existence before birth

[Laurie]

Mrs Eddy makes it quite clear that death is not a stepping stone to eternal life. It is just a transitional stage: "As man falleth asleep, so shall he awake. As death findeth mortal man, so shall he be after death, until probation and growth shall effect the needed change." (page 291)

But can we extrapolate from that statement? Can our existence NOW be dependent on growth we had (or didn't have) prior to birth? Most protestant religions, however, believe that a baby is born with a clean slate - without sin. But if life is eternal, then surely we have existed prior to birth (but not necessarily on this plane of existance - I'm not talking about simple reincarnation) and we had experiences which influenced our spiritual growth.

So what do Christian Scientists believe? Are babies born without sin? with a clean slate? or do we have experiences prior to birth that may or may not affect us on this plane of existance?:confused:

[Merry1]

I don’t think I can speak for all Christian Scientists, but I can try to tell you what I think about it. Mrs. Eddy describes mortal existence as a waking dream. Just as in dreams when we seem to be having a certain experience and it seems absolutely real to us even though it is just a dream, so it is with our experiences in matter. Just as our sleeping dream doesn’t really affect our waking experience (unless we allow it to by thinking about it), our material experience (the waking dream) doesn’t affect our real existence at all except, maybe, to the extent that we allow it to in belief. Looking at it this way, I think the answer to your question is no. From a spiritual standpoint, our real existence is not dependent on our spiritual growth. Our eternal existence as the pure, perfect, and spiritual ideas of God, created in His image and likeness, is not now and never was material, so we don’t have to grow in order to achieve it. Instead it is innately and permanently ours before, after, and even during the time that we seem to be experiencing life as material beings. Understanding this means we can see not only babies but every person as without sin, and our experience as sinful mortals as nothing but an illusion, a dream of existence in matter, not the reality of our existence at all. Whether or not this particular dream that we are currently having is an outgrowth or an evolution of an earlier dream, I really don’t know; however, I’m not sure that it much matters. When I am dreaming at night and within that dream I find that I am in a bad situation, I sometimes try to figure out, while I'm still dreaming, what went wrong in my dream-experience to get me into that predicament so that I can undo my mistake. What always gets me out of the bad-dream situation, however, is not fixing my mistake within the dream but, rather, waking up to the fact that I never made the mistake in the first place. Death is not a stepping-stone to eternal life because it’s just another part of the dream of life in matter. Just like I can’t escape the sleeping dream by changing my experience in the dream, I can’t escape a belief in material life by changing the material experience through death. I think it is awakening to the reality of existence that is the growth Mrs. Eddy thought we needed to experience in order to effect change in our material circumstances. By awakening to our real existence as God’s pure and sinless children, we find it is no longer possible to believe that the material experience is real, and it loses its hold on us. Then we understand and recognize our own experience as having always been and as continuing to be spiritual, not material, so what we thought was real while we were dreaming that life was material (and whether we thought it during one dream or many successive dreams) is of no real significance.
Does that make any sense?

[Laurie]

It makes sense but it doesn't actually answer my question.

If death is not a stepping stone to eternal life, can we actually say
that birth IS a stepping stone to innocence?:confused:

[Merry1]

I guess what I was trying to say is that I don’t think so because if our spiritual, eternal perfection is an established fact, as Christian Science teaches, then we are always, already completely innocent. We don’t need a stepping-stone to innocency because we are already there, and our seeming experiences in matter, whether they are material birth, death, or anything in between, don’t contribute to or detract from the reality of our innocence at all.

[jamshep]

Laurie, there are several questions in your post.

First, is our life here dependant on life we had in our existance prior to birth?
If we remember that we are speaking about this myth called material life, I say Yes. Death itself is not a stepping stone. But the growth in understanding we make in this experience-- every bit of growth out of the belief that matter is real-- helps us in this human existance...and in the next plane. To me it would seem logical that the growth we made in the past existence[s] helps us in this one as well.

Second, is a baby pure at birth? That baby is no more or less innocent than you and me. Sometimes human innocence gets confused with divine innocence. Humanly that baby is going through that process of realizing its total connection with the divine--as are you and me. Actually, right here-- right where we seem to be in a less than perfect state--we are comprised only of divine qualities.

