Law of One Religion?

[Monica]

Most of us have probably had encounters with religious fundamentalists who quote scripture to justify otherwise unacceptable actions. These people truly believe that they are doing the 'right' thing and that they're not supposed to ever question the bible (or other 'holy book'). A classic example is the born-again Christian adage that 'only Christians go to heaven' because the bible says so. Religious fanatics take it even further when they attempt to justify bigotry or violence, in the name of their religion.

Do you think of the Law of One as a religion? Do you find yourself making decisions based on Law of One quotes, regardless of whether or not it makes sense, or feels like the right thing to do? Have you observed yourself taking action that maybe you wouldn't have done before, and then when you feel your conscience nagging you, do you tell yourself "It doesn't matter what I do...there is no right or wrong" ?

Is it convenient to quit searching for ethical solutions to life's challenges, in favor of opening the Law of One books at random and taking the first quote you see as your answer, as a Christian might do with their bible?

Are Carla, Don and Jim your gurus? Do you seek to emulate them?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, do you do this with only the Law of One, or with the other LLResearch channeled works too, such as the Q'uo sessions? Do you believe that if Q'uo said it, it must be true? 

Has the Law of One, or the body of channeled works from LLResearch, become your 'bible'?

[Plenum]

I think of the Law of One as a philosophy, first and foremost.  That, of course, doesn't prevent people from turning it into dogma, as is the case with almost anything that one forms an emotional attachment to.

I think what inherently sets this philosophy apart, and that is also a safeguard, is that the First Distortion is referenced as the Law of Free Will.

If the Free Will of the self is recognised in oneself, then it can be recognised in others, and then we get to the situation where co-operation, dialogue, and freedom of expression can be the means of interaction; rather than a system of rules which apply to everyone, no matter the circumstances.

I've met Jim and Carla in person, and they are great people.  But I don't inherently see them as being any different from you or I.  

[Parsons]

I would say that the threshold where it would become religious behavior is if one were to judge someone else (group or individual) based on the concepts in the LOO.

[Shawnna]

Most of us have probably had encounters with religious fundamentalists who quote scripture to justify otherwise unacceptable actions. These people truly believe that they are doing the 'right' thing and that they're not supposed to ever question the bible (or other 'holy book'). A classic example is the born-again Christian adage that 'only Christians go to heaven' because the bible says so. Religious fanatics take it even further when they attempt to justify bigotry or violence, in the name of their religion.

Do you think of the Law of One as a religion?

 

Nope - not even close to what I think of as a religion.

Monica   Do you find yourself making decisions based on Law of One quotes, regardless of whether or not it makes sense, or feels like the right thing to do?

 

Not a chance - I'll never give away my personal choices and responsibility like that.

Monica   Have you observed yourself taking action that maybe you wouldn't have done before, and then when you feel your conscience nagging you, do you tell yourself "It doesn't matter what I do...there is no right or wrong" ?  

Never.  That would be abdicating my Life's Purpose (to reflect Love).

Monica   Is it convenient to quit searching for ethical solutions to life's challenges, in favor of opening the Law of One books at random and taking the first quote you see as your answer, as a Christian might do with their bible?

I look within for answers.

Monica    Are Carla, Don and Jim your gurus? Do you seek to emulate them?

Nope; I don't believe in gurus of any persuasion.

Monica   If you answered yes to any of these questions, do you do this with only the Law of One, or with the other LLResearch channeled works too, such as the Q'uo sessions? Do you believe that if Q'uo said it, it must be true? 

Has the Law of One, or the body of channeled works from LLResearch, become your 'bible'?

Absolutely not.  

For me, the Law of One is simply another source of information that is consistent with my own spiritual beliefs. I consider myself a mystic and a student of all spiritual paths. 
 
I enjoy reading this forum because in general, those who participate are deep thinkers and always give me something more to think about.  

[Reaper]

The closest thing I have to a "bible" is my own reasoning. There are many sources I draw inspiration from, but none I would sacrifice my own discernment to follow.

