What would you do with a book written by "God"?

Posted Jan. 10, 2012 by DyckDyck in Open

Anonymous Icon

commented on March 18, 2012
by dustproduction



To read a book or books written by God? How would you approach this? Would you simply deny that its possible or likely and cast it aside? Look at it curiously for amusement? Would you read it skeptically, looking for 'obvious' knock-offs or proofs?

Are you capable of judging such a book?

If you want to read it without judging it (to just learn) how would you do that?

Can learning happen without judging or using what we've already 'learned' ? Lots of Q's around this. Get the picture?

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Mar 18, 2012

    Sam Harris: Not Being Indoctrinated


  • DyckDyck Mar 14, 2012

    Slowly.. Lazu.. Frequency.. To keep the apparently slippery question on-track... without imposing or "lecturing" my views or being otherwise tricky... without trying to convince or win something has been my aim.

    The diversity of approaches to the topic question surprises and informs me. And yes, it has been a challenge for me to remain objective... to not color, mis-read, classify, judge, interpret your responses as I give mine. My job it seems, is to hear, honor, challenge with affection each response.

    Initially I was curious to get a temperature of how objective scientifically oriented people are on Noetic Forum, perhaps even where they are spiritually. I see it is I who is being tested for my openness and honesty. And so, the benefits from this discussion are clearly mine. My gratitude to all.

    Perhaps this will continue, since I am still curious how people see themselves relating to God (however they define God) via a book or otherwise.

    I read an opinion that there are really only two ways to determine if we have experienced God, actually. First is by in-person experience. Second, is in the aftermath society determines that was God. Since most people don't have opportunity to personally experience God or someone who claims to be God, they look for proof, miracles, prophesy. Not being satisfied, it is left to history and interpretation and thus the world cannot acknowledge an incarnate God in current times.

  • slowlygetnthar Mar 11, 2012

    Dyckdyck, define "God." It seems folks could not agree the book is written by God when they never seem to agree what is G*d in the first place!

  • frequencytuner Mar 11, 2012

    Every experience is a page in the book of God. It has already been written, is being written and has yet to be written, all in this very moment. Are you reading?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Lazuleye Mar 09, 2012

    Well Dyck, I didn't realize you posed the question in order to lecture about the correct answer. I'm not sure I "believe" in the separation of mind and heart, as you imply is the crux of the matter here.

    Your syntax and speech patterns are oddly reminiscent of my father who adores Ayn Rand and would sneer at us both (you and I) for even beginning this conversation.

    An intellectual discourse on the heart. Or a heart feeling about the mind? And what does that have to do with the original question? Don't answer, that was rhetorical.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Lee_Denning Mar 07, 2012

    Hmmm... DyckDyck... nice idea, by all means carry with on the storyline if temptation overcomes you!!! I'm partial to the Triple-A syndrome (ambiguity/ambivalence/allegory) when responding to such philosophical/religious/existential questions as you pose... thus my answer is couched in fiction. A character flaw, probably, but I just think it's more fun to answer indirectly, let folks read their own meaning into it... sort of like different takes on the Bible, the Qur'an, etc, heh, heh... :-)

  • DyckDyck Mar 05, 2012

    Lee_ , OK, admitted then, I let you reel me in even as I noticed my welled-up curiosity ignoring the clear filament line rubbing on my neck. Enjoyable.

    Then, tempting it is to an add-on scam toward a perhaps endless finish of your story... to develop a surprising, if not implausible notion that God was actually well disguised mother, who came to check on the only one she's ever loved... her adolescent son, at 40 seeming stuck with one of his many faceless baptisers.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Lee_Denning Mar 05, 2012

    So… I sit at my local Irish pub, tracing circles on the bar with the wet bottom of my beer glass. I contemplate whether my empty shot glass needs just another touch, courtesy of the last twenty dollar bill in my pocket. This fella walks in, carrying a box. Hat comes off; he shakes the rain off it as he looks around. Not too many of us to count -- it’s just me and John the bartender, who’s washing glasses at the far end. The fella walks over and sticks out his hand.
    “Hi. I’m God, and I’ve written this book.” He plops the box on the bar and pulls out a book with his left hand as he shakes my right. “Wonder if you’d like to buy a copy? It would help me out…”
    “I think you want John,” I thumb toward the bartender, “the Baptist.”
    “The Baptist?”
    “Ever since a fitting on the Guinness keg let loose.”
    “Oh.” God looks back and forth between me and John, makes me as the likelier mark. “Twenty bucks,” he says with a toothy smile, “a deal… secrets of the universe, change your life. Money-back guarantee.”
    I smile back at him, trying to match his toothiness. “Think I’ve heard this before, God… Old Testament, New Testament, gospels, epistles, all that stuff…”
    “This is different,” he says, rubbing the raindrops off the book cover with a bar napkin. I turn back to the bar and pick up both of my glasses, blocking his attempt to press the book into my hands.
    “Heard that before, too. Different cultures, different times, different book…”
    God looks at me, smile gone, face long. “You an atheist?”
    I consider the question. It requires a little nourishment. I wave my last twenty at John the Baptist. He fills the shot glass. Jamieson’s, the good stuff; he’s giving me sympathy for getting the tough question.
    “Dunno… define God and I’ll answer in that context.” Pleased with my answer, I raise the glass in toast and drop the whiskey down the hatch. The resulting warmth in my chest actually feels like it’s reaching out to embrace God. But he pulls away, putting the book back in the box.
    “I can’t define myself,” he says, looking sad, “never could.”
    God puts his hat on, picks up the book box, heads for the door. I drain the beer and signal The Baptist for another shot and chaser. He scoops all the change left from the twenty off the bar. Sympathy’s over.
    God exits, looking back sadly over his left shoulder.
    “Try the uptown bars,” I call after him, trying to be helpful, “better class of believers up there…”

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Mar 01, 2012

    Yes DyckDyck,

    Maybe ought ask her to dance.

  • moretocome Mar 01, 2012

    Hi DyckDyck,

    Your words show the beautiful qualities expressed by your wife. By the same token, your words reveal that these same qualities are embodied by you. That which you admire in others is also present within you (by way of Reflection).

    Much Joy to you both. :-)


  • DyckDyck Feb 29, 2012

    I like humor, moretocome. I like your humor. My wife is opposite of myself.. quiet, gentle, kind. She has attributes I need badly to learn, and the ways to get thru to teach me. I absolutely see God in her... she comes closest to having what one Buddhist Master says embodies compassion, "take all the blame and loss on yourself. give all gain and credit to others."

    Fallensoul & Lazuleye, I want to comment on the apparent disparity between acting from the intellect versus acting from the heart. In the question of 'knowing' God (as when reading a book) it seems relevant in considering, 'What is it that can 'know' God?'

    It appears that we can best function when there is harmonious relationship between the the mind and the heart (defining heart in the ancient & metaphorical sense). Science and the mind has a place in the everyday world of the material and mechanical. The heart has a place in the non-material, spontaneous, spiritual world. It could be said the heart uses the material world, including the body, to express itself.

    Certainly, the mind has capability to ponder, even intellectually understand love. But, even with proofs and precedent, this understanding is not 'experiencing' or 'knowing' and hence is dry and lifeless. Our minds cannot accept that God doesn't offer evidence or proof in miracle or concession. Our minds are hence not equipped to grasp love or faith or infinity. That's the domain of the heart.