"But the spiritual, eternal man is not touched by these phases of mortality"
S&H 311:31

[Laurie]

Thanks all for your most insightful comments. I'm going to think about it for a few days and get back to you. Please don't think I'm ignoring your responses.:rolleyes:

[Starlight Rider]

I think it may be relevant to this discussion to remember that there are not two realms, spiritual and material, but only one - the spiritual. As I understand it, the so-called material world, or Earth as we call it, is simply the spiritual world, Heaven, improperly perceived. Sin therefore is not a matter of guilt or innocence, but merely "missing the mark" as the word sin was originally defined.

Christian Science, being scientific and not prone to speculation, is more interested in what can be proven here and now. It is not particularly interested in speculation about a pre-existence we cannot at this stage observe. That's not to say your questions are irrelevant, but with no real evidence available to most of us at this stage I feel it is better to "let the mystery be" (as a song puts it) than to rely on or act on something that can only be based on mere belief.

The song I quoted above was from "Let the mystery be" by Iris DeMent (http://www.irisdement.com/lyrics.html). The full chorus goes this way:

Everybody's wonderin' what and where they they all came from
everybody's worryin' 'bout where they're gonna go when the whole thing's done
but no one knows for certain
and so it's all the same to me
I think I'll just let the mystery be

[Laurie]

"It is not particularly interested in speculation about a pre-existence we cannot at this stage observe. "


Well I was actually thinking that we can observe the effects of that pre-existence by the lack or abundunce of spiritual growth or problems that a person has. I haven't completely thought this through but I was wondering if people who seem to have a smooth spiritual life have just learned more during previous phases of their life and that people who have more spiritual challenges just haven't yet learned these lessons?:confused:

[NYCtown]

"It is not particularly interested in speculation about a pre-existence we cannot at this stage observe. "


Well I was actually thinking that we can observe the effects of that pre-existence by the lack or abundunce of spiritual growth or problems that a person has. I haven't completely thought this through but I was wondering if people who seem to have a smooth spiritual life have just learned more during previous phases of their life and that people who have more spiritual challenges just haven't yet learned these lessons?:confused:
I've never met anyone who's said they've had a smooth spiritual life. ;) Some might make it look easy, but when you get to know that person, sometimes they share past struggles -- and even struggles with faith itself. I guess Jesus had few doubts and really understood his unbreakable relation to God, but even so, there were bumps along the way...you know, that whole crucifixion thing. ;)

But it makes sense to me that the lessons we've learned before this experience on earth (and we had to have learned some, right?) means that we don't have to relearn them here. And the stuff that we haven't mastered before this earth experience ends, will be mastered eventually. It's never too late!

[jamshep]

I've never met anyone who's said they've had a smooth spiritual life. ;) Some might make it look easy, but when you get to know that person, sometimes they share past struggles -- and even struggles with faith itself. I guess Jesus had few doubts and really understood his unbreakable relation to God, but even so, there were bumps along the way...you know, that whole crucifixion thing. ;)

But it makes sense to me that the lessons we've learned before this experience on earth (and we had to have learned some, right?) means that we don't have to relearn them here. And the stuff that we haven't mastered before this earth experience ends, will be mastered eventually. It's never too late!

I agree, NYC. There's no 'smooth life'. If we're really trying to better understand and demonstrate what is truly real, we'll be challenged. Because matter seems to be king here. But Mrs Eddy says, in essence, that Love forces us to accept what best promotes our growth. Actually its when everything seems really humanly satisfying that we need to be on guard most, I think.

We can certainly never judge where someone else is in their spiritual progression. Someone may appear to be smoothly sailing along in a certain area because they've already made tons of progress in that area. Or they may appear to be sailing because they're not yet ready to overcome that certain lesson and so Love isnt forcing progress in that area yet. One thing is for sure: we never come upon a challenge that we're not able to overcome!

[imjim]

"If death is not a stepping stone to eternal life, can we actually say that birth IS a stepping stone to innocence?"

Jesus disciples once asked about a man born blind, “Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” (John 9) Jesus reply “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.” (John 9)

Jesus, recognizing no cause or effect from matter, turned the thoughts of the disciples away from a material sense of things back to God, Spirit, as the only Cause. Mrs. Eddy, in a similar manner to Jesus, directs our thinking away from matter back to Spirit as the only Cause with her statement that “death is not a stepping stone to Life.” (S&H 203:17)

Man is found perfect (innocent) only in God, Spirit. Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I Am" (John 8: 57-59) which points toward the eternality of the Christ (his existence before any human form). Doesn't this preclude any supposed “innocence” found in material existence? If death can afford us no understanding of Life, can it truly be said that birth affords us an understanding of innocence? Are not both extremes of a supposed material existence?

