-
Posts
-
I wish I could help you but I have no idea what you’re talking about.
Gee, where have I heard that before?I think you hit on it.
The third person of diety has several designations and every one, the authors seem to use in conjunction with what he is doing it seems to me.I just thought that “unity” was more appropriate for the Conjoined Actor in this designation as opposed to “integrate” which I thought would be more suiting to the function of the God of Action.
The authors are precise and technical with word usage and I try to put it together so I understand their intent. Not easy. Their meanings are not always on the surface. Also Sometimes I read into stuff more than is there.
I just thought that “unity” was more appropriate for the Conjoined Actor in this designation as opposed to “integrate” which I thought would be more suiting to the function of the God of Action.
Hmmm are you saying the Conjoined Actor and the God of Action are two different persons?
I just thought that “unity” was more appropriate for the Conjoined Actor in this designation as opposed to “integrate” which I thought would be more suiting to the function of the God of Action.
Hmmm are you saying the Conjoined Actor and the God of Action are two different persons?
Oh no. Just the language used by the authors to tie function to the various names they use for him.
Paper 9:1.1 The Third Source and Center is known by many names, all designative of relationship and in recognition of function: As God the Spirit, he is the person-
ality co-ordinate and divine equal of God the Son and God the Father. As the In- finite Spirit, he is an omnipresent spiritual influence. As the Universal Manipula- tor, he is the ancestor of the power-control creatures and the activator of the cosmic forces of space. As the Conjoint Actor, he is the joint representative and partnership executive of the Father-Son. As the Absolute Mind, he is the source of the endowment of intellect throughout the universes. As the God of Action, he is the apparent ancestor of motion, change, and relationship.Oh, okay. In terms of unifying, isn’t that something each individual personality is supposed to be doing for the Supreme? If the Conjoint Actor did the unifying, then what role would our personalities play? So, I guess I still don’t understand your point exactly. Oh well.
Why and how do you think religion ” . . . ennobles the commonplace drudgery of daily living” (100:0.2)? I think the word “ennobles” is important. They could have said “enables”, but they didn’t. Ennobling is much better than enabling, which is what a lot of people seem to want in this modern age. What this world needs is Jesus. Jesus is the great ennobler:100:7.18 Jesus was the perfectly unified human personality. And today, as in Galilee, he continues to unify mortal experience and to co-ordinate human endeavors. He unifies life, ennobles character, and simplifies experience. He enters the human mind to elevate, transform, and transfigure it. It is literally true: “If any man has Christ Jesus within him, he is a new creature; old things are passing away; behold, all things are becoming new.”
Oh, okay. In terms of unifying, isn’t that something each individual personality is supposed to be doing for the Supreme? If the Conjoint Actor did the unifying, then what role would our personalities play? So, I guess I still don’t understand your point exactly. Oh well.
I can only say that to me, when Conjoint Actor functions in this level:
104:4.43 [Part III]
The Conjoint Actor universally integrates the varying functional aspects of all actualized reality on all levels of manifestation, from finites through transcendentals and on to absolutes.It seems that it is more of a function of unity, unifying – as opposed to integrating.
Probably a silly point to pick on.It seems that it is more of a function of unity, unifying – as opposed to integrating. Probably a silly point to pick on.
How do you see the difference between unifying and integrating?
It seems that it is more of a function of unity, unifying – as opposed to integrating. Probably a silly point to pick on.
How do you see the difference between unifying and integrating?
Only this: from Webster I’d summarize that unity happens after the integration effort.
But clipped from 9:1
“As the Conjoint Actor, he is the joint representative and partnership executive of the Father-Son”
doesn’t this seem like the domaine of unity?Based on another 9:1 clip:
“As the God of Action, he is the apparent ancestor of motion, change, and relationship.”
This fits integration function imho.But I take the authors at their word. It’s just curious.
They are always trying to raise our consciousness, get us to think.100:1.3 Growth is not truly indicated by mere products but rather by progress.
What do you think this means? Does it mean that we cannot assess our own growth by the production of fruit?
100:1.3 Growth is not truly indicated by mere products but rather by progress.
What do you think this means? Does it mean that we cannot assess our own growth by the production of fruit?
Given the examples in the same 100:1.3 paragraph I’d say that (in hindsight because we are told growth is unconscious) real growth can only be assessed by the production of fruit, real progress.
As it states”enlargement of vocabulary does not signify development of character”
Wouldn’t character development be the identifiable change that has real value? The real sort of change that results in growth? Assessable only later after it has all happened?Otherwise yours is a very interesting question and gets me to thinking more about growth and progress.
I’d like to read how others interpret this.
100:1.3 Growth is not truly indicated by mere products but rather by progress.
What do you think this means? Does it mean that we cannot assess our own growth by the production of fruit?
