• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Vortex

Helpful Information

  • Gender
  • Marital Status
    Happily;iy married 30 years and going
  • Location
    East Coast

Friendly Details

  • Interests
    Religion, Metaphysics, Philosophy, Natural Healing Arts & Sciences, Technology and Medical Science, American & World History, Police Science/Criminal Justice, Art, & Photography, Politics and Political Science, Chess, Chinese Martial Arts,
  • Doctrine /Affiliation
    Christian Non-Denominational

Other Details

  • Occupation
    Retired: Dr, of Naturopathy, Commercial Artist

Vortex's Achievements

Honorable Friend

Honorable Friend (6/17)

  1. Give the Anima/Animus a little more thought in relation to God. All things are possible are they not? Why would any human assume to know the totality of what God is or is not, or what "omnipotence" really means? "Omnipotence" (almighty), does not mean there are not opposites to His nature. It may very well be for all we know, that the two opposites (by whatever name one chooses to describe it) are elements that compose His "omnipotence." We see the example of this in "ALL" of His creation here on Earth and within us as well. Now you have to ask yourself why "omnipotence" would create things to function on a foundation of "opposites," unless it was not already integral to His nature. In our human ways, we understand "wrath" to be related "destructive" regardless of the reason it is issued for, which in God's case is the passing of "Judgement". Nevertheless, it is destruction as opposed to its opposite. on others as a negative idea, yet God displays wrath in His own constitution. So, He can demonstrate "wrath" as demonstrated with Sodom and Gomorrah and other situations, or He can demonstrate the opposite, "Blessing;" wrath vs blessing are polar opposites. Wrath is "aggressive" and "Blessing" is passive--Animus/Anima. Regarding "Unknowing." In over 40 years of studying Biblical Scripture, I have learned many things about God's ways through His work on Earth and by having been a Creative Artist for as many years. Having been a professional commercial advertising artist and painter, I was faced with having to come up with concepts and ideas every single day, ideas that were not in my conscious mind to begin with. Every artists knows that ideas surface to the conscious level from that "unknown" creative space within, many times even from dreams. Every inventor, artist, musician, and scientist who has had to create, has experienced this. Before God creates anything, it must first be an idea in His thought. Otherwise, there would be no order to His creation. And we see throughout the entire universe that all creation can be interpreted by mathematics as far as the things humanity is capable of expressing. This is order, and order means form, and form displays opposites. The "unconscious" side of God is simple put, a part of His "Creative" process; that special space that all creative artists know but can't explain. The "omnipotence" of God, is to my mind, the outward manifestation of God's Creative process giving His idea form and motion--animating it into life. Below is a direct Biblical demonstration of polar opposites in the Bible, stated by the son of David. Ec:3:1: To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: Ec:3:2: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; Ec:3:3: A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; Ec:3:4: A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; Ec:3:5: A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; Ec:3:6: A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; Ec:3:7: A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; Ec:3:8: A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
  2. We are taugth that Jesus had absolute power over evil, and that he knew no sin. This is true. But what are we to actually understand from this? What is "evil?" Jesus demonstrated that evil and sin are conditions of inharmony within us that are based on our lack of understanding of God's spiritual laws. Jesus also said, "What I do ye can do also." "Be ye perfect as your father in heaven is perfect." These words are all founded on principles of spiritual laws that humanity in general fail to comprehend. The effects of sin and evil cannot dominate where spiritual laws of life and harmony are clearly understtod and put into force. So Jesus' mission, overall, was to make us aware of spiritual laws (commandments) available to us that would set things in motion in the right direction. If one then manages to hit on the right key, the right tone will sound. Christ came with an inborn understanding of what the correct key was and how to access it at will. But for us, it will always be a task because our own members war against us continuously. We were created this way. All his teachings have underlying truths in them that unfold to one's consciousness experientially. Otherwise, they simply remain words in a book. His spiritual teachings, must, as he said, "be made alive", and "written in the hearts of men." Read what I wrote to Fawzo.
