Whatever the perspective of the consciousness that associated with the body of Jesus, it was perhaps more spiritually insightful than any before or since. That perspective favored the body of Jesus, to guide humanity to a sense of innate empathetic connection. When that body suffered and died, the extent of God's connection to us, even unto death, was demonstrated. With such demonstrated love, the point was made that God has not "left the building."
The message of Jesus was mainly about good faith (Great Commandment) and good will (Golden Rule). It is a message extended to people who want to assimilate a decent civilization, that respects the innate freedom and dignity of its members.
Islam is not at all like that. Islam is about detailed rules enforced by arbitrary, authoritarian, and often demented rulers. Islam in practice has often been a perversion against human decency and freedom of mind. People are free to follow Christianity or not. But open apostates to islam are often not permitted to live.
To be human, to believe anything, is to think freely about it. If you don't believe in a metaphor, it is a pretense, not a model. Followers of islam, upon acquiring power, tend not to tolerate free thinking. In that respect, they deploy Islam as a sub-humanizing meme against people who believe God connects to all who are receptive. So applied, Islam becomes entirely unsuited to a representative republic that values freedom for its citizenry with regard to thought, expression, enterprise, and association.
Perhaps our bodies are secondary, derivative significations. Perhaps 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. Perhaps it's the spiritual evolution of the archtypes for which our bodies facilitate expression that's important. Perhaps the primitive idea of original sin may better be understood with respect to our imperfect separation from the Holism and our need to find our way beck, even if only metaphorically. Perhaps original sin would better be understood in respect of original need.
IAE, it is obvious that existentiality entails a trinity of Consciousness, Substance, and Information. The Trinitarian metaphor of Christianity facilitates respect for the consciously reconciling (Jesus), the substantively facilitating (God), and the informationally Inspiring (Holy Spirit). It is a metaphor that facilitates understanding, not a literalism for parsing logic or science.
Likewise, Islam pertains to metaphors about spirituality, not to a coherent system of logic or science. Yet, its use as a metaphor has produced mainly barbarism, backwardness, and insults against human freedom and dignity. Writings and practices under the meme of Islam have hardly facilitated human thought, science, enlightenment, or decency.
************
As perspectives of consciousness, it is our responsibility, for our temporal and dynamic feedback with the Godhead, to participate in determining that which should be led to unfold as being worthwhile, meaningful, purposeful, meritorious, deserving, or ... reprehensible. We do that by participating in how our civilizational systems are designed and evolved.
Even so, too many faux-thinkers seek to wrap the infinite and the eternal into a contemporary box and bow. As if God should, everywhere and for all time, be ascribed with such names and literal limits as successions of particular persons and cultures may fleetingly entertain. As if the Godhead should care whether you call IT (or heaven or the hereafter) by a gender, name, or limiting purpose. Or worry ceaselessly about whether IT abides as a Unitary and/or a Trinity.
****************
Converse more with those who appreciate that Jesus spoke in figures of speech. The "punishment" for bad ways of being may simply be that they come no longer to occupy beingmess.
Moreover, people who do not empathize with purposefulness may conceptualize that non-beingness would be perfect nirvana. No worries. A problem free philosophy. Hakuna matata. YOLO.
Problem is, I doubt Consciousness, except in particular perspectives, can actually choose no longer to exist. You did not choose either to be born or to exist. I doubt the past, as a whole, no longer exists. Rather, its Information is carried forward.The reconciling perspective cannot be set aside. However, counter-fulfilling ways of thinking can be set aside.
*****************
Most parents are not trained in deep philosophy. Most (perhaps all?) deep thinkers have not constructed a consistent, coherent, complete philosophy. To what standard, then, should parents look, to decide in specific cases how to do what is "best" (*?) for their children instead of what is best for social acceptance?
Most people simply surrender to accept tenets from the culture or religion of their parents or peers (or people-farming conditioners). If you want to say they should not do that, then to what set of standards should they look? If you claim proof for a valid standard that can be specifically applied to specific situations, then show your work. :)
(*If parents are willing to think freely and be receptive to such guidance as is availed by "Nature's God," then I think a still, quiet voice will guide them. Even without formal instruction by moral scientisimists or expert theologians --- other than to learn habits for thinking for themselves.)
*************
As it happens, Jews, Muslims, and Progs happen to have disproportionate numbers of law droolers amongst them. IOW, the propensity for law drooling --- which quickly devolves into sharia law or democratic socialism (aka, Nazism) --- just so happens to be high among them. See ACLU, ADL, NAACP, CPUSA, CAIR, Soros Open Society, Scotus (Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan), etc., etc.
