The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

This is a forum for posting Spiritual essays of human thought and experience. Please do not post celestial messages here or copy written material without the owner’s permission.
Post Reply
User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:07 am

This is about Sacred Geometry. What is it? Well, the wikipedia article on it isn't very long, so I'll just describe it in by own words. It is the geometry used in the planning and construction of religious structures. It is the math behind the shapes most commonly found in nature. It is an efficient organization of space. It is the founding architecture of creation. It is the golden ratio. It is Metatron's cube. But is it actually sacred? Is it holy? If God and His Paradise Sons use mathematical principals to create the universe and the life which inhabits it, are these mathematics sacred? Must we remain infatuated with geometric shapes? I do not hold that mathematical or geometrical facts are divine. If a design is so great that God would use it, that makes it efficient. God values efficiency, and certain shapes and ratios are particularly helpful. We should not be regarding such things as hallowed, for they merely exist to provide value. This is proficient geometry. If a shape is superior in its role, then it will be used whenever and wherever it can be of value. That is only logical if we assume things are meant to be as perfect as they can be. If something is functionally supreme, it is going to be used by those who require this level of functionality. But such things should not be automatically regarded as mystical or divine, even when used by the divine.

The same problem has occurred with sacred books. What makes mere text holy? These too are shapes which carry meaning. If one letter is not deemed holy, why would a specific combination of unholy letters become so precious? Clearly the ideas they carry are more important. So isn't the value a shape provides more important than the shape itself? Is a tool as precious as its maker? Is it more precious than the task its maker wishes to complete?

What I am trying to argue is that geometry is not existential, but I may have to go to Havona to find out if that is really the case.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:00 pm

Interesting, overmind. I take your points, and I see it that way too, that surely the geometry we find in nature is indeed efficient and useful. At the same time, perhaps there is more to it than simply utility. A two-by-four provides precise utility to a carpenter when building a table, and there is no question that the Golden Ratio provides similar utility to the many shapes of nature. But perhaps Sacred Geometry goes beyond the mere physical, and indeed has energetic components that move beyond mere utility and efficiency. It is difficult if not impossible to define life, but what if it is Sacred Geometry that allows things to breathe? Biologists have no ability to describe why life . . . lives. Nor can they understand the distinction between life and non-life. Even a virus is not yet categorized either way. And we just looked at Tesla's idea that understandable or not, a crystal is certainly alive.

I believe when it comes to Sacred Geometrical shapes and configurations, the idea is that they have properties that lend power to manifestations and even add energy to life itself, as their attendant energetic structures enable amplification of applied or inherent energies.

For instance, your recent post wondered about the supposed energies contained in crystals. In using crystals for body layouts (in which one lies supine and applies crystals to the chakra points and to areas surrounding the body), the energies are amplified when one lays out the crystals in accordance with Sacred Geometry. I utilize such energy grids myself, and also when I place crystals beneath my pillow. I think of this practice as enabling each crystal's energies to meld with the body's own Qi, as the geometric configuration provides passages along which energy travels smoothly. In the process the energy is not only given an easy road to traverse, but it takes on even the properties of the Sacred Geometrical configuration itself. In this way layer upon layer of healing potentials are amplified, from the innate energetic healing properties of the crystals, to the propensity of the Qi to seek the smooth and unimpeded freecoursing of its own dynamics, to the geometry itself and its inherent qualities. Thus the healing experience is amplified and exponential, not one-note but multi-dimensional in its scope and potential.

If you are familiar with the Merkabah, this is not merely a geometric construct, but an energetic device used by the ancient alchemists, among them King Solomon and Melchizedek. It is rooted in ancient mystical Judaism. While one can envision themselves standing within the sacred Merkabah, which is 55 feet in diameter and spins rapidly in one direction from the solar plexus up and in another direction from the solar plexus down, one is not merely evoking a concept or an idea and hoping to make use of the attendant energies. Instead, one is actually standing within the sacred Merkabah, which provides protective energies and assists the individual in attaining to balance, within and without, and particularly in the spiritual sense. While we each were born within a Merkabah, the strength of this protective container can dwindle with time and with ongoing exposure to lower vibrational frequencies. But those who meditate, who enrich their connection to the Divine, and who do manifestation work can invoke and strengthen their Merkabahs of protection over time, re-energizing them and amplifying their powers. In this work they can call upon God or any alchemical figure whom they believe to be a helper and thus heighten their own manifestation work, thereby stabilizing their respective Merkabahs.

Another great example of the spiritual or esoteric properties of Sacred Geometry is the Tree of Life, also rooted in ancient Judaism. Again we find layer within layer of compounding meaning and energetic powers, as the very nature of the Hebrew language itself is energetic in value. If you've ever seen the mystifying break-downs of the numeric qualities to these letters and they way they form and lead to related words, you'll know what I mean.

Sometimes the simplicity of a given Sacred Geometrical structure can itself point to its complexity. To me, the Yin/Yang symbol is deceptively simple, yet it encapsulates the entirety of existence in one streamlined form. Dawn contains within it the seed of day, and within the day we find the seed of night. We cannot have night without day, nor darkness without light; each opposite contains the potentiality of its opposing point along a continuum. Duality is an artificial construct, and the transcendence of duality is what the Yin/Yang depicts.

Apart from the inherent value of Sacred Geometrical constructs, I believe there is an additional layer of attendant power from which each of us may draw, should we choose. Over the millenia, many individuals have made use of these shapes, and added power to their original energetic value through focused intent. In thought form, these forms now contain the accumulated power of thousands of years worth of use. This is similar to the topic Geoff explored, in which he discussed his belief that whether or not certain figures ever existed -- I think he gave the Egyptian Goddess Isis as his example -- the many individuals who have poured energy her way over time have, at minimum, created her in thought form. She either exists independent of this built-up, harnessed energy, and is thus amplified by it, or else, even if she never existed, she now shines as a radiant source of support for whoever calls upon her due to her creation in thought form.

So I tend to view Sacred Geometry in a similar sense. From the esoteric alchemists who applied focused intent and made manifest the unmanifest, to the scientists and artists who also heralded these forms as Divine and energetically radiant (Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Tesla, Fibonacci, et al.), today these forms are available to us, and can increase our connection to the Divine if we choose to make use of them. I've shared with you in the past how insensitive I am to spiritual subtleties, and it has taken me well over a decade to sense the tiniest things about the invisible realms. But I've worked with Sacred Geometry for years now, and I believe it has heightened my weak sense of these things, and has assisted me in raising my vibrational frequency slightly. Because maybe that's what has happened when we notice increasing sensitivities - maybe we've simply raised our frequency a bit? Whatever its source, I recommend giving this area a try, and you might be surprised by what you sense or feel as time passes.

Another thing I am wondering is what attracted you to explore this topic? Perhaps wikipedia provided a diluted sense of this mystical area of spirituality. There are many texts that go deeper in discussing Sacred Geometry if you are interested . . . I could try to remember some titles that I've read over the years if you'd like?

:loves Thanks for another exciting essay!

With love, Michele :sunflower:

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:26 pm

Interesting, overmind. I take your points, and I see it that way too, that surely the geometry we find in nature is indeed efficient and useful. At the same time, perhaps there is more to it than simply utility. A two-by-four provides precise utility to a carpenter when building a table, and there is no question that the Golden Ratio provides similar utility to the many shapes of nature. But perhaps Sacred Geometry goes beyond the mere physical, and indeed has energetic components that move beyond mere utility and efficiency. It is difficult if not impossible to define life, but what if it is Sacred Geometry that allows things to breathe? Biologists have no ability to describe why life . . . lives. Nor can they understand the distinction between life and non-life. Even a virus is not yet categorized either way. And we just looked at Tesla's idea that understandable or not, a crystal is certainly alive.
When the Life Carriers move the beginning life plasm to a planet (or create it there), the Michael of the local universe must give the "breath of life" to that planet, whatever that may be. It is most likely a form of energy not understood yet. The Life Carriers can create life in their laboratories, but it does not retain all of its functions, such as procreation. I believe crystals can form naturally on a barren planet not considered an inhabited sphere, so I do not consider them as living things. Now, they may be a result of the Planetary Supreme's activity, meaning they are part of a much larger living system, but I still hold that they should not be considered as a form of life itself. If a human can create a crystal, but cannot create life, then a crystal is not a form of life.
I believe when it comes to Sacred Geometrical shapes and configurations, the idea is that they have properties that lend power to manifestations and even add energy to life itself, as their attendant energetic structures enable amplification of applied or inherent energies.
And I could easily call this a form of efficiency. Take LED's for example. An LED’s efficiency increases as its output power decreases, which means that it can emit more optical power than the electrical power it consumes (although at this level of power, it is not functional for consumers). In a specific experiment, researchers reduced the LED’s input power to just 30 picowatts and measured an output of 69 picowatts of light - an efficiency of 230%. The physical mechanisms worked the same as with any LED: when excited by the applied voltage, electrons and holes have a certain probability of generating photons. The researchers didn’t try to increase this probability, as some previous research has focused on, but instead took advantage of small amounts of excess heat to emit more power than consumed. This heat arises from vibrations in the device’s atomic lattice, which occur due to entropy.

