-
Posts
-
196:3.2 is saying instead of trying this religious consciousness and getting this….
1.science
2. philosophy
3.truth
4. personality (using a religious consciousness) *truth is missing….
Try this out…..
1.physical reality
2. intellectual reality
3. spiritual reality
4. personality (using a philosophical consciousness) *truth is meant to be here relating to all 3-fold reality not just spiritual reality
(2094.1) 196:3.2 There are just three elements in universal reality: fact, idea, and relation. The religious consciousness identifies these realities as science, philosophy, and truth. Philosophy would be inclined to view these activities as reason, wisdom, and faith — physical reality, intellectual reality, and spiritual reality. We are in the habit of designating these realities as thing, meaning, and value.
There is no way you can get a balanced 3-fold triune viewpoint if your viewpoint of 3-fold reality is (science, philosophy, truth). That is a biased viewpoint. Its a viewpoint that is focussing only on truth as it relates to religious reality.
196:3.2 The religious consciousness identifies these realities as science, philosophy, and truth.
The religious consciousness identifies a triune reality: science, philosophy and truth. That’s what I said.
Science is the same thing as: fact, reason, knowledge, thing, matter, physical reality, body.
Philosophy is the same thing as: idea, logic, meaning, wisdom, coordinate consciousness, intellectual reality, mind
Religion is the same thing as: faith, value, relation, truth, spiritual reality, spiritual insight, spirit
It doesn’t matter what you call each part of a triune reality. The various names are given from different levels of viewpoint, but they are all the same thing. The bottom line, though, is expressed in this next quote which states that religion grasps the whole of the entire cosmos and offers this insight to philosophy which attempts to make it jive with physical reality (facts, things, science ). But philosophy fails without revelation. Why is that? Because philosophy, even true philosophy, is still a function of the material mind. Religion involves the soul, a higher reality level.
102:3.10 Science seeks to identify, analyze, and classify the segmented parts of the limitless cosmos. Religion grasps the idea-of-the-whole, the entire cosmos. Philosophy attempts the identification of the material segments of science with the spiritual-insight concept of the whole. Wherein philosophy fails in this attempt, revelation succeeds, affirming that the cosmic circle is universal, eternal, absolute, and infinite.
1107.2) 101:2.12 Revelation as an epochal phenomenon is periodic; as a personal human experience it is continuous.
It is logical (in the philosophical sense) to me that both are happening in my experience with this book.
Truth is not meant to relate to just spiritual reality though, and the religious consciousness merely identifies science and philosophy it does not actually view the activities therein. (science, philosophy, truth) is not a triune viewpoint. Its a biased viewpoint. We are supposed see scientific truth, philosophical truth and religious truth. Which is what a philosophical consciousness does, it literally views the activities of physical reality, intellectual reality and spiritual reality as opposed to merely identifying them.
A true philosophical consciousness is like the cosmos. The cosmos are a synthesis of power and the spirit personality of the Supreme. We are conforming our mind to the cosmos hence the term “cosmic consciousness”. We can synthesis our material and spiritual consciousness together into one holistic consciousness.
Also this quote is basically suggesting that revelation is philosophical. By saying that revelation finishes off what philosophy is attempting to do, its basically an omission that it is philosophical. This quote is not saying that philosophy fails to do what revelation does, but “wherein” philosophy fails revelation succeeds. That is like me saying wherein I failed to sweep my floor a vacuum came along and finished the job.
“Wherein philosophy fails in this attempt, revelation succeeds, affirming that the cosmic circle is universal, eternal, absolute, and infinite.”
Also this quote is quite literally saying that revelation is philosophical….
1105.5) 101:2.1 The fact of religion consists wholly in the religious experience of rational and average human beings. And this is the only sense in which religion can ever be regarded as scientific or even psychological. The proof that revelation is revelation is this same fact of human experience: the fact that revelation does synthesize the apparently divergent sciences of nature and the theology of religion into a consistent and logical universe philosophy, a co-ordinated and unbroken explanation of both science and religion, thus creating a harmony of mind and satisfaction of spirit which answers in human experience those questionings of the mortal mind which craves to know how the Infinite works out his will and plans in matter, with minds, and on spirit.
Its a biased viewpoint
How can God-consciousness be biased? Bias means prejudiced, unfair, one-sided.
(1281.5) 117:3.3 Said Jesus: “I am the living way,” and so he is the living way from the material level of self-consciousness to the spiritual level of God-consciousness. And even as he is this living way of ascension from the self to God, so is the Supreme the living way from finite consciousness to transcendence of consciousness, even to the insight of absonity.
The Supreme relates to our consciousness. “The insight of absonity” is a philosophical perspective that we gain after mota. Why would the authors link absonity up with the Supreme and tell us that the supreme is the way to a transcendence of consciousness? Its all connected to a philosophical/moral consciousness. A mind that is like the cosmos is like the supreme. The cosmos are both matter and spirit combined as one whole (power-personality synthesis). A mind that is a synthesis of material and spiritual consciousness is like the cosmos. We are dedicating our mind to the harmony of the cosmos and that is a dedicating to the Supreme. With this mind we can take religion to its supremacy.
