Eckhart Tolle Quote: Thoughts?

[immortalson]

Hi Talk-Grace,

I would like to know what you think about this quote from A New Earth by Eckhart Tolle:

"A new heaven" is the emergence of a transformed state of human consciousness, and "a new earth" is its reflection in the physical realm.

End Quote

Thanks.
Barb

[Lou]

imo the heavens and earth was ruling structure of a religious system. At he parousia of Christ that ended. We know relate with God on a personal level.

[Amie]

Lou's insight is something I am still wrapping my brain around. It is true that "heavens" was a place above in local and it was seen as the higher (in position/status) abode of God. It is also true (okay, imv it is true) that God is with us right where we are and so positionally has become as a friend.

I also get the idea of "realms" so to speak - that there is a mortal one, and an immortal one. I would agree that the coming of the "Kingdom" to earth meant a transformed heart and would be interested to know if "heart" as I understand it and "consciousness" as Tolle understands it, are the same. I would agree that because of the transformed heart, that the immortal realm is reflected here as in:


1Co 15:49 And as we bore the image of the earthy man, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.

Amie

[Jotham]

I enjoyed Tolle's writings (Power of Now & New Earth). I will also admit that his writings IMO would be viewed by most mainstream "Believers" as heretical or at least dangerous to one's faith in a personal God. I got out of his writings that part of consciousness is the idea of a "God" that is basically the energy/spirit and permeates all of creation and is not a personal God, but rather an intelligent loving force behind it all. And that WE are that God/Force.

Now personally i am trying to play the what-if game incorporating Tolle's version of "God". I don't know if i like the idea of some impersonal "Force", loving, intelligent, et all being "God". There is comfort in the idea of a God that somehow knows one's name and every deed...or, was that for the OT/NT saints and we are into something all together different this side of the event-horizon? Lou does have a good point and i have grabbed hold of that some time ago for the heaven/earth idea (that it was political and not going to be an earth-shattering-renovating thingy).

Cheers,
Thom

[Me Again]

Re: your comments, Thom. I believe that men like Tolle can be beneficial reading to believers in a personal god. I enjoyed reading Deepak Chopra's writings, even though I disagree with a fair portion of it. There were times when he hit the nail on the head - and gave a more accurate description of god than most "conservative" scholars, due to his open-mindedness. I believe Tolle is probably the same way.

ed

[Lou]

Heavens and earth was a system of religious/covenant rule and in light of the passage below I see no was in God’s present economy it can exist post parousia.



1 Cor. 15:23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those [who are] Christ's at His coming. 24 Then [comes] the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.

[Me Again]

Lou,
I think I remember your views on the kingdom/new covenant/new heavens and earth; and if I remember correctly, I disagree with them - respectfully. :)

I think that Jesus brought a NEW (or more properly "RENEWED") heavens and land (eretz/ge). The NEW heavens are where righteousness dwells, i.e., Jesus is the ONLY authority under the watchful eye of the Father. The NEW LAND is where Jesus rules - in his kingdom of priests.

[Lou]

Ed I believe that God’s plan has come to fullness, I also believe that Apostle Paul spoke for God. 1 Cor. 15 covers past, present and future from Paul’s perspective. So when Paul says at the parousia “all rule and all authority and power” is brought to an end I take it literally.

I know that there they are those that say “heavens and earth” have nothing to do with rule and authority but from the beginning (Genesis 1:16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.) That statement is much stronger what the literal sun and moon would do.

To bring “heavens and earth” into God’s economy is just a way for man to place him(her)self as a mediator between God and his children.




1Cor.15:20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, [and] has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man [came] death, by Man also [came] the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those [who are] Christ's at His coming. 24 Then [comes] the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy [that] will be destroyed [is] death. 27 For "He has put all things under His feet."(ps.8:6) But when He says "all things are put under [Him," it is] evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28 Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

[Me Again]

No I agree that heavens and earth have to do with God's authority. I just believe that it says that he puts down all rule and authority, he doesn't mean his own throne, upon which he would rule as the Father's vice-regent. Just as when David brought the ark of the covenant into Jerusalem to signify that his throne would actually be God's throne, so Jesus sitting down on the Mercy Seat was signifying the same thing. God the Father would be King, but would reign through His Son, Jesus.

