With Open Minds Forum restored now for almost half a year at it's new location with forumotion.com we can now turn to look at reaching out to OMF's original members who have not yet returned home. OMF's original membership was over 6,000 members strong, prior to the proboards suspension, according to the rolls of the time. We can probably safely assume that some of those accounts were unidentified socks. If we were to assume a reasonable guess of maybe as many as 30% possible sock accounts then that would leave potentially somewhere between 4800 to 4900 possible real members to locate. That is still a substantial number of people.
Who were all these people? Some were average individuals with common interests in ufology, exopolitics, globalism, corruption, earthchanges, science and technology, and a variety of other interests. Some just enjoyed being part of a vibrant and unusually interesting community. Others were representative of various insider groups participating in observation and outreach projects, while still others were bonafide intelligence community personnel. All with stake in the hunt for truth in one fashion or another. Some in support of truth, and communication. Others seeking real disclosure and forms of proof. And others highly skeptical of anything or limited subjects. The smallest division of membership being wholly anti-disclosure oriented.
So where did these members vanish to? They had many options. There are almost innumerable other forums out there on the topics of UFO's or Exopolitics, the Unexplained, and Conspiracy Theory. Did they disappear into the world-wide network of forum inhabitants? Did some go find new homes on chatrooms or individual blogs? Did they participate in ufo conventions or other public events and gatherings? How about those who represented groups in special access? Or IC and military observers? Those with academic affiliations? Where did they all go and what would be the best way to reach out and extend an invitation to return?
And what constitutes a situation deserving of their time and participation? Is the archive enough? How exactly do people within the paradigm most desire to define a community? Is it amenities, humanity or simply population size for exposure? Most of the special guests have been emailed and have expressed that population size for exposure is what most motivates them. But not all. Long-time member Dan Smith has other priorities and values motivating his participation. Should this open opportunities for unattached junior guests who have experience and dialog to contribute to the world? How best to make use of OMF's time, experience and resources?
Many skeptics would like to see the historical guardian of discourse opportunity to just up and disappear; go into permanent stasis. They think that not everyone has a right to speak about their experiences and if there is no proof involved then there can philosophically be no value to discourse. I personally would respectfully disagree with them. Discourse has always been the prelude to meaningful relationships and meaningful mutual relationships have always been the prelude to exchanges of proof. In a contentious social environment with regards to communication vs disclosure how do we best re-establish a haven for those preludes? Is it only the "if we build it they will come" answer? Well considering OMF has been largely fully functional over the last four or five months this line of reasoning is not necessarily true. So what would be the best way re-establish this? Your suggestions are sought. Please comment.
David Grusch's testimony is unquestionable and irrefutable.
Dr. Ronald Pandolfi, his unpaid and unacknowledged security consultant John Sillasen and his proxy/mouthpiece Dan Throop Smith should testify before congress about all clandestine UAP, SAP, or paranormal operations that they or any other unnamed individuals or associates were involved with and beg for amnesty before it is too late.
“What if there really is an Illuminati?” Wilson asked Thornley one pot-fogged night in 1968. “Maybe they’ll find out about us and be pissed.”
“I doubt if there is,” Thornley answered. “And if there by some chance is, they would probably be very happy to have wildass fools like us covering up for them by spreading bizarre theories.”
Me just sticking my head in the door to check on all the incorrigibles. Grin. Hope all is well here.
Cy
_________________
"This is an indeterminite problem. How shall I solve it? Pessimistically? Or optimistically? Or a range of probabilities expressed as a curve, or several curves?..........Well.....we're Loonies. Loonies bet. Hell, we have to! They shipped us up and bet us we couldn't stay alive. We fooled 'em. We'll fool 'em again!" Robert Heinlein, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
Rue she said Protection Rooster's Crow Confusion One thing else to end the deed -- A dog with no Illusion. ~ Walter Wangerin Jr., Book of the Dun Cow
What we are attempting to explain or rationalize is the onset of metabolism……. from a non-physicalist perspective.
Metabolism is mainly about reproduction/multiplication……. it is a numbers game.
We have appealed to MPD/DID to initiate the numbers game.