http://phys.org/news/2012-03-efficiency.html
For instance, your recent post wondered about the supposed energies contained in crystals. In using crystals for body layouts (in which one lies supine and applies crystals to the chakra points and to areas surrounding the body), the energies are amplified when one lays out the crystals in accordance with Sacred Geometry. I utilize such energy grids myself, and also when I place crystals beneath my pillow. I think of this practice as enabling each crystal's energies to meld with the body's own Qi, as the geometric configuration provides passages along which energy travels smoothly. In the process the energy is not only given an easy road to traverse, but it takes on even the properties of the Sacred Geometrical configuration itself. In this way layer upon layer of healing potentials are amplified, from the innate energetic healing properties of the crystals, to the propensity of the Qi to seek the smooth and unimpeded freecoursing of its own dynamics, to the geometry itself and its inherent qualities. Thus the healing experience is amplified and exponential, not one-note but multi-dimensional in its scope and potential.
I have no experience in this, so I would have to take your word for it. That said, I think if the energy is following some kind of pattern, then it will be easier for it to do its thing. Organization has value, and it is probably better to have those crystals in a particular shape than just randomly placed on the body. I believe sound is quite similar in this respect. Our ears focus more on the organization of sound, rather than it's strength. In fact I'm surprised you have not mentioned vibration yet, as sand vibrating on a surface will make specific shapes based on the frequency. You could say that those shapes make it easier for that vibration to pass through the sand, which would be another form of efficiency.
Another thing I am wondering is what attracted you to explore this topic? Perhaps wikipedia provided a diluted sense of this mystical area of spirituality. There are many texts that go deeper in discussing Sacred Geometry if you are interested . . . I could try to remember some titles that I've read over the years if you'd like?
I like dissecting things which many may take for granted, or don't feel like exploring. There is a lot of, what I would call, "new age quackery", although some of it is actually quite old. Everything should be questioned, and when I see people add so much value to specific shapes without questioning the utility of said shapes, I see it as superstition. If a design or pattern provides the most value for a specific task, great! Use it! But don't idolize shapes because everyone else is doing it. Don't believe something simply because people have been doing so for centuries. Sacred geometry should really just be called perfect geometry, or efficient geometry, if it truly performs the best at a certain task.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:01 pm

Hi overmind!

Thank you for explaining about Life Carriers, the Michael of the local universe and the "breath of life" given to planets and ecosystems. This was all new to me, and I enjoyed learning about it!

A human can create life, unfortunately. I don't find it advisable, but laboratorily-derived life forms are a fact of life now, just as you mentioned that human beings can also create crystals. Perhaps it is a puzzle to imagine a crystal to be a living thing (does it breathe? Does it consume? Does it excrete?) yet each time biology attempts to define life, they find an exception to the rule they've just created. We have found life forms that don't excrete, that don't reproduce, that are self-sufficient, we are forever finding new exceptions to every rule that's set down. In the end life does not require scientific permission to live! :lol: A lesson scientists are slow to learn. :lol: I am tempted to believe crystals are indeed alive due to my experiences with them, but I appreciate that in the lack of such experiences, it seems to be an impossible claim. Whatever so moved Tesla to make that statement, he saw evidence of a 'formative life principle,' and I don't doubt he'd be horrified to learn we now create life in the laboratory, either. Though I do doubt he'd be surprised to find it was possible . . .he likely hypothesized the same. Ethics used to direct scientific investigation.

That's an interesting example about LEDs. I don't deny what you're describing is indeed efficient -- it certainly is.

I too am leery of "new age quackery," but as you said, some of it is actually quite old. An excellent example of new-age attention to an age-old idea (which is thus widely misinterpreted and misunderstood) is yoga. Yoga is an ancient spiritual practice, hardly to be categorized as 'exercise' on the level of an aerobics class. Its practice extends far out beyond the mere physical body, and is in fact a life approach rooted in spirit. Its meditative purpose is seldom what is emphasized these days, though many people who are just looking to get thin count themselves spiritual for selecting yoga over running. And maybe that's fair enough. I'm no one to judge.

As you mentioned, Sacred Geometry is an ancient concept, and cultures the world over revered this idea. I suppose I find myself relating to your questioning mind, though. While I am a devotee of energy healing; consider myself a believer in God; adore and make use of gems and crystals and so on -- each areas that require a certain degree of 'belief' and a willingness to step outside empiricism and into the unknown -- I too am challenged to find the deeper spiritual meaning in various things, and I turn often to doubt. When I experience the unknown and there are no satisfactory explanations offered by science, I still find it hard to believe I've been touched by the Great Beyond.

I know you are a sincere believer in God and that you view all matter as God's Creation (whether directly or indirectly), so one might ask what is so difficult to believe about the idea that Sacred Geometry might indeed hold spiritual properties, not merely utilitarian ones? But I don't need to ask you that question because I face the same struggle in my own life -- believing there is a deep meaning or set of properties to things that echo evidence of the invisible realms. Sometimes it is only experience that can take us to that next level of meaning -- sometimes not even that works. ;) I've been hit over the head with enough evidence that the invisible realms are real that I could fill a library with books on the topic -- yet I often feel like it's all a game of make-believe. So I'm right there with ya brother! :roll

With love, Michele :loves

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Sat Nov 23, 2013 2:18 am

Thank you for explaining about Life Carriers, the Michael of the local universe and the "breath of life" given to planets and ecosystems. This was all new to me, and I enjoyed learning about it!
Actually, it was Nebadonia (or the local universe Mother Spirit) that takes on this role. I was simply working from memory and made a mistake. These excerpts from the Urantia Book will help, but I suggest reading all of Paper 36.

(396.1) 36:0.1 LIFE does not originate spontaneously. Life is constructed according to plans formulated by the (unrevealed) Architects of Being and appears on the inhabited planets either by direct importation or as a result of the operations of the Life Carriers of the local universes. These carriers of life are among the most interesting and versatile of the diverse family of universe Sons. They are intrusted with designing and carrying creature life to the planetary spheres. And after planting this life on such new worlds, they remain there for long periods to foster its development.

(398.1) 36:2.14 There are over one million fundamental or cosmic chemical formulas which constitute the parent patterns and the numerous basic functional variations of life manifestations. Satellite number one of the life-planning sphere is the realm of the universe physicists and electrochemists who serve as technical assistants to the Life Carriers in the work of capturing, organizing, and manipulating the essential units of energy which are employed in building up the material vehicles of life transmission, the so-called germ plasm.

(398.4) 36:2.17 Sphere Number Four and its tributary satellites are devoted to the study of the evolution of creature life in general and to the evolutionary antecedents of any one life level in particular. The original life plasm of an evolutionary world must contain the full potential for all future developmental variations and for all subsequent evolutionary changes and modifications. The provision for such far-reaching projects of life metamorphosis may require the appearance of many apparently useless forms of animal and vegetable life. Such by-products of planetary evolution, foreseen or unforeseen, appear upon the stage of action only to disappear, but in and through all this long process there runs the thread of the wise and intelligent formulations of the original designers of the planetary life plan and species scheme. The manifold by-products of biologic evolution are all essential to the final and full function of the higher intelligent forms of life, notwithstanding that great outward disharmony may prevail from time to time in the long upward struggle of the higher creatures to effect the mastery of the lower forms of life, many of which are sometimes so antagonistic to the peace and comfort of the evolving will creatures.

(399.3) 36:3.1 Life does not spontaneously appear in the universes; the Life Carriers must initiate it on the barren planets. They are the carriers, disseminators, and guardians of life as it appears on the evolutionary worlds of space. All life of the order and forms known on Urantia arises with these Sons, though not all forms of planetary life are existent on Urantia.

(399.4) 36:3.2 The corps of Life Carriers commissioned to plant life upon a new world usually consists of one hundred senior carriers, one hundred assistants, and one thousand custodians. The Life Carriers often carry actual life plasm to a new world, but not always. They sometimes organize the life patterns after arriving on the planet of assignment in accordance with formulas previously approved for a new adventure in life establishment. Such was the origin of the planetary life of Urantia.

(399.5) 36:3.3 When, in accordance with approved formulas, the physical patterns have been provided, then do the Life Carriers catalyze this lifeless material, imparting through their persons the vital spirit spark; and forthwith do the inert patterns become living matter.

(399.6) 36:3.4 The vital spark — the mystery of life — is bestowed through the Life Carriers, not by them. They do indeed supervise such transactions, they formulate the life plasm itself, but it is the Universe Mother Spirit who supplies the essential factor of the living plasm. From the Creative Daughter of the Infinite Spirit comes that energy spark which enlivens the body and presages the mind.

