Is the Law of One harmonious with the Abrahamic faiths?

[βαθμιαίος]

Interesting post at another forum. I don't really agree (especially about the Law of One being from demons), but it's interesting to think about how well the Ra material jibes or doesn't jibe with Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

http://vigilantcitizen.com/vcboards/view...14#p413814

I believe there is quite an amount of irreoncilable differences between Ra's Law of One and the fundamental principles of Abrahamic faiths (Though I will be speaking mainly through a Christian perspective, if that even makes a difference with this topic).

One could take certain statements from the Bible and see them as parallels towards the principles of the LOO but I see this as quite a stretch as, in the context of the scriptures as a whole, the meanings of these statements do not equal what certain individuals may be interpreting them as. One can cherry pick isolated passages to fit a plethora of meanings, but many times with this being done there arises contradictions to the interpretation among the other bodies of scripture (Not speaking solely of other books in the Bible either).

From what I know of the LOO, it clearly states that all things are one, and all compromise the Creator. This clearly is a pantheistic mentality and it is thoroughly rejected within the Bible which claims God as a sovereign ruler and creator. Continually we are called to be His servants, not essences of Him bearing equality. Nature and the world are created without any signification they are as well apart of Him. God expressly opposed cultures and religions which adhered to such pantheistic mentality as well. These matters are simply not compatible.

From what I also remember, there exists no exact right or wrong within the LOO, as they exist within Abrahamic faiths. Everything is ultimately connected to the Creator. It's all based on ''identity'' within the Creator. Feelings and mentalities of fear, negativity, and etc. are opposed within this doctrine but in a way that states, ''that is not good for your well being,'' not, ''This is evil in the sight of the Lord and worthy of punishment.'' There is a huge difference here.

Ultimately the LOO is just another doctrine from demons which state that we are gods and don't need to be concerned about having a relationship with Jesus Christ as is stated within scriptures. Christ is turned into more of an ideal to metaphysically replicate. The relationship is fundamentally built on a relationship to ourselves, and through ourselves we automatically gain a relationship with ''God,'' for we are all one and the same.

This doctrine takes away the sovereignty of God and seeks to place us at His own level. It turns sins (The rejection of God and His kingdom, worthy of not ever being apart of it (Thus eternally destroyed)) only into errors that inhibit one from ever becoming better in themselves. It takes away all power and correction that can be taken from God and places it into the hands of man. We are to atone for our own mistakes. We are to make ourselves ''holy.'' It's all about us.

This mentality defies the very nature of God, ourselves, the relationship we should seek with Him, the objective laws of all reality, and the consequences of rejecting said laws.

By no means are they in alignment.

[hogey11]

This point of view fails to realize that the Abrahamic faiths may have been tainted by Orion contact. If you are going to judge the Law of One, you cannot cherry pick only one side of things to refute and not incorporate the rest. The reason that the Abrahamic faiths are so close-minded towards any other idea is precisely due to the negative influence. I love this topic, and can go on and on and on, but I won't (yet)

It's funny to read someone want so badly to be 'punished' tho...

[Tenet Nosce]

The Abrahamic faiths are, philosophically speaking, an outgrowth of Zoroastrianism, which is a theology of dualism. This type of system postulates that there are two irreconcilable forces in the universe: good and evil. In Zoroastrianism, these are referred to as "wickedness" and "righteousness."

The Law of One is a monistic theology. This states that there is only a singular force in the universe- the One Infinite Creator- and everything else is a derivation thereof.

The poster you referenced is confused.

"This clearly is a pantheistic mentality and it is thoroughly rejected within the Bible which claims God as a sovereign ruler and creator."

Monotheism is actually a subset of pantheism. Thus the First Commandment which says, "Thou shalt not worship other gods before me." This statement acknowledges the existence of multiple gods, and elevates one of them over the rest. (Which we know to be the false "Yahweh".) By contrast, the Law of One is neither monotheistic nor pantheistic, but monistic.

If the First Commandment were, "There is only one God." that would be an entirely different philosophical base, and more harmonious with the Law of One.

