Why are we here?

[Starlight Rider]

Why are we here?

I don't mean why are we on this particular forum. I'm talking about the bigger picture. Why are we here, in what appears to be a material human experience, if we are really spiritual beings?

The reason I ask is because I've often felt that Christian Scientists try to explain away this simple question by saying it's just an illusion, so it is unexplainable. That strikes me as rather unscientific. More a matter of faith than understanding.

For if we really are perfect spiritual beings, how in heaven's name could we ever have been so gullible as to accept an illusion as reality?

Unless we did it intentionally, for some purpose we are not currently aware of.

Some religious and spiritual teachings suggest this may have been the case. Mary Baker Eddy makes just one oblique reference to "Earth's preparatory school" (S&H page 486), which implies an educational or experiential purpose. I'm puzzled as to why she chose not to explain that statement any further. It would seem to me that knowing something about how we came to accept this illusion might help us find our way out of it.

Or maybe the whole point is to find the way out on our own, to work out our own salvation. Christian Science helps show us the way, certainly. Perhaps what we learn along the way is our purpose for being here. Some philosophers and writers have suggested that we cannot appreciate our perfection unless we have something less than perfect to compare it to.

Is that why we're here?

[goodwinh]

Hmmm.... thinkiing out loud ...

In reality, there is no "past tense" which are the basis for the questions.

We understand the infinite principle of math or even a rule of math is not the same as the symbol, manifestation and results. We don't know the entire principle of math. Ditto for music and notes and symphonic results.

Then definately ditto for the divine Principle called "existence" or eternal Life and its manifestation - the Christ - the perfect results. How majestic was Jesus proof of the Life Principle ?! How harmonious the Principle, the Science and "the results"?

Are we "little children" in pre-k (earth's preparatory school) learning the principles of life and demonstrating them and also learning that "2 + 2 = 5" is not based on principle - and knowing we know that, and even proving it ? We can't do calculus till we know we know "2 + 2 = 4" and can prove it. The error that "2 + 2 = 5" will seem real until we can know we know, and therefore reveal the truth that destroys the error that resides in belief.

There are not two Principles. There are not two manifestations. We choose every moment what we know to be true - and in proportion find the results. That moment by moment choosing is our mental schooling.

[Merry1]

Hey Starlight,
You’ve got kind of a tough question here, but try thinking about it this way, and see if it helps. Have you ever had a dream where you felt confused about why you were in whatever the circumstances happened to be? (It happens to me from time to time.) Well, if, in one of these dreams, you ask someone to explain why you are there (at the park or the movies or your grandma's house or work – whatever the setting of the dream may be), they might be able to give you some kind of explanation that seems reasonable, but that still won’t make it true. The fact is, that you aren’t really in those circumstances at all. The answer that you really need is to be shaken awake, not to have the reason for the dream explained. So, even though the “it’s just an illusion” answer might seem like a cop-out, it really isn’t because there’s simply no other answer to give. But, on the plus side, knowing this material experience isn’t real relieves us of the necessity to try to understand or explain it and allows us to focus on understanding and expressing our REAL, spiritual selves instead. And, let me tell you, I find that experience so much more interesting and enjoyable to focus on and learn more about. It’s where all the really good stuff is happening! ;)

[MikeDavis]

I don't see anywhere in Mrs. Eddy's writings where she says that a perfect child of God can fall asleep and dream, or temporarily experience illusion, or even seem to do these things. A perfect child of God is a direct manifestation of Him, and could no more experience a mortal dream, even temporarily, than God Himself could. Mrs. Eddy indicates a number of times in her writings that it is mortal mind, not the child of God, that dreams and misperceives things. A human child is not a perfect child of God having a dream, it is a human conception of a child of God. And human conceptions of God's children contain both characteristics of mortal mind (and its dreams) as well as the qualities of God's children.

Someone told me once that they'd heard a Christian Scientist say that she was planning not to have any children because she believed that having a child was taking a perfect child of God and bringing him into the illusion of mortal existence. This seems to me to contradict Mrs. Eddy's teachings, because a perfect child of God cannot be brought into an illusion.

[MikeDavis]

Why are we here?
Some philosophers and writers have suggested that we cannot appreciate our perfection unless we have something less than perfect to compare it to.


It seems like these philosophers and writers are trying to justify the horrors of evil and mortal existence, which is something I don't see Mrs. Eddy ever doing. It seems to me that trying to come up with a justification for evil and imperfection undercuts the whole basis of Christian Science healing. To use an analogy, light never justifies or explains darkness -- the presence of light instantly wipes out any claim of darkness to have any kind of positive reality.

Since God's children cannot ever experience anything other than perfection, or even seem to experience anything else, human beings come up with a question about the origin of mortal mind, which misperceives God's creation. Mrs. Eddy says in the chapter on Spiritualism in Science and Health that mortal existence is an enigma or mystery. Mrs. Eddy indicates that we are faced wtih moral mind in human experience and she explains the illusory nature of mortal mind and its dreams -- how mortal mind yields up its claim to reality in the presence of the light of Christ. But she never tries to offer an explanation for the "origin" of mortal mind. And Christian Science healing ultimately wipes out even the mistaken perspective from which this question could arise.

[UserX]

I've often wondered about the "Why are we here?" question myself. And I've never found a completely satisfying answer to it. Recently I've read a few things that have caused me to shift my questioning in a different direction. The question I now prefer to ask is "What is the truth of my being?" I feel this will ultimately be more helpful.

Just as, if I were on the way to an important meeting and found myself stranded in some small town by some unknown circumstances -- say I woke up to find myself on an empty bus parked somewhere -- it would be of very little help to keep asking how I got there (though I might be very curious). More helpful to ask how I might get to where I needed to be and set about doing it.

Here are couple of the statements that have changed my thinking on this.

Mary Baker Eddy says, in Science and Health, page 403: "You command the situation if you understand that mortal existence is a state of self-deception, and not the truth of being."

Also, in Miscellaneous Writings, p.63, she addresses the following question:

"Is it possible to know why we are put into this condition
of mortality?"

She begins: "It is quite as possible to know wherefore man is thus conditioned, as to be certain that he IS in a state of mortality." She concludes her answer with this statement: "We must not consider the false side of existence in order to gain the true solution of Life and its great realities."

[imjim]

For if we really are perfect spiritual beings, how in heaven's name could we ever have been so gullible as to accept an illusion as reality?

Jim,

I don’t know how to reply to this - other than to share my own perceptions / conceptions and experiences. So, I shall stammering attempt to explain my views on the matter. . .

When my children were babies I can remember holding my hand in front of their faces - moving it from side to side. The babies eyes would attempt to follow the movement jumping as they tried to catch up to the mystery unfolding in front of them.

There was nothing wrong with their eyes. There was nothing wrong with the way their perceptions were unfolding. They just needed some practical experience to be able to grasp what was going on right in front of them.

To a baby, the world is vast, huge, intriguing. Babies are a perfect expression of what man is, yet they have not progressed in their understanding enough to be able to comprehend it. And the world is full of mystery.

My children are now adults, and in many ways, their eyes still jump from vision to vision exploring the things in front of them.

Like my children, my understanding of God, Spirit, and what it entails, jumps from one view to another. Spirit is so vast, so huge, so intriguing that it takes an eternity to fully unfold. I, like my children, will forever be at the same time youthful and mature discovering that vastness.

My intent at the moment is to build on what I’ve learned - to learn from others - to press forward - to “improve earths preparatory school” - and see what happens. If past experience is any indicator, I’m certain the next “jump” of my eyes will reveal more.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't see the process described above as an illusion, but rather, the gentle unfolding of Reality.

Hope this helps,

Jim

[Starlight Rider]

Hoo, boy! I appreciate the attempts, but I can't get through any of them without encountering either a gap in logic or a paradox of some sort.
------------------------
Goodwinh's math analogy just left me scratching my head. I really didn't see any correlation with my question.

------------------------
Merry1 gave a dream analogy saying
The fact is, that you aren’t really in those circumstances at all. The answer that you really need is to be shaken awake, not to have the reason for the dream explained. So, even though the “it’s just an illusion” answer might seem like a cop-out, it really isn’t because there’s simply no other answer to give.

Ok, suppose this is all a dream from which we need to awaken. When you wake from a dream you realize you were dreaming you were in a certain place when really you were in bed. All fine so far. But you also understand that the dream really did occur, as a dream, in your thought. The events in the dream were "unreal" by any objective standard, but that does not mean you didn't dream. In fact, before you dream, you make a conscious decision to go to bed and sleep and temporarily escape the real world and dream, which is consistent with my original suggestion about how we came to experience materiality when we are really safe in spirit.

------------------------
Mike said:
I don't see anywhere in Mrs. Eddy's writings where she says that a perfect child of God can fall asleep and dream, or temporarily experience illusion, or even seem to do these things.

Mrs. Eddy uses the word "seem" or some variation thereof dozens of times in reference to how we perceive things. Clearly, she felt that things could seem very different from what is real.

Mike continued:
Mrs. Eddy indicates a number of times in her writings that it is mortal mind, not the child of God, that dreams and misperceives things. A human child is not a perfect child of God having a dream, it is a human conception of a child of God. And human conceptions of God's children contain both characteristics of mortal mind (and its dreams) as well as the qualities of God's children.

This is a paradox. You're saying the human conception, whether a dream or a mere misunderstanding, is impossible and yet the perception exists or we wouldn't be discussing it.

------------------------
UserX made a useful suggestion, asking a different question, what is the truth of my being? But then offered this quotation:
Mary Baker Eddy says, in Science and Health, page 403: "You command the situation if you understand that mortal existence is a state of self-deception, and not the truth of being."

