God according to Kurt Leland's AP

The Opportunity for Spiritual Growth while still in physical life. Topics such as Spirituality and Metaphysics are welcomed.
User avatar
fairyana
Initiate
Posts: 464
Joined: August 24th, 2012, 12:26 pm
count: 2

God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by fairyana » December 9th, 2012, 10:06 am

I though it was really interesting the way Kurt Leland described God from his AP journey.

"Heaven is a boundless energy plane in which each individual has the renewing and recharging experience of presence within the heart of God: not, of course, the Creator and Sustainer of universes itself—that would be overwhelming—but rather the powerful energy that is at the source of all humanity: its mission. That mission, of course, represents humanity's place within the great Creator and Sustainer of Universes."

Why this made sense to me has to do with Spiritist teachings and also has to do with what Tom Campbell concluded. Spiritism says that souls are not part of God, like a sculpture is not part of the sculptor. This would make sense with what Tom Campbell said about the Big Bang and our universe. When you create something, you are outside that something. If our universe was a computer (a system), there would have to be someone outside of the computer to turn it on. Therefore, whoever created the universe, logically, could not be part of the universe, they have to be outside of it. And so we are not part of a God since He is outside the universe that He created.

Is seem to me that the creator of the universe is not the same as the God we perceive. Tom Campbell explains that the larger consciousness system of which we are a part of has all the characteristics that we attribute to God. Tom doesn't state, however, that the large consciousness system IS in fact God, he just points out that they have very, very similar traits.

So to me it would make sense that the larger consciousness system is the same as the "presence within the heart of God that is at the source of humanity", which in turn is not the same entity as the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe.

Does anyone follow me? What do you think?

User avatar
Jettins \o/
Adept
Posts: 1466
Joined: October 11th, 2011, 2:20 pm
count: 608
Location: Florida - USA

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by Jettins \o/ » December 9th, 2012, 10:51 am

Yeah, that would make sense. In my view the creator or the intelligent force that created our physical and non-physical universe is in another universe that we cannot access. The creator or what we would have to refer as god would be a spark that created this universe and we are creating the dimensions within it. I think dimensions are constantly extending and expanding to infinity which means there will be sub creators or gods within dimensions and universes.

Some interesting stuff. Thanks for bringing it up. I've been reading Kurt Leland's book lately.
Image Would you like to contact me via live chat? You can via Skype. Contact me ahead of time so we can arrange. Skype username: J.E.T.T.I.N.S

User avatar
PauliEffect
Initiate
Posts: 111
Joined: July 30th, 2012, 6:17 pm
count: 20

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by PauliEffect » December 9th, 2012, 11:27 am

I have got the feeling that Campbell doesn't believe in the existence of
anything else than Digital Consciousness, which is both the Software,
the Database, the Hardware (computer) and the Programmer.

Everything else doesn't really exist, those other things are virtual at best.

User avatar
Jettins \o/
Adept
Posts: 1466
Joined: October 11th, 2011, 2:20 pm
count: 608
Location: Florida - USA

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by Jettins \o/ » December 9th, 2012, 12:02 pm

PauliEffect,

Interesting observations. If my memory serves me correctly, God according to Tom is a property of the universe. A type of auto mechanism of creation in which the big G is undefined. Not entirely sure how to extend this view. I could be missing information on Tom's views, so don't quote me. I think some of the mechanistic metaphors Tom uses help explain certain things well, but not everything.
Image Would you like to contact me via live chat? You can via Skype. Contact me ahead of time so we can arrange. Skype username: J.E.T.T.I.N.S

User avatar
PauliEffect
Initiate
Posts: 111
Joined: July 30th, 2012, 6:17 pm
count: 20

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by PauliEffect » December 9th, 2012, 1:18 pm

Jettins, I'm not absolutely sure about that. Campbell has stated in various places that the
things we believe exist, don't exist, for example in this link -> here (quote from Campbell):


"You have heard me say in these forums many times that guides are merely metaphors
expressing a form of help the larger consciousness system provides to encourage and
aid our evolution. Also that "Higher selves" or "Over-souls" are also merely metaphors
for that non-PMR functionality of our consciousness - that we and our higher selves are
one fully integrated thing, not separate things with separate functions. Add souls, IUOCs,
Indra's Net, RWW, TBC, AUM, VRRE, OS, and everything else that we have functionally
defined as a separate component of the larger reality to that list of "merely metaphors".
None of it exists -- not as separate objects/beings/stuff/units. It's all virtual.You have
heard me say in these forums many times that guides are merely metaphors expressing
a form of help the larger consciousness system provides to encourage and aid our evolution.
Also that "Higher selves" or "Over-souls" are also merely metaphors for that non-PMR
functionality of our consciousness - that we and our higher selves are one fully integrated
thing, not separate things with separate functions. Add souls, IUOCs, Indra's Net, RWW,
TBC, AUM, VRRE, OS, and everything else that we have functionally defined as a separate
component of the larger reality to that list of "merely metaphors". None of it exists -- not
as separate objects/beings/stuff/units. It's all virtual.
"


... None of it exists.