Likewise, there are many people I consider role models, but none reflect such a level of perfection that I would put them on a pedestal.

While I don't believe in good and evil as objective realities, I do have an understanding of the path I find to be most conducive to personal growth, and I recognize that to successfully follow that path I must consciously choose to do so at every moment of the day. I wouldn't expect to be judged for living an indecisive, irresponsible life, it's just not something I want to do.

[Matt1]

I think its fairly obvious at least in my line of thinking that the Law of One is a philosophy. I would further add that the basic philosophy is really the same in almost all mystical paths that i have studied. Be in the Western Mystery Tradition, Buddhism, Tantra etc. Once you boil it down, its really the samething.

[dreamliner]

Are Carla, Don and Jim your gurus? Do you seek to emulate them?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, do you do this with only the Law of One, or with the other LLResearch channeled works too, such as the Q'uo sessions? Do you believe that if Q'uo said it, it must be true? 

Has the Law of One, or the body of channeled works from LLResearch, become your 'bible'?

Personally, I haven't looked much into the other llresearch channeled or other type of works. The reason was/is that, the level of logic and wisdom of the Law of One outbalanced any other work. For instance, the "time lateral" thing in Quo transcripts had sounded negative to me.

If you use the word "guru" in the meaning of its western derogatory interpretations, I guess there must be some exploitation to be carried out (or to be caused) by the "guru", voluntarily or involuntarily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru

As Arthur Hastings pointed out, an individual should value the essence only, "not give over their emotional authority to somebody speaking just because they're saying things that sound good and they're presumably from the great beyond". http://www.intuition.org/txt/hastings.htm

Mod edit: Off-topic material removed from this point to its own thread.

[Ashim]

I see the Ra material more as a practical handbook for self help.
When you work with intelligent energy and connect with source this then becomes the 'Überbible'.
Ra gave us a roadmap to enable us to help ourselves.
Religion can serve as a moral compass up until a being starts to take full responsibility for its thoughts and actions.
Then it becomes superflous or a tool of manipulation, depending on polarity.

[Spaced]

Hi Monica. From reading your post I get the feeling that you do not look positively on organized religion. With the way you worded the opening post do you really expect anyone to answer in the affirmative?

I have a question for you: do you think people who look to religion for guidance are necessarily mistaken in doing so?

[Monica]

I think of the Law of One as a philosophy, first and foremost.  That, of course, doesn't prevent people from turning it into dogma, as is the case with almost anything that one forms an emotional attachment to.

I think what inherently sets this philosophy apart, and that is also a safeguard, is that the First Distortion is referenced as the Law of Free Will.

If the Free Will of the self is recognised in oneself, then it can be recognised in others, and then we get to the situation where co-operation, dialogue, and freedom of expression can be the means of interaction; rather than a system of rules which apply to everyone, no matter the circumstances.

I've met Jim and Carla in person, and they are great people.  But I don't inherently see them as being any different from you or I.  

Agreed! The reason I started this discussion is that I've been observing a rather disconcerting trend in some of the discussions, wherein people sometimes state "Ra said xyz therefore it is fact" seemingly with no regard of the rest of what Ra said. A single phrase is taken out of context, ignoring myriad other points made by Ra that could flesh out the concept. This is akin to a Christian taking a single bible verse and using it to justify whatever they like...for example, an old testament quote in which the 'god' of the bible commanded his 'chosen few' to invade their neighbors, steal their land and slaughter all their children could be used by an extremist to justify violence and bigotry, while ignoring the teachings of Jesus about love, peace, forgiveness and compassion. I've seen this happen in the religious community numerous times.

An example of such cherry-picking can be found here. For example, "Ra said there is no right or wrong" while ignoring the 2 paths. Or, "Ra said the key is acceptance" while ignoring the importance of free will and choice. Or "Carla does xyz therefore I can too" which isn't fair to Carla, since she has expressly stated that she doesn't wish to be anyone's guru. Or "I am a 6D Wanderer so I don't need to have compassion...that is a 4D trait" which seems to be missing the point about why we're here in the first place.