So, in conclusion, I would say yes, there is a fundamental incongruency between the Law of One and the Abrahamic faiths. Which might explain why bringing the Law of One through a channel so strongly identified with an Abrahamic belief system was such a challenge. (Pun intended.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monism

Monism is a point of view within metaphysics which argues that the variety of existing things in the universe are reducible to one substance or reality and therefore that the fundamental character of the universe is unity. Contrasting with this point of view is dualism which asserts that there are two ultimately irreconcilable substances or realities (with consciousness and/or mind on the one hand and matter on the other) or pluralism which asserts any number of fundamental substances or realities more than two. Monisms may be theologically syncretic by proposing that there is one God who has many manifestations in the diverse religious traditions.

[hogey11]

This doctrine takes away the sovereignty of God and seeks to place us at His own level. It turns sins (The rejection of God and His kingdom, worthy of not ever being apart of it (Thus eternally destroyed)) only into errors that inhibit one from ever becoming better in themselves. It takes away all power and correction that can be taken from God and places it into the hands of man. We are to atone for our own mistakes. We are to make ourselves ''holy.'' It's all about us.

Yet Jesus called us the children of God (just as he was the Son of God - we're the same) and preached a gnostic-leaning gospel himself. Jesus was far more aligned with the Law of One than he ever was with the Judaic faith that ended up leading to his death. It's amazing to me that Christians can never separate the Abrahamic OT God and Jesus's gospel, as it was precisely his teachings against the Jewish faith that ultimately put him on the cross.

It was the rigidity of the Abrahamic faiths that killed Jesus. Sounds pretty STS, no?

The rub of it all is that the Law of One is harmonious with everything. That's why it's the Law of One.

[Tenet Nosce]

Jesus was far more aligned with the Law of One than he ever was with the Judaic faith that ended up leading to his death. It's amazing to me that Christians can never separate the Abrahamic OT God and Jesus's gospel, as it was precisely his teachings against the Jewish faith that ultimately put him on the cross.

I believe we have Paul to thank for that. His writings seem to be an attempt to rework the teachings of Jesus back into the dualistic framework of Judaism. Gnostic Christianity, on the other hand, is much more congruent with the Law of One, and in my opinion, the true teachings of Jesus, i.e. we are one in Christ.

Have you noticed that in church they rarely read directly from the quotes attributed to Jesus, but more often decide to read from the works of Paul?

[BrownEye]

βαθμιαίος the person that wrote what you quoted was a drug using possessed teenager last time i checked. It's been over a year, so i don't know if his status has changed. His mind has taken on some change removing a small portion of that cognitive dissonance, forcing him to see things differently, but he has not changed much. Still on the orthodox bandwagon. Looking for evil in all the "good" places, unable to see the "bad" that is in his own space.

Very funny how it works out. Most of the religious on VC that point out everything as being demonic happen to have their perceptions filtered by negative entities. So in reality the only demons are right at their side.

[Tenet Nosce]

Very funny how it works out. Most of the religious on VC that point out everything as being demonic happen to have their perceptions filtered by negative entities. So in reality the only demons are right at their side.

Under the Zoroastrian system, the ahuras were the good spirits, while the daevas were the evil spirits. Ahuras were often depicted somewhat grotesquely while the daevas were beautiful according to human standards.

As Zoroastrianism made its way through the Indian subcontinent, it of course because subsumed by Hinduism- but with one important change. The spirits flip-flopped, and the daevas became the "good spirits."

This inversion persisted into the Abrahamic faiths whereby the daevas became the "angels" and the ahuras the "demons" of these faiths.

As a side note, I think it is interesting how Americans have picked up on this word as "deva" and use it to refer to highly materialistic people.

[Horuseus]

Deleted.

[βαθμιαίος]

Pickle and Horuseus, are you guys on that board, too?

Regardless of the individual's circumstances, the thought patterns are ones we all may come across if we discuss the Law of One with devout Christians, Jews, or Muslims. Further, it's interesting because he has a pretty good handle on what the Law of One says, he just doesn't agree with it.

[BrownEye]

I used to love going there just to poke the fundies.

[Tenet Nosce]

Regardless of the individual's circumstances, the thought patterns are ones we all may come across if we discuss the Law of One with devout Christians, Jews, or Muslims. Further, it's interesting because he has a pretty good handle on what the Law of One says, he just doesn't agree with it.

How would you respond to this thought pattern?

[βαθμιαίος]

Usually somewhere between "To those who wish to sleep we could only offer those comforts designed for the sleeping" and "In the case of those with whom you, as entities and as a group, are not in resonance, you wish them love, light, peace, joy, and bid them well."

I'm hoping that trying to understand the pattern counts towards "Thus, to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make."

