GOD THE CHAMELEON lamoore0777@sbcglobal.net wrote: >Homer Wilson Smith wrote: >Which brings up the question (in regard to the first): What, Homer, is >the distinction, and or relationship, you draw, if any, between the >word God, as you employ it, and the word Consciousness (as you >experience it)? "The existence of a multi faceted operating actuality is self evident" - Sufi "Perfect certainty that something exists is the root of all sanity" - Adore. Adore, which is a baby phase religion, puts it this way in 3 year old words. There is the Looker, the Looked Through and the Looked At. The looker is the static of Hubbard, the awareness of awareness unit of Scientology, and the conscious dream unit of Adore. The Looked AT are our holographic conscious experiences such as color, sound, taste and smell that we are aware off, also emotion, thought etc. Also our self awareness of agency, intent, will, volition, and The DOER. The Looked Through is the illusion of space/time that 'separates' the Looker from the Looked At. The Looker and Looked At are in fact one thing, one event, one causeeffect, which is why perfect certainty between them is possible. If someone holds up two different colors in your consciousness, you can learn with perfect certainty that they are in fact different because you are looking directly at them, not at some later symbol for them like a machine with a video camera does. Certainty is impossible with mechanical learning. The Looker is a God Unit, which has incarnated in the conscious experience of space/time, thus is 'inside' of space/time as Creature, rather than outside of space/time as Creator. The static mocks up holograms of space/time in its own glow in the dark self luminous fabric, and then individuates or incarnates into viewpoints 'inside' that hologram of space/time. The conscious experience of space/time does not itself take up any space or time and thus provides an illusion of space and time in which to play, a sleep dream in the Cosmic All where we all dream together. From there the individuated static confuses the existence of his dream conscious experiences with non existent external physical 'actualities'. It believes that because he sees space and time, that therefore there is space and time, and that the qualities of his conscious pictures of space time acccurately reflect the qualities of the actual space and time. He will thus talk about red or green colored photons. The being's conscious experience thus forms a virtual reality machine for him to play in, accurate down to the last quark. Scientists have wanted something to do for *EONS*, well they finally devised a game that suits them. As long as he can maintain the delusion that space/time is not an illusion he can remain in the dream and not wake back up to Native State. Persistence depends on being certain of objects which do not exist (physical universe) and not being certain of objects which do exist (conscious experiences). The absolute actuality then of his conscious experiences is transferred onto the non existent physical referents, and thus he becomes sure the physical universe exists independently of himself being conscious of it, and he is no longer sure he exists at all ("maybe I am someone else's hallucination"). That's the level of inversion necessary to maintain a persistence beyond the first sneeze. He's thinking "I doubt I am, therefore I probably am not." Truth is "I doubt I am, therefore certainly I am." Doubt of anything is always perfect certainty of doubt. Thus perfect certainty exists, and that which is perfectly certain exists, namely the doubter, i.e. the Looker. One can't be perfectly certain of something that is wrong. One can pretend one can be, and then demean perfect certainty later when one finds out one was wrong, but its a deceit designed to destroy the light and validity of perfect certainty, in order to more easily remain in the dream. Thus being certain of what does not exist, and not being certain of what does exist, reverses personal integrity to a point where the being will never wake up until corrected. Incarnation is not into a body but into an individuated viewpoint of space/time. Incarnation into a body is just the last step on its way to the garbage pail. The intent of incarnation is "FUN, Finding and UNearthing unearthly hypocrisies. The hypocrisy on Earth is so thick it is like a wall. You can hammer nails into it and hang pictures of smiling faces from them. Thrill is always the effort to get lost. Romance is always the effort to get home. Halcyon is bemused relief on the verge (of time). The Halcyon winds of summer heal the cold cruel wounds of winter. Mortals bow and pray to the God of Time, Stone and Dust in the Wind, their *FAITH* not to be belittled. Eternal Pride however is Eternal Home. The whole world is a stage, because the whole universe is a grave. If Time Stone be Tomb Stone, then let wisdom be epitaph." - Adore >To be clear, do you suppose that God *Has* Consciousness, as opposed to >God *Being* Consciousness? And if so, wherein lies such a distinction? >And what is that distinction? Between God and His Consciousness? (and >the seemingly natural extroplation, being namely, what is the >distinction You experience between You and Your Consciousness?) Ain't been there, no clue. >For myself, I find no such distinction, in substance. But find it, only >in form. In other words, when I sleep the world vanishes. When I >awaken, it appears. Thus perhaps God sleeps also? And this world is his >nightmare. Or pleasant dream, as the case may