What do we do? What do we do?

[Molly Brogan]

Merriam-Webster defines the word “do” as ways we act, behave, get alone, fare, manage, happen, finish and serve, among others. Often our actions require our ability to rationally ascertain the context of our actions, the possible consequences of our actions and the ethics of our actions before we do anything. Or do they? Our actions, I think, like our words, are very clear indications of our state of mind. Sociopaths would act differently than saints in the same circumstances, because they bring to the moment, a different frame of reference, different viewpoint and different foundation for action.

There are psychologies to both doing and doing nothing. Yes, there are rational-emotional models of the factors that predispose humans to do nothing. And there are theories of the psychology of action, which take into account reasoning abilities, emotion, attitude and other factors.

When our belief system holds God and Divine Action, our state of mind is very different than states that do not hold that belief, and our actions may reflect these differences. To understand and bridge these differences, The Vatican Observatory (VO) and the Center for Theology and Natural Sciences (CTNS) jointly sponsor a series of conferences on divine action. The theme of each conference is an area of the natural sciences: quantum cosmology and the laws of nature (1992), chaos and complexity (1994), evolutionary and molecular biology (1996), neuroscience (1998), and quantum mechanics (2000). This brings specificity and precision to the discussions of divine action. In one of the papers from these conferences, along with summaries of many others, is posted on the CTNS website: In “The Metaphysics of Divine Action,” John Polkinghorne notes that any discussion of agency requires the adoption of a metaphysical view of the nature of reality. He claims that there is no “deductive” way of going “from epistemology to ontology,” but the strategy of critical realism is to maximize the connection. This leads most physicists, he claims, to interpret Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as implying an actual indeterminacy in the physical world, rather than an ignorance of its detailed workings. Polkinghorne’s summary on the nature of Divine Action includes the insight that divine agency has its own special characteristics and that God’s knowledge of the world of becoming will be truly temporal in character.

In his book, Religion in late Modernity Robert C. Neville, suggests that these inquires “concerning divine action takes its rise from people who affirm as a supposition the belief that God is a personal being of some sort.”

In A Search for God In Ancient Egypt, by Jan Assmann, divine action and religious experience are part of the cosmic dimension of the mystic experience. Here, divine action is implicit in all contact with the divine once transcendence into Divine Presence has been realized. In other words, our actions become Divine Action, while in the presence of the One within.

To Bernard de Clairvaux, mysticism is the highest degree of the scale of love and “a perfect participation in the love which God has from Himself in the unity of the Spirit…to become thus is to be deified.” Our actions are naturally inspired from this unity of the Spirit that pervades our state.

This idea is similar to the mystical divine action, our own action, taken as a result of our mystical union with the God with us. The mystic Jan Ruysbroeck suggests in mystical union God “breathes us out from Himself that we may love and do good works; and again he draws us into Himself, that we may rest in fruition.”

Our efficacy and actions then, may be defined by whether or not we believe in God, and if we believe that God is external and personal, or a state of being within ourselves. What do YOU think?

[Michael]

Molly, you constantly ask, what we think, I see the question as being much the same as offering an alcoholic a drink.

[kris]

Often our actions require our ability to rationally ascertain the context of our actions, the possible consequences of our actions and the ethics of our actions before we do anything. Or do they? Our actions, I think, like our words, are very clear indications of our state of mind. Sociopaths would act differently than saints in the same circumstances, because they bring to the moment, a different frame of reference, different viewpoint and different foundation for action.As much as we live in this objective world, we also live with and within our individual subjective world views. This world view is the frame of reference for all, sociopaths and saints alike. Even our state of mind depends on our world views. Consciously, or otherwise, our actions are guided by our world views.


When our belief system holds God and Divine Action, our state of mind is very different than states that do not hold that belief, and our actions may reflect these differences. ...... In “The Metaphysics of Divine Action,” John Polkinghorne notes that any discussion of agency requires the adoption of a metaphysical view of the nature of reality. He claims that there is no “deductive” way of going “from epistemology to ontology,” but the strategy of critical realism is to maximize the connection. This leads most physicists, he claims, to interpret Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as implying an actual indeterminacy in the physical world, rather than an ignorance of its detailed workings. Polkinghorne’s summary on the nature of Divine Action includes the insight that divine agency has its own special characteristics and that God’s knowledge of the world of becoming will be truly temporal in character.