We get a Pocatok playing Olympiad, and thus the rudiments of physics, but it is still a long way to solar physics, and 10^10 persons.
10^10 is our Telos before we go back to being one with the One, thus completing our virtual/singular quantum loop.
I believe that we’ve determined that this loop is more like an ellipse with two foci……. the Alpha and Omega.
If we had to place the Sun at one of the foci, it would probably be at the Alpha…… being the Source……. a surrogate or metaphor for the I Am.
The other focus is the Omega/Telos or Eschaton, with which we are about to have a close encounter.
This might also be where we would place the Moon….. the Eschaton being our Total Eclipse……. we did have the portals opening for five days and then the Sun going out.
We might also recall Nostradamus and the eclipse prophecy for 1999.
Does this give us a handle on metabolism?
We do have the nexus for a surplus of entanglement!
We are looking for an intuition pump that will enable us to cut through the entanglements of Creation……. to see how they might be disentangled on the far side of our close encounter with the Eschaton.
They say that the tree of loving shine on me again They say it grows on the bank of the river of suffering Shine on me again, and Weave, weave, weave me the sunshine Out of the falling rain Weave me the hope of a new tomorrow Fill my cup again
………….
But what does this have to do with metabolism?
Well, we could start with atoms and the Logos……
The Anthropic Principle counts as a proto-metabolism.
It is what makes biology possible.
The AP is strongly aligned with the Logos.
The Telos and Logos are also strongly aligned.
The Sun, then, is an absolutely necessary feature of Creation.
So, it turns out that it is not all that far from Pocatok to metabolism.
Does this chain of logic render atoms and photons objective?
It places them into a tightly woven net……. relationalism wins the day.
Does this network of Creation come from atoms?
No, it derives from persons.
It is how persons manifest in space and time…… in history.
We, Co-creators, and Creation are Pratītyasamutpāda…… atoms and the Sun come along for the ride.
So, finally, is our best possible circle/circuit of Creation unbroken…… not by and by, but today, Lord?
It’s now just a game of finding and filling in the biggest hgaps.
Do we now understand why and how there is the best possible something?
I have to stop and think about what might be the biggest missing piece of the puzzle……
For how much longer do we have to wait?
For the best possible amount of time.
Conceptually, we have arrived……. all ye, all ye, in free!
Hearing no further objections, we can start the review.
So how do we coordinate 10^10 hallucinations?
Keeping time is a big factor, especially without a metronome.
How do we maintain the Sun on its appointed rounds, for instance, without appealing the Earth’s rotation.
The best analogy is the coordination of biological rhythms……. a spectacular example is the coordination of fireflies in some specific regions………
Why synchrony? Scientists studying the synchronous firefly have determined that the males flash in unison as a way for the female to be certain she is responding to one of her kind. There are other firefly species flashing at night, and some of them are predatory, so she must be able to recognize males of her species.
Musicians are often able to keep accurate time without the benefit of a conductor.
But now we keep time with nanosecond accuracy indefinitely.
Who is coordinating whom……. in the case of atomic clocks, when we don’t believe in atoms?
Here we have a gap in the Narrative.
Here we appeal to the cosmic net and relationalism.
We are looking for the heartbeat/metronome of the Metanarrative.
May we appeal to pendulums, if we don’t believe in gravity?
Wait, in exactly what sense do we not believe in gravity.
We appealed to gravity to play the first Pocatok game.
How did the Olympiad of talking heads manage to get on the same wavelength?
We appealed to the cosmic consciousness of the I Am.
The only way to coordinate cosmic consciousness is to appeal to the BPW.
Without the appeal to the Telos of the 10^10, would the stars be jumping around in the sky?
That is our basic presumption.
If we are talking about synchrony, why are we not talking about the wheel of time with Hinduism?
The problem with with cyclic time is that you get lost in the cycles.
If we have an external time source, how do we determine a present, without a common presence?
A common presence sounds a lot like the initial quantum observer…… like an I Am.
Right from the get-go, it seems that the mystical Eastern tradition is ruled out of court.
Is religion really this simple?
How could so many of us be so wrong ?
Well, the prophetic tradition had to have an origin.
Why couldn’t there have been multiple origins, which, in fact, there were, with Zoroastrianism, for instance.