    My heart can exist functionally to serve its purpose, when my mind understands and accepts its boundaries (it gets out of my way). Logically, this frees me... to feel my way... to explore new limitations perhaps.

    This is my quest bringing science and spiritual together to understand life.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 29, 2012

    The book Scott cited would be one written by Godess...

  • moretocome Feb 28, 2012

    What would you do with a book written by "God"?

    I would ask my wife how she found the time to write a book. :-)

    Lol....I just couldn’t resist….Love and Laughter to All.


    "The 21st century will see the emergence of a new religion; namely, Unconditional Love."

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 27, 2012

    Proverbial or actual rearview mirror? Because rearview mirrors do not much good when something is barreling towards &there is nowhere to go. Actual rearview mirrors.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Lazuleye Feb 25, 2012

    woops - fumble finger posted that before the last of that one =

    does it matter who wrote it and what is said? I think for me only the second part matters because it is where I have some potential to effect it. What if we each have "use instructions" pasted on our backs? And haven't looked in a rear-view mirror?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Lazuleye Feb 25, 2012

    I wonder - didn't read each comment but the last 2/3rds - has anyone addressed the idea of how do you KNOW the book is the The Divine One AKA G-D??

    The Christian Bible is a bunch of men talking about God and what happened - not exactly who di what when but sort of. And as we all know was a fragment of the recorded stories of that God and paradigm that another group of (old) men decided was ?? important or safe or both/neither enough - to be codified as the one and only true story of this God.

    You cite other doctrine type texts that are presumably written by the Divine One of whatever name.

    Where does faith turn to knowledge?

    I"m still trapped in part one of the question and haven't considered reading the book <quick think> well of course I would. Would i use it to guide my life depends on who I believe wrote the book!

    Then the next question for me is "does it matter?" (who wrote the book and what it says

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 25, 2012

    It does not matter what done with book. It is a book. Its the interpretations.

  • Fallensoul Feb 23, 2012

    DyckDyck: If you're hungry and you get a meal, you could sniff it, touch it, feel it, look at it, turn away from it, run away, cry, watch tv before the meal, show your dog the meal, put it on your head etc. etc. But the essence of having the meal there is for you to eat it.

    So I really hope we dont lose sight of READING THE BOOK!

    slowlygetnthar: Nice questions.
    "So, if we have these books, and we understand that our souls somehow hang in the balance, daily, when these battles are waged, what is the real purpose and destination of our souls? Are we going to Nirvana? Are we what forces are trying to gain in these battles? Are our souls just war booty or do we have more purpose here?"

    The idea would be to read the authoritative books and find out... but we could also start our own thread and summarize the essential teachings from various schools of thought there. Want to open up a new thread? I've eaten this one.

  • DyckDyck Feb 22, 2012

    It appears I've gotten in over my head when I brought up written language... here's a tiny excerpt I pulled from Wikipedia (which also covers symbol, hieroglyphs, pronto-language, etc., much older).

    A tribe known as the Latins, who became known as the Romans, also lived in the Italian peninsula like the Western Greeks. From the Etruscans, a tribe living in the first millennium BCE in central Italy, and the Western Greeks, the Latins adopted writing in about the 5th century. Previously using their native Anglo-Saxon runes, the Anglo-Saxons began using Roman letters to write Old English as they Christianized from Anglo-Saxon paganism following Augustine of Canterbury's mission to Britain in the 6th century.

    Back to my point, which simply tries to deal with "what I would do" if confronted with a book written by God, or with God incarnate? How would I recognize this experience and deal with it?

    This has been more complex & challenging question than I'd anticipated. Perspectives are so very diverse.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 22, 2012

    Everything is fair game, charliet! By that, I mean no one, no one book, nothing--- has a monopoly on G*d. So, I think all spiritual texts, across traditions, should be considered. This seems the only way to get a well-rounded vision of expression the G*d/Tao/Force/All that Is/Unnamed eternal... I don't think that texts need to be validated by any religious body in order to hold meaning.

    Dyckdyck, do you mean 500BC where you wrote 500AD? I am confused--are you referring to biblical texts? Those date back to the Second Century AD, as far as I recall, don't they? But there was written word long before they were recorded.

    And the ancient Upanishadic texts date back much much further--2500BC??? or earlier? Anyway, they pre-date Buddha by centuries, as do the ancient Taoist texts of China, such as the I Ching (@ 1000 BCE) and the Tao te Ching (@500 or 600 BCE).

    I think that, like the bible, other texts that the West tends to view as mythology are actually bearing out to represent some sort of historical fact. One example is the evidence of vitrification and residual high radiation in the city in India--Mohenjodaro?-- where some of the great battles described in the Mahabharata were to have taken place. There is plenty in the bible as well, that has been born out as fact, via archeology.

    There it is again--science finally catching up to what the spiritual texts have been saying all along!!!

  • charliet Feb 22, 2012

    Dyck Dyck

    Another question now comes to mind. Would we not also have to consider the rejected material that never was put into the supposed book written by God and would we not also have to consider the newly discovered material found in the last few decades? Would these scrolls and books not be worthy of consideration?

    You have started a good thread here, thank you.

  • DyckDyck Feb 20, 2012

    As I understand it after Darwin's brilliant work, the Christian Church decided the Bible was a book of historical account and therefore to be interpreted as such and not literally God's word. This was decided even though Darwin had no mention in his work on evolution the subjects of creation and of man.

    Another point DelamerDuverus reminds me of is that the written word was not invented till somewhere around 500 AD. Oral language was very well developed in story telling. But, there's no denying with history that the further from first hand witness the further from accuracy the report.

    And, of the seven Avatars (God-Man), the only Ones that likely lived in the age of written language were Mohammad, Lord Rama, and Meher Baba. (Others were Zoroaster, Buddah, Lord Krisha, Jesus)

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 19, 2012

    I do not mean to get too far afield from the original questions, but I was thinking that in many religions, people believe they do have books written by G*d--the bible being one of those. I am also thinking of other religious texts, for example the Vedas, the Upanishads.

    I was thinking that DelamerDuverus is raising a good question about killing for a G*d or implications for worshipping a G*d that kills. Moreover, reading the Mahabharata and Ramayan, and even the Book of Revelations, in the new testament, there is this notion that there is a spiritual battle going on. At times, it has been waged on earth (the Ramayana), and in the future, it may return to this locale (Apocalypse).

    So, if we have these books, and we understand that our souls somehow hang in the balance, daily, when these battles are waged, what is the real purpose and destination of our souls? Are we going to Nirvana? Are we what forces are trying to gain in these battles? Are our souls just war booty or do we have more purpose here?

    For me, in response to DelamerDuverus, it's not just a matter of the fruits of G*d (and there is that chapter in the Nag Hammadi that says we worship a false G*d) but what is the fruit of the soul in relationship to G*d--what do our spiritual texts say?

  • Anonymous Icon

    DelamerDuverus Feb 15, 2012

    When someone has said that God has written a book, then we would seek out the fruits of this God. If they are good and follow the Ten Commandments, then we might read it. However, we are sure that we would not understand all of it, and some of it we would put on the back burner of our mind, hoping one day to be enlightened, and we would ask for that enlightenment as an intention.