When you replace religious like assimilation of common sense values of faith, family, and fidelity with central regulation that drools to appeal to every demographic against a target goat (Whitey) with moral scientism by elitists that sneer at the common free-thinking citizen, you get fascist oligarchic despotism. I.E., law drooling.
The thing about law droolers is this: To acquire power, they need a common goat. Otherwise, little holds them together. Goats of history have included the Russian nobility, Jews, Kulaks, Blacks, and now ... Whities.
If you want a free-thinking, representative republic, a quick way to lose it is to put centralizing, knowitall, law droolers in charge of regulating the minutiae of your life ... in every institution. (Pelosi, Maxine, Schumer, Obama, Soros, Ginsburg, etc. -- ugh!) Law droolers do not want a free-thinking, representative republic. They seek their rewards and security in acquiring positions from which to regulate and farm the masses or to shill for those who do. That's why DC is a swamp for the Deep State.
A society that cannot survive without invasive intrusiveness by law droolers is a society that has lost most of decency. Which is what we now have. I loathe much more than admire law droolers. I do not exempt them merely because they happen to be of one race, gender, religion, or orientation or another.
The message of Jesus was mainly about good faith (Great Commandment) and good will (Golden Rule). It is a message extended to people who want to assimilate a decent civilization, that respects the innate freedom and dignity of its members.
Islam is not at all like that. Islam is about detailed rules enforced by arbitrary, authoritarian, and often demented rulers. Islam in practice has often been a perversion against human decency and freedom of mind. People are free to follow Christianity or not. But open apostates to islam are often not permitted to live.
To be human, to believe anything, is to think freely about it. If you don't believe in a metaphor, it is a pretense, not a model. Followers of islam, upon acquiring power, tend not to tolerate free thinking. In that respect, they deploy Islam as a sub-humanizing meme against people who believe God connects to all who are receptive. So applied, Islam becomes entirely unsuited to a representative republic that values freedom for its citizenry with regard to thought, expression, enterprise, and association.
Perhaps our bodies are secondary, derivative significations. Perhaps 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. Perhaps it's the spiritual evolution of the archtypes for which our bodies facilitate expression that's important. Perhaps the primitive idea of original sin may better be understood with respect to our imperfect separation from the Holism and our need to find our way beck, even if only metaphorically. Perhaps original sin would better be understood in respect of original need.
IAE, it is obvious that existentiality entails a trinity of Consciousness, Substance, and Information. The Trinitarian metaphor of Christianity facilitates respect for the consciously reconciling (Jesus), the substantively facilitating (God), and the informationally Inspiring (Holy Spirit). It is a metaphor that facilitates understanding, not a literalism for parsing logic or science.
Likewise, Islam pertains to metaphors about spirituality, not to a coherent system of logic or science. Yet, its use as a metaphor has produced mainly barbarism, backwardness, and insults against human freedom and dignity. Writings and practices under the meme of Islam have hardly facilitated human thought, science, enlightenment, or decency.
************
As perspectives of consciousness, it is our responsibility, for our temporal and dynamic feedback with the Godhead, to participate in determining that which should be led to unfold as being worthwhile, meaningful, purposeful, meritorious, deserving, or ... reprehensible. We do that by participating in how our civilizational systems are designed and evolved.
Even so, too many faux-thinkers seek to wrap the infinite and the eternal into a contemporary box and bow. As if God should, everywhere and for all time, be ascribed with such names and literal limits as successions of particular persons and cultures may fleetingly entertain. As if the Godhead should care whether you call IT (or heaven or the hereafter) by a gender, name, or limiting purpose. Or worry ceaselessly about whether IT abides as a Unitary and/or a Trinity.
****************
Converse more with those who appreciate that Jesus spoke in figures of speech. The "punishment" for bad ways of being may simply be that they come no longer to occupy beingmess.
Moreover, people who do not empathize with purposefulness may conceptualize that non-beingness would be perfect nirvana. No worries. A problem free philosophy. Hakuna matata. YOLO.
Problem is, I doubt Consciousness, except in particular perspectives, can actually choose no longer to exist. You did not choose either to be born or to exist. I doubt the past, as a whole, no longer exists. Rather, its Information is carried forward.The reconciling perspective cannot be set aside. However, counter-fulfilling ways of thinking can be set aside.
*****************
Most parents are not trained in deep philosophy. Most (perhaps all?) deep thinkers have not constructed a consistent, coherent, complete philosophy. To what standard, then, should parents look, to decide in specific cases how to do what is "best" (*?) for their children instead of what is best for social acceptance?
