-
Posts
-
What about a midwayer we are not that far removed from them on the mind-latter.
There are two types of midwayers. Secondary midwayers have access to the spirits of worship and wisdom and are intellectually endowed with the morontia transition type of mind, which is like the mind of our souls. Primary midwayers use the angelic technique which has inherent spiritual insight capability. Presumably their minds have the capacity to be in contact with spirit presence. In order to have spiritual insight there has to be a relationship with a spirit personality, probably the Creator Son and Spirit in their case (32:3.6).
Personality is essential to spiritual insight because spiritual insight is God-consciousness. God-consciousness is not just being conscious of the intellectual idea of God at the mind level, it is to know God as a personal experience. Spiritual insight is not solely a mind function. Cosmic mind is impersonal, it cannot provide spiritual insight, it can only provide recognition of spirit reality and that is it. To see spirit, one must have an actual spirit to look at, otherwise you’re looking at something imaginary. I don’t know how simpler to put it. I’m wondering if other people are having similar difficulty in understanding what I’m trying to say.
If the minds eye is not spiritual how can we see any spiritual reality?
The material mind doesn’t see spiritual reality, it becomes conscious of a spiritual reaction because of an experience of the soul. Spiritual reality can only be experienced, which is why it is a phenomenon of personality . It is the soul that experiences spiritual reality and the soul is a relationship with God, a spirit person.
p1136:1 103:6.6 Man experiences matter in his mind; he experiences spiritual reality in the soul but becomes conscious of this experience in his mind.
I think a new thread is a good idea (Bonita, it’s your suggestion and your lead, as long as the great points already made by you and TUB are reviewed in the initial post).
Hmmm. That’s a ton of work. So, if I start the thread I have to post a summary of all my points made so far and then Scott would summarize his? I’ll think about it. I’m kinda lazy ya know. Meanwhile, how about a more general topic like, “What’s the Difference Between the Various Insights?” I think starting out with a question is the best way to get conversation going. Or maybe we’ve already beaten this thing to death.
Well, anything would do really, to enable writers to examine the revealed hints about cosmic and spiritual insight in a new thread.
In response to the original Philosophical-or-Religious question of this thread, I think that the revelators would be OK with the emphasis on philosophy provided we kept in mind their idea of philosophy – a kind of method of viewing the world which allows a responsible scientific attitude to co-exist in the same dome alongside a living, growing religious appreciation of total reality. A good philosophy simply allows the mind of a scientist to coexist with the soul of a religious believer without necessitating a division of personality or a compartmentalization of experience.
This the UB achieves by providing a new, revealed cosmology in conjunction with an enhanced view of spirit realities.
I like it Reader.
My problem was with the statement that the UB is NOT a religious text, but a philosophical text. I agree with you that the revelators give philosophy credence but that does not take away from the fact that the book is called an epochal religious revelation.
I agree with Reader, there are a lot of other topics that are really a different topic. A new thread would help.
Spiritual reality can only be experienced, which is why it is a phenomenon of personality . It is the soul that experiences spiritual reality and the soul is a relationship with God, a spirit person.
If spiritual insight is innate in cosmic endowed minds, don’t you think that cosmic mind can experience spiritual reality? Morontia mind is just a higher form of our mind. Morontia mind is a cosmic mind variant.
192.5) 16:6.9 These scientific, moral, and spiritual insights, these cosmic responses, are innate in the cosmic mind, which endows all will creatures.
If spiritual insight is innate in cosmic endowed minds, don’t you think that cosmic mind can experience spiritual reality?
Think about that. Cosmic mind is impersonal. How can it experience anything?
Morontia mind is a cosmic mind variant.
The morontia mind is associated with the cosmic mind; it evolves by direct contact with cosmic mind. Morontia mind is a dual mind dominated by one will.
Think about that. Cosmic mind is impersonal. How can it experience anything?
The phrase “cosmic endowed minds” is a reference to someone who is endowed with a cosmic mind. I thought that was a given, but I guess it wasn’t.
Bradley offered this quote on another thread:
(1124.5) 102:6.3 The religionist of philosophic attainment has faith in a personal God of personal salvation, something more than a reality, a value, a level of achievement, an exalted process, a transmutation, the ultimate of time-space, an idealization, the personalization of energy, the entity of gravity, a human projection, the idealization of self, nature’s upthrust, the inclination to goodness, the forward impulse of evolution, or a sublime hypothesis. The religionist has faith in a God of love. Love is the essence of religion and the wellspring of superior civilization.
What do you suppose they mean by “philosophic attainment”? I know they describe, more or less, a 4-fold perception of a personal God as the result of philosophic attainment. But, how do you achieve “philosophic attainment”?
