09-20-2010, 08:18 AM
(09-19-2010, 10:27 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I agree with the first statement but not the second. I don't think we can exclude religion as an influence. It's a catalyst, like everything else in 3D.
If you think religion can negatively affect entities, then why couldn't it also positively affect entities?
Or are you saying that the people immersed in religion, but who have found the positive, can influence others positively, but the institution of religion itself can't? Is that what you are saying?
because religion is a control tool.
we broadly categorize many things in the group of 'religion', but, when we look them in detail, numerous ones from the eastern philosophies like buddhism, taoism and so on, are more philosophies than religions. ie, they are unlike others. they do not subject you to any organization, religious hierarchy in their core. there may come up entities who do it with their own incentive, creating hierarchical groups within themselves, but if you look at the core of the philosophy, there is no ordering authority (god) and there is no appointed emissary (prophet). entities are free to come and go as they please, think as they please, and develop their own understandings. almost nothing is mandated.
when we exclude such philosophies, what's left in the religion genus becomes exclusively the hierarchical philosophical organizations that control people. it is rather a stretch to call most of them philosophical too.
'but religion isnt just that organization' -> no it is. take out the 'turn the other cheek' and 'love each other' message from christianity. what is left ? you dont have turn the other cheek, and love, in islam even. similarly judaism. i wont even touch the subject of ancient central american religions.
Quote:...and creating catalyst for others, rather than being affected by the catalyst?
Or, might it be both?
the logic you propose here is similar to incarnating in a negative world, and trying to be catalyst for others and oneself, whereas positive worlds which fit with the core understanding are available for incarnation.
Quote:That's disconcerting.
However, the control isn't total.
there is no total control anywhere. through the information in Ra text regarding negative path, we know that negative path needs some freedom to exist, even to be able to polarize negatively.
in the context we are talking about, i think the source which is trying to negativize this world may get similar results from partially controlling 1 billion entities or more ( a whopping number ) to what it would be having if they totally controlled 5 million entities. at least, the hampering of the positive progress would happen.
Quote:Hmmm....good point. Do we know that those 'saints' were all harvested in the previous cycle?
we know of 2 that is given as examples in Ra text. all the beautified people in catholic religion, we cant know. we cant know either, whether they were people really of high frequency or not, or even deserved any beautification or not, regardless of their actions. we cant be sure.
however Ra makes a small generalization about them, ie, saying their preferences made incarnating in these religious organizations desirable. whether they speak of these two, or all of them, i dont know.
Quote:So you aren't proposing that we cram the Law of One down the throats of religious fundamentalists?
nooo. i think they wouldnt accept it either.