Most people simply surrender to accept tenets from the culture or religion of their parents or peers (or people-farming conditioners). If you want to say they should not do that, then to what set of standards should they look? If you claim proof for a valid standard that can be specifically applied to specific situations, then show your work. :)
(*If parents are willing to think freely and be receptive to such guidance as is availed by "Nature's God," then I think a still, quiet voice will guide them. Even without formal instruction by moral scientisimists or expert theologians --- other than to learn habits for thinking for themselves.)
*************
As it happens, Jews, Muslims, and Progs happen to have disproportionate numbers of law droolers amongst them. IOW, the propensity for law drooling --- which quickly devolves into sharia law or democratic socialism (aka, Nazism) --- just so happens to be high among them. See ACLU, ADL, NAACP, CPUSA, CAIR, Soros Open Society, Scotus (Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan), etc., etc.
When you replace religious like assimilation of common sense values of faith, family, and fidelity with central regulation that drools to appeal to every demographic against a target goat (Whitey) with moral scientism by elitists that sneer at the common free-thinking citizen, you get fascist oligarchic despotism. I.E., law drooling.
The thing about law droolers is this: To acquire power, they need a common goat. Otherwise, little holds them together. Goats of history have included the Russian nobility, Jews, Kulaks, Blacks, and now ... Whities.
If you want a free-thinking, representative republic, a quick way to lose it is to put centralizing, knowitall, law droolers in charge of regulating the minutiae of your life ... in every institution. (Pelosi, Maxine, Schumer, Obama, Soros, Ginsburg, etc. -- ugh!) Law droolers do not want a free-thinking, representative republic. They seek their rewards and security in acquiring positions from which to regulate and farm the masses or to shill for those who do. That's why DC is a swamp for the Deep State.
A society that cannot survive without invasive intrusiveness by law droolers is a society that has lost most of decency. Which is what we now have. I loathe much more than admire law droolers. I do not exempt them merely because they happen to be of one race, gender, religion, or orientation or another.
***************
Too many law-drooling Jews, Muslims, and Social Justice Warriors deem themselves elite and chosen to farm and dhimmi others, while they reduce such others to a precarious proletariat of open-bordered and cheap-competing labor. They teach this as "good intentions" and "looking out for you."
Too many other "minorities" want to be farmed. They fall for the "looking out for you" bs. So they help those who clamor for more power in the central gov, under pretending benefactors, while their pretending benefactors harvest their cheapened labor and laundered kickbacks. But farming the masses in this way, giving special favors to every lobbying group that votes for a living, results in counter-productive socialism. It results in Democratic Socialism, i.e., Fascist Nazism. Monster-ism dressed up in high sounding words, fine clothes, and shiny boots. Without goats to blame, it cannot cohere.
Self respect under a decent civilization comes from a citizenry that does not cave to whiny, dopey, saggy-panty, able-bodied wussies. Caving to proud wussies and parasites paves the way to turn civilization into re-enserfing dystopia. Democratic Socialism and Islamic Socialism are varieties of Communism, on blood-sucking steroids. More primitive societies may call such "democratic socialism" cannibalism. More descriptively, it is law-drooling, sub-humanizing, ACLU, cannibalism.
Free the people by taking race-baiting, goat-making power away from the central, law-drooling apparatus.
I don't know the primary source of it or how it may or may not be related to races or genetics, but I am fed up with all the knowitall ELITIST, republic-destroying, muck-agglomerating, proudly perverting, sheeple-diversifying, family-destroying, decency-mocking, scientisimist LAW-DROOLING by demented people farmers. Absolutely fed up with it.
In an absurd world, Eric Boling's alleged antics towards adults are verboten harassment. However, indoctrination of children by predatory groomers (teachers?) to sexual confusion (extreme toleration) isn't?
Is Eric being punished for something Progs believe to be wrong, or is he being made a goat for being a Conservative?
We are communism with regard to "to each according to his needs," but not with regard to "from each according to his abilities."
So we are FLC -- Free Lunch Communism --- with religious belief in A.I. as our saviors. While monstrous people-farmers who sell this crap rub their hands in anticipatory greed and lust.
There are too many people who want to be doped, duped, pleasured, entitled, and farmed. When they reach critical mass, representative republicanism is blown away. They are massing, while too many otherwise decent, free-thinking people are sleeping. If the gangrene is not cut away, the entire body will rot.
