Religion as Self Fulfilling Prophecy

[otherbrother]

Do I believe in God? Yes. Mainly because my praying to God works for me. Metaphysically? If it works, there must be something there, but knowing its exact nature is not necessary.
Even if “God” is really only a positive self-fulfilling prophecy that my mysterious mind fulfills religiously, that’s as real as it needs to be, as far as I’m concerned. Which would leave me metaphysically with Mind, perhaps a deeper action of mind that utilizes subconscious processing and may or may not tap into a quantum substrate of physical reality, and may or may not even tap into a yet deeper (super implicate—Bohm/Hiley) reality as well. But that aside, all that is necessary is that I can use my religious practice and “belief” to create positive self-fulfilling prophecies. Even if only now and then, it is worthwhile to me.

 

[TheLightWithin]

A self fulfilling prophecy is something where your beliefs cause you to take actions which then cause your expectations to come true, more or less.
So if you are making your expectations come true... if it's something positive, as you indicate, sounds all good.

 

[otherbrother]

A self fulfilling prophecy is something where your beliefs cause you to take actions which then cause your expectations to come true, more or less.
So if you are making your expectations come true... if it's something positive, as you indicate, sounds all good.

Yes, praying to the “Good Unknown”
(Good because we don’t want the bad stuff from the Unknown) is like the new age concept of “law of attraction.” The mind orients towards. hones in on, and at times seems to actually attract certain realities.
Case in point, I wrote this poem during Easter Sunday sermon:
Resurrection



I resurrected 6 or 7 people

who departed in my time.

Each came alive as potential

that ostensibly was mine.

Each an Easter lily.

Each a sacred song we sing.

Each felt deeply in each breath

until death had lost its sting.


Later in day while running, I visualized Christ as my Rabbi and felt love and a yearning to learn spiritual principles/truths/skills. I was mentally resurrecting a great spiritual person from the past. One I never met in my time, but read about many years later. As I was doing this mind exercise, two mourning doves flew across my path, right in front of me! I never had that happen before. Even if only a coincidence, it was a very meaningful one to me. I claim it as a sign. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it! Did my mind in deep meditation attract the doves? Or just put me in a state that could appreciate the event as a sacred moment?

 

[otherbrother]

If there is a Zero Point Field (from Lynn McTaggart’s book, The Field) that stores life’s memories and other information and energies, or Rupert Sheldrake’s Morphogenetic Field or Jung’s Collective Unconscious or a Quantum Substrate, then our mind’s focus might attract frequencies or energy in the vein of electromagnetic something-or-others. This “Field” , supposedly closer to energy than mater, may then interact with a surface reality layer where matter predominates. And mental activity is more like an energy field, so it attracts energy formats easier than a direct mind over matter possibility. Mind interacts with a whole ocean of energy whose waves may at times reshape the shore.

 

[wil]

I resurrected 6 or 7 people

who departed in my time.

Ever read Napolean Hill's Think n Grow Rich?

He recommended having a master mind group of people to help each other out.

His group consisted entirely among "resurrected" people. Respected people from his past that he used their thoughts to evaluate his own.

 

[otherbrother]

Ever read Napolean Hill's Think n Grow Rich?

He recommended having a master mind group of people to help each other out.

His group consisted entirely among "resurrected" people. Respected people from his past that he used their thoughts to evaluate his own.

Neat. Someone else has already done this weird science and found it useful, even recommending it to others!

 

[otherbrother]

Ever read Napolean Hill's Think n Grow Rich?

He recommended having a master mind group of people to help each other out.

His group consisted entirely among "resurrected" people. Respected people from his past that he used their thoughts to evaluate his own.

Whateverland



When the mind goes deep to God

or into the great unknown

I know it will yield a harvest,

but not sure where the plants are grown.



Are they grown in a peaceful meadow

that’s a hidden part of me?

Or in vast plains

that stretch across eternity?



I place my bet on the latter,

based on certain things I perceive.

But I also think it may not matter,

based on the bounty I receive.



Of one thing I am certain,

the rock on which I stand,

going deep is worth the journey

to and from whatever land.

 

[otherbrother]

Neat. Someone else has already done this weird science and found it useful, even recommending it to others!

