Re: Questioning God, Part 1

2007-3-11 05:23:00

Let us comment on Socioheresy's post. He says:

Trusting only what the Spirit of God tells you is great in theory. The trouble is, in my experience this so-called Spirit of God tells everyone something different.

Everyone I know well who has claimed that "The Spirit of God" was speaking to them has turned out to be either lying or badly mistaken.

Here's what creates the problem. One communication through the soul does not contradict another communication through the soul, BUT over 90 percent of what people call soul communications, contacting the Holy Spirit, God, receiving revelations, Jesus, the Spirit etc. are merely contacts made with the emotional self. A thoughtform may be involved, but always there is emotional feeling that makes the person positive he communed with the divine in some way.

An emotional contact disguised as a divine communication brings information that is peculiar to the person's own thinking and feeling nature which is different than any other person. Thus an emotional revelation will not be in harmony with either reality or other people's emotional revelations - unless they are tapping into the same mass thoughtform.

On the other hand, soul contact brings contact with an essence that vibrates at the registration of true principles. The contact of one person will not contradict the contact of another. Neither will contact at one period of time contradict contact at another time in an individual's life.

There is a principle that helps here. The lower cannot understand the higher, but the higher can understand the lower. The person who makes emotional contact cannot understand or relate to he who has soul contact. He who has soul contact can understand emotional contact as well as soul contact and differentiate between the two.

Visualize the path to liberation as an actual path ten miles long through a diverse landscape. True soul contact begins the journey at the zero point.

Many people without soul contact have been taught about this path and what it will be like. Some concentrate so much on it that they have dreams, visions, strong feelings and imaginings of what will be found upon the path.

The problem for them is that almost all the details they reveal about the path are not only wrong but do not even agree with each other.

On the other hand, those who have actually entered the path and traveled upon it do know what will be found at the various markers of 1, 2, and 3 miles until they get to ten.

Let us say there is a beautiful lake at the three-mile point and the traveler meets two others who claim to have knowledge of the path. The person who has not traveled the path but imagines that he knows will not describe the lake or know anything about it. But if the pilgrim meets a fellow traveler he will indeed know about the lake at the three-mile point and the two can share communion.

Now let us take a traveler who has gone to the seven-mile point who meets another who has gone only to the three-mile point. They both will have knowledge of the path up to the lake and will give the same non-conflicting revelations about it. But the seeker at the three mile point will have no certain knowledge of what lies between the three and seven mile point.

He who is farther along on the path will understand all that has transpired behind him and his knowledge will encompass all that the second traveler has, plus four extra miles. The second traveler can understand up to the three-mile point, but he cannot completely understand the first traveler's knowledge until he also arrives at the seven-mile point.

Even though two who are upon the path will not contradict each other their descriptions may differ just as do our descriptions in physical reality differ.

For instance, visualize two seekers arriving at the three-mile point. One looks to the right and concentrates on taking in the beautiful lake. The second sees the lake also but is captivated by the beautiful mountains on the left.

When teaching one may talk about the mountains and the other concentrate on the lake, but both will be aware that both the mountains and the lake were there. There may be a difference in their description, but no contradiction.

SH:

If I start following some inner voice that I labeled "The Spirit of God", why in the world should I expect to be the exception? Am I so special that my Spirit of God would be the true one?

You will not be the exception. Eventually everyone finds soul contact, but we all find many illusionary paths before finding the right one.

The worst thing we can do is nothing like the two guys paralyzed in the parable of Decision. If we follow the highest we know and move ahead to the best of our ability we will indeed make many mistakes, but the pure in heart will discover their mistakes and correct them. It is only a matter of time before the true seeker enters the path as a knower.

SH:

JJ still has my attention, but not because I believe anything divine is in communication with him. He has it because his ideas are original and interesting to me. I don't care where he gets 'em from, but the less divine contact he outright claims the more likely I am to listen. I probably would not have read The Immortal if it had been published as non-fiction.

"Always follow the highest you know" is a much more useful teaching in my opinion. That is sheer brilliance. It's a megathought, a singularity of pure truth, six words that can change a planet - Screwy Dewey at his finest. Those are indeed immortal words because they work for everyone no matter where they are (hello), and I don't care if he got them off the back of a cereal box.

How'd you know I got that off a cereal box?

Seriously, I'm glad you realize the significance of that phrase. It is indeed something we can all do without worrying if we are high or low on the ladder. It matters not that the highest one knows may be different than the highest seen by another. If we follow the highest we know, and correct our mistakes as we go, then the path of liberation lies ahead. Not only this, but all who do this receive an inner peace and stability even though outside forces may be aligned against their progress.

  

Global Warming Enlightenment:

Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930's the media peddled a coming ice age. From the late 1920's until the 1960's they warned of global warming. From the 1950's until the 1970's they warned us again of a coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate's fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years.

Senate Floor Speech, 
Delivered by:  Senator James Inhofe,
Monday, September 25, 2006
http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759