-
Posts
-
Thanks MidiChlorian for your input. Although Bonita and Brad are struggling to understand what they don’t appear to know, it’s clear they actually do.
Well….I know the Papers teach that Enoch is not perfect (even still, after 35,000+ years since his translation) and that no one becomes perfect by fusion and that our experiential perfecting does not result in perfection until graduation from Paradise. And I know the UB says what it says and does not say what it does not…..and it does not say what you are claiming nod/VA. Should students of the UB at a UB Study Group allow some to claim falsehoods or declare false teachings to go unchallenged?
Bonita’s commitment to accuracy and specificity does indeed cause discomfort in some….I prefer to embrace her knowledge and willingness to share as an opportunity for my own greater appreciation and understanding of what the UB actually teaches us….but that’s just me….recognizing the gift(s) of one for others.
I am struggling to understand the nature of our continued experiential gains in wisdom by further experience as finaliters though once we acquire that level of perfection. Bonita – will we then still gain further wisdom by further experience – sort of like the Michael’s do from their very beginning in time? They are created in perfection and we acquire perfection by ascension upon becoming finaliters?
I am not sure what I don’t appear to know that you claim I do VA/nod. Sounds like an accusation of insincerity to me.
So, are Bonita and I being accused of being dense…..or deceptive…..or what?
I don’t know Bradly. It sounds like so many other VanAmadon/nodAmanaV-isms, like this one:
“The harder you struggle to describe what you don’t know, the more you become what isn’t true.” Tue Sep 20, 2016
Then there’s this one:
“There’s a difference between working and thinking.” Mon Jul 25, 2016
Van/nod’s quotes remind me of Yogi Berra’s quotes, like this one: ” It’s like déjà vu all over again.”
All you can do is laugh and carry on. Who knows what he’s really talking about? It’s hard to tell.
Should students of the UB at a UB Study Group allow some to claim falsehoods or declare false teachings to go unchallenged?
Would this not depend on the experience of the student, and the level of understanding? Then would it also depend on what has been declared as a falsehood?
I am not sure what I don’t appear to know that you claim I do VA/nod.
Interesting Bradly, where you mention in the post from which these statements came from that there may be different levels of experience which adds to one’s level of perfection but, as was mentioned the definition of perfection varies and would then also vary based on experience? If one has little experience, can they also be perfect based on that limitation of experience? Would then someone who has much experience, be more perfect or would they be less perfect depending on the type of experience, experienced, assuming that not all experience is positive? Then there is someone who has experienced negative experiences, where this may have an adverse affect depending on their understanding of positive and negative interactions?
There is no way for you and I to have had the same experiences but, it is possible that we have experienced things differently depending on our previous religious experience. Now, when I mention religious experience, I am referring to how the UB defines these experiences as religious. Then how we understand the way the UB defines or uses this term is different for every reader and or student, therefore for anyone to make a statement that indicated that you “know the UB says what it says and does not say what it does not…” limits everyone to your understanding of the UB, and would also indicate that you have closed you mind to anything different than what you know or don’t know about the UB. So, based on this type of thinking, you don’t know but do know, that your understanding is limited to your experience even if something someone else may say or claim to know cannot be comprehended as being truth, as you see it? Everyone has an opinion, but it would seem that only yours is valid, to you, which is fine, as long as you allow everyone else to have their own as well, without assuming that yours is perfect.
I am struggling to understand the nature of our continued experiential gains in wisdom by further experience as finaliters though once we acquire that level of perfection. Bonita – will we then still gain further wisdom by further experience – sort of like the Michael’s do from their very beginning in time? They are created in perfection and we acquire perfection by ascension upon becoming finaliters?
Sorry Bradly, I missed this. Is this question for me? I’m not certain what the question is, but that hasn’t ever stopped me from yammering on and on. We are evolutionary creatures, the Michaels are not. They bring what they already have into the experiential realm. They do that on seven experiential levels in order to become Masters of experience. Their purpose is already perfect. They’re the teachers of purpose.
As finaliters we have perfected only one type of experience, the experience of purpose. Once we’ve perfected our purpose to carry out God’s will and take the oath for all eternity, our evolution continues to the next spirit level, I think there are seven. But immediately after attaining perfection of purpose, we start working on attaining perfection of understanding, something the Michael’s already have too. The work of perfecting understanding has to do with relationships between all persons and things, something the Master Michael’s are perfect at because they have attained the level of experiential supremacy. I think they will be around to help us then and beyond.