Sorry, but, by definition, there can only be one BPW.
There could only be one Abraham……… just as there could only be one I Am.
Could there be only one jguy?
Well, Mohammed made a valiant attempt, but he pretty much proved the rule…….. there would be one crucifixion, to end all crucifixions.
So, why did it take me nearly half a century to realize that the problem of synchrony was liable to be crucial.
It’s like with physics……. the problem is not to get the right answer, the problem is to ask the right question .
Once you’ve come up with the right question, you realize that the only answer has to be the Metanarrative…….. the best possible Metanarrative……. there is absolutely no competition……. no room for competition…….. not even with an uncountable infinity of eternities.
It’s a small world after all…….. with only one degree of separation.
Does everything else follow from the synchrony question.
How do we get atoms from synchrony?
Well, they have to be quantum atoms for a starter.
And there has to be some sort of standard model to ensure that each set of the resulting particles are identical.
That requirement pretty much determines the rest of mathematics. ……….
But, no, I’m not seeing that atoms can be deduced from synchrony.
However, the notion of an I Am is mainly of quantum origin.
Quantum physics demands synchrony……. the observations have to be coordinated…….. that’s how we get to a Telos of 10^10.
The quantum synchrony brings us from the Alpha to the Omega.
Do the atoms say anything about the stars?
It has been noted recently that there are too many well-formed galaxies in the farthest reaches of the JWST.
It would be very difficult to rationalize stars without nuclear physics.
In that sense, stars and atoms are pratītyasamutpāda.
Stars are the incubators of the elements. ………..
The very notion of cosmic consciousness demands a small world, and an Alpha and Omega.
It also demands sapience……. mere sentience will not do.
Sapience has to be self-contained, IOW.
Being lost in space and time makes no sense, despite the best efforts of the scientists.
How they managed to avoid the synchrony problem is hard to explain.
Maybe I’d better refine the synchrony problem……..
It seems so obvious, but obviously it isn’t.
It has to do with the peculiarity of time and how it flows…….. as compared with space.
Einstein should have wondered about relativity……. but, no, he shut up and calculated.
Merrily, merrily, down the stream………
Why do we all find ourselves in exactly the same place on the stream?
McTaggart, almost single handedly, raised the question of presentism.
Well, no, it may have been Leibniz who raised the question in a modern context……..
Actually, it is Aristotle who first questioned the absoluteness of time….. can time occur independent of events.
It should have been a no brainer for Newton and Einstein, but, no, it wasn’t.
We think of Einstein as having overthrown Newton, but, no, they were both stuck in the same conceptual box…… Einstein’s was just slightly roomier.
Questions about time arose with questions about fatalism.
Am I a fatalist?
Well, in a superficial sense.
Free will exists mainly in our imagination…….. and that ain’t nuttin’.
Consciousness is all about being present…….. having a presence.
In as much as there is but one global Now, there is but one global consciousness.
It is important to note that there is no Now in physics……. there is only relative time.
Well, isn’t that just another instance of relationalism?
I seem to be pointing toward an absolute Now.
There is something absolute about cosmic consciousness.
In that case, there is something absolute about personhood, which is centered on consciousness.
But, noté bené, the personalism of the BPWH is actually an interpersonalism.
The ontology of interpersonalism is precisely what gives us our global Now.
To be is to relate, interpersonally.
We are social creatures……. through and through.
So where did our Now come from?
From the Big Bang?
No way, José.
The further back in time that we look with the JWST, the further does a the Big Bang recede.
Time is framed by an Alpha and Omega.
Time is framed by a prophetic tradition.
The prophecy is the end of history.
Is it also the end of consciousness?
The prophecy is the opening of the portals.
What will happen to our cosmic Now?
I’m suspecting that the cosmic Now will become relative……..
…… relative to the I Am……. in a topological sense……. as we become one with the One.
What happens to time?
The end of history is the end of time.
We become present with the Presence.
But the BPW is embedded in Eternity. ……….
A large part of becoming one with the One is to experience other lives…… in the end realizing that there is only one life……. just as there is only one interpersonal consciousness.
All of this is done sub specie aeternitatis…….. whatever that means, and I’d say that we are about to find out.