(399.7) 36:3.5 In the bestowal of life the Life Carriers transmit nothing of their personal natures, not even on those spheres where new orders of life are projected. At such times they simply initiate and transmit the spark of life, start the required revolutions of matter in accordance with the physical, chemical, and electrical specifications of the ordained plans and patterns. Life Carriers are living catalytic presences which agitate, organize, and vitalize the otherwise inert elements of the material order of existence.
A human can create life, unfortunately. I don't find it advisable, but laboratory-derived life forms are a fact of life now, just as you mentioned that human beings can also create crystals. Perhaps it is a puzzle to imagine a crystal to be a living thing (does it breathe? Does it consume? Does it excrete?) yet each time biology attempts to define life, they find an exception to the rule they've just created. We have found life forms that don't excrete, that don't reproduce, that are self-sufficient, we are forever finding new exceptions to every rule that's set down. In the end life does not require scientific permission to live! :lol: A lesson scientists are slow to learn. :lol: I am tempted to believe crystals are indeed alive due to my experiences with them, but I appreciate that in the lack of such experiences, it seems to be an impossible claim. Whatever so moved Tesla to make that statement, he saw evidence of a 'formative life principle,' and I don't doubt he'd be horrified to learn we now create life in the laboratory, either. Though I do doubt he'd be surprised to find it was possible . . .he likely hypothesized the same. Ethics used to direct scientific investigation.
We still don't create life, we modify and grow it. We use life to create new life through DNA modification, but we cannot create life from scratch. Scientists cannot add together the building blocks of life (such as amino acid chains) and form a single-celled organism. We take these organisms and play with them, and when they stop moving, we don't always know why. There is an argument frequently used by creationists which I will borrow. Peanut butter contains all of the necessary ingredients for creating life, but no organisms randomly start growing out of the peanut butter. Something has to assemble the pieces and give it the "spark" necessary for life to appear.
...so one might ask what is so difficult to believe about the idea that Sacred Geometry might indeed hold spiritual properties, not merely utilitarian ones?
It's not that it's difficult to believe, it has more to do with semantics. I could easily argue that if something has spiritual properties, then it is utilitarian for spirit. Utilitarian simply means something is designed to be useful or practical. If something has different uses, it can be utilitarian in both spiritual and material ways. Thus, you can put it all under this utilitarian category. Even if "sacred geometry" was only useful to spirit, it would still be regarded as "useful". Therefore, it is "useful geometry". And if it turns out to be very useful, you could call it "efficient geometry". How it is efficient does not matter. If it is efficient for a certain task, it keeps that label. And if you say that a certain shape cannot be used for everything and is thus not always efficient, then I can say Metatron's Cube is not so sacred as it was not incorporated into my favorite paper snowflake design. I don't think an adjective like "sacred" should be used to categorize a shape or design. Something that is truly sacred would not hold this description in a subjective way. It should be obvious if something is sacred, as that trait would be upheld by God. But we live on an evolutionary world were everything is changing. I don't think we have the ability to make things sacred by believing that they are. And I don't think this sacredness can be translated into a completely different concept, such as efficiency. The biggest thing I dislike regarding sacred geometry is the language. That is what this is mostly about. If you want to believe certain shapes, patterns or ratios are the best at fulfilling a specific purpose, I have no problem with that.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:29 pm

I see what you mean overmind, and yes when you break it down as you've done, I suppose it is merely a matter of semantics. ;) I don't tend to use words like "efficient" when dealing with the extra-special, or areas that lie within God's domain, but as you spelled out your thoughts on the matter I see we really are talking about the same thing here. ;)

After reading this last post of yours, I realized something -- or I should say you reminded me of something -- that I've often come across in my reading about ancient beliefs. So many cultures, from the Native American tribes to the Buddhists of the far east, have looked at our world as though each and every single thing had its own 'life.' There are many of us who naturally and unintentionally ascribe emotions or facial features to inanimate objects -- and then we call this tendency "Anthropomorphism." We treat this tendency as though it is merely reflective of our internal psychological make-up. But so many cultures viewed our world through this lens, that one begins to wonder.

Just as when we discussed whether a crystal could possibly be alive? And we pondered how that could possibly be so . . . (and believe me, I am with you on finding that to be a challenge), I recall a passage from Michael Crichton's book "The Andromeda Strain" that really had me thinking. Did you ever read that book? It is about a team of scientists who hole up in an underground bunker after an orbital satellite returned to earth carrying a virulent infectious strain of unknown origins -- and possibly extraterrestrial. A small town is killed within a matter of seconds after the local doctor unwittingly pries the satellite open. The scientists are left to analyze the contents of the satellite and determine its nature.

As they studied it, they found it contained no amino acids. This floored them, as their concept of "Life" requires proteins, and they had never conceived of a life form without them. They were forced to the outer edges of their own imagination, their own ability to conceptualize beyond what had formerly seemed to be the basis of life. As they further studied it, they found it did not excrete, that instead it made perfect use of whatever it consumed. They called it a pure-conversion system. Upon further study, they found it was composed of a crystal matrix, upon which point one of the scientists (a microbiologist) asserted that he has long felt that all life forms were built upon a crystaline matrix. They had wondered how life could survive without protein-based organization, and now they knew how: the crystaline structure. A reasonable substitute.

Finally the microbiologist illustrated his points by picking up 3 objects: A piece of black cloth, a watch, and a piece of granite. He said they were all alive and challenged the others to prove they weren't living. He put the black cloth in the sunlight and allowed it to to become warm; he called his energy conversion. The others said this couldn't be called energy conversion because it was not purposeful -- it served no point. He asked them "How do you know?" With the watch he showed how the radium dial glowed in the dark, and said decay is taking place; light is being produced. The others said this was merely a release of potential energy held in unstable electron levels, but they were becoming confused because they began to see the microbiologist's point. Finally they came to the piece of granite. He said something like, "This is alive. It lives, breathes, walks, and talks. We just can't see it, because it takes place too slowly for us to see it. A rock's lifespan is 3 billion years. We have lifespans of 60 or 70 years. We can't see what's happening to this rock in our sense of time, it would be like playing a record at the rate of one revolution every century."

He'd made his point and they revised their thinking after that discussion. They had to concede that it was possible that they simply couldn't analyze certain life forms. They hadn't the ability due to their basic assumptions being incorrect, and their inability to see through to the life form's true nature.

The book also talked about "The Rule of 48." It was intended as a reminder to scientists that even in the face of evidence, wild mistakes are made, because "All scientists are blind." :lol: Apparently, back in the 1940s and 50s, a massive collection of literature showed that the human chromosome numbered 48; the international community was in agreement about this finding. Then suddenly in 1953 a group of American scientists announced that instead that human chromosomes numbered 46. Everyone was very upset and felt these upstarts a fraud, but when they went back and recounted, all the old pictures showed just that -- there were 46 chromosomes, not 48 as formerly supposed. For all those years, all those scientists had miscounted, over and over again. So the "Rule of 48" means "All scientists are blind." :lol: The scientists in the book laughed about this and lamented the fact that in scientific investigation, one nearly always finds whatsoever backs up his own hypothesis. Give a set of symptoms to a neurologist, he'll find something wrong with the nervous system. The same set of symptoms leads the cardiologist to the heart, the immunologist to the lymph system, the bacteriologist to infection and so on. This is basically the premise of the TV show House, too. We tend to view empiricism as staunchly rooted in data and thus irrefutable, but scientists are merely human and it is their interpretations of the data that we learn about in school. For years schoolchildren had erroneously been taught that the human chromosome number was 48, after all, and what else has gone unintentionally wrong in our learning process?

I had a teacher who reminded us of this every day: You have to go underneath your basic assumptions to find the truth. But how many of us are capable of this? :shock: I know I struggle with this over and over again -- it's probably why I revert to doubt as often as I do. My basic assumption must be that we stop when we die, that life is merely physical, that God is like Santa Claus. So when God and His helpers show me over and over again that the human chromosomes number 46 instead of 48, I keep missing the bigger picture! :lol: But I'm lucky in that they don't give up on me . . they keep after me and give me another shot. For that I am grateful. ;)

I think your essays are invaluable for this reason -- they give us a chance to lift up our basic assumptions and peer underneath them. ;)

As for your assertions about crystals vs. the ability to create life (and that distinction had been lost on me, so I appreciate your pointing out that we cannot create life from scratch -- I'm relieved to find that out! :shock: ), I have a thought about that and I wonder what you think? Suppose that our nature-made crystals are alive, and yet we cannot define why or how they are. Now, suppose that in the laboratory, we create a crystal that is not alive. If we can't see or determine how the nature-made crystal is alive, how would we know if this replica created in the lab was not alive? They look alike, and yet we weren't able to analyze the nature-made crystal to begin with. It reminds me of the microbiologist's mind-bender about the watch, the black cloth and the piece of granite. It would first take a clear determination that a nature-made crystal is not alive to determine that the lab-replica is identical to it, and if our basic assumptions preclude that a crystal could be alive, we might never even seek this finding. I wonder again just what Tesla had in mind in this regard.