In his book, Religion in late Modernity Robert C. Neville, suggests that these inquires “concerning divine action takes its rise from people who affirm as a supposition the belief that God is a personal being of some sort.”

In A Search for God In Ancient Egypt, by Jan Assmann, divine action and religious experience are part of the cosmic dimension of the mystic experience. Here, divine action is implicit in all contact with the divine once transcendence into Divine Presence has been realized. In other words, our actions become Divine Action, while in the presence of the One within.

To Bernard de Clairvaux, mysticism is the highest degree of the scale of love and “a perfect participation in the love which God has from Himself in the unity of the Spirit…to become thus is to be deified.” Our actions are naturally inspired from this unity of the Spirit that pervades our state.

This idea is similar to the mystical divine action, our own action, taken as a result of our mystical union with the God with us. The mystic Jan Ruysbroeck suggests in mystical union God “breathes us out from Himself that we may love and do good works; and again he draws us into Himself, that we may rest in fruition.”

Our efficacy and actions then, may be defined by whether or not we believe in God, and if we believe that God is external and personal, or a state of being within ourselves. What do YOU think?One cannot speak of Divine Action without implying Divine Will. I think physicists are wise to acknowledge uncertainty in our ability to determine physical reality. At the other dangerous extreme, there are those who claim certain knowledge of the Divine Will. I think it is best not to second guess Divine Will.

[greg]

Merriam-Webster defines the word “do” as ways we act, behave, get alone, fare, manage, happen, finish and serve, among others. Often our actions require our ability to rationally ascertain the context of our actions, the possible consequences of our actions and the ethics of our actions before we do anything. Or do they? Our actions, I think, like our words, are very clear indications of our state of mind. Sociopaths would act differently than saints in the same circumstances, because they bring to the moment, a different frame of reference, different viewpoint and different foundation for action.

There are psychologies to both doing and doing nothing. Yes, there are rational-emotional models of the factors that predispose humans to do nothing. And there are theories of the psychology of action, which take into account reasoning abilities, emotion, attitude and other factors.

When our belief system holds God and Divine Action, our state of mind is very different than states that do not hold that belief, and our actions may reflect these differences. To understand and bridge these differences, The Vatican Observatory (VO) and the Center for Theology and Natural Sciences (CTNS) jointly sponsor a series of conferences on divine action. The theme of each conference is an area of the natural sciences: quantum cosmology and the laws of nature (1992), chaos and complexity (1994), evolutionary and molecular biology (1996), neuroscience (1998), and quantum mechanics (2000). This brings specificity and precision to the discussions of divine action. In one of the papers from these conferences, along with summaries of many others, is posted on the CTNS website: In “The Metaphysics of Divine Action,” John Polkinghorne notes that any discussion of agency requires the adoption of a metaphysical view of the nature of reality. He claims that there is no “deductive” way of going “from epistemology to ontology,” but the strategy of critical realism is to maximize the connection. This leads most physicists, he claims, to interpret Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as implying an actual indeterminacy in the physical world, rather than an ignorance of its detailed workings. Polkinghorne’s summary on the nature of Divine Action includes the insight that divine agency has its own special characteristics and that God’s knowledge of the world of becoming will be truly temporal in character.

In his book, Religion in late Modernity Robert C. Neville, suggests that these inquires “concerning divine action takes its rise from people who affirm as a supposition the belief that God is a personal being of some sort.”

In A Search for God In Ancient Egypt, by Jan Assmann, divine action and religious experience are part of the cosmic dimension of the mystic experience. Here, divine action is implicit in all contact with the divine once transcendence into Divine Presence has been realized. In other words, our actions become Divine Action, while in the presence of the One within.

To Bernard de Clairvaux, mysticism is the highest degree of the scale of love and “a perfect participation in the love which God has from Himself in the unity of the Spirit…to become thus is to be deified.” Our actions are naturally inspired from this unity of the Spirit that pervades our state.

This idea is similar to the mystical divine action, our own action, taken as a result of our mystical union with the God with us. The mystic Jan Ruysbroeck suggests in mystical union God “breathes us out from Himself that we may love and do good works; and again he draws us into Himself, that we may rest in fruition.”

