Atheism and Oneness

[Diana]

I think once you reach the stage of "all there is" or final enlightenment, and feel the all-encompassing love, you probably won't lose it again.
Imo. Just speculating of course.

My theory is that there is no final anything--especially enlightenment. All things are evolving including the entire universe, and "God" if an individual feels there is a God, or Prime Source (whatever an individual sees as the unmanifest or infinity). It could be like a soup, all connected, even "past lives" and multidimensional existences that we as individuals are part of and experiencing through, by, and with.

[Oceania]

then what's the point of having these densities to climb? and all this talk about what comes after? if everytything is endless then can't we choose our own way?

[native]

My theory is that there is no final anything--especially enlightenment. All things are evolving including the entire universe, and "God" if an individual feels there is a God, or Prime Source (whatever an individual sees as the unmanifest or infinity). It could be like a soup, all connected, even "past lives" and multidimensional existences that we as individuals are part of and experiencing through, by, and with.

If I had to define what it is I believe the logos is doing, I'd say it is living a myth. A myth as in a story. The octave is the unfolding of a story that is essentially one thought.

Imagine when one reads a book or watches a movie, we are totally projected into another reality aren't we? What separates us from this reality and that which is not 'real', the movie? The silver screen. The veil seems to be symbolic of the silver screen, and when we incarnate, we pass through it and become the actors. What better way to pass our time for all eternity?

See the thing is, when you are sitting in the movie seat or reading a book, you go through emotions that seem real, but it's just a story, a myth. When we are incarnate in the myth, the emotions and story lines seem very real, but they're not. They're just projections of thought.

---

Lol yes she was rather nervous, wasn't she?
To me he made sense, because I had a similar experience like that woman and it went away after some time. And like her I asked my self "did I blow it? I had it, and then I lost it?"
So it would make sense that it was that contact with the void, or nothing-ness. Since there was only me, as well.
I think once you reach the stage of "all there is" or final enlightenment, and feel the all-encompassing love, you probably won't lose it again.
Imo. Just speculating of course.

She was nervous hehe..I imagine her experience must have been intense. We do come from an infinite well of nothingness.

[Lavazza]

Hey all,

Great conversation. I think the most important key to understanding the atheist perspective is to bear in mind that free will is paramount and thanks to an infinity of possibilities, will result in any sort of belief system you can imagine. But in addition to this I think the atheist perspective is not such a surprising one considering that the Logos did such a fantastic job veiling the subconscious or intuitive mind from the conscious or intellectual mind. From a rational point of view, there is no compelling, flawless all out proof of the afterlife, Unity or indeed most paranormal things. Coming to the conclusion that we are our bodies and nothing more is not a crazy conclusion I think, just what you get when you look at things from a "left brained" or rational view-point only. This isn't to say that viewpoint can explain everything of course, because it can't. (Why do things exist rather than not exist, etc.)

Here's an awesome video I recommend all watch before reading any further: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI



Notice that he called the left brain the "Burlusconi of the Brain". It is a self re-enforcing system. You cut off or mentally discredit all intuitive thought patterns and focus only on what can be divided in to parts, categorized, labeled or measured. Words and language are also left brained tools, so you effectively seal the door against "right brainedness". This is why as seekers meditation can be so powerful, because we're consciously saying "NO" to the language and going in to a zone that is language free and exploring with our emotions, intuitions and etc.

Also check out what happens to people when their left brain is completely deactivated thanks to a stroke: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyyjU8fzEYU



What is the overall impact of Atheism here today, or what is an atheists' life plan? I agree with previous posts that quite likely these entities are seeking balance from another incarnation where their thought patterns were more controlled. ALSO, as annoying as I think Richard Dawkins is at times, I think atheism is what many cultures and people need in the current era. We (the collective consciousness of the planet) are recovering from centuries upon centuries of dogmatic, witch hunting and separationist thought patterns thanks to conservative religion. That people are branching away from that and seeking for themselves what it means to live a moral good life without pre-written guideposts is extremely empowering. (Incidentally, has anyone heard about 'The Good Book', written by philosopher and atheist A.C. Grayling? http://www.amazon.com/dp/0802717373/ref=...0802717373)

How would an atheist or the atheist community respond to the idea of Oneness? Well, some are friendly to the concept of meditative practice or buddhist thought in general such as Sam Harris (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris_%28author%29), however for the most part I think speaking about metaphysics to most atheists will be a lost cause. Remember, the atheist creed (to the best of my limited understanding) is that if you can't scientifically show something is true, then it is not true. Also- the scientific proof has to be validated by the scientific community, you can't just show them something from "controversial science" no matter how good the study or research is. (That's not rational of course, but remember we're dealing with fallible human beings and fallible human psychology!) So forget about talking to them about Dean Radin's PSI research or anything about controversial material. To back up a bit, they would reject anything form the Ra material simply by virtue of the subheading of the book "By Ra, An Humble Messenger".