That is exactly my point. This whole experience is a state of self-deception. My question is whether you can fully understand this self-deception without knowing why you deceived yourself? Was it for a purpose, or did it just happen? I find it easier to accept that a perfect child of God might do it for a purpose. If it was involuntary that either impugns the omnipotence of God or makes God both good and evil.

------------------------
Finally, the other guy named Jim suggests we are constantly growing from a narrower view and progressing towards an infinitely larger view. It is not unlike a model of growth I have pondered from time to time. However, in reference to my question, it suggests that this never ending growth process includes a period of material mindedness which we currently seem (?) to experience. Is a material perception of the world then just a "stage" we're going through as our perception of reality gradually but steadily improves?

------------------------
I've asked a tough question that has been asked through the ages. I don't expect a final answer on this forum. My intent here is to challenge my own thinking and assumptions, but also to challenge others so that no one gets too complacent with their own conclusions. It's often too easy to fall back on "Mrs. Eddy says such and such" and leave it at that. If we really want to be Scientists, which is all about knowing, we have to ask the hard questions, and the answers, if they are to be taken seriously, must stand up to scrutiny.

[pam]

I agree with what Startlight is getting at...its a philosophical question that goes beyond understanding what we we ''should'' be doing as Scientists...This is a compelling thought:I find it easier to accept that a perfect child of God might do it for a purpose. If it was involuntary that either impugns the omnipotence of God or makes God both good and evil., (Starlight R.)
What is the point of all this elaborate experience? Can we really say its all bad?
There seems to be a common theme to many of the remarks in these fora that sum up with the idea that pretty much its all illusion, its all unreal and its all somehting we just have to get over....I agree, in Absolute terms, yes, that's Science, and we wish to understand and demonstrate that. But there is a large area of experience that we either make philosophical exceptions to (as in talking about the 'beauties of earth, God's creation' -which isnt! God didnt make the physical earth. its matter!Yuk, right?(sic)) or dismiss as unreal, and something we should "get over" as quickly as possible (as in: we are dreaming a night dream and need to awaken. Why? I love many of my dreams, and often do not want them to end! Mrs Eddy talks about night dreams often being nearerer reality than day time experiences!)
There is a contradiction here, and its natural, but it has a lot to do with wondering Why Are We Here?
I think that the responses that are along the lines: well, its self decption, and its a lie so how can you seek to understand it, just step over or away from it, and see the Truth unfold, there's your answer work very well to shake thought up, and cause us to turn or head to look for another view...and that's very cool. Its, like, oh, yeah, duh. (excuse my vernacular).
On the other hand, are we to simply dismiss our experience here as just big yawn, a detour, a decption? What is it for? What is the point?
Einstein, who believed in God, pointed out that the world is so beautiful and elegant and full of pattern and intelligence...it comforted him, as he said it could so easily have been ugly and chaotic. (some would argue it is ugly and chaotic!)
Mrs Eddy certainly loved the natural world, nature and the sense of identity that she saw around her, and wrote about it a lot.
So many remarks I read in CS discussions, here and elsewhere, in answer to questions about how we should assess things that are strongly affecting our human experience are about the need to see it isnt real. Sin sickness and death, these we need to see are not real. Physical day to day experiences from the nice to the naughty to the boring are also "unreal"...so what are we supposed to do? Throw out the baby of enjoyment of of life and identity with the bath water of sin and deception?

I tend to like the ideas that talk about how we are here as expressions of God, we express God here, well, often physically! through physical healing, and through our physical exploits, music art, social reform, acts of good, making a nice dinner. What is around us expresses God...... and then there are these things we dont like, red herrings thrown, in like joker cards...perhaps this is all a game, an elaborate theatrical experience....Eastern thought as described in the Vendanta (?!) writings , the Upanishads, or something (i am not an expert, sorry!) describes God as creating the whole thing for His own enjoyment just to express, like making a painting, or writing a play, and that He has assigned roles to himself, and the world and its life forms are all parts He is playing... its a poetic and lively idea...God is about Being....identity and expression.. we Are that too....and here we are in this part of the game, like some sort of video game, tryig to get to the next level??? I suppose that sounds trite....and its not a new idea, but I tend to think of it all that way.
We are here for kicks.
We are here to play with these ideas, and try to work with the good ones...(well, folks interested in spiritual progress are, that is.)
I am tend to worry when I hear that its all a mistake, all a lie all a deception Surely there are things here that are important to enjoy and experience here, that are about identity, Soul, that come from our physical experience..its sort of the Epicurean model of CS I guess, as opposed to the Calvinist approach. I had a freind who upon studying Science soon declared, "well, nothing is real then!" and it made me laugh, and I sort of agreed, in fact, even the key board I am writing on is not Real! but its letting me write down thoughts for others to read, and for me to think about, and its also fun!....Maybe we are here to think about it all, and observe, and decide what we like and don't like, and go on from there...a sort of virtual reality game.

pam

[imjim]

For if we really are perfect spiritual beings, how in heaven's name could we ever have been so gullible as to accept an illusion as reality?

Kinda like when my kitten saw it's reflection in a mirror - it momentarily thought it saw a real kitten. . . once it figured out it wasn't real, it gave up trying to find it.

On some days, I'm almost as smart as that kitten... :cool:

Jim

[adyer]

A true story I often use in Sunday School:

Years ago on vacation in California we stopped in Bakersfield for the night. After checking into the hotel we went out for dinner. This was around 7 or 8 o'clock in the evening. The restaurant was a couple of miles to the west of where we stayed.

After dinner we left the restaurant and drove back to the hotel...except we didn't get there. We drove way too far and I realized something was wrong. It was at that point I realized the sun was in my eyes. I was traveling west...the hotel was to the east!

What happened? I knew from the beginning the hotel was east of the restaurant. As I drove away from the restaurant the landmarks did not seem foreign to me. It was only a sense that I did not arrive when I should arrive that alerted me to the problem.

But what happened? In the face of evidence to the contrary -- the sun in my eyes -- I believed I was going in the right direction when I was not. Was there evidence to support my wrong conclusion? No. I was believing a lie.

Now, let's be clear, there can be no lie without truth to lie about. Yet the lie is unreal because it is untrue. The only reality of getting to the hotel by driving west was the belief that it could happen. It was impossible.

But how real did it seem while I believed I was heading in the right direction? Examine any mistake you have made and you realize it stemmed from its SEEMING reality, which disappears when you learn more about Truth.

So in Christian Science, material existence is the lie about spiritual existence. It seems as real as my driving experience. I can easily look in retrospect and laugh at my little goof-up, but AT THE TIME I was convinced. Only when the error was uncovered did I repent and turn around.

It is perfectly reasonable -- and scientific -- to look at so-called material experience in the same way.

[goodwinh]

Sooo Sorry for the confusion ... maybe next time I won't "think out loud" ;)

here is an abreviated version attempt to clarify...

Why is "2 + 2 = 5"? -
As related to math, this is an erroneous belief problem - and is only real to me if I believe the equation is true. The results would be erroneous too and corrected by understanding the original question is not true and that 2 + 2 = 4. In math, this is a small problem and easy to solve.

"Why am I here (where? in a material world belief?) ?" -
As related to "the Science of Being", this too is an erroneous belief problem - in the degree I believe it is true. The results are also erroneous and corrected in the degree that I understand "the Truth". This is a world-wide problem but Jesus totally solved it.

You could repeat the same logic for music.

[JudyRae]

Fascinating answers from everyone with lots of food for thought – thanks Jim for starting this thread!

Why are we here?


The reason I ask is because I've often felt that Christian Scientists try to explain away this simple question by saying it's just an illusion, so it is unexplainable. That strikes me as rather unscientific. More a matter of faith than understanding.

For if we really are perfect spiritual beings, how in heaven's name could we ever have been so gullible as to accept an illusion as reality?



I just love MBE's answer to the question: Is it correct to say of material objects, that they are nothing and exist only in imagination? Mis 86:9

It’s really worth reading it all, but I particularly love this sentence: “In our immature sense of spiritual things, let us say of the beauties of the sensuous universe: "I love your promise; and shall know, some time, the spiritual reality and substance of form, light, and color, of what I now through you discern dimly; and knowing this, I shall be satisfied.”

Rather than getting bogged down with illusions, deceptions, dreams etc, I like to compare the different experiences and perceptions we have to those Magic Eye pictures which were so popular in the 80’s and 90’s.

When you first look at the Magic Eye pictures, all you see is a puzzling pattern which is on the surface. However, if you focus your eyes BEYOND the surface, the true 2D image appears.

But it’s all the same piece of paper! :cool:

Isn’t this exactly what the Revelator saw and which Eddy explains so beautifully? “…the heavens and earth to one human consciousness, that consciousness which God bestows, are spiritual, while to another, the unillumined human mind, the vision is material.”

I know that doesn’t touch on the big question “Why are we here” to which I always feel that’s we’re here to love. It's all about Love. It's all about Life, etc etc. It sounds trite said like that, but it’s a huge thought!

JudyRae

[Starlight Rider]

I've been mulling a response to some excellent posts, and I still don't quite know what to say. Some interesting ideas have been put forth that may be worth further discussion.

Pam, I am inclined to agree with your inclination not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. I was also interested in your analogy to a video game. Neale Donald Walsch in Conversations with God goes into that idea in some detail. It assumes that time is a mental construct, as Christian Science does, but takes it further. In the absence of time, everything that ever happened, ever will happen or ever could happen is happening all at once, so to speak, much like every possible outcome of a video game is encoded on a CD-ROM. What we experience is determined by the choices we make. But that is still more of a "what is here" answer rather than an explanation for why spiritual beings would get bogged down in material beliefs.

Judy, I looked up your reference to page 86 Miscellaneous Writings and realized I had marked it several months ago while pondering some related questions. What Mrs. Eddy says there would seem to contradict her oft-quoted "sometimes beautiful, always erroneous" statement about Earthly things. And again, as with Pam, it's a "what" answer rather than a "why" answer.