Jim

[Starlight Rider]

Well I was actually thinking that we can observe the effects of that pre-existence by the lack or abundunce of spiritual growth or problems that a person has. I haven't completely thought this through but I was wondering if people who seem to have a smooth spiritual life have just learned more during previous phases of their life and that people who have more spiritual challenges just haven't yet learned these lessons?:confused:

It would seem reasonable to assume that our pre-existence affects our current experience in some way. But I would think it would have a greater influence if we could actually remember what came before. Your questions are good ones. I just don't know if we have the ability to answer them satisfactorily.

CS has always been my foundation, but it does seem to leave out a lot of questions like this. Thus I have no qualms about exploring other spiritual writings to see if I can glean any truths from them to help fill in the gaps. (I personally don't believe any one belief system gets everything right, or covers the whole of the Infinite.)

I don't necessarily subscribe to this theory, but Neale Donald Walsch's Conversations with God says that we have intentionally "forgotten" our pre-existence in order to experience life from a fresh perspective and to experience what we are not in order to better understand what we are. Our task, according to this theory, is to remember what we really are and to "create" our individuality by expressing God's creativity. It has its own internal logic, and there may be some element of truth to it, but I can't necessarily endorse it. Something still feels like it is missing from the explanation. I just throw it out there as a possible direction for further inquiry.

[livinglightly]

I think we have to be careful about biting the bait that says that life is horizontal. Looking at material life, perhaps we've grown used to thinking of life as "yesterday", "today", and "tomorrow".

My understanding of eternal Life is not about lots of tomorrows and countless yesterdays.

Two things from Science and Health, I find helpful.
"Mortals have a very imperfect sense of the spiritual man and of the infinite range of his thought. To him belongs eternal Life. Never born and never dying, it were impossible for man, under the government of God in eternal Science, to fall from his high estate."

"Life is eternal. We should find this out, and begin the demonstration thereof. Life and goodness are immortal. Let us then shape our views of existence into loveliness, freshness, and continuity, rather than into age and blight."


So perhaps here, we are shaping our views of existence. Instead of a horizontal model, we are exploring loveliness, freshness and continuity. Not being born and dying. Mary Baker Eddy also says that "Jesus saw the perfect man..."

I'm guessing that means he saw continuous existence forever and eternally fresh and lovely. Our language may not be able to completely express this new model. Yet a glimps of this present perfection heals.

One definition of "continuous" is "having the function of absolute value". I'd like to think of each of us having absolute value right now. not a part of the number line of life.

[NYCtown]

I think we have to be careful about biting the bait that says that life is horizontal. Looking at material life, perhaps we've grown used to thinking of life as "yesterday", "today", and "tomorrow".

My understanding of eternal Life is not about lots of tomorrows and countless yesterdays.

Two things from Science and Health, I find helpful.
"Mortals have a very imperfect sense of the spiritual man and of the infinite range of his thought. To him belongs eternal Life. Never born and never dying, it were impossible for man, under the government of God in eternal Science, to fall from his high estate."

"Life is eternal. We should find this out, and begin the demonstration thereof. Life and goodness are immortal. Let us then shape our views of existence into loveliness, freshness, and continuity, rather than into age and blight."


So perhaps here, we are shaping our views of existence. Instead of a horizontal model, we are exploring loveliness, freshness and continuity. Not being born and dying. Mary Baker Eddy also says that "Jesus saw the perfect man..."

I'm guessing that means he saw continuous existence forever and eternally fresh and lovely. Our language may not be able to completely express this new model. Yet a glimps of this present perfection heals.

One definition of "continuous" is "having the function of absolute value". I'd like to think of each of us having absolute value right now. not a part of the number line of life.
This is really good stuff. It still makes sense to me that lessons learned aren't repeated...no retrograde steps...but you've got me thinking in new ways. Thank you!

[livinglightly]

Mary Baker Eddy often makes reference to the "relative" or how the world appears to us humanly
.

The difference I feel she makes, and what distinguishes Christian Science, is that she doesn't reason from the "relative". As she says in her chapter "Christian Science versus Spiritualism". "Mortal existence is an enigma."

My understanding is that spiritual existence, or commonly known as the "kingdom of heaven" offers the clear picture of what is truly happening - reality.