What will trigger the opening of the portals?
Will it be something bad or something good?
I suspect there will be a carrot and a stick……. a stick, especially where stragglers are concerned.
There will be altered states of consciousness…… in and around the opening of the portals……… all 10^5 of them.
We will be heading back into the primordial Dreamtime.
The Sun will not be going out, but it will no longer be growing food.
Will we starve ourselves out?
I wouldn’t rule it out.
What will be on the other side………? The wedding feast in the sky.
What sort of metabolism will that entail?
What does Agape taste like? …………..
So, where does the quantum come from, we might wonder.
Does it come from the I Am……. the initial (self) observation, which had to include a seminal form of the BPW……… in the Creator/Creation dimension?
From Schrödinger (1944) on……. it has been impossible to ignore the quantum aspects of (biological) life.
Is there a quantum aspect to time and/or consciousness?
Well, it seems that quantum mechanics demands a time dimension in a way that classical mechanics does not.
Wait…….. quantum mechanics demands a Now, in the form of an observer, that classical mechanics does not.
Whatever someone does, they do for the good of themselves partly.
Ideas are timeless.
Plato said things are beautiful only if they participate in the idea of beauty.
Nothing ever is; all things are becoming.
We take shadows for reality.
We can pass from the sensible to the intelligible world.
Plato's belief in the reality of the intelligible realm can be seen as a rejection of empiricism, which holds that all knowledge comes from sensory experience. He believed that sensory experience is unreliable and that true knowledge can only be gained through the rational apprehension of the Forms.
Plotinus claimed to be an interpreter of Plato, but he extended some of Plato’s ideas. He perhaps had access to sources we do not as well.
Plotinus's philosophy revolves around the concept of "the One," which he posited as the ultimate, transcendent reality beyond all categories of being and non-being. According to Plotinus, the One is an ineffable, infinite presence that is the source of all existence. It is beyond intellectual comprehension because it exists beyond being and non-being, beyond any conceivable category or concept.
From the One, emanates the rest of the universe in a hierarchical manner. The second principle is the Nous, or Divine Mind, the realm of Ideas or Forms as articulated by Plato. It is the first self-thought of the One and the architect of the material world.
The third principle is the World-Soul, which is derived from the Divine Mind. This World-Soul is responsible for animating the universe and introducing motion and change. It links the intellectual and material realms, and is also associated with self-consciousness.
Lastly, there is the material world, which is the least perfect reflection of the One. Although it is furthest from the perfection of the One, it still emanates from it and holds a degree of its beauty.
Plotinus also introduced a complex moral and aesthetic theory. He believed that the highest form of human happiness and the ultimate goal of human life is the achievement of union with the One.
I concur.
This is my experience.
I also lean away from Gnosticism, he was quite critical of them, and more toward Neoplatonism as maybe the most highly advanced systems we developed until we went off the rails with materialism.
He suggested that everyone could achieve union with the divine through philosophy, contemplation, and virtuous living. He was also critical of the Gnostics' claim of having exclusive access to truth.
The Gnostics were very confused.
I see the world as a beautiful emanation of the One as Plotinus did, which also casts a shadow in matter.
I do not think a human can do better than virtuous philosophical living and silence/contemplation.
If I were to choose a roof to shelter under, it would share a lot of its structure with Neoplatonism.
The Christians added a personal element to their faith and didn’t have much to do with reincarnation. This is grounded in Jesus’ ministry to the disciples and their belief God became a human being.
Well, I don’t know about all that, no one does. And there is much debate about what Jesus actually claimed. I think he was part of the emanation, like we all are. And in many ways, the essence of his gospel is shared with Neoplatonism.
Dualistic views of good and evil are ultimately flawed and muppets just can’t handle these kinds of concepts.
I believe we can and will sit down and have a beer with the One.
It’s Persons, all the way up and down.
Even the Logos is a person…… is the I Am.
This has been the stumbling block for many a poor boy.
But my main concern right now is the Now!
I believe that the Now and the One are in cosmic alignment.
That’s what the Quantum is all about…… Presence.
The I Am is the ultimate Presence.
That initial observation was/is pratityasamutpada with the seminal Word……… with the BPW.
