Apologies for the paragraph of code at the top; my little computer is overheating and going a little bonkers....

Katschen:   thank you for your post.  I too have problems with computers that sometimes do things I have no control over.

 

I seem to be in agreement with you about where your faith is now.  My journey is a bit different as I grew up in the UCC, and had an open-minded liberal mother who encouraged me to ask questions and who was always open to discussion about how religion (or anything else) should be interpreted.  While I had periods of doubt, and questions to ask, I didn't feel a strong urge to rebel or turn away from religion because I had never been drilled into thinking as a literalist.  

 

I've been noticing your posts on the Cafe, and enjoying them. 

 

Best of luck on your faith journey.

 

 

 

Some of the Bible is so obviously metaphorical that even literalists take it metaphorically. Other parts, like some of the teachings, are obviously meant to be taken literally. Yet other parts are historical.

 

Which parts of the Bible are literal, which are metaphorical, and which historical is up to the reader to discern. Almost everyone has a different opinon on which is what, and what the metaphors mean.

Love, love, love. Simple as that. So hard to do.

 

Personally, I think this is the part of your "letter" that speaks most eloquently to me, and I believe the words can apply to all who consider themselves Christians (fundamentalist or other, and even to those who don't, since the words don't imply a need to be Christian, but point to the reality that all have a place if they choose to take it.) Thank you for sharing this, and welcome to Wonder Cafe.

 

I'd like to hawk what I think is a superb book: very clear, informative and mind-changing.

 

Michael Grant : "Jesus

An Historicans' Review of the Gospels"

I read a page or the a day...when I wasn't reading it I was thinking about it. Questions came up before I thought of them and answers given gave me a sense of actually understanding those ancient times. 

Better than Gibbon.

Better than Will Durant

(Both of which I have read and admire)

It. Will. Change. Your. Mind. For the better.

If anyone here reads it front to back-- (It gets better and better, every page, and every page is necessary to properly undersand the next. With all that an easy read!

---due to my post I will think my vist to WC has been meaningful.

AND

(Singsong) You. will T H A N K me.)

In Sum: He makes it real.

 

(In my dream world everybody here does and  a hundred interesting threads ensue...The United Church approves it offically and the church takes over the world. which becomes a planet of milk and honey...)

Just think....82 and I finally found out the answers to "Just who WERE these guys and gals?"

 

 

 

yes and me as well, at the end of the day, we are all broken, Christianity is about taking our masks off and letting God be

Hi- Katschen--I am what you call a Fundamentalists, and we may not always agree. But let us at least agree God is Love , I believe He Loves you as much, as He loves me. I would wish good luck on your walk, But we  christians don't have luck I believe we have grace so I will say , God Bless you on your walk . airclean33

Totally agree. I disagree with extreme fundamentalists who take everything literally, but I also disagree with extreme liberals who claim that everything has to be taken metaphorically.

 

I have to say that I haven't seen any person here that takes everything in the Bible literally. I think, the ones calling them "fundies" or fundamentalists simply tend to overreact about comments from more conservative Christians.

Every Christian cherry picks the parts of the Bible they choose to follow and parts they choose to ignore.

 

Some people just aren't as honest about it as others.

Depending what you mean by literally I could say that I take none of teh text literally.  THat is to say that I do not believew any of the narratives describe what happened as it actually happened. 

 

This is not the same as saying that I believe none of the events happened, just that all the narratives contain interpretation about how they happened.  And there is a lot of room to debate which ones happened.

May I disagree with you, Waterfall, lovingly?

 

IMO, "Love--that is, the agape-kind of love of 1 Cor 13--is not hard to do. Because one does not have to strain at "it", and do "it"; just will to be loving and let "it" happen.

I'm glad you shared Katschen. It sounds like your journey is really progressing beautifully and I hope GOD continutes to bless you on it.

Thanks, Gord, this is perfect.  Beshpin--I think Gord's answer  is the only way I can answer your (important and very good) point at this time.

Thanks, too, for everyone else's response.  Much appreciated.

