11-29-2015, 05:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-30-2015, 07:00 PM by 4Dsunrise.
Edit Reason: spelling corrections
)
4dphilosophyproject (at) gmail.com
If you have a serious interest in developing the IUP/AOP and producing a philosophical treatise and curriculum for mainstream university study send an email. Elaborate on what your goals are and what specific interests you may have related to this project.
What is the Ra group's theism when they speak of "the One Infinite Creator"?
How does this theism affect the role of evolution using the stages of metamonism and of polarity and reincarnation as a means of evolving towards becoming a transcendent co-creator (like becoming a next octave Guardian or gaining infinite spiritual mass)?
What about when the Quo group speak of a "Godhead" which means "Supreme Being" or when the Hatonn group speak of the "Father" which sounds like a Christian version of an anthropomorphic father figure?
And what is the Orion alliance's version of a Creator? How does their theistic philosophy motivate them to feel and behave the way they do?
These seem like interesting and scholarly questions to address for a LOO scholar.
I'm no LOO scholar but do like the more loose and creative R&D approach which allows this theism topic to be explored, and so with that, on to the topic.
The Ra group make reference to a mysterious and transcendent Creator God or Prime Mover and so this part describes a basic transcendent monotheistic God.
.
References are:
"the Creator desires to know Itself"
"in the previous octave there is the mover and the moved"
"I greet you in the love and the light of the One Infinite Creator"
"Go forth and rejoice in the power and peace of the One Creator"
They also make reference to the Creator God as subdividing to become everything in the Universe to the extent where "every thought is the Creator's" and "every particle of light is the Creator" etc, and this reflects a potentially known and immanent pantheistic God. Potentially known implies no mystery or infinite beingness to aspire towards.
A quick note to clarify in session 14
The Ra group are referring to the pantheon of Egyptian gods and so this term should be called pantheonism or polytheism and not pantheism. But, to be fair, pantheism can imply more than one god that is immanent such as if there is a belief in dualism ie primal male and female substance as with a father and mother deity. Then it can be called poly-pantheism as opposed to mono-pantheism.
Panentheism
And so combining transcendent monotheism with immanent mono-pantheism results in mono-panentheism or just plain panentheism when understood as a monism of one substance or one being. This panentheism can be called "all-one-theism" to signify the Ra group's panentheism.
To further clarify panentheism vs pantheism and also pandeism using these specific definitions.
Pantheism: The belief that the physical universe is equivalent to God, and that there is no division between a Creator and the substance of its creation. It is the belief that the Universe is identical with divinity, or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent god. Pantheists thus do not believe in a distinct personal, anthropomorphic or transcendent god. (therefore no Godhead, Supreme Being or Father referred by Quo and Hatonn)
There is no need for a spiritual Logos influence to have a Primal Triad of Free Will, Love and Light and thus no need for veiling or reincarnation to aspire towards becoming a transcendent being and eventual merging with the Great Central Sun. It's more like the notion of the non-evolutionary Hindu interplay of Lila in the similar pandeism. (according to the following definitions)
Pandeism: A belief that God became the entire universe and no longer exists as a separate being. Therefore all is co-creator and there is no existing one Infinite Creator to know Self or a Prime Mover/Motivator with Logoic motivation to evolve towards transcendence.
Lila is comparable to the Western theological position of Pandeism, which describes the Universe as God taking a physical form in order to experience the interplay between the elements of the Universe. It is interplay and experience but with no explicit motivation to evolve towards transcendence and Oneness and therefore no particular need for polarity or veiling or reincarnation.
Scientists ie Albert Einstein and Carl Sagan, who don't believe in reincarnation, and therefore not an extended spiritual evolution, were considered pantheists or pandeists.
Sagan's son says this:
Lovela vs Lila
Meaningful and motivational interplay and experience involving evolution towards transcendence and Oneness does imply the need for polarity and veiling and reincarnation and this kind of interplay may be called Lovela to emphasize the need for love and meaning.
So Lovela is comparable to the interplay and experience of Panentheism or "all-one-theism".
Panentheism: Like Pantheism, the belief that the physical universe is joined to God. However, it also believes that God is greater than the material universe, and so the divine both transcends and is immanent in everything. The notion of Quo's Godhead or Supreme Being seems consistent with this while the 4D Hatonn's notion of Father seems a bit too restrictive and anthropomorphic.
As with a male and fatherly Sun God deity, the father archetype probably resonates for them to contemplate the panentheism or "all-one-theism" nature of both an immanent and transcendent Creator.
A basic definition from philosophers is that anthropomorphism means "the unjustified projection of human qualities on things that are not human" -- but perhaps it is justified and perhaps the notion of personalizing the Creator God is also justified because of the inter-subjectivity of our experience with the Creator/Experiencer.
This inter-subjectivity is a branch of philosophy called "phenomenology" which comes very close to new age philosophy and worth explaining in another post.
But to sum up -- the evolutionary stages of metamonism using IUP/AOP and the motivational intention of panentheism with the Lovela, or interplay of Infinity and Unity, or All and One -- "all-one-theism" -- seem like a perfect fit.
For a colorful example, think of the movie Avatar and the ever-evolving Navi from the planet Pandora who worship in a panentheistic way.
In a later post a revised IUP/AOP derivation of panentheism from the Xandria thread will be explored.
If you have a serious interest in developing the IUP/AOP and producing a philosophical treatise and curriculum for mainstream university study send an email. Elaborate on what your goals are and what specific interests you may have related to this project.