Pratityasamutpada is all about the cosmic Now!
The jguy just got there first…… the firstest with the mostest.
It’s been about the Now, ever since.
The jguy event was a recapitulation of the I Am event.
The Second Coming will pretty much wrap things up.
The portals will introduce the eternal Now.
Is the eternal Now going to eat our lunch 🥪?
Kinda.
Be here or be square.
This is what Heidegger was trying to tell us.
Being is time……. and time is finite……. until it isn’t.
Welcome to the eternal Now. ……….
The quantum concept of time first emerged from early research on quantum gravity, in particular from the work of Bryce DeWitt in the 1960s:[6]
"Other times are just special cases of other universes." In other words, time is an entanglement phenomenon, which places all equal clock readings (of correctly prepared clocks – or of any objects usable as clocks) into the same history.
Hmmm……….
Is there any other……. entanglement?
The BPW is necessarily the only entanglement…….. pratītyasamutpāda.
Btw, Bryce was a high school mate……. small world. ……….
Have I missed anything?
Entanglement does imply the existence of a singular small world.
Entanglement came into my cosmic context thanks to the Princess…… another small world…….. but a central part of the only one.
It was a word that she passed on…….. not being a physicist.
Entanglement was a word that I had heard many a time….. as something technical.
But, coming from her lips, it took on a whole new dimension……. it became a word of biblical proportions.
Almost by definition, there can only be one entanglement……. we are it…… microcosms that we are…….. all ye, all ye in free……. Now!
The one thing to know about about portals is that they operate on the principle of entanglement……. entanglement with the eternal Now. ………..
Any day, Now, sports fans…….. and the sooner the better…… IMHO.
This is exactly why we’re here, Now.
Do Putin and/or Xi have a clue?
Putin, more likely than Xi.
Putin realizes that it is Now or never.
Xi still thinks he is playing the long game.
The eternal Now is not the long game.
It is the only game.
ChatGPT……..
While Heidegger's exploration of temporality in "Being and Time" may touch upon aspects of the present moment, it does not directly address the notion of an "eternal Now" typically associated with concepts like timelessness or a timeless state of being. His focus is more on the relationship between temporality, human existence, and the ontological nature of being.
Close, but no cigar.
One interpretation that touches upon this idea is the "block universe" or "block time" concept, which posits that past, present, and future all coexist simultaneously. In this view, the universe is conceived as a static, four-dimensional block, where every event and moment is equally real and accessible. This interpretation, however, is not universally accepted and is just one way of conceptualizing the relationship between time and the quantum realm.
Better.
Some interpretations of quantum mechanics, such as the Copenhagen interpretation or the Many-Worlds interpretation, have sparked philosophical debates and speculation about the nature of reality, time, and consciousness. However, the relationship between entanglement and the eternal Now is not a widely recognized or established connection in scientific or philosophical circles.
Hmmm………
Well, that was as of 2021…….
While the block universe concept shares some similarities with the notion of the eternal Now, they are not necessarily identical. The eternal Now typically refers to the idea that there is an eternal present moment that encompasses all of existence. It often carries implications of timelessness and a static nature.
That is so 2021.
In both the block universe and the eternal Now, the past, present, and future are considered to coexist in some manner. They propose that all moments of time are equally real or accessible, without a privileged "now" or a flow of time.
The idea of portals or specific mechanisms of access to different moments of time would be separate concepts or hypotheses that could be explored or proposed within the context of time travel or other speculative theories. These concepts, however, go beyond the basic concepts of the block universe or the eternal Now.
You are correct, and I apologize for any confusion caused by my previous responses. If there were an eternal Now, it would indeed imply a privileged present moment that encompasses all of existence. In that sense, the eternal Now would be considered the singular and privileged point of reference for the entirety of existence.
In some philosophical and scientific discussions, the notion that time is an illusion is related to the concept of timelessness or the idea that all moments are equally real and accessible. It is believed that our experience of time as past, present, and future is a result of our limited perspective or consciousness.
We don’t say!
When considering the accessibility of time or the potential limitations on our understanding of it, invoking the concept of the Katechon can be seen as a metaphorical or speculative proposition. It suggests that there may be forces or factors that restrict or limit our full comprehension or access to certain aspects of reality, including time.