 

Yes, Linds, simply being is being spiritual. And when we simply are, then we experience the totality which is God as a unitive whole, and experience the unitive love that keeps the whole together.

 

We don't have to put IT together—IT is together. All we have to do is refrain from fragmenting IT!

 

Our knowledge is fragmentary, and our prophecies are fragmentations. But when that which is perfect has come, then the fragmentation will end.

 

1 Cor 13:9-10, Luther Version

Hi- witch-- I can not agree with what you have said . I have been called a  Fundamentalist many times here on wondercafe you your self has called me that. I take the Word of God the way I believe God wrote it through other men and women.I try not to take away something  I don't under stand to make it something I do.I try to understand what God is saying as He wrote it .So I cannot change Gods word to please others I will not cherry pick, Is this not the reason you call me a  Fundamentalist or fundi? I can not be one and the other.

I see your point, but some in the world just won't "Let it be".

Peaceful thoughts sent to you as you journey with us, Kats.  There's an ebb and flow to our lives that keeps us interesting!

Any belief that grants people authority to judge another's walk is bogus, imo.  In stillness, you'll know your truth...cheers to you and welcome to the coffee shop!

 

Do you eat ham?

 

Do you wear clothes with mixed fibers?

 

Do you pick up venomous snakes?

 

Do you attend church on Sunday?

 

You cherry pick as much as anyone, you just choose to believe that your cherry-picking isn't cherry-picking.

 

And, as I have said many times, there is an huge difference between a fundamentalist, and a fundie.

Who here remembers that "classic" Star Trek: The Next Generation episode where Picard is stuck with a member of a race who speaks, in Picard's terms, "entirely in metaphor."

 

Here is a clip:

 

 

I chuckled when I saw this episode (and I liked it), because whenever we use language, we are using metaphors.  All of these written words on WC are metaphors.  And it can get quite nested (as in a nested function), as we also have metaphors aboot metaphors and metaphors aboot metaphors aboot metaphors...

 

So there is the surface meaning of our words (who did what to whom, etc etc) and then there is the deeper things, how our language interacts and works with us, the spiritual nature of the words.  I live in a culture and a language that tends to look only at the surface meaning of our words.  English has become a technical language and seems to me to be steadily ignoring the spirituality of these words.

 

So, to me, the 'fact-statement' that Christ was Crucified and that it was Christ isn't as important as WHAT THAT MEANS and how that meaning affects people and, from that, the world.

 

We are all literalists, to some extent; that is how our neurology seems to work (and everything that is influence by that, so all of our Theologies, all of our Philosophies, all of our sciences, our engineering, etc etc etc).  We take the nonverbal reality (reality as it is) and do as Adam did, we make up names for it.  These names give order to chaos, they are comfortable.  We then confuse these names with the nonverbal reality.

 

What ends up happening, I find, is that we are a lot like Movie Reviewers with all of this talk aboot "I am right and this is why" and "No, you are wrong, because of this..." as we argue for what we find comfortable and against what we don't find comfortable.

 

We are a fascinating species.

Hi- witch - Thats why you and I get mixed up, you think I'm a Jew. No witch I"m a christian and if you knew the Bible the way you say. You would know the old testment is God working with the the Flesh. The new testment  is God working  with the spirit The laws the jews followed I am not under. I have not picked up a snake yet. But then you know we are not to temp The Lord my God.It seems to me you cherry pick. The Bible is ment for those that walk in the way and as you said you have turned your back on it.

Oh yes, Inanna, I remember that one very well!

 

Language is always somewhat metaphorical. Concepts that make sense to us would be incomprehensible to a New Guinean highlander who never had any outside contact  (I dont mean linguistic differences but conceptual differences).

 

Even within our language and culture, conceptual understanding differs. I, for instance, favour the word "synthesis" to denote a state of oneness, unity, at-one-ment, indivisiveness, inseparableness or nonduality because I think "synthesis" describes this state most clearly and unmistakenly. The word is especially meaningful and even sacred to me beause I feel this unitive state most of the time. Yet I realize that "synthesis" is frequently misunderstood or not understood, or people simply can't relate to it from personal experience.