But I flipped around that section of the book and came upon a question more relevant to this discussion on page 49:

If all that is mortal is a dream or error, is not our capacity for formulating a dream, real; is it not God-made; and if God-made, can it be wrong, sinful, or an error?"

Unfortunately, the answer employed circular reasoning, and seemed to dodge the issue with the same old argument that both the dream and dreamer are an illusion and neither can be real. It is yet another paradox that makes my head spin and leaves me frustrated.

I can accept that the material world exists only in my consciousness, and is not "stuff out there." I can accept that my perceptions may be clouded by fear, ignorance, or sin, as she says in Science and Health, but when she likens this experience to a dream, then states that the dreamer is as unreal as the dream, she loses me. In fact, in doing so she denies my very existence, which is a self-evident absurdity.

[pam]

J.I.M.
I understand your desire to be specific on this question! Its ''why?'', not ''how?'' or ''what?''

The only thing I can still think of is still on the paradoxical side: God expresses the universe as an aspect of His nature, the universe expresses Him back, as reflection of His qualities.
At this point, we all wonder about the ''quality''of this reflection, the experience we are having as creation, it doesnt always seem so great...so then we discuss various ways of improving that and understanding the original Expression better....thats the "what".
BEING. Is it all about BEING?
I remember when I was about 12 yrs old, I had a very deep thought, and contemplated the consequences of there just being nothing. Nothing at all. Then there wouldnt be anything to start with. There would only be nothing. It fascinated me. (I decided that it would be very boring, if there could even be boredom, (there couldnt)...it was the void. It was a quiet idea, a constant, quiet, nothing. Empty. No purpose. No confusion, of course...hmmm.)
But obviously we live do in a Something, whatever you want to say about it. By merely exisiting, it suggests there is a lot of Something exisiting all over the place, including in the future we dont know yet, stuff we dont apprehend here and now, all much along the same lines of somethingness...
Is it plausible to suggest that this is a "purpose" the Purpose of Being?
We Are, we enjoy being, we contemplate and study Being...we all have fun playing with ideas, good ones and bad ones. God enjoys His creation too, and this is His Purpose too? Its something to do!
Is the purpose to Fill the Void?
If the Void wasnt filled, there would be no Purpose, so you could argue that its important work.

[adyer]

But that is still more of a "what is here" answer rather than an explanation for why spiritual beings would get bogged down in material beliefs.

They don't.

The practice of Christian Science is not to extricate spiritual beings from being bogged down in materiality but to demonstrate the impossibility of matter to affect Spirit...because it is unreal.

The unreality of matter is the premise of Christian Science.

The unreality of the sun's orbit around Earth is a premise. We don't do anything to stop it from happening. We use astronomy to demonstrate it is impossible...despite appearances. Science contradicts material sense...contradicts error.

Without the correct premise it is impossible to reach correct conclusions.

But this isn't an intellectual exercise. No one ever has to intellectualize the sunrise. It always appears to rise but we always know the principle of astronomy is the rotation of the earth and that the sunrise is actually an optical illusion.

Science is the understanding of universal Principle. It does not involve intellectual exertions.

[pam]

JIM
further to yor last comment, that quote from P. 49, Mis.
(and back to the "what?"!):
I can accept that the material world exists only in my consciousness, and is not "stuff out there." I can accept that my perceptions may be clouded by fear, ignorance, or sin, as she says in Science and Health, but when she likens this experience to a dream, then states that the dreamer is as unreal as the dream, she loses me. In fact, in doing so she denies my very existence, which is a self-evident absurdity.
So here,we are back to it being about we ARE SOMETHING, but its not matter.
She isnt contradicting your existence. Yeah, we arent the ''stuff out there'' , we are some other cool stuff, and the indications are that it is 'substance form and colour'. The dreamer refered to is mortal man: immortal man wouldnt be dreaming, that individual is all complete and unseperated from God. (And, of course, individual, etc.)

The Game of Being would be about detecting the things of value in our experience, and feeling good about them/it, and then enjoying the game more...ie wanting more existence. Thus the purpose of Existence would be about wanting more exisitence as opposed to wanting the void. (You know, on a really bad the day the void seems like a great idea.) (ha ha).
As an individual improves their ''game''(learns to perceive the truth, has a better experience), that individual (and it can be any life form, right?) develops more and more enthusiasm for the search for Truth, the enjoyment of a life well lived, more curiosity and application for the future experience.
Its why we undertake any activity in the earthly experience, from the otter playing, the mocking bird working on his song, the human writer working on his big novel or painting his house, or the spiritual seeker getting a clearer idea of existence...its sort of fun to see the results develop. Its very compelling.Sometimes its d*** hard work and slog, too. (as in painting the house)

As for the dream analogy ...again, the dream can be pleasant, instructive, terrifying, compelling,as Mrs Eddy says elsewhere about dreams in S&H ....and its about the process of learning from that dream....I dont see the dream as "bad", btw...I see it as part of the game, a bunch of clues, and the Purpose , why we are here, is to interpret the dream and benefit during our experience of eternity, (proceding to more complex and compelling aspects of Non Void)... and adding to the general well being and enjoyment of the Universe. For kicks. Something to do, rather than hang out all day in the void.
Pam

[Starlight Rider]

As I was submitting my previous post last night, a diverse variety of thoughts began to coalesce in my mind, and became further refined when I went to bed and on through today. It led me out of the paradoxical problems I've observed and tied together everything we've discussed here.

I was reminded of a 1980s PBS series and a book called The Day the Universe Changed (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj9OB3Lq-ig) hosted and written by James Burke. It was all about how mankind's concept of reality changed after various scientific discoveries were made, and how that affected society. He began the book (and in a similar fashion the first episode) with this comment:

"Somebody once observed to the eminent philosopher Wittgenstein how stupid medieval Europeans living before the time of Copernicus must have been that they could have looked at the sky and thought that the sun was circling the earth. Surely a modicum if astronomical good sense would have told them that the reverse was true. Wittgenstein is said to have replied: 'I agree. But I wonder what it would have looked like if the sun had been circling the earth.

The point is that it would look exactly the same."

I applied that idea to the material illusion and the spiritual reality problem, where two* theories compete for mankind's attention:
That matter is the basis of everything and that consciousness is a product of material forces.
That mind or spirit is the basis for everything and that objects are really ideas in our consciousness.


It occurred to me that no matter which of these propositions is true, they would look exactly the same. Thus the "material sense" view is not so much a dream or an illusion so much as a simple misinterpretation of the cause-effect relationship. In other words, the "material sense" view sees an effect and interprets it as the cause, while "spiritual sense" interprets cause and effect in their correct order.

Stated this way, UserX's reversal of the question from "Why are we here?" to "What is the truth of my being?" makes perfect sense. Goodwinh's math analogy, which puzzled me at first, also made sense. And so did Mrs. Eddy's argument that both the dream and the dreamer are unreal, because there is no dream or illusion, beyond a simple misunderstanding about which comes first in the cause-effect order.

Some people may find this difficult to accept because it is predicated on the hypothesis that spiritual reality and material belief look exactly the same. Or as Judy said, using the Magic Eye (http://www.magiceye.com/) analogy, "It's all the same piece of paper!"

However, looking the same does not mean a world that behaves the same. If we look to matter as cause, we are subject to whatever limits we place upon it - because it is actually the effect of our thinking. If, however, we place Mind as cause, then the world we experience is opened up to infinite possibilities, limited only by our imagination. Going back to the astronomical analogy, realizing that the earth is spinning instead of believing that the sun is going around us ultimately allowed men to go to the moon and to take our cameras to almost every planet in the solar system, plus a few comets and asteroids. If we tried to do that with the incorrect model we would have missed our target every time.

So I guess my question now is not "Why are we here?" but rather how did we (meaning mankind) get into the habit of reversing the cause and effect relationship?

-------------------
*Actually there are three, the third being that matter and spirit/mind are two separate things that somehow interact, but that has several problems of its own, and is easier, at least for me, to dismiss out of hand.

[solo]

Man is governed by God . But Man has self - government ,and this self government could be abused or contrary to the will of God,any time 100 thousands years ago ,million/billion years ago ,or in the far future.
That is why we are here. Not by will of God ,but by human will.

[Metaphysician]

Why are we here?

Christian Science Studies


"The Holographic Universe That Never Was"
(A Treatise in Metaphysical Reasoning)

By
David Serrato
***


For an explanation of "Why are we here as we seem to be"..., according to my understanding of The Science of Being (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_Science_tenets%2C_prayers%2C_and _statements#The_Scientific_Statement_of_Being_by_M ary_Baker_Eddy) or Divine Metaphysics (http://www.endtime.org/library/gilmore/divinemetaphysics.html), we need a scenario and for this we are going to need for you to picture a fairly large fish tank full of water, big enough to house your immediate environment.

The tank will be populated, thanks to the aid of a laser beam projecting 3-D images (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography) of fish and environmental props that go along with in a real fish tank. Now, as far as we are concerned a viewer will witness a hologram (http://youtube.com/watch?v=lFqlQiTTHRs&feature=related) that looks very real to him, bun never the less an illusion as real fish and props. But we know better for we know the truth.

Suppose somebody sticks their hand in the tank and tries to grab a fish, you think they're going to succeed? Of course not because it is not there at all! It's just an illusion, a hologram that looks very real but is never there.

The water never makes contact with the fish nor the props and vise versa, this holds true with Spirit and so called matter. The water symbolize Infinite Spirit or God (Mind), and the populated 3-D imagery symbolize the physical universe, ethereal and finite matter along with it's planets and stars.

God is infinite and occupies all space within His infinite space, but never ever shares it with anything that is remotely "something" unlike himself for He is infinite Spirit. Nothingness can't exist insomethingness, not even as an illusion.