26:4.12 The pilgrim lands on the receiving planet of Havona, the pilot world of the seventh circuit, with only one endowment of perfection, perfection of purpose. The Universal Father has decreed: “Be you perfect, even as I am perfect.”
26:4.13 When, through and by the ministry of all the helper hosts of the universal scheme of survival, you are finally deposited on the receiving world of Havona, you arrive with only one sort of perfection – perfection of purpose. Your purpose has been thoroughly proved; your faith has been tested. You are known to be disappointment proof.
26:4.13 By the time you reach Havona, your sincerity has become sublime. Perfection of purpose and divinity of desire, with steadfastness of faith, have secured your entrance to the settled abodes of eternity; your deliverance from the uncertainties of time is full and complete; and now must you come face to face with the problems of Havona and the immensities of Paradise, to meet which you have so long been in training in the experiential epochs of time on the world schools of space.
26:4.14 Faith has won for the ascendant pilgrim a perfection of purpose which admits the children of time to the portals of eternity. Now must the pilgrim helpers begin the work of developing that perfection of understanding and that technique of comprehension which are so indispensable to Paradise perfection of personality.
This next quote describes what happens when we reach the seventh spirit stage of becoming perfected. The eternal goal is personal divinity realization, first on the level of supremacy, which is the exhaustion of finite possibilities or potentials, then onto ultimacy and finally the absolute. But all potentials can never be exhausted, otherwise there wouldn’t be an eternity. So we keep on experiencing . . . that’s what we do . . . and the Creators keep showing us how and teaching us why . . . that’s what they do.
117:6.7 Upon the completion of the sixth stage of existence and the entrance upon the seventh and final stage of spirit status, there will probably ensue the advancing ages of enriching experience, ripening wisdom, and divinity realization. In the nature of the finaliter this will probably equal the completed attainment of the mind struggle for spirit self-realization, the completion of the co-ordination of the ascendant man-nature with the divine Adjuster-nature within the limits of finite possibilities. Such a magnificent universe self thus becomes the eternal finaliter son of the Paradise Father as well as the eternal universe child of the Mother Supreme, a universe self qualified to represent both the Father and Mother of universes and personalities in any activity or undertaking pertaining to the finite administration of created, creating, or evolving things and beings.
Here’s another quote that better explains how God (and presumably his Sons) experiences:
1:5.14 God, being eternal, universal, absolute, and infinite, does not grow in knowledge nor increase in wisdom. God does not acquire experience, as finite man might conjecture or comprehend, but he does, within the realms of his own eternal personality, enjoy those continuous expansions of self-realization which are in certain ways comparable to, and analogous with, the acquirement of new experience by the finite creatures of the evolutionary worlds.
I think the Creator Sons and the Adjusters are the means by which expansion of the Father’s self-realization occurs, with the Creator Sons being the intermediaries. I know it works that way in our minds and in our lives.
Thanks Bonita…very helpful!! So much to learn….still.
Midi says above:
“There is no way for you and I to have had the same experiences but, it is possible that we have experienced things differently depending on our previous religious experience. Now, when I mention religious experience, I am referring to how the UB defines these experiences as religious. Then how we understand the way the UB defines or uses this term is different for every reader and or student, therefore for anyone to make a statement that indicated that you “know the UB says what it says and does not say what it does not…” limits everyone to your understanding of the UB, and would also indicate that you have closed you mind to anything different than what you know or don’t know about the UB. So, based on this type of thinking, you don’t know but do know, that your understanding is limited to your experience even if something someone else may say or claim to know cannot be comprehended as being truth, as you see it? Everyone has an opinion, but it would seem that only yours is valid, to you, which is fine, as long as you allow everyone else to have their own as well, without assuming that yours is perfect.”