I think I agree that the best opening in a conversation will be about large scale cosmology (What caused the big bang? Are we apart of a multi-verse and if so where did that come from? Why do things exist when they could just as easily not exist?) or Quantum Mechanics (Superposition has shown things can exist in two places simultaneously, what's up with that? How can two entangled particles interact instantly across the entire span of the universe with no apparent connection? How cool is it that at the basis of every sub-atomic particle is simply information as expressed by pure energy? Matter is just an interpretation of that... makes no damn sense and is so awesome!)

A last note- of paramount import when talking to an atheist as we are seekers on a path to positive polarity is to remain humble, understanding and non-confrontational at all times. Trust me- engaging in a debate is simply not worth it and will only result in both parties feeling more solidified in their initial position, not to mention callousing any sort of friendship you could have had with that individual, even if to a subtle degree. This happens often when neither party can conclusively prove their position to the other... (Speaking from first hand experience- lesson learned!) That's not to say you shouldn't enter a conversation about metaphysics, but I would highly recommend not becoming attached to an outcome and being light hearted about it. Not debating in other words. I wouldn't mention this except it's all too easy to feel compelled to debate since on the surface of things, it may sound like your entire belief system is being trampled upon and poo-pooed. That probably *is* what's happening, but the responsibility is on us to show the color of our characters by remaining humble.

[Oceania]

yeah atheism is needed.

[Diana]

Here's an awesome video I recommend all watch before reading any further: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI

Fantastic video! Thank you

[Plenum]

I get the feeling that there are many atheists out there who would be rather open to the idea of oneness if they simply learned how to ask the right questions, or were exposed to such a perspective in a more open and understanding attitude that sympathizes with religion's lack of a coherent explanation.

I think atheism is a gut reaction (maybe rightly) to the pre-dominant religious expressions in our society.

it is not a thing in itself, but rather a response that goes - 'no thanks, I'd rather not believe the things that you believe in".

it's like walking into a restaurant and not like anything on the menu. But given a different menu, I think they would be much more open minded.

[Ali Quadir]

I think atheism is a gut reaction (maybe rightly) to the pre-dominant religious expressions in our society.

Amen!
Pun intended of course. But it's still true that.

I've seen two types of atheist. The first who is atheist because he thinks and cannot conclude a God exists.. The second who emotionally rejects any form of religion.

I can understand both groups. Even if I don't necesarily agree with them.

[Diana]

then what's the point of having these densities to climb? and all this talk about what comes after? if everytything is endless then can't we choose our own way?

We do, always, choose.

I think the densities are a blueprint. We, along with all of creation, are evolving, and so creating as we go within the framework available. The future is not set, beyond the basic parameters of existence. Perhaps at some point of understanding, we can change or evolve even the blueprint.

In the infinite field of possibilities, everything is possible. I can see how that could make existence seem random, or purposeless. It is part and parcel of the paradoxical universe we live in at the moment. To me, infinite possibilities is an exciting thought, while the idea of densities as a blueprint, is comforting. As I write this, it seems that is a clue right there.

---

I get the feeling that there are many atheists out there who would be rather open to the idea of oneness if they simply learned how to ask the right questions, or were exposed to such a perspective in a more open and understanding attitude that sympathizes with religion's lack of a coherent explanation.

I think atheism is a gut reaction (maybe rightly) to the pre-dominant religious expressions in our society.

So true Plenum. Thinking individuals would necessarily reject monotheistic religions for their antiquated, idiotic (when one actually reads the material and considers the mandates) premises.

Unfortunately, atheists, in calling themselves thus, are yet again labeling and closing their minds to other possibilities. Not a good move on their parts, in my opinion.

[Lavazza]

Just to shift the conversation slightly, I'd love to hear your feedback on this (series of) videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuyUz2XLp1E

[Diana]

Just to shift the conversation slightly, I'd love to hear your feedback on this (series of) videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuyUz2XLp1E

I've heard it. I was a big fan of Christopher Hitchens. Although he had his foibles in being close-minded about possibilities other than religion. He did, however, a great and intelligent job of exposing religions for what they are.

He called himself an anti-theist, rather than an atheist, however, because he was against religion.