Under Democratic Socialism (neo-Nazism), every imaginable new interest organizes to clamor for its piece of the central pie. The effect, much like Communism, is to turn all power over to central gov bureaucrats --- who are owned and puppeted by oligarchic monsters, with the help of faux-moral-scientists and true-believing bureaucrats. Democratic Socialism is Communism, sans the work. It terrifies and numbs the mind. Like Mohammad, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and so on.
Progs and their Farmers make me puke. When they made God puke, they were banned from Eden. Power to the entitlement minded people is the destruction of civilization.
Ordinary Americans have trusted like little girls, while the GOPe offers them candy and a free ride. The Rino Party is not a Party for Americans. It is a Party for the people-farming funders of Congress. Americans need to find their own voice, in a new Party for Conservers of Liberty. If they don't unite to conserve liberty, they will be swept along in a flood to the new world serfdom. McCain, et al, are godless, self-godded, money-taking, pos's. Funded by pos's like Soros.
Most parents are not trained in deep philosophy. Most (perhaps all?) deep thinkers have not constructed a consistent, coherent, complete philosophy. To what standard, then, should parents look, to decide in specific cases how to do what is "best" (*?) for their children instead of what is best for social acceptance?
Most people simply surrender to accept tenets from the culture or religion of their parents or peers (or people-farming conditioners). If you want to say they should not do that, then to what set of standards should they look? If you claim proof for a valid standard that can be specifically applied to specific situations, then show your work. :)
(*If parents are willing to think freely and be receptive to such guidance as is availed by "Nature's God," then I think a still, quiet voice will guide them. Even without formal instruction by moral scientisimists or expert theologians --- other than to learn habits for thinking for themselves.)
You may want to converse more with those who appreciate that Jesus spoke in figures of speech. The "punishment" for bad ways of being may simply be that they come no longer to occupy beingmess.
Moreover, people who do not empathize with purposefulness may conceptualize that non-beingness would be perfect nirvana. No worries. A problem free philosophy. Hakuna matata. YOLO.
Problem is, I doubt Consciousness, except in particular perspectives, can actually choose no longer to exist. You did not choose either to be born or to exist. I doubt the past, as a whole, no longer exists. Rather, its Information is carried forward.The reconciling perspective cannot be set aside. However, counter-fulfilling ways of thinking can be set aside.
My concern relates to ways to identify with meaningfulness and purposefulness. Empathy that invites, inspires, and assimilates decent civilization. That is the invitation of Jesus. Most of the rest is commentary. Hellfire carries no weight because, except for the deluded, it makes no sense. Karma makes little sense, but more so than hell.
As perspectives of consciousness, it is our responsibility, for our temporal and dynamic feedback with the Godhead, to participate in determining that which should be led to unfold as being worthwhile, meaningful, purposeful, meritorious, deserving, or ... reprehensible. We do that by participating in how our civilizational systems are designed and evolved.
Even so, too many faux-thinkers seek to wrap the infinite and the eternal into a contemporary box and bow. As if God and all the hereafter should, everywhere and for all time, be ascribed with such names and literal limits as successions of particular persons and cultures may fleetingly entertain. As if the Godhead should care whether you call IT (or heaven or the hereafter) by a gender, name, or limiting purpose. Or worry (and chop heads) ceaselessly about whether IT abides as a Unitary and/or a Trinity.
Too many law-drooling Jews, Muslims, and Social Justice Warriors deem themselves elite and chosen to farm and dhimmi others, while they reduce such others to a precarious proletariat of open-bordered and cheap-competing labor. They teach this as "good intentions" and "looking out for you."
Too many other "minorities" want to be farmed. They fall for the "looking out for you" bs. So they help those who clamor for more power in the central gov, under pretending benefactors, while their pretending benefactors harvest their cheapened labor and laundered kickbacks. But farming the masses in this way, giving special favors to every lobbying group that votes for a living, results in counter-productive socialism. It results in Democratic Socialism, i.e., Fascist Nazism. Monster-ism dressed up in high sounding words, fine clothes, and shiny boots. Without goats to blame, it cannot cohere.
Self respect under a decent civilization comes from a citizenry that does not cave to whiny, dopey, saggy-panty, able-bodied wussies. Caving to proud wussies and parasites paves the way to turn civilization into re-enserfing dystopia. Democratic Socialism and Islamic Socialism are varieties of Communism, on blood-sucking steroids. More primitive societies may call such "democratic socialism" cannibalism. More descriptively, it is law-drooling, sub-humanizing, ACLU, cannibalism.