I did not say “I” “know” everything at all. And our experience does not determine what is written…only our appreciation, understanding, application, and usefulness of what is written. You seem to be confusing fact and truth: the UB clearly states, as fact, that fusion is not perfection and we will not attain any form of perfection prior to our Paradise sojourn. VA/nod’s “opinion” is inaccurate and contradicts the UB. I have asked both he and you to post any text which supports such a false claim…all I get is more opinions which contradict the text. My mind is hardly closed in prejudice to my own limitations….I obviously have much to learn and enjoy doing so very much, thank you. I have always found that the more one comes to know, the more you discover how much more there is to learn. This appears to be a universal truth….we will never stop learning until we close our minds and cling to our “opinion” which defy reality.
VA/nod seems to think perfecting is a race and is a dangerous pursuit in a dangerous universe fraught with perils and has claimed that the UB is a DANGEROUS book. I find it is his anxieties and prejudice and disappointment in others that continue to be displayed, none of which might find support in the UB itself. The book says what it says….hardly a difficult concept to understand after all. I am not one who “limits” others but one who learns from others and when some other declares a falsehood or directly contradicts the text, all sincere students should raise voice and post text simply to allow the UB to speak for itself….as it does so well.
It seems to me that a person can’t claim to understand something unless they can explain it and teach it to someone else. Learning requires teaching and teaching requires learning. Some folks don’t like to be taught. There’s nothing you can do about that. Bradly loves to be taught, but his cosmic mind reality reflex kicks in whenever someone else’s so-called “understanding” or “teaching” doesn’t sound right. He won’t be taught by fools. And that’s a good thing. Being able to recognize when something is not “right” is often the first step in looking for what is “right”, or what pings with the reality reflex. It’s really easy to recognize when something is not right. It’s harder to discover and recognize what is right, and that’s the learning process. Once you discover, recognize and interpret it, you want to share it, to act it out or teach it as a service . . . sharing what you know.
There is a crowd of TUB’ers out there who are constantly screaming about their right to interpret the revelation any way they want. Yes, they are totally free to interpret any which way they desire, but they are not free to teach their interpretation unless it is in line with reality. If it doesn’t ping with the three reality reflexes, then it’s poppycock and no one has to listen to it. Lucifer taught poppycock. It’s a shame that some listened to it, but over time, most realized that it didn’t ping with reality. So, I say hooray to Bradly who is quick to recognize when something is not pinging and speaks up about it. Good for you brother.
Experience is defined in this quote:
102:4.2 What is human experience? It is simply any interplay between an active and questioning self and any other active and external reality. The mass of experience is determined by depth of concept plus totality of recognition of the reality of the external. The motion of experience equals the force of expectant imagination plus the keenness of the sensory discovery of the external qualities of contacted reality. The fact of experience is found in self-consciousness plus other-existences — other-thingness, other-mindness, and other-spiritness.
Note that experience has to do with the recognition of reality. And, we know that the recognition of reality never fails to develop in reflective thinkers. It is sad there there are so many backwards, upside down and inside out thinkers who claim to have a special interpretation of TUB, their own personal little revelation. I say, if you can’t teach what you know, then you don’t know it. It’s not that other people’s minds are closed to your teaching, it’s that your teaching makes no sense, it doesn’t ping with reality. So Bradly, when backwards, upside down and inside out thinkers try to bend your mind to suit their opinion and you just can’t do it, don’t apologize. And don’t be upset if you’re called nasty things like prejudiced, closed minded, narrow minded, intolerant of other opinions or biased.
Remember this Van/nodism:
“In other words, the more trouble and pain, the better it is. This is why Jesus came here to live. Because he knows what’s good.” Sat Sep 03, 2016
And boy did Jesus get a lot of those names thrown at him, didn’t he?
This appears to be a universal truth….we will never stop learning until we close our minds and cling to our “opinion” which defy reality.
Bradly, I’m not sure that that is a “universal truth” however, it may be your truth? Besides, are you saying that you have “closed” your mind and are clinging to your “opinion” which defies your “reality”?
I did not say “I” “know” everything at all. And our experience does not determine what is written…only our appreciation, understanding, application, and usefulness of what is written.
Yes, maybe, but you did indicate that you know what the UB says and what it don’t say. Therefore, you are saying that you “know”, what? but then you say that it is our experience that determines how we, or you, have “appreciation, understanding, application, and usefulness of what is written.” Then, these attributes come from your experiences? and if one does not know what your experiences are, then they also could not understand how it is that you know what you know? Yet, it appears that you seem to expect others to know what you know or don’t know to be true as you know it? Thereby, everyone’s experiences changes how they understand what is written, “opinion” as it relates to them self, not you.
