The Doctrines of Aviemus

[size=200]The Higher Doctrines of Aviemus[/size]

· God is the supreme consciousness dwelling in all living beings.

  • He is the impersonal power of our spirits

  • God is the father & mother of nature

  • All healing comes from God

  • God is the driving force of life

· Heaven and Hell are states of mind.

  • Heaven is the mindset of being in bliss and seemingly eternal happiness

+Hell is the mindset of being in depression and seemingly eternal suffering.

· Jesus was a man, among many of the like, who showed the path to true happiness and healing. The same with Buddha, Mohammed, Krishna and many others.

· The only commandment is the Golden Rule:

  • Do onto others as you would have them do onto you

[size=150]
The Lesser Doctrines of Aviemus[/size]

The doctrines of Aviemus do not promote a new organized religion. They transcend religion, and are a new approach to philosophical spirituality. These doctrines may be part of your life… you may alter and minipulate them at will, to fit your own personal beliefs.

* It is unknown what happens after death. What I will state, however, if my own personal opinion of the afterlife.

Inside every living being, is an essence (soul, spirit). When the body dies, this essence has to move onto someplace else. Having to leave behind the body, the first thing that goes, is the memory of anything of your physical life. But the effect that your physical life had on your attitude and personality, stay very much clear within your essence, so that you are unique from any other soul. From there, you loose all sense of sight, hearing, smell, or taste. The ‘sixth sense’ is the only sense that you remain with, and with this, you are able to make contact with knowledge without any of the senses you had a body. You, a soul, are truly genderless, ageless, and have no race.

There is a realm/dimension, of SOME sort, alternate from the physical world. This is where your soul will go. It is where your soul has ALWAYS been, but your body & brain have given it an anchor to stick to the physical realm. Well, when those anchors die, your are unleashed.

This is total speculation on my part, but my theory is, that once you are unleashed back into freedom in the alternate world, you are able to somehow look for another anchor to the physical world. The physical world, in my theorizing, can cover this Earth, and all other earth-like planets in existance or that are available. So, if you were to find an anchor, it could be in a totally different planet! Because the alternate world would be alternate not only to THIS physical planet, but all the physical planets that can maintain life. For life has to be present, in order for there to be an anchor for the soul to attach to.

* Now, this may seem a bit out of order, but I think it follows just fine with the speech about what happens after we die. This theory, is the theory of the beginning of the OmniSoul (all souls combined into one, to form a major being) AKA God.

In the beginning of everything that ever was, or anything that ever could be, there was nothing whatsoever. There was no life… there was nothing.

From this nothing, came something. One consciousness. The void, collapsed on itself. There was utter chaos, do to the fact that there was nothing in existance. This ‘void’ formed into a living being, who was fully aware of itself. This one being, or the OmniSoul, as we will call it, was the only thing in existance. Just as the void collapsed on itself, so did the OmniSoul. The OmniSoul collapsed, and it was blown into atomic bits of matter. These bits of matter, which numbered countless on the scale of numbers, were (are) our souls. Our souls, are the OmniSoul. The one consciousness. These infinate-googleplex of souls, blew out away from each other. Into the void that was created after the two collapses. And from this next void, came the spirit world (look at the above theory).

And the souls, for however long, floated around this spirit world. The spirit world, being the ‘world’ for the spirits. Then, the spirit world collapsed on itself. And from this, came the physical world. The world that we are anchored in, right now. I will now make a chart, so this is less confusing.

The Void à collapses on itself à forms the OmniSoul à OmniSoul collapses on itself à forms the countless souls (us) à souls go into Void à the extra Void becomes Spirit Realm à the Spirit Realm collapses on itself à forms the Physical Realm à particles of the OmniSoul drift onto the Physical Realmà evolution begins à billions of years (since time can be measured physically) à lifeforms with consciousness come into existance à anchors are forms in the bridges between the void, Spirit Realm, and Physical Realm à the souls in the Spirit Realm able to latch onto the anchors

Now, that was all I could do to make it easy to understand. And I hope I did a good job at explaining.

When the existances ‘collapsed’ on themselves, they form other existances, while STILL maintaining their own existance. For example, when the Void collapsed and formed the OmniSoul, the Void was still in existance, it had just split apart and formed other matter.

[NOTE: The process of how or souls are able to latch onto the anchors (our brains, which are inside our bodies) is totally unknown. It is all a theory, anyway.]

this is wishful thinking. nothing made my personality except my memories and possibly slightly my genetics. both of which sit in a coffin. unless you dont forget your memories when you die because god scoops them up for you. this is still possible according to science, which has not yet found the ones and zeros recorded inside the brain.

personally i think the easiest way to believe in the afterlife is just pure reincarnation with no heavenly interludes. maybe god decides a good family and planet to put you in based on your actions, and maybe its all preordained from day one and maybe its random.

its easy to believe that the ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ is actually the light on the other side of your next moms vagina. its hard to believe that this thinking object im in right now is going to understand a heavenly world without time.

when the mukluk splooged on itself, it flurbed the omnisoul. there is no way to talk about the first cause. trying to will only hurt your credibility. i deal with this problem by saying that ‘causing things’ is not only an idea completely reliant on the presence of time, which can be modified inside this universe and is therefore potentially no more than a product of pieces of this universe, but its a thing weve never actually seen.

nothing has ever actually been observed to be caused. the word cause doesnt mean anything except coincidence. its what we say when a thing happens at the same time as another thing consistently. there is no definition beyond that. there is no machine that we can see, and yet it is the foundation of everything that we know. without cause and effect, there is absolutely zero knowledge. and we have no knowledge of any causes ever happening.

its just such a weird paradox and it also happens to be the ultimate paradox that allows the possibilty of atheism, the undiscoverability of the creation of the universe.