Cheers! :roll Michele :kiss:

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Sat Nov 23, 2013 6:15 pm

It's funny that you mentioned chromosomes, because the authors of the Urantia Book had to deal with that exact problem. They knew humans miscounted the chromosomes and would eventually fix that mistake, so they played with their language. They said that "On Urantia there are forty-eight units of pattern control — trait determiners — in the sex cells of human reproduction." This includes the X and Y chromosomes used to determine the gender of the child, creating 48 chromosomes, and someone who originally thought that there were 48 regular chromosomes would agree with the statement. You can tell that this is the case because they talk about trait determiners, instead of chromosomes, but they do use the word chromosome elsewhere in the book. There are lots of instances where the authors had to anticipate both human discoveries and changes and language, so the book contains the wording necessary to link together the old and new eras. It is rather fascinating.
As for your assertions about crystals vs. the ability to create life (and that distinction had been lost on me, so I appreciate your pointing out that we cannot create life from scratch -- I'm relieved to find that out! :shock: ), I have a thought about that and I wonder what you think? Suppose that our nature-made crystals are alive, and yet we cannot define why or how they are. Now, suppose that in the laboratory, we create a crystal that is not alive. If we can't see or determine how the nature-made crystal is alive, how would we know if this replica created in the lab was not alive? They look alike, and yet we weren't able to analyze the nature-made crystal to begin with. It reminds me of the microbiologist's mind-bender about the watch, the black cloth and the piece of granite. It would first take a clear determination that a nature-made crystal is not alive to determine that the lab-replica is identical to it, and if our basic assumptions preclude that a crystal could be alive, we might never even seek this finding. I wonder again just what Tesla had in mind in this regard.
It is clear that you want crystals to have some kind of purpose (as you give them life to create purpose) since you seem to treasure them, so let me think of some. Crystals exist for both beauty and function. They are a common building material on High, and I believe beauty may be the main reason there. There are several crystal buildings, and this is mentioned in a few past transcripts. There is also the sea of glass.

(487.1) 43:1.10 The Edentia sea of glass is one enormous circular crystal about one hundred miles in circumference and about thirty miles in depth. This magnificent crystal serves as the receiving field for all transport seraphim and other beings arriving from points outside the sphere; such a sea of glass greatly facilitates the landing of transport seraphim.

(487.2) 43:1.11 A crystal field on this order is found on almost all architectural worlds; and it serves many purposes aside from its decorative value, being utilized for portraying superuniverse reflectivity to assembled groups and as a factor in the energy-transformation technique for modifying the currents of space and for adapting other incoming physical-energy streams.

This is a clear example of how crystals can be used for functionality, being utilitarian in design. Crystals are also important for humans. They are used in manufacturing, consumer products and prove very useful to scientists. Are crystals natural byproducts of the earth? I believe so. But I also think God had reason to put the natural laws in place leading to their natural and inevitable creation on evolutionary spheres. They may act as part of Urantia's energy network. They may be here to aid humans in their material struggle. Clearly crystals can be of immense value, whether people believe them to be alive or not.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Sat Nov 23, 2013 6:39 pm

I really enjoyed those passages! The sea of glass is fascinating, and I enjoyed the way they had to contend with the confusion over 46 vs. 48 chromosomes (or 'traits') as well!

I've never been a reader of the UB, so I appreciate you finding those passages so much. Thank you for searching for those!

It's interesting to me overmind, when you bring up the fact that clearly I 'want' to find a deeper layer to the crystal. It is so true what you say. Even as a doubter, I 'want' God to be real, I 'want' the invisible realms to be available to us. I do doubt, and my scientific or questioning mind does reject the extra-special every day, time after time as the unexplained occurs in my life. But what I have is hope -- and I do want to be proven wrong in my disbelief, if that makes sense. ;) This is where I differ from a friend of mine, who clearly is very attracted to the supernatural and yet always rejects happenings in his life in a rather stoic fashion . . I see he and I have the same starting point: of wanting there to be something much bigger than ourselves. But he is afraid to hope. If he hopes he might be proven wrong . . .I can see from witnessing him that I do live with the force of hope, and that might be the one thing that keeps me seeking. When I feel tied to empiricism, I want to be proven wrong! And when he feels tied to empiricism, he wants empiricism to win. I do think that deep down, even he secretly cheers on the spiritual precepts that he so fervently denies.

We're a puzzle, us humans, aren't we?! :lol:

Lots of love to you overmind! Thanks for this awesome discussion! :roll Michele

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Sat Nov 23, 2013 6:59 pm

I would seriously consider at least reading the parts of the Urantia Book that would interest you. There is a lot of interesting information in there, such as detailed descriptions of some of the architectural spheres and capitals, such as Jerusem and Edentia. Since I am generally interested in philosophy, history, spirituality and the universe, most of the book was interesting to me. I can easily direct you to a free PDF of the book, which has links to each chapter. The book satiates my scientific mind, and I believe it will do the same for you. I found it when the best information I could find about the afterlife were the personal accounts of those with NDE's, and many were just too different to produce an accurate and stable portrayal of the next dimension of awareness.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Sat Nov 23, 2013 7:12 pm

That's so neat to think about how in reading about NDEs, chapter after chapter of exploration began opening to you. ;) Thanks for your suggestions about the U-Book as well. ;)

:sunflower:

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Sat Nov 23, 2013 9:11 pm

Let me provide some examples, just for fun. I grew up as a Christian (Methodist), and my dad is a (pretty good) theologian. This makes "PART IV: The Life and Teachings of Jesus" interesting to me. Once the Magisterial Mission gets into full swing on this planet, I can easily get my dad to accept the book. It is obvious how a truthful account of the life of Jesus, detailing ever year, would be important to a theologian. I just cannot create a good enough (and easy) argument for the book without the physical presence of our universe administrators.

As you could tell from the previous post, I was interested in the afterlife, so the descriptions of the worlds I will be visiting is also very interesting. Learning about the Resurrection Halls, the reasoning behind different revival times for humans and how our days will be structured (with education, work and play) is all very cool. But there are also these minor details that help paint the overall picture.

"(519.2) 46:1.1 Jerusem is divided into one thousand latitudinal sectors and ten thousand longitudinal zones. The sphere has seven major capitals and seventy minor administrative centers. The seven sectional capitals are concerned with diverse activities, and the System Sovereign is present in each at least once a year.

(519.3) 46:1.2 The standard mile of Jerusem is equivalent to about seven Urantia miles. The standard weight, the “gradant,” is built up through the decimal system from the mature ultimaton and represents almost exactly ten ounces of your weight. The Satania day equals three days of Urantia time, less one hour, four minutes, and fifteen seconds, that being the time of the axial revolution of Jerusem. The system year consists of one hundred Jerusem days. The time of the system is broadcast by the master chronoldeks.

(519.4) 46:1.3 The energy of Jerusem is superbly controlled and circulates about the sphere in the zone channels, which are directly fed from the energy charges of space and expertly administered by the Master Physical Controllers. The natural resistance to the passage of these energies through the physical channels of conduction yields the heat required for the production of the equable temperature of Jerusem. The full light temperature is maintained at about 70 degrees Fahrenheit, while during the period of light recession it falls to a little lower than 50 degrees.

(519.5) 46:1.4 The lighting system of Jerusem should not be so difficult for you to comprehend. There are no days and nights, no seasons of heat and cold. The power transformers maintain one hundred thousand centers from which rarefied energies are projected upward through the planetary atmosphere, undergoing certain changes, until they reach the electric air-ceiling of the sphere; and then these energies are reflected back and down as a gentle, sifting, and even light of about the intensity of Urantia sunlight when the sun is shining overhead at ten o’clock in the morning.

(520.1) 46:1.5 Under such conditions of lighting, the light rays do not seem to come from one place; they just sift out of the sky, emanating equally from all space directions. This light is very similar to natural sunlight except that it contains very much less heat. Thus it will be recognized that such headquarters worlds are not luminous in space; if Jerusem were very near Urantia, it would not be visible.

(520.2) 46:1.6 The gases which reflect this light-energy from the Jerusem upper ionosphere back to the ground are very similar to those in the Urantia upper air belts which are concerned with the auroral phenomena of your so-called northern lights, although these are produced by different causes. On Urantia it is this same gas shield which prevents the escape of the terrestrial broadcast waves, reflecting them earthward when they strike this gas belt in their direct outward flight. In this way broadcasts are held near the surface as they journey through the air around your world.