Its a biased viewpoint
How can God-consciousness be biased? Bias means prejudiced, unfair, one-sided.
God-consciousness can be experienced by a philosophical consciousness, because God is more than a “he” a merely religious viewpoint will never yield god-consciousness because it is only focussing on one aspect of God while ignoring the rest. A moral/philosophical consciousness can be truly religious, there is still true religion.
A merely spiritual consciousness is only looking at one facet of reality, God encompasses is the source of all reality.
“(2097.3) 196:3.35 And God-consciousness is equivalent to the integration of the self with the universe, and on its highest levels of spiritual reality.”
God-consciousness is equivalent to the integration of the self with the universe, in other words we have to have a consciousness that is like the universe so that we can integrate with it.
a merely religious viewpoint will never yield god-consciousness because it is only focussing on one aspect of God while ignoring the rest.
Then why do they say that when you search for God you are searching for everything and when you find God you find everything? Seems pretty unbiased and all encompassing to me. There’s not a whole lot being ignored when you have “everything”.
A religious viewpoint is a Godward viewpoint, a spiritual viewpoint referred to as insight. It has nothing to do with favoring organized religion at the expense of science and philosophy. In fact, we are told that religion cannot be isolated from everything else (102:6.1) Religion is an integral part of life on all levels.
God is spirit and spirit is the highest personality reality attainable. Consciousness of God, which is a religious or spiritual consciousness, is the prime motivating influence in life. It is the ultimate in mortal mind attainment (71:7.13). It seems to me that the UB would not say such a thing if doing so results in ignoring 2/3 rds of reality.
117:6.9 When men search for God, they are searching for everything. When they find God, they have found everything.
56:10.8 . . . and thus even cosmology leads to the pursuit of divine reality values — to God–consciousness.
102:6.1 To isolate part of life and call it religion is to disintegrate life and to distort religion. And this is just why the God of worship claims all allegiance or none.
I’m totally convinced that the UB is a religious text and I don’t think I’ll be changing my mind on that any time soon. Revelation is always spiritual.
I can understand a claim that the FER is a philosophical text, but not any claim that it is not a religious text…or a historical text….or a scientific text. Is it not all of these? But do not philosophy, history, science – when factually functional – bridge the mind to God and a personal religious experience of and with Him? Isn’t philosophy but the bridge of understanding to enthuse the mind to transfer the seat of identity? And isn’t such a transfer the foundational point and function of the Revelation? The transcendent and transformative reality of personal religious experience is the point and purpose IMO – all the rest is multi-dimension points of context and reference upon which to launch the mind into soul building…one soul at a time.
I don’t understand the declaration that the UB is not a religious text. Except by different definition of religion than the one presented therein. Religion is the act, philosophy the idea, science the facts…how do we disentangle their relation to reality….or to each other?
A merely spiritual consciousness is only looking at one facet of reality, God encompasses is the source of all reality. “(2097.3)196:3.35 And God-consciousness is equivalent to the integration of the self with the universe, and on its highest levels of spiritual reality.” God-consciousness is equivalent to the integration of the self with the universe, in other words we have to have a consciousness that is like the universe so that we can integrate with it.
Scott it is worth looking at P2097:2 as well:
The great challenge to modern man is to achieve better communication with the divine Monitor that dwells within the human mind. Man’s greatest adventure in the flesh consists in the well-balanced and sane effort to advance the borders of self-consciousness out through the dim realms of embryonic soul-consciousness in a wholehearted effort to reach the borderland of spirit-consciousness–contact with the divine presence. Such an experience constitutes God-consciousness, an experience mightily confirmative of the pre-existent truth of the religious experience of knowing God. Such spirit-consciousness is the equivalent of the knowledge of the actuality of sonship with God. Otherwise, the assurance of sonship is the experience of faith. And God-consciousness is equivalent to the integration of the self with the universe, and on its highest levels of spiritual reality.
This quote suggest to me that there is nothing “mere” about spirit-consciousness. It is the ultimate reality….contact with the divine presence. Do you see any difference between God-consciousness and cosmic consciousness?
Do you see any difference between God-consciousness and cosmic consciousness?
I know this question was for Scott but I can’t help myself to point out the difference. God-consciousness has to do with a person, God the Father. Cosmic consciousness has to do with the evolving Supreme. When a person applies his God-consciousness to life, does the will of the Father, he is contributing to the Supreme and developing a cosmic consciousness, becoming a cosmic citizen.
Cosmic consciousness has to do with circle mastery. We’re told that even a seventh circler can be God-conscious, but as the we progress in circle mastery, we become more conscious of the Supreme, which is a cosmic consciousness.
