I do not pretend to know what my experience will be after the body of Joseph E. Duncan III dies. I only know that my experiences will never end.
I do not know this because of anything I have read or have ever been told. And I do not know this because it comforts me to believe it. It does not comfort me; it humbles me and would terrify me if I let it.
But I have faith in the Universe that determins every experience I will ever have. I believe that all experience is ultimately purposeful. And I believe THAT because it DOES comfort me.
In other words, I don't KNOW my experience (i.e. my life) is purposeful, I only BELIEVE it is because to believe anything else causes me to suffer. And I don't BELIEVE I will live forever, I KNOW I will from having direct knowledge of The Eternal Being.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
Materialism vs. Science
It has come to my attention that I have been mistaking materialism for science. But now I realize that I have been giving science a bad rap.
Materialism is a metaphysical ideology that even most scientists confuse with science itself. To claim that something metaphysical is unscientific is to imply that materialism is not a metaphysical viewpoint. My own confusion, often refering to science as a neo-religion, has been the result of my mistaking materialism for science.
Materialism exhibits all of the dogmatic and irrational faith-based belief systems that has defined religion from the beginning (note, shammanism and buddhism are not religions by themselves, but are turned into religions by those who like most scientists today, tur the experiences expressed by the shammans and buddhas into dogmatic belief systems).
The book, Science and the Near-Death Experience, by Chris Carter (see Fifthnail book list), has an excellent chapter that addresses just this confusion (chapter 16, p. 235). It opened my eyes, but note, that does not mean that my views have changed, only the words and terms I use to express those views have changed.
Materialism is a metaphysical ideology that even most scientists confuse with science itself. To claim that something metaphysical is unscientific is to imply that materialism is not a metaphysical viewpoint. My own confusion, often refering to science as a neo-religion, has been the result of my mistaking materialism for science.
Materialism exhibits all of the dogmatic and irrational faith-based belief systems that has defined religion from the beginning (note, shammanism and buddhism are not religions by themselves, but are turned into religions by those who like most scientists today, tur the experiences expressed by the shammans and buddhas into dogmatic belief systems).
The book, Science and the Near-Death Experience, by Chris Carter (see Fifthnail book list), has an excellent chapter that addresses just this confusion (chapter 16, p. 235). It opened my eyes, but note, that does not mean that my views have changed, only the words and terms I use to express those views have changed.
Friday, June 10, 2011
Philosophical Vanity
Any philosophy, theology, or ideology that presumes humans to be more significant than other living creatures is biased and useless.
If we cannot see ourselves as a part of the continuous spectrum of life then we only deprive ourselves of any significance at all.
So, if we have souls, then so must germs. If we have eternal life, then so must an insect. And if it is possible at all to know the source of our being, then it must be possible for all beings to equally know that source!
That does not mean that our individual relationships with (i.e. understanding of) our source must be the same. It only means that our ability to have a relationship with (or and understanding of) our source must be derived from the same principles. It is a mistake to take any intellectual understanding of our existence as devine or imperical at all. True understanding must have such a nature as to exist independently of all thought or intellect.
If we cannot see ourselves as a part of the continuous spectrum of life then we only deprive ourselves of any significance at all.
So, if we have souls, then so must germs. If we have eternal life, then so must an insect. And if it is possible at all to know the source of our being, then it must be possible for all beings to equally know that source!
That does not mean that our individual relationships with (i.e. understanding of) our source must be the same. It only means that our ability to have a relationship with (or and understanding of) our source must be derived from the same principles. It is a mistake to take any intellectual understanding of our existence as devine or imperical at all. True understanding must have such a nature as to exist independently of all thought or intellect.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
To Know Me Is To Love Me!
If you can put what you believe into words then you do not yet know what you believe.
I say that I believe in One Consciousness (i.e. “One God”). But to say this is not a true expression of my belief. My belief transends words. That is why I often seem to directly contradict myself. I can say just as honestly that there are an infinite number of gods (or conscious beings). Though these statements seem to contradict each other they are both true, but only in their own sense of expression. The ultimate truth about the unity or duplicity of consciousness is inexpressible. But – and this is important – it is knowable! (Gnostic)
In fact, it is directly known by all conscious beings. It is what I might call true belief, if that term wasn't as wore out as it is. To me, true belief is what everyone believes, but only a few realize. All religions are based on true belief, but no religion manages to convey it. It is impossible to convey, at least not with any human words.
To know God is to know yourself; and to know yourself is to know (and understand) me!
I say that I believe in One Consciousness (i.e. “One God”). But to say this is not a true expression of my belief. My belief transends words. That is why I often seem to directly contradict myself. I can say just as honestly that there are an infinite number of gods (or conscious beings). Though these statements seem to contradict each other they are both true, but only in their own sense of expression. The ultimate truth about the unity or duplicity of consciousness is inexpressible. But – and this is important – it is knowable! (Gnostic)
In fact, it is directly known by all conscious beings. It is what I might call true belief, if that term wasn't as wore out as it is. To me, true belief is what everyone believes, but only a few realize. All religions are based on true belief, but no religion manages to convey it. It is impossible to convey, at least not with any human words.
To know God is to know yourself; and to know yourself is to know (and understand) me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)