(520.3) 46:1.7 This lighting of the sphere is uniformly maintained for seventy-five per cent of the Jerusem day, and then there is a gradual recession until, at the time of minimum illumination, the light is about that of your full moon on a clear night. This is the quiet hour for all Jerusem. Only the broadcast-receiving stations are in operation during this period of rest and rehabilitation.

(520.4) 46:1.8 Jerusem receives faint light from several near-by suns — a sort of brilliant starlight — but it is not dependent on them; worlds like Jerusem are not subject to the vicissitudes of sun disturbances, neither are they confronted with the problem of a cooling or dying sun.

(520.5) 46:1.9 The seven transitional study worlds and their forty-nine satellites are heated, lighted, energized, and watered by the Jerusem technique."

I have an interest in the structure of Deity, how God participates in creation and what the meaning of it all is. This makes Papers 0-11 very useful to me.

I want to know as much as I can about the universe, which makes Papers 12-33 rather important.

Most of my questions regarding the afterlife (and several other things) are answered in Papers 34-56.

Papers 57-119 provide an excellent lesson on unrecorded history, especially how religion has grown for thousands of years and what it contributes to human experience. There are now quite a few historical mysteries that I know the answers to. I understand aspects of evolution that science has yet to uncover. There are very few things in the bible I do not have information on. I can shed light on almost all Christian misunderstandings. Basically, I have knowledge that would make historians salivate, provided they could even accept the truth. Yet I still have to keep myself humble. And if I share too much information, I will sound crazy to the average person. People need to understand the context of information in order to make use of it. I don't blame people for being intimidated by the book. It took me two years to read it the first time. Reading it again from start to finish would probably take one year. But I do know that it would be worth my time.

Hope that all helped.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:31 pm

Hello overmind! :hithere

I read the passages you provided with interest. Just as when Sandy posts passages in response to a post, I'm always floored by the attention to detail and the time this must take -- I realize the book is thousands of pages long. So this was very much appreciated, and I wanted to thank you for taking the time to provide these passages for us to gain familiarity with them.

I find it interesting about your dad. You mentioned that it would be difficult to make a case with him for the Urantia Papers in the absence of the universe administrators. What I'm wondering is whether you ran the Papers by him to some degree to get his take? And if so, what he responded?

While I've never read this book in full, I've gained some familiarity with its content through Sandy's posts, and others like yours here, and have begun to get a flavor and a sense of their nature. I am curious: you mention that in becoming versed in this book, you're now able to shed light on many Christian misunderstandings. This is invaluable, and I've often had questions of this nature without anywhere to turn, so if you're willing I'd love to pick your brain about some things.

What I also wonder is, does this book go beyond the Christian take? In other words, does it also go on to discuss Quetzalcoatl, the Yellow Emperor, Krishna, Buddha, King Solomon, et al.? Or is this book more of a revised version of the Bible (inclusive of the New Testament) in the sense that it sticks with the idea that Christianity is the one true religion, or Jesus the one truth?

After your posts yesterday I went online and read as much as was available about the origins of this book, much as you've recently done in sharing your thoughts about Sainte Germaine and Sacred Geometry. I found the origins of this book a bit confounding, and I wonder if you might share your thoughts on that point? Especially since you share with me a questioning, doubting or scientific mind, an unintentional adherence to empiricism and a skepticism of 'New Age' spiritual quackery ;) I grow curious as far as what it was about this book that to you lends it credence, where, say, Sacred Geometry and Sainte Germaine appear bungled up in that "quackery" we discussed yesterday? I know we can visit websites to discredit anything at all (including the long-held belief that the earth is indeed spherical! :lol: ), but as you have often felt the need to dismiss various mystical concepts due to such discrediting, what was it about this Book that raised it above such concerns? I know it's a loaded question but I genuinely wonder if you could explain it to me . . particularly as you are rooted in an upbringing in which you were raised traditional Methodist and your father is a theologian. I am interested in his 'take,' and what he's answered when (or if) you broached him on this subject.

I am always interested in learning as much as possible about the various Holy Books of the world, just to get a sense of the various beliefs out there. I may never read the U Book in its entirety, but these are the questions that most immediately spring to my mind.

Thanks overmind for sharing and peace to you! Thanks again for this great thread . . . :roll :sunflower:

With love, Michele :loves

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:24 pm

I find it interesting about your dad. You mentioned that it would be difficult to make a case with him for the Urantia Papers in the absence of the universe administrators. What I'm wondering is whether you ran the Papers by him to some degree to get his take? And if so, what he responded?
Before I started reading the book, I asked if he had heard of it, and he said yes. I never went any further than that, and I am certain he has not read the whole thing. I don't want to have a verbal debate because I am a much better writer than speaker, and he is smarter than me and knows it. He is extremely well-educated, and I think it goes to his head sometimes. He stays away from what could be considered the occult, and focuses on the academic study of the New Testament. I could probably make my case now, but I don't think it would be easy. I would much rather have obvious proof. Actually, that proof is probably more necessary for my mom, since she only has average intelligence and simply goes to bible study at church. I think she is more opinionated simply because there is less she understands in this field.
I am curious: you mention that in becoming versed in this book, you're now able to shed light on many Christian misunderstandings. This is invaluable, and I've often had questions of this nature without anywhere to turn, so if you're willing I'd love to pick your brain about some things.
Sure, go ahead. Even if I don't know something, I can give you an educated guess.
What I also wonder is, does this book go beyond the Christian take? In other words, does it also go on to discuss Quetzalcoatl, the Yellow Emperor, Krishna, Buddha, King Solomon, et al.? Or is this book more of a revised version of the Bible (inclusive of the New Testament) in the sense that it sticks with the idea that Christianity is the one true religion, or Jesus the one truth?
It does mention other religions occasionally, but it mainly focuses on the history of Judaism and early Christianity, since this has a lot more to do with our Creator Son's life in the flesh. Besides Christianity and Judaism in its different forms, it mentions Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Mithraism, Zoroastrianism, Suduanism/Jainism, Shinto and Confucianism. It goes into more detail about the development of early tribal religions/cults and paganism, starting with fire/nature/sun worship, moving into ghost fear and hero worship, and ending with more well-known examples, such as the snake cults, Baal worshipers, and the religions of Egypt, Rome and Greece. (Actually, that order probably isn't correct, but you get the idea.)
After your posts yesterday I went online and read as much as was available about the origins of this book, much as you've recently done in sharing your thoughts about Sainte Germaine and Sacred Geometry. I found the origins of this book a bit confounding, and I wonder if you might share your thoughts on that point?
There are a few PDF's that go into detail about the book's history, as well as an earlier attempt (in England I believe) which actually failed. I just need time to find them.
I grow curious as far as what it was about this book that to you lends it credence
When I first started, the possibility that it could be from superhuman intelligences, such as angels, about topics I was interested in kept me reading. I had the idea that it could be real revelation that the world had not accepted yet, so I kept an open mind. I had a tough time with the language and complexity though, so my progress started very slow. I found this forum not too long after I began reading, and George's testimony about the midwayers and the Urantia Book also kept me reading. Also, I had found transcripts of someone who actually channeled Caligastia -- who I understood a little because of the Papers George had me read, which involved the midwayers. Ignoring the various lies and deceit, he seemed to accurately portray his origin and previous responsibilities. I could tell that this was Caligastia by the way he tried to defend his past actions. Probably after I had read the first fourth of the book, I did get deceived by another website which claimed to get information from Micheal, including his plans for the future. My trust waned over time, but I stayed open to certain possibilities until I was absolutely certain that this receiver, who I frequently spoke with, was a bad tree who bore rotten fruit (I think this was early 2012). I believed her to be sincere in most cases, but not right in the head. I was never scammed out of money since I never donated to the website (I'm either frugal or just cheap), but much of my time had been wasted. In the summer of 2012, I finished the Urantia Book, and was definitely proud of the achievement. I have also frequently used the book as a reference, so I am used to going through the text. The most obvious proof of the books validity (besides the fact that it made sense) was that the book was too complex and organized to be the sole work of humans. There was simply too much consistency.

If you want proof regarding the book's contents, I would consider reading the reports on http://www.ubthenews.com/Reports_List.htm -- This mentions the different correlations between the books contents and scientific/historical discoveries.

Also, I would consider looking through (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... 8011,d.cWc) -- This talks about the mistakes in science which the book has avoided, as well as other reasons why the book must have been authored by an intelligence greater than ours.

And you should watch http://www.ubastronomy.com/video.php?video=wituaw -- This shows the similarities between the book's cosmology and modern astronomy.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:05 pm

Hi overmind!

