I think you don't know what the word means, you are so full of yourself ... there is no room for another.
You refute everything He teaches. You refute everything He stands for. You are contemptuous of those who follow Him.
God bless,
Thomas
human nature - inherently good or evil?
- Thread starter IowaGuy
- Start date
You refute everything He teaches. You refute everything He stands for. You are contemptuous of those who follow Him.
God bless,
Thomas
Oh, my dear ... if you only knew ... you haven't the feintest inkling of the truth.
God bless,
Thomas
L
Lunitik
Guest
I just don't think a friend should have requirements like "do what I command". No friendship with a living person would last long if one party got to give out orders constantly and the other had to obey every time.
No, I said many slaves work in the home of the master... I am not sure how you got from my words what you have replied to.
Certainly, and I do not put Jesus on any sort of plateau. He is a man, born of a woman like the rest of us. We can all approach his station, but instead we decide to worship a man that seems to be so much higher than we are. Instead of bridging the gap, we make him the son of God, now we don't have to do anything, just worship him.
Then I would suggest he do something about his problem, I would lose all respect for a man so hung up on another persons statements. If he can take such stances, what kind of role model is he? How can you worship a man that has not transcended lowly human attributes such as jealousy?
No, an awakened man would never be so petty.
My grandfather is dead, I love him dearly for all he has done for me in my life. This statement is absurd to me, just because they are dead I should cease my love? Love doesn't end just because the other has died. If it can, it simply wasn't love in the first place.
L
Lunitik
Guest
You are perfectly right, I do not have many years of people telling me how I ought to be understanding these texts.
L
Lunitik
Guest
You could not be further from the truth here... I am completely empty, I do not cling to anything, I do not have any opinions this way or that. I speak on experience, on genuine encounters. I have allowed the ultimate in, removing myself to make room. This is the only way to know love, for otherwise it is only infatuation with what the other can offer you.
Again, inaccurate, I refute only that which his tradition has become after he has gone. I know his message deeply because I have arrived at where he is pointing. I completely agree with what the man has said, what I don't agree with is the way men have molded his words this way and that to fulfill their own desires.
L
Lunitik
Guest
Again, of course, this is not acceptable to you because of what you have been told your whole life. Have you ever been near a master, an enlightened one? Then there is no metaphor necessary, you can feel their vibrations, you can sense yourself taking in their being.
The Bible is quite disgusting in this regard, it is cannibalistic because you are eating blood and bones/flesh. With a living master, you drink of their spirit, not their physical form.
It is perfectly good as a device to remember, but people go on remembering his death. Mansoor Al-Hillaj died a much more gruesome death for his attainment to the ultimate, but he is not remembered. Everyone dies, why remember how this individual died? Remember his love, remember his teachings, but his death only shows the way of human nature: the establishment feared change so they had him killed.
L
Lunitik
Guest
Thomas: Have you encountered anything of the Spirit? Has there been anything that has happened to you to confirm directly the words of Christ? I do not mean little voices talking in your head, or angels coming to talk to you - this is imagination - I mean a real encounter.
I would guess nothing has happened because your knowledge won't allow it, you are in your own way. You can know the ultimate, you can have a baptism of fire through acceptance of your place in the body of Christ. You can know you are a part of the trinity within that context, and see the Kingdom of God before you taste death.
This is theosis, the only important doctrine of the Christians.
This is the primary difference between you and I: I have attained and then looked back at scriptures more in depth, you are reading from a human perspective and thinking you know. I concentrated on mystical avenues, then looked back at the outer traditions, you look from the outer and guess about the inner. You too can know the inner dimensions of religion, but first you will have to drop everything - become as a child again - and then delve more deeply.
The pantomimes every Sunday have not helped, you are the same person only with a few new concepts. Your clinging to fallacy, to acquired knowledge from those who do not know themselves, will never allow you to attain. I can invite you, but you must accept...
I would guess nothing has happened because your knowledge won't allow it, you are in your own way. You can know the ultimate, you can have a baptism of fire through acceptance of your place in the body of Christ. You can know you are a part of the trinity within that context, and see the Kingdom of God before you taste death.
This is theosis, the only important doctrine of the Christians.
This is the primary difference between you and I: I have attained and then looked back at scriptures more in depth, you are reading from a human perspective and thinking you know. I concentrated on mystical avenues, then looked back at the outer traditions, you look from the outer and guess about the inner. You too can know the inner dimensions of religion, but first you will have to drop everything - become as a child again - and then delve more deeply.
The pantomimes every Sunday have not helped, you are the same person only with a few new concepts. Your clinging to fallacy, to acquired knowledge from those who do not know themselves, will never allow you to attain. I can invite you, but you must accept...
Yet friends do not exist without someone asking something of the other.
Because you said when the master is gone you can still learn from what is left in the house. You say Jesus is gone yet you could still read, think upon, and choose whether to follow.