    When we threw our Bible across the room because we could not accept Joshua killing peoples who his "Lord" led him to do, and this was before reading Thomas Paine's, "Age of Reason", we wanted nothing to do with the Bible, but we wanted only the truth. We could not fathom our God telling us not to kill, but guiding us to kill in His name. That is a contradiction. It was then we were led to truth and even more truth and discovered that Joshua was a bloodthirsty beast and his "lord" was what we call the Alien Mind, what the churches call satan. In Gnostic phillosophy, Jehovah was the god of war and destruction.

    So, if we are to read a book written by God through His Messengers, we must check the fruits of this God to know which mind it is.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 14, 2012

    I would add, please. If I had an edit feature. I do not. Someone evidently, does. Thank you.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 14, 2012

    I asked for the posts of mine on this thread which have been edited for content to be removed. I never once described any situation using particular words used here, below. If these are left, I ask all posts from all boards be removed.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 13, 2012

    There is content included in what was writ which was edited AFTER I posted. If this is someones idea of a game, not amusing, not appreciated. Remove my posts, all of them from the board please.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 13, 2012

    My bad. I ought have stated I am ruined for such talk before entering in.

    Odd. I cannot for the life of me recall how I found this site.

    Edgar Mitchell, the person founded this place, was it intended to discuss religion? It is great you do, just wondering.

    Literally had a professional in health field bring up such topics totally without my participation and when suitably confused by this and uncomfortable, he became perturbed with me I was not participating in discussion. One I was not expecting. Then I finally felt pressure to answer what I am not yet realizing is a religious based question and I thought my answer was fine; seemed his head might explode because I gave a really brief answer, did not understand. I am being asked this rhetorical question, he wants reply. I give one, he was livid and stated dissatisfaction with my answer. This distressed me a good deal and still not okay about it. Especially because of the additional conversion attempts over the years. Under guise of chats. In settings these things not being discussed. At all. It like a dentist bringing up your haircut.

    So coming to board on any such topic this way, not my thing. I thought Id try. Getting accused of arguing made me realize its maybe a mistake and a half.

    In the end, have got nothing to contribute of consequence, which is fine. It is no different than discussing anything else really. Seems to be controversey on many topics. But this one takes the cake for most often..anything with god. In this case I entered in an answer or two. Now am exiting. It feels too tense, like the other q and a I mentioned.

    Am half asleep. A book on god would be placed beneath pillow to elevate it, right about now.

    It seems god is no different no more controversial than discussing any other "spirit", only the least likely to ever be found on any ghost hunt tv show, someone brought up on another thread...while no ghosts I am aware of have ever contributed a book (yet) , but both topics are open to speculation same way and everyone can be right until wrong, or all wrong, or just great. Everything is a toss up. That is to say no less controversial, either. But same essentially.

    Ten people here claim god or spirits equal energy, six over there say something else. When is energy a spirit, god or just energy? A scientist told me metaphysics principles are not intended to be used this way, to explore matters of consciousness, so beliefs are separate area since they do involve consciousness. I am not educated cant tell you. But feeling something is feeling something and knowing is that...that is what this site was about I thought. The sense of connectedness stuff.

    I did say god as a concept creates division. I still feel is most often the case. I never had this opinion in my life before. Do now.

    Not that it matters to discussion.

    If the answer is landed on, the one asked below, I will expect to see a writeup in the news papers. Until then, be well.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    According to the Tao te Ching: "The name that can be named is not the eternal name."

    So, then, how do we figure that G*d really wrote the book?

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012

    So, is this an autographed copy, is there a watermark, is it a re release, edited version or all new materials, this god book?

    Just kidding. These questions were asked, already. Only directed to the person asking the question.

    Which the question, on this display end, has been since edited. Since first I asked. So why I continue to participate in this mental experiment is beyond me.

    I neglected to ask by which name, god? Jesus, Allah, Un named, etc? As to the Author. Not the publisher. Of the god book.

    Dyck Dyck mentions attacks. Biblical texts are full of these. That is not all. But in good portion.

    I raise these things for valid reasons. Not to create division. To avoid further.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    Back to the original questions, then:

    DyckDyck asked: "If you want to read it without judging it (to just learn) how would you do that?

    Can learning happen without judging or using what we've already 'learned' ? Lots of Q's around this. Get the picture?"

    I am not sure how to answer the first question, except to say that I judge content and determine if it will be easy to absorb and digest before completely engaging with it. That's how I pick books to read, so I don't know if other folks can read without judging material. If G*d were writing a book, would I even begin to understand it?

    As for learning, if we go by the neural network model of the brain, it seems that the brain pulls up old info that corresponds/correlates/or is free-associated with the new, incoming material. Then, the brain is selective about what it deems worth hanging onto, ties the new info to the previously built framework, making a new synthesis of material. Some sort of discretionary process seems to be in place, thus, judgment seems like a built in filter--used to determine what info is relevant/useful/worthy and what's worth hanging onto. So, maybe part of our mental process would involve judgment, whether or not we wanted to be receptive to the content.

    I would also wonder if rejecting the ideas put forth in the book = rejecting G*d?

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012


    I kid you not; just moments before reading this reply of yours, I was told (by someone off line) that I apologize too much. No need for apologies. I cannot explain any better. Maybe this in particular not important. I certainly have enough things which are. Not here.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    I am sorry, but I cannot understand this part of what you are saying: " The question I had was, does this question pertain to previously released, re released or, new materials and the rest. ...This is what my reply concerned."

    Are you referring to materials folks have written on this discussion site or materials elsewhere? I don't understand to what you are referring.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012


    "that said, book or not, everything bears the signature"

    The thread pertains to what one would do with a book written by "god". You said "or not" concerning a book. I said there are numerous, proposed to be such already. The question I had was, does this question pertain to previously released, re released or, new materials and the rest.

    This is what my reply concerned. Hope this clarifies.

    Maybe I am slower to get thar than thou.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    I wasn't veering off-topic. Someone on the discussion raised the question about a book being signed by G*d. It was on-topic. That's why it was my response!

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012

    Naming that there is an argument does not make it so. You tried to veer off topic by saying book or, not.

    Controversey seems not to be serving many areas of the planet currently. Books, included.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    Hmmm... I never said, " discussion lacks involvement by individuals." That's your interpretation and gee, there was a personal attack behind it. That's what should not be on these discussion boards.

    Controversy causes reinspection of the topic, which often leads to new info, thus, possibly, evolution of theory.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012


    As to the question about autograph and your explanation of what constitutes it still comes down to interpretation doesnt it? What you just stated is part of existing ongoing controversey. And you are incorrect in saying this discussion lacks involvement by individuals. Re read the original question above. No doubt, is from the perspective of the questioner.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    I agree, controversy is not off-topic. Entries that are all about whether or not folks are offended and personal attacks are off-topic, and some are even self-indulgent where the writer/s seem to think this discussion board is about them. It's not.

    G*d is controversial. That said, book or not, everything bears the signature of rational design--is that G*d's autograph?