 

The indigenous Okanagan language has the word "En'owkin," denoting a collective or tribal creation. In the indigenous Okanagan culture, were tribal consciousness, conscience, cohesion, and creativity was more important than indivdualism, a lot was done in the spirit of "En'owkin" and the word elicits immediate understanding and a strong response in the indigenous Okanagan culture. Yet "En'owkin," even when translated into English as "collective or tribal creation," is not very meaningful to us because we, as rugged individualists and egomaniacs, can't relate to it.

Hi Katschen

Thanks for posting. Very interesting.

I think there is nothing wrong with taking some parts literal.

The key is "some".  Very few take "all" parts literally, even the Literalists.

 

This debate is so old, it could be classed as ancient  -  

St. Augustine was writing about it in the 5th century.  He said, among other things, understanding the cultural and contextual, We must, therefore, consider carefully what is suitable to times and places and persons, and not rashly charge men with sins.

 

His rule regarding the figurative and literal - Accordingly, in regard to figurative expressions, a rule such as the following will be observed, to carefully turn over in our minds and meditate upon what we read till an interpretation be found that tends to establish the reign of love. Now, if when taken literally it at once gives a meaning of this kind, the expression is not to be considered figurative.

[City of God]

 

It is a simple rule - if reading the text one is led to observe the two "greatest" commandments, love god, love neighbour, then one should literally conduct themselves.

 

He also wrote -  Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

 

If a 5th century priest could grasp such concepts one would think that the "modern" mind could as well.

 

 

LB - perhaps it is a sign of the times

---

History is a cyclic poem written by time upon the memories of man.

     Percy Bysshe Shelley (1792-1822)

 

The issue, the nut, of this whole thread is, I think, of people taking responsibility for what they experience, be it the Bible, be it seeing an accident, be it calling someone a name.

 

For me, the stereotypical "Biblical Literalist" is someone who goes "These words say what they say and I have no role in them."  A more sarcastic way of saying it would be "G_d made me do it."

 

By understanding how every word we use is a metaphor, that means that every word we have a role in, then we can no longer not take responsibility for our words.

 

Even our perceptions, our "Hey, that is a horse over there" is a bet by our neurology -- it is a very complex interaction between whatever it is of the "horse" interacting with the physics and laws of the world and our neurology.

 

So, when someone goes "Homosexuality is a sin, the Bible says so" and acts upon that, they are, even unconsciously, acting upon the metaphor and are responsible for that knowledge and the actions that arise from them.  The same thing if people act upon "the greatest commandment".

 

So all this talk by some of us aboot fundamentalists (or Witch using thier term 'fundie') -- and here I reiterate that anyone can be a fundamentalist, be it a Girl Scout or a Scientologist or a Postal Worker, it tain't just religious -- these are people who forget their active role they have in the words that they use and act upon -- they confuse their words with the actual reality and believe it so strongly that anyone else is automatically wrong.

 

But yes, there are some things that everyone considers automatically true -- because otherwise, we would always be reinventing the wheel and conversations would TAKE A LONG, LONG, LONG time ;3  But these things aren't necessarily always the same among different people.

 

That is where the fun comes in :3

Arm, this just came to me this week: IT? Could it be that IT stands for that which is imminent--the loving kind, of course--and transcendent Being.

 

I think of IT as the Inexpressible TRUTH, which we can truthfully experience but are unable to truthfully define, mainly because it encompasses the totality of everything: everything that is known, not known, not yet known, and not knowable, including the nothing from which everything arose, as a unitive, transcendental whole in a state of synthesis: The mystery of mysteries, a.k.a. God. Yes, the imminent, and immanent, transcendent being.

Berserk - I think the idea is to say something in the post area.

 

 

*golf clap*

IT is intelligence transfer which is to say the least intermidable in humans ... often interrupted by concentrated spirit inside the creature causing them to expound upon experiences ... collisions withouther's in the same dimension. Thus the creature itself becomes clearly muddled in his or hur transcience in all dimensions.

 

All dimensions being translated as everything inclusive and thus the term Oh Mega Odd ... when one leaves the body for an instant. Some say they can have such an in organic moment ... just by thinking outside their self!

 

That's shiyr space that retreats form the desires of man ... the war of intellect against the emotions ... some balance required!

 

There is an old English word Lubberland which is said to refer to London and its population that was known as Lud's Town ... leading with imagination to Ludites and Ludicrous which is how the aboriginals of aL far countires probably looked upon the English sense of Roman Empire. Now considering space as infinite even with all the ripples and folds ... can we see how the other side of infinite is all bent out of shape as we believe in a physical God when it is mostly metaphysical ... like light, heat, and white noise? This could be anachronism or a metaphore as short pseudonym ... something said that means something else just to disturb the institutionalized sleeper ... going on and on like nothing much is happening down below. Does Christ wake such people from time to time as alien energy collides with the dirt on creation ... Mother Earth? On her the script was writ ... well rounded syntax spring forth ...

 Just wondering. I have nothing against derailing threads - because usually the derailment has at least something to do with the original topic, but what do the last 6 posts have to do with the "Open Letter to Biblical Literalists?" Even loosely. Or did RevLGKing just post his "IT" thing here on this thread  for no discernible purpose at all?

Lindsey King, are you a trained hypnotist?.....as far as this thread is concerned, i have only one thing to say..."boo"......(that is meant to be a joke)

Can a mortal relate to anything at all, or are they limited, now intelligence, is that beyond a mortal desire? Just look around you ... by mortal definition of the Webster brothers ...

 

That's a spiritual Tiye in old gifts of the tongues ... a talent buried in dis crypt words?

 

One should dig into such profound things, and how they evolved, perhaps then we could relate to: "And the word was God!"

 

Does it too evolve? Does that relate to a spiritual themes as the sound reverberates across the pool of some minds ... some foggy forms absorb and some are clear Eires ...

 

 

I am sure Linds knows hypnosis.

 

When used wisely, hypnosis, or self-hypnosis, can be a useful tool toward spiritual and intellectual enlightenment.

 

Like any other talent, hypnosis can be abused grossly, or used wisely, or anything in between. (this is no joke :-)

IMHO

Hypnosis, is occult pratice, its to manipulate, alter, shift, restrain , cohurse  anothers mind and will.

i dont know why anyone would want to allow another into ther own personal mind space.

 

I hope it's been long enough since I used this image last, but there is no better way to express the irony of blackbelt complaining that hypnosis can "manipulate, alter, shift, restrain, cohurse (sic) anothers mind and will."

complaining??????????

is that what you got out of it?

I take it you failed reading

 

 

It takes guts to spell it "cohurse", and then complain about my ability to read it.

 

Are you not complaining about hypnosis?  OK, so you're in favour of hypnosis.  Hypnosis is on equal footing with religion and other supernatural claims, so you're certainly in good company.  If you like hypnosis, I take back to the irony meter comment and jpg.

NO, that was my ability to spell, and you still cant read

 

 

an opinion or beliefe is not a complaint, go back to school hamson

It comes from a big bang ... co Erse ... a sacred tongue of the free thinker ... Celtic Spirituallity that is used for the good of all ... sometimes brutal like Christ culling a non-productive fig ... leaving Adam and Eve without cover ... bare soles?

 

Judaic powers hated a naked soul ... keep your thoughts to yourself and if we don't hear of your needs we can ignore them! Far from a cooperative realm ... afar people in real terms ... deis in da Vale 'v Cush ...

 

The unscene future ... unless you can see what's coming of the present state. It isn't pretty unless you have the powers of Onyx ... the black nail of irony, bet' No ire onite ... never go toes leap ugly .. that realm will haunt yah ... oh mega odd realm ... a huge restive space where you can lose yourself in the deeps of the emotive psi-chi ... do some surreal sojourning ... out of the boques thing-heh ... Complex, or Irrational Matte needing workers ... spin drifters of the hi plane?