  3. Hello Fawzo. When I wrote "chaos", "evil", "neagtivitiy," I didn't expand on it to keep the post short. Anima.Animus is another way of wording it, which I'm in agreement with as well. But Anima/Animus does not limit itself to simple feminine/masculine characteristics as we identify. It goes much deeper than this. They are in reality forces, energies, that constantly struggle to maintain equillibrium between each other, and in so doing create influences and effects. And when we experience these effects, we give them labels according to how they affect us mentally, emotionally, and physiologically. You can for example, under the heading of Anima.Animus, say that when your blood Ph value is read, you are faced with the measure of two opposing forces--acid vs alkaline. Though both are needed for the entire physiology to survive, when one or the other transgresses the boundary of its opposite in too great a degree, one will experience either a heart attack from one side, or a stroke from the opposite side. We can of course label these effect as chaos, evil, etc., or whatever we so chose to. The psychological theory of Anima/Animus can be applied to anything, because all things we know are composed, or function, on the basis of opposites. Even walking up a set of stairs requires that you first press "down" in order to go "up." This is all the Gestault of life. So, it is not that I paint God as a schizophrenic entity at all. What I point out is the possibilty that within the "whole" of what God might be, He may be more conscious of one side of His power and His ability to apply it as opposed to a side of His nature that is under less conscious control. Thus, the effect between the two sides of His nature creates forces and effects that we little humans perceive as creation vs destruction, and label each effect over us based on their affects on us. But to God, those effects may be normal every day struggles within His creative eternal being. Now just as we do not enjoy what negativity generates within us when opposing forces are not in balance, it's possible that God too doesn't enjoy of what is generate from His nature that He must set out to correct and balance. If one reads the story of Moses, for example. God offered Moses a deal, which was to destroy the disobedient Hebrews and create a "new" nation from Moses. Moses had to remind God of His promise to Abraham. So in creating humanity, we have to ask ourselves why didn't He create a people with Freewill who would also be able to perceive the effect of right and wrong choices? In this great experiement, something in God did not know what man would choose to do with his first choice under freewill. This then would infer a side of God's nature that is unknowing rather than knowing. Hence, what comes froth from Him in the soup of creaton must, in my mind, be from the unconsious side of His forces that afterward becomes the puddy for His creative work. In other words, something comes from witin Him that is the material He creates with, and He becomes conscious of it only after it has coe forth from Him.
  4. Hello Fawzo & Dan54, I have a question to pose to both of you. Let me first preface with the following. In the Old Testament, we find that God is intolerent of anything opposing his will. God will even go so far as displaying great anger and destroy that which disagrees with Him. In the New Testament we find that Jesus presents a different God, one who is loving and patient. Jesus goes as far as stating to Sanhedrin opposition that hold to Old Testament Mosaic beliefs, "You are of your father the Devil." Then we look at the Old testament story of Job, and here we find ourselves reaing about a wager going on bewtween God and Satan concerning this poor fellow, Job. The wager allows for the destruction of Jobs family to prove a point in the wager. Now considering that humankind can also be good or evil, and created this way, and that humankind displays a conscious and subconscious, and recognizes both darkness and light much like God does, isn't it then possible that what we in humanity recognize and define as "chaos" (Satan, evil, negativity) is a manifestation of God's own subconscious mind, an area in God's mind that plays a background role in His own creative forces, and that He (like us) has no absolute power to regulate over that side of His own spirit nature?
  5. Although the originator of this post has left, according to some of you who replied to me, I may as well contribute my two cents also. I can understand where the thread originator was coming from. "Savedinchrist" was apparently taught as most Christians who have not been exposed to anything other than mainstream evangelical doctrine, which encourages to make converts. From his only post, it was apparent that he believed he was doing the right thing to help two Wiccans, which he believed were on the wrong path, to change their belief to agree with his own. He of course meant well. As I thought about his above request, it was clear to me that he did not study his Bible as well as he should have. If he believed the individuals he was trying to influence were on an evil path, he should have realized that not even Christ Himself tried to convert Satan or any demonic entity he expelled in cases of possession. According to Scripture, Satan is wiser than any human being anyway, and the struggle with Satan is one in which