The answer to this is to live it the best you can anyway.
Have courage.
The transcendentalists brought a revival of Neoplatonism.
This thread 🧵 has my attention.
Pseudo-Dionysius synthesized Platonic philosophy and Christian theology, which had an immense influence on mediaeval mysticism and Renaissance Humanism.
“Go, speed the stars of Thought On to their shining goals; — The sower scatters broad his seed, The wheat thou strew'st be souls.”
“God enters by a private door into every individual.” —Emerson
Read this today.
These are the waters I’m drawn to. Emerson provides some wise guidance here.
We seek to understand our consciousness and we follow and look into others for more pieces of the puzzle.
I suppose this is what fascinated me about Dan.
He was speaking up.
How could you not listen to any who may speak up?
Accept it all.
I speak up less and less.
One must find the truths that illuminate our works.
Emerson - Intellect Essay wrote:The ancient sentence said, Let us be silent, for so are the gods. Silence is a solvent that destroys personality, and gives us leave to be great and universal. Every man's progress is through a succession of teachers, each of whom seems at the time to have a superlative influence, but it at last gives place to a new. Frankly let him accept it all. Jesus says, Leave father, mother, house and lands, and follow me. Who leaves all, receives more. This is as true intellectually as morally. Each new mind we approach seems to require an abdication of all our past and present possessions. A new doctrine seems, at first, a subversion of all our opinions, tastes, and manner of living. Such has Swedenborg, such has Kant, such has Coleridge, such has Hegel or his interpreter Cousin, seemed to many young men in this country. Take thankfully and heartily all they can give. Exhaust them, wrestle with them, let them not go until their blessing be won, and, after a short season, the dismay will be overpast, the excess of influence withdrawn, and they will be no longer an alarming meteor, but one more bright star shining serenely in your heaven, and blending its light with all your day.
But whilst he gives himself up unreservedly to that which draws him, because that is his own, he is to refuse himself to that which draws him not, whatsoever fame and authority may attend it, because it is not his own. Entire self-reliance belongs to the intellect. One soul is a counterpoise of all souls, as a capillary column of water is a balance for the sea. It must treat things, and books, and sovereign genius, as itself also a sovereign. If Aeschylus be that man he is taken for, he has not yet done his office, when he has educated the learned of Europe for a thousand years. He is now to approve himself a master of delight to me also. If he cannot do that, all his fame shall avail him nothing with me. I were a fool not to sacrifice a thousand Aeschyluses to my intellectual integrity. Especially take the same ground in regard to abstract truth, the science of the mind. The Bacon, the Spinoza, the Hume, Schelling, Kant, or whosoever propounds to you a philosophy of the mind, is only a more or less awkward translator of things in your consciousness, which you have also your way of seeing, perhaps of denominating. Say, then, instead of too timidly poring into his obscure sense, that he has not succeeded in rendering back to you your consciousness. He has not succeeded; now let another try. If Plato cannot, perhaps Spinoza will. If Spinoza cannot, then perhaps Kant. Anyhow, when at last it is done, you will find it is no recondite, but a simple, natural, common state, which the writer restores to you.
If muppets would only let go of their attained knowledge.
What treasures and wisdom they could find.
What a human does is still the best evidence of things unseen.
Knowing thyself is still the best and ONLY real game in town.
The last couple weeks I have been sick with COVID.
It is a different kind of virus.
It holds on and goes for your weak spots.
I haven’t been able to read much, but some things have captured my attention.
Emerson really summarizes the state I’m in above well.
It is not an easy state to enter into.
Also, the voices come when your defenses are weak
They can be so critical and blunt and cut deep.
But one realizes they are not their thoughts per se, but their arbiter.
Perhaps these voices are the gods, they know us inside and out and they can time their attacks for greatest effect.
I feel one should listen to all the voices, even the scary ones and boil them down.
Don’t blurt them out untested.
Wait for the fruit of action to come forth, pick the flowers of compassion.
Then you may have something.
You can outlast your attackers.
And then silence comes and settles it all.
Sweet sweet silence.
One can see the good in them and this is the prize.
One can feel the darkness in some of the voices.