This is how matter (nothingness) and Spirit could "seem" to co-exist as described above. The question arises than as to why matter as an illusion seem to co-exists. It does not...If matter or nothingness could speak it would say something like this:

God, if I could exist as something I would have to exist as "nothing", because you are all-in-all. I would seem to occupy your infinite space and therefore I would have to exist as a suppositional reality and be in anyway opposed to you, I would be a lie... nevertheless very unreal, but something that seems very real to my self (as mortal mind) but not to the real Man, made after the image and likeness of you [God]...but I will always be a lie to whomever entertains me as a reality.

God, I would take your Christ and turn it into an infinite finite evil limited reality and minds many, very real to me as a mortal, but you will never see me do this, nor your Christ. Only if I could be real would appear as thus, but in order for me to exist I have to populate the infinite with lies thanks to your Truth, for I have no power of my own. I know I could do it for real if I could exist as real nothingness, and God if you could disappear or die I would have to die too for I only feed from you. I would not have your Truth to lie about and that's how I could seem to exist by your own very existence but as nothingness or non existent, therefore I am not.

You mean to tell me that I exist as a NON REAL hologram then? In the vastness of this universe? No! God in order to be God it has to be God to something and not to nothingness. Now grasp this: Water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water#Definition_and_basic_characteristics) is oxygen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxigen) and hydrogen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen), this is what causes "wetness" or the condition of being liquid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid) like (which is the effect of oxygen and hydrogen hence the real CAUSE of water). Picture this water filling all space without end (this is Spirit or Mind). Wetness is the witness that testifies that oxygen and hydrogen exist with no end. Therefore what oxygen and hydrogen is, the wetness does likewise. That's Cause and Effect, for God is all that Is. Spiritual Infinite Man is the image of His Love just like liquid is the image of oxygen-hydrogen.

The effect of Mind is the Christ Mind reflected and this is Man or Christ hence me or you. This is the real universe and [not the universe that we see with our faculties]. Gods is infinite cause and you are as infinite as the cause. Does God have eyes? yes he does, does He have lungs yes he does arms, hands yes but they are infinite and perfect with no material shape at all. You reflect His eyes, lungs, arms. hands and all He is or the effect of reality.

Let's turn off the switch to the hologram image in the fish tank for a minute and then contemplate what's left. Infinite Variety but always ONE. Now suppose we take an eye dropper and squeeze a droplet of water unto the vastness of this sea and call it you. You just have become one with God everywhere present and do the same with Joe, Mary, billy and so on. Also with a tree, potato, and a world. This is call infinite variety.

We are always going to have a seemingly limited mortal identity until we outgrow the magnetism or hypnotism that seems to be holding us back. We are so afraid to loose the material self, but it will never be lost from the mirage as long as we hold tight to the lie. The real Man in whatever realm he seems to move into, as he progress through life, this material (seemingly) self will become more and more refined to do marvelous feats as Jesus did through Mind, when He walked or went through a material physical door to greet the apostles. But never ever lose the fact that you exist as thus (a Material you), you are The Image of His Love. You will always exist as God sees Himself, you are at this very moment that Man, made in his His image and likeness. Because no body can exist as a seeming less material reality, by knowing this, matter and our mortal existence can be influenced by your metaphysical understanding... Contemplate the Truth and you will be the victor.

We have The Mind of Christ but the suppositional reality of man interprets Infinite Mind into a limited and evil human mind, unable to distinguish Truth. God stays as Infinite Variety but always one. We are always in the infinite here. So you can enjoy your Material existence by giving matter back to Mind. Does it make sense to you as a metaphysician? The words I use to call matter an illusion, nothingness, seemingly are just aids or tools to arrive at the Truth or give the hologram mirage back to Mind (Mind=God & mind= matter) in other words, "reverse engineering" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_engineering) must yield matter (The Hologram (http://youtube.com/watch?v=lFqlQiTTHRs&feature=related) ) back to Mind to find it as nothing, and thus establish The Science of Being. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_Science_tenets%2C_prayers%2C_and _statements#The_Scientific_Statement_of_Being_by_M ary_Baker_Eddy)

Note:
Herbert W. Eustance C.S.B. in his book, "Christian Science its "Clear Correct Teaching" and Coplete Writings, states the folowing:
Water not a good illustration: "...The relation of a drop of water to the the ocean does not adequately express the nature of man's relationship to God..." Then he goes to say... "Only in the sence that a drop of water and the ocean are one in their chemical constituents is it possible to use them as similies to express the fact that God and man are one in being, in essence. This is the only sence in which Mrs, Eddy compares them" Pg.357


The scientific statement of being:

There is no life, truth, intelligence, nor sub-
stance in matter. All is infinite Mind and its infinite
manifestation, for God is All-in-all. Spirit is immortal
Truth; matter is mortal error. Spirit is the real and
eternal; matter is the unreal and temporal. Spirit is
God, and man is His image and likeness. Therefore
man is not material; he is spiritual.

.:Mary Baker Eddy

[JudyRae]

Hello again Jim, I'm so pleased that you are getting your answers! Prayer will always reveal what we need to know and I thought that Pam's and Adyer's ideas were spot on too!

Glad too that my Magic Eye allegory helps - to me it is the nearest simple explanation of the Revelator's different states and stages of consciousness (S&H 573)

But I was thinking, I remember how easily and simply healings came when I was a child - don't we all need to get back to that simplicity, love and trust in God rather than "paralysis by analysis"? :confused: When I turn the ignition on in my car, I have full trust that it will start to move and get me to where I need to go, but I haven't a clue HOW it does that! Likewise, with electricity - I don't know what it is, what it looks like, how it works, but I do know it works and that I can plug into it and use it with confidence.

Paul said, in I Cor 13: "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."


So I guess my question now is not "Why are we here?" but rather how did we (meaning mankind) get into the habit of reversing the cause and effect relationship?

Hey, I think that's been covered in Genesis 2&3!! :p and Paul called it the "carnal mind" in Romans 8. Your question is a bit like a school kid worrying about how he added up 7 and 9 and made 21. Isn't it simply a mistake and the DENIAL of the truth? Isn't that what Christian Science is all about - reversing the lie, "exchanging things into thoughts" and reconnecting with the sole reality of spiritual existence?

The root of the word "sin" is sunder - separation (from God) and the root of the word "religion" is to re-connect - I just love that!

Actually there are three, the third being that matter and spirit/mind are two separate things that somehow interact, but that has several problems of its own, and is easier, at least for me, to dismiss out of hand.

That's a tough one I agree, and one of the areas, where today's "new thought" diverges from the Science of the Christ.

JudyRae

[LoraHoward]

Great discussion. I will throw my small change into the arena.

There are not two realities. There is only one. There are not two of each of us--a material and a spiritual doppleganger.
There is only one thing, Good ,going on.
We say that materiality is not real, because it has no bad cause, like itself. It is the wrong thought about the right thing. Mrs. Eddy says over and over that to get at the real thing, to heal, look at the material thing and reverse it. The understanding is that there is only one life going one,here, now and always. We just misunderstand it. When we understand, see correctly, the misconception is no longer there and we are healed.
Jesus healed himself of the belief of materiality.

I cannot answer the question. I just plod along one healing at a time. And when one happens, the bad thing is not there anymore and I don't care where it went or where it came from.

Thanks,
Lora

[solo]

there are many things that puzzle many of us,like in the far future ,

lion with lamb ,rat with cat ,no night with stars, moon,the beauty of nights.and if live without carniverous is it ..?
and life without sex? is it temporal the sex organs all animals including man ,they have?or is it eternal, i mean imerishable,if eternal, we employ them as we do now.
and there is no baby, child thing ?we love them here there presence,i think we will miss them.by the way don't forget god is three-in-one ,father mother and child,the scripture call it father holy ghost son.
can we forget what we call it material laws on the far future ,like gravity ,4 seasons with their coldness like siberia,hot like arab ?i dont think .
but i believe one thing ,man is created to dominion over -the bible say man is dominion over the fish ....

[solo]

We are here,in Truth ? yes.
we are here , in error? No.
error is unreal.Therefore we are not mortal.Mortality is human concept.It exist in Time. Man's immortality , not on Time ,but on eternity.

[LoraHoward]

I have been enjoying this thread.

I recently ran into this by Laura Sargent, whom, as you probably know, was a good worker at Pleasant View and a practitioner and teacher.

"Why is there evil(materiality) and what is its origin? Evil never existed as an entity or reality, so it has no existence and no origin. Real existence alone is original. Certain questions, such as,'How did the mist arise when all was primeval harmony?' are attempts to keep us busy with that which is not; and we must silence such attempts by knowing there is no mind to ask such questions."

What i got from that is that , enjoyable and interesting as the why are we here discussions are, and this one is, at basis, they are like saying," I balanced my check book, replacing the 4 with a 6. But, where did the 4 go? Why was it there? " or,"What caused this cold and why did it leave. Where is it now?" And so forth.
In other words, it is more profitable to discover the truth than analyze the falsity.

Now please don't think i'm being patronizing or something. What I think is that we need threads like this in order to come back, perhaps again and again, to what is true. At least i do.