What is the Ra group's theism when they speak of "the One Infinite Creator"?
How does this theism affect the role of evolution using the stages of metamonism and of polarity and reincarnation as a means of evolving towards becoming a transcendent co-creator (like becoming a next octave Guardian or gaining infinite spiritual mass)?
What about when the Quo group speak of a "Godhead" which means "Supreme Being" or when the Hatonn group speak of the "Father" which sounds like a Christian version of an anthropomorphic father figure?
And what is the Orion alliance's version of a Creator? How does their theistic philosophy motivate them to feel and behave the way they do?
These seem like interesting and scholarly questions to address for a LOO scholar.
I'm no LOO scholar but do like the more loose and creative R&D approach which allows this theism topic to be explored, and so with that, on to the topic.
The Ra group make reference to a mysterious and transcendent Creator God or Prime Mover and so this part describes a basic transcendent monotheistic God.
.
References are:
"the Creator desires to know Itself"
"in the previous octave there is the mover and the moved"
"I greet you in the love and the light of the One Infinite Creator"
"Go forth and rejoice in the power and peace of the One Creator"
They also make reference to the Creator God as subdividing to become everything in the Universe to the extent where "every thought is the Creator's" and "every particle of light is the Creator" etc, and this reflects a potentially known and immanent pantheistic God. Potentially known implies no mystery or infinite beingness to aspire towards.
A quick note to clarify in session 14
Quote:the entities of the nation Egypt were in a state of pantheism, as you may call the distortion toward separate worship of various portions of the Creator.
The Ra group are referring to the pantheon of Egyptian gods and so this term should be called pantheonism or polytheism and not pantheism. But, to be fair, pantheism can imply more than one god that is immanent such as if there is a belief in dualism ie primal male and female substance as with a father and mother deity. Then it can be called poly-pantheism as opposed to mono-pantheism.
Panentheism
And so combining transcendent monotheism with immanent mono-pantheism results in mono-panentheism or just plain panentheism when understood as a monism of one substance or one being. This panentheism can be called "all-one-theism" to signify the Ra group's panentheism.
To further clarify panentheism vs pantheism and also pandeism using these specific definitions.
Pantheism: The belief that the physical universe is equivalent to God, and that there is no division between a Creator and the substance of its creation. It is the belief that the Universe is identical with divinity, or that everything composes an all-encompassing, immanent god. Pantheists thus do not believe in a distinct personal, anthropomorphic or transcendent god. (therefore no Godhead, Supreme Being or Father referred by Quo and Hatonn)
There is no need for a spiritual Logos influence to have a Primal Triad of Free Will, Love and Light and thus no need for veiling or reincarnation to aspire towards becoming a transcendent being and eventual merging with the Great Central Sun. It's more like the notion of the non-evolutionary Hindu interplay of Lila in the similar pandeism. (according to the following definitions)
Pandeism: A belief that God became the entire universe and no longer exists as a separate being. Therefore all is co-creator and there is no existing one Infinite Creator to know Self or a Prime Mover/Motivator with Logoic motivation to evolve towards transcendence.
Lila is comparable to the Western theological position of Pandeism, which describes the Universe as God taking a physical form in order to experience the interplay between the elements of the Universe. It is interplay and experience but with no explicit motivation to evolve towards transcendence and Oneness and therefore no particular need for polarity or veiling or reincarnation.
Scientists ie Albert Einstein and Carl Sagan, who don't believe in reincarnation, and therefore not an extended spiritual evolution, were considered pantheists or pandeists.
Sagan's son says this:
Quote:Einstein wrote, "We followers of Spinoza see our God in the wonderful order and lawfulness of all that exists and in its soul as it reveals itself in man and animal," "My father -- Carl Sagan -- believed in the God of Spinoza and Einstein, God not behind nature, but as nature, equivalent to it."
Lovela vs Lila
Meaningful and motivational interplay and experience involving evolution towards transcendence and Oneness does imply the need for polarity and veiling and reincarnation and this kind of interplay may be called Lovela to emphasize the need for love and meaning.
So Lovela is comparable to the interplay and experience of Panentheism or "all-one-theism".
Panentheism: Like Pantheism, the belief that the physical universe is joined to God. However, it also believes that God is greater than the material universe, and so the divine both transcends and is immanent in everything. The notion of Quo's Godhead or Supreme Being seems consistent with this while the 4D Hatonn's notion of Father seems a bit too restrictive and anthropomorphic.
As with a male and fatherly Sun God deity, the father archetype probably resonates for them to contemplate the panentheism or "all-one-theism" nature of both an immanent and transcendent Creator.
A basic definition from philosophers is that anthropomorphism means "the unjustified projection of human qualities on things that are not human" -- but perhaps it is justified and perhaps the notion of personalizing the Creator God is also justified because of the inter-subjectivity of our experience with the Creator/Experiencer.
This inter-subjectivity is a branch of philosophy called "phenomenology" which comes very close to new age philosophy and worth explaining in another post.
But to sum up -- the evolutionary stages of metamonism using IUP/AOP and the motivational intention of panentheism with the Lovela, or interplay of Infinity and Unity, or All and One -- "all-one-theism" -- seem like a perfect fit.
For a colorful example, think of the movie Avatar and the ever-evolving Navi from the planet Pandora who worship in a panentheistic way.
In a later post a revised IUP/AOP derivation of panentheism from the Xandria thread will be explored.