Our efficacy and actions then, may be defined by whether or not we believe in God, and if we believe that God is external and personal, or a state of being within ourselves. What do YOU think?

God is both external and personal and at that point God is Good and Evil. When you see no difference between Good and Evil in God you are in the cosmic religion.

Greg

[jufa]

"To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the sun. A time to be born. . ."

Everyone who enters into this dimension is here because of the above statement. People criticize everything man does and does not do in the flesh, but the flesh is a dimension which must be entered because it is, for each and every individual who re-enter it, time to dissolve the mess their conscious accepted and actions continuously display within their conscious world heretofore.

Everything is a circle. Thesre are three hundred and sixty degrees in that circle, and at some point and time in man's existence, that circle has been broken by man. Not broken literally, but figurative by their disobedience to the Promise man make with The Father when the Father appointed man's time to once again consciously realize the substance offlesh.

In re-entering the world of matter, man still carry all the tears, laughters, joys, anger. pains and pleasures he first received from his ancestors, and expanded upon. At the moment of his entrance into the material world of matter, man becomes the sole saviour of the line of thought he used for his entrance back into this world for the purpose of ending the dominance of the flesh mental will in him, thus, free that line from continuing on into the cycle of human universal mentality. Our purpose is to stop the buck here as Jesus did.

You will note that Jesus had nothing in this world to attach Himself to. Jesus freed Himself from the human line of dominance when He would not yield to the temptation of man's mind set. Jesus set the example we must follow for overcoming the world. But we refuse to let go of our family, or fears, or the influencing thoughts of humanism. Thus, until one clears himself of the ways of the world in his consciousness, he cannot freed the captive in hell, or his ancestors from continuing on. We enter this realm to "live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." This must be exclusive, as Jesus demonstrated to hang the old man upon the cross for piercing for the blood and water to go back into the ground, so the Spirit can arise.

[greg]

Everyone who enters into this dimension is here because of the above statement. People criticize everything man does and does not do in the flesh, but the flesh is a dimension which must be entered because it is, for each and every individual who re-enter it, time to dissolve the mess their conscious accepted and actions continuously display within their conscious world heretofore.

Everything is a circle. Thesre are three hundred and sixty degrees in that circle, and at some point and time in man's existence, that circle has been broken by man. Not broken literally, but figurative by their disobedience to the Promise man make with The Father when the Father appointed man's time to once again consciously realize the substance offlesh.

In re-entering the world of matter, man still carry all the tears, laughters, joys, anger. pains and pleasures he first received from his ancestors, and expanded upon. At the moment of his entrance into the material world of matter, man becomes the sole saviour of the line of thought he used for his entrance back into this world for the purpose of ending the dominance of the flesh mental will in him, thus, free that line from continuing on into the cycle of human universal mentality. Our purpose is to stop the buck here as Jesus did.

You will note that Jesus had nothing in this world to attach Himself to. Jesus freed Himself from the human line of dominance when He would not yield to the temptation of man's mind set. Jesus set the example we must follow for overcoming the world. But we refuse to let go of our family, or fears, or the influencing thoughts of humanism. Thus, until one clears himself of the ways of the world in his consciousness, he cannot freed the captive in hell, or his ancestors from continuing on. We enter this realm to "live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." This must be exclusive, as Jesus demonstrated to hang the old man upon the cross for piercing for the blood and water to go back into the ground, so the Spirit can arise.

Jesus said “ I am the light I am the way, no one reaches God except through me.”
Is this “Live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God”
I do. And if not how do we determine what are the words of God?

Greg

[jufa]

Jesus said “ I am the light I am the way, no one reaches God except through me.”
Is this “Live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God”
I do. And if not how do we determine what are the words of God?

Greg

The beginning quote is what Jesus is supposed to have said. I will grant you the benefit of the doubt, even though these words were written years after Jesus came and went. Don't know why you quoted this to me because Jesus was not the way, it was the "Christ in him, the hope of glory," being Jesus was the Son of Man, who had to die so the Son of God could arise from the grave of the Son of Man's intellectual ignorance.

So in saying this, I am dispurting you live "by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" because you are still bound to the first two temptation because you do not live to the obedience of 'thou shalt have no other gods before me."