[pam]

SOLO's comments made think again about this discussion....I have been enjoying it too. I do think its worthwhile trying to understand complex concepts....and there are times when its very important to only stick to the very simple truth, and it is a lot like saying "Oh! That was a silly mistake! Here its the right thing!" Many helpful and creative analagies have been offered here on how we turn our mental gaze to the real, the Spiritual. We do best when we can remember that matter is unreal, what we see and experience here is unreal, a misapprehension....
But I still feel that we are missing something important if the language we use to describe our experience here is mostly about describing life on earth is "lie", "unreal" "mistake" "dream-we-need-to-wake-up-from-now!" "error" "sin" (yikes!).....these are pretty harsh terms to paint the whole expereince with!...Sin disease and death are certainly as above!Those are lies and unreal! They point away from Truth, God's creation doesnt include them. The proof is in these things going away when the truth is realized.
The beauty of the natural world, our loved ones, the song of the birds, any wonderful experiences we have here are not deserving of that 'absolute' style language. I go back to the idea that we are here to learn to discern between experiences..to sift the chaff from the wheat, to improve on a false sense of life, to love the promise we see around us, in those things which are beautiful, and are expressing the same spirituality we are....we do touch feel smell and hear much of this stuff ''materially'' ; then we think about it, (and talk about it in discussions like this one!) and decide, or can begin to see, that a lot about the things we are enjoying are 'spiritual', and DO reflect God's creation, (and they dont dissapear if we pray over them. The kitten doesnt dissapear if one prays over it. It may become a better kitten, though!). I have to say that, technically, one could argue against the the description of the 'beauty of God's creation', when it means natural wonders, beauty, etc. God did not ''create'' the Grand Canyon! the Polar Bear, the Sunset!... yet we usually get very excited about the spiritual aspect of these things that are entirely material.
Mrs Eddy writes about this stuff all the time... (didnt she like to describe sunrises a lot!?)....but she doesnt talk about how its all just stupid matter, and a lie! She enjoyed the world around her. Jesus did too. He often referenced physical phenomena that could illustrate his idea...the light under the bushel! The salt of the earth, the eye of the needle and the camel! These are hilarious analogies .... he would have had his hearers chuckling, and nodding with agreement, with these sorts of comparisons.
I think its somehow missing part of the point to simply dismiss as a Lie, as Untrue the experience we have here in the world. There are important clues here, and the things we enjoy do lighten our hearts and make us wish to go on. And these experiences are related to our sensory experience of them, we should be ok with that.... and then think about what spiritual clue is wrapped up in it. Thats a good reason to be here.
repsectfully
Pam

[adyer]

I have to say that, technically, one could argue against the the description of the 'beauty of God's creation', when it means natural wonders, beauty, etc. God did not ''create'' the Grand Canyon! the Polar Bear, the Sunset!... yet we usually get very excited about the spiritual aspect of these things that are entirely material.
Yet they aren't really material, are they? I don't look at it that way. The Grand Canyon is PRIMARILY a spiritual idea. What we see as the material is a counterfeit of the spiritual reality.

Mrs Eddy writes about this stuff all the time... (didnt she like to describe sunrises a lot!?)....but she doesnt talk about how its all just stupid matter, and a lie! She enjoyed the world around her.
I don't think we can easily read into her writings an enjoyment of the material world. We know she wrote extensively and explicitly about creation as primarily and ultimately spiritual; any enjoyment has to be conceived of as spiritual. Again, the concept of a material creation is a material concept after the fact of the real spiritual creation already in place and intact.

So which are you enjoying...the original or the counterfeit?

I think its somehow missing part of the point to simply dismiss as a Lie, as Untrue the experience we have here in the world.
The liability is to consider any so-called material experience as original. A material Grand Canyon, a material sunset. But a material sunset is a lie about the real sunset. Which one do you want to talk about?

The point to be gained in metaphysics is not a reversal of joy but the discovery of its true basis. By enjoying the Grand Canyon you are not enjoying matter...it is IMPOSSIBLE to enjoy matter, or for matter to enjoy.

The lie is that matter could have sensation. But you never lose your spiritual sense of joy.

[NYCtown]

It helped me a lot when I shifted my thinking from there were two things (the absolute -- spiritual creation and the relative -- material life) to know that there's jus one reality. So what's the material picture? It's my incredibly imperfect perception of the spiritual. And whenever I get a deeper sense of the spiritual, that's when I have a stronger foundation for joy, a greater appreciation for beauty, and when I experience healing of all kind.

[pam]

Hi Adyer,
I entirely agree with the fact that we are looking at a spiritual concept. As I think I said.
My concern is with the language we use to describe the material concept. I do not find it entirely helpful to think of my postive and enjoyable experiences as a human as 'Lie' ,"Error" etc. Its a poor use of the language, and it is disheartening.
I think it is much more realistic to phrase these positive things in terms of 'getting a better understanding', 'discerning the spiritual','loving the promise" (Mrs Eddy, Mis. Writings, a big favourite for everyone) and this is the sort of language we use to ourselves, as we think about things...right?....otherwise every refreshing bite of watermelon somehow is labled a Lie. Its too much. When I eat something delicious, or jump into a cool lake on a hot day, I am probably not thinking about how I am not realizing metaphysical it is. Not every single second. I would be surprised if many Scientists faithfully employ this sort of vision during every minor human experience. Overall, during the day, many times a day, this Scientist's thoughts will pause and think about the spiritual nature of the whole experience, in a thankful moment of enjoyment and gratitude...drinking in the delights of Soul, yes? I dont get too upset if I miss a moment and do not think about the ocean as a sprititual concept when I see an ad for a vacation get-away. Sometimes I do think of it that way, at that moment.

I do get very upset at myself if I entertain negative thoughts about the body, or imagine some mortal harm from a nuetral human experience. I beleive that is much more important work, and vigilence is required.Some human experiences clearly need a lot of metaphysical vigilence from the get-go.

Generally, I tend to remember God in everything, and all around me, and Mind doing the thinking anyhow!!! When I get too wrapped up trying to think about it all, I try to remember that little Pam isnt doing any of it, God is doing it all, and I dont have to understand it all, every second. God does. Its taken care of, and maybe tomorrow I will see more of it. I feel a ''physical weight'' ''lift off my chest'' in relief as I realize this fact. ''I dont have to do anything! God does it!''. It is a childlike standpoint. Very comforting. I describe it as a 'physical' sense of relief, I believe this is an accurate description of what I am feeling as a human. Intellectually, I kow that he understanding I have there is spiritual, the actual effect is sprititual. It is however a ''relative'' experience for me.
See what i mean? We are really splitting hairs here, for the purposes of discussion; of course,I think you see what i am getting at? It sounds so pedantic, and looks so bizarre in writing!
So human! Mrs Eddy said ''Divine Love meets every human need'',;she didnt say there is no human need.


However, my primary concern in my previous post was that I dont see using the same language we use for sickness and sin for the nuetral, benign aspects of life. (small 'l'). I think certain language makes us too hard on ourselves in some instances. There is a wide variety of human need, and a wide variety of words to use for those states.
Our language can be more accurate. Thats why we are here.
pam

[pam]

NYCtown. In your previous post, you wrote:
''It's my incredibly imperfect perception of the spiritual. And whenever I get a deeper sense of the spiritual, that's when I have a stronger foundation for joy, a greater appreciation for beauty, and when I experience healing of all kind.''

This is a very good description of the relative.

We are living in the relative.

We are not living in the Absolute.

Its impossible here.
I believe this is a very important point in CS discussion and in life. If we were living in the Absolute, we would not be here, we would ascend. I know we are all working on it :rolleyes:, but it is a long way off for me and everyone I know. Our language needs to accurately portray this. Otherwise, it looks like we are kidding ourselves, and it tends to induce a sense of discouragemnt. We should be realistic, even in discussions like this. IMHO.
Pam

[W359]

This is a question I always had too, Starlight Rider. Let me illustrate in a graphical:

A. Matter is something.
B. "Something" != real. It could be defined as an illusion
C. The question: What is matter? An error of Adam? And then, what? Certainly nothing of God, any more I can create spirit with hammer, can God create matter by Spirit? No!

However, I have to wonder, by what standard is matter permissible, whence comes this falsity? One must understand one's enemy to fight it. No one has ever "disappeared" except Jesus, not even Mary Baker Eddy, but she says it's possible. She didn't return from the grave to show us it was possible for whatever reason, but I don't doubt Christian Science anyway.

But every time I ask this question I seem to get a wishy-washy answer, nothing solid, or absolute textbook references. Just stuff like, "It's a dream, go study." We must understand what matter is and is not, and most importantly, whence it comes, in order that we should fully understand sickness and how to heal it.

And then too, broken bones. Mrs. Eddy always speaks of sickness, but it is intangible. What of cuts and broken bones? Shall we mend them too? Certainly if material existance is an illusion of our own minds, but not if it has any partial reality. You see how we must understand our enemy to destroy it.

-W359

[NYCtown]

NYCtown. In your previous post, you wrote:
''It's my incredibly imperfect perception of the spiritual. And whenever I get a deeper sense of the spiritual, that's when I have a stronger foundation for joy, a greater appreciation for beauty, and when I experience healing of all kind.''

This is a very good description of the relative.

We are living in the relative.

We are not living in the Absolute.

Its impossible here.
I believe this is a very important point in CS discussion and in life. If we were living in the Absolute, we would not be here, we would ascend. I know we are all working on it :rolleyes:, but it is a long way off for me and everyone I know. Our language needs to accurately portray this. Otherwise, it looks like we are kidding ourselves, and it tends to induce a sense of discouragemnt. We should be realistic, even in discussions like this. IMHO.
Pam
Hmmmmmmm. I think maybe my words aren't conveying what I mean. I don't think I am talking about the relative. I think sticking with those definitions slowed down my healings and I'm always looking to speed them up. ;)

MBE didn't talk about the relative, either (or at least that's what I've gathered from a really quick search). I think as long as you do, you're stuck to some degree.

[pam]

Adyer wrote:Yet they aren't really material, are they? I don't look at it that way. The Grand Canyon is PRIMARILY a spiritual idea. What we see as the material is a counterfeit of the spiritual reality.