That's the reign we are in today, IMO. We are in the "kingdom of His Son" which is "forever."

ed

[Barry]

Hey folks
I'm still working on this topic.

So IMHO I see some points on the various sides of this topic.
There is a difference between the "reign" while there are still enemies and the "reign" of what we call the thereafter.

I'm not at a point where I think I can present anything of my view very coherent.
Nevertheless LOL, what it deals with IMHO is "love".
In old covenant terms "all authority is put down". In fulfilled terms it means that love reigns thus God reigns thus Christ's obedience which destroyed all enemies reigns thus the first-fruits which ushered in the Kingdom of heaven reign.


Just a thought.
Barry

[immortalson]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the opinions and thoughts. I like the parallel scrip used copied here:

1Co 15:49 And as we bore the image of the earthy man, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.

Do you think that this denotes process as in when consciousness unfolds the earth will reflect that unfolding?

Thanks,
Barb

[Amie]

Barb,

I can't speak to the idea of unfolding consciousness because I don't fully understand what you mean by that. If my answer is lacking due to that ignorance, maybe you will help me to understand?

I think that the heart of God was already revealed and that humanity has responded to that as any child in pain would -- some are in denial because they don't even love themselves, some want to hang on to performance mindedness so they can display their righteousness (they wouldn't have that need mind you, unless they felt less to begin with), some are still afraid to put down rituals because they are less confident.

I think that the reaction of freed slaves is a good example of how we humans tend to respond. Some celebrated, some were angry, some couldn't believe it, etc..

NONE of the responses negated their freedom. Because reality is reality, the world will reflect it. Maybe even this acceptance of reality could be seen as a sort of consciousness of it. There is a difference biblically I think, between those who inherited the covenant itself, and those who would partake of the life therein. Basically, we can't smell roses that we are not conscious of even if someone put them in front of our face.

Was there ever a day that you had less faith in God's love? Why did you feel that way? How do you feel now? If you and I are truly aware of a beautiful reality, surely our own stories will also be indicative of what others are feeling.

The short of how things were for me when I felt less faithful is that I was ashamed of myself. I couldn't look at me in the mirror, much less even think about God seeing me. I did what I could daily to put it out of my mind - though that didn't always work.

More and more I feel that theology will not change the world. The world has already been changed and perhaps we could model love to others.

What are you thinkin' about?

Amie

[Lou]

Quote Ed
I think that Jesus brought a NEW (or more properly "RENEWED") heavens and land (eretz/ge). The NEW heavens are where righteousness dwells, i.e., Jesus is the ONLY authority under the watchful eye of the Father. The NEW LAND is where Jesus rules - in his kingdom of priests.

Ed there is biblical support for a son to be king under his father.


Dan 5:1-8

Belshazzar the king made a great feast for a thousand of his lords, and drank wine in the presence of the thousand. 2 While he tasted the wine, Belshazzar gave the command to bring the gold and silver vessels which his father Nebuchadnezzar had taken from the temple which had been in Jerusalem, that the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines might drink from them. 3 Then they brought the gold vessels that had been taken from the temple of the house of God which had been in Jerusalem; and the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines drank from them. 4 They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold and silver, bronze and iron, wood and stone.

5 In the same hour the fingers of a man's hand appeared and wrote opposite the lampstand on the plaster of the wall of the king's palace; and the king saw the part of the hand that wrote. 6 Then the king's countenance changed, and his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his hips were loosened and his knees knocked against each other. 7 The king cried aloud to bring in the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers. The king spoke, saying to the wise men of Babylon, "Whoever reads this writing, and tells me its interpretation, shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around his neck; and he shall be the third ruler in the kingdom."
NKJV


Here “Belshazzar” is king while his father is king over him. The thing is that Jesus was king on David’s throne and like David was a righteous and conquering king.


Acts 2:29-30

29 "Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne
NKJV

Christ finished the thousand year reign.



Rev 20:6
6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
NKJV


The problem with a continuing Kingship is that God was King and wanted people to recognize him as the only true King.



Hos 13:9-11

9 "O Israel, you are destroyed,
But your help is from Me.
10 I will be your King ;
Where is any other,
That he may save you in all your cities?
And your judges to whom you said,
'Give me a king and princes'?
11 I gave you a king in My anger,
And took him away in My wrath.
NKJV






Quote Barb:

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the opinions and thoughts. I like the parallel scrip used copied here:

1Co 15:49 And as we bore the image of the earthy man, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
Do you think that this denotes process as in when consciousness unfolds the earth will reflect that unfolding?

Thanks,
Barb


Barb the way that verse is translated is makes it somewhat misleading. Here is what I believe is an more accurate translation.



(Rotherham) 1 Corinthians 15:49 And, even as we have borne the image of the man of earth, let us also bear the image of the man of heaven

I like the way Amie put it.

[Jotham]

Ed, (and every one!) thank you for your thoughts and insights. On the Tolle consciousness thingy...a further clarification on my current interpretation and questions:

I mentioned in my post that i have interpreted Tolle's concept of consciousness / teachings as to include the idea of an impersonal "God". Expounding on that, is the idea that God includes the idea of a Loving, Creative Intelligence that desires to manifest itself into the human existence. Included in that idea is that of a force/collective that is all inclusive of all creation.

Though Tolle states that his teachings are non-religious in nature if find them to be permeated with religious tone. I'm not saying this is bad or good. And i'm also not saying i dissagree with any of his concepts...I'm just having a hard time playing the what if game that is based on something other than my idea of what "God" should be.

...That idea included the concept of including in my running internal dialog such words as "Father", "Lord" etc... which, if i'm interpreting Tolle's concept are not really useful (that is a politically correct way of stating it).

I'm all for being corrected on any of the above. Not trying to pick a fight, rather i'm attempting to get some working definition in all this teaching. And how, if at all, it applies to life as we know it as it concerns Faith, and Life and in what is called Christianity?? Or if at this point in humanity...we are beyond "Christianity" ??

Blessings,
Thom

[Lou]

Ed, (and every one!) thank you for your thoughts and insights. On the Tolle consciousness thingy...a further clarification on my current interpretation and questions:

I mentioned in my post that i have interpreted Tolle's concept of consciousness / teachings as to include the idea of an impersonal "God". Expounding on that, is the idea that God includes the idea of a Loving, Creative Intelligence that desires to manifest itself into the human existence. Included in that idea is that of a force/collective that is all inclusive of all creation.

Though Tolle states that his teachings are non-religious in nature if find them to be permeated with religious tone. I'm not saying this is bad or good. And i'm also not saying i dissagree with any of his concepts...I'm just having a hard time playing the what if game that is based on something other than my idea of what "God" should be.

...That idea included the concept of including in my running internal dialog such words as "Father", "Lord" etc... which, if i'm interpreting Tolle's concept are not really useful (that is a politically correct way of stating it).

I'm all for being corrected on any of the above. Not trying to pick a fight, rather i'm attempting to get some working definition in all this teaching. And how, if at all, it applies to life as we know it as it concerns Faith, and Life and in what is called Christianity?? Or if at this point in humanity...we are beyond "Christianity" ??

Blessings,
Thom

Oprah and Tolle are starting their own religion, watch in the future when those disagree will be condemned by the movement.
I may not of stated this the “political correct” way but I believe political correctness is the belif that you can pick up a turd by the clean end.

[Amie]

Thom (and all),

Tolle's discovering of this method was through his own dissociation from him-self. I agree with a lot of stuff that he says, yet I don't click with the disconnectiveness. A friend of mine pointed out (from an article he wrote on his website titled "The One Thing" that he wrote that people must meet three requirements for awakening (performance stuff imo).

First, "there must be a readiness on the part of the reader, an openness, a receptivity to spiritual truth, which is to say, a readiness to awaken. For the first time in history of humanity, large numbers of people have reached that point of readiness, which explains why millions have responded so deeply to The Power of Now."

If I am not "awakened", am I there for not ready, closed, not receptive to truth, etc? I find that tone condemning.

Second, " the text must have transformative power. This means the words must have come out of the awakened consciousness rather than the accumulated knowledge of a person’s mind. Only then will a text be charged with that power, a power that goes far beyond the informational value of the words. That is why such a book can be read again and again and lose none of its aliveness."

This one confuses me, lol. The words of his book must come out of an awakened consciousness in my mind? I must take on his words as my own and then those words will have power? Why would I want his words to have power over me?