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012

    Besides, if all the texts ever published under the name of G were ever placed into one book, it would be too heavy to pick up. Maybe that is why so many different factions, exist all claiming to have THE book. If all got together and placed these into a single volume,it would be too crowded for everyone to get a look.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 12, 2012


    Controversey is not off topic. Anywhere the word of god has debuted, controversey follows. Not that it is the only source. As to what one does with the controversey explains probably branches of religions and war, perhaps. Or goes some way to explaining.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 12, 2012

    You are absolutely right. The G word makes for controversy. Still, let's stick to the topic!!!

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 11, 2012

    Doubtful very many concepts out there raise hackles, stir controversey as questions involving the G word.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 11, 2012

    Shouldn't this website be more about ideas than about individual egos???? Let's get on with the discussion. Focus on unity, not division. What are the commonalities to folks' responses to this questions raised by DyckDyck???????????????????????????????????????

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Feb 10, 2012


    Yes, as you state, my last post to you offered an olive branch of friendship. Since then, I had the opportunity to read your comments to this and other topics.

    I have not heard from DebReilly and do not know if she is offended. I, on the other hand, found your comments to her to be extremely offensive.

    Her comments were not addressed to you. All she did was make her "first comment" to this website by responding to the question asked by the author of this topic. Her response was an innocent, honest and reasonable response. You devoted 350 words to berating her in a manner far beyond the limits of what a reasonable individual, let alone a spiritual individual, would do [I am being kind].

    In my opinion, over the past many months, you have taken advantage of the open-minded posture of this website. You have continuously posted your rigid beliefs and often, aggressively attacked those who did not agree with you. If you think that I am being unreasonable, try also posting your typical comments to an Islamic website.

    Your most recent post to BECHAMEL reflects that you have been transformed from a lion into a lamb; remarkable transformation. If this transformation is an honest one, you will not hear from me or those who agree with me again. Blessings to the new you……Jim

  • Anonymous Icon

    Kalara Feb 10, 2012

    For DyckDyck and all the rest of me (as we are all one),

    This has been an interesting string. I would think that most people have been wounded at some time or another. I was really wounded physically and emotionally. Now I am healed. I was healed by God, that incredible intelligent energy force of LOVE that first conceived of us, brought us into being, and then let us go according to our own will, even though it saddened it. We are created in the image of God, the image of its energy, intelligence and creativity, and yes, LOVE. LOVE is so strong an emotion it scares most people into avoiding it.

    To answer DyckDyck's original question: would I read a book written by God? Of course, I would. I read many books. Why would I not want to read one written by God? Would I judge it? No. I would think about it and study it. I would learn all I was capable of learning from it. If I were able to learn anything from it, whatever I learned would become a part of my thoughts and actions. This is the same as everything that is learned. It becomes "YOU" in one way or another. To use the knowing or avoid using it, whichever way it feels appropriate for you.

    When God healed my physical body, he changed my understanding as well. Now all is well, all is well, all is well. There are no problems, only finding solutions, to the best of my now enhanced ability. I teach Love, Oneness, Compassion, and I do it as a willing servant of God.


  • DyckDyck Feb 10, 2012

    I'll keep this impersonal and say that when one is already wounded it is easy for them to react with distress and view life at full of attacks.

    It's my opinion that everyone is to some degree, wounded. I am.

    I suppose this is only one of many reasons for the conditioning and bias that prevents or colors my own 'seeing' (hearing, taking-in). But, this simple Q for many, easily turns into a human relations quagmire which seems exactly what humanity does so well.

    (original Q. "What would you do ...?") In the set of circumstances (assumptions) without many variables, a question is asked (topic).

    Only a relative few people answered forthrightly without fanfare. Most found it necessary to make modifications to the Q. Some denied the Q. Some had much to say about the Q and thought they were answering it. Most imposed at least some beliefs or certainties about what God would or would not do, or what defines such a book, etc.. (can you spot any?)

    What I'm picking up is something I catch myself doing on occasion too. I try to change or avoid a question that is too uncomfortable... as I see it leading to very delicate territory. (But, I don't want to 'appear' to do this because it isn't accepted.) This territory might, if looked at with serious contemplation, might lead to my 'house of cards' coming down (my construct of life). This can be scary. 'Apparent' reasons appear ranging from social to very private, from arrogance to fear, from ignorance, lack of self awareness, etc.. This is pretty hard for me to dig myself out of (be free of)... and I'm sometimes aware of it.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 10, 2012

    For fallensoul;

    Not sure I follow. Starting out the pointing to one version of an interpretation meaning there are others. Differing versions. My speculation remains.

    According to you, I have walked in on an existing debate here?

    This forum with people proposing to be pitted against one another while others get netted in the middle is reminding me of that story with the north wind and the sun making a wager each can get a guy to take off his coat. The wind blows forcefully, the guy pulls coat tighter around him. The sun shines creating warmth, guy starts sweating, must remove the coat to cool off.

    There are probably a number of interpretations of this story. Certain things I get from it maybe not intended by author. Sun and wind are betting on this guy. He is affected by forces he has limited awareness of and not much hope of having any control over. Neither the sun nor wind necessarily has the best interest of the person in question, it is more about a wager. Also, they are trying to get him to shed something and in one part gets him to cling tighter instead. It is a massive head game. Who knows how many times they wagered this way? Depending on the person in the coat, may not be up to being wagered on. If the wind and sun so cognizant and powerful, they could make it temperate out, working together. Instead, playing head games with the man below. Misuse of power.

  • Fallensoul Feb 10, 2012

    Good question, the answer from the Vedic version is that God is reciprocating with our desires. We have a limited amount of free will and God does not interfere with that. So Man proposes and God disposes, according to our karma. Now there are a large number of living beings who do not wish to acknowledge God's presence. They more or less want to remain in forgetfulness of God. How does God reciprocate with their desire. He does not make Himself easily available. This is why you don't see God presenting Himself and saying "Here I am, accept it." But for those who search, who can appreciate the indirect signs of his creation and intelligence, the insignia is found. It's a question of your search.

    Why allow so much stress and choas? Why does the government allow so much choas in prisons? Its due to the rebellious nature of the inmates, which the government cannot be blamed for. Our sufferings are due to our own actions and ignorance, God is not to blame for such ill desires. He has created a perfect situation but we abuse it, trying to exploit one another. So the idea is to qualify ourselves to get out of prision where real life as a law-abiding citizen exists eternally. For that one needs transcendental knowledge.

    Jim: I'm sorry you have become so offended. Its ironic that you wish to be my friend and then falsely accuse me of being "a religious fundamentalist emailing you volumes of material, who is inflexible in his thinking and inappropriate in behaviour." I'd like to clarify that I am not making any personal attack on anyone, but I certainly am challenging one's ideas. Regarding my post to Debbie. It's inappropriate to make blasphemous remarks about another's holy scripture, so I responded to that with questions which are quite rational. I apologize if she got offended. Try to respond to the ideas rather than the person Jim. I have nothing against you, Debbie or anyone here.

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 10, 2012

    Point for Dyck Dyck:

    This thread is not for identifying what beliefs people hold religiously or not and your reply about dancing reminds me why I hesitate to post certain things but apparently not hesitate enough.

    Assuming god has placed things in book and paper format and being all powerful god, have come to wonder why it left up in air with no universal insignia of some kind, maybe could markate in some way to differentiate it.
    Why allow so much chaos and stress?