I can understand that intellectually, but I do not think I can literally at this stage know what "The Grand Canyon" looks like spiritually. I cannot enjoy it entirely spititually. I admit to enjoying the counterfeit (as you ask, further down in your post). I can speculate, wonder excitedly what these things will appear as when my experience is vastly more spiritual (probably not in this human form)...and it is an exciting proposition. I spend a lot of time productively wondering about these things. If this earth life is an illusion of spirituality, I cant wait to see what the real thing is! I think we benefit spiritual by this sort of contemplation, sifting through what we feel is nearer the truth, and what would be left on this plane.
John 3:3 "It doth not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when He shall appear we shall be like him" That will apply to everything we experience; it will be ''without material accompaniments'' (Mrs Eddy/ SH).. a very exciting thing to look forward to!!... We catch glimpses here: a healing improves the human situation, we see the material proof. A spititual thought really is suddenly clear to us, and we feel delighted, inspired (a less material reaction!)...there is so much to do here to improve the human experience, and we get a lot of experience in the right direction...(many instances of tremendous control over the body and mortal experience have been experienced by Scientists!)...but I dont think we are able to see the Absolute here in this form. Striving for it teaches and helps us. We reach for it. That effort and understanding improves our situation. Thus we know it is worthwhile, the truth. We wish to learn, and prove, more.
The Bible even says we cannot see God face to face and ''live'' (ie be mortal ?)... (Job tried that, and in the end, got quite an encouraging response from God!) Jesus' transformation for the small group of his disciples was a close experience of, maybe, the next stage of reality for humans... but even that has a certain material aspect to it...the disciples were still in material form as they saw Jesus and the other 2 figures (2?). John's vision in the apocalypse reaches the ethereal level- visions are outside of the body expereince as we have it here...I think there are many levels of mortal experience, progressing more and more spiritually, to a point we simply cannot imagine.
But I cant say that I think we can literally experience the world around us on an entirely Spiritual level. Well, I cant.
I suppose you could say, maybe, that part of our mind does, but it does not ''deactivate'' our bodies in a mortal sense....I mean that we can understand something,be trasnported, healed, inpsired, see new spiritual horizons, but we dont then leave our bodies behind entirely. In fact those experiences heal the body. Its still the body.
In some consternation,
(I was going to put one of those smilies here, but the last one I used in a post I thought was "hopeful" looking, and I see now that its meant to imply "sarcasm"..maybe I need to learn them better too!). :o
pam

[adyer]

Pam, what I'm trying to get at is that you DON'T experience it materially.

"All is infinite Mind and its infinite manifestation." We can't hedge on the "all" part. It's all or it's not all. We have to buy in or out of it before we go further.

For instance, you can't have a counterfeit $3 bill because there is no original $3 bill. And if I have a real $1 bill and a counterfeit $1 bill, how many dollars do I have? I have only $1. I can experience having only $1. Healing is the destruction of the belief that the counterfeit could be real and could be experienced as another dollar of wealth.

The same is true of every aspect of experience. What we call "Grand Canyon" must exist as spiritual idea before it could ever be counterfeited. But you don't experience the counterfeit; you experience the original. The counterfeit cannot have any effect or be experienced. It is impossible.

But I cant say that I think we can literally experience the world around us on an entirely Spiritual level. Well, I cant.
My response is that you can't help it. You are incapable of truly experiencing anything that is NOT spiritual. It is only the belief that experience could be material that suffers from itself.

This is the extraordinary revelation of Christian Science...what makes it Science. If it were true that our material bodies actually exist for any amount of time, then Christian Science would be merely a New Age philosophy in which some mystical element in the material world results in some miraculous outcome. But in Science man exists RIGHT NOW as he really is.

I suppose you could say, maybe, that part of our mind does, but it does not ''deactivate'' our bodies in a mortal sense....I mean that we can understand something,be trasnported, healed, inpsired, see new spiritual horizons, but we dont then leave our bodies behind entirely. In fact those experiences heal the body. Its still the body.
Our life work is not to heal a body but to heal the belief that a material body could be real, could have any effect on us, could be part of an actual experience. The prosperity of the Christian Science Movement rests on demonstration of this fact.

[LoraHoward]

Thanks Pam.
MBE said, somewhere, probably Mis., that the more she understands true humanhood, the more she sees it to be sinless.
Indeed, there is only one thing going on, and this is it. It's a matter of viewpoint whether it looks good or bad, material or spiritual, but there is only one creation.
So enjoyment of life, with gusto, and appreciation of all the good qualities everything has, which are from God and inherent, is a good idea. We are not in hell, waiting for heaven, which is somewhere else. We are to improve, through better thinking, earth's preparatory school, and enjoy it. Death, improved beliefs, healing, revelation, do not take us somewhere else. They just change our thinking about the only reality there is--right here.

That's how Pam's post got me thinking, which, i'm certain, is how I should be thinking anyway.
So thanks again Pam and really, everyone has terrific ideas here.

Lora

[W359]

Our life work is not to heal a body but to heal the belief that a material body could be real, could have any effect on us, could be part of an actual experience. The prosperity of the Christian Science Movement rests on demonstration of this fact.

Then what is matter? Illusion has an existance, though false, as an illusion. No Christian Scienctist has ever ascended as Jesus did. I do not agree that matter is not possible, since we are communicating on material computers over material circuits and wires. It is something, even if it is a something illusion. Why are we in matter? Who or what started it?

I also have to wonder, if we destroyed our material senses, and left the material Earth behind to be purely spiritual, where would the challenge be left, what would eternal, infinite life be, as just mentality? I have to wonder if material Earth has no purpose, because what shall we do in pure spirituality? Talk about the weather? I don't understand it myself, that's why I'm watching this thread.

-W359

[adyer]

Then what is matter? Illusion has an existance, though false, as an illusion.

Imagine the mirage of an oasis in the desert. (I've never seen this but work with me, OK?) Does the illusion exist? Does the oasis exist? Which are you concerned about, the oasis or the illusion that it exists?

I do not agree that matter is not possible, since we are communicating on material computers over material circuits and wires. It is something, even if it is a something illusion. Why are we in matter? Who or what started it?

Elsewhere I told the true story about me driving in the wrong direction. (Not as if we haven't all done this.) Now the question is not whether I was driving a particular direction but whether I could get where I wanted to go by doing so. So did getting to the destination, by driving the wrong direction, ever exist? To the belief that the wrong direction was the right direction, the answer is yes. Once I awoke from that belief, I realized the true answer was NO.

Apply this literally to earthly existence and it looks like this:

The question is stated, Does matter exist? I submit that this is the wrong question. The real question is, Does the real, conscious man exist in a material form? (After all, you don't REALLY care about matter otherwise, right?) To the belief that matter can have sensation, soul, substance, intelligence...the answer is yes. But we can awaken every day by yielding to the Christ consciousness and understand that the real answer is NO.

It's not some odd, esoteric philosophy. You effectively deal with illusions all the time. There's the mathematical model in which 2+2=5 can be written and believed but never demonstrated. There's the driving model where I can turn the wrong direction and believe I can reach my destination but never get there. There's the railroad tracks receding in the distance that appear to meet but I can never see them touch. Mrs. Eddy even has a full paragraph on this, with the marginal heading "Testimony of the senses" (S&H page 122):
The optical focus is another proof of the illusion of material sense. On the eye's retina, sky and tree-tops apparently join hands, clouds and ocean meet and mingle. The barometer,--that little prophet of storm and sunshine, denying the testimony of the senses,--points to fair weather in the midst of murky clouds and drenching rain. Experience is full of instances of similar illusions, which every thinker can recall for himself.

In all cases, the key is that I have to change my mind about reality. Matter will never give me proof one way or another.

[pam]

I must say this thread has really been a thought rouser!!!
....Adyer, yes! I understand, I really do: Spiritual Reality is what informs everthing we do, here, anywhere.!...Spiritual Reality is on -going, eternal, intact and we are never, in Reality, ever seperate from it!!
But I also understand that I am in this ''state'' where I find I am not always able to demonstrate that Spiritual Reality. I think its ok to be aware of that,in a relative sense. A sense that gives me the space and compassion to work it out...since its clear to me that that is needed.

I remember a very helpful demonstration from CS Class Instruction...3 small pieces of paper, folded in half so they stood up, like place cards.
One one we wrote DIVINE
On the next we wrote HUMAN
on the next we wrote MORTAL.

The teacher told us to line them up in that order, with the HUMAN in the middle.
Then he had us move the DIVINE over the HUMAN, then the MORTAL over the HUMAN, and so on, first one then the other. You could completely cover the HUMAN with the DIVINE....Obviously, the analogy being that if the HUMAN allows no other thing to cover it over, it can be all DIVINE.

The obvious opposite was to cover the human with the mortal. YUK! Nobody wanted to do that!

Of course, you could just leave it alone, and have the HUMAN with no input from the divine (or the mortal) -but we all agreed that was a lazy way to be.
By the way, the teacher suggested out that not allowing the mortal to overcome the human was in itself better than being overcome with mortality....we used this in discussion all the time.

(I suppose, you could also crumple up the HUMAN and the MORTAL and throw them away and be left with only the DIVINE...Very Zen!....but is it realistic?) I confess to being human right now, today. Its where I am at. I cannot be the Living God. It isnt realistic. I do feel that I am able to allow more and more of the DIVINE to come in and alloow less of the HUMAN; that seems to work, in Science. It works very well. I feel very happy about that.

It isnt the ultimate perfect analogy, none of them really are....But it made a big impression, as we moved that DIVINE over the HUMAN, it didnt leave room for the mortal....the less mortal, the more DIVINE. The point was made, of course that the HUMAN wasnt bad. But it was greatly improved by having as much DIVINE as it could demonstrate! The mortal was seen as bad, yes, indeed. we want to push that out. The human is sort of neutral; the cute little puppet.