Perhaps when ever we begin to reason from the standpoint of mortal existence we fall into a type of spiritualism, the belief of individual personalities - Personalities that are growing and progressing along the life's continuum.

Christian Science offers such a radically different model. What I do know is that an understanding of this Science, brings harmony and heals - just as Jesus did.

Do babies have a cleaner slate than each one of us? I would have to answer "no". We are as fresh and clean as a babe to the degree we are willing to accept and wear our spiritual identity. Maybe that is why we are told we must be "new born". My understanding is that we are "new born" every minute.

Innocence, freshness, promise - what for me babies represent, remind me of who I am. Promise for each and every one of us.

[Starlight Rider]

I think we have to be careful about biting the bait that says that life is horizontal. Looking at material life, perhaps we've grown used to thinking of life as "yesterday", "today", and "tomorrow".....



That's a very good point. We tend to look at things within a framework of time, with cause and effect. In eternity, which is the absence of time not infinite time, the concept of cause and effect breaks down.

[Courtenay]

Hi everyone,

In her book Miscellaneous Writings, pp. 64-65, Mary Baker Eddy addresses a question that's related to what we've been discussing: "Is it possible to know why we are put into this condition of mortality?" (We could connect that with: Where did we come from before this, and did our experiences "before" affect where we are now?)

She answers in part:

"The only evidence of the existence of a mortal man, or of a material state and universe, is gathered from the five personal senses. This delusive evidence, Science has dethroned by repeated proofs of its falsity.
We have no more proof of human discord, - sin, sickness, disease, or death [those "tough parts" that, it's been suggested, could be caused by something before our birth] - than we have that the earth's surface is flat, and her motions imaginary....
Every question between Truth and error, Science must and will decide. Left to the decision of Science, your query concerns a negative which the positive Truth destroys; for God's universe and man are immortal. We must not consider the false side of existence in order to gain the true solution of Life and its great realities."

To sum that up as best I understand it: In Science, we're not looking at things from a limited, material-sense viewpoint, asking "How did I get here? Where was I before this life? What did I do back there that got me here??" Mrs Eddy makes this point throughout her writings: "Never born and never dying, it [is] impossible for man, under the government of God in eternal Science, to fall from his high estate." (S&H p. 258) Or, as a marvellous Sentinel article says, "you cannot find a cause for something that is not true." (Laurance Doyle, "Do the Spiritual Math", Feb 27 2006, p. 16) So our pre-existence is not a state we had "before" this human experience that had some influence on where we are now. We actually can never find a cause (here or anywhere else!) for any human discord, because it is not real, and to find a cause for it would be to give evil a place in God's Allness - which it simply cannot have. This is why (as someone's already quoted), when the disciples asked "who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?", Jesus responded by healing him - thus taking away the whole premise of the question.

As best I understand it - and others have mentioned this - we can't comprehend pre-existence by thinking in a linear fashion: pre-existence - birth - human life - death - hereafter. Pre-existence is not a state of perfection (or otherwise) that we had before birth, we somehow lost (by our actions or by choice), and now we're striving to return to it. Our "pre"-existence is actually our NOW-existence - as God's perfect, spiritual, forever-innocent expression of Love. (That's true for ALL of us.) We're just learning that we have never lost this at all!

I love what a friend of mine once told me - when her daughter was born, a friend wrote on their congratulatory card: "How wonderful to know that she [the baby] never left heaven!" How wonderful to know that none of us ever have! It doesn't matter where we seem to be to mortal sense (baby or adult, carefree or struggling) - none of that ever touches who we really are. Babies are simply a beautiful symbol of the free-from-mortal-illusion innocence that we ALL have!

(I think that, too, answers the query about Christian Science seeming to "leave out a lot of questions like this". It doesn't at all - it only seems that way sometimes to finite human logic, which can't grasp the infinite. Christian Science is actually not a belief system (or even really a religion)... it is THE Science of being. Honestly, it really does cover everything - I realised that so clearly while taking Primary class instruction (and I too had tried plenty of human philosophies and belief systems - all full of "gaps" - before I found CS!). If it seems Christian Science leaves something out or doesn't answer a question, then either the answer will become clearer as we grow in our understanding of God, or we'll see that the question itself is irrelevant, as Mrs Eddy's answer quoted above indicates - because it deals with a false sense of existence that we're losing, not trying to explain!)