    I appreciate speculating about it without people posing challenges or contribiting to further divisions. Now I know well enough to keep this to myself in the future.

    I am hampered by certain things Dyck Dyck, which impacts my ability to process things at times with my thinking. I am not always so quick to formulate conclusions. Sometimes I wonder if that is better, because it is less often I jump to them.

    If by dancing which you do not do you refer to arguing, no, let us not please. I am not interested in arguing.

  • slowlygetnthar Feb 09, 2012

    Each of us is a book written by God/the Universe/All that is/Tao--whatever you name the eternal nameless. I think we often look for God externally, when really, God is in us, which connects us, inextricably, to all else. So, who needs a book? Everything is God Thought.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Feb 09, 2012


    I notice that you made your first comment to this site on Feb 3 and haven’t posted since. I hope you were not discouraged from posting because of the response to your comment.

    I found your post to be quite reasonable and sincere. The guy who responded to you is very inflexible in his thinking and his caustic remarks to you were quite inappropriate. I generally simply ignore him, except when his comments are directed at me.

    I look forward to reading any future posts that you care to make. Please be aware that to run into a dogmatic religionist is very rare on this site. Best wishes…..Jim

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 07, 2012

    Dyck Dyck.

    Was just attempting to be social without getting drawn in to further discussion. Sorry if I offended.


    I appreciate what you share.
    About the comment whatever is writ would be by god (paraphrased) only exception might be something like Mein Kampf. Any guess on what inspired that. It was just republished. Maybe god just needs a better publisher?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Xristos Feb 07, 2012

    The book of "God" is all around you and you are writing it.



  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Feb 07, 2012


    Your advice to change “that believing something does not-necessarily- make it true” is good advice, I stand corrected…..thank you.

    Your second point causes me to realize that there are truly different levels of consciousness. Some may believe it to be an invalid analogy to see the various levels of consciousness as a ladder with the more desirable states near the top and the lesser desirable levels near the bottom, but this is the analogy that I have chosen to work with.

    I have generally believed that climbing up the ladder brought one to a somewhat permanent state. I now find that this is not true. Based on your recent words, I believe that you are currently near the top; perhaps I have been there, but in the past several days I recognize that I have involuntary taken a few steps backward. The next problem is to consider what I believe to be the cause of my backward movement on the metaphoric ladder.

    The generally accepted advice for such a movement backwards is to recognize that the cause is not to blame; it is our reaction to the cause that must be addressed. This may be good advice in most cases, but I am currently having difficulty in following that advice.

    A condition exists that is causing varying degrees of discomfort to other parties with whom I share somewhat of an affinity. One course of action would be to rise a few steps on our metaphoric ladder and address the problem from that level. Another course of action would be to temporarily take a few steps back on the ladder and address the problem on the level on which I believe that it is occurring.

    The course of action I have decided on is to wait and see if the problem corrects itself and then do nothing or make a decision based on the verbal skills that the universe grants to me. I recognize that it is not possible for you to offer advice without knowing the specific problem of which I speak, so please allow some time to pass before we continue our interesting conversation. Best wishes…..Jim

  • Anonymous Icon

    Blazen Feb 07, 2012

    In my opinion, I find God or the Will of God, within the hidden forces in most things. Within the prose of poetry, the notes (and silences) in music, the song of a bird, the glint of light on water, the subtlties. Also stronger forces within a storm, wind or crashing of waves, the dark, the silence, the thunder. God is the ultimate creator of the universe and it's laws. The beautiful, good, bad and ugly are varying degrees of these laws.

    In essence anyone that writes a book, is a form of God's creation, even the words are the creation. God pervades throughout, the ALL. I don't believe God is a personified being and the fact that "We are made in the image of God" to me, means that we are also creators!

  • DyckDyck Feb 07, 2012

    Jim, am enjoying this, yet have something to add too.

    I note a key word missing from an otherwise accurate statement (in my opinion). I would adjust your comment to "...that believing something does not -necessarily- make it true..." It doesn't seem 'knowable' what are the results of believing something... nor is it easily defined the levels of belief as it is surely on a continuum with 'hope' 'faith' 'intuition' 'insight' 'experience', etc.. and on to 'realization' & 'I am'.

    On another point that does seem related to the topic (and I often find myself making your very comment)...
    re your comment "... but have not experienced a conversion. There should be some way of getting out of this mess..."
    I'll be bold and say, not as advice but my own living question, is possible to find God in the face (or voice) of others?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Feb 06, 2012

    OOOOOOOO, I really enjoyed the banging your head against the wall comment. I didn’t think you were capable of such caustic humor. Chalk one up for your side!

    As for my comment about my neighbors, you may have been too angry to understand it. I stand by my comment that believing something does not make it true and those who accept their beliefs as absolute truth and insist on proselytizing those beliefs to others are often simply tolerated. I read the volumes of material that you emailed to me, but have not experienced a conversion.

    There should be some way of getting out of this mess. Perhaps we should reflect on the metaphor that ended our lengthy verbal jousting many months ago when we recognized that we were in the Amusement Park of Conceptual Thought. Can we agree to disagree and resume our friendship?...........Jim

  • DyckDyck Feb 06, 2012

    Dear BECHAMEL,
    As you have not yet engaged in my question I am hesitant to respond to you. But, since you're reading I'll say this, dancing is usually fun for me. But, if you want me to try to satisfy your need for proof we aren't meant to have this dance.

    BTW I meant no trap. not trying to convince anyone of anything. just an inquiry... getting a glimpse of the diversity of my brothers and sisters... and a mirror held up to me.

  • Fallensoul Feb 06, 2012

    @DebReilly: I found your post to be quite audacious.

    Why couldn't God communicate to us in written form? Why do you assume that the book of God is simply a do's and don't manual?

    While there are many cheaters and false teachings, to say that all of them are heavily flawed is frankly very arrogant. Why couldn't someone whose gained realization of God, speak about Him? As if you're actually entered into the teachings of any of these on a serious level. One should also try to understand a very important principle. That it's not just a question of philosophical reading. Its dependent on your level of consciousness. A k-school child reading a grade 12 mathematics book will reject it saying its "heavily flawed", but it is due to the child's immaturity of consciousness. So the point is that, yes one has to be very careful of divine claims, but that shouldn't exclude the fact that there is a source of knowledge that is divine and one can access that knowledge in a scientific way.

    >If we want to hear God, we need to stop searching for magic and complicated physical cand just listen to the higher part of ourselves, the >part that goes beyond language and ego, to the part that already knows."

    And why should we accept what you say above? One could claim that "Conversations with DebReilly" is also heavily flawed? In fact where are you getting this source of knowledge? One may be able to gain the truth through accessing the higher part of oneself, but how practical is that in this day and age of distraction? An easier method is to gain knowledge from someone who already knows and has communicated that knowledge through various means, including books.

    >God does not “incarnate.” That's our job, isn't it?
    Any why can't God appear within His own creation? God's incarnation is not like our reincarnation where we are forced to change material bodies. God's incarnation is in his same spiritual form. Incarnation also means to descend from above.

