What if?

This is my reply to several posts on private and public blogs and emails within a select group of friends. I have hesitated posting it here because there are concepts I express that transcend what may be considered acceptable, politically religious correct Fundamentalist/Evangelical/Orthodox norms. I am not one who of my own desires would set out to cause a controversy or debate, Id rather let it ride and let someone else argue and live in a state of elevated blood pressure. I dont relish having to respond to every nickel and dime objection. Serious inquiries are one thing, purposeful attempts to draw into debate - are another. So - if there are those who really want to dissect and develop your arguments as to the heretical nature of these things - Gather your material, compose your thoughts, write it as logically as you are able to present it - and post it on your own blog space. But - if you are seriously inquiring - to learn - to find truth that may be real deeper than the confines of what our religious systems have permitted, then I welcome your query. The original posts are listed first and my responses follow. ============= What measure, gauge, method, system, etc. do you use to determine what is true? ============= Do we engage, react and respond to circumstances, situations, events, people, things and places based on who we believe we are in that moment? If God IS love and Christ (God) IS our life, then is love who we are (our identity)? What would life be like if we adopted and depended upon 'love' as our only identity? What other identities do we adopt and why do we adopt them? Did Jesus see himself as love, and live out of that identity? ============== Maybe the "dot" is anything that separates. If we are all expressions of the only source (God), our identities are exactly the same. The prodigal son's father focused on his son's sonship. Maybe grace is focusing on the divine as ourselves and others even when we/they aren't expressing that reality. I find freedom and peace seeing and interacting with people on that basis. I just wish I 'lived there' more. ============== Rick (and the rest of the gang) A lot seems to be coming from your direction, so rather than try to express my perceptions as individual topics, Im going to face them all together in one place. Some of these I believe are interconnected. Maybe the "dot" is anything that separates. - and If we are all expressions of the only source (God), our identities are exactly the same. Im not sure our identities are exactly the same. If by identity we mean Christ, I guess, in a sense, they are the same. If we mean our personalities in Christ, I dont

believe this is true. Christ in us is our common source. Our connection and relation to the divine, existing before all time and space, the life power that emanates through us, but not of us or from us. Each of us has a mental concept of what that Christ is. The man Jesus being God the Fathers express manifestation of that character, and each of our individual mental pictures of Jesus being our own personal model upon which we pattern our Christs. So, as many mental perceptions as we have - the same number of distinct personalities may be expressed. Not that one is better than the next, they may just be distinctive, and possibly even contrary to the other. Now, the source, and perceiving that source, or as we have been expressing, feeling, that is were our identities proceed from, and that source is the same, but may, as we interpret and act, differ in personality as it is expressed. All this assume we are drawing from the same source - Him - in us, and not our own intellectual contrivances. Anything that separates in and of it self can not be the dot. Because then that which is Christ in us, may well be that dot. Separation, or at least its very real potential, is an attribute of what will occur as Christ is formed in us. Jesus said he did not come to bring peace, but a sword, and a mans enemies will be those of his own household. Also leaving homes, wives, children, parents for the sake of the Kingdom is not inconceivable. Now it is true I am finding experience in this. But what is more, I am coming to realize that love, and realizing it as best expressed to those I love most, entails a willingness to let go. More than the natural of a parent letting their children go, but in order to manifest love to the object of that love - parting (in all its pain and discomfort) may be the only viable answer. This brings up focusing on the divine as ourselves and others even when we/they aren't expressing that reality. If WE are not expressing that reality - (operating in relation to Him - the source) - focusing on the divine as ourselves and others is an impossibility. Apart from our immediate sourcing Him, in us, we are not able to appraise or evaluate anything. In such a state, our mental condition is the same as the rest of the world. Only a different form of religion. Only by active participation in Him is focusing possible. This is not to say that we do not or are not to focus, but it is not we who focus, but Him who focuses us. Maybe it sounds like splitting hairs, but Ive realized, I cant do it , or make it happen, and the more I try, the further away from Him I find myself. Now I still read, and seek, and try to be open and receptive, but it is Him who divulges what He wills, as he wills. Reading your blog that Jim reposted if God is Love and the replies is an education in Spiritual levels and dimensions. If you hadnt noticed (and youd be blind as a bat if you hadnt), I am not very accommodating to orthodox religion as it pertains to what I perceive as deceptive, restrictive, blind faith based on preferred ignorance of Spiritual realities that are clearly described and elucidated in the scriptures and substantiated in life. But this is not a disdain for any individuals. It is the religious norms that have evolved over the centuries, that essentially keep us from relation with God that I feel such