Related to both the Christ envisioning exercise and the positive self-fulfilling prophecy concept, I made this comment in the post about death transcendence. It fits I well here also, since my mind is busy processing ideas from both threads (and real doesn’t care all that much from which particular place the new ideas are inspired):

I did a mind exercise while running yesterday. I imagined being at the base of physical being (the matter me), as though in continuous incarnation. Between the “God” or deep Unknown zone and the physical zone. Since it was my mind doing the imagining or autogenic visualization (feelings in there also), I noticed or interpreted it as seeing being—the mind seeing my being. The Hindu distinction of Purushna (sp?) vs Moshca (sp?) later came to mind. But today in church it was potential vs actuality. Then I refined it to seeing/mind at deepest part of my recentering, then intermediate seeing of “potential” as the beneath part of physical being. While potential is more like energy (“capacity for doing work”), it is more attached to my physical being than seeing/consciousness/mind. But also in between mind and matter. So it may be only academic where you place potential. Mind fountains/flows into potential/energy, which in turn flows into body/matter. Doesn’t matter where potential is placed, as long as a person learns to use it in order to more abundantly be (greater “quantum coherence,” maintaining more quantum wave function?).
All in all I was acting through the concept of “projection” or fountain flowing deep and wide. I was being out of the box (body), with a higher ratio of potential (in relation to actuality) than usual. A dynamic symmetry leaning towards potential.
Then I recalled an earlier concept of doing the Hegelian “dialect” (or is it “dialectal?”) in the “key” of synthesis, in which the antithesis is so immediately partnered with new growth that death hardly has any meaning other than opening into potentiality, and perhaps also into Mental intending (the Word?). The fountain flows from mind to energy to matter. Yes, all just different states of Ultimate Reality but navigation between them requires acceptance of their differences. All pat of learning to be IN the physical world, but not OF it.

 

[otherbrother]

BTW, I call my overall approach to growing spiritually, “Depth-Dynamic Being”

 

[Thomas]

Hi @otherbrother –

I feel it is time for me the withdraw from our dialogues, as it seems to me all I can offer is a critique perhaps not entirely constructive of your position. That said, were I to respond now, it would be in much the same vein as at the start, so I would simply be repeating myself ...

If I could offer anything, I suppose it's a caution against assuming that the spiritual world operates in the same way as, or as an extension of, the mental/material, and can be explained under the same conditions and categories – I would urge you to balance your reading with insights from spiritual writers as a counterpoint to psychological sources.

 

[otherbrother]

Thomas.
I seem to lean more to a psychological perspective of how God works, with the assumption that God’s or Ultimate Really’s fingerprints are in the creation called the human mind that psychology and spiritual thought/theology sufficiently converge to work back and forth between each other. The concept of wholeness (and later, integration) seems a useful bridge between them, as both give a lot of weight to it. I also see a link between going “deep” mentally and achieving wholeness, since I believe that even a metaphysical convergence occurs during very deep mental states, and that this amounts to either connecting directly with a real God, or connecting to a heavenly dimension of Creation which then indirectly puts us at God’s door.

Perhaps our apparent divergence of thought is based on how much time we spent in our respective “fields” (whether vocation or avocation)?
I understand your feeling of talking to a broken record with me. But then again there are surprising moments of agreement between us. Perhaps give space but jump in when and if our views do happen to align? A separation rather than a divorce between our intellects?!
I certainly value the discussions we’ve had so far. And any loss of future opportunity can’t take away the meaningful journey we’ve already had (at least from my perspective of it).
Thanks for speaking honestly/candidly.
Love,
Darrell (otherbrother)

 

[otherbrother]

Thomas.
I seem to lean more to a psychological perspective of how God works, with the assumption that God’s or Ultimate Really’s fingerprints are in the creation called the human mind that psychology and spiritual thought/theology sufficiently converge to work back and forth between each other. The concept of wholeness (and later, integration) seems a useful bridge between them, as both give a lot of weight to it. I also see a link between going “deep” mentally and achieving wholeness, since I believe that even a metaphysical convergence occurs during very deep mental states, and that this amounts to either connecting directly with a real God, or connecting to a heavenly dimension of Creation which then indirectly puts us at God’s door.

Perhaps our apparent divergence of thought is based on how much time we spent in our respective “fields” (whether vocation or avocation)?
I understand your feeling of talking to a broken record with me. But then again there are surprising moments of agreement between us. Perhaps give space but jump in when and if our views do happen to align? A separation rather than a divorce between our intellects?!
I certainly value the discussions we’ve had so far. And any loss of future opportunity can’t take away the meaningful journey we’ve already had (at least from my perspective of it).
Thanks for speaking honestly/candidly.
Love,
Darrell (otherbrother)

God’s creation (after awhile) of the prefrontal cortex is a neuropsychological tool for whole essence and integration. It helps with spiritual and growth. I can’t see such gifts as being irrelevant to God or the pursuit of alignment

 

[Thomas]

I seem to lean more to a psychological perspective of how God works, with the assumption that God’s or Ultimate Really’s fingerprints are in the creation called the human mind ...