In all these cases, it seems to be a matter of picking a single point alone, while ignoring the bigger picture...similar to the religious person who creates an entire doctrine based on that single scripture. There are literally thousands of variations just in the Christian religion alone...all because of slight differences in interpretation. The mainstream Christian religions all agree that only those who have been 'saved' by believing in Jesus will go to 'heaven' and families have been torn apart by this single belief, political decisions have been made, wars have been fought...this is the power of religious dogma.

I contend that no beliefs are completely immune, not even the Law of One, unfortunately. Perhaps the reason is that some people are simply trading their Christian dogma for Law of One dogma. I see the shimmering of religious, dogmatic thinking bleeding into Law of One discussions. I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed this?

[Monica]

Hi Monica. From reading your post I get the feeling that you do not look positively on organized religion. With the way you worded the opening post do you really expect anyone to answer in the affirmative?

I have a question for you: do you think people who look to religion for guidance are necessarily mistaken in doing so?

Hi Spaced! No, I don't look positively on anything that denies people their own free will and seeks to control them. Not to mention, that there have been countless wars fought in the name of religion. 

I think organized religion is a mixed bag. It's a tossup whether it has done more harm or good, but overall I'd say it's done more harm.

It's not my place to decide for another person whether they should follow a religion or not. Everyone makes their own choices and they must have their own reasons for choosing as they do. But, we are veiled. Many choices are made because of that veil. For example, if people weren't veiled and remembered their past lives, they could never accept a simplistic 'heaven/hell' philosophy...if they understood karma, they wouldn't fall for the 'Jesus died for your sins' stuff.

And yet, here we are. The Logos chose this veiling so that's the situation we're dealing with. 

My main interest is this: Clearly, Jesus taught some very advanced concepts, yet his teachings got grossly corrupted. 2000+ years later, we don't even know what he really said, since the oldest fragment is dated about 100 years after his death. Yet millions of people base their lives on snippets of dialog attributed to him, wars have been fought over those ancient books, families have been torn apart over differences in belief, etc. What's to stop this from happening to the Law of One? Is anyone concerned that the Law of One might turn into a religion?

[Monica]

I think its fairly obvious at least in my line of thinking that the Law of One is a philosophy. I would further add that the basic philosophy is really the same in almost all mystical paths that i have studied. Be in the Western Mystery Tradition, Buddhism, Tantra etc. Once you boil it down, its really the samething.

Agreed! I often marvel at how Law of One concepts are found in many spiritual traditions. 

[Ashim]

What's to stop this from happening to the Law of One? Is anyone concerned that the Law of One might turn into a religion?

This happened about 13.000 years ago and has continued up to present day.

Ra can be seen as the 'perpetrator' of religion, hence their guilt trip.

Of course if you have really understood the LOO then this knowledge can be used to control and dominate.

[Monica]

I think of the Law of One as a philosophy, first and foremost.  That, of course, doesn't prevent people from turning it into dogma, as is the case with almost anything that one forms an emotional attachment to.

I think what inherently sets this philosophy apart, and that is also a safeguard, is that the First Distortion is referenced as the Law of Free Will.

If the Free Will of the self is recognised in oneself, then it can be recognised in others, and then we get to the situation where co-operation, dialogue, and freedom of expression can be the means of interaction; rather than a system of rules which apply to everyone, no matter the circumstances.

I've met Jim and Carla in person, and they are great people.  But I don't inherently see them as being any different from you or I.  

I agree that the First Distortion sets this philosophy apart, but I'm not sure it it's a safeguard, because it is but one of many concepts, and any concept can be ignored in favor of cherry picking whatever they want to make into a dogma.

I too have gotten to know Jim and Carla, after interviewing them once a week for 3 years. That is many hours of dialog that I enjoyed with them! I agree that they are wonderful people! One of the traits I have always admired about them is that they never put themselves above anyone else. This is why I cringe when I see people trying to put Carla in the position of guru or role model. This isn't fair to Carla, and it's really no different from what religious people do with their pastors, bishop, pope, etc. It's an example of religiosity seeping in.