No God.

No IUOCs.

No Universe.

No astral worlds.

Nothing exists, except for Digital Consciousness.

User avatar
hydro1
Initiate
Posts: 1222
Joined: May 16th, 2012, 8:27 pm
count: 40
Location: st. louis MO
Contact:

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by hydro1 » December 9th, 2012, 1:34 pm

But god said he made us all in his image....meaning hes not woman or man nor black nor white its genderless meaning its a entity or energy in itsself..but then again it can't be energy if we are made in its image it only leaves it to be a entity...and people say its all around so it is of this universe but of a differ vibration/frequency level...i'm glad someone brung up the subject of god cause this what i was gonna say....this is just my 5 cents on the matter....that also mean god has feeling and emotions too...love is a feeling and an emotion.
Go hard or not at all

User avatar
fairyana
Initiate
Posts: 464
Joined: August 24th, 2012, 12:26 pm
count: 2

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by fairyana » December 9th, 2012, 2:42 pm

I see Tom's point. He seems to be saying (if I understood it correctly) that it doesn't exist because it's virtual, only consciousness is real. But I have to disagree with him in this point. Something that is virtual exists in itself. If this reality is a virtual game, than it's a virtual game that exists. It's an existing illusion, more or less.

User avatar
PauliEffect
Initiate
Posts: 111
Joined: July 30th, 2012, 6:17 pm
count: 20

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by PauliEffect » December 9th, 2012, 2:57 pm

hydro1 wrote:But god said he made us all in his image...
According to Campbell, god is just another metaphor. God does not exist.

Beside, what god do you mean? Zoroastrian? Wiccan? Presbyterian? Druidic? Hindu? :)

User avatar
hydro1
Initiate
Posts: 1222
Joined: May 16th, 2012, 8:27 pm
count: 40
Location: st. louis MO
Contact:

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by hydro1 » December 9th, 2012, 3:05 pm

The one true god the father of jesus christ all the rest are lesser gods who barely have peoples best interest at heart many would say these other so called gods are just the devil disguising himself to decieve you...but i don't believe everything people say i have my own beliefs outside of god and religions i do believe in the father of jesus christ but i believe in other things as well
Go hard or not at all

User avatar
PauliEffect
Initiate
Posts: 111
Joined: July 30th, 2012, 6:17 pm
count: 20

Re: God according to Kurt Leland's AP

Post by PauliEffect » December 9th, 2012, 3:18 pm

fairyana wrote:It's an existing illusion, more or less.
That was the kind of the claims that made it important for me to get answers to PE-Queries8's questions.

If reality doesn't exists. If no physical reality exists, and we are just Consciousnesses being fed
a Data Stream, that results in some implications for retrievals. Retrievals serve very little or at
least a very different and less important purpose, if there is really nothing keeping dead people
stuck in an afterlife. Guides don't exist. Nothing really exists. We are just being tricked, because
even we don't really exist. At the best we are virtual, but not even that is sure.

The purpose of explorations also becomes a different issue, if there is no real physical world
to explore. Monroe stated that the physical world makes an imprint, the physical world changes
who we are, and that's one of the reasons why it's important to be born in the physical world.

But if the physical world doesn't exist, then why can't the AUM just calculate the outcome
without running a heavy simulation? Campbell claims the reason is that we act as "disturbances"
to the system because we have free will, but that free will can be taken away from us once we
exit the particular piece of software which simulates the illusion of physical reality.

So...

There is a big difference between a WoW character who doesn't consist of real flesh and bone,
and a guy in the woods who exists in his own right even when the WoW server is scrapped.

Campbell goes even further. Reality is not only virtual, it's not even rendered if no one acts
as the observer, that's how virtual it is. But, then again. Campbell urges everyone to be
open minded sceptic, even of the claims of Campbell himself.

Campbell further states in his book MBT that he will not reveal his own TOE. And everyone
should go find a TOE of their own, not blindly trusting Campbell. :)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest