I wrote a few posts about the one people’s public trust (OPPT).
Those posts if you get a chance to read kind of get progressively skeptical, my last one especially. I feel I’ve been a bit harsh, or better to say not open – which really means I’ve not displayed a great deal of humility. I’m working on that.
I did however meet a few people tonight who are really inspired by all this at the Sydney meetup about OPPT. Lisa Harrison was one who I felt was very sincere and she’s one of the core group. I didn’t go and challenge anyone on those points I raised on my last post, as that wasn’t my intention. I just wanted to learn about this from real people off the Internet. I just believe all in all, you get a better sense of people with face to face interactions, not necessarily with words, sometimes despite words and you just don’t get that on the net.
Anyway, I do however think it would be beneficial to look at having a more open presentation of what I wrote about – in relation to who and what our creator is and what our purpose is, and in the end that would just make it more inclusive. You might say something like at this point in time this is what is understood as the purpose of creation but it is a continual source of discovery and revision etc. rather than stating these things matter-of-factly like was done. If any one thing is infinite, then it follows learning about anything is infinite too, so its always fruitful in my mind for any theory to be in a space of openness.
Yeah but like I can talk about being open 🙂
I’ve actually emailed Heather who started OPPT a few weeks back asking whether those things where open to being revised, given I believe what I was quoting was a revised version from the original filing anyway. She’s not replied but I imagine thousands of emails hit her publically published email, so a bit of a long shot there. I suppose in some ways it doesn’t matter, it seems that it served its purpose in that it was a catalyst to getting a lot of people seeing the fiction of this system we believe we are under or subject too.
What’s important from all my postings on this subject is that people are not about raising one view of the spirituality, the creator and the purpose of creation as being higher than others, especially given no one really has the authority other than God to say they know all there is to know. Of course we can use logic and experience to determine what is closer to the truth. But only God could state that with absolute certainty, so there’s got to be some arrogance on our part to believe we know the full picture. So it’s more about being in the spirit of openness that counts.
The opposite to that is just how dogma is made, and with dogma, people start enforcing things on others regardless of repecting others free will or sovereignty. So that was a red flag for me which I mentioned on the last post I made on the OPPT.
Overall, I feel if OPPT or the movement that is generated out of it sticks to its core points, it would not only steer clear of being misused to exercise power over others but will be much more embracing:
1. We are all of equal value, unique and free souls,
2. So we are all personally responsible for all our thoughts feelings and actions, past, present and future.
3. No one but our creator has authority over us. And no one has authority to stand as an intermediatary between our creator and us.
That pretty much is their main message as I first understood it and for me its a solid one as each is logically provable. It was just the additional stuff on the revised filling that threw me off my initial enthusiasm, and which made me question things.
The thing is, OPPT, or anything similar, or anyone else won’t take away our personal and our world-wide problems, we individually and collectively only have the power and authority to do that. If rather we’re handing over any authority to anyone or anything else, we’re back where we started, in a system of our creation that oppresses us via our willingness / consent in the end to do so.
It just looked to me that many of those drumming up support on Facebook and blogs (like me), just got overwhelmed by the feeling that suddenly an event and a group of people would take all their problems away. You see that right there is a denial of personal responsibility. It’s understandable, as for most of our lives me included, fear has governed us. Because fear governs a lot of our choices, we caused a lot of harmful outcomes, each of us, and who wants to look at oneself in the mirror and see that? We want to just feel good, we want someone to take the burden away.
It’s like that myth that Jesus died for our sins. As far as I’m aware, Jesus died because he was murdered, it was just wrapped up in a nice package and sold to us – and for many years we kept buying it. It wasn’t anyone’s doing, it was God’s plan, he did it and because of that, we have an open licence to do whatever we want so long as we believe a bunch of fictions and go to church every Sunday.
I’m not saying that’s the core teachings of the church, but you can see how it could be easily swallowed and practiced that way.
So my point is, if that is what happens with how people see OPPT or anything, whichever way you look at it, it will be a platform for problems not solutions.
Anyway, I think I’ve said more than enough on this, so I’m not going to go on with it like a broken record.
What was good though for me is meeting real people, not Internet avatars. It actually helped me to see or maybe closer to feel that these people are sincere seekers for substantial positive change. That’s what I was left with after tonight.
So in the end, real change, both personal and collective as far as I can see, is achieved by all and each of us.
For me the fruit of change is demonstrated by acts of love. If something like OPPT, or Divine Truth, or the Cassiopeian Experiment, or whatever brings people to have more compassion, kindness, integrity, truthfulness / honestly – all qualities of real love, then it is worthy and I support it.