AletheiaRivers

Hi elithea! Nice to have you here. The board has been way too quiet lately. My name is an alias, btw. It's a play on the word "lethe", the mythical river that we drink of between incarnations so that we forget our previous life. A-Lethe-Ia = Unforgetting. Rivers - as in the river Lethe. Elithea is your real name? Very pretty. I was going to choose the name Mnemosyne, which has a similar meaning to Aletheia, but was too complicated.

Thanks for the smile this morning Des. Did anyone catch Robin Williams "rant" against the SpongeBob gay controversy on the Academy Awards last night? His delivery was a bit off, but it was classic Robin Williams.

WindDancer, Nice avatar! Thou Art That is really quite good. If you haven't read it yet, I'd say it's well worth it. Ahh, Bart Ehrman. I have really grown to like him. I haven't read his books, but (thanks you XianAnarchist) I have purchased a few hundred dollars worth of courses from here: Link: The Teaching Company Check under the religion section. He has lots of stuff there. Watch for sales. Stuff is usally 50-75% off! Aletheia

I sat last night trying to think of what books influenced me most when I was a little girl. I tried to remember if I ever read any books that were "religious" in nature that weren't Jehovah's Witness books. ONE BOOK popped into my mind. It's not a book about the Bible or dogma (although Fulghum is a Unitarian minister), but it impacted me more as a young adult than anything else I can remember. All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten - by Robert Fulghum "Most of what I really need to know about how to live, and what to do, and how to be, I learned in Kindergarten. Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate school mountain, but there in the sandbox at nursery school. These are the things I learned.. Share everything. Play fair. Don't hit people. Put things back where you found them. Clean up your own mess. Don't take things that aren't yours. Say sorry when you hurt somebody. Wash your hands before you eat. Flush. Warm cookies and cold milk are good for you. Live a balanced life. Learn some and think some and draw and paint and sing and dance and play and work every day some. Take a nap every afternoon. When you go out into the world, watch for traffic, hold hands, and stick together. Be aware of wonder. Remember the little seed in the plastic cup? The roots go down and the plant goes up and nobody really knows how or why, but we are all like that. Goldfish and hamsters and white mice and even the little seed in the plastic cup - they all die. So do we. And then remember the book about Dick and Jane and the first word you learned, the biggest word of all: LOOK. Everything you need to know is in there somewhere. The Golden Rule and love and basic sanitation. Ecology and politics and sane living. Think of what a better world it would be if we all - the whole world had cookies and milk about 3 o'clock every afternoon and then lay down with our blankets for a nap. Or if we had a basic policy in our nation and other nations to always put things back where we found them and cleaned up our own messes. And it is still true, no matter how old you are, when you go out into the world, it is best to hold hands and stick together." Link to: "All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten" PS - It's not a child's book, but I remember reading it when I was 8-10 years of age.

The experience versus faith comment had to do with his experiencing a mystical union with his Bliss, what we would call God. JC's view of God was similar in nature to Brahman in Hinduism - an impersonal force. I've searched all over the associates area at the Joseph Campbell Foundation and found a few references regarding the crucifix in his room. Joseph Campbell had just as much "belief" in Judeo/Christianity as he did in any religion. He believed that Christianity has many truths to teach and having been raised Catholic, was still connected to the "myth" of Christianity, especially to the mystical view of the "Christ Triumphant". He didn't, however, agree with the traditional Catholic or Christian view of God. The link below takes you to a pertinent discussion on the JCF forum. You have to be an associate to view it, but it's free to join (plus you get lots of cool free downloads). I've been an associate for a little while now. The websight is very informative. The Joseph Campbell Foundation Forum - Subject: Did Joseph Campbell Convert?

Two authors come to mind. The Chronicles of Narnia by CS Lewis. God Thinks You're Wonderful by Max Lucado I actually haven't read Narnia (yet) or anything by Lucado, but Cynthia says that they are in the conservative "grey area". What do ya think Cynthia?

Yeah, Thomas Moore is a Jungian psychologist. What I meant was, he sees perennial truths in Mythology like Campbell does. Huston Smith and William Teasdale are perennialists as well, but they focus more on the perennial truths that occur across Mystical traditions instead of myth.