Arm, thanks for your comment--from back a few years. Doing some research, I just happened to stumble on it.

Interestingly, my interest in hypnosis began when I was a child--in the 30s and 40s--and got to be old enough to read the adds in popular magazines and comic books of the day. They all carried adds like: Amaze your friends, learn about HYPNOTISM, the secret of magicians.

As a child, I remember saying to myself: One day I hope I will be able to find out what this is all about; and whether it is true, or not....

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/see-how-easy-you-can-learn-hypnotism/

https://www.google.ca/#q=adds+about+hypnotism+in+old+comic+books

 

As it turned out: In the 40s, 50s and 60s--as a keen student of psychology, philosophy, theology and eventually pneumatology (mother of psychology)--I did find out. Despite the exaggerated claims of the adds, there are many important things, for better or for worse, we all need to know [questions and comments welcome].

 

TAKE NOTE:

James Braid (19 June 1795 – 25 March 1860) was a Scottish surgeon and "gentleman scientist". He was a significant innovator in the treatment of club-foot and an important and influential pioneer of hypnotism and hypnotherapy. He is regarded by many as the first genuine "hypnotherapist" and the "Father of Modern Hypnotism". In 1828, he moved to Manchester, England.

 

IMPORTANT NOTE:  James Braid coined the word 'hypnotism' in 1843--a word based on the Greek word 'hypnos', the god of sleep. He used this neo-logism at the time to replace the hocus pocus and the magic associated with the word "mesmerism"--Dr. Franz Antoine Mesmer, of Vienna and Paris--a great pioneer that I admire--called it 'Animal magnetism'.

 

Later, Braid admitted he was in error. And because he discovered that the trance state--often used by gifted and creative, as we often say, children, artists, inventors, mystics and saintly people--is not necessarily the same as the sleep state, he wanted to use the word' 'monoideism'--focussing the mind on one idea.

IN MY OPINION, JESUS WAS A PNEUMATIST

Personally speaking, I agree with Braid. I think of pneumatism and the trance state as as a state of being fully AWAKE and focussed.

 

But through no fault of Braid, by then the name 'hypnotism' had stuck, hypnotically, in the mind of people, the masses. One other note: This phenomenon is so much a part of nature, so easy to use and so common that many people are, unconsciously, going in and out of trances all the time, even without people even being fully aware of what is going on.

 

This is how we learn, or unlearn things, including habits, which can be good or bad for us. Like willpower--what social psychology now recognizes as the "greatest human strength--it can be used to do much good or ill. 

 

BTW, because, in my opinion, it is a spirit or pneuma-based power, I prefer to use the following neologisms--'pneumatherapy' instead of hypnotherapy; and 'pneumatism' rather than hypnotism.

=============

Linds,

Is this like Mariah (relative to the Blackfooted Benny? That's a myth about a Western American Christian prior to the arrival of the European Christian) the winds of alternate awareness weaving among the singular twigs of the focussed soul (as 3; Y you ask!) in common tongue often just for cuss'n as authorities don't like simple people to get beyond where the authorities would like to encapsulate them. Thus we suffer KISS Principle when out in the solar wind ... dazed or night! Then Mariah interacts with dirt, sea and phor (metaphorical term of energy as pyre) that'll carry you through hard spots. I suspect it is something that carries patients thro' hospitable walls into the greater unknowns. Big odds some find that phunny ... all that we don't know. I do believe Happy John is catching on to that phrase ... that is convoluted to say the least about IT's genre! That'd be the genre of gnoe'n dark dimensions ... mortally mind-blowing? this could disrupt even the toughest psychopath. Being that pathe is pain and psycho is the mind ... would this be a stimulation for thought as in the sympathetic and Para-sympathetic motes? When you consider that the "p" was derived from  the Latin "rho" and this from the Greek "kho" does this take us into the unknown area of the Hebrew "keth" that is close to a "heth" that is yet un punched or bored like de borah ... that void in a difficult dimension ... sometimes hard to find as a metaphor of god essence that carries phermones or sometimes conceived of as aura that can set the powers Luce!