  • Fallensoul Feb 06, 2012

    @Rainforest: Why limit God to only energy?? Why can't God can be a Supreme person (with a form) with supremely powerful energies i.e within and without of everything?

    @Jim Centi: Regarding your last post: Try getting your head around this concept: From one perspective to bang your head against the wall or not to bang your head is really the same thing.

    Regarding your previous post about your neighbours. The true teachings of the Bible and Bhagavad Gita do not differ in their essential teachings so I do not see a contradiction in your statements. There may be many difficulties in realizing that true teachings due to a unfortunate prevalence of ignorance and corruption. The teachings have been misinterpreted, the reader/student does not know how to access the knowledge etc etc. But that doesnt mean there doesnt exist a true source of knowledge, so the point is that accepting a source of knowledge like the Bible or the Bhagavad Gita is not blind. The teachings provides hypothesis for experiements and controls that you can perform on yourself and judge by the result, just as our currently accepted sciencific model.

    The question is have you or your neighbors actually done the experiment properly?

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Feb 05, 2012

    Adding to the variety of opinions……from one perspective to believe in God and not believe in God is really the same thing.

    Those who believe in God have a concept of God that they can believe in. Atheists have a concept of god that they cannot believe in.

    Our concepts of God are not God, as our concepts our mates are not our mates and our concepts of self are not self. Concept are always at least one step removed from the thing being considered. Of course it is more fun to pretend you are not aware of all this.

    Please do not be harsh in your concepts of me. (:,

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 05, 2012

    A reply for Dyck Dyck;

    Shall your reply be interpreted as a no on the autograph then? Of the books I was raised with of god materials, do not recall a one being so marked. Maybe a watermark but I never had thought to check! The way the question was posed, thought perhaps you were hiding some new release materials under your coat, wanting to test the waters prior to introducing them. The manner in which we store books is variable with not very many making it out of here without some telltale wear. Perhaps an e book would be a better format for our household.

  • DyckDyck Feb 05, 2012

    Its fascinating to read the variety of thinking on this. There are so many responses seeming to KNOW what God would or wouldn't do or say... what he is, how he would dole out information or whatever... maybe some resentment attached. And some of these seem tongue-in-cheek, I'm supposing these would be atheist responses, no?

    Some argue from the premise we are God, yet seem without a plausible consideration of our states of 'imperfection'. Or, no constructs are offered that speaks to to the realization (or lack) of God within, or how consciousness relates to creation, evolution, and spiritual realization of the I Am God state (if there is such a state).

    I interpret to this point that several people would read such a book openly, curiously, without prejudice to the extend possible.

    Everyone else would be skeptical and probably not read such a book without proof (of some kind) of it being God's word actually, or they are already certain that this is a foolish question (impossible).

  • Anonymous Icon

    BECHAMEL Feb 04, 2012

    A question for Dyck Dyck;

    Would this book be autographed by author?

  • Anonymous Icon

    DebReilly Feb 03, 2012

    Why would God write a book? If God wanted us to have a “Do’s and Don’ts” manual, we’d have been born with it implanted in our consciousness; life would not be able to erase any of it.

    An open mind can see the works people claim to have co-authored with God are heavily flawed: the Bible, Conversations with God, A Course in Miracles. If we want to hear God, we need to stop searching for magic and complicated physical contrivances and just listen to the higher part of ourselves, the part that goes beyond language and ego, to the part that already knows.

    God does not “incarnate.” That's our job, isn't it?

  • Anonymous Icon

    kettell Feb 02, 2012

    What would you do with a book written by God? Read it.
    In fact there is a book which claims to be written by God - actually some of God's many spiritual helpers. You can find it at http://www.urantia.org/

  • Anonymous Icon

    jimkemp Feb 02, 2012

    Encase it in glass and put it in a museum so all could look and wonder how we ever believed such an authority limited our creativity.

  • Anonymous Icon

    taozen Feb 01, 2012

    Here's a sample from "Conversations With God 1" where "the man himself" gives an answer to the question:



  • frequencytuner Feb 01, 2012

    Human skepticism and prejudice. The language of "God" is not words, but the medium may be. The body of "God" is not physical, but the messenger may be. The Word of God is not subject to pitiful human interpretation.

  • DyckDyck Jan 30, 2012

    This is admittedly difficult to discuss for me. It is very stimulating to contemplate these thoughtful responses, comparing them to my own... and mostly to notice what these responses elicit in me.

    When I read (still reading) the book God Speaks, it took me a month before I even opened it, to think about how I would read it. I decided I would attempt to not try to stack it up to what I knew or to make it prove anything to me... to not use anything I'd learned to try to understand it... So, not know how, I decided as best I could, to pour the book over me and just do nothing.... Over time I am finding my construct of life is changing and I am changing.

    God (syn; Love, Infinity, etc..) is an area that defies both definition and discussion... but rather is better, or only to be experienced. Although I admit, it appears this all can be represented in words. But, I find it difficult to include words like Faith, Surrender, Renunciation... in my discussion. Other terms that people may call 'beliefs' or 'intellect' or 'knowns' or 'insights' or 'realized' or 'experienced' .... are all on a continuum of certainty of knowing, I think. I suppose I should just go for it and not hold back (not wanting to offend or bring in my own God constructs).

    Few religions of the world embody most or all of the following, due to history and their evolved rituals & authority.

    1. There is only one God (not affiliated with any "religion")
    2. Each incarnation of God (God-Man being Avatar) over the ages (one every 700 - 1400 years) ... 7 so far, are the same 'Ancient One'
    3. The message of each Avatar has been the same
    4. Due to needs of the culture, age, values, etc., 'each message has been the vernacular of the age'
    5. Man is the only species that is fully conscious (although superficially used)
    6. The journey upon arriving at full consciousness is inward (involution & spiritual). Prior to full consciousness it's evolution (physical).
    7. When a mortal man becomes God Realized he becomes a 'Perfect Master' or man-God.
    8. There are definite steps toward full God realization from Gross to Subtle to Mental to Perfect.
    9. Perfect intelligence would not be recognizable to any, save a Perfect Master or God.
    10. Hence a book written by God cannot be 'read' in the conventional sense because the reader has nothing 'real' (only our worldly illusions) for a toe-hold. One could 'pour the words over himself' and might observe himself thereafter for any possible affects.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Inspiration Jan 28, 2012

    Actually, if we are co-creators with God, then all books are written with God.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Inspiration Jan 28, 2012

    I would be skeptical.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Jim Centi Jan 27, 2012

    I have neighbors, who I try to avoid, because they believe that the Christian Bible was written by God and they claim to accept every word written in it.

    As there are millions who believe that the Bhagavad-Gita is the Supreme Source, there are also millions who believe that the Bible is the Supreme Source.

    I realize the anger that can arise when someone’s beliefs are questioned, but I feel a responsibility to say that believing something does not make it true. Those who accept their beliefs as absolute truth are victims of powerful conditioning and they share the commonality of proselytizing their beliefs……..With respect, Jim

  • Fallensoul Jan 27, 2012

    Saoirse: Well maybe you arent aware of The Bhagavad Gita --spoken directly by Lord Krishna in one piece, considered by millions to be that Supreme Source? The Vedas themselves are considered to be eternal with no human agent. Srila Vyasadeva, who is compiled and presented the majority of the Vedic literatures is considered an incarnation of Krishna, so there is no human agent involved in all of this knowledge.

