I may (or may not) be starting to understand this. At first I was thinking “How could I possible have/know your memories when the molecules that presumably code those memories are scattered to the winds?” But then I realized that that wouldn’t be a concern if I “existed” atemporally; the memories would be just as extant as the scattering.
It’s almost as if everyone who values goodness/love above all else is God, but from the context of a temporal frame of reference, can only be said to be becoming God: once they’re God they’ll be in the position of never having not been God.
BTW, in your view, do those who do not value goodness/love still gain the uber perspective?
(And more importantly, is any of the above even remotely close to what you’re talking about?)
That is exactly what I’ve been trying to say. From God’s perspective (reference frame), the universe simultaneously has not yet begun, is ongoing, and is finished — all at once. Just like the inside, wall, and outside of the circle may be seen all at the same time by 3D-man. Even Paul understood this: “For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” — I Corinthians 13:12.
No. But only because they’ve chosen to be cut off from it. It is like the man who stands before a Picasso and declares it to be a piece of junk that a monkey could do. How does he share the perspective of artists who understand Picasso in the context of art history, and value it accordingly? Just as education contributes to the appreciation of Picasso, so does edification contribute to the appreciation of goodness. Owing to its nature, goodness always increases itself. It is the perpetual motion machine of aesthetics.
It would seem to me that we now share a common understanding.
Benevolent Hedonism: A phrase I made up, basically a combination of enlightened self-interest and indulgence in the sensual pleasures of life, but not to the point of being criminal or completely self-absorbed.
I’m having trouble picturing our essential nature as spirit-identical-to-God, and how the creation scenario plays out in all of this.
If I remember correctly, your view is that God is creating/has created (or at least, is using/has used) the universe as an ideal mise en scène for free moral beings to grow in. Once these individual beings have “grown” into God, they become what they’ve always been.
I’m not clear on why God is (or has), um, “fractionated” Himself into separate free moral beings in the first place. Or has He? Is it more a matter of God leveraging the universe to evolve more God, thus adding to infinity, so to speak? (Forgive the tortured wording; these are not concepts I can express coherently yet).
No, my friend. I have only a “shadow of an inkling” of your understanding, but I’m working on it.
Thanks for the explaination and the laugh. Benevolent Hedonism is a good term. I think I are one.