The revelatory part of the UB is meant to open our eyes to our cosmic potential and this can be accomplished by first becoming God-conscious. Because we have personality, we are already self-conscious. The next step in personality realization is to become God-conscious which consists of three differential reality realizations: mind-consciousness (the idea of God); soul-consciousness (the ideal of God); and, spirit-consciousness (the spirit of God) (5:5.11).
Philosophy is part of mind-consciousness concerning the idea of God. As we progress we gain soul-consciousness and intimately learn of his nature as a personal experience, then eventually, we are meant to reach the dim embryonic borders of the soul and arrive at spirit-consciousness of the Adjuster himself.
Now, it appears to me that it all comes down to this: is the UB a revelatory text or is it not? If the UB is only a philosophical text, it cannot be revelatory, since we are told that revelation is invariably spiritual. If the UB is merely a philosophical text, then it is NOT a revelation and I am inclined to put it back on the shelf with Plato and Socrates. But since I haven’t been able to put the book down for 44 years and each time I read it I discover something new and exciting, I know by personal experience that it is indeed revelatory and therefore must be spiritual. It’s a lock for me.
True philosophy is spiritual. I can see how the word philosophy makes people feel uncomfortable because they think of every rationalization scheme that has been invented about reality by people who call themselves philosophers. True philosophy is like the cosmos, its a synthesis of 3-fold reality as one holistic whole. The philosophic realm is also the moral realm. When someone enters into the higher domain within their mind they enter a spiritually moral domain. The spiritual moral consciousness is the spiritual philosophic consciousness and that is a cosmic consciousness. Its also religious. True philosophy is a co-ordinate consciousness, its co-ordinating a 3-fold harmony in our mind. When there is that 3-fold triune harmony in our mind, our personality can personalize in that domain because its a harmonizing influence. Like meets like. If our mind doesn’t conform to the Supreme and the cosmos our personality finds it difficult to function in a system that isn’t harmonious. Consider the phrase kindred minds. We can have minds that are all functioning cosmically and are connected to each other through the individuality of the whole. Our mind takes on that harmony of the whole of the universe which is the harmony of the supreme. We are integrating our self with the universe.
A co-ordinate consciousness is just unifying these 3 independent forms of cosmic thinking. There is a balance and harmony between all 3 when unified.
“But when they become unified, they produce a strong character consisting in the correlation of a factual science, a moral philosophy, and a genuine religious experience. And it is these three cosmic intuitions that give objective validity, reality, to man’s experience in and with things, meanings, and values.”
@Julian God-consciousness is like soul-consciousness in that we become conscious of the reality God in our mind (god-consciousness) or conscious of our soul (soul-consciousness). You can have god-consciousness and soul-consciousness in a cosmic consciousness.
You can have god-consciousness and soul-consciousness in a cosmic consciousness.
Yes. That is correct; but it is a progression. And I, personally, would capitalize the word God. God-consciousness with a small “g” may have nothing to do with the person of the Father.
We begin with self-consciousness as personalities and when we enter the 7th circle we are capable of God-consciousness. As we progresses in circle mastery, we become soul-conscious. Once we become soul-conscious we are capable of cosmic consciousness because it is a realization of the Supreme. People in the higher circles are actually more conscious of the Supreme. Also, recognition of the Supreme is actually a morontia consciousness.
p1211:1 110:6.16 Perhaps these psychic circles of mortal progression would be better denominated cosmic levels—actual meaning grasps and value realizations of progressive approach to the morontia consciousness of initial relationship of the evolutionary soul with the emerging Supreme Being. . . . A seventh or sixth circler can be almost as truly God-knowing—sonship conscious—as a second or first circler, but such lower circle beings are far less conscious of experiential relation to the Supreme Being, universe citizenship.
Here is another way to look at this. We are conforming our mind to the cosmos and the Supreme and we are conforming our will to the will of the Father. A dual consecration (will and the way of God). The Supreme is not actually personal in our universe so I don’t think our relationship to evolutionary Deity is one that involves our personality as it does our Father. However the Supreme is the way to a transcendence of consciousness and the mother influence is a strong influence in our evolutionary development as the authors state. If we conform the harmony of our mind to the cosmos we will have a 3-fold perspective of (things, meanings and values). We can enjoy a relationship to the Supreme and to God the Father at the same time, one is intellectual and the other is personal.
The authors drop a big hint IMO when they tell us how the “insight of absonity” relates to our relationship to the Supreme, especially considering that mota and “the insight of absonity” are philosophical insights.
1281.5) 117:3.3 Said Jesus: “I am the living way,” and so he is the living way from the material level of self-consciousness to the spiritual level of God-consciousness. And even as he is this living way of ascension from the self to God, so is the Supreme the living way from finite consciousness to transcendence of consciousness, even to the insight of absonity.
This paragraph IMO highlights that dual consecration.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.