VA/nod’s “opinion” is inaccurate and contradicts the UB.
There is a problem with what you seem to be saying here? How is it that you know that ‘VA/nod’s “opinion” is inaccurate’, if his opinion is based on your “opinion”, as you see it? From my experience in reading the UB, I have found many contradictions in the UB but, this may only be that they only seem to be contradistinctions because there are so many different subjects being presented in the UB and the authors chose to use similar wording in their narration which seems to be linked together but in actuality are different within each section where they are presented? By your indication that you know or don’t know, are you taking all these differences into consideration, or are you lumping them all together as one, all having the same plot, so to speak?
VA/nod seems to think perfecting is a race and is a dangerous pursuit in a dangerous universe fraught with perils and has claimed that the UB is a DANGEROUS book. I find it is his anxieties and prejudice and disappointment in others that continue to be displayed, none of which might find support in the UB itself.
How is it that you can say that you “find it is his anxieties and prejudice and disappointment in others …”? What qualifications do you have to be able to make this kind of statement if you are not presenting this as your opinion? Whereby it would seem that you are making a judgment against another, based on what you do not know about another, where it would appear that you are making an accusation but by who’s authority do you imply this? yours, or what you may understand to be supported in the UB, as you believe it or have been taught to think about it through your experiences?
A book can only be dangerous if it is misinterpreted as fact and truth without the support of experience as might be associated to our own understanding of reality?
There is a crowd of TUB’ers out there who are constantly screaming about their right to interpret the revelation any way they want. Yes, they are totally free to interpret any which way they desire, but they are not free to teach their interpretation unless it is in line with reality. If it doesn’t ping with the three reality reflexes, then it’s poppycock and no one has to listen to it. Lucifer taught poppycock.
Can one assume that you are also subject to this statement or are you the only one who is “free to teach their interpretation” to others because you are “in line with reality”? From my reading of the UB, I do not recall that “Lucifer taught” anything, only was presented as having exercised his opinion, as others understood it to be? Can you present any direct quotes attributed to Lucifer which were not opinion or third party narration? What is or are “the three reality reflexes”?
POPPYCOCK ALERT: The Lucifer Manifesto is a teaching. It is a mission statement instructing all members of the mission on how to think and act. It was written by Lucifer, not a third party. A manifesto is not an opinion. A manifesto is a declaration of policy, a program to be carried out.
POPPYCOCK ALERT: Revelation is not dangerous. Truth is not dangerous. But, there is great danger in “. . . succumbing to the error of the circumscribed viewpoint, to the evil inherent in a segmentalized conception of reality and divinity.” (19:1.4)
EDUCATIONAL ALERT: A segmented conception of reality is due to the failure to utilize the three cosmic mind reality recognition reflexes, or reality sensitivity responses, which are:
16:6.4-8 There exists in all personality associations of the cosmic mind a quality which might be denominated the “reality response.” It is this universal cosmic endowment of will creatures which saves them from becoming helpless victims of the implied a priori assumptions of science, philosophy, and religion. This reality sensitivity of the cosmic mind responds to certain phases of reality just as energy-material responds to gravity. It would be still more correct to say that these supermaterial realities so respond to the mind of the cosmos.
The cosmic mind unfailingly responds (recognizes response) on three levels of universe reality. These responses are self-evident to clear-reasoning and deep-thinking minds. These levels of reality are:
1. Causation — the reality domain of the physical senses, the scientific realms of logical uniformity, the differentiation of the factual and the nonfactual, reflective conclusions based on cosmic response. This is the mathematical form of the cosmic discrimination.
2. Duty — the reality domain of morals in the philosophic realm, the arena of reason, the recognition of relative right and wrong. This is the judicial form of the cosmic discrimination.
3. Worship — the spiritual domain of the reality of religious experience, the personal realization of divine fellowship, the recognition of spirit values, the assurance of eternal survival, the ascent from the status of servants of God to the joy and liberty of the sons of God. This is the highest insight of the cosmic mind, the reverential and worshipful form of the cosmic discrimination.