be. Witness Saddam and >Bush. One God, two dreams, simultaneously Being. Adore says Native State is a state of fair chosen sleep. That all manifestation (awakeness) is dream time. Yes each I-AM of the multi I-AM AllThatIs is dreaming a different dream within the context of one bigger dream called the physical universe. This universe is many universes down from the first one for this cycle of beings, and thus although the being thinks he is in only one universe, he is in fact seeing this universe through all the others as he never left them when descending into the next one down. >Back to the beginning then, when you pen: "there is no separation >between God and anything that exists" I understand that, from my point >of view, but am left wondering, what is it, in terms of specifics, or >mechanics, or principle, from your point of view, or from your >understanding, that *connects* God to anything that exists? Other than >the fact that God is *Being* everything? Consider the lowly LCD screen. That's God. When it is blank, God is asleep, no manifestation. Now consider the image of a ball on the LCD screen rolling along. That is God having a dream of a space/time with a ball rolling along in it. Notice the dream is projected in the 'fabric' of God itself. God is a zero dimensional (scalar) operating actuality which can project images of multi dimensional realities (dreamtime) within itself. The projections of space/time do not take up any actual space/time and thus change the nature of God not at all. >For example Homer, last night I had a dream. And I dreamed I was on a >ship with a number of other men. And the sea's were violent, and the >ship was tossing and turning, and the winds were tearing at the sails. >And some of the men were screaming and some of the men were cowering >and some of the men were gallantly fighting to save the vessel, whilst >one man was holding onto the main mast, and praying. >And then I woke up. Realizing, only upon awakening, that none of those >men existed, in the absence of my consciousness, and creation, of them. I disagree. Just as both you and I exist now, so did those men in your dream. When you woke up, those men may or may not have continued in their dream. The error is assigning it as YOUR dream rather than as OUR dream. The people in my dreams are just as real if not more so than the people around me. More intelligent, more creative, more beautiful, more evil, more powerful, more awake. Sometimes not, but I run into some lulu's almost every night. Certainty of course for me is impossible on this subject, as I am only certain of myself, but the more I talk with dream beings, the more I poke them, the more I have come to consider it great arrogance that there isn't other conscious units in them that feel and care and give a damn just like me. Most of them just seem a bit simpler that's all :) But some of them are worthy of command. Thus I now assume that if a being looks alive it is, either in this waking dream or my sleep dreams. The more I have considered such, the more alive they have become. >Which makes for my understanding of your statement, from my point of >view, regarding God and all of Creation. But doesn't enlighten me, in >regard to yours. >Which question restated is this: What is the distinction, and or >relationship, you draw, if any, between the word God, as you employ it, >and the word Consciousness (as you experience it)? God's body glows, he lights it up for his own enjoyment. "Source sources what source is not" - Adore The purpose of manifesting glowingness is to have FUN and share beauty of infinite peace via loss of infinite peace. The *MECHANISMS* of that loss, the lies involved, are as beautiful as what was lost, and thus for those who can see how it works, the suffering man is a artwork masterpiece manifestation of beauty, humor and infinite peace. "The Golden Key Tragedy and Travesty, Romance and Sin, Miracles and Majesty, that's where I've been. Miracles in Majesty, Romance and Song, Tragedy and Travesty, that's where I've gone. The fact that I'm still here, is PROOF don't you see? In the OMNI LONG RUN, it's better to BE. Halcyon and Thrill, High-Cool and Romance, In Class and Free Fancy I chose to dance. Pride is our willingness, our willingness to Be, I Adore me forever, forever for free." From Adore. How I don't seem to have answered the question. Consciousness is one function of the Multi I-AM God. God's consciousness is how God perceives its own glow in the dark light show called our experience of the virtual reality 'world,' God is like a chameleon, his skin can change color, and that color is what we see around us, only we ARE that God looking at its own skin. Homer >Thanks Homer, >Lar - -- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink (607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com Fri Dec 30 14:43:00 EST 2005 ================ http://www.clearing.org ==================== Wed May 27 03:06:02 EDT 2015 ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore300.memo Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help ================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof =================== Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty. Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect. Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty. Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFVZWzaURT1lqxE3HERAqlRAKCzwbV2JGUFCCdL67LIwJnuH5omngCgjxV6 IEFZZLyKB1KsIJV1DYsJ7LA= =PnC6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Wed May 27 15:17:53 EDT 2015