Our job here is to IMPROVE. Our ideas slow us down, or speed us up.
Science and Health is comprised of many many many Absolute Statements. It is a textbook. It is our guide to the Absolute. Mrs Eddy makes many comments that we cannot prove what we dont understand, that we dont progress very far until the experience called death, and other remarks along ''relative'' lines....

The teacher in Class pointed out that we are constantly striving to have the DIVINE cover over the HUMAN all the time, and thus push out the MORTAL. He agreed that its a constant back and forth, (see Mis Writings ('A Colloqy"- we are always arguing in our heads :good vrs evil) and he added with a little smile that the DIVINE entirely covering over our HUMAN is the Absolute, a place we cannot really live in, this form, can we? He looked around the table with a quizical raised eyebrow.

The work we do in Science aligns us with the Divine. We feel the tremendous peace and relief when we fill our thoughts and centre our being with the Divine... and we understand that that is the ongoing reality. We realize we are in a ''puppet show'', a belief, thats sometime fun, sometimes not...and we learn that we can improve on it by holding thought always on what we can grasp of the Absolute.
Yes, its a belief, but I can only control my concept of that belief up to a certain point now. I am very grateful for that. I also find it interesting and inspiring.

Thinking about this tangled mess of knitting that we are in in this thread has made me think a lot more clearly about what I understand, and its wonderful to have other people to discuss this with. Even if it is extremely esoteric.

I derive all my comfort , my guidance and my sense of who I am, who the living things around me are, specifically by understanding that they, and I, are ideas, eternal perfect and intact in their spiritual identity. Its the only thing that matters, and understanding this protects and encourages me. And I thank GOD for it!

Again, I UNDERSTAND that my concept of the Grand Canyon is Spiritual. That is the reality that goes on before and after I am not in this body. This body is a, well, a puppet show, an illusion. I can learn more and more about the nature of Reality, and be less interested or controlled by the Puppet Show, the Belief, and demonstrate control over it. But at my point in understanding I cannot voluntarily leave my body, jump out of a window, exist without food, or experience God directly. This doesnt really bother me, I am very confident that I am on a terrific path toward at the latter! (the former are a silly list to make a point. ) I reflect Infinite Mind. I can work to see that, and improve on a false sense of limited intelligence, but I will probably not be able to access Total Knowledge here.

Why are we here? To show that we arent here!
When we understand fully and completely why and how we are ""here", in other words that we arent, we will Not Be Here. It solves itself!
When Divine Love meets that human need, it isnt a 'need' anymore!

Everytime we control the illusion with truth, we are a little less "here"...
but the Final Demonstration is very hard, Mrs Eddy tells us, and it takes time.
My concern about Absolute statements is that they make us feel we have so far to go, its over whelming, non Scientists think we are bonkers and it can lead to a lack of love for the experience we are having. (for example my reluctance to label all human experience with the harsh moniker "lie", or "error", when what we are doing here often is learning simply to see the truth, and bring peace love healing and understanding to a limited sense. We see error as the lie, not everything as a lie.)

Pam

[W359]

There are certain questions where we must live somewhat recursively. Just learn a little of the science of being. Don't try to understand all of it, don't feel matter needs to be finally destroyed and everybody needs to ascend right now. Just learn a little, and know it's enough, and go on living. Teach the children, and let them learn a little more. Someday, man will realize it fully and outgrow the "need" for matter (?). And it really makes no difference if we're all eternal.

-W359

[pam]

Adyer wrote
But we can awaken every day by yielding to the Christ consciousness and understand that the real answer is NO.
Well, this is another example of our hopeful and constantly improving relative experience. Its ongoing.

We know intellectually that matter isnt real.
We demonstrate it bit by bit.
If it were to appear clearly to us all at once, fully expressed I believe we would necessarily cease to be here, and move onto the next level. it would be wonderful and very interesting!
It is of course possible.But it doesnt seem to happen very much.

It dosent mean we are failing.
It doesnt mean that we should feel we have to strive for that. It would make me uncomfortable to feel that that was my goal, and to, well, fail.
It would make me want to not try.
humbly,
pam

[LoraHoward]

Much of this conversation sounds like Judge Hannah's article,"The Absolute and the Relative." It's really hard to talk about this stuff, because it' so easy to start thinking in terms of two things, instead of one, and this separation and dividing is exactly what mortal mind does.

I think Hannah's article, tho carefully thought out, tends to promote the thought of division, even if he did not mean to do so.

My personal favorite is what Martha Wilcox or Bicknell Young said.(Sorry, can't remember which or where):

"Matter is a wrong idea about a right thing."

So, if the world, the flesh and the devil is all a matter (pun unavoidable) of incorrect seeing, the only thing to do is keep reversing that which is wrong, and see what is right. We are children of the light and in Him is no darkness at all. Period. End of story.

[MikeDavis]

In this thread and elsewhere on the forum there has been mention of "the absolute" and "the relative." Mary Baker Eddy uses the word "absolute" from time to time, usually as an adjective, as in "absolute Truth." But she never speaks of "the relative" or speaks of contrasting "the absolute" and "the relative" in any of her books or in any documents in the collection housed in The Mary Baker Eddy Library. Nor does she say anywhere that Science and Health should be analyzed in such a way as to identify some statements that are "absolute" and other statements that are "relative." At The Mary Baker Eddy Library, we have copious notes taken in one of her classes at the Massachusetts Metaphysical College, and there is no mention in these notes of analyzing things in terms of "the absolute" and "the relative."

Using terminology this way appears to have been introduced after Mrs. Eddy's death and seems to have come into widespread use among Christian Science teachers in teaching their classes.

While I think I have an idea of why people find it helpful to use this terminology, still I feel that iintroducing terminology not used by Mrs. Eddy into Christian Science can sometimes lead to a subtle ateration of her metaphysics. I feel that one thing that using this terminology has sometimes led to is a kind of dualistic thinking in which people believe there is a realm called "the absolute," but that we are at present living in a separate realm called "the relative" that we need to somehow get out of and into "the absolute." Also, I've sometimes heard of Christian Scientists who consider themselves to be "absolutists" going through Science and Health and blacking out all statements they consider to be "relative" in the belief that we should quickly outgrow "the relative" and only dwell on the so-called "absolute" statements. Personally, I see the whole of Science and Health speaking to human consciousness for its redemption, and as long as anyone is experiencing human consciousness, everything in Science and Health will still be necessary for salvation.

Finally, it seems to me that going around talking about "the absolute" and "the relative" introduces another layer of jargon into Christian Science that Mrs. Eddy herself didn't feel the need of using.

[MikeDavis]

The publishing of the article by Judge Hanna that Lora refers to was apparently the first occasion when the terminology of "the absolute" and "the relative" was introduced into Christian Science. It was published in late 1911, about a year after Mrs. Eddy's death.

[W359]

I think I posted this once before, but I'm going it again, because I don't think it was the main topic of my post.

I think matter (or the illusion thereof) must have some sort of purpose. Maybe it's an outlet of spiritual reality. Maybe it's where we are supposed to learn and grow, maybe it will never go away.

Maybe we will just realize that it's just within us and, though we are born with it and all destined to live a portion of time here, it's not the truth of our being, for it is within us, and if we have realized that, when we overcome the ending of the mortal body though what is termed death, we shall see the Truth. Does this theory sound so unreasonable?

But another point to consider is, people who have died and return to Earth all report on a visual perception of those gone before, their families, and Jesus. Why? Because they weren't Christian Scientists? I don't know, no one really does, but these are points to be considered.

[adyer]

I think matter (or the illusion thereof) must have some sort of purpose. Maybe it's an outlet of spiritual reality. Maybe it's where we are supposed to learn and grow, maybe it will never go away.

Maybe we will just realize that it's just within us and, though we are born with it and all destined to live a portion of time here, it's not the truth of our being, for it is within us, and if we have realized that, when we overcome the ending of the mortal body though what is termed death, we shall see the Truth. Does this theory sound so unreasonable?

I certainly respect your thoughtfulness in working this out and I admire your persistence in this pursuit.

However, the theory you outline is not consistent with Christian Science as taught by Mary Baker Eddy. You hypothesize a man who is born in a state of ignorance (see in bold), predestined to live in this state to exit it through death and experience Truth in an afterlife.

You have more or less described a variation on orthodox doctrine.

EDIT:
One other thought, from Miscellaneous Writings by Mary Baker Eddy. This is on page 367 ("Science and Philosophy"):
Matter and evil are subjective states of error or mortal mind. But Mind is immortal; and the fact of there being no mortal mind, exposes the lie of suppositional evil, showing that error is not Mind, substance, or Life. Thus, whatever is wrongfully-minded will disappear in the proportion that Science is understood, and the reality of being--goodness and harmony--is demonstrated.
Be patient. We all learn gradually. Don't mistake "gradual" for "slow". It just means we ascend by steps not in one huge leap. Science is what it is. We cannot expect to theorize our way around it. As we grow spiritually and learn, it will make more sense and human theories will disappear.

[Starlight Rider]

Whoa! Last time I looked this thread I started was just two pages, but when I wasn't looking it suddenly it has jumped to five! Lots of interesting ideas have been expressed here.

Like Pam I'm uncomfortable with the idea that its all just a lie or an illusion or a dream. Adyer's insistence on dealing with absolutes, however, is also important, but I'm not comfortable with her (or his?) comments about counterfeits, because that implies dualism.

I stated way back in post #18 (http://www.christianscience.com/forums/showpost.php?p=814&postcount=18), that I was able to reconcile all of these diverse viewpoints by the realization that spiritual reality and material belief are merely reversals, in our own thought, of the cause-effect relationship, not an actual change in that relationship.

This relates to Pam's discussion of what the Grand Canyon and other natural wonders would look like to spiritual sense. My point was that it would look exactly the same! The only thing that would be different was our understanding of where it came from. To spiritual sense, the Colorado River would feel just as wet, and the canyon walls would look just as tall and just as red, but we would understand that they are images in our consciousness and not things "out there."