 

An aquaintance in the Jungian Field says nothing fascinated him more than where catatonics go when recessing from real focus ... is that out of 'ere or what ... like Luce ended genre? The things available for mental ecclesia (gathering thoughts as a storm)! Is that mire pool in simple form that can provide explicite eL Gae or green slime? This is light energy personified or characterized as low life form ...

 

Then I am just an explorer of that large dark pool of words where I know and monstrous issue roams (vertiguous vale) one who knows the field inside and out ... and mortals made such an wise entity into a devil of a thing that can pop up un-announced as people drop off into heh's world! It is a sort of shared travelling ... weaving and wobbling as a person addicted to getting to know some small thing ... naughty luss?

 

Misnomers are good for hiding things ... authorities have used them for millenia and called "eM" redaction. Alas who knows what that really means other than alteration ... something that can also apply to thought. One retired  Literature Prof. told me Moby Dick was a life changing experience for a number of his students ... the etude of a profound monster that is bigger than any of the mortal sol's and that's all there is!  Such realization can blow a mind and the people in the real field will call imagainary things crazy. Considering that imaginary has the metaphor abstract and abstract insinuates something is incomplete ... is there something lost in the deeper myths? Always something for the rod to probe and thus Roosevelt's comment about the big genteel stick ... inhits the total fall right intuit! On soft ground carry it crossways ... has saved many a swampeople from what's under that floating matt ... the icon also poped up outside Mexico City!

 

Kind a makes a person wonder and think ... about what we don't know!

 

I've been told I'm crazy by a number of one-liners (mono-lithes; lith being impressed print) they see nothing as complex or multiple and they believe they should control everything as the god(s) present to them ... they obviously haven't encountered the thinking portion (sector?)  and when they do could that turn heav'n baggage into an eLLe 've a thing? it is a deep enigma like Samson with that lyon pile a bones ... what do you do wit heM?

 

Did you know phonetically that in/inn was once known as a kahn? It takes on a number of weird connotations ... connotation; an interesting word in depth especially when compared to con*nate ... but biblicly we are not supposed to compare ... causes problems for god-like mortals like Rob Ford, and many of Sennate types ... like Sen ach Arab ...a personality right out of the soul of the west that we don't know as the  KJV ... even tho' we believe we know it as God ... a dark, ferme, bottomland plateau of learning about alien things ... that suggest according to the ends of John's Gospel truth, go on and on as an inqui pool!

 

Perhaps why a person should drift off once in a while ... it is said being alert for more than 168 leads to certain death! Is there a dark message there as black mail? Then chain mail ... is that irony as linkage to that which we don't know??? How does the knight appear naked ... that's rye sol'mon ... sometimes known as Jay'n Eire ... the genre of thought is ephi Merrol! Y IT is all about us ... and we can't see it until certain conditions are met and gotten over ... Sisyphus? The things amon has to encompass ... give it a hug and something will be satisfied ... as eerie ... a shallow pool of the Ontario tribe. Not hard to get over in winter ... now is that kohl like that night approaching that is poorly understood in sole-stache ... where wisdom resides beyond the mind blowing state of mortal! This is dark hue ... gnoe?

 

A deep interest in IT will prevent those on the other side from knowing you're processing anything atoll! You will be declared innocent or ignorant and set free of any lawful confinement. Look what ignorance does for high riders! I can hardly wait for them all to take to: "O' I've slipped the surrly bonds of earth ..."

 

The we devilish thinkers can be left in the depth of wisdom ... feeling our way around it ... implicitely! This process goes on and on ... infinitessimal depth.

OK! Now, think about this: Tell me a few of the things you do know about. Then add a few of the things you are working on and would like to know about.

Are you? If so, in what way, or ways?

 

Now, you're drama and grammar are driving me crazy. Is that your goal? And is it a cool thing to do?

 

IT? It is an acronym I sometimes use. It stands for imminence and transcendence.

 

So?

Linds,

I love it ... your interpretation of IT!