    Perfect knowledge comes from a perfect source. Humans are imperfect. Therefore perfect knowledge can only originate from God, a supremely perfect person. He is that perfect teacher. Still if an imperfect human can repeat the message of the perfect teacher then that knowledge presented is also perfect. So a human agent can present perfect knowledge provided it is the same teachings of the supremely perfect person and he is authorized to do.

    Still even if one cannot appreciate the purity of the source of knowledge, you'd be a real fool not to enter into it and see what is actually being taught. And this is where most of us fall short. Appreciating this knowledge is not a simple philosophical engagement as most of us are trying to engage in here. One has to actually purify the consciousness in order to appreciate the teachings. This is the key. That Consciousness is the filter to our understanding of reality. Just like a dirty mirror. The mirror of the knowledge is there, but we cannot see it clearly. One has to first clean the mirror of the consciousness, then one will be able to see things perfectly.

    One ofcourse has to accept that teaching in full. I think its a bit of a stretch to say that everyone accepts some of it and rejects others. The True practitioner of a bona-fide teaching accepts it in its entirety.

    But the test of the authenticity of the knowledge is by application. One has to perform the experiment.

  • Saoirse Jan 26, 2012

    I think it's odd that an omnipotent god would be incapable of creating a book by any other means than coaching humans to write it for him in bits and pieces, based on vague ideas that he puts into their dreams. So, I would not be likely to believe that a book was written by God unless it happened without the use of human agents.

    It seems to me that most people judge whether a book is written by God based on how closely they agree with what it says. If it matches their personal views, then it was obviously divinely inspired, while if it espouses ideas they dislike or disagree with, it wasn't. And even when individuals claim to believe that a book -- such as the Christian bible -- is the word of God, they still have no hesitation in disregarding the parts they don't agree with or don't find appealing, considering the parts they like to be divine and the parts they don't to be irrelevant.

  • rainforest Jan 24, 2012

    Reponses to the additional questions:

    if God appeared in front of you, would you know it?
    For me, god is always in front, behind, to the sides, within, beneath, beyond, around, above, below, constantly resonating, vibrating with all that is, including myself. I as well as everything that is, are manifestations of god.

    Are you open to the appearance of God or is it impossible?
    It is a matter of perception. I appreciate god in everything, flowers, the skies, the oceans, a cricket, a frog, a child, my loved ones, a stone, a stranger... I do not limit the image of god to a human form. To me god is unfettered energy, this allows me to appreciate in any of its forms. I also believe that the universe speaks the language of possibility. Everything is possible. I had two near death experiences at two different stages of my life. These experiences contributed greatly to my deep knowing that everything is possible and to my deep appreciation of god in everything that is, whether perceived by the senses or in a deep state of meditation.

    Does this question make your feel comfort or fear? Comfort, peace, giggles, harmony, tickles and joy…

    Please use whatever 'God' is to you to answer - God to me is the field of intelligent and transformative energy that makes up the entire universe.

    Thank you for posting these wonderful questions.

  • rainforest Jan 24, 2012

    My belief is that God is energy and therefore present in everything that is. I also believe that there is no separation only oneness in a vast field of diversity. I would read this book the same way I read any other book with openness, love, respect and enthusiasm, which I consider the languages of the universe, the languages of alchemy and magic. I would allow its teachings to ebb and flow in oneness with the depths of my unconscious, fully trusting the unfolding that will follow, enjoying the bliss of my new awareness, feeling grateful for the opportunity of widening my perspective.

    Are you capable of judging such a book?
    When I shift my focus to judging, I close my ability to be open, respectful, loving and enthusiastic. And when I am closed, I cannot learn anything new. I chose not to judge and remain an open vesel.

    Can learning happen without judging or using what we've already 'learned'?
    When I was a child, I was open to learning myriad things and adding new learning styles to what I already had learned. Learning was much fun. As I grew up, I was conditioned to judge and such conditioning impaired my ability to be open, respectful, loving and enthusiastic. I am now focusing on unlearning the conditioning with the goal of recovering the magician, my inner child and allowing that inner child to continue learning without judgement. It brings me much love, peace and harmony to follow this path.



  • Anonymous Icon

    michael_1000 Jan 24, 2012

    Several years ago I had a life changing experience. I was a truth seeker looking for God, I would look for nearly 15 years before I found what I was looking for. It was through the meeting of a women that I had an intense spiritual and physical awakening. I was enveloped in love and bliss for nearly 2 months. One day while saturated in this love bliss, I drove to the book store. As I walked in to the store my experience of reality was not limited by the eye-sight alone but there was a SEEING given through the experience of love as I am. That experience showed that the idea that I could read anything to add unto me was really a very big joke. In that moment All books were filled with dry sticks, twigs, and those that sat at their tables reading their books with this intention was quite funny, and so silly, for they are also that uncorruptable LOVE/LIFE/GOD. No book can give you what you are, you are the experience of unlimited love, unlimited life, uncorruptable life, and you are INVINCABLE. When you see this you will know it. The mind does not wander in the experience of yourself.

  • DyckDyck Jan 23, 2012

    This question might be slightly exaggerated by asking... if God appeared in front of you, would you know it?

    Are you open to the appearance of God or is it impossible?

    Does this question make your feel comfort or fear?

    Please use whatever 'God' is to you to answer.

  • Anonymous Icon

    Rajneesh Jan 16, 2012

    I would look at the book often at different times of the day. Making sure to do so in a bunch of ways. This includes examining its design, reading it carefully, studying its layout, noticing its structure, taking notes, diagraming it, and leaving it in some place where it could easily be seen.

  • KYRANI Jan 16, 2012

    No book has been written by God. Having said that though there are books that contain the words of prophets and they are people who have attained an enlightened state. In such a state they are in union with God in a manner of speaking. It is very hard to describe this really. However you query about how would you read it is a point. We need a new reformation so that each and every person who is humane can reach a state of enlightenment because reading books is not good enough, even if there was a book that was 100% not corrupted in which ever way. I discuss meditation, which is a royal road to gain enlightenment in my blog at http://kyrani99.wordpress.com/ but it is in bits and pieces here and there. I discuss it in relation to the question of disease and getting well wiith medical interventions, by getting the body to do the job. Meditation is a good practice for many health reasons, but for enlightenment it is a royal road.

  • DyckDyck Jan 16, 2012

    Alas ooooooo and tally hoe hoe... but not as much value you speaking for others... just YOUR answer of how you would handle this will suffice.

  • charliet Jan 12, 2012

    I would read it as I would any other book. I would absorb, consider and judge what it had to say.

    Judge!! Yes, judge it. It is "purportedly written by God". Who has made the first judgement to "assume" that it is from God. What are their credentials, are they any more qualified than I to judge? Where was it found, how did it come to be? And many more questions.

    We judge to learn and we learn to judge, not all things are what they seem. Our nature is to judge. We were given a mind by God, as we are of him and our nature is to be curious, judge, imagine, etc. then one can only assume that he too is curious, judges and has an imagination (that would kind of explain dinosaurs - pardon the levity - God - "oh neat, big lizards --- okay, that was a mistake - time to move on, lets try something in my image")

    Yes, some may discard it and not read it at all, those we shall call "the skeptics", they will exist no matter what.