Thanks for answering all those questions of mine! I appreciate it. ;)

That's understandable about your hesitation to approach your father. I often feel the same way -- for instance I don't share with my family members about the Midwayers; I know they wouldn't be open to it. Having you and our other board members understand the relationships we form with them seems to be enough for me. ;)

I'll have to think about some of those Christianity questions I have for you, and thanks for your offer to consider them. I've compiled such a massive list over the years I'll have to sort through my own mind. :lol: I wonder if the U Papers in any way address the topic of the separate religion that sprung up from Jesus' life? Does it also underline the importance of Christianity dividing from Judaism? This is a question I've long held, as I never saw the need for a separate religion to form (and neither, of course, do Jews, who regard Jesus as a worthy prophet and one of their own number). People who think along these lines don't believe Jesus intended a divergence from Judaism, so I wonder if the topic is addressed.

That's interesting to hear the walk-through the U Papers provides regarding those various faith traditions you mentioned. I hadn't ever gotten the sense it delved to any extent into other faiths, owing to the adherence often quoted here in this forum to Christ Michael. When you say "it focuses mainly on the history of Judaism and early Christianity, since this has a lot more to do with our Creator Son's life in the flesh," I suppose this best answers my question. In other words, the book holds Jesus in the same esteem as do the Christian faiths, or gives him greater import than other prophets or other divergent faith traditions. I have always enjoyed the idea of the Ascended Masters and Teachers (Jesus is considered one of them), in which all of the various world prophets are regarded as visiting disparate areas of the earth to deliver one underlying message repeatedly throughout the ages, each inspired or guided by God. Just as we often hear that "It's the message that matters, not the messenger," this is what confuses me about such emphasis in placing one prophet above all others. Do the Urantia Papers address that thought at all?

I'm with you as far as finding written works intriguing when their source is superhuman, e.g. angelic or divine in origin. A great many of the world's books make this claim, such as when Joseph Smith, Mormonism's founder, channeled those messages that gave the world the divergent or alternate-reality Bible. There are so many such claims that I suppose we can only weed through them.

That's what I meant when I asked you what your thoughts were regarding the book's origins. From what I read on several sites, a Chicago doctor witnessed a man who entered a trance state and recited the contents of this book while unaware of doing so. The reason I find this fantastic is not because I find such channeling impossible; I believe George and Sandy are truly channeling the Midwayers. Instead, I become curious about the fact that these people are strangers to us, and if we take the U Book as representative of a higher truth, we are placing our faith and trust in these two people. I know stranger things have happened, but it's an awful lot of trust and faith to place in individuals who are unknown to us (frankly it's the same reason I am challenged by the Bible). I shared with you that I too find it a difficult to 'believe' enough to find spiritual attributes in gems & crystals, in Sacred Geometry and even in God -- but I take comfort and direction from the many millions before me who have done so. In other words, ancient tradition gives me something to stand on when I struggle with doubt. The U Papers not only grew up out of only one mind (with only one or two witnesses) but they are very recent, not ancient tradition at all, and that is why I ask you how you find an ability to place such emphasis on them, as they are not age-old wisdom, but quite new and non-encompassing by comparison to say, Sacred Geometry, which has been revered throughout the ages by divergent cultures as Divine.

I also read yesterday about the many areas where the U Papers offered scientific claims, just as you mentioned here. In the works I read, however, it was the many areas where those claims ran counter to accepted science that were emphasized. (The formation of the solar system; the age of the universe; the distance to the Andromeda Galaxy from Earth; the erroneous date of a prophesied solar eclipse and so on; the list was lengthy.) It also said that any area where the science was off so happened to be aligned with the scientific wisdom at that time, which later was revised or corrected. I'll take a look at the links you provided here which point to the accurate scientific claims instead. Perhaps there are things out of order with what I read.

Thanks so much for taking the time to walk through this with me . . .I'm going to visit some of those links right now. I am curious and it will be interesting to explore further . . .

Cheers! With love, Michele :loves :roll :kiss:

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:46 pm

p.s. I've been reading for a while now and this is very compelling! The scientific claims indeed defy explanation if they were not supernatural in origin. Thank you for pointing me to these links!

Michele

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Mon Nov 25, 2013 2:16 am

I wonder if the U Papers in any way address the topic of the separate religion that sprung up from Jesus' life? Does it also underline the importance of Christianity dividing from Judaism?
Yes. More specifically, it talks about the two original branches of teachings which followed the death of Jesus. While some of his apostles began creating a religion about Jesus and the resurrection, which was later further transformed by Paul, Abner had been pushing for a religion that focused more on Christ's teachings.

(1831.6) 166:5.3 The Jews at Jerusalem had always had trouble with the Jews of Philadelphia. And after the death and resurrection of Jesus the Jerusalem church, of which James the Lord’s brother was head, began to have serious difficulties with the Philadelphia congregation of believers. Abner became the head of the Philadelphia church, continuing as such until his death. And this estrangement with Jerusalem explains why nothing is heard of Abner and his work in the Gospel records of the New Testament. This feud between Jerusalem and Philadelphia lasted throughout the lifetimes of James and Abner and continued for some time after the destruction of Jerusalem. Philadelphia was really the headquarters of the early church in the south and east as Antioch was in the north and west.

(1831.7) 166:5.4 It was the apparent misfortune of Abner to be at variance with all of the leaders of the early Christian church. He fell out with Peter and James (Jesus’ brother) over questions of administration and the jurisdiction of the Jerusalem church; he parted company with Paul over differences of philosophy and theology. Abner was more Babylonian than Hellenic in his philosophy, and he stubbornly resisted all attempts of Paul to remake the teachings of Jesus so as to present less that was objectionable, first to the Jews, then to the Greco-Roman believers in the mysteries.

(1832.1) 166:5.5 Thus was Abner compelled to live a life of isolation. He was head of a church which was without standing at Jerusalem. He had dared to defy James the Lord’s brother, who was subsequently supported by Peter. Such conduct effectively separated him from all his former associates. Then he dared to withstand Paul. Although he was wholly sympathetic with Paul in his mission to the gentiles, and though he supported him in his contentions with the church at Jerusalem, he bitterly opposed the version of Jesus’ teachings which Paul elected to preach. In his last years Abner denounced Paul as the “clever corrupter of the life teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of the living God.”

(1832.2) 166:5.6 During the later years of Abner and for some time thereafter, the believers at Philadelphia held more strictly to the religion of Jesus, as he lived and taught, than any other group on earth.

(1832.3) 166:5.7 Abner lived to be 89 years old, dying at Philadelphia on the 21st day of November, A.D. 74. And to the very end he was a faithful believer in, and teacher of, the gospel of the heavenly kingdom.

(1869.2) 171:1.6 Within a short time after the destruction of Jerusalem, Antioch became the headquarters of Pauline Christianity, while Philadelphia remained the center of the Abnerian kingdom of heaven. From Antioch the Pauline version of the teachings of Jesus and about Jesus spread to all the Western world; from Philadelphia the missionaries of the Abnerian version of the kingdom of heaven spread throughout Mesopotamia and Arabia until the later times when these uncompromising emissaries of the teachings of Jesus were overwhelmed by the sudden rise of Islam.

(2071.1) 195:1.1 The Hellenization of Christianity started in earnest on that eventful day when the Apostle Paul stood before the council of the Areopagus in Athens and told the Athenians about “the Unknown God.” There, under the shadow of the Acropolis, this Roman citizen proclaimed to these Greeks his version of the new religion which had taken origin in the Jewish land of Galilee. And there was something strangely alike in Greek philosophy and many of the teachings of Jesus. They had a common goal — both aimed at the emergence of the individual. The Greek, at social and political emergence; Jesus, at moral and spiritual emergence. The Greek taught intellectual liberalism leading to political freedom; Jesus taught spiritual liberalism leading to religious liberty. These two ideas put together constituted a new and mighty charter for human freedom; they presaged man’s social, political, and spiritual liberty.

(2071.2) 195:1.2 Christianity came into existence and triumphed over all contending religions primarily because of two things:

(2071.3) 195:1.3 1. The Greek mind was willing to borrow new and good ideas even from the Jews.

(2071.4) 195:1.4 2. Paul and his successors were willing but shrewd and sagacious compromisers; they were keen theologic traders.

(2071.5) 195:1.5 At the time Paul stood up in Athens preaching “Christ and Him Crucified,” the Greeks were spiritually hungry; they were inquiring, interested, and actually looking for spiritual truth. Never forget that at first the Romans fought Christianity, while the Greeks embraced it, and that it was the Greeks who literally forced the Romans subsequently to accept this new religion, as then modified, as a part of Greek
culture.

(2071.6) 195:1.6 The Greek revered beauty, the Jew holiness, but both peoples loved truth. For centuries the Greek had seriously thought and earnestly debated about all human problems — social, economic, political, and philosophic — except religion. Few Greeks had paid much attention to religion; they did not take even their own religion very seriously. For centuries the Jews had neglected these other fields of thought while they devoted their minds to religion. They took their religion very seriously, too seriously. As illuminated by the content of Jesus’ message, the united product of the centuries of the thought of these two peoples now became the driving power of a new order of human society and, to a certain extent, of a new order of human religious belief and practice.