only His eternal enemy, Christ, is prepared to meet. In my estimation, what is important for Christians to accomplish, as with anyone else, is to practice goodness wherever possible and rid oneself of one's own demons. If we do right and set examples of goodness for others, this is enough. And in so doing perhaps, just perhaps, a few will, by contrast, examine their own heart and soul and move towards making a change for the better in their own lives. Am interesting story. About 8 to 9 years ago, on this ULC forum, I came across a thread started by a "Satanic Church Members" who was backed by another from his belief system. They were both being battered with hostility by other ULC members. I felt pretty bad about it and thought I'd join in and try to help change the atmosphere from anger to more positive constructive dialogged. I began by asking respectful questions of the Satanic Church members that others had bot thought of yet. The conversation turned to a quite friendly, interesting, and more productive discussion for everyone; they didn't have to flee. There were things I didn't agree with concerning Satanic Church philosophy. But before I set out to point out what my disagreements were, I took the trouble to purchase, read, and study the "Satanic Bible." Wouldn't you know that after pointing out contradictions between the belief and practice of the Satanic Bible author and founder of the First Church of Satan, Anton LaVey, the two Satanic members found themselves in agreement with me. After six months of friendly conversation exchanges, everyone moved on. Two years later, I was invited to join ULC Tribal, and did so. When I introduced myself to say hello as a new member, to my surprise, those same two Satanists welcomed me to the forum. They remembered me, which was a nice feeling. They then reminded me of that thread on this ULC forum. To my amazement, they both informed me that their conversation with me had opened their eyes to questions about their beliefs they had not thought about. Then they informed me that the six month discussion we had had helped change their lives, and they had changed to what they believed was a more meaningful spiritual path for them, their wives, and their children. They expressed their thanks. My basic point is that "Savedinchrist" may have started out with the wrong approach and didn't have enough experience with people to remain on board and learn how he could have turned his topic post into something meaningful for him. David may have placed himself in a position of confrontation with Wiccans, without first having learned what their ways and philosophies were. He most likely forced his opponents into taking a defensive stand rather than applying a wiser approach where everyone can take away something positive from his mission. I'm sure we all agree that when different belief systems clash nothing good ever comes of it. But good words and questions well though out in any struggle are like seeds that in due course germinate in the heart and soul of good people, and such people will come to their own fork in the word where they must make a choice.
  6. I find it interesting that "savedinchrist" has everyone here responding to each other. But where has the originator of the thread been since?
  7. Brother Michael Sky Thanks for your honest reply. If the OBE book you suggested, and Urantia, work for you, and you feel it is helping you make progress in the right direction, that's all that matters. Perhaps you'd like to share one of your OBE experiences that was of a spiritual nature, and one that presented difficulties for you during your learning journeys. Don't worry that others may or may not have had experiences of there own. I believe the majority of participants in this forum are familiar with what OBE is about in one way or another. After I read one of your shared choice experience, I will be happy to share one of my own as well. Perhaps some of our participants may wish to share some of there own with our spiritual brothers and sisters here.
  8. Michael, you've answered the question without realizing that it contradicts your conclusions. By stating that "Psychology 101 shows that man's mind comes with a self fill bias," it would then logically follow that the Urantia book can only be a "book of truth" for one who is "bias" in favor of it, thereby leaving no room to discover any "self-evident truth" (Fawzo). Bias in any form is a cup already filled. Spiritually minded individuals don't generally open books like Urantia, or any other book, looking for lies, but rather for confirmation or learning something new that may contribute to expanding knowledge, consciousness, and spiritual development. But in that journey, is is also not uncommon to come across information that is in contradiction with facts of science, or with the ideas and teachings of master souls who have walked among us. When contradiction and disappointment rears its head, something is within us raises a red flag to it. And this perhaps is something we need to pay more attention to, because evil does often disguise itself as good in our world; a fact we see and experience in everyday life around us everywhere.