[Jim Kent +]

Greetings Monica, 

As words are unsatisfactory blunt tools and because I'm a pedantic sod, I always try to be as precise as I can be when using them.

The Oxford English Dictionary describes religion as:

1: The belief in and worship of a superhuman human controlling power, especially of a personal God or gods > a particular system of faith and worship

2: A pursuit or interest followed with great devotion

Definition 1: 

As I consider every human a Spirit / The Creator first and foremost and a genetically tweaked ape second, and don't believe in a God as described by religion, in Spiritual terms, I don't believe that there exists in this Universe anything that "superhuman". More evolved yes, but not "super" which inherently implies a difference and separation. 

However, if The Confederation's claims are true, then the Orion Empire and their human minions, in malice and The Council Of Saturn, supposedly in benevolence do control somewhat and as I trust Carla and her shamanic contact, then I would have to say : yes I do believe in a controlling power. But the last thing I would ever do is worship any of them or perceive and / or describe any of them as "gods".

( Personal note about the OED: note how they wrote "God" uppercase "gods" lowercase. Never underestimate how pervasive Christian Consciousness is! )

The Confederation's philosophy could be regarded as a particular system of faith from a human perspective, but from The Confederation's viewpoint, much of what they share with us could be described as a science.

Neither L/L nor The Confederation ask us to have faith in their work, they just suggest that we have faith. But at this point in our evolution, we cannot know the accuracy of virtually all of their claims and we are therefore left to trust the info or not. Is trust in this material the same as faith in this material?             

 Definition 2:

I have been much more obsessed with this material a decade ago when I first discovered it, but I cannot honestly say that I follow it with great devotion.

The idea that this material might turn into a dogmatic way to control people and offer judgement of others sickens me, but to be honest, I really don't think that this will happen with this particular source of metaphysical wisdom.

L & L

Jim

[Minyatur]

And there I thought "strictly Law of One" meant those threads were about analyzing what Ra tried to pass as information. It really was about religion!

No but seriously for myself I quote Ra because I think people on this forum value his point of view more than they do with mine when it is contrary to what they want to hear.

I love to use his words on many things while I don't agree with all, at most I view Ra as a kind of different perspective than my higher self.

What I don't get is that a lot of people try to view STS as evil while is it nowhere near such a thing and I quote Ra a lot on this because fending off something as evil or bad is very very religion-like and my modest opinion doesn't cut it while Ra is more valued than I am.

Sorry fellas but when I'm out of this incarnation, I'm gonna go talk to your respective social memory complexes and have you lot forced to partake in the Lucifer Experiment for your own growth. I will of course join you in all fairness . To reach 7D I think one needs to lose polarity and some seem to give to much importance to being STO. They should play the other role in this game, but that's my opinion. Being STO was easy, my nature without working on myself already was over 51% while being STS seems more of a challenge to understand it's purpose and worth in this One Creation.

About religions, they serve their purpose. I too would like every soul on this planet to be hundreds of billion years old and understand everything, but that is not the case. An interresting idea which I got from a Lucifer chanelling, is that it will carry on until people do not wish to be misguided anymore and then they will not be needed anymore. They are called upon just as Ra is.

In the end isn't growth simply a marvelous thing as there is no right way to proceed with it?

[AnthroHeart]

Lucifer once helped me go through hell I was experiencing. They knew it best.

[kycahi]

Jeez, I never thought about this before now. The LOO might die down after awhile or it might turn into holy scripture. In a hundred years people might pray to St. Donald, St. Carla and St. James. Deplorable that! I more expect it to fade because I think Ra is saying that this planet's time for hosting 3D is nearing an end. Whew!

I continue to pick up new things from the Ra material, none of which conflicts with what I already have from it. Still, I only resonate with the information and don't expect to bind with any interpretation of it, including my own.

When I post something in these forums, I hope that I answer from my own opinion, and make that clear, or I say what I think Ra said. In future I will try to make surer of this.