Courtenay :)

(P.S. There was a great article by Michelle Nanouche in the CS Sentinel of Jan. 15-22, 2007 (double issue, pp. 10-11), which examined the question of pre-existence - also a beautiful classic article by Violet Hay in the Sentinel of May 14, 1955, called "I Was There" (it's in the new Anthology of Classic Articles that you can get from Reading Rooms). Also, in the "roundtable discussion" section of this website, you can see some answers to a question about karma - the idea that we suffer in this life for our sins in a previous life. Those might be helpful too.) ;)

[radiopotty]

Now I am confused. But while I ponder all the terrific answers - I have a question too,

Given that we existed prior to human birth in harmonious motion with the Divine Mind - what happened that brought us into this seeming material state. How did the 'mortal dream' commence?

Should we just not accept that this is enigma - being untrue - can not be answered because there is no answer to a lie?

[radiopotty]

Now I am confused. But while I ponder all the terrific answers, I have a question too.

Given that we lived a prior life in harmonious motion with the Divine Mind - what happened to us as individuals that brought us to our current state? Do we accept that there are as yet to be born children living in a conscious state with God that are going to be brought - almost against their will, in to human existence.
Is this enigma just a lie? And as such can not be answered since there can be no truth to the lie????????

Frank

[Starlight Rider]

Now I am confused. But while I ponder all the terrific answers - I have a question too,

Given that we existed prior to human birth in harmonious motion with the Divine Mind - what happened that brought us into this seeming material state. How did the 'mortal dream' commence?

FYI, We've been discussing that very question in the Why are we here? (http://www.christianscience.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116) thread.

[pam]

(I do recommend checking out the thread mentioned above, its too funny, these 2 discussions ending up with the same thing!)

Imagine watching a movie, or dreaming a dream, all the analogies we so often apply to this sort of discussion....there you are: enthralled! totally wrapped up in the story! its so real! youre loving it, or hating it...but how did it start? Well, you went to sleep and something was on your mind, or your subconscious wanted to tell you something, and you have this crazy dream...or you wanted to see that movie, you rented it, or went over to the cinema, and allowed yourself, your imagination, to be taken in to the world in the movie. Its an experience you are having. Its real in that it affects how you think about things...it may lead to a spiritual insight that enlightens you to such a point that you have some physical proof of it (if its the movie or the dream, you may cry or laugh or feel terribly exhilerated...it may inspire you to take up some sport, or contact a long lost freind, or write a screenplay yourself- this would be physical evidence that you watched the film, had a great dream). ....and THEN you wake up, or walk outside after the movie, and feel disoriented, confused, Wow, It seemed so REAL!

In human life, we ''have that dream'', ''see that movie'', do something with our life, inspired by the dream we are having/the movie we are watching...then the human life is over, we reflect, look at our acheivement, what we learned, how we progressed with it, and then, well, I dont really know! But I imagine there is more of the same, based on what we learn, what we like, what we want to do next.....but it all goes on in a subjective, personal, mental state, more, or less(!), aware of the fact that it is not the Reality Of Being, Not The Real World, not The Big Picture. God is a conscious constant power, like the sun that always shines, even if we decide to sit in the shade!

And this is just an analogy based on what I think! I dont really know...but based on things we read in the Bible, other great mystical writing world wide, the writings of Mrs Eddy, who seemed to have some pretty cohesive ideas (!), this is what we can deduce, and try to put into words we can understand...it seems plausible, reasonable.
pam

[shelly]

I refer back to Mrs. Eddy's statement in the chapter Christian Science versus Spiritualism often. She says "Mortal existence is an enigma...." She goes on to say that the mortal senses cannot inform us of what is real and what is delusion.

I've found that questions about mortal existence cannot satisfy my deep desire to understand the nature of reality. They only leave me frustrated.

Later MBE says that it is only through the "revelations of Christian Science" that we can understand the nature of reality. To me that means that we can only find our answers in our desire to know God, and spiritual reality intimately.

Some may say this is begging the question, but material existence is not a reality. It is not a logical, principled truth or body of knowledge. Birth, death, have nothing to do with God's Kingdom. Material birth and death do not have anything to do with the Christ. There is no correlation or some part of it that needs to be understood.

Perhaps that is what is hardest. Maybe we think that if we understood these material concepts, because they hold such importance within material existence, we would have a better understanding of God.