 

But was this not denied common mortals by the insinuations of Genesis 2? Some focus on "not knowing" it appears to me. Thus knowing anything is an alien objective by insinuation in biblical law! Did Jesus (de Light) in dissecting the law? Sort of like splitting de phi'sh; you did know that phish/phesh is a component of soul in Hebrew? Such things are like hypnotic to those that block such focus out of their mind-soul-psyche complexes! Instead of convergant focus we get divergant focus on the other side of what was once called camera obscura ... the focus point of the mind as damned spot (dor'thy larger folded dimensions) that can be imagined as the archtype of "X" as referred to as "chi" in dimensions unknown to us. Sort of like myth when myth=beyond or out there like IT/IÐ. A profound etude into various linguistic traditions is enlighteneing about the forces directing the evolution of language into communication that eventually allows everyone to be quite stupified by the entire Maas (that's as it flows in Flemish tradition ... but who'd know that?) This is close to a' nihilism or black floe as dis crypt word appears ... thus dousing emotions about a lot of things ... in a sort of baptism of pyres (þier, or bier in another tradition of floaters). The unseen as looked into ... and those that don't wish, don't appear to look into anything!

 

Such things are stimulous to dissonace to a restive mind that has not awakened to present reality of what we are doing to a mortal dimension! This is d' athe, or wisdom to the Hebrew which are simply an imaginary race across the page to the general paradigm (average Joe's or Joyçe in the etude of Sufi)? Such stare into alien dimensions is weird to many ... thus the crazy appearance from opposing sides of what is dark mire-aur ... obsideon! These appeared coupled on the breast plates of valued peoples in an old black's myth in ... we might just call this a disturbed mind by what is observed. Then in true Heiseinberg style step outside the emotional fixation to contemplate like Julian or Nor'Witch or other isolated mystic on things the general population and leaders don't wish to understand. Such things drive them near the edge, no strength to survive the vert-egos (floe of green growth?) as  abstract vision!

 

Is it a sin to destroy an individuals belief system without "good" reason? Now if that belief is based on what is good for an exclusive group ... could this be called Utilitarian Philosophy or just the opposite sort of conclusion ... ends ... escatology? Piggy asks Po': "are eus tile there?" Of course this is just imaginary ... out of 'Eire ... in the common sense of the brain being a spiritual containment of foreign things to our awareness! It does appear to be essence toule ... like lacy fabrication ... easily destroyed when the components in the action are overly emotional ... plundering ensues with consequences.

 

One has to consider the interpretation of exclusive groups, isolationism, shunning and denial of the less fortunate tiers of society. In western philosophy is anti-socialism quite acceptable as a religious tendancy? Perhaps I am practicing underground isolationism, or separation (דביא)* from anti-social parties! This would make me a bit odd right? I have been told by many on WonderCafe that I need assistance ... but no one is really curious about such unknowns as the Golden Rule in a monolithic social order that operates on simple desires without reflection! This would be two sided, cheeky and Ka Deuces in some regard to the hard one-liners. This could cause Hei Zues to chimeris action ... and did not jayZues speak of 2 cheekyness in form of literary allegory? Appears to me he was a Master Igniting peoples cold emotions into warmer forms through that Roman despised ignatious ... an Classic S' ain't, or that which isn't now? Goes a long way to define how things arn't any more and thus IT isn't ... so we don't! Such is ineffable, and thus unspeakable in religious disjointings of timely things as spread out! This can be history or hysterical ... depending upon disposition.

 

Now if one can get some diverse understanding of the Hebrew icons for *D'B'A, or A'B'D that may very well have been abba'd or fathered from an aboriginal mind (Ba?) as something a fertile curve could extract from the primal power (IÐ' forerunner of IT and "ich") and cultivate in a lowland zoan (zone?). These are separated things that one should have the drive to gather ... like the understanding of scattered words of wisdom. Biblical presentation of god(s) do not appear to favour any clues in this isolated department (sort of like spaces/courts in the father's mansion). Such is a rest from collectiove wisdom to allow the children of higher powers to see how ru'agh it can be without IT/iÐ/Ich or the curiosity of understanding things that are covered up by a lot of presupposed authorities. The grasp of such things requires some travail or wondering; the work of thinking outside the confinement?

