Jump to content
Urantia Book Forum, conversations with other readers

Absonite

Members
  • Content Count

    343
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Absonite last won the day on March 22 2013

Absonite had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

460 Excellent

About Absonite

  • Rank
    Poster

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.
  1. Yesterday I visited and made an inquiring/validating post on the new forum. http://urantia-uai.org/social/ I had to sign up a new account there. I encourage you folks to go there and sign up. It is different indeed to the layout style of this forum. This may very well be my last post here.
  2. Those offline conversations are not boring for me as much as they are just not topically about religion, spirituality, etc... So everything comes down to what is personally and socially demonstrated, regardless of words or conversational topic. Eg. There's no talking about God, love, compassion, the after life adventures, etc... as a topic - instead, love, peace, joy, and all the other principles must be demonstrated directly through facial expressions, mannerisms, tone of voice, and behavior. It's almost totally about deeds, not words - because the guys truly don't care much about the words at all. Words are just fancy ways to use the mouth to shape tones, for them. What really matters, is meaningful, and is the truth to them is the message you convey through the pitch and tonal inflection behind the words, and all the other "body language" used. The rest is just "lip flapping" or BSing as far as they're concerned. And as much as that can sound ideal to like minded individuals, it is as much of an extreme situation as conversation here - but in the inverse way. When the guys get into trouble, it's deep trouble like a pit they truly have problems climbing out of, because there's no room for giving and receiving nuances of helpful meaning in a brute body language based communication culture. They tend to be motivated first and foremost by primal instincts. Etc... And makimg it through all that is as exhausting for me as I have no doubt discussing the absolutes of infinity would be for them. But I have learned a lot from the guys about what truly motivates me to relate with them according to personal demonstration. And it comes down to foundational topical discussions online in the inverse direction.
  3. I only know a meager handful of people offline who can handle conversations that delve into clarifying the cosmological, theological, and philosophical foundations of various religious and spiritual topics. Beyond such rare people, most of the conversations offline which I have about religion and spirituality focus answering questions, or providing suggestions for perspective refreshers, to people who are suffering personal crises. But let me be completely clear here: such conversations are in the severe minority of the conversations that I have in a given month. The overwhelming majority of conversations offline which I have with others, on a daily basis, topically have nothing to do with religion and or spirituality. That's right. The overwhelming majority - as in 95 to 98 percent of them. And they revolve around the basic concerns of daily living: eating, sleeping, excreting, and sharing various accounts and recounts of the challenges, successes, and failures to accomplish the enjoyable fulfillment of those missions. Any explicitly religious or spiritual talk (beyond merely parroting popular platitudes) is dismissed as totally irrelevant for successful, hard core, no nonsense, pragmatic living. The only topics that are somewhat permissible to go into with a bit more detail are: fantasy football; fanatically blind team-sport support for national politics; concupiscent conquests; hunting paraphernalia; and, anything mechanical below the techno-level of computers. All else is summarily ignored in preference for reacting strictly based upon your body's sex, race, and age (in that order) - as well as your body's demeanor as expressed through tone of voice, facial expression, and mannerisms. What your body looks like, and how you say something, means so much more than anything you actually say that the situation is nearly astonishingly and astoundingly stupefying. And I'm not exaggerating here one bit. The personally loving service that I practice in daily life offline happens at an entirely different linguistic, socio-economic, and interactive level - or it truly cannot be accomplished. I have to be prepared and motivated enough to remain capable of engaging them all without losing my mind - according to how I am piloted from within - according to a demonstration of personal and social deeds, rather than with words, for all the aforementioned reasons above. And conversations like these here online are the only mental gym I regularly have to run on the treadmill, use the machines, and curl-, dead-, and bench- lift the heavy cosmotheosophical weights on a regular basis to stay in competitive shape. Other than buying books, I'm also not involved at all with the "Urantia Movement" offline. I've known about the various conferences and meetings and study groups, etc... for decades now. But I just haven't received the message from within to join in with any of them. So being online here, able to talk shop with other readers, is great for me.
