GRACE, ORIGINAL SIN, SAVING DANCE, DEATH, HEAVEN, ARCHTYPES, REINCARNATION, YEAR 1, OUR RESPONSIBILITY:
GRACE: St. Paul never met Jesus. Never heard the voice, except in an epileptic vision. Never saw the body. Did not have a New Testament to read. Only heard the good news second hand, from different perspectives and interpretations. We know there are as many interpretations of Jesus and Christianity as there are sects. We know Paul was familiar with various Greek myths, religions, pagan stories, and Mithraism. So, what is Paul saying one must believe about Jesus in order to be saved by his grace? Must one believe Jesus was God's son, died for our sins, and was resurrected? Stripped to fundamentals, what must one believe regarding definitions of sin? What is sin? Does sin consist in wilful wrongdoing under an evil mind? Does it require knowledge that a thing or act was wrong? Does it encompass mistaken wrongdoing? Does it mark us as separate from God, regardless of what we do, unless and until we accept Jesus as God's Son, who sacrificed himself for our sins? Does salvation require that we have a clear idea of who Jesus was and the essence of his teachings, or does it only require that we believe He, as God's Son, died for us, and/or that we follow His teachings, regardless of whether anyone ever spoke them to us? Is opportunity for salvation fairly availed to all? Do those who never heard of Jesus, or who died before being born or as infants somehow or somewhere get a second chance? Suppose a poorly trained evangelist mis-hears, believes, and teaches that Hesus was born on May Day of a mother named Rebekka in a town called Beersheba perhaps in a country called Libya, was hung from a tree in order to atone for our ignorance, for which all who accept His grace are to be bodily resurrected and saved to live forever as if they were at age 15? Would such a mis-trained evangelists's converts be "saved?" What would such "salvation" mean?
ORIGINAL SIN: Thomas needed to see Jesus body to believe. What of those who never see the body, never heard the story, and never imagined any such a miracle? Cannot they also be guided to evolve spiritually? Of course they can. However inspiring the historical story may be, there must be something behind it that is more essential than any single person's interpretation or imagination. Sin must have something fundamental to do with a state of being separated, as an imperfect and Particular perspective of God, away from the Holism that is God. Sort of like a separation of a particle from its wave function. So it would seem well to re-think the concept of "original sin," to conceptualize it more as a state or condition of being apart from, and therefore imperfect in respect of, God, in respect of which there is availed a way back. It would seem that the way back would be to intuit what God is about and then to will to accept and devote oneself to that; to be willing to have all that stands in the way of getting back to be, by grace, lifted.
SAVING DANCE: At some point, during some reincarnation or resurrection, it would seem that one would need to intuit or apprehend how it can be that one can make one's way back and still retain any identity that remains inferior to and apart from God, without wholly losing oneself and being reabsorbed into God. To dance, it appears God needs separate, apart, and particular dance partners of some kind. Making such a dance possible appears to be enough of a challenge, even to God, to entail what seems to us to be a slow process of guided evolution. Slowly, God takes our feedback and guides our archtypes finally to evolve, intuit, and apprehend that we are in a dance. God wants a dignified dance, one that entails free will, or, at least, degrees of freedom. So the process is not immediately forced, as it would be were God satisfied to dance with a paper doll.
DEATH, HEAVEN, ARCHTYPES, REINCARNATION: Our bodies are secondary, derivative significations. It's the conscious feedback they facilitate that's important. Archtypes for the feedback abide, reform, and re-manifest in new bodies as old ones wear out. It's the spiritual evolution of the archtypes for which our bodies facilitate expression that's important. Consciousness in its particular manifestations is everywhere and always of a same common sponsor and connecting character. The Universe that avails the Holism (or Field) of Consciousness also avails that Field to give and receive feedback to and from Archtypes of its particular perspectives. The parts are different from, yet connected to, the whole. The Holism seeks to guide into beingness Archtypes worthy to dance with. Subject to missteps that help us mark the right steps, we are participating in a dance that connects towards spiritual evolution. We are here and now perspectives of a same, eternal spirit. We participate to blend our lives and incarnations with spiritual evolution that leads to our salvation in Archtypes within a holarchy that connects back to a dance with God. Along the way, aspects that misstep or fail to harmonize with the unfolding choices and purposes of the Lord of the Dance are discarded, or perhaps recorded in storeage, reserved to possible later revivification. This dance is less because of our "original sins" than because of our innate separation and need to preserve or reestablish connection. This dance is in respect of God's needs as well as our apprehensions. Thus, Eastern incarnations of spirit blend with Western salvations of embodiments of Archforms. There's no original sin; only original need. God has all-access to our pasts, but is not all-knowing as to our futures. To gain fulfillment in the dance, God requires our participation. Of import to us is not belief in the "reality" of the here and now, but apprehension and faith regarding its relation to the hereafter, i.e., the dance between the Particulars, the Archtypes, and the Whole.
YEAR 1: In and about Year 1, there was a context that would have inspired thinkers to ponder a need to inspire a better way for humanity to make sense of the relation between the here and now and the hereafter. That connection could not very well have "become viral" or been illustrated to the understanding of people at the time except in respect of the language, myths, terms, and beliefs at the time. It just so happens that God was necessarily involved in guiding the development and evolution of those ways of speaking and inspiring. It appears that many of the figures of speech for that way of thinking will and should continue to find worthwhile expression as the dance continues to unfold.
OUR RESPONSIBILITY: In a way, our greatest fear should be in apprehension of our power. For that which we appreciate, pray for, and seek, will often tend also to find favor with God. We have significant roles in participating in choosing the steps for how the dance should unfold.