  9. Hello Brother Michael Sky, Many years ago, before the ULC website was revised and all posts were lost, I had a topic thread on OBE that became quite long. Have you per chance ever experienced OBE yourself by any chance? I'm supposing you've already read the book you recommend above; I haven't, because the best books on the topic have already been written in the past but are not on the market anymore, except for that of Robert Monroe's "Journeys Out of the Body" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Monroe ). What do you think about the possibility of OBE? And in what way do you believe "all this might just possibly interrelate?" Expand on this for conversation purposes so that some of us can share our thoughts and perhaps our personal experiences with such activities as OBE.
  10. Hello mj606, I believe you misunderstood my point. In no way did I indicate that EC and Sadler were related. My point was that if one man, EC, had no problem allowing himself to be known, then why couldn't the person who is belieed to be the conhuit for Urantia do likewise? When I refered to EC's work as being authored by him, what I meant was that what EC received was attributed to his special gift and not actual authorship; I should have been more clear. With EC, it all began when he was a child, when he fell asleep on a book and woke up knowing the entire contents--page for page. But becoming a conduit began when he lost his voice, for which the cause was remedied after another entity introduced himself through EC who had been placed under hypnosis. The work of EC and SS was of a spirtual nature and unique. I simply feel if EC had no problem in being public, the condit for Urantia should also have had no problem doing the same. Secrecy "always" implies hiding something one doesn't wish the public to know about. True that Jesus left no written document in his own handwriting. However, even Jesus had absolutely no problem being out in the open, regardless of any opposition, scruteny, and the threat of death. In addition, he had disciples that at one point numbered many more than twelve; there were thousands of additional witnesses who heard him speak openly, including his opposition. And there was a public execution that also witnessed. But with Urantia, where are the witnesses? Where are the people who knew the conduit persoanlly? Was there anyone who saw him receive any portion of Urantia who could attest to the authenticity of how the material came into being? I don't believe any of these question can be answered with absolute credibility. For all we know, because of the secrecy surrounding Urantia, it is possible that it was the work of someone's imagination. Just imagine the work that went into Tolkin's "Lord of the Rings" The author even created an entirely new language; a work far more involved than Urantia, and all of it from imagination. Why can't the same be true of Urantia? This is the reality of it to me, especially since the so called conduit is not known. One cannot, in commonsense reason, instantly assume that the entirety of Urantia is based on truth with no facts anywhere to support it. A reader can easily specualte many things here with Urantia. He can say that the "adjuster", for example, was a reinterpretation for the Bible's term--"Holy Spirit." Many other ideas related to the cosmos could have been picked up from the work of Einstein, Neils Borg, other past scietists and astronomers. Have you read the "Aquarian Gospel of Jesus?." It too was claimed to have been transmitted to a conduit, but we know who the man was; he wasn't hidden even though was expected to deemed controvertial. As much as I like the Urantia Book, I do believe it is important to know who the conduit was. Otherwise, it's like trying to solve a crime and not have the main pieces that tie all elements together to formulate a concrete case to present to a jury (the reading public). You mention that contacts "worked closely with celectials." This too should be taken with a grain of salt, since there is no evidence of it. Yes, Dr. Sadler was a respected and recognized psychiatrist and author. But are we to simply accept his view because of his credentials? I, for example, am a holistic naturopathc doctor, not a medical phycician. If I had accepted what medical physicians told me was impossible due their credentials being superior, I may not be alive today, nor would my sister who had cancer. I questioned everything and set about to acquire my own education and find the loopholes, and cured myself and my sister. It's the same thing with Urantia. In the end, the reader has to determine for himself/herself, where the information is taking them and if it is serving a functional goal one can hang their hat on. I studied the entire Urantia Book, the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus, the Upanishads, the writings of Buddhiharma, the Bagavagita, UFO Pleiades of Billy Mieres, and many other literatures as well as works of science.n addition, I had two personal encounters with UFO's, which I detailed in writing and sent to Mufon. But in the end, it all seems to boil down to a simple question, "What should each living soul achieve for itself before departing from this world?" Neither Urantia or any book can answer this question; we have to open our own inner book of the soul to find that answer.
