consequence might be graciously
appreciated. the law of grace holds in all cases.
many masters, understanding this law, have taught versions of the
golden rule: choose for others only as one would choose for one's
self. when honored, the golden rule guarantees gracious behavior, not
always 'good' behavior. this is so because we are all one, one
naturally chooses for one's self only what one would choose for one's
self. forgetting to do so, one would naturally design in reminders.
it is the graciously organized design of awareness. it is
observable. the one source designed it this way before imagining
itself as individuated, separated, and many.
namaste.

[Nina]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com, "amilius2001" <angelfatigues@...> wrote:
>> this is the law of grace: all choice generates benefit for
purposes of appreciation. gracious choices generate benevolence for
sharing.
> the law of grace holds in all cases.
> it is the graciously organized design of awareness.

dear amilus,
title of movie, "as good as it gets", came to me, sort of
modified..."grace is as good as it is"...
like the way your words "feel", thanks for posting - nina