Not bad there avi…it looks like a good start to the Aviemusian Bible.

Hi Aviemus,

I suppose we all have our own doctrines to some degree. It isn’t completely wrong either, since what we call ‘God’ is a ‘No-thing’ that we experience personally and express personally, or we have no experience and are theoreticising. This has always been the problem with communion with the Absolute Being, and many a Prophet or Mystic has had to suffer the abuse of Theoreticians, even torture and death.

At the same time, having a doctrine means that we have some kind of authority. Prophets and Mystics (not Gnostics) have never claimed to have their own authority, albeit they have had communion with God. It is important to bear this in mind, since we all suffer one problem: “Our knowing is only in part, just as our prophecy is only in part.” The question is therefore not whether ‘our’ doctrine is better than another, but whether it is genuine. Does it come from true communion with the Absolute Concern, the Divine Presence, and does it ring true to the situation we live in? Now, this is something each of us must ask himself and not something we can judge through this medium.

That is as good as any other attempt to describe ‘God’ – as long as it isn’t regarded as dogmatic truth. The problem that many Christians have is that they are fond of their ideas of what ‘God’ could be like and the metaphors are confused with the reality they are trying to describe. This however, is a form of idolising ‘God’ and what Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were trying to escape from. The confusion experienced here is continually portrayed throughout the Bible, not least when the assumption of a King or Prophet invokes ‘wrath’ or ‘anger’, or when a Warrior like Joshua or Gideon, or even David, assumes that God is ‘on his side’ and has to be made clear that God doesn’t take sides – humans do!

If we regard what we know about the psychology of man, a state of mind is very real. On another note, Jesus often told his Parables with the line: “With what can I compare the Kingdom of Heaven…” and went on to describe a mustard seed or leaven. It is “at hand,” it belongs to the “poor in spirit” and those who “have been persecuted for righteousness’ sake.” Heaven is the “Throne Of God” that we need to “enter.” The Baptism of John is said to have been from heaven and the seer who hears a voice from heaven writes: it was “as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder, and the voice which I heard was as of harpers harping…”

Hell, or “the fire of Gehinnom,” indicates that it too is a metaphor. It also shows us that the understanding of the day saw everything and everyone created with a purpose! Each of us has a role to play - we all have a mission. Gehinnom is the place where garbage is taken – that is, where those things end up because they no longer fulfil a purpose or are use-less. The question of Jesus, whether the Scribes and Pharisees expect to escape “the judgement of Gehinnom” is rhetorical – of course they do! But what if their piety is rendering them ‘useless’?

Here I beg to differ – he was not among the many, but among the few! His hope however, was that many would follow. The “Sons of God” should bring peace – shalom – even though their lives are predestined to be in conflict with the ‘Theoreticians’ around them. The greatest irony of the followers of Christ was that they were persecuted for being ‘Atheists’ in the view of the Romans and later by the Church of Constantine. Even today the Mystics are branded as heretics by conservative Christians, just like the Prophets and Christ, as well as the early Christians were.

This dispute had it’s equivalent in the dispute of Christ with the Pharisees about the nature of the ancestry to Abraham. For Christ it was an ancestry of spiritual pose, not a biological ancestry. Those who “believed” were Sons of Abraham, not those who claimed to have his blood in their veins. That is why he went throughout the country looking for faith, which he often found more present in the ‘goyim’ than amongst his brothers and sisters.

It is difficult to say whether Christ was really comparable with Buddha and the others. The are certainly similarities and I am willing to make the comparison. However, the cultural framework was a different one and consequently the metaphors are different. There is a unwillingness in Buddha to talk about the Divine – as can be said about many far east religious personalities. Perhaps we should learn from them instead of being all too ready to take the name of God in vain – something that we can witness on this site over and over again.

Whereby you have quoted the active form rather than the passive version that was common in time of Jesus. Jesus was progressive in compassion, not in his teaching, which is why the active form is attributed to him. The person who asks who is his neighbour is told to be a neighbour rather than split hairs. In fact, Jesus even presents him with a story that is deeply critical of the everyday practise of the Priests and Scribes, who regarded their service in the temple as more important than obeying the dual commandment of love. He says that love towards God and towards our fellow man is connected, we can’t separate – even if the fellow man is a ‘Samaritan’ or someone in our society who doesn’t find acceptance.

Shalom
Bob

I am beginning to suspect that what goes is not the memory of your physical life, but the ‘you’. The memory of your actions, emotions and thoughts is added to the sum total of universal knowledge. That is why you are here in the first place, to experience the physical senses. It seems that what may be discarded is the defective you that has got much too engrossed with the body you have occupied all these years. All those experiences, however, make interesting additions to the library of knowledge.

Awesome, guys. I have read all of your replies and thought about them. At a later time, I indeed will make individual replies back to you all, but seeing to as I have so little time at the moment, I cannot do that.

Thanks.

.

You and that guy dan from this forum would get on well , he talks about himself in third person too . Disciple of light finds that amusing

.