LoraHoward stated it similarly in her last two posts:

Indeed, there is only one thing going on, and this is it. It's a matter of viewpoint whether it looks good or bad, material or spiritual, but there is only one creation. (Post #35) (http://www.christianscience.com/forums/showpost.php?p=951&postcount=35)

It's really hard to talk about this stuff, because it' so easy to start thinking in terms of two things, instead of one, and this separation and dividing is exactly what mortal mind does ... My personal favorite is what Martha Wilcox or Bicknell Young said.(Sorry, can't remember which or where): "Matter is a wrong idea about a right thing." (Post #41) (http://www.christianscience.com/forums/showpost.php?p=959&postcount=41)

So for me this issue is settled, as far as it goes. But I still don't have an answer as to why we have reversed the cause-effect relationship in our perception. Was it voluntary? Was it a bad habit we got into? It is the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but why did we eat the fruit? That is still the heart of my original question, and it remains unanswered.

Perhaps its just a matter of where we happen to be when we're looking. If we looked at the solar system from a point out in space, it would be obvious that the earth rotates as it goes around the sun. But none of us are out there. We're here on earth watching the sun rise in the east and set in the west. From our perspective there appear to be two possible realities: that the sun goes around us, or that our planet rotates. Either way, they look exactly the same - from this perspective. Mankind started by choosing the most obvious explanation, which turned out to be wrong. It took much careful study of certain astronomical subtleties to get the correct view, which we all now accept intellectually. Yet most of us still think in terms of sunrise and sunset, not earth rotations, because, for reasons of either habit or convenience, it is simply easier. Perhaps the same is true of the matter/spirit problem.

[adyer]

So for me this issue is settled, as far as it goes. But I still don't have an answer as to why we have reversed the cause-effect relationship in our perception. Was it voluntary? Was it a bad habit we got into? It is the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but why did we eat the fruit? That is still the heart of my original question, and it remains unanswered.
I struggled with that for a long time. It's an unanswerable question because you might think you get close to it...or it seems important to probe it. But it's endless because it never reaches a final conclusion.

This is part of what I understand in Jesus statement, Let the dead bury their dead. The theoretical exploration of the origin of matter (as illusion or reality) cannot help me progress in an understanding of Truth. I must accept that error is a lie about Truth, treat it as such, and focus on demonstrating Truth in my daily life. The subject of the nature of Truth, Spirit, is infinite and far more fulfilling than wondering about this. I do not mean this in a condescending way...it's what I saw in those who introduced me to CS and why I took up its study. They left behind what I at the time felt I had to struggle with. I wanted the freedom I saw in them. It's the heart of sharing the gospel, as I understand it.

[W359]

You hypothesize a man who is born in a state of ignorance

Apparently he is. Were he not, we would not be stuck in this material loop, would we?

-W359

[adyer]

Apparently he is. Were he not, we would not be stuck in this material loop, would we?

-W359

I do not consider myself stuck in a material loop.

[W359]

You're communicating to me on a computer. That's material. With wires (material) and electrical impulses (matter). I'd say that's material enough. If we weren't in matter somehow, even by illusion, we wouldn't be here.

And also, if everything is God-made, then must not our ability to "imagine" matter be God-made as well?

-W359

[Starlight Rider]

I do not consider myself stuck in a material loop.

But a lot of us do, and despite our best efforts to apply Christian Science we end up with more questions than answers.

In this week's "My Bible Lesson" on Mortals and Immortals there are three questions posed at the end of the first section, and they are closely related to our subject at hand:

Take a good look at what you think you're made of - and how. What does the world say about you? What does divine Science say? How can you prove the world wrong and divine Science right?

I can easily answer the first two questions. The third has me stumped. I've had many insights that point to the divine Science explanation, but they are still largely intellectual, not something I feel I really know firsthand, much less can prove. It's like the difference between reading about Paris and actually experiencing Paris. I know about Paris, but I don't know Paris. I know about my spiritual origin, but I don't feel I know my spiritual origin. Hence the feeling of being caught in a material loop.

[adyer]

You're communicating to me on a computer. That's material. With wires (material) and electrical impulses (matter). I'd say that's material enough. If we weren't in matter somehow, even by illusion, we wouldn't be here.

And also, if everything is God-made, then must not our ability to "imagine" matter be God-made as well?

-W359There is no way I can answer this to your satisfaction.

I am not stuck in what you call a "material loop." Neither are you. I don't feel that I am; I have no reason to investigate the material loop to find a way out. Because it is an illusion it cannot contain me. It is only the claim that something finite and material could govern me.

This is the nature of prayer in Christian Science; we claim our existence as the image of infinite Mind and that it is impossible to be governed by any so-called power that would oppose Mind.

Matter cannot explain itself because it is ignorant of itself. Your answer is in spiritual understanding. This is something each of us must learn for ourselves. It is not something we can talk each other into.

[adyer]

n this week's "My Bible Lesson" on Mortals and Immortals there are three questions posed at the end of the first section, and they are closely related to our subject at hand:

I can easily answer the first two questions. The third has me stumped. I've had many insights that point to the divine Science explanation, but they are still largely intellectual, not something I feel I really know firsthand, much less can prove. It's like the difference between reading about Paris and actually experiencing Paris. I know about Paris, but I don't know Paris. I know about my spiritual origin, but I don't feel I know my spiritual origin. Hence the feeling of being caught in a material loop.

I have a thing I work with about honesty. ACD. Acknowledgment, Compliance, and Defense.

The first part is to acknowledge a premise with a simple yes or no. It can be anything. For us, let's say "I'm a spiritual idea without a single material component." Yes or no?

If you say yes, then you get to Compliance. This is a matter of aligning your thoughts and actions with your acknowledgment. Sometimes it can seem straightforward. Let's say I acknowledge that I want a more beautiful lawn this summer. (For the sake of this example, let's leave lawn service people out of it...it's Adyer vs. The Lawn!) Then to comply with that I need to do what will make the lawn more beautiful...whatever it is. But what it means is I have to change my mind about what I was doing before. So this is a direct and probing thing.

Last is Defense. Once I have acknowledged a premise and begun to comply with it in what I think, do, and say, I will inevitably confront things that would oppose the premise. In the case of lawn care, I might be confronted with, "It's too much trouble." Ok, then I didn't really mean it when I said I wanted a more beautiful lawn. Otherwise, I have to meet this opposition and not allow it to subvert what I think is true.

Without all the ACDs I cannot claim to be honest about whatever it is. In this case, lawncare.

When it comes to my being a spiritual idea, the same applies. If I agree that I am in God's image and spiritual, then I must comply with that. Doesn't seem as straightforward at first, but compliance means I must start from a standpoint of divine goodness and the fact that I reflect it...and that I do not manifest anything but divine goodness.

My compliance on this point is a disciplined approach to examine everything in my experience and ask whether I am considering myself limited, powerless, hopeless, etc. It demands that I change the way I think.

Then comes the lies. "But I seem to be in matter." Things pile up, discouragement sets in, confusion seems to reign. These, like the opposition to lawn care, are lies about the truth that my spiritual completeness comes with a consciousness and assurance of that completeness.

I cannot merely give in to the discouragement and see my forward progress stopped awaiting some answer to how this material sense of things fits in to my spiritual completeness. It doesn't belong! The material evidence is not another existence; it is only the suggestion that another existence could be real. It is up to me to accept or deny that suggestion. But that is all it is.

Every moment is an opportunity to turn away from material sense and toward spiritual sense. Regardless of how real materiality seems, it is still nothing. We must each honestly work this out by defending ourselves from these aggressive suggestions.

This is so important that the bylaws of The Mother Church mention it specifically (page 42, "Alertness to Duty"):

It shall be the duty of every member of this Church to defend himself daily against aggressive mental suggestion, and not be made to forget nor to neglect his duty to God, to his Leader, and to mankind. By his works he shall be judged, -- and justified or condemned.

[W359]

On S&H, page 173, line 6-10, it is written:

"When the supposition, the Spirit is within what it creates and the potter is subject to the clay, is individualized, Truth is reduced to the level of error, and the sensible is required to be made manifest through the insensible."

What it creates. In earlier paragraphs, they were talking about the falsity of Spirit in matter.

I would point out that, as far as I can tell, Mrs. Eddy never says that matter is in our heads or has completely no existance, but that believing it is superior to Spirit is the illusion. Something to be considered.

-W359

[adyer]

On S&H, page 173, line 6-10, it is written:

"When the supposition, the Spirit is within what it creates and the potter is subject to the clay, is individualized, Truth is reduced to the level of error, and the sensible is required to be made manifest through the insensible."

What it creates. In earlier paragraphs, they were talking about the falsity of Spirit in matter.

I would point out that, as far as I can tell, Mrs. Eddy never says that matter is in our heads or has completely no existance, but that believing it is superior to Spirit is the illusion. Something to be considered.

-W359

This speaks of the error that Spirit could be within its creation...an impossibility since its creation is idea, not matter.

W359, I'm not sure how familiar you are with S&H, how long you have studied it, whether you have had class instruction, etc. Mrs. Eddy speaks of matter relative to a false sense of existence. She makes unmistakably clear that matter is the opposite of Spirit and does not exist in the realm of Mind. The scientific statement of being (page 468) read in church every Sunday states this succinctly. If you have access to a concordance to Science and Health I urge you to look up references to Spirit and matter. You will see this for yourself.

You cannot gain what you need to know merely by conversation. It must be your pursuit -- your journey. Make it your own. I urge you to turn wholeheartedly to the textbook. Make it your companion in your search for Truth. No one can talk you into or out of anything. It is Christ within you that will speak directly to you.