[Monica]

Jeez, I never thought about this before now. The LOO might die down after awhile or it might turn into holy scripture. In a hundred years people might pray to St. Donald, St. Carla and St. James. Deplorable that! I more expect it to fade because I think Ra is saying that this planet's time for hosting 3D is nearing an end. Whew!

I continue to pick up new things from the Ra material, none of which conflicts with what I already have from it. Still, I only resonate with the information and don't expect to bind with any interpretation of it, including my own.

When I post something in these forums, I hope that I answer from my own opinion, and make that clear, or I say what I think Ra said. In future I will try to make surer of this.

Yeah, it's disconcerting to think about, eh? I'm sure Jesus et al didn't intend for their teachings to get turned into a rigid dogma either!

I don't think there's anything wrong with quoting Ra. Most of us do that, and we are, after all, studying Ra's words. I think where the problem come in is when a single Ra quote is used by itself, without context, and without being considered as a part of the whole.

For example, the concept of Acceptance is one that is commonly misused, in my opinion. Taken by itself, it is often interpreted to mean that 'anything goes' and we should never help anyone, never try to make the world a better place, never do anything, really...just let it all hang out! See someone about to murder a child...nah, just let them do it...accept everything without any discernment whatsoever. Lose your temper and hurt someone's feelings...nah, no need to apologize...they need to just accept whatever venom we decide to vomit on them...Don't bother ever trying to do any good in the world...just accept it as is...etc.

These are all examples of a twisted interpretation of what Ra meant by Acceptance...an interpretation based on that single word, without any regard for context, without any regard for integrating it into the entire Law of One philosophy, which included other concepts as well that might even seem to contradict, at first glance, but really don't, once they're all integrated. It is this taking a single concept by itself that can turn into a rigid dogma that can lead to gross misunderstanding.

[AnthroHeart]

I never thought about LOO getting old to me. But who knows I'm still pretty young. Who knows what 50 years would bring.

A lot of the LOO is 6D philosophy, such as being without polarity, so much of it is hard to apply to here and now.

[Monica]

I never thought about LOO getting old to me. But who knows I'm still pretty young. Who knows what 50 years would bring.

Do you think we have some responsibility in protecting the material from being turned into a religion? Is there anything we can do to prevent that from happening?

[AnthroHeart]

I never thought about LOO getting old to me. But who knows I'm still pretty young. Who knows what 50 years would bring.

Do you think we have some responsibility in protecting the material from being turned into a religion? Is there anything we can do to prevent that from happening?

Hey Monica.

I think our responsibility lies in the Law of Confusion. We should only reveal it to those that we feel are ready.

[Monica]

I never thought about LOO getting old to me. But who knows I'm still pretty young. Who knows what 50 years would bring.

Do you think we have some responsibility in protecting the material from being turned into a religion? Is there anything we can do to prevent that from happening?

Hey Monica.

I think our responsibility lies in the Law of Confusion. We should only reveal it to those that we feel are ready.

This is a good point, Gemini. A lot of the material could be confusing or even fear-inducing to those who aren't ready for it. How, then, do we act responsibly with the material, in the age of the internet?

[AnthroHeart]

I'd say keep the material limited to this and similar websites.

I did share the LOO with my mom but she never got back to me, so it didn't resonate with her.

[Minyatur]

For example, the concept of Acceptance is one that is commonly misused, in my opinion. Taken by itself, it is often interpreted to mean that 'anything goes' and we should never help anyone, never try to make the world a better place, never do anything, really...just let it all hang out! See someone about to murder a child...nah, just let them do it...accept everything without any discernment whatsoever. Lose your temper and hurt someone's feelings...nah, no need to apologize...they need to just accept whatever venom we decide to vomit on them...Don't bother ever trying to do any good in the world...just accept it as is...etc.

I think you also misunderstand the concept of Acceptance, this concept is a distortion of that All is One. Wether you stop the murder of a child is up to your free will and the essence of your existence remains the same as that of the murderer and as the murdered child. Whatever story unfold, the Creator always is every role as you are now one of his role, how the particular incarnation of the Creator that you are acts depends on your free will.