I think it's like looking at palm tree to get a better understanding of Alaska. The only lesson to learn is that "there are no palm trees in Alaska".

That just gave me an insight. Maybe by becoming so clear as to why material birth and death are not spiritual and have nothing to do with reality, one could come to a better understanding of God, eternal Life.

[radiopotty]

material existence is not a reality. It is not a logical, principled truth or body of knowledge. Birth, death, have nothing to do with God's Kingdom. Material birth and death do not have anything to do with the Christ. There is no correlation or some part of it that needs to be understood


Thanks. That will do fine.

[Herschel]

FYI, We've been discussing that very question in the Why are we here? (http://www.christianscience.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116) thread.

As a 4-year student of CS I find one question constantly nagging at me. If mortal life is an illusion or unreal what is its purpose? Is there a relationship (union) between mortal consciousness and immortal man? I think CS fails to address these (and similar) questions In Sci&Health. Help.

[solo]

In my opinon the you mention it ,isn't without sin ,the belief that life in matter is not slate or with out sin. This belief has long...before the history of our planet.,before 100 thousands years ago..

[pattyp]

In the paragraph ‘Continuity of existence’, Mary Baker Eddy writes: “If we live after death and are immortal, we must have lived before birth, for if Life ever had any beginning, it must also have an ending, even according to the calculations of natural science. Do you believe this? No! Do you understand it? No! That is why you doubt the statement and do not demonstrate the facts it involves.” (p. 429)

In Miscellaneous Writings, she explains that “Jesus’ true and conscious being never left heaven for earth.” Then surely it can be said of our “true and conscious being” – not as mortals but as ideas of God – that we never left heaven (harmony) for earth either.

The ‘continuity of existence’ is beautifully explained in Science and Health, where we are told that “God expresses in man the infinite idea, forever developing itself, broadening, and rising higher and higher from a boundless basis.” (p. 258) This refers to the only man you and I really are or ever will be, and not to the “old” man that we seem to be.

We are already God’s infinite ideas, and our “true and conscious being” has always been developing itself, not only during the forever that we were experiencing before the suggestion of birth, but also in the forever that we are experiencing right now in what is mistakenly thought to be a here today/gone tomorrow sort of thing.

Without the slightest interruption or lapse, our broadening and rising higher and higher as “God’s infinite ideas” continues unabated in the forever that some might call the “hereafter”. But there is no hereafter in the forever of infinity. Even when every last vestige of mortal sense has been “swallowed up in victory”, even then our development as God’s infinite ideas will still be broadening and rising higher. And can we even imagine such glories!

Did Jesus believe that Life is eternal? Yes! Did he understand it? Yes! He never doubted the ‘continuity of existence’. That’s why he was able to demonstrate the facts of Life, clearly rising higher in demonstration, even before our very eyes.

So what are the present possibilities of our own wondrous development as God’s infinite ideas? Jesus gave us an amazing example of how it can play out for us out right here and now. So . . .

“Let us then be up and doing,
With a heart for any fate,
Still achieving, still pursuing,
Learn to labor and to wait!”

[W359]

How about this theory? Someone tell me if I'm right.

God exists outside linear time. If he creates something, it's eternal. Maybe birth on Earth is a material time measurement for "when" God creates us. Because if he creates us, we take up an eternal state, and have always existed. Does that make sense?

-W359

[W359]

Pam's post above makes a lot of sense. What is Heaven? If it's just a mental state, what is there to do there? Certainly eternal life, able to communicate with the greats of the past would seem quite awesome, but I don't want to go through life just recursively thinking "it's all error, it's wrong, it's a lie." That's pessimism! Christian Science is happy! We don't need to hate matter, just know it's not the Truth of the universe.

There's nothing wrong with dreaming, long as you know you aredreaming. Just like (if you belive in this sort of thing) there's nothing wrong with having poor eyesight, long as you know about it so you can get glasses.

-W359

[W359]

Pam's post above makes sense. I don't want to go though life thinking "it's a lie, it's error, it's wrong." That's pessimistic! Christian Science is happy! Sure, it's true, but we don't need to hate matter. We only need know it's not the true nature of the universe. We don't need to go through life looking at everything and despising it because it's not real (or only real to unreal sense... does that make sense? :))

There's nothing wrong with dreaming, as long as we know that we are dreaming! Just like (if you believe in this sort of thing) there's nothing wrong with having poor eyesight, just so long as you know about it so you can get some glasses.

-W359