Yes…I think so….the full quote context indicates growing experiential wisdom and spirit progress…it’s not what you know so much as what you do with what you know? Perhaps the quote refers to creedal and ceremonial religious practice vs. a growing understanding and idealism expression of the inner light regarding the fruits?
100:1.3 (1094.5) Give every developing child a chance to grow his own religious experience; do not force a ready-made adult experience upon him. Remember, year-by-year progress through an established educational regime does not necessarily mean intellectual progress, much less spiritual growth. Enlargement of vocabulary does not signify development of character. Growth is not truly indicated by mere products but rather by progress. Real educational growth is indicated by enhancement of ideals, increased appreciation of values, new meanings of values, and augmented loyalty to supreme values.
For example…by the time I was 13, I could recite hundreds of Bible verses…did such knowledge indicate religious growth or mere education and memorization?
Bonita wrote: Does it mean that we cannot assess our own growth by the production of fruit?
While looking up somethng else, I ran across this: “Jesus always insisted that true goodness must be unconscious.” (140:8.26) I am of the opinion that we cannot assess our own growth by spiritual fruitiness. “The factors of religious growth may be intentional, but the growth itself is unvaryingly unconscious” from Paper 100 100:1.8.
100:3.7 Man cannot cause growth, but he can supply favorable conditions. Growth is always unconscious, be it physical, intellectual, or spiritual. Love thus grows; it cannot be created, manufactured, or purchased; it must grow. Evolution is a cosmic technique of growth. Social growth cannot be secured by legislation, and moral growth is not had by improved administration. Man may manufacture a machine, but its real value must be derived from human culture and personal appreciation. Man’s sole contribution to growth is the mobilization of the total powers of his personality — living faith.
I have no idea how to measure, assess, evaluate, determine my own spiritual fruitiness or growth for that matter. I think anyone who is trying to do that is spending way too much time thinking about himself/herself. I myself have spent too much time in the past dwelling on myself, as to whether I was spiritual enough. It’s very self-centered, but maybe it’s a phase people go through to get to the other side of self-preoccupation. I think some people, like me, want to figure out what their spiritual standing is, as though it could be measured, as though production of spiritual fruit could be measured and weighed in a balance.
But your question, Bonita, implies there is some way to measure personal progress, spiritually speaking. Here’s one suggestion from the book:
156:5.18 As you grow older in years and more experienced in the affairs of the kingdom, are you becoming more tactful in dealing with troublesome mortals and more tolerant in living with stubborn associates? Tact is the fulcrum of social leverage, and tolerance is the earmark of a great soul. If you possess these rare and charming gifts, as the days pass you will become more alert and expert in your worthy efforts to avoid all unnecessary social misunderstandings. Such wise souls are able to avoid much of the trouble which is certain to be the portion of all who suffer from lack of emotional adjustment, those who refuse to grow up, and those who refuse to grow old gracefully.One other thought
Can’t find the quote but: we cannot cause growth, we are grown. It’s a top down thing.
We exercise our will and make choices that are in sync with the big picture which is the process of perfecting. Exercising our will is assessable isn’t it? We reach up and the ministries reach down and the process of perfecting (growth and progress) begins. We put it together or assess the process sometime later after the fact.We put it together or assess the process sometime later after the fact.
I can see my own progress by comparing how I used to be, if that is what you mean. And this reminds me of this reference about the past, present and future:
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.. . . and this snippet from Rodan:[…] Human beings unfailingly become discouraged when they view only the transitory transactions of time. The present, when divorced from the past and the future, becomes exasperatingly trivial. Only a glimpse of the circle of eternity can inspire man to do his best and can challenge the best in him to do its utmost. And when man is thus at his best, he lives most unselfishly for the good of others, his fellow sojourners in time and eternity. (160:2.9)We put it together or assess the process sometime later after the fact.
I can see my own progress by comparing how I used to be, if that is what you mean. And this reminds me of this reference about the past, present and future:
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.. . . and this snippet from Rodan:[…] Human beings unfailingly become discouraged when they view only the transitory transactions of time. The present, when divorced from the past and the future, becomes exasperatingly trivial. Only a glimpse of the circle of eternity can inspire man to do his best and can challenge the best in him to do its utmost. And when man is thus at his best, he lives most unselfishly for the good of others, his fellow sojourners in time and eternity. (160:2.9)Yup, good ole hindsight.
I still think that differential between growth and progress is important to think about.
One possible indicator of growth is a unique feeling that could easily be missed or misinterpreted when the soul grows as result of some decision/action that results in actualizing a spirit related value. Isn’t this really like creating something? (Any quotes that tie soul growth to feelings)??
One possible indicator of progress could be found in the people who are impacted by your growth related decision/action??
So maybe one could interpret growth as personal and progress as social???
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.