Bradly wrote: I have always found that the more one comes to know, the more you discover how much more there is to learn. This appears to be a universal truth….we will never stop learning until we close our minds and cling to our “opinion” which defy reality.102:2.4 Knowledge is an eternal quest; always are you learning, but never are you able to arrive at the full knowledge of absolute truth.
The use of the words eternal and always kinda make this a universal truth, if universal means affecting all persons capable of questing and learning. Absolute truth is something only God is privy to. None of us will ever become God, so we will never have full knowledge of absolute truth. However, it is an eternal quest which we will always be doing.
I admire Bradly for always questing and learning. And, he is always willing to change his views if he learns something new. The problem with some people here is that they get upset if he is not learning from them, not choosing to accept what it is they are teaching or sharing (i.e., their interpretation). The good thing about truth is that it’s never illogical. It makes sense, it pings with reality, it clicks into place. Much of what I read from the complainers is illogical. Not all of it, I don’t mean to be casting aspersions, but most of the logic and reasoning is despairingly tortured, so much so that it is unintelligible and unusable.
Wait . . . that reminds me of a Van/nodism:
What I’m saying is that the idea that being or thinking in the middle, between true and false never results in quality. Although it seems like it’s okay, gray falls in the realm of the nondoable. Sat Jul 16, 2016
Yeah, it’s something like that. In other words, if the note you’re singing falls in the crack between two keys on the keyboard, it’s not a true tone. It’s a crack-tone, a made up note. That’s what I’m talking about . . . falling in the crack between true and false. It’s wrong. It’s error. It’s not perfect. Oh . . . and since Van/nod is always talking about pitching perfect games . . . falling in the crack between notes is not perfect pitch . . . Ah . . . I love tortured metaphors. Soooooo, Bradly doesn’t tolerate crack-tones, gray nodoable thinking or anything that doesn’t ring true to his reality recognition responses. Way to go Bradly! You’re a maestro, or is it an ace? Eh, whatever . . .
They do say that the higher your education, the more respect you have for other people’s knowledge. Education is the business of life, so someone like Bradly, who has been dedicated to the business of life for a long time can surely recognize real knowledge when he sees it. If he doesn’t see it, then there’s little he can do except attempt to enlighten if he can, which he does.
25:3.12 The higher a creature’s education, the more respect he has for the knowledge, experience, and opinions of others.
71.7.5 Education is the business of living; it must continue throughout a lifetime so that mankind may gradually experience the ascending levels of mortal wisdom, which are: 1. The knowledge of things. 2. The realization of meanings. 3. The appreciation of values. 4. The nobility of work — duty. 5. The motivation of goals — morality. 6. The love of service — character. 7. Cosmic insight — spiritual discernment.
It is difficult to use “POPPYCOCK” to prove that something is “POPPYCOCK”?The Lucifer Manifesto is a teaching. It is a mission statement instructing all members of the mission on how to think and act. It was written by Lucifer, not a third party. A manifesto is not an opinion. A manifesto is a declaration of policy, a program to be carried out.
First of all the “Lucifer Manifesto” is not “teaching.” As you state latter above, in part, that it is “a public declaration of intentions, opinions, objectives, or motives, as one issued by a government, sovereign, or organization.” Where the UB presents a summary of what this “Manifesto” implies but later on in the UB it presents additional implications as to what this “declaration” proposed, however there are no exact quotations as to specific narration, therefore can only be assume as “opinion” either from the authors or Lucifer. Thereby, in order to bring this so called “Manifesto” to action, it would require as certain amount of authority, which was eventually striped from those who presented the “declaration”. Also, the UB presents another example of a “manifesto” which was declared and put to action in Jesus’ time, which would imply that Jesus’ presentation was similar to what Lucifer presented to be proved through action.
(1718.2) 154:2.1 Sunday, May 8, A.D. 29, at Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin passed a decree closing all the synagogues of Palestine to Jesus and his followers. This was a new and unprecedented usurpation of authority by the Jerusalem Sanhedrin. Theretofore each synagogue had existed and functioned as an independent congregation of worshipers and was under the rule and direction of its own board of governors. Only the synagogues of Jerusalem had been subject to the authority of the Sanhedrin. This summary action of the Sanhedrin was followed by the resignation of five of its members. One hundred messengers were immediately dispatched to convey and enforce this decree. Within the short space of two weeks every synagogue in Palestine had bowed to this manifesto of the Sanhedrin except the synagogue at Hebron. The rulers of the Hebron synagogue refused to acknowledge the right of the Sanhedrin to exercise such jurisdiction over their assembly. This refusal to accede to the Jerusalem decree was based on their contention of congregational autonomy rather than on sympathy with Jesus’ cause. Shortly thereafter the Hebron synagogue was destroyed by fire.
