Scientific explanations?

A place for anything that doesn't fit into the existing forums
Locked
OnlyNow
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:47 am

Post by OnlyNow » Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:52 am

Presentlybythesea ( me too btw)

you said ".........Even if you don't believe in Spirit or Oneness; I think operating in a manner as if it did exist would still bring about the change needed. "

is this not an impossible aspiration.

If one does not believe in spirit or oneness operating in that manner is not going to happen
When the Pupil is ready the Master appears

User avatar
rosalind
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: Graz, Austria

Post by rosalind » Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:04 pm

:shock: What shattering news about that film ninjin.
I must admit I can't remember which scientist Green was in the film as there were so many, but I quite liked the idea that we create the world with our thoughts and that positive thinking and affirmations only stay on a surface level and can never erase what concepts we get from our ancestors and the society we live in etc. I also like the idea of the watermolecules that change according to the word that is written on the bottle discovered by some Japanese. How proven is that?
rosalind

ninjin

Post by ninjin » Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:35 pm

Nothing in the movie is "proven". What you can say is that nothing holds up to the scientific standard of research. Watching these kind of movies like the secret also is just for making people feel good. Its an "documentary" feelgod movie.
But affirmations and positive thinking can change how you think and react I suppose. Just basic planning and following your plans is the reason behind most successes.

presentlybythesea
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:45 pm

Scientlific explanations

Post by presentlybythesea » Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:11 pm

OnlyNow

You quoted me "..Even if you don't believe in Spirit or Oneness; I think operating in a manner as if it did exist would still bring about the change needed."


You responded: "Is this not an impossible aspiration? If one does not believe in spirit or oneness, operating in that manner is not going to happen."

When I suggested to operate as if you believed we are all One. I meant that even people who don't believe in Oneness are still welcome to participate in the betterment of humankind. As " A Course in Miracles says, " everything that you teach you are learning" As Student points out we are both teachers and students.

So, I think if you want to have a more compassionate world do compassionate acts. You will be teaching compassion. You will learn from such teaching activity. You may eventually come to learn that we are indeed all One.

The "Course" Also says..."what you teach is teaching you. And what you project or extend you believe." So, when Ninjin says, "A lot of ego is involved in helping other people", and I later agreed with that, we are projecting negativity that we then learn. When you extend only peace, you learn only peace.

He also said, "If we all just worked together on one world goal at a time we would get a much happier planet a lot faster." That happens when we extend peace and learn peace. I think if we teach by doing and learn from that doing, maybe we need to just do what we think the world needs to be doing.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." Gandhi, as I tend to repeat.

OnlyNow, I wish you peace,
Presentlybythesea
Every encounter in the present, an opportunity to affect collective human consciousness.

Student
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:44 am
Location: Oregon

Post by Student » Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:06 pm

Hi you guys. Good discussion.

I remember Eckhart on a CD saying that we can never prove stillness or oneness with logic, and can know it only through direct experience.

However, to me the portals into stillness like surrender that Eckhart describes are totally logical and "scientific." So, I don't know if we can prove anything about stillness, but it seems like we can prove why the portals work.

For example, if I tell myself "I refuse to be happy unless I have certainty about physical survival tomorrow," I have just plunged myself into fear and unhappiness because of the law of impermanence of form. The unhappiness that we just inflicted on ourselves is totally logical. It is like saying "I refuse to be happy unless gravity makes rocks fall up."

We only do this to ourselves when we are not aware that we are doing this to ourselves, or out of habit from many years of using a "false need/demand" pattern in our neuropathways. In cognitive psychology I have seen these called automatic irrational responses. Eckhart might call this an unconscious reaction, or a no to now. Compulsive ego thinking is dominated by demanding to get a better now later.

On the other hand, if through giving attention, I surrender that false need/demand, and say "I refuse to demand certainty about physical survival tomorrow, I shed the suffering and can enjoy life where it is in this moment. We might say that stillness resides in a "no need, no demand, state of awareness." It feels like oneness, but I don't know if the oneness can be proven scientifically.

The ironic thing is that wanting physical survival seems to be is fine, and we have a better chance of dealing rationaly with a challenge to physical survival if we are doing it from still awareness (ie from a non-demanding "positive response" rather than from a demanding "reactive response.")

Goldenflutist
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:43 am
Location: North America
Contact:

help

Post by Goldenflutist » Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:38 pm

I was so poised to go and get the audiobook A Course in Miracles, which is the first time I have ever been intrigued enough to go and get something else other than Eckhart's work at this time.

I found a book on audible.com called Secrets of the Immortal: Advanced Teachings from A Course in Miracle and to my horror the first thing the narrator does is lodge a prayer to the "Holy Spirit" to be in charge of the program, and used the personal reference to god and the holy spirit as a "He".

This was very confusing to me. It sounded like the beginning of one of the Pentecostal revivals I used to attend as a child!

I will have to rethink this one. I do not understand why 'God" had to be referred as a “he” for any reason whatsoever. Even glossing it over later by the narrator that we are all one and there is no he/she etc. did not help. Then don’t use those words. My hat’s off to Eckhart for avoiding such contretemps.