Free the people by taking race-baiting, goat-making power away from the central, law-drooling apparatus.
I don't know the primary source of it or how it may or may not be related to races or genetics, but I am fed up with all the knowitall ELITIST, republic-destroying, muck-agglomerating, proudly perverting, sheeple-diversifying, family-destroying, decency-mocking, scientisimist LAW-DROOLING by demented people farmers. Absolutely fed up with it.
In an absurd world, Eric Boling's alleged antics towards adults are verboten harassment. However, indoctrination of children by predatory groomers (teachers?) to sexual confusion (extreme toleration) isn't?
Is Eric being punished for something Progs believe to be wrong, or is he being made a goat for being a Conservative?
We are communism with regard to "to each according to his needs," but not with regard to "from each according to his abilities."
So we are FLC -- Free Lunch Communism --- with religious belief in A.I. as our saviors. While monstrous people-farmers who sell this crap rub their hands in anticipatory greed and lust.
There are too many people who want to be doped, duped, pleasured, entitled, and farmed. When they reach critical mass, representative republicanism is blown away. They are massing, while too many otherwise decent, free-thinking people are sleeping. If the gangrene is not cut away, the entire body will rot.
Under Democratic Socialism (neo-Nazism), every imaginable new interest organizes to clamor for its piece of the central pie. The effect, much like Communism, is to turn all power over to central gov bureaucrats --- who are owned and puppeted by oligarchic monsters, with the help of faux-moral-scientists and true-believing bureaucrats. Democratic Socialism is Communism, sans the work. It terrifies and numbs the mind. Like Mohammad, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and so on.
Progs and their Farmers make me puke. When they made God puke, they were banned from Eden. Power to the entitlement minded people is the destruction of civilization.
Ordinary Americans have trusted like little girls, while the GOPe offers them candy and a free ride. The Rino Party is not a Party for Americans. It is a Party for the people-farming funders of Congress. Americans need to find their own voice, in a new Party for Conservers of Liberty. If they don't unite to conserve liberty, they will be swept along in a flood to the new world serfdom. McCain, et al, are godless, self-godded, money-taking, pos's. Funded by pos's like Soros.
Most parents are not trained in deep philosophy. Most (perhaps all?) deep thinkers have not constructed a consistent, coherent, complete philosophy. To what standard, then, should parents look, to decide in specific cases how to do what is "best" (*?) for their children instead of what is best for social acceptance?
Most people simply surrender to accept tenets from the culture or religion of their parents or peers (or people-farming conditioners). If you want to say they should not do that, then to what set of standards should they look? If you claim proof for a valid standard that can be specifically applied to specific situations, then show your work. :)
(*If parents are willing to think freely and be receptive to such guidance as is availed by "Nature's God," then I think a still, quiet voice will guide them. Even without formal instruction by moral scientisimists or expert theologians --- other than to learn habits for thinking for themselves.)
You may want to converse more with those who appreciate that Jesus spoke in figures of speech. The "punishment" for bad ways of being may simply be that they come no longer to occupy beingmess.
Moreover, people who do not empathize with purposefulness may conceptualize that non-beingness would be perfect nirvana. No worries. A problem free philosophy. Hakuna matata. YOLO.
Problem is, I doubt Consciousness, except in particular perspectives, can actually choose no longer to exist. You did not choose either to be born or to exist. I doubt the past, as a whole, no longer exists. Rather, its Information is carried forward.The reconciling perspective cannot be set aside. However, counter-fulfilling ways of thinking can be set aside.
My concern relates to ways to identify with meaningfulness and purposefulness. Empathy that invites, inspires, and assimilates decent civilization. That is the invitation of Jesus. Most of the rest is commentary. Hellfire carries no weight because, except for the deluded, it makes no sense. Karma makes little sense, but more so than hell.
As perspectives of consciousness, it is our responsibility, for our temporal and dynamic feedback with the Godhead, to participate in determining that which should be led to unfold as being worthwhile, meaningful, purposeful, meritorious, deserving, or ... reprehensible. We do that by participating in how our civilizational systems are designed and evolved.
Even so, too many faux-thinkers seek to wrap the infinite and the eternal into a contemporary box and bow. As if God and all the hereafter should, everywhere and for all time, be ascribed with such names and literal limits as successions of particular persons and cultures may fleetingly entertain. As if the Godhead should care whether you call IT (or heaven or the hereafter) by a gender, name, or limiting purpose. Or worry (and chop heads) ceaselessly about whether IT abides as a Unitary and/or a Trinity.
No comments:
Post a Comment