Revelation is not dangerous. Truth is not dangerous. But, there is great danger in “. . . succumbing to the error of the circumscribed viewpoint, to the evil inherent in a segmentalized conception of reality and divinity.” (19:1.4)
I’m glad that you used a portion of the UB, to make your argument here, (19:1.4), which is as I implied to Bradly in the use of certain section of the UB which may not apply to a specific scenario being attempted for an example. Where the following is the a more complete representation:
(215.1) 19:1.4 In this connection, however, it may be noted that Teacher Sons are the supreme co-ordinating personalities of Trinity origin. In such a far-flung universe of universes there is always great danger of succumbing to the error of the circumscribed viewpoint, to the evil inherent in a segmentalized conception of reality and divinity.
(215.2) 19:1.5 For example: The human mind would ordinarily crave to approach the cosmic philosophy portrayed in these revelations by proceeding from the simple and the finite to the complex and the infinite, from human origins to divine destinies. But that path does not lead to spiritual wisdom. Such a procedure is the easiest path to a certain form of genetic knowledge, but at best it can only reveal man’s origin; it reveals little or nothing about his divine destiny.
(215.3) 19:1.6 Even in the study of man’s biologic evolution on Urantia, there are grave objections to the exclusive historic approach to his present-day status and his current problems. The true perspective of any reality problem — human or divine, terrestrial or cosmic — can be had only by the full and unprejudiced study and correlation of three phases of universe reality: origin, history, and destiny. The proper understanding of these three experiential realities affords the basis for a wise estimate of the current status.
(215.4) 19:1.7 When the human mind undertakes to follow the philosophic technique of starting from the lower to approach the higher, whether in biology or theology, it is always in danger of committing four errors of reasoning:
(215.5) 19:1.8 1. It may utterly fail to perceive the final and completed evolutionary goal of either personal attainment or cosmic destiny.
(215.6) 19:1.9 2. It may commit the supreme philosophical blunder by oversimplifying cosmic evolutionary (experiential) reality, thus leading to the distortion of facts, to the perversion of truth, and to the misconception of destinies.
(215.7) 19:1.10 3. The study of causation is the perusal of history. But the knowledge of how a being becomes does not necessarily provide an intelligent understanding of the present status and true character of such a being.
(215.8) 19:1.11 4. History alone fails adequately to reveal future development — destiny. Finite origins are helpful, but only divine causes reveal final effects. Eternal ends are not shown in time beginnings. The present can be truly interpreted only in the light of the correlated past and future.
(215.9) 19:1.12 Therefore, because of these and for still other reasons, do we employ the technique of approaching man and his planetary problems by embarkation on the time-space journey from the infinite, eternal, and divine Paradise Source and Center of all personality reality and all cosmic existence.
A segmented conception of reality is due to the failure to utilize the three cosmic mind reality recognition reflexes, or reality sensitivity responses, which are:
I’m not sure how your explanation refers to your use of “the three reality reflexes” but I can understand where you may have associated this to the presentation you used, which is viable but does not seem to explain your original use of the phrase in question? Where as you indicate is more associated to the “cosmic mind”, which one could only assume that in its reference that you have access too, and if it is not exclusive then all others have the same access, making any exclusivity common.
As I stated before, some posts are so entirely illogical that there is no reasonable response. What Jesus presented is similar to what Lucifer presented?? Sigh. A manifesto closing the synagogues to Jesus’ teaching is the same as the Lucifer Manifesto??? Yet a manifesto is not a public teaching or guideline to action???? Another sigh. And the Lucifer Manifesto is just an opinion of what Lucifer meant, not actually what he said or wrote????? Many more sighs. Ahhhh . . . . I think I’ll just let irrationality be seen for what it is and move on. Best to get out of the way and let the train that’s jumped the tracks come to its own stop. Which it will.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.