Ra reffered to this existence as a game and when you think about it is pretty much the case. The child that is murdered will never meet as that particular incarnation the people he would have met but will instead meet others in another incarnation that he most probably would have never met had he lived this one, and in the end his existence will never cease into Infinity and the resentment he could've had can only be a spectre of dust in his own existence.

Pain and suffering are only cycles of experiences in which the Creator learns of Himself and can be in a lot of cases a chosen experience. You are not responsible of the well being of all of Creation. Creation already is fully the Creator and every conciousness will grow in infinity toward their divine-nature, a never ending process of many densities and infinite octaves.

Accepting all that is hapenning is pretty much what every higher-density beings do to a certain extent and these groups need to be limited in what they do, to not infridge upon free will. The Earth for exemple, simply is there, it will not stop the murder of a child that you spoke of, it will heal the soul of the child afterwards and watch it as it reincarnate elsewhere either upon it's surface or leaving for another home with less suffering if it had enough. 

Ra said that the correct response to every action is Love, and that is Acceptance. Forgiveness is also knowing that there is nothing to forgive in the first place, there is the Creator making mistakes and learning, so don't expect every soul to have reached your level understanding of the Creator of Himself, this very gradation is one of the purposes of Time in my opinion.

[Monica]

For example, the concept of Acceptance is one that is commonly misused, in my opinion. Taken by itself, it is often interpreted to mean that 'anything goes' and we should never help anyone, never try to make the world a better place, never do anything, really...just let it all hang out! See someone about to murder a child...nah, just let them do it...accept everything without any discernment whatsoever. Lose your temper and hurt someone's feelings...nah, no need to apologize...they need to just accept whatever venom we decide to vomit on them...Don't bother ever trying to do any good in the world...just accept it as is...etc.

I think you also misunderstand the concept of Acceptance, this concept is a distortion of that All is One. Wether you stop the murder of a child is up to your free will and the essence of your existence remains the same as that of the murderer and as the murdered child. Whatever story unfold, the Creator always is every role as you are now one of his role, how the particular incarnation of the Creator that you are acts depends on your free will.

Ra reffered to this existence as a game and when you think about it is pretty much the case. The child that is murdered will never meet as that particular incarnation the people he would have met but will instead meet others in another incarnation that he most probably would have never met had he lived this one, and in the end his existence will never cease into Infinity and the resentment he could've had can only be a spectre of dust in his own existence.

Pain and suffering are only cycles of experiences in which the Creator learns of Himself and can be in a lot of cases a chosen experience. You are not responsible of the well being of all of Creation. Creation already is fully the Creator and every conciousness will grow in infinity toward their divine-nature, a never ending process of many densities and infinite octaves.

Accepting all that is hapenning is pretty much what every higher-density beings do to a certain extent and these groups need to be limited in what they do, to not infridge upon free will. The Earth for exemple, simply is there, it will not stop the murder of a child that you spoke of, it will heal the soul of the child afterwards and watch it as it reincarnate elsewhere either upon it's surface or leaving for another home with less suffering if it had enough. 

Ra said that the correct response to every action is Love, and that is Acceptance. Forgiveness is also knowing that there is nothing to forgive in the first place, there is the Creator making mistakes and learning, so don't expect every soul to have reached your level understanding of the Creator of Himself, this very gradation is one of the purposes of Time in my opinion.

Case in point: So are you saying that if you were to encounter someone about to murder a child, you would do nothing to stop it? (Please clarify if I'm misunderstanding you.)

[Unbound]

Oh god, not this again.

[Monica]

Oh god, not this again.

Oh, I didn't know there was already a thread on this topic. Can you please direct me to it? I've been away from B4 for quite awhile and missed it.

[Unbound]

No, I mean the argument over what "acceptance" means. Seen this circle a thousand and a half times on these forums.

[Monica]

No, I mean the argument over what "acceptance" means. Seen this circle a thousand and a half times on these forums.

Ah, yes, that's true. I mentioned it only as an example...not intending it to become the focus of this discussion.