[Tenet Nosce]

Usually somewhere between "To those who wish to sleep we could only offer those comforts designed for the sleeping" and "In the case of those with whom you, as entities and as a group, are not in resonance, you wish them love, light, peace, joy, and bid them well."

I'm hoping that trying to understand the pattern counts towards "Thus, to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make."

What is your thought on the reconciliation of the Law of One with the Abrahamic religions? Do you see a way to harmonize monism with dualism?

[βαθμιαίος]

I'm not sure that philosophically they can be reconciled, but tactically there's some hope in that most Christians, etc. don't seem to think of themselves as subscribing to a philosophy of dualism. One way to build bridges would be to do what Jesus did and find the love and light in the existing scriptures and draw attention to those parts.

[Tenet Nosce]

I'm not sure that philosophically they can be reconciled, but tactically there's some hope in that most Christians, etc. don't seem to think of themselves as subscribing to a philosophy of dualism. One way to build bridges would be to do what Jesus did and find the love and light in the existing scriptures and draw attention to those parts.

This thought just occurred to me: What if the trinity concept is an attempt at reconciliation? Basically- it is the concept of a triune godhead of Hinduism blended together with the notion that the primary attribute of God is Love.

---

"Thus, to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make."

Funny... isn't that precisely what Jesus did during those years of his life upon which the Bible is silent?

---

ROFL! This is hilarious! According to Bible.org:

The tri-personality of God is exclusively a Christian doctrine and a truth of Scripture.

I suppose they forgot about the Hindus.

[Confused]

One way to build bridges...

Why at all should an attempt be made to build bridges between the LOO and the traditional faiths of the world?

[Tenet Nosce]

Why at all should an attempt be made to build bridges between the LOO and the traditional faiths of the world?

It gives our friends of Q'uo something to do while they are waiting for us to meditate.

[native]

Haha.

[Tenet Nosce]

(especially about the Law of One being from demons)

Questioner: The fifteenth archetype is the Matrix of the Spirit and has been called the Devil. Can you tell me why that is so?

Ra: I am Ra. We do not wish to be facile in such a central query, but we may note that the nature of the spirit is so infinitely subtle that the fructifying influence of light upon the great darkness of the spirit is very often not as apparent as the darkness itself. The progress chosen by many adepts becomes a confused path as each adept attempts to use the Catalyst of the Spirit. Few there are which are successful in grasping the light of the sun. By far, the majority of adepts remain groping in the moonlight and, as we have said, this light can deceive as well as uncover hidden mystery. Therefore, the melody, shall we say, of this matrix often seems to be of a negative and evil, as you would call it, nature.

It is also to be noted that an adept is one which has freed itself more and more from the constraints of the thoughts, opinions, and bonds of other-selves. Whether this is done for service to others or service to self, it is a necessary part of the awakening of the adept. This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black. The magic is recognized; the nature is often not.

[Confused]

... I suppose they forgot about the Hindus.

Yeah, TN, everybody forgets us

However, On the inside, all humans are one essence. Thus, we can still take solace on being forgotten!

Oh wait, I can still run up to Q'uo and complain.:p

[βαθμιαίος]

This thought just occurred to me: What if the trinity concept is an attempt at reconciliation? Basically- it is the concept of a triune godhead of Hinduism blended together with the notion that the primary attribute of God is Love.

Interesting. Maybe so.

Why at all should an attempt be made to build bridges between the LOO and the traditional faiths of the world?

Get a start on fourth density?

[Tenet Nosce]

Yeah, TN, everybody forgets us

Confused, I didn't know you are a Hindu! What do you know of the connection with Zoroastrianism I was discussing above?

[Cyan]

Why at all should an attempt be made to build bridges between the LOO and the traditional faiths of the world?

Get a start on fourth density?

Because its the right thing to do. To build bridges across the various islands

[Confused]

Get a start on fourth density?

8.1 Questioner: I have a question regarding what I call the advertising of the Confederation. It has to do with free will. There have been certain contacts allowed, as I understand, by the Confederation, but this is limited because of free will of those who are not oriented in such a way as to want contact. Many people on our planet want this material, but even though we disseminate it many will not be aware that it is available. Is there any possibility of creating some effect which I would call advertising, or is this against the principle of free will?

Ra: I am Ra. Consider, if you will, the path your life-experience complex has taken. Consider the coincidences and odd circumstances by which one thing flowed to the next. Consider this well.