I also don’t buy into the idea that I have to reincarnate until I get it right. That sounds like dogma to me. Below is from the site. Click on sample to hear the prayer.

http://www.audible.com/adbl/site/produc ... Cookie=Yes
GF
A dog's eyes reflect the innocence and beauty of nature.

User avatar
heidi
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2703
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 12:37 am
Location: 42nd parallel, Massachusetts, USA
Contact:

Post by heidi » Tue Jul 24, 2007 8:49 pm

I do not understand why 'God" had to be referred as a “he” for any reason
That who he god thing has always rubbed me the wrong way, too. In fact, as with other discussions about strife in the world, I think we can chalk up most suffering, wars and the like to man's ego and his identification with a god made in his own image.
Heidi
http://www.heidimayo.com
wonderment on the third wave

Goldenflutist
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:43 am
Location: North America
Contact:

Post by Goldenflutist » Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:07 pm

I agree heidi. When you start making God into a personal being with powers to do things, it give many the illusion that God, a personal being, can control what happens in this world. Forms come and go, and life goes on without labels.

"Why does God allow bad things to happen!" Children often ask me this in the classroom. Of course adult ask as well. I am so tired of that question. :?

GF
Last edited by Goldenflutist on Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
A dog's eyes reflect the innocence and beauty of nature.

OnlyNow
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:47 am

Post by OnlyNow » Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:17 pm

Hi pbts

yes, I get your drift

My point was that in the practical world that we find ourselves in the chances of someone operating in the mode suggested ( believing in spirit and oneness) just ain't gonna happen unless they actually believe that its true.

I quite agree that if someone did operate in that manner despite not believing
it would still be beneficial, just that in practical terms its unlikely to happen

Incidently, I've read 'A course in miracles', quite a difficult book in terms of repetition'

...though valuable nonetheless
When the Pupil is ready the Master appears

OnlyNow
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:47 am

Post by OnlyNow » Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:39 pm

'He' or 'the god' or' the creator', all terms implying a single personal god supported in 'theist religons' like christianity and islam

Theist religons grew up in societies where precepts generally could not be questioned.

These religons though emanating from masters soon donned other clothing and became moneymaking and controling entities

Most of the wars in Europe and the middle east during the last millenium found the church deeply implicated

I brought this up just recently in another thread in a quote from webwanderer

I think if you except ET's understanding of this world/life this theist conception of a single personal entity has no room
When the Pupil is ready the Master appears

Goldenflutist
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:43 am
Location: North America
Contact:

Post by Goldenflutist » Tue Jul 24, 2007 10:56 pm

These religions though emanating from masters soon donned other clothing and became moneymaking and controlling entities
I agree with you OnlyNow. Unfortunately, if the world is ever going to become a place of non-violence all of us must evolve away from the personal God mentality, or we're stuck.

I was one of those personal God believers even as early as this May, and was able to shed it. It is possible. What a weight it took off of my shoulders as well. I was getting sick and tired of defending an ego created entity.

It’s too bad so many people have so much of their ego which they think is the “real” them invested in organized religion. Many people would rather die than give up the illusion.

GF
A dog's eyes reflect the innocence and beauty of nature.

ninjin

Post by ninjin » Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:01 pm

As I remember from my readings of the Bible and the Qu'rahn God has nothing to do with human behavior. We make our own choices we create our own pain.

OnlyNow
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:47 am

Post by OnlyNow » Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:02 pm

Goldenflutist wrote:
............................................

It’s too bad so many people have so much of their ego which they think is the “real” them invested in organized religion. Many people would rather die than give up the illusion.

GF
...and do gf
When the Pupil is ready the Master appears

Student
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 5:44 am
Location: Oregon

Post by Student » Wed Jul 25, 2007 12:48 am

I agree that many get lost in organized religion. It is easy for the ego to turn a signpost into an identity. We can also do it with ET teachings, if we invent the false need for his signposts to be the only signposts.

You can see the same process of reaching peace of mind in many disciplines.

Eckhart's signpost is to shift out of demanding into observing.

Christianity's is to surrender and let Christ (presence) run life. (eg. not my will but thine be done). It works for some people, who drop all needs/demands. But many in organized religion pick up other replacement demands, like "I demand that my opinion or signpost be the only correct one."

In cognitive psychology the emphasis is on undoing irrational thinking.

In a Course in Miracles (which does use the word God and Holy Spirit, the same way that Eckhart uses presence) the emphasis is on changing how we "see the world" from a "condemning/demanding to get" outlook towards the world to an "accepting/blessing the world" outlook.

The Buddha said that enlightenment is the end of suffering. And suffering is caused by desire. By implication, drop the desire to end the suffering and experience enlightenment.

I hope those who feel offended by the male use of the word God can forgive the authors for their imperfect signposts.

:D :D

OnlyNow
Posts: 152
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:47 am

Post by OnlyNow » Wed Jul 25, 2007 1:17 am

I hope those who feel offended by the male use of the word God can forgive the authors for their imperfect signposts. :D :D
Student, for my part I am not offended if people use generic terms derived from the theist religons in their discussions

If you or anyone else chooses to use words like God ( which ET shys away from for obvious reasons ) so be it

My questioning would only be for clarity.

It would seem a little vague if on one hand those that embrace ET's works choose the very concepts he shy's away from.
When the Pupil is ready the Master appears

Locked