(2071.7) 195:1.7 The influence of Greek culture had already penetrated the lands of the western Mediterranean when Alexander spread Hellenistic civilization over the near-Eastern world. The Greeks did very well with their religion and their politics as long as they lived in small city-states, but when the Macedonian king dared to expand Greece into an empire, stretching from the Adriatic to the Indus, trouble began. The art
and philosophy of Greece were fully equal to the task of imperial expansion, but not so with Greek political administration or religion. After the city-states of Greece had expanded into empire, their rather parochial gods seemed a little queer. The Greeks were really searching for one God, a greater and better God, when the Christianized version of the older Jewish religion came to them.

(2072.1) 195:1.8 The Hellenistic Empire, as such, could not endure. Its cultural sway continued on, but it endured only after securing from the West the Roman political genius for empire administration and after obtaining from the East a religion whose one God possessed empire dignity.

(2072.2) 195:1.9 In the first century after Christ, Hellenistic culture had already attained its highest levels; its retrogression had begun; learning was advancing but genius was declining. It was at this very time that the ideas and ideals of Jesus, which were partially embodied in Christianity, became a part of the salvage of Greek culture and learning.

(2072.3) 195:1.10 Alexander had charged on the East with the cultural gift of the civilization of Greece; Paul assaulted the West with the Christian version of the gospel of Jesus. And wherever the Greek culture prevailed throughout the West, there Hellenized Christianity took root.

(2072.4) 195:1.11 The Eastern version of the message of Jesus, notwithstanding that it remained more true to his teachings, continued to follow the uncompromising attitude of Abner. It never progressed as did the Hellenized version and was eventually lost in the Islamic movement.
In other words, the book holds Jesus in the same esteem as do the Christian faiths, or gives him greater import than other prophets or other divergent faith traditions.
Yes, except that Christians view Jesus as God the Son from the Trinity, which is impossible as the Trinity cannot directly leave Paradise. They also think Jesus died for their sins, which is also false.
I have always enjoyed the idea of the Ascended Masters and Teachers (Jesus is considered one of them), in which all of the various world prophets are regarded as visiting disparate areas of the earth to deliver one underlying message repeatedly throughout the ages, each inspired or guided by God. Just as we often hear that "It's the message that matters, not the messenger," this is what confuses me about such emphasis in placing one prophet above all others. Do the Urantia Papers address that thought at all?
Jesus was the last bestowal of our local Creator Son, he was both human and divine. All of the other prophets were human, unless you include Machiventa Melchizedek. While you may analyze the messages of the Prophets, we are meant to analyze Christ's actions. It was through his actions which others learned the love of the Father. He was not just a messenger, but an example. He was also the only human I know of to perform miracles, and the UB talks about each one. Most simply relied on the Creator Son's ability to abrogate time.

(1517.1) 136:5.5 Thus did Jesus become apprised of the working out of his decision to go on living as a man among men. He had by a single decision excluded all of his attendant universe hosts of varied intelligences from participating in his ensuing public ministry except in such matters as concerned time only. It therefore becomes evident that any possible supernatural or supposedly superhuman accompaniments of Jesus’ ministry pertained wholly to the elimination of time unless the Father in heaven specifically ruled otherwise. No miracle, ministry of mercy, or any other possible event occurring in connection with Jesus’ remaining earth labors could possibly be of the nature or character of an act transcending the natural laws established and regularly working in the affairs of man as he lives on Urantia except in this expressly stated matter of time. No limits, of course, could be placed upon the manifestations of “the Father’s will.” The elimination of time in connection with the expressed desire of this potential Sovereign of a universe could only be avoided by the direct and explicit act of the will of this God-man to the effect that time, as related to the act or event in question, should not be shortened or eliminated. In order to prevent the appearance of apparent time miracles, it was necessary for Jesus to remain constantly time conscious. Any lapse of time consciousness on his part, in connection with the entertainment of definite desire, was equivalent to the enactment of the thing conceived in the mind of this Creator Son, and without the intervention of time.
The U Papers not only grew up out of only one mind (with only one or two witnesses) but they are very recent, not ancient tradition at all, and that is why I ask you how you find an ability to place such emphasis on them, as they are not age-old wisdom, but quite new and non-encompassing by comparison to say, Sacred Geometry, which has been revered throughout the ages by divergent cultures as Divine.
A good number of people were involved with the book, and several personalities beyond the veil acted as the authors. First read https://app.box.com/s/78slfxf8gqdhazssuh7x, and then read https://app.box.com/s/ahk8obarjnrcrdmo5yba (mainly just the first five pages, although you're free to continue).
In the works I read, however, it was the many areas where those claims ran counter to accepted science that were emphasized. (The formation of the solar system; the age of the universe; the distance to the Andromeda Galaxy from Earth; the erroneous date of a prophesied solar eclipse and so on; the list was lengthy.) It also said that any area where the science was off so happened to be aligned with the scientific wisdom at that time, which later was revised or corrected.
This is covered in the ubastronomy link. There are actually two presentations, but the one I linked is more important.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Mon Nov 25, 2013 4:23 pm

Hi overmind!

Thank you so much for these passages from the U Book, and for addressing all those questions. I enjoyed reading these and following the links you provided as well. It was a great introduction, and I appreciate it so much! Very compelling reading, and you managed to answer my questions, complicated though they were. Thanks!!

With love, Michele :love

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Wed Dec 04, 2013 12:24 am

Getting back on topic, there is a similar discussion going on in another forum. So here is a more recent argument:
The value in these shapes is in their use. Without the value of their possible use in creation, they are merely lines on paper. Calling them sacred infers that value comes directly from the shape, but what is truly valuable is the relationship between the said shape and God. Basically, if God were to create something which was shaped like a pyramid, that would not make all pyramids holy. The pyramid was simply the needed foundation for the specific "thing", and the value of that "thing" does not come from the pyramid. The pyramid only aids in the production of value done by the "thing". The shape creates efficiency by improving a certain function. Geometry helps create value in its utilization, but it is useless alone. The same can be said for the written word. Even the Urantia Book exists as a mere formation of shapes, and would be nearly meaningless if no one read it or gained something from the ideas being communicated. Here the ideas/thoughts hold the real value, while the words are the vehicle to deliver this value. The letters (shapes) are only valuable in the sense that they are given value by man through their use. They are valuable in how they aid language, but the level of efficiency that is produced is what should be so prized. An alien language may have entirely different letters (from ours) which act as this medium, so this value is entirely subjective as these shapes are not valuable to everyone.

Geometry is never the source of values, God is the true source. God makes the shape valuable as it becomes utilized in the design of creation, matter, energy, life, morontia or spirit. Shapes cannot be sacred, but their use can be. This simply makes the shape efficient, or utilitarian, for a specific purpose. This appears to give the shape objective value, but God created the original purpose (or use for the shape) which creates this value or level of efficiency. Even if something is so utilitarian that it is used by Deity, Deity creates the value of the shape through how it is used. God ultimately holds the key to how useful a form of geometry is, and calling it sacred misplaces this value onto the object itself, which would be so useless on its own. A shape or pattern is used as a means to an end. In time, all possible routes to this end may be experienced or realized. The means are valuable only in their relationship with this end, and would lack all value without it.
This kind of logic also lead me to a greater understanding of human behavior, or perhaps I should call it the values hidden behind behavior, action, choices, etc. Human action is not as valuable as the result of the action. In fact, an action or a certain experience has little value in and of itself after it is experienced for the first time. What has value is the benefit of the experience, which I do think is quantifiable by spirit. If you want to experience relaxation, then you will likely perform the activity available which provides the greatest level of relaxation (unless of course there are other intervening factors). Much of this is covered in basic economics, by giving activities different ratings of utility. However, there are other things involved, such as human emotion and the fact that we cannot always analyze the future utility of our actions. The other problem is that utility is just too vague a term. Value can be broken up into several categories, or put differently, there are many different things which people find valuable.

Some examples: excitement, peace, fun, engagement, awe, pleasure, love, affection and discovery. An experience may produce multiple senses/feelings of something at different levels. You may want to do something that is engaging and fun, but if your goal is to use up time, the engagement may be more valuable -- thus having a greater impact. It is also true that while something is both exciting and produces a sense of awe, your current goal may be to find excitement. That awe factor may have no value at that moment (such as a pretty view). Now it is obvious that many of these senses can be so connected in the activity (one causing the other), that it is hard to separate them and give each a rating of importance. Something can be exciting because it is awe-inspiring, and something can be engaging because it is so fun. Things done from love can be both affectionate and pleasurable. Discovering something new can teach you something and either bring excitement or a feeling of peace. But one of these senses can take priority and can become the sole reason for performing an activity.