[Monica]

Just saw this on FB:

[AnthroHeart]

Nice find Monica. I'm not sure if God really has a preference.

[Monica]

Nice find Monica. I'm not sure if God really has a preference.

Haha, yeah ultimately probably not!

But keeping in mind who said it, I think what they meant was, for harvestability to STO positive (which Christians call "going to heaven").

[Patrick]

Just saw this on FB:

I like that.

[Lavazza]

Saw this today, hope you don't mind the comedic diversion

[Infinite Unity]

Atheism isn't a topic I have thought about much at all, so I know little about their arguments and stances.

I was wondering what their typical responses to the ideas of oneness are? So if you were to explain that we are all the creator experiencing itself, what is the general position in regards to that type of philosophy?

In listening to some of their arguments in general, they seem very naive and basic. By that I mean they seem to spend much of their time criticizing and picking apart the rather obvious flaws of religion. "Why would God create so much suffering?"..for example. They could be asking more useful questions by considering the radical idea of being God themselves, and then approach their metaphysical issues in relation to such a philosophy. Many atheists of the West seem to conclude that there is no God based on the inherent faults of Christianity and the bible. Understandable, but perhaps they come to their conclusions too quickly. They seem trapped in victim-consciousness arguments. They also seem to heavily rely on the scientific angle, attempting to invalidate intelligent design. It would seem rather fruitless trying to prove God to an atheist through science, and the better approach would be to suggest more intuitive observations.

What are their thoughts on say, Taoism or duality in general? I imagine a certain amount of atheists study philosophy in general, which attempts to answer the nature of existence, but my impression is that many atheists are happy with their conclusions on the basis of religion not being able to provide them with reasonable answers. When it's required that one go deeper, they simply stop.

I get the feeling that there are many atheists out there who would be rather open to the idea of oneness if they simply learned how to ask the right questions, or were exposed to such a perspective in a more open and understanding attitude that sympathizes with religion's lack of a coherent explanation.

I think thats quiet ironically funny, using science to disprove intelligent design....

[loostudent]

How to be an Atheist (Funny)

[Nau7ik]

In the L/L transcript library, I remember from an earlier transcript, the group got a contact from a civilization (Oxal possibly?) that said they were highly scientific in their third density. Through their pursuit of science they realized the inherent glory of Creeation and came to the conclusion of intelligent design.

[native]

I've grown pretty sympathetic to the atheistic frame of mind over the years, since time and again the simplest of beliefs have come undone, with experience (normal and mystical) proving to be the greatest teacher. I can't really claim to know many things, beyond knowing that there is something supernatural going on and that everything is conscious. Atheists seem to be coming from a place that wants to say "But how can you be so sure?" and I can't say that I blame them.

[kristina]

From the Camelot Journal: Jim McCarty
Questions 16.39 and 16.40 underline the fact that in the third density we do not have to consciously understand the Law of One-and in fact we cannot consciously understand the Law of One-to be harvestable to the fourth density:



"Questioner: I am assuming it is not necessary for an individual to understand the Law of One to go from third to fourth density. Is this correct?



Ra: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously realize it does not understand in order for it to be harvestable. Understanding is not of this density.

In 16.41 Ra said that it is not until the fifth density that an entity must be consciously aware of the Law of One to progress:



"Questioner: At what point in densities is it necessary for an entity to be consciously aware of the Law of One to progress?



Ra: I am Ra. The fifth-density harvest is of those whose vibratory distortions consciously accept the honor/duty of the Law of One. This responsibility/honor is the foundation of this vibration."



In our third density it seems to me that using Ra's process of balancing our catalyst on a daily basis is the most conscious means of progressing spiritually because it makes us very conscious of the action of catalyst as Ra said in 5.2:



"To begin to master the concept of mental discipline it is necessary to examine the self. The polarity of your dimension must be internalized. Where you find patience within your mind you must consciously find the corresponding impatience and vice versa. Each thought that a being has, has in its turn an antithesis. The disciplines of the mind involve, first of all, identifying both those things of which you approve and those things of which you disapprove within yourself, and then balancing each and every positive and negative charge with its equal. The mind contains all things. Therefore, you must discover this completeness within yourself."

This last statement from Ra regarding how the mind contains all things is reminiscent of what is being discussed here.
One that had been atheist but now is not and maybe another the was and is not now.
The path to the Law of One finds us ALL eventually. Now, or perhaps in 5th density. It is very interesting how the mind works. How it forms it's opinions and comes to it's conclusions for each of us. As mystifying as all that is, we still all end up at the same place; learning the Law of One. Some will take short, some will take long but we all get there.