And I can agree with that, as long as we don't fall into the error of making anthropomorphic assumptions as far as God is concerned.

Dionysius the pseudoAreopagite (known in the East as St Denys, which is how I shall refer to him hereafter) said:
"But again, the most divine knowledge of God, that which comes through unknowing, is achieved in a union far beyond mind, when mind turns away from all things, even from itself, and when it is made one with the dazzling rays, being then and there enlightened by the inscrutable depth of Wisdom." (The Divine Names)

My point is that analogous models work only so far ... the Divine Mind is a superlative 'idea' with regard to creature and Creator, but the Divine Mind does not function as human minds do, or rather, in assuming how human minds work is a model of how the Divine Mind works – that is why the great spiritual commentaries speak of 'silencing the mind' or 'going beyond mind'. The mind works with ideas and images, and Meister Eckhart notably said that so long as we have these ideas and images in mind, there is no space for God.

+++

Can I recommend "Paths to Transcendence" by Reza Shah Kazemi

+++

The parable of Martha and Mary (John 10) has wisdom to offer on this; so does the race of Peter and John to the empty tomb (John 20). John is the mind, and arrives first, but cannot enter, but what lies within is beyond its knowing; Peter is the will, and arrives after (the will powers the light of the mind to look ahead, so in that sense the intellect is always ahead of the will), and suffers the same not-knowing, but by strength of will goes into the tomb ...

Going deep into that place where creature and Creator meet is never, and cannot be, a purely mental act – it's a whole-body experience. It is why ascetical praxis goes hand-in-hand with self-disciplined theoria on the spiritual path.

Taken conversely, it's why profound 'mystical' experience often comes with pronounced physical reaction – as evidenced by the likes of Ezekiel (catatonic states) and Saul of Tarsus (blindness).

+++

Just yesterday I stumbled on a video of Jimmy Carr talking about the late Sean Lock. Sean was something of a mentor to Jimmy, and Jimmy grieved his passing, then recovered, then 'caught a cold' and lost his voice ... he was seeing a therapist at the time who said the loss of voice was not uncommon, as if the body's way of saying 'nothing you can say can match how you feel'. What it signifies is a 'whole person experience' rather than some abstract "I'll miss him" passing thought.

+++

 

[otherbrother]

the Divine Mind does not function as human minds do, or rather, in assuming how human minds work is a model of how the Divine Mind works – that is why the great spiritual commentaries speak of 'silencing the mind' or 'going beyond mind'. The mind works with ideas and images, and Meister Eckhart notably said that so long as we have these ideas and images in mind, there is no space for God.

Yes, If mind is allowed to go deep enough into its base and essence, the specific content (images, thoughts) become artifacts to Mind Itself. Can regular human mental habits allow that? No. But human minds do have the potential to transcend regular mental (thought-laden) processes. Our minds are connected to Mind (or God that seems more like mind than anything else we can relate to), but we don’t often find or use the connection.
Possible case in point: In my dream right before awakening this morning. I was passing a basketball to a teammate that had broken free enough to pass to. The content (me, teammate, other players that could have interfered with the pass) was not very important to understanding what the mind was doing. Me was not regular me, but spirit me or Mind me or True Self. The pass was made difficult when I got confused and thought I had to use regular me’s arms (which were not moving) to pass the basketball. But that’s not how the mental object is passed. It is passed MENTALLY (and not by discrete mental units/thoughts but by its energy alone). And the ball is not even a ball. It is mind inertia extending seamlessly from True Self, Mind Self, or Spirit Self. Basically it was my spirit moving into the container (the open teammate) called me (regular me).
I tend to think my soul is the wholeness that allows coherence of my physical parts and processes. It is there in or about my body as I sleep. But my “spirit” (or my particular expression/arm of Mind Itself or God) moves about (in an “astral plane?”) and gathers additional information and “active information” (nudges, guidance from God) to bring back to regular me. But it has to locate and dock back into my soul and body. Yes, the regular me probably is dependent on thought-laden, image-laden, mental processes. It was regular me (nested in my soul?) that saw the specific content of the dream. It is up to spirit me to teach me how to sense the energetic flow of mind that is no particular thing, no-thing, non-dual.
I simply see that deep, true, spiritual, “me” (aspect of overall self) as still connected to God or Mind Itself, even when it is distracted and functionally separated from God, Mind Itself. The separation is just a bad habit I have from becoming OF the world (physical dimension) instead of only IN it. Spirit may eventually teach me to be successfully IN but not OF the lesser reality in which I live out this “life.”

