Selfishness

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Pathless

Who made up the Christian "club" though? Jesus?

More to the point: Q, do you believe Jesus to be selfish?

Absolutely not. Everything He did was for the Father. The ultimate altruist...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Pathless

So are we to base our actions on Fear? Is that the Christian thing to do? I thought Jesus was rooted in Love.

Look, I "love" my Dad. However I still "fear" him (hold him in awe).

I love Jesus, but I am in fear of Him too...for very good reason...He's much bigger than I can ever hope to be.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, all!

Fashionably late, I suppose...

Perhaps I am still under the influence of Ayn Rand, but I do not see selfishness as inherently "bad." Indeed, if one considers, the typical Christian act of charity is driven by selfishness. From my POV, Mother Theresa was selfish.

How can I dare suggest such a thing? Simple...she was driven by the selfish desire to love as many as possible, in order to achieve heaven. Selfishness is not bad, much like guns and cars and free will are not bad. It is what we do with these tools that determines the "good and bad" aspects, and then it is still tied to our actions and motives...motives which are quite typically selfish.

I am hungry. That is selfish of me. Yet, you will not feed me simply because I am hungry. If you see I am hungry, and have no means to get food, and you have the ability to feed me, you may choose (selfishly) to feed me. Or you may selfishly choose to keep all of your food for yourself and family for another day, and send me on my way. Both are selfish actions, only one of which *might* be determined to be "bad." From my vantage, being hungry, I know which one that is, but there are other considerations that may not cross my mind...perhaps you have a squeaky tight budget, or only have food for a few days? Dunno, but there are a lot of possibilities surrounding a personal *judgment* of this scenario, and we are not assigned to cast *condemnation* on another without first walking a mile in their shoes.

I love the parable of the Good Samaritan for many reasons...not least it shows me that in the face of condemnation by others, I still have a hope of salvation by G-d. The Samaritans were held in disdain by the Jews, they were lesser than dogs. All the more irony, that an "unsaved" one should be noted for performing a goodly action worthy of salvation towards one "already saved." While others "already saved" basically went their merry way, saying "but for the grace of G-d, there is me. Sure glad it's not, thanks G-d!" Too often we can't be bothered with the struggles of others...add in the conflict across religious boundaries, and it's no wonder there are misgivings leading as far as war. Rather, shouldn't we see our brothers and sisters as just that, brothers and sisters. Regardless of skin color, regardless of socio-economic position, regardless of religious affinity? G-d will work through whom He chooses...I am continually amazed at the love and charity and good deeds exhibited by "other sheep" outside of the fold of Christianity. Sadly, I am also witness far too often, of the lack of love and charity and good deeds by so-called Christians towards those outside of the faith.

Selfishness is natural. Having the spirit of G-d move through a person is natural only if the person is tuned to G-d. G-d will not move through an unsaved or unsalvageable person. Evidence of the Holy Spirit is entirely based on actions and deeds. Show me your faith without works, I will show you my faith by my works. I know this appears to contradict an awful lot of Sunday school teaching, but it is quite Biblical.

My two cents.

That's because actions speak louder than words. Or put another way...show me the company you keep, and I'll know what kind of person you are...

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I hate to admit it, but Christianity is a very selfish and exculsive "club". Therefore no other options are allowed. The Christian ground rules are specific.

I'm sorry that others can't accept that, but then I didn't make up the rules for Christianity.

No, but neither did Christ MAKE UP such rules ... or at least, some of us believe. Thus we do NOT find such a brand of "Christianity" (patterning one's behavior after the Christ of Love) to be either appealing, or in the least bit inviting.

When "Love thy neighbor, and thine enemy (even!)" gets turned into a "member's only CLUB,"we no longer have what the Master intended. Not that he expected perfection, or immediate Planetary Peace (and true Brotherhood).

But we will WORK toward these goals, and endure whatever injustices, personal attacks, and so forth ... during the process. And one day, folks will catch on. Hopefully, soon enough to avert all sorts of disasters - which really occur, when everything is said & done, in the name of selfishness.