He can be hard to read. Some of the books that have come out since his death are easier, because they are actually transcripts of lectures. I highly recommend "Thou Art That" about Christian myth. Short book, very good. Joseph Campbell, Huston Smith, William Teasdale and many others call this "Perennial" or "Primordial", although if you look up those words, the definitions won't quite fit. Thomas Moore (the quote at the bottom of my posts) is interesting to read. Some of his stuff, like "Care of the Soul" is like Campbell's stuff; it weaves myth and mythological meaning into your personal life. Some of his other stuff, like "The Souls Religion" doesn't deal with myth in this way. I think The Souls Religion is one of the best books I've ever read. Have you ever SEEN the interview? The imagery is quite astounding and watching Campbells humor is a trip. Edited for spelling

I didn't list my zoo in my intro, so what they heck, I'll do it here. I have 5 cats: Circe, Calypso, Chakakan, Sebastian and Bogan. I recently adopted a cockatiel and named him Luna, as he is all grey, like the moon. I also have 8 finches. Cynthia - you have rats?! I used to have two chocolate brown fancy rats that I saved from being snake food, and named them Heebie and Jeebie. They were awesome. They both got cancer repeatedly and so I eventually had them put to sleep. If I could find two more female rats like them, I'd get them in a heart beat! Aletheia

Right! Whether it's God having a dream (like Braman in Hinduism) or Adam having a dream, the view that the world is illusion can lead to the view that there is NO evil. The only way I think that the world being illusion wouldn't lead to nihilism, is like that portrayed in the movie, The Matrix, where EVERYONE is "dreaming" and contributing to the illusion. But if it's just one being, one man, then nothing is "real" and nothing matters. I could go out and kill somebody and say "Well, God is dreaming the world, and wants to experience murder as well as love. I know some have this view, but personally, I just don't get it.

Heck Des, I reread what I wrote a day later and I think: "That ISN'T what I meant to say at all!" The word dualism can apply to so many things. Some believe that matter is one thing and spirit is another. That is one form of dualism. Some believe that God is God and humans are something God created out of nothing. That is another form of dualism. Some believe God IS love and that God HAS to be all good, so there must be another being that IS evil that is causing all the problems in the world. That is another form of dualism. My calling myself "dualist" is in response to views like Christian Science and New Thought and most Hindu and Buddhist theology, but I'm not truly a dualist in the way most Judeo/Christians define the term. I don't think I'm completely seperate from God but I also don't think this world is an illusion or a dream God is having. Oh I don't know about that. Doesn't CS basically teach that our world, our universe is illusion? That "all of this" is actually just God having a "dream"? If they do, they would hold a view of reality that is a form of monism (there are many different ones).

Wind, In doing some googling I found quite a few good websights. You have to google "Philosophical Taoism" because it is quite different from religious Taoism. One of the websights I found seems to be based on Alan Watts and the research done by Huston Smith (another "hero" of mine). The link is: http://www.yakrider.com/Tao/Taoism_Daoism.htm

Cynthia, WAY freaky considering the other things that have been happening to me, which would be way off topic for a progressive Christian board.

First off, I just found out that I did NOT coin the phrase "duality in unity". I thought I was being original! Hmmm. A summary of my ontology? God and reality are "neutral" in nature. Not good. Not evil. Neutral. There! That's it in a nutshell. OK. Seriously. Something really weird just happened. I did a search on "unity in duality" and found a websight that has a page about taoism, which I swear I have nothing to do with and have never read before. Wanna know the websight? The Aletheian Institute. Here's a quote: I've come to the above opinion on my own, over a period of years, through mystical experience and great philosophical conversation. However, in all my philosophical discussions, I've never had anyone express "duality in unity and unity in duality" to me before. It's very disconcerting (cool, but still!) to find it summed up on a webpage that bears my freaking name! Here's the link to the page I just found: The Aletheian Institute Where I might differ from Taoism and the Monism espoused by that websight, is that I believe in a creator that manifested our universe (all universes?), but in doing so, "created" us to be independent, relational beings. I am not (as many Hindus would say) a dream of a bored god. One creation myth that I particularly like is that in creating the universe, God made all things from godself, except one, which was created "ex nihilo" - receptivity. God, being alone, wanted to share, to give and so created a "vessel" to receive the light of God. The nature of being receptive was the one "thing" God had to create ex nihilo. OK, I'm getting off topic. I'll shush up.

Hi Eric! I'll try to expand on what I meant before in another reply. In the meantime, I found this interview with Thomas Moore on the Jesus Sutras. He is the same Thomas Moore btw.