Thirdly, "the terminology used needs to be as neutral as possible so that it transcends the confines of any one culture, religion, or spiritual tradition. Only then will it be accessible to a broad range of readers world-wide, regardless of cultural background."

I can respect and appreciate his effort at inclusiveness. Neutral words can reach across religions rather than becoming stagnant in one, I agree.

I thought about that too since I call myself writing a book which will include the bible story as told on the sort of spiritual and psychological level that we tend to recognize around here. I was concerned somewhat, about writing a non-inclusive book -- yet another one for the Christian bookstore shelves (If I'm lucky) among the zillions. Yet I think that the story as we often share it IS inclusive -- that God IS inclusive and revealed that through Jesus to everyone regardless of culture or religion.

I see myself as "Christian" in modern terms in that I believe that Jesus was Savior. I don't see it biblically as the first fruits were those that Christ literally entered into and took on his identity. I don't think that the point of the whole thing was a new religion.

Just some thoughts.

Amie

[Amie]

Another interesting quote by Tolle in that article:


We are running out of time. From the perspective of the ego, that’s bad news and will give rise to fear. From a higher perspective, the running out of time is exactly what is needed for the new consciousness to come into this world.

[immortalson]

Ed, (and every one!) thank you for your thoughts and insights. On the Tolle consciousness thingy...a further clarification on my current interpretation and questions:

I mentioned in my post that i have interpreted Tolle's concept of consciousness / teachings as to include the idea of an impersonal "God". Expounding on that, is the idea that God includes the idea of a Loving, Creative Intelligence that desires to manifest itself into the human existence. Included in that idea is that of a force/collective that is all inclusive of all creation.

Though Tolle states that his teachings are non-religious in nature if find them to be permeated with religious tone. I'm not saying this is bad or good. And i'm also not saying i dissagree with any of his concepts...I'm just having a hard time playing the what if game that is based on something other than my idea of what "God" should be.

...That idea included the concept of including in my running internal dialog such words as "Father", "Lord" etc... which, if i'm interpreting Tolle's concept are not really useful (that is a politically correct way of stating it).

I'm all for being corrected on any of the above. Not trying to pick a fight, rather i'm attempting to get some working definition in all this teaching. And how, if at all, it applies to life as we know it as it concerns Faith, and Life and in what is called Christianity?? Or if at this point in humanity...we are beyond "Christianity" ??

Blessings,
Thom


Hi everyone (Thom),

I had a thought I wanted to share about your message above that has helped me. When Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was, I AM" I think he was stating the following:

Abraham was the "Father of the faith" the eldest of the elders, and Jesus Christ was stating before all religion, I AM. He exists outside of any religion and even outside of time. For me, Judaism and Christianity provided a context in which to come to know God at least in part. But I want to know the part that exists outside of the box of religion. If we are to truly embrace the kingdom age, do we still need the box?

Thanks,
Barb

P.S. Lou, I really chuckled at the turd comment.

[Amie]

Barb,

I think that some do still need the "box" per an internal need. On one hand I think that love itself helps them to come out. On the other hand, I wonder what it is that drives me to want to "help" them, lol!

Amie

[immortalson]

Ed, (and every one!) thank you for your thoughts and insights. On the Tolle consciousness thingy...a further clarification on my current interpretation and questions:

I mentioned in my post that i have interpreted Tolle's concept of consciousness / teachings as to include the idea of an impersonal "God". Expounding on that, is the idea that God includes the idea of a Loving, Creative Intelligence that desires to manifest itself into the human existence. Included in that idea is that of a force/collective that is all inclusive of all creation.

Though Tolle states that his teachings are non-religious in nature if find them to be permeated with religious tone. I'm not saying this is bad or good. And i'm also not saying i dissagree with any of his concepts...I'm just having a hard time playing the what if game that is based on something other than my idea of what "God" should be.

...That idea included the concept of including in my running internal dialog such words as "Father", "Lord" etc... which, if i'm interpreting Tolle's concept are not really useful (that is a politically correct way of stating it).

I'm all for being corrected on any of the above. Not trying to pick a fight, rather i'm attempting to get some working definition in all this teaching. And how, if at all, it applies to life as we know it as it concerns Faith, and Life and in what is called Christianity?? Or if at this point in humanity...we are beyond "Christianity" ??