  4. Yes, -Scott- the Revelator bemoans the shortcomings of language about this. Meaning cannot be put in a box. And words are not boxes. Instead of being boxes, words simply are arrows that point at - that indicate, reference, etc... - meanings. The Revelator knows that, and longs to be able to do what cannot be done (otherwise the Revelator simply would have done it!) using language. And we've been given a very clear explanation that simply points at the meaning for the word love: love is the desire to do good to others ((56:10.21) Notice that the phrase whole hearted is not part of that explicit explanation. When one desires to do good to others, one is loving. That's what love simply is. If you desire to do good to others, then you are loving. That's the basic bottom line. Period. Since you know that you're on the level of brotherly love, then that means that you do indeed know that you are a loving person on that level. Loving as a brother means that you desire to do good to others as a brother. That's a pile of horsepucky, -Scott- You already know God - and you already know where God exactly and intimately is - with specific reference to your Fragment. And I'm not making any sort of rarefied use of the word know here. Getting what I simply mean does not require gyrating through any sort of semantic gymnastics while hanging up on the rings of esoteric and arcane metaphysics. This is just simple basic affirmation of what you have learned from basically reading the UB, and what you are currently experiencing as a personality with a Fragment of God. The quote from (195:10.5) clearly says that going the second mile is grasping your brother in love and sweeping him on under spiritual guidance toward the higher and divine goal of mortal existence. You have already affirmed that you are on the level of brotherly love. Therefore, you are already walking the "second mile". Whether or not anyone else chooses to run with popular notions about love - whether or not anyone else goes beyond convention and duty - and whether or not you have only a half-hearted desire does not matter because of what you have affirmed yourself as already doing and what the Revelator has said such doing means (loving) by simple definition. You are a person. You know God. You already are engaged in performing personally loving service - because you already desire (as caring) to do good to others as a brother. Therefore you already are a "second-miler". And you can continue progressively working with your Fragment to deepen that desire to whole heartedness, thereby deepening the personally loving service.
  5. Ok, so now wait a minute here... You're not a very loving person?? What?? How can you not be a loving person?! Since you are a person, and Since you care about people, and thus desire (in any way) to enact that care for the good of those people - and Since the UB explicitly tells us that love is the desire to do good to others (56:10.21) - then you are loving (you love) those people. Therefore, you are a loving person. Right?
  6. -Scott- do you realize that admitting you don't think it's possible to perform personal loving service over the "interwebs" reflects you and whatever you share here? You've just affirmed that you feel separated from us personally, and affirmed that whatever you share here (although something of a service) is not done to offer personal loving service, because you think doing so (offering personal loving service) here is impossible - for you. Yes. For you. Regardless of why you might think that no one else can do it just because you cannot do it - just focusing on the fact of what you think is not possible with regard to performing personal loving right here and now - why you are here engaging all these conversations? Very seriously: Since you realize this for yourself - Since you cannot fathom how it's possible to perform personal loving service here online - and Since you know that we're all supposed to be striving to do that (performing personal loving service to the best of our abilities in whatever way(s) we can) - - then why exactly are you not totally devoting your efforts in the realm (offline) where you feel that you actually can fulfill the mandate of offering personally loving service to others?
  7. Who can? Well ... God can! And does! That's it. Everyone else is going to be engaging the endless adventure to do so - but always having more to comprehend and (to me) more to experience.