PS - I meant Meister Eckhart above, NOT Eckhart Tolle. Whew! What a goof!

I haven't studied Taoism really, but over the course of the past few months, as I've been working out some "stuff", I keep coming back to the "dualism in unity" symbol of yin/yang over and over and over. I think it is the most true and profound view of "reality" that I've ever come across. My cosmological/theological views don't neatly fit into the yin/yang box, but they are pretty dang close. Heck, I might find out, if I studied Taoism, that my views are even closer than I think. It would take me pages to explain what I personally mean by that statement, so I won't.

Ya know, it all depends in who you talk to. It also depends in how you interpret the writings of certain mystics. Non-dualists read Eckhart Tolle and see non-dualism in his words. The same holds true for Thomas Merton. I've had a couple of profound mystical experiences that were NOT non-dual. When I try to share such experiences with non-dualists, I get the runaround that my experiences weren't TRUE experiences precisely because my experiences were dual. It's frustrating. Non-dualists often use the symbolism of a drop of water in the ocean to explain our (the drop of water) relationship to God (the ocean). In that analogy, the drops of water (us) ARE God. I like the the symbolism of a fish in the ocean to explain our relationship to God. We (the fish) are in God (the ocean) but we are NOT the ocean. It's a big difference. It's the difference between panentheism and pantheism. But in all fairness, when I was researching pantheism years ago, after having just left my church, I didn't grasp the theological, philosophical and moral implications of what monism (non-dualism)/pantheism were. It came to me in time and many have helped me understand along the way. Someone in a chat room or on a bulletin board mentioned that they weren't pantheistic, they were panENtheistic, and I went "What's that?" And I researched. And researched. And researched. So, long story short (too late!), I believe mysticism very much fits in with a dualist/panentheist cosmology. The "fish" can feel at one with the "ocean" because the ocean surrounds and permeates the fish. As a Hindu guru I once read said, "I don't want to BE sugar. I want to TASTE sugar."

WindDancer, I think Campbell meant that he didn't need to have faith in God because he experienced God. I'm sure it didn't have anything to do with faith in the way Christians think of the term, ie, "faith in Jesus as savior". Campbell's view of God was somewhat Hindu in nature. Thou Art That.

Aaaahhh Darby! You just made my week. I am so glad you are here on this board! Aletheia

I've been participating in a discussion on another board in which I find I do not fit in (imo) because I'm a dualist (I am not God) whereas most on the discussion list are Buddhists and are "hard core" non-dualists (all is One, yada yada yada). It hasn't been my experience that "New Agers" (ie Shirley McClaine, Sylvia Brown, Wayne Dyer) are really all that non-dualistic, not in the way certain Hindu sects and Buddhists sects are. New Agers might talk about non-dualism, but it's been my perception that they really don't know or appreciate what they are talking about. Gawain would be a good example of what I said above. When she mentions "creating my own reality" she really isn't talking in the strict "Maya, illusion" sense of the word.

Process New Thought, talked about at the link Panta provided, is a huge step for New Thought to be taking. The difference between pantheism, as taught by most New Thought churches, and panentheism, that is starting to be taught at many New Thought churches, is HUGE.

Tired, Welcome to the board. I'm a little confused. In your first post you seem to be saying that you think CS is true and good and give the impression that you are still a member. In the second post you said you dropped out. Are you still an active member of the CS church? Thanks in advance for the clarification! PS - if you hit the "edit" button in the upper right corner of your post it will let you change stuff without having to double post. PPS - Nevermind about my question. I just finished reading the double post, which answered it. That info wasn't in the second post. LOL!

LOL Fatherman! Actually, I like the idea of giving up flour and sugar for Lent for a couple of reasons: 1) I really really like both of those things, so it would indeed be a sacrifice. 2) I'm borderline diabetic, so I'd be doing something good for my health as well. I wish I'd realized Lent started Wednesday, but I guess it's not too late to start? I've never observed Lent before.

I appreciate the definition of "salvation" as occuring when a "critical mass" of people live their lives centered on God. The change that would occur from reaching this critical mass would create the Kingdom of God here on earth. Jesus provided the perfect example of FAITH balanced with WORKS. As Cynthia said, we don't need to be saved FROM God. I also don't think we need to be saved from creation as if it's evil or fallen. Everything was created just as it was supposed to be, but humans have kinda mucked it up.