I describe the thoughts as voices.
If you listen closely, you can see different personalities or commonalities in the voices.
You know when a friend is speaking or moving by you.
But practicing what I preach, I remember the critical voices are friends too.
Why these voices?
Love.
Love rejoices in the truth.
I was reminded of a scripture I used to meditate on often.
Paul’s letter to the Church of Corinth.
1 Corinthians 13 wrote:If I speak in the tongues[a] of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,[b] but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
Now that is some letter.
I am still really moved by it.
Something in me is magnetically aligned with these words.
Unique in time.
I could argue that Paul seemed to get Jesus.
Faith, hope and love.
To see face to face is akin to knowing thyself in my view.
I much prefer face to face than a still small voice.
The voices are still with me.
And I am glad of it.
Accept it all.
That’s what I feel the cosmos saying, accept it all.
In this way, those obsessed with Disclosure, are also seeking themselves.
They just have not come face to face with themselves yet.
Disclosure is a portal for them.
Same with any kind of faith, it brings one face to face.
The voices must come out of the shadows and reveal themselves.
You can command them once you have come face to face.
The good shall remain.
The good is what is true, reality.
What is in you that is real, loves the real.
There are echoes of dualism in my words still I guess.
Habits are hard to break.
“The eternal Path is not the sort of path you go walking on.”
—David Bentley Hart (Translation of the main theme of the Tao Te Ching)
David Bentley Hart wrote:Thus the soul’s primordial appetite for truth in itself, its orientation toward a horizon of perfect understanding and immediacy, has here only shadows—though often golden shadows—to feed upon. I suppose that is why perhaps the loveliest and most absorbing promise in Paul’s letters is that one day we will not only peer into a glass, darkly, but see face to face: The original author, having translated himself into a human idiom, will translate us into the idiom of the divine, without loss, confusion, or separation; and the restless human desire always to understand yet more (of which the imperfect art of translation is one small manifestation) will at last achieve satiety, because we will at last understand even as we are understood.
Not that this gives me any better idea what to do with the word logos.
David Bentley Hart wrote:In Tradition and Apocalypse, you see, I make the argument—which here I am happy to simplify almost to the point of idiocy—that the evolution of dogmatic and theological tradition has never consisted in the necessary and rational unfolding of the inevitable consequences of antecedents always already virtually contained within the initial deposit of the faith; rather, the tradition has advanced spasmodically at best, often by way of historical traumas, in light of a future revelation of meaning whose full nature can be glimpsed from the vantage of the present only as in a glass darkly, as a result of things adumbrated in the past but never seen with perfect and final clarity. Each healthy and perdurable synthesis achieved in the history of Christian doctrinal definitions has been at once an anticipation of that ultimate unveiling and also a radical revision of the past; what it has never been is an anxious, jealous, traditionalist preservation and curation of an unchanging institutional, cultural, or confessional heritage. And, from an early moment in Christian doctrinal history, it became clear that that final apocalyptic horizon, where supposedly we shall at last see face to face and, as Henry Vaughan says, “shall need no glass,” must be one that can make sense not only of an entire biblical language about the mutual indwelling of God in his creatures and of creatures in God, but of that indwelling as perfectly realized in the incarnation of the Logos: God becoming human (as the lapidary formulation has it) that human beings might become God; a miraculous exchange of natures culminating ultimately in the inconceivable reality of a deified and glorified creation in which God is “all in all.”
…
You may like this Dan.
…
One should treat the great drama/comedy/tragedy of life as such.
One should not obey God, but wrestle with God.
Hecate is the watcher over the 3 ways.
The guardian of the threshold has several faces.
…
Interesting thing Plato said about time in Timaeus.
Time is the “moving image of eternity.”
How can time be an image of eternity if they are opposites?
He said that it was a living thing’s nature to be eternal, but it isn’t possible to bestow eternity on anything begotten.
Time is connected to numbers (many, more than one).
But eternity remains in unity, oneness.
Eternity has no was or will be, only is, changeless and motionless.
But what about time and eternity across dimensions?
Philosophy is the science of estimating values. One knows the quality of a substance through philosophy. The mission of philosophy “a priori” is to establish the relation of manifested things to their invisible ultimate cause or nature.