  8. The way the UB uses the word comprehend is very different than how I (and nearly everyone I know) uses that term. The implication with how the UB repeatedly talks about us being unable to comprehend various things, beings, situations, and processes seems to me to be about something more than merely mentally grasping explanations for, and getting the gist of, how stuff works. Instead, the way the Revelators use the word comprehend implies some kind of epic encapsulation for a topic that only can be achieved from using a vantage native to beings of specific cosmic levels relevant for a topic. i.e. that which is eternal is that which has neither start (beginning) nor finish (ending). In my everyday use of this language, accepting that definition right there is enough for accurately saying that I comprehend what eternal-eternity-eternality is - (that which eternal-eternity-eternality means). But such everyday use of that term is not what the Revelators seem to me to mean when they use the word. They seem to me to mean grokking (epically encapsulating on a relevant level of being) eternal-eternity-eternality - which only really can be accomplished by eternal beings! So I basically have all but completely stopped using the term comprehend when talking about certain UB teachings, given that what I mean by the word is so different than what the Revelators mean by the term. In light of that, my answer to your question, Nelson is exactly what Bonita just pointed out: God, The I AM, (and associated issues like infinity and eternality) is always going to remain incomprehensible - according to that very special way the Revelators use the term comprehend (and it's inverse: incomprehensible). But we can get a certain kind of basic mental gist for successfully thinking about (and accurately discussing) various topics within the universe frame, such that they colloquially "make sense".
  9. As I know it, experience in general is involvement with situations happening. I experience living a human lifetime on Urantia. I experience various interactions with things, and relationships with beings. etc... those situations are happening, and I experience them because I am involved with them. When I am not invokved with a situation happening, then I am not experiencing that happening situation. My relationship with God is a situation happening with which I am involved. My relationship with God had a beginning, but may not (and I am working to ensure that relationship does not) have an ending. Although the finite references situations that have both beginnings and endings, the finite also includes such situations that had beginnings but may not have endings (0:1.11). Therefore, my relationship with God is a finite experience, which can be said to continue perpetually forward. If settling the Grand Universe in light and life means the exhaustion of all finite experience - then that suggests that the experience of my relationship with God (which is finite - albeit open ended) could be exhausted. And I just don't see how that ever could happen.
  10. Conversation here can be a kind of service to others. Like it or not, the Internet is part of the "real world". Many people are assisted, encouraged, motivated, etc... by the information and conversations that happen online. If the implication is that people should not be assisting, encouraging, motivating, etc... - according to whatever degree of scholarship and expression they choose - then I disagree. People who conclude that their efforts would be better spent offline assisting others certainly can do what they are urged to do ... and just as they don't have to devote more time online just because others do, others don't have to spend more time offline just because some people do. This is NOT about trying to judge individuals' online contributions compared to their offline contributions.
  11. Seems to me that exponentially more people today than ever before know about the UB - thanks to the Internet. Our conversations here and elsewhere are ONLINE, folks. They show up in searches. People interested in a spiritual perspective stumble across what we share as UB Readers with each other, and I don't doubt that such conversations (coupled with Google, etc...) encourage many to check into it all further once they obtain a sample. The teachings of the UB are increasingly unobscure with each day. And there is a big responsibility on all our parts to ensure that what we do put in here on the Internet reflects the quality of character one successfully develops from pursuing diligent study - as well as earnest praxis.
  12. Nelson askes: Could a grand universe, settled in light and life have exhausted all possible experience? At this point, my answer is: no. Why? Simply because: accepting that experience (itself) is limited currently results with me considering God' ability lovingly to create infinite meaningful, valuable, and insightful experiences of beauty, truth, and goodness for me to enjoy with God and with others - as limited. However I do accept that the Grand Universe will be one day settled in light and life - and that will mark the end of that specific stage (but not all) of Supreme development. And yes - my perspective is not UBodox.
  13. Personally attaining light and life? Now THAT is true Enlightenment!
  14. A "mini" UB would be a very nice edition to have! I especially like the idea of a zippered version! I hope that one day one of the publishers will put one out there. Perhaps no bigger than about 6" x 5", and aim for a thickness no deeper than 2" (including cover) I would gladly pay for copieS (plural) of that one, folks. You publishers out there hear me? I would PAY for THEM. Name the price! (hint) (hint) (hint) Added Note: balancing font and thickness easily can be using a dual-column format.
×
×
  • Create New...