contempt for. Of course, those who would so ardently defend these falsies (fallacies) , would earn the burden of this contempt. I can not judge or argue with any of the replies to this blog, Nor do I desire too. They are obviously seekers. But - if you will notice, there are levels, or dimensions of thought as to where the mental position of the replies are manifesting from. Most are generating from the mind of man. One in particular, using the mind, on a lower plain. Drawing on natural categories, apparently attempting to realize God from baser knowledge and understanding. Another - understanding God as the religious other - seeking to do His will. Seeking to know God in what I must do, what is required of me. And another, realizing a dimension of Spirit - transcending what would be considered the norm. This one coming closest to what we have been talking about. In virtually all of these perceptions there is an attempt to fit into what is normal orthodox religious categories - a dimension of Spiritual being that has been ignored or out right disqualified as relevant for so many centuries, if not actually persecuted as heretical. The mental norms are established as the judge and jury as to what is God and of God. The mind has become the sphere of adjudging and realizing the Kingdom or its imitations. The tendency for most is to construct the religious norms, and then as Spiritual dimension is realized, try to make the new Spirituals fit into the old categories. OR if the new does not fit the Old - reject the new as untested, in error, potentially heretical. is love who we are (our identity)? What would life be like if we adopted and depended upon 'love' as our only identity? To the natural mind - the mind dependant upon its own resources, the mind steeped in the religious norms and resistant to alter these, these become nonsensical questions. They dont fit into the categories as understood and established as absolute. Those categories focused on , me, and I, and what I must do, or what is required of me. The reality of Him, as anything other than a historic figure, the incarnation of the God out there, is not conceivable, because their faith - their religion - is built from and in their heads. The reality of the heart is yet to be realized. Thats not to say it is not there. That is not to say that Spiritual potential does not reside in them. But the categories of the natural mind - the religious mind - precludes its comprehension. What other identities do we adopt and why do we adopt them? - Too many to go into. And why do we adopt them?- because we are not secure in Him in us. (short and sweet) Did Jesus see himself as love, and live out of that identity? - Jesus could say and do nothing but what He received from the Father. Seeing Himself as love I dont believe was an issue. Hearing and relation to the Father was. I believe as we realize, know and are able to maintain that relationship - attempting to be love will not be an issue for us. As we see Him (the Father), as we receive and respond, we are love. When will we see this fully manifested? - Thats not my worry, Im not paid to think. I listen, I respond (obey), I am. What measure, gauge, method, system, etc. do you use to determine what is true? The good simple Evangelical answer to this would be, the Bible, period. But since I am no

longer a good simple Evangelical, I am allowed to (or will regardless of what others think) divert from the religious norm. Samuel Butler said Life is like music; it must be composed by ear, feeling, and instinct, not by rule. Nevertheless, one had better know the rules, for they sometimes guide in doubtful cases, though not often.! The Bible gives me the rules. But, these rules are not the gleaned and artificial extractions of the religious elite. The Talmud of modern Judaizers. In relation to the indwelling Logos, there are few, if any rules that apply. And those that are applied, are between myself and that Logos. They are not my impositions upon anyone else. In relation to my dealings with other men and society, particular what is the Christian community, there may be social standards that are better understood, than neglected, particular if I wish to move within that general community. As a musician, as I have come to understand and master many styles, forms, genre, the more localized to the American western mind and aesthetic, as well as various world genres and cultural types, It becomes apparent that in music, there really are NO absolutes. But, if I wish to play and be appreciated within a particular culture, it is probably best advised that I temper my music to accommodate the taste of the audience I wish to communicate with and gradually introduce a broader set of aesthetic values as my audience is able to receive it. This means knowing their rules, although not necessarily adopting them as my absolutes. The rules, if used properly, can become tools for communication. But what do I use determine what is true? Assuming - Christ dwells in me - To thine own self be true. Bob