(or in the name of, "MY religion above ALL OTHERS" ... for this is exactly what is so troubling about the situation in parts of the Middle East - but not just there)

Oh for the day of `LOVE to all beings, PEACE to all beings, Will-to-Good to all beings ... '

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

That's because actions speak louder than words. Or put another way...show me the company you keep, and I'll know what kind of person you are...

And it is still my selfish motives that drive me to my choices.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Andrew!

Originally Posted by AndrewX

No, but neither did Christ MAKE UP such rules ... or at least, some of us believe. Thus we do NOT find such a brand of "Christianity" (patterning one's behavior after the Christ of Love) to be either appealing, or in the least bit inviting.

When "Love thy neighbor, and thine enemy (even!)" gets turned into a "member's only CLUB,"we no longer have what the Master intended. Not that he expected perfection, or immediate Planetary Peace (and true Brotherhood).

But we will WORK toward these goals, and endure whatever injustices, personal attacks, and so forth ... during the process. And one day, folks will catch on. Hopefully, soon enough to avert all sorts of disasters - which really occur, when everything is said & done, in the name of selfishness.

(or in the name of, "MY religion above ALL OTHERS" ... for this is exactly what is so trouble about the situation in parts of the Middle East - but not just there)

So you selfishly say...

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, Andrew!


So you selfishly say...

No juan, selflessly so ...

For not for myself alone do I desire these things, but for you, and for all ... SEE MY EDIT (which I made before seeing your post )

Oh ye of little Faith ....

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by AndrewX

No, but neither did Christ MAKE UP such rules ... or at least, some of us believe. ...Thus we do NOT find such a brand of "Christianity" (patterning one's behavior after the Christ of Love) to be either appealing, or in the least bit inviting.

Yeah, He did make the rules... He said He is the truth, light and the way, only through Him can we get to the Father...pretty specific in instructions I should think...

It's ok if one does not choose to follow the "host's" rules, but then one doesn't have to sit at the host's banquet table either...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by AndrewX

No juan, selflessly so ...

For not for myself alone do I desire these things, but for you, and for all ... SEE MY EDIT (which I made before seeing your post )

Oh ye of little Faith ....

Not when you "want" others to accept your perspective on things...

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Andrew!

Originally Posted by AndrewX

No juan, selflessly so ...

For not for myself alone do I desire these things, but for you, and for all ... SEE MY EDIT (which I made before seeing your post )

Oh ye of little Faith ....

No surprise I disagree. There is no such thing as "selflessness," it is illusion. How can a "self" not exist, and still write, care, love or have compassion? No, you have your selfish motives, whether disguised or open, whether consciously known or unknown. Altruism is at its very root a selfish act. Rand explains this far better than I. How selfishness acquired a bad connotation is beyond my understanding...simply put, selfishness is not evil unless it is pointed in that direction and used for such.

[juantoo3]

By extension, Jesus was the most perfectly selfish individual to live, precisely because he directed his motivations in line with those of the Heavenly Father in extending grace, love and forgiveness to all who looked to him.

[AndrewX]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Yeah, He did make the rules... He said He is the truth, light and the way, only through Him can we get to the Father...pretty specific in instructions I should think...

It's ok if one does not choose to follow the "host's" rules, but then one doesn't have to sit at the host's banquet table either...

Last time I checked, it was still possible to understand Christ's words in a Universal context, being as how Christ seems a fairly Universal figure.

But don't let me break up your club.
(Heaven knows, I sure don't want to upset your preferred seating arrangements! )

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Not when you "want" others to accept your perspective on things...

I don't want anything from you, Joshua. Don't try and make things personal.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

There is no such thing as "selflessness," it is illusion.

You're trying to have your cake here, and eat it too. As an esotericist, I understand this as the distinction between a lesser self (or the personality - such as "you," me, Joshua, etc.) ... and a Greater. A synonym for the latter is Soul.