A lot of what we do is simply done because of the new possibilities we have yet to explore. A lot of the old or routine actions are performed out of a need for security (we know the results they will produce). One feeling may be the ultimate goal, and other feelings created by the experience simply act as the delivery method for the goal. Examples: routine -> secure -> peace, new -> discovery -> excitement, fun -> bonding -> affection -> love.

One final factor is the level of difficulty, or how much one values ease vs. challenge. Someone may seek fun in the easiest or fastest way possible, while also wishing for a romantic challenge (i.e. going after someone who is playing hard to get). Both challenge and ease create value in and of themselves, but I feel that if someone's goal did not involve such values (especially on the challenge side), they would take the fast and easy route in order to expedite the goal. The main value from ease is simply the reduction of time or effort. It is the added simplicity to the equation which gets the individual to their goal. It is the saving of time and energy, though sometimes the easiest route actually involves more time and effort, as it can simply involve a lack of complication. The value found in the challenge factor is growth (through the exercise of the body and mind), accomplishment and the drawing out of the experience. If the experience provides other bonuses, you may wish the activity to take longer (though you can take your time on something easy, challenge is not always necessary). These factors may also conflict, such as when one wants to complete a challenging activity quickly or take their time with something easy. Here, time is a value to consider, which impacts (or becomes the medium for) the target feelings or sense. Goals and results are often time-sensitive, at least in the world we live in.

Humans are not robots, and are thus not bound by this logic, but I believe this is a good look at the reasoning or "code" behind many of our actions. The whole point of this was to look at how our decisions are the delivery method of the conclusions we desire. The desired end helps create the means to the end. I believe we put a little too much emphasis on the means by not recognizing the end we are looking for. We do things which are not necessarily the best routes to a goal, and the main reasons seem to be the formation of habits and the desire to try something new. Notice that both of these are opposites, which can both act as boundaries to a goal.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 5:34 pm

Hi overmind!

I enjoyed your post. It was pretty cool thinking about your ideas regarding human behaviors, and how it is the impact of the behaviors that matter, not the actions themselves. Sometimes you need a road map for behaviors just to decipher what is meant, especially when people feel one thing and do another. Some of those examples were so right on. Intuition helps in figuring things out, that's for sure.

I also think I understand better after reading this post what you were trying to say in your earlier discussion of Sacred Geometry. I agree with you that if a pyramid is an example of what we're calling Sacred Geometry, that the pyramid itself does not become holy, just like the words and shapes used to form the U Book are not in themselves holy. It's the message that matters, not the shapes.

I agree with you and in fact it is not a precept of Sacred Geometry that shapes become holy, at least not on the level you're talking about. The idea in Sacred Geometry is that when God created these shapes, these creations themselves were injected with the extra-special. Of course their spiritual properties are God's design and ultimately have more to do with Him than with themselves. But once they are out there, and are utilized by others, they carry an extra charge, because God gave them that extra charge. Their utility and efficiency is evident but they have another layer that goes out beyond the 2X4. In the end though it's not to say that a pyramid is holy, merely that its use (or placing objects in a configuration that mirrors that of a pyramid) elevates energies beyond the mere physical. So in that way it's just like our respect for the greater universe, or acknowledging that our universe is more than merely physical, than invisible realms and energies that can be felt but not seen impact us every day.

In Rod's thread "Paradise Trinity Day" he is after something extra-special relating to the circle, and while almost all of his ideas are well over my head I just love reading his research and seeing what he's up to! I think he does a much better job than I ever could in giving a flavor of just what is so special about Sacred Geometry. In fact you might ask him his take on your ideas, I wonder what he'd say. That would be so interesting.

I really loved what you were saying about the ends vs. the means. . . It reminds me a lot of my mom always saying "Your father means well." We kind of roll our eyes at her, but she has a good point. ;) If someone kind of screws up and gets something wrong but their heart's in the right place, it's true, that really does matter more. That's the part I like to keep. ;)

Love to you, thanks for the great discussion! Michele :roll

User avatar
overmind
Moderator
Posts: 775
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 3:45 am
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: U.S.
Contact:

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by overmind » Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:04 pm

I agree with you and in fact it is not a precept of Sacred Geometry that shapes become holy, at least not on the level you're talking about. The idea in Sacred Geometry is that when God created these shapes, these creations themselves were injected with the extra-special. Of course their spiritual properties are God's design and ultimately have more to do with Him than with themselves. But once they are out there, and are utilized by others, they carry an extra charge, because God gave them that extra charge. Their utility and efficiency is evident but they have another layer that goes out beyond the 2X4. In the end though it's not to say that a pyramid is holy, merely that its use (or placing objects in a configuration that mirrors that of a pyramid) elevates energies beyond the mere physical. So in that way it's just like our respect for the greater universe, or acknowledging that our universe is more than merely physical, than invisible realms and energies that can be felt but not seen impact us every day.
Well, as I probably stated before, my main goal is simply to reduce superstition, and this could either be from new ideas or traditional ones. I am not a scientist attempting to demystify creation through a godless material view. I'm trying to sort which spiritual beliefs in the ugly knot of metaphysics can be relied upon, and I can only look to logic, revelation, first-hand experience and intuition to guide my mind. This doesn't really matter after I'm dead since I'll have access to all of this info, so this is mainly the action of the soul working with its own faith. Though I am personally growing, I'm hoping any insight I can glean can help guide others the right way. Also, analyzing the behaviors of humans and the values behind them will help me understand the activities of other beings, such as the midwayers and angels. Of course, it is far easier to use such knowledge to understand the lower animal species, but they are not as interesting. Also, I would have to better understand the values of God in order to understand those who follow those values. There is only so much I can do as a mortal, so most of this will just have to wait.

I wanted to point out that there is a big topic that I failed to accurately describe in the previous post. There are multiple categories of pleasure, including physical, mental and spiritual.

Everything in the physical category relates to the body feeling good, especially through the use of its senses. There is a mental aspect to this as well, but it is mainly physical as the brain is measuring and interpreting these senses (the mind then interprets the information gathered by the brain).

Mental pleasure has mainly to do with mental stimulation and positive emotions, and these can easily be influenced by physical pleasure. A person can be after the mental pleasure that can come from physical pleasure. An example would be a morning cup of coffee that improves someone's mood, assuming the individual is seeking to alleviate grumpiness instead of reducing tiredness, when reducing tiredness improves mood.

Spiritual pleasure is actually rather simple. It is the inner response to following the higher values which the soul recognizes. Another way to phrase this is that the personality grows the soul through the practice of these higher values, and the soul recognizes or takes in what it is meant to with the help of the Thought Adjuster. Since spiritual pleasure must be filtered through the mind to be consciously recognized by the individual, it is considered a form of mental pleasure that remains misunderstood by science. This spiritual ecstasy can be blocked out completely by the animal mind if the subject is so willing to do so (or is developed to feel a certain way be society). It is also possible for the ego to turn this kind of pleasure into a confirmation of personal value, leading to smug behavior. An example of this is a rich man giving a large some of money to charity in order to feel morally superior. Here, the goal is not following higher values, but to feel better than others. This is one of many incorrect paths people take in order to feel better about themselves. Here, the human mind creates an artificial feeling of spiritual pleasure which remains as hollow mental pleasure. And again, many people do not know the difference when the spiritual pleasure from altruistic behavior is difficult to discern. One possible explanation would be that people are not used to living an altruistic life, devoting themselves to God and others every second, and instead focus on single altruistic acts through opportunities that slowly trickle into their life.

That's all for now. I mainly wanted to highlight that pleasure can be so subjective since it is split up into different categories of perception.

User avatar
11light11
Family
Posts: 1326
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:44 pm
Please type in these numbers: 46373: 1111
Location: Illinois, United States of America

Re: The Sacrosanct and the Geometric

Post by 11light11 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 11:08 pm

I think that's such a great example, overmind, about a rich man donating to charity to feel morally superior. We unfortunately see a lot of this and it can be kind of a downer. It goes back to what you said before really, about action vs. reaction, and how sometimes the action is not as important as what is intended. In this case the people who receive the donation will benefit, but for that person's own well-being his starting point (wanting to feel superior) might hinder his growth, eh?

I remember once when I was a kid, our neighbor's mom died and she was truly devastated. Someone left a large bouquet of flowers and a loaf of gourmet bread on her door step without a note. She was so upset about this because she couldn't thank them. She carried on about it for months. In a way it was a good thing because it helped her to focus somewhere other than her mother for a few minutes here and there. But ultimately she never saw the beauty in that person just wanting to reach out without needing credit for it. I was only 8 or so but it left a deep impression on me and I never forgot it. Sometimes you don't need to be thanked. ;)
:sunflower: Thanks for this! Michele :kiss:

Post Reply