Blessings,
Thom

I have a friend named Des Walter who when he speaks he will not use many Christian catch phrases (Christianese) so your mind will not be brought to a preconceived doctrine.

I have read Tolle's books and others that have basically the same message and I think they hope to relay an idea while using a language that will be inclusive of many religions. I don't think he is advocating a context void of any religious tone but I do think he (and others) are trying to bring us out of religion into spirituality while not trying to create a new religion per say.

I have had to adjust to the nomenclature (as I am sure many that have been speaking Christianese all their adult lives have had to do as well). I feel what this new thing offers is a perspective outside of religious context no matter what the belief is.

I think that God put himself inside of Judaism so that we could have context. Judaism led us to Christ, and Christianity led us to, well,... error through its many divisions, factions and sects.

I think this move will bring us back to center and will magnify the teachings of Jesus Christ albeit void of doctrines that cause schism.

Barb

[adhitthana]

Hi Talk-Grace,

I would like to know what you think about this quote from A New Earth by Eckhart Tolle:

"A new heaven" is the emergence of a transformed state of human consciousness, and "a new earth" is its reflection in the physical realm.

End Quote

Thanks.
Barb

It is an interesting thought. :)

I did like Tolles interpretation of the parable of the ten virgins. It was the same as that of John A Sanford in his book The Kingdom Within, The Inner meaning of Jesus Sayings

[Dena]

imo the heavens and earth was ruling structure of a religious system. At he parousia of Christ that ended. We know relate with God on a personal level.


I'm a-going WAAAAY back here, and I haven't yet read Tolle (on my ever-loving list!), but I remembered something I read in "Beyond Creation Science" --

Those guys made the claim that the phrase "heavens and earth" when used in the OT, refer to the former covenant, and those within it.

So, we now have a new heavens and earth -- a new covenant.

Shalom, Dena

"The unanswered questions aren't nearly as dangerous as the
unquestioned answers."

"We turn to God for help when our foundations are shaking only to
learn that it is God shaking them." - Charles West

"Naked is having no clothes on. Nekkid is having no clothes on and
being up to something."

"Our truth, when it becomes the ONLY truth, ceases to be truth."

"While we're not fearful of tasting new things, we don't necessarily
swallow all that we taste."

[Lou]

Hello Dena and welcome. I believe that we are now in the eighth day(age). In the eighth day God took care of all (gen.2:6) and required nothing from man. The eighth day is were all has been accomplished and sin has been dealt with. We benefit from the Church fulfilling the New Covenant but don’t believe we are still in the New Covenant.


Jeremiah 31:31 " Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah --

Israel and Judah were the firstfruits (Church) of the New Testatment.

[Dena]

Hello Dena and welcome. I believe that we are now in the eighth day(age). In the eighth day God took care of all (gen.2:6) and required nothing from man. The eighth day is were all has been accomplished and sin has been dealt with. We benefit from the Church fulfilling the New Covenant but don’t believe we are still in the New Covenant.



Israel and Judah were the firstfruits (Church) of the New Testatment.


Hi Lou, and thanks for the welcome!

I'm not sure I understand your sentence here: "We benefit from the Church fulfilling the New Covenant but don’t believe we are still in the New Covenant."

So, we're not in the New Covenant?

I'm in the "deconstruction/defragmentation" process of this paradigm-shift ... coming from a traditional eschatology, into this fulfilled eschatology, so I'm getting things in bits and pieces, and trying to form a big picture.

Too bad we don't have a handy-dandy flannel-graph, no?:cool:

Shalom, Dena

"The unanswered questions aren't nearly as dangerous as the
unquestioned answers."

"We turn to God for help when our foundations are shaking only to
learn that it is God shaking them." - Charles West

"Naked is having no clothes on. Nekkid is having no clothes on and
being up to something."

"Our truth, when it becomes the ONLY truth, ceases to be truth."

"While we're not fearful of tasting new things, we don't necessarily
swallow all that we taste."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Lou]

Jer.31:31" Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah –

Hebrews 8:8 Because finding fault with them, He says: "Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah --

The New Covenant was made only to (Unified) Israel and bring all God’s promises to fullness. That was the first century Church. The first century Church is the foundation of what we now have, a personal relationship with God. Once their purpose was finished there is no need for prophets, teachers and priests we now can relate to God and fellow man without conditions.

Sorry it took so long to get back to you.