The idea, then, which is what Christ was getting at, is that we live for the sake of others, no less than, our "own" self. The Will of the Soul is the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number.

And that, in a nutshell, is "my brand" of Christianity.

If I practice it, as a party of one, I am no less content.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by AndrewX

Last time I checked, it was still possible to understand Christ's words in a Universal context, being as how Christ seems a fairly Universal figure.

But don't let me break up your club.
(Heaven knows, I sure don't want to upset your preferred seating arrangements! )

I don't want anything from you, Joshua. Don't try and make things personal.

You're trying to have your cake here, and eat it too. As an esotericist, I understand this as the distinction between a lesser self (or the personality - such as "you," me, Joshua, etc.) ... and a Greater. A synonym for the latter is Soul.

The idea, then, which is what Christ was getting at, is that we live for the sake of others, no less than, our "own" self. The Will of the Soul is the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number.

And that, in a nutshell, is "my brand" of Christianity.

If I practice it, as a party of one, I am no less content.

My aspiration is to be the doorman...

I am my soul which has the name "Joshua".

I believe Christ said "Love God, love neighbor as self" (para).

By definition, the "will" is a self centered tool, and is essential to the existence of man's personage.

v/r

the soul named Joshua...

p.s. but it is personal. You want me to see things from your perspective. Nothing insulting about that. But it is "selfish"...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

By extension, Jesus was the most perfectly selfish individual to live, precisely because he directed his motivations in line with those of the Heavenly Father in extending grace, love and forgiveness to all who looked to him.

Taken from that perspective...it makes sense. Afterall, God did make us for His pleasure and delight...

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Andrew!

Originally Posted by AndrewX

Last time I checked, it was still possible to understand Christ's words in a Universal context, being as how Christ seems a fairly Universal figure.

I suppose it is possible to view Christ in any ol' way a person chooses. How relevant it is to sacred scripture is another matter.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

But don't let me break up your club.
(Heaven knows, I sure don't want to upset your preferred seating arrangements! )

I am thinking your selfish actions are betraying your words here.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

You're trying to have your cake here, and eat it too. As an esotericist, I understand this as the distinction between a lesser self (or the personality - such as "you," me, Joshua, etc.) ... and a Greater. A synonym for the latter is Soul.

Oh my. I let myself get a little out of sorts with Taijasi. Because of such, I tried really, really hard to accommodate Zagreus. Now, Andrew shoves comments like these in my face...almost a dare? We are mincing semantics. You, as an esotericist, are going to invent words and apply meanings that are non-existent or irrelevant or completely contrary. As an exotericist, I am using the precise meaning of the word selfish. Now, if you could somehow tie "self" to "ego," perhaps in a Buddhist sense you might develop a coherent argument. But as it stands, what you have is opinion. No less than I do. Except I see my opinion as based in reality and established meaning, supported by a well known if somewhat obscure philosopher named Ayn Rand. Whereas I see your application fluctuate depending on company present, subject at hand and who you wish to buffalo for the moment. Hospitality has its limits; when a guest is rude, they are asked to leave, politely at first. Your disagreement is not the cause of my concern, the snide remarks that go along with your comments however, betray your "selflessness." Simply put, no matter what you say to the contrary, there is no evidence.

Originally Posted by AndrewX

The idea, then, which is what Christ was getting at, is that we live for the sake of others, no less than, our "own" self. The Will of the Soul is the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number.

And that, in a nutshell, is "my brand" of Christianity.

If I practice it, as a party of one, I am no less content.

Ah ha! Something we both can agree on! What a wonderful change! As long as one understands that "the Greatest Good for the Greatest Number" must be tempered with respectful concern for those in the minority. Otherwise, you only have Mill's utilitarianism...also known as "the end justifies the means." Are you saying it is alright to trample the minority in order to sate the majority? I would hope not, and suggest you reconsider your selfish motives.

Jesus came to heal the sick (minority), not heal the well (majority).