It seems Jesus addressed that, according to Matthew 5:9 Happy the peacemakers, because they will be called Sons of God. I agree with you, it is between Jesus and God whether or not he is a son of God.
Really. In the gospels I read that Jesus had problems with many people. By that, I mean he saw evil behavior in others and he declared it to them. You say Jesus was not awakened, but was petty, or jealous instead? As he says it is harder for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into heaven, you think he was just jealous?
Your love sounds selfish. You love what your grandfather did. You like it when others give you gifts. How is that you being loving? What do you do, loving your grandfather? How do you give to your grandfather now, as you say he is dead?
L
Lunitik
Guest
False, so false I would suggest you have no idea what love is. For you, it seems, relationships are a trade - you give me this, I'll give you that. This isn't love at all, this is something utterly disgusting. This is exactly as I differentiate between friend and acquaintance in fact: I want something out of the latter, they are convenient.
So you agree that people are still slaves of Jesus? Then what are we disputing?
This is my whole motive here: showing how the different religions are really one, how they all teach the same thing in essence - to create peace among them, even so they might learn from each other and further each other spiritually. It cannot be otherwise, for there is only one being, the cosmos is utterly unified but we have forgotten so we go on competing. We know we are something bigger than these puny bodies, but we go about becoming more in a wrong way.
I say many of his behaviors are not at all that of an awakened man, he is too much split between extremes. The awakened man knows that all is one, yet Jesus - even on the cross in his last moments - has maintained a dualistic perspective. Honestly, I am torn on Jesus. I love him because I see truth in his words, but yet his actions are very opposed to what I know of the ultimate. Certainly I can see how people have taken his words and justified all sorts of atrocities, yet I can see in his words the devices to reach higher.
My grandfather loved me, and I loved him back. He has given material things as a display of his love but you see this is exactly why I say it was love: he expected nothing in return. Real love does not wear thin, it does not fade away. I loved him while he was alive, and I will love him for as long as I live. This is real love, not some give and take arrangement that benefits both parties.
In fact, true love cannot even be taken away, many have the experience of loving someone they do not want to. They go on fighting it and yet it will not go away. Mind wants love to have a purpose, but love doesn't work through mind, only infatuation can - a false love that dies easily, a type of possessiveness. As with other mind pursuits, it is about gaining more and more, you make friends because they offer something, you enter relationships because there is something in it for you. If you pursue the same things through heart, it will be diametrically apposed. You will look for what you can do for the other to make their lives more pleasant. Ultimate love is not even targeted, it becomes a situation where you want to help all you encounter, you want to show everyone love whether they are friend or foe.
Through this, directly as a result, you will feel a great joy - you will not even require a thank you because your reward is already there. You aren't reaching out to them because of this reward though, else you are still selfish - you want to do good because it will make you feel good. No, the reward comes of its own accord, you simply love everyone completely and so you want to do something for them. It is an over-flowing of love, it either spills everywhere or you can give it to someone, but you cannot retain it - it is simply too much to keep inside.
This is love.
Why, was the tree not recycled of properly?
I have personally destroyed a few computers, cars, and trees. I tried to recycle responsibly. So, now you think I am vengeful? The computer, the car, and the tree, did not have too much to say about the matter. Maybe I should have asked them how they felt about the matter?
L
Lunitik
Guest
You do not think destruction is violent?
I am rather bemused that you are even requesting an explanation here.
It is definitely possible to love someone who hates you, but that would be a matter of loving an enemy. No? Friends involve someone asking something of the other at some point in time. Even an exchange of words can require it.
What are you reading from, the corrupted NIV? People are slaves to their own sinful ways.
So you like to teach, but I think your teaching is very distant and opposed to what Jesus taught.
How exactly is it that you love a corpse? You love your memory of him, or does your grandfather still talk with you? You say Jesus is dead, but put your grandfather up on a pedestal instead?
If I ask your grandfather right now whether or not you are loving to him, what is he going to tell me?
Sounds great, but as you say that you love Jesus, and that you love your grandfather, your love is looking a bit macabre (selfish) to me. If I ask those who you call friend whether or not you are loving them, what will they say?
I destroy every time I hit the delete or backspace key. What, you think I should be ashamed of destruction? I dismembered a tree limb by limb, so I think you could say I am far more violent than Jesus when it comes to killing a tree. I have used a lawn mower, with a dull blade, and yanked weeds out with a spade. Do you seriously call me vengeful for this?
L
Lunitik
Guest
An unconditional love does not categorize, and love is also contagious - if you love them enough, they will cease enmity towards you. I am becoming more and more convinced you do not know love at all... do you love yourself? Do you expect anything out of your love for self? Jesus says love your neighbor as yourself, don't simply reach out to them because you can benefit. I think you have missed the foundation and tried to build your house in the sand.
I am reading from nothing, I am responding to your bizarre statements. People cannot be slaves to sin, for sin simply means "self". The problem is that they do not know who they are, what they are. If you can know you are the whole, you will not do anything against existence. Will you cut your own arm off because it itches? This is what we go on doing, something annoys us so we lash out at it. This is sin, utter ignorance to our true self, identification with ego.