Each entity will receive the opportunity that each needs. This information source-beingness does not have uses in the life-experience complex of each of those among your peoples who seek. Thus the advertisement is general and not designed to indicate the searching out of any particular material, but only to suggest the noumenal aspect of the illusion.

[Confused]

What do you know of the connection with Zoroastrianism I was discussing above?

Frankly, I am learning it for the first time due to your comment, TN.

I do not consider myself a practicing Hindu. I was born into the tradition and that is about it. I make no big deal about it, personally; and moreover, a true student of the LOO can not make a big deal about his or her illusory personal identity of an incarnation, in my opinion.

80.11 Questioner: Could I say, then, that implicit in the process of becoming adept is the seeming polarization towards service to self because the adept becomes disassociated with many of his kind?

Ra: I am Ra. This is likely to occur. The apparent happening is disassociation whether the truth is service to self and thus true disassociation from other-selves or service to others and thus true association with the heart of all other-selves and disassociation only from the illusory husks which prevent the adept from correctly perceiving the self and other-self as one.

---

To build bridges across the various islands

I see no islands, personally; but only a continuous spectrum of devotional thought, typifying the common yearning of the human heart to reach out and spiritually mate with the One Infinite Creator.

[Tenet Nosce]

I do not consider myself a practicing Hindu. I was born into the tradition and that is about it. I make no big deal about it, personally; and moreover, a true student of the LOO can not make a big deal about his or her illusory personal identity of an incarnation, in my opinion.

Oh, I didn't mean to make a big deal about it! I was just excited that somebody might be able to confirm or deny my ramblings.

It is a particular area of interest of mine to research how the original teachings of Ra became distorted, and how these distortions have worked their way down to the religious teachings of the modern day.

Thus- I didn't mean to define you according to your "illusory husk" but just thought that your particular husk might be more prone to the possession of information that I would find helpful in my studies.

I see no islands, personally; but only a continuous spectrum of devotional thought, typifying the common yearning of the human heart to reach out and spiritually mate with the One Infinite Creator.

One time- on an ayahuasca trip- I was specifically given the image of islands floating in a vast sea. The sea represented our physical universe. Each of the islands had a long cylindrical growth (like a rod) on its underside, reaching deep down into the sea below, and providing a counterbalance against waves rippling through the sea. Also- some type of energy was being drawn up the rod from the sea to support the islands.

I was given the impression that, as those inhabiting the islands grew in awareness through incarnation into the physical, the balancing rod grew thicker and deeper down into the sea. I was further given the impression that the inhabitants of one of these islands decided to do an "experiment" and artificially extend their rod in order to draw more energy from the sea.

Something went "wrong" and it caused huge explosions in the sea. Huge tidal waves went rippling across the sea, causing the nearest islands to pitch and dive precariously... particularly the ones whose balancing rods were not highly developed.

A coalition was made to repair the damage, however in order to do this, the inhabitants of the affected islands needed to go underwater (i.e. physically incarnate) and make the adjustments from the inside.

Here on the flip-side of Creation, earth is the place where this explosions occurred. We experienced these as the detonation of nuclear weapons.

Thus, the "bridges" to be constructed are those between the inhabitants of the affected islands, now incarnated on earth, and those incarnated from the island where the experiment took place. The intent is to use those bridges for dissemination of information which can help to balance the errors in philosophy which provided the foundation for the development of the nuclear weapons.

These errors primarily revolve around a dualistic theology/cosmology wherein there are "good" and "evil" forces in the world. This is the philosophical foundation for the idea that "evil" could be eradicated through the use of nuclear weapons, or threats thereof.

[Cyan]

To build bridges across the various islands

I see no islands, personally; but only a continuous spectrum of devotional thought, typifying the common yearning of the human heart to reach out and spiritually mate with the One Infinite Creator.

Really. I see plenty of islands (planets, moons, coments, rocks, asteroids, belts, suns, galaxies) floating in a background of null (nothing) space.

And building bridges (allowing various planets, moons etc, free contact as they request with other planets moons etc)

Or, in a small scale.

Instead of only talking about this stuff online. Walk to your closest LOO oriented friends house and go "wadap" and you now have 1 island instead of 2 islands

---

I was given the impression that, as those inhabiting the islands grew in awareness through incarnation into the physical, the balancing rod grew thicker and deeper down into the sea. I was further given the impression that the inhabitants of one of these islands decided to do an "experiment" and artificially extend their rod in order to draw more energy from the sea.