 

[Thomas]

OK.

 

[Thomas]

I said:
the Divine Mind does not function as human minds do ...

Yes, If mind is allowed to go deep enough into its base and essence ...

It seems to me you're saying Yes, and then talking about the human mind as if it is divine ... ?

 

[otherbrother]

Can I recommend "Paths to Transcendence" by Reza Shah Kazemi

I plan to read that book. Thanks for the recommendation. Never heard of it. Perhaps ideas from optimal psychology (“self-actualization” — Maslow? Or Erickson?) will meet those spiritual ideas and practices in the middle somewhere, converge. mind/Mind, in such a way that the “Other Side” and this “side” can better cooperate, harmonize, integrate. I do believe that that amounts to doing God’s will in the form of the Lord’s Prayer part “on earth as it is in Heaven.”
I hope you see by now that I am not dismissing the metaphysical, but simply loosening my grip on it. Which I think you do also when you insist (rightly so) that we cannot exactly know God’s nature. Even the mere use of self-fulfilling prophecy probably has a transformative effect on the “self” that is using it. God grows the self who thought he was using God.

 

[Thomas]

Perhaps ideas from optimal psychology (“n) will meet those spiritual ideas and practices in the middle somewhere, converge.

Trust me ... they won't.

What does psychology say about God?

I hope you see by now that I am not dismissing the metaphysical, but simply loosening my grip on it.

To be honest, if a bit unkind, I'm not sure you ever had a grip on it ... by which I mean you seem to interpret everything through a psychological lens.

Even the mere use of self-fulfilling prophecy probably has a transformative effect on the “self” that is using it. God grows the self who thought he was using God.

I think there's a lot of assumption going on there ...

 

[otherbrother]

What does psychology say about God?

Not sure what the experts in psychology say, but as one taught in the field and who practiced clinical psychology, I said in this post something to the effect that God is a projection of our mind (which stores human potential) and that we use this positive projection (pushed/projected outward because the potential exceeds our ability to process in terms of what we think to be actual) to reclaim by means of a self-fulfilling prophecy. The Highest Potential Self, the self that appears too good to be true (and therefore must be disowned and projected outward) is experienced as an external Being who we then seek to unite with. Which means, in psychological terms (specifically, Gestalt therapy terms), to reclaim the projection. The mental projection holds the potential that our previous self was not ready to hold or actualize.
Here we get back into the fascinating topic of time that Powessy introduced. Potential is both within and not yet actual, the latter meaning it is in a future. Actualizing potential is, in a way, making/creating time!
And if the positive potential is way within, who can insist that it is a part of the not-yet-fully-developed “me?” And yet if I insist it is NOT me, I push it away and make it less accessible to use. I prefer to say it IS a part of “me,” albeit not the pathetic sinner (missing the marks) I now am.

 

[Thomas]

Not sure what the experts in psychology say, but as one taught in the field and who practiced clinical psychology, I said in this post something to the effect that God is a projection of our mind (which stores human potential) and that we use this positive projection (pushed/projected outward because the potential exceeds our ability to process in terms of what we think to be actual) to reclaim by means of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

OK

The Highest Potential Self, the self that appears too good to be true (and therefore must be disowned and projected outward) is experienced as an external Being who we then seek to unite with. Which means, in psychological terms (specifically, Gestalt therapy terms), to reclaim the projection. The mental projection holds the potential that our previous self was not ready to hold or actualize.

OK

Here we get back into the fascinating topic of time that Powessy introduced. Potential is both within and not yet actual, the latter meaning it is in a future. Actualizing potential is, in a way, making/creating time!

OK

And if the positive potential is way within, who can insist that it is a part of the not-yet-fully-developed “me?” And yet if I insist it is NOT me, I push it away and make it less accessible to use. I prefer to say it IS a part of “me,” albeit not the pathetic sinner (missing the marks) I now am.

OK

In which case, as I thought, we are fundamentally incompatible in our beliefs.