I am engaged deeply in metaphysics these days including cosmology, theology, and the nature of being. Neoplatonism summarizes the ancient pagan practices. It is not only derived from dialogues and scraps of ancient paper. There is an interactive aspect to platonism and the mysteries.
Plato regarded Philosophy as the greatest good ever imparted by Divinity to man.
To see humans throwing up their hands in disgust proclaiming the meaningless of being is heart rending.
That is the farthest one can be from one mind.
A tragedy.
“A little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion.”
—Sir Francis Bacon
Aristotle opens “The Metaphysics” with, “All men naturally desire to know.”
Everything speaks to us and can reveal true nature.
But the door seems closed to us, but that is only an illusion.
The door is wide open.
We are seeking to estimate the relationship between the one and the all; the effect and the cause; the mind and source of the mind; the spirit and its substance; Nature and the foundation of Nature; the illusion and reality.
“He who has not even a knowledge of common things is a brute. He who has an accurate knowledge of human concerns is a man among brutes. But he who knows all that can be known by intellectual energy, is a God among men.”
Your status in the natural world is determined by the quality of your thinking. He whose mind is enslaved by his bestial instincts is philosophically not superior to the brute; he whose rational faculties ponder human affairs is a man; and he whose intellect is elevated to the consideration of divine realities is already a demigod, for his being partakes of the luminosity with which his reason has brought him into proximity.
That last bit is the good stuff and beautiful. When one looks back from whence they came, suddenly they realize where they have arrived at by no motion of their own, but through the motion of the one mind, which is a wholly new dimension of being.
It is an awesome thing being here now and the awareness of this is beyond description.
One realizes what a treasure has been found.
They immediately see how backward the world is and how they have lived.
Truly I am speechless before the sun.
This is just my poetry describing the state.
In our our age Philosophy has been obfuscated into meaningless isms.
It is the stabilizing influence in human thought.
Once the medicine has begun to work, vistas appear and the mists of time evaporate.
Where once you saw darkly, you see all as luminous.
I do desire to know nature and my self in it, as Plotinus did.
As Plato.
As Heraclitus.
As Jesus.
As Maximus and Augustine.
As Socrates.
As all of them witches and warlocks.
Of course I desire to know.
My heart is their heart.
My eyes are their eyes.
Once one is touched by infinite self-moving mind, they see as Paul must have and all the others.
The words may change, but they all point to the same stuff.
“All things belong to the gods; the gods are friends to wise persons; all things are common among friends; therefore all things belong to the wise.”
—Diogenes of Sinopis
I realize I am just remembering what I always know.
Stepping into the material world is stupefying.
Contemplation on the sensible leads to remembering.
Last edited by Smelly El Chivo on Sun Jul 09, 2023 12:44 pm; edited 1 time in total
In the best possible world, I don’t know that there can be any dark corners.
Everything has a purpose.
In this very small world, nothing is neglected.
You may be neglecting the importance of time and Eschatology.
Ultimately we will be see everything……. sub specie aeternitatis, which is not merely a still shot, but a whole new dimension……. where time takes on new meaning and purpose.
(cont……….)
Last edited by dan on Sun Jul 09, 2023 1:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
Open Minds Forum v.2 2012 - Current. OMF continues its work on the topics of UFOs, Exopolitics, Extraterrestrial Contact, Conspiracy, Ancient History, Exotic/Cutting-edge Technologies, Cryptozoology, Special Cases, Associated Theories & Philosophies, Whistleblowers, and Sanctioned Communications.
Social bookmarking
Bookmark and share the address of Open Minds Forum on your social bookmarking website
by 
knows this. 
, for his part, has not figured out how the planets 🪐 go around….. if we don’t appeal to Newton. 
. 
platform. 
? 
. 
it isn’t. 
with the One. 
, Princess? 
before the sun. 
» Why are we here?
» OMF STATE OF THE UNION
» Disclosure - For U by U
» The scariest character in all fiction
» Uanon's Majikal Misery Tour "it's all smiles on the magic school bus"
» What Music Are You Listening To ?
» Livin Your Best Life
» Baudrillardian hauntology - what are some haunting truths to our reality?