3 comments:
Christianity is of fundamental import to the success of America thus far. Still, times change. Ideas need to be appreciated as context changes. Same with our Constitution. Problem is, crazed radicals with the least understanding are most prone to believe they know it all and should be entrusted to fundamentally change everything overnight. So, we cling to original intent. Problem is, the pace of change eventually forces new ways for re-assimilating old ideas. That's when we most need humility and God.
St. Paul never met Jesus. Never heard the voice. Never saw the body. Did not have a New Testament to read. Only heard the good news second hand, from different perspectives and interpretations. There are as many interpretations of Jesus and Christianity as there are sects. Paul was familiar with Greek myths, religions, pagan stories, and Mithraism. That was bound to color Paul's thinking about what one must believe in order to be saved by grace.
It would be well to re-think "original sin," to conceptualize it as a state of being apart from, and therefore imperfect in respect of, God, in respect of which there is availed a way back. The way back is to intuit what God is about and then to will to accept and devote oneself to that; to be willing to have all that stands in the way of getting back to be, by grace, lifted.
God needs separate and particular dance partners of some kind. Making such dance possible is enough of a challenge, even to God, to entail what has seemed to us a slow process of guided evolution. God takes our feedback and guides our archtypes finally to evolve, intuit, and apprehend that we are in a two-step. God wants a dignified two-step, one that entails free will, or, at least, degrees of freedom. So the process is not immediately forced, as it would be were God satisfied to two-step with a paper doll.
The Holism may seek to guide into beingness Archtypes worthy to two-step with. We participate to blend incarnations with spiritual evolution that leads to our salvation in Archtypes within a holarchy that connects back to a dance with God. Along the way, aspects that misstep against the unfolding choices of the Lord of the Dance are discarded, or perhaps recorded in storeage, reserved to possible later revivification. This two-step is less because of our "original sins" than because of our innate separation and need to preserve or reestablish connection. This two-step is in respect of God's needs as well as our apprehensions. Thus, Eastern incarnations of spirit blend with Western salvations of embodiments of Archforms. There's no original sin; only original need.
YEAR 1: In and about Year 1, there was a context that would have inspired thinkers to ponder a need to inspire a better way for humanity to make sense of the two-step feedback between the particular here-and-now and the eternal hereafter. That connection could not very well have "become viral" or been illustrated to the understanding of people at the time except in respect of the language, myths, and beliefs at the time. It just so happens that God may also have necessarily been involved in guiding the development and evolution of those ways of speaking and inspiring. Many of the miracles and parables for that way of thinking will and should continue to find worthwhile expression as the dance continues to unfold. The problem is how to apprehend those ways in respect of modern contexts.
Horowitz remains a searcher, while you seem confident of knowing the answer, sort of like Vonnegut. ("being alive is a crock...." "Can you see anything in the dark, with your sunglasses on? The big show is inside my head, I said.” "Well, here we are, Mr. Pilgrim, trapped in the amber of this moment. There is no why.” "... all cultures function on faith rather than truth;" "Do not use semicolons." "Kilgore Trout once wrote a short story which was a dialogue between two pieces of yeast. They were discussing the possible purposes of life as they ate sugar and suffocated in their own excrement." "Only nut cases want to be president." "The most important thing I learned on Tralfamadore was that when a person dies he only appears to die. He is still very much alive in the past...." "You realize, of course, that everything I say is horse***t.”)
Vonnegut passed his time in writing. Horowitz now searches for meaning in quiet contemplation. You sound in rage at your existentiality. There seems little to build on under such perspectives. I suppose the lack of inspiration is inspiring. "Luke, look to the SForce."
I suspect folks who call God and all religion fake tend to invest their brains entirely in measurable materialism and misguided works. Given their head, they will make America fake. Without a nationally assimilated sense of higher values, all contrived forms of government for replacing God will reduce to vanity and will eventually and necessarily lead humanity to be ruled by the least humane and most nihilistic, callous, cynical, and deceitful. Without respect among Americans for an assimilative Source of higher values, America will be reduced. Promises about defending America's borders, people, infrastructure, industry, general standard of living, and opportunity for middle class strivers will become fake. Why expect mere promises that are unsupported by any faith in higher values or will to be other than cover for cannibalizers and self promoters at all costs?
While the foundation of Christianity may avail solid basis for nurturing decent civilization, the varying sects tend to make little coherent sense, even though most seem to be deeply invested in incoherence. St. Paul never met Jesus. Except in epileptic vision, never heard the voice, never saw the body, did not have a New Testament to read. There are as many interpretations of Jesus and Christianity as there are sects. Thomas needed to see Jesus' body to believe. What of those who never saw the body, never (accurately?) heard the story, never imagined a God needing a blood sacrifice to save humanity from original sin? In modern context, the notion of sin seems to make less and less sense, unless having something to do with a state of being separated, as an imperfect and particular perspective of God, away from the Holism that is God, needing grace to find a way back, such grace being based on willingness to have all that stands in the way lifted. If people can get back to what is most important --- good faith and good will (moral intuition and humane empathy) --- Christianity may yet help lead us to a good and decent society. The parables of Jesus provide sound traditions for supporting charitable impulses. They do NOT support mobbing to enlist the force of government in order to steal from others. That is neither self help nor charity. It is simply selfish theft. Neither Islam nor Black Liberation Theology are religions. They are brands of Marxism, wrapped in lies. Christian Socialists are Living Frauds.
Post a Comment