  11. Hello Brother Michael Sky & mj606 I agree that taking the Urantia Book at face value has merit. The contents of the book speak for itself. Aside of its merits, the issue of authorship makes for good conversation. Brother Michael, you mention Edgar Cayce, whose work I am very well acquainted with. I was a member of the A.R.E. ten years, between 1970's & 1980s. In the 1960's, E.C.s work was my first intensive study on alternative medicaine. I also took the course study on "Dream Interpretation" based on E.C.s method under Dr. Herbert Puryear of the A/R.E., for which I received certification after having completed a 1,000 dream interpretions over a period of several years. The problem faced when comparing Cayce's trance with that of an "unknown" author for the Urantia Book, is that we know who Cayce was, and nothing about the man who authored Urantia. For all we know, the author of Urantia may even have been someone genetically cloned by alien visitors among us. Now here's something to think about. Why secrecy by the Urantia author when Edage Cayce and the apparent author of the Urantia book were living during the same period? Edgar C. was out in the open, why not the author of Urantia? Now regarding Dr, Sadler..."Dr Sadler subsequently became the head of the "Contact Commission," who interfaced with the celestial revelators." I find some contraictions with this statement for the following reasons: Sadler was a post-graduate of Medical School in Chicago, became a psychiatrist at Columbia Hospital, was for over twenty-five years professor and chairman of the department of pastoral psychology at McCormick Theological Seminary; and wrote more than "42 books" and numerous magazine articles, he authored such works as: Theory and Practice of Psychiatry, Psychiatric Nursing, The Mind at Mischief, Growing Out of Babyhood, Piloting Modern Youth, and The Quest for Happiness. Can you imagine the volume of work and research that goes into writing 42 books related to his work. Together with his full time clinical work, membership in the AMA, etc., I would imagine him to be a person who sees psychic phenomena as clinical aberrations and abnormalities of the brain. Quote: "Sadler was a well-known skeptic of psychic phenomena and devoted a substantial amount of his time to exposing the proponents of the paranormal as frauds and charlatans and writing numerous books on the topic. He worked with magician Howard Thurston in exposing frauds and mediums. He was considered one of the world's foremost authorities on the subject and held the life-long opinion that all psychic phenomena was explainable within the confines of the laws of nature." End Quate: (Source) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book#Authorship In my mind, whoever authored the Urantia Book may have been someone with a slightly different brain genetics than our own. And perhaps this is what had to be kept from the public, otherwise, he could have been introduced to the public as Edgar Cayce was, since they were both active during the same period of time in their lives. It would not have been so strange to the general public at all, since even Cayce was writing unknown periods of time in Jesus' life, and also about Atlantis, as well as confusing Christians (beginning with himself) of the idea that re-incarnation was a real fact.
  12. Brother Michael Sky, I know of the website you suggest above. Was there anything in particular you wanted me to check out for discussion purposes? There is also "The Urantia Book Fellowship": http://www.truthbook.com/index.cfm?linkID=13 Also: "The Urantia Book online: http://urantiabook.org/newbook/papers/index.html , and various other sources.
  13. I purchased the book and completed reading all 2,097 pages of it on September 1997. It took several months; lots pf patience, and lots to absorb if you take notes as I did. The entire book is impressively written and organized. Reading it, one gets a sense that the material was transmitted from somewhere else indeed. From the beginning, I found it iteresting that no one knows who actually wrote it. No name claimed authorship to it. A good portion relates to the uiverse, history of the planet, states names, and explains certain powers and spiritual forces at work, and speaks of God and Consciousness. About 1/3 of the book (towards the end) is dedicated to the life and mission of Jesus Christ. Of particualr interest how certain external spirit forces served and assisted Jesus in generating the miracles attributed to him, such as when thousands were fed. The converstaion he had with his disciples, teaching them, and how he encouraged them to think and discuss issues among them, captures your attention. You can isualize it all happening in your mind's eye. I plan to read the entire material once again soon. Like any other spiritual work, I feel there are many sections that are difficult to comprehend and meant to open up to your consiousness with maturity in spiritual knowledge and experience.
  14. When your bones begin making noises they never made before, and your sons and daughters think they are wiser than you are.
  15. Has anyone here had a dream or vision with the Buffalo in the past ten years? Vortex