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Jan 11, 2012


    Once again, I answered your question. Read my second response below about the "fundamental framework of ideas/archetypes".

    That is how I would personally treat anything along the lines you mentioned.

  • DyckDyck Jan 11, 2012

    No answers yet to my question, which reads... What would YOU do....?

    I seek a personal ANSWER FOR YOURSELF.......... (will anyone disclose themselves?).

    I am happy to give MY answer to this quite real question, but thought I should wait to see what happened first.

    PS, take note the question is not referring to the Bible, Quran, Torah, Tipitaka, etc..

  • ProtectiveAngel Jan 11, 2012

    No problem. I'm curious about God too.

    Being curoius about God I think, What if when it says in the bible that we are made IN his image. What if the IN was just that. That we are INSIDE of God. When it says we will see him everywhere. Think of planets orbiting a star. Now think of the elements. Centers with orbiting electrons.
    Think of this theory I posted on another board. God is an alien who wants to control us. Scripture reads that God created earth, meaning that he CAME FROM OUTSIDE (alien) where we are.
    It also states in the bible that we are to serve God as SLAVES TO OUR MASTERS.

    We should view a book written by God as truth. With that said, was the bible written plainly? Over the years and several different translations it has been watered down some of true meanings I'm sure. Judge the bible? Study and understand is for me. I was surprised at some of the AMAZING stuff in there. It even lists the number of men used to build Solomons temple.

  • Gretchen Dreisbach Jan 11, 2012

    What if God isn't an entity but is actually the Universal Energy that permeates ALL THAT IS?
    And this Energy is LOVE?
    And this Consciousness is Intelligence?

    That WOULD mean that every book ever written was written by SOURCE!

    And since the Divine is not only what "is" but is also what "isn't" (as pure potential-infinite possibility) this would also mean that every book YET to be written will be written by GOD.

    We are ALL facets of this Diamond Consciousness, even if our own personal facet is buried deeply beneath some grime.

    Some Diamond facets may be tarnished, yet their fractal of wholeness is under there somewhere!

    What if we looked for TRUTH in every book ever written? Perhaps coaxing its LIGHT to peek out, even if it is deeply buried under untruths?

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Jan 10, 2012


    Yeah, Allen Watts insulted me temporarily too when I first heard that idea from him, lol.

    Sorry about that, I didn't mean any offense ;-)

    Yes, I am Christian. I don't hold it as a belief system that excludes other systems, though. But, it has always been the one that has "hit home" the most for me.

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Jan 10, 2012


    I think we did answer your question. It's just that it's a question with no simple answer. And, the answer depends on your point of view.

    For example, in some beliefs in the East, we are ALL viewed as incarnations of God. Therefore, one brought up in such a belief system, could claim all books have been "written by God".

  • DyckDyck Jan 10, 2012

    It seems I've asked a difficult question... and people are modifying it. Why?

    But it is quite simple. How would you read a book that COULD BE written by God? If you think this is an impossible situation you can't answer then, can you? If you want to talk about God or religion your not answering, are you?

    I am not a Christian or any other religion. My question really has nothing to do with religion, except to point to dogma and conditioning that seems to linger in our thinking, which surely prevents us from seeing what is real.

    So far no one has directly answered.

    Perhaps the season hasn't arrived yet to be objective about this question of how we would learn something that is totally outside our domain of thinking. Perhaps we have no way (right now) to answer. Then enough to think upon it... leave the question open.

    PS, I have such a book (written ~ 1940).

  • charliet Jan 10, 2012

    If a book were to be found that was "truly" written by God you would know. It would not condemn, chastise, judge or try to control you and your thoughts.

    It would speak truth and you would know it was true for the words would be logical and make total sense, it would give you that "ah-hah" moment.

    It would speak of love and acceptance, not hatred, war and condemnation.

    It would take the word Religion and make it one and only one, all of man's added laws, decrees and lies would be thrown out and what would be left is the law of the Universe and the understanding that we are all the same, eternal beings, experiencing this earth plain, learning what we need from it to further our knowledge.

  • ProtectiveAngel Jan 10, 2012

    First I was insulted, but I continued reading. I do see your point, that God is much more than words. God says the word is him. I would say yes, but until the day we meet him, they are still words.
    I have to ask if you are a Christian?

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Jan 10, 2012

    I'd like to reply this post in another way too, that is probably more of a direct answer to your questions anyow.

    I feel this is where a study of comparitive mythology/religion is so very important. What compartive mythology (as well as certain branches of psychology) has shown, is that at a fundamental level, all religions are saying the same thing. They all contain the same fundamental truths. Each religion contains a set of symbols and ideas that have a certain subjective tint to them, which is based on the culture and time period they are found in, but nevertheless appear to all reference an objective truth at a more fundamental level.

    So, by taking on this study, you end up with a framework of fundamenal ideas (or archetypes as Carl Jung liked to call them) .

    If some new book comes along "purported to have been written by God", or even just inspired by God, you can use the above mentioned framework to perform a litmus test.

  • Anonymous Icon

    EthanT Jan 10, 2012

    Alan Watts once said, "I believe the Bible should be reverently and cermoniously burned every Easter".

    A rather shocking statement, but he had a deeper meaning. In particular, he was referencing Peter when he talked about the "spirit that creates life, and the letter that kills"

    Worshipping scripture is basically a modern form of idolatry. As Watts points out, most modern day folks won't confuse a golden calf for God, but it is still very easy to confuse a set of ideas for God, because ideas are more abstract and tenous.

    God is beyond all ideas and concepts, or likely to at least be beyond the ones we are currently able to form. So, to get stuck on some limited picture of him, as presented in any particular religious scripture, or set of ideals, is likely to fall short of His ultimate nature.

    This is what Mesiter Eckhart meant when he said, "The ultimate leavetaking, is the leaving of God, for God". Or what, Heinrick Zimmer meant when he said, "A person's God is his limit", since our idea of God usually represents the "highest" we can imagine at any given moment.

    So, I guess my point is that any scripture, or religious book, must be read while keeping this in mind. Sure, it may be a "divinely inspired" message that ultimately comes from a divine origin, but the message came through a human channel. And, all human channels act as "filters" which can distort the message. In additon, the book would be talking about something in words, which ultimately is beyond words, so automatically this divne message would be "diluted", as well.

    Going past the "letter" that kills the message, and to the spirit that "creates life", is the key. God ultimately won't be found in any book, but within the heart, mind and soul of every man. God's ultimate nature will be found through the spirit, or through direct experience, not some set of words coming from a limited language. Books, scriptures, are just there to help each of us get started on the journey.

  • BobNCONUS Jan 10, 2012

    My humble opinion is that God, no matter how you conceive it; is probably not writing books. However, the books that reportedly God has written, were through profits (often thought to be a God) or just prophets. In receiving messages from God or the Devine it is difficult for even the most attentive to decipher the concepts and these concepts are subject to the receivers’ interpretation. Many Books from the Bible to Nostradamus, seem to be obscure to say the least. In many cases I believe the writer may not exactly understand but writes the message that is received and now we must haggle over what the meaning is.

Stay in touch with IONS