But, how do you achieve “philosophic attainment”?
I think it is by first, the ministry of the Adjutants of wisdom and worship, second by the witness and testimony of the Spirit of Truth and TA, or personal revelation, third by the deliverance of Epochal Revelation – but then, by the unification of these witnesses, testimonies, and revelators by the harmonization of mind – the personalized and experiential philosophical unification of religion and science – or “philosophical attainment”. ?????? Truth filled or truthful perspective of cosmology, origin, destiny, cause, and effect.
But, how do you achieve “philosophic attainment”?
I think its just a matter of going UP, in our minds. I think there is a philosophic/moral domain there by grace because of the 3 cosmic intuitions of the Holy Spirit. I think there is enough there to get us started. But I think revelation helps tremendously in reforming our mind so that it takes on a more reflective philosophic character.
So continuing on with the theme of this thread. I found this to be very interesting. According to this quote TUB is providing for the “authoritative elimination of error”. So that means there cannot be errors in the book if it is authoritatively eliminating them.
(1109.6) 101:4.5 Truth may be but relatively inspired, even though revelation is invariably a spiritual phenomenon. While statements with reference to cosmology are never inspired, such revelations are of immense value in that they at least transiently clarify knowledge by:
(1109.7) 101:4.6 1. The reduction of confusion by the authoritative elimination of error.
Yet this quote below says that there are “errors on the face of the associated cosmologies therein presented”. And that the cosmology presented is going to be outgrown in a very short time. So how can there be “errors on the face” and yet an “authoritative elimination of error”? That is a blatant contradiction. Not to mention the part about the cosmologies being outgrown in a short period of time.
(1109.2)101:4.1 Because your world is generally ignorant of origins, even of physical origins, it has appeared to be wise from time to time to provide instruction in cosmology. And always has this made trouble for the future. The laws of revelation hamper us greatly by their proscription of the impartation of unearned or premature knowledge. Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time. Accordingly, future students of such a revelation are tempted to discard any element of genuine religious truth it may contain because they discover errors on the face of the associated cosmologies therein presented.
They key to all of this is that the authors are not talking about the 5th epochal revelation in this paragraph above. Look at this line “Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time”. The cosmology of TUB is not being presented as part of a religious revelation. If it was there would be “errors on the face of the associated cosmologies”. But there isn’t any errors in TUB, not even on the face of it.
330.2) 30:0.2 It is not possible to formulate comprehensive and entirely consistent classifications of the personalities of the grand universe because all of the groups are not revealed. It would require numerous additional papers to cover the further revelation required to systematically classify all groups. Such conceptual expansion would hardly be desirable as it would deprive the thinking mortals of the next thousand years of that stimulus to creative speculation which these partially revealed concepts supply. It is best that man not have an overrevelation; it stifles imagination.
This book is meant to be used for the next thousand years. Its not meant to be outgrown in a short period. If there is a religious revelation, the cosmology can be looser with errors in it. But with a philosophical revelation you can’t have errors in the cosmology or else it would be discarded in a short period of time.
Bradly wrote: Truth filled or truthful perspective . . .I really like that. So you’re thinking that philosophical attainment is a truth filled perspective of reality. But what does that mean? Truth is “a living and flexible factor in the philosophy of the universe,” (2:7.2) and truth is also an experience of the soul.(130:4.10) So, I’m thinking that the philosophical attainment they’re referring to must be at the soul level. Not sure though. It could be a form of divine wisdom.103:6.15 The highest attainable philosophy of mortal man must be logically based on the reason of science, the faith of religion, and the truth insight afforded by revelation.TUB wrote: I think its just a matter of going UP, in our minds.I’m curious Scott, what’s the difference between going upward and going inward?I’m curious Scott, what’s the difference between going upward and going inward?
I think that “inward” is upward. :) The word ascend literally means going up, but we could say that the ascension upward is also inward IMO.
So how can there be “errors on the face” and yet an “authoritative elimination of error”? That is a blatant contradiction.
I believe you might be misinterpreting the meaning of the sentence: “The reduction of confusion by the authoritative elimination of error”.
Revelation points out errors of philosophy, or logic. The sentence has nothing to do with the actual errors of science or even the errors of religion. It’s talking about errors in thinking about science and religion. So in that way, it is concerned about philosophy since philosophy is a function of thought. Revelation is the technique of sorting the errors of evolutionary thought by exposing them to a spiritual light (truth). Revelation takes erroneous philosophy and illuminates it with spirit, which is why the revelation of truth is a spiritual experience at the soul level, the only place spirit can be perceived.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.