It is not the case, although it is certainly opposed to what the Christians perceive of Jesus.
I do not put him on a pedestal at all, love cannot be this way. Love does not judge, cannot perceive of difference. The other is equal to you, there is no need to compare at all. This is the whole poison of your current perceptions, you seem to think love places you below the other. This is actually quite natural of your female nature, naturally you wish to be lower than a man, protected by him. You are not yet complete of yourself, you deny your male nature, where there ought to be a balance found.
How can you understand a complete giving of oneself to another as selfish? It is your own understanding of love which is selfish, for you seek some kind of benefit, you want something in return for your giving - it is not unconditional.
L
Lunitik
Guest
Yes, although I will also say it is perfectly natural.
It is bound to be that you lash out because you think that everything owes you something - you have been saying this repeatedly in this thread. When it does not give you anything, you are angry and want to commit some harm. You may not think you are angry because the anger is so deep within you, it is not a conscious type of anger at all, but you clearly are. You are almost proud of it too, you do not see that the tree was a living thing.
You are civilized, so you cannot lash out at people, you choose instead the innocent tree. Next time you commit such an act, simply watch more deeply your state of mind, you will see the truth to my words.
Nope, your expressed belief is in appeasement. By your accounting Jesus failed to be loving, failing to make his enemies love him. They crucified him.
You think I am below someone for doing them a good deed, per their wishes?
I am trying to visualize how you are uncontitionally, completely giving yourself to your dead grandfather, let alone Jesus. Please explain.
So you say I am vengeful and angry for destroying a tree, mowing the yard, and uprooting some weeds. Whereas if I don't, some of the neighbors will consider us lazy or even get angry for making their neighborhood look overgrown.
I guess one of us could go on a hungar strike, refusing to eat any plants or animals, refusing to use anything man made that involved the killing of a tree, plant, or animal, and of course: refusing to do any gardening or farming. If one of us wishes to not be vengeful and angry, by your judgment, then I guess one of us will have to do just that.
L
Lunitik
Guest
I have said things which caused you to infer this... your conclusion is perfectly right, but it is completely the work of mind. I have said nothing like this myself...
Again, correlations you are fabricating yourself. If all is one, how can anyone be better or worse? 1 Corinthians 12:12-27 tells about this, I suggest you read it since you have a leaning towards Christ, I hope you can correct your thinking through these verses.
I don't understand why this concept is so difficult for you? You seem to be looking for some physical confirmation of that love, but for what? Is not simply the love enough?
What I call love is simply consciousness known through the heart. Part of my very being remembers both men, they are both part of me. What more is possible to give? What are you expecting be said as a proof of this? They have each touched me, and their impression remains. There is nothing to do about this, they have no obligation to me, it is simply so.
Your very attempts to visualize miss utterly, if there is one thing you get from this discussion understand this alone: love is not of mind. Mind demands some sort of result from the act, ego is completely selfish. Every time we talk, I am telling you again and again to escape restrictions of mind, but your whole perception is stuck within the boundaries of mind. You are creating your own prison, while I am trying to show you how to break free.
L
Lunitik
Guest
Why does the perceptions of others both you? You would rather do something immoral than upset people that are blind with societal correctness. Their perceptions should be none of your concern, you cannot please everyone - it is impossible.
That said, one or two people protesting against the whole society will achieve nothing. Your refusal to do these things will create enmity, and then the situation will become much worse because now you will be lashing out at people.
Vegetarianism or veganism cannot work in society today, we give all our grains and the like to animals to create our meat. We can certainly eat more fruits and nuts instead of roots and animals but if all began doing this we would die. I am trying to engage in such a diet, and I choose housing where I do not have to commit any violence in the upkeep of the home, but I am not going to cause family a burden because of this - if they happen to serve meat at a family function I will still eat it.
This isn't my point at all, I am simply saying: acknowledge your violence in these acts. If you become more and more aware of it, you may stop it yourself. I am not trying to tell you what to do, I simply say do not justify things and explain them away as something they are not.
No, it was not my conclusion, it was a conclusion based on your belief. My conclusion is: You can't make someone love you, nor hate you, for if you do then it is not really theirs. People will try to convince otherwise. My conclusion does not come from thinking alone, nor from any discussion with you.
Instead of answering my simple question to you, you refer me to a letter from Paul to Corinth, and you hope that I will use it to correct my thinking? Perhaps you believe Paul is a guru or an enlightened person?
My point is that the love you experienced with your grandfather(s) is entirely different than what you have been saying and claiming about love. Your grandfather(s) love involved a relationship with you: touching you, leaving an impression with you, as you've described it. If you appreciated how your grandfather(s) were loving to you: who are you touching today in the same manner? Are you, or will you be, that loving grandfather to someone?
As you found your grandfather(s) loving, I submit that their love involved the use of their heart, their mind, and their soul.