Something went "wrong" and it caused huge explosions in the sea. Huge tidal waves went rippling across the sea, causing the nearest islands to pitch and dive precariously... particularly the ones whose balancing rods were not highly developed.

A coalition was made to repair the damage, however in order to do this, the inhabitants of the affected islands needed to go underwater (i.e. physically incarnate) and make the adjustments from the inside.

Here on the flip-side of Creation, earth is the place where this explosions occurred. We experienced these as the detonation of nuclear weapons.

Thus, the "bridges" to be constructed are those between the inhabitants of the affected islands, now incarnated on earth, and those incarnated from the island where the experiment took place. The intent is to use those bridges for dissemination of information which can help to balance the errors in philosophy which provided the foundation for the development of the nuclear weapons.

These errors primarily revolve around a dualistic theology/cosmology wherein there are "good" and "evil" forces in the world. This is the philosophical foundation for the idea that "evil" could be eradicated through the use of nuclear weapons, or threats thereof.

http://youtu.be/TarH1yb2GXY?t=5m39s This kind of what you mean?

[Monica]

Yes, compatible with the Law of One, because everything is contained in the Law of One.

No, not compatible with the STO path, but not for the reasons cited. Not compatible because the Bible, particularly the old testament, is elitist and glorifies genocide, invasions, wars and tyranny...decidedly STS concepts.

---

βαθμιαίος the person that wrote what you quoted was a drug using possessed teenager last time i checked. It's been over a year, so i don't know if his status has changed. His mind has taken on some change removing a small portion of that cognitive dissonance, forcing him to see things differently, but he has not changed much. Still on the orthodox bandwagon. Looking for evil in all the "good" places, unable to see the "bad" that is in his own space.

His statements are the same as what fundamentalist Christians typically say...they call anything not Bible-based 'satanic' and 'demonic.' (Regardless of whether they use drugs!)

Very funny how it works out. Most of the religious on VC that point out everything as being demonic happen to have their perceptions filtered by negative entities. So in reality the only demons are right at their side.

Yup...They have no idea that the very deception they accuse others of, is happening to them. Their 'satan' is laughing his ass off!

[Confused]

Oh, I didn't mean to make a big deal about it! I was just excited that somebody might be able to confirm or deny my ramblings.

I completely understand, TN.

Lol...at times, human communication can be so complicated as to be lost in translation. I was reading this article the other day as to sometimes how foreigners visiting Sweden can find the local population distant. But in fact, the native population of the country are only very intent upon upholding the noble principle of respecting the right to privacy of others, which however can, in distorted manner, communicate the aura of aloofness.

Similarly, I meant my post about my 'identity' in a very self-effacing manner, which probably looked like I was trying to score a point with you.

If not for the disastrous and painful consequences of human communication (or lack there-of) gone awry on this planet, the whole subtext of human interaction based on communication by words would be so comical, in my opinion!

---

Really. I see plenty of islands...

I understand. However, I choose to behold the wondrous singular waters that hold the multiple islands on its surface.

[Aaron]

Oh, I didn't mean to make a big deal about it! I was just excited that somebody might be able to confirm or deny my ramblings.

I completely understand, TN.

Lol...at times, human communication can be so complicated as to be lost in translation. I was reading this article the other day as to sometimes how foreigners visiting Sweden can find the local population distant. But in fact, the native population of the country are only very intent upon upholding the noble principle of respecting the right to privacy of others, which however can, in distorted manner, communicate the aura of aloofness.

Similarly, I meant my post about my 'identity' in a very self-effacing manner, which probably looked like I was trying to score a point with you.

If not for the disastrous and painful consequences of human communication (or lack there-of) gone awry on this planet, the whole subtext of human interaction based on communication by words would be so comical, in my opinion!

---

Really. I see plenty of islands...

I understand. However, I choose to behold the wondrous singular waters that hold the multiple islands on its surface.

In Sweeden, there is this popular idea called "Jantelagen" (yontay loggen) which means "The Law of Jante" (not related to Law of One ). Jante is the typical Swede. Jante doesn't do anything that would make him stand out too much, be too "loud" or draw too much attention to himself. All should remember to be like Jante, because nobody wants to look like a fool!