Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (4446)	12/8/2000 2:04:14 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

But Chris was implying that I meant Christians had restrictions and other people don't. We all have restrictions on our thoughts- patterns, ways of thinking, etc. I was trying to get at a difference between meaningful restrictions (the thought: I know a bus will hit me if I step in front of it and it doesn't have sufficient time to stop) and non-meaningful restrictions (the thought:if I die and have not confessed my sins I will go to purgatory, or whatever). So I was trying to get at the distinctions between limitations of action, and thought, based on testable, semi-objective criteria (I think we can all agree a bus WILL hit you if it is moving and you step in front of it, and it does not have sufficient braking time) and non-testable, subjective criteria. Now I don't have a big problem with non-testable (or testable but untested) subjective criteria- after all I act on some of those myself- but I know what I am doing. I am kind to people because I think it makes the world a better place. But is that true? I certainly can't prove it. Maybe it makes someone else act awful somewhere else to make up for my niceness. The point is, I don't rely on this for anything. If it isn't true- it doesn't matter. I'm happy anyway. I guess that is the difference I'm getting at. I prefer objective restrictions and IF I am going to be acting on subjective ones, I want to be willing to say to myself honestly- "self, that is a subjective restriction or limitation on your action." Of course my self will probably be ok with that- but I'm agreeable with my self.

To: cosmicforce who wrote (4446)	12/9/2000 1:30:50 AM
From: Charliss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

Re the restrictions - It could be that there are two separate contexts here.- one, pretty much the one of the old testament, being the context of law. the other, pretty much the one of the new testament, being the context of grace. The level of consciousness experienced within the context of grace would have no need for the law- in this case as written in the old testament. If we can view the living out of life under the law as the old way, and the living out of life within the experience of grace as the new way, then perhaps we can see that Jesus, and other mystics as well, especially other eastern mystics, could have been teaching the advantages of the living out of life not so much as from a belief system as living it out of an inner experience. Today, we often think of the appearance of grace as the experience of transformation. Also, we speak of a new paradigm. And we can hardly contemplate the meaning of these things before we begin to equate the ego with a belief system, and the belief system as the barrier to the experience of the presence of something deeper and beyond the belief system. Jesus was clear about what this something is. It is love. The law, the old way, would be an affirmation of the very thing that it attempts to deal with- the belief in a duality- in good and evil. Jesus, on the other hand, taught not to resist evil. His contemporary zen master may have taught that if you resist something, it persists. Both would have taught that the duality can only survive in a belief system that permits and in fact nurtures the duality. It is interesting that non-resistance is essential to an understanding and successful practice of the eastern martial arts. The sayings and the stories of Jesus, and too the facts of his life, teach lessons about power, and it could be here that we can really get hung up and perplexed: Not only does power come from not resisting what a belief calls evil; it also comes from from not affirming what a belief system calls good. Neither exists, not in grace, not in transformation. Belief in one makes the duality with which law only is preoccupied. Real power becomes no power. Without the duality, there is no need for power. Getting to this kind of consciousness is perhaps our real journey, from the old toward the new, and if mystery joins us as our companion along the way, perhaps this is the real joy that keeps us moving along our way. After all, life is best when it becomes a real "page turner." One of Charles Schultz's Peanuts episodes illustrates this: Snoopy is perched on the peak of his doghouse, typing away on his portable. He writes- It was a dark and stormy night. Next, he writes- Suddenly a pirate ship appeared on the horizon. This is followed by- Meanwhile, a little red haired girl was growing up on a farm in Iowa. Then, Snoopy looks up, fixes us with his gaze, and assures us- I tie it all together in the end....:-) Have fun.......