 

If one were to return to heaven (or heav'n dimension; quantumly dissonant) and find it a place of massive and deep thought (wordy) would that make hell of a heavenly expectation? This would agree with Dante's expression about soul dimension and it's variable nature; it can be a hell of a place for people that operate on emotion alone and no underlying wisdom! Will thought dissappate desires when a co-operating sort realizes that what they desire is painful to the home group? Now could this me sympathetic or empathetic reason as a logi called thing?

 

There are those that believe logi as alien to our present dimension and I believe this may be true ... tho' "I can't know" as the paradigm accepts that common people shouldn't know anything (based on the Latin Religion of Heiros Gammos ... or dark heros). Hero worship does bother me, when you consider what the wee people do while the hero survives to shine on what other people have accomplished for him. Alas it is common for people not to wish to know such stuff and then they will not have to do the work of refelecting about the dark  complex mess real people have made of this world. This may take some imagination for those that are fixated or focussed on what they were told previously ... stuff that was never questioned as it came from the mouth of authority ... or the loudest bull if you wish to state "it" that way. Then scripture or enscribed word is different ... takes time and labour of love to get it down right!

 

Ever wonder why it is called script-Ur in an ephemeral genre? Gotta love that ðue!

 

Such efforts drive highly emotional people into phtttzzz ... of spitting and roaring especially if they don't have ability to retreat into the relative calm of a thinking dimension ... something called "nothing" to those expecting some  gross positive reaction in their world devoid of adequate response (wise answer). Our present world appears to thrive on wiz dumb answers ... a quick and energetic thing as compared to work horses, mules and wise asses bringing up the latent hynde end as hermenuetic ... that which follows the blast as a negative response to emotion. Perhaps this could be a negative side of an emotional brain ... like a thought?

 

I wouldn't know ... not supposed to! I have the matter under question and inquiry ... but I wouldn't admit that to many Linds. Only you and a few others that would presume to read into my complex responses to what I see as simple one-line religion of success for the subject and to hell with the object ... and thus personalities like me dig in deep dimensions that are out of 'ere. This is crazy zone to question ... as some would kill you to protect what is hidden there! Is this the pitz or just the Greek Nus expressed propoundly or deeply as V-Nus?

 

Didn't Botticelli do a marvelous job of presenting his imagination to the Medicis who emplyed him to hide such perceptions in perverse art of the rye-sol'? perhaps why the mind is considered the devil when compared to an emotional brain stem that appears high to the right in that painting in velvet hue ...

 

Does this appear as scattered thought in your perception? This is all I am allowed at present ... I have hope of future supportive positions ... without hope of alteration to present things does one begin to probe martyr dumb-isms?

 

The "-ism" represents belief and dumb is self-derelect ... such positions just kill me in the humur of it all of what little I know compared to those that claim to know god (an infinite wise persona in some projections) an imagination that is just wild and not self-knowing? You can draw conclusions from this, but such would be condemned on this side of the horizon we are familiar with ... to close to process of thought! Just denied in emotional standards ...

PLUS,

What do I know? Practically nothing in comparison to the infinite-out-there !

 

What am I working on? Mostly words that I don't understand due to their convoluted sources ... this could be a warped knowledge as drew out by previous authorities (drewiðs) that didn't know much either! Is there anything more chaotic than the various tongues created by god to confuse mortals from getting it all together (ecclesia)? Such is the will of emotional ideal-ism!

 

Crazy? Is crazy a relative dependancy on how deep one is into the pool of word or beyond the intense emotional state of ignorance. How ignorant is a personality when in the depth of an emotional outburst. If emotions collapse are they a implosion of thought giving rise to bent inner dimensions (negative value system as compared to positive desires)? This could lead to dark string theories unseen by those emotional sorts that believe thinkers to be stone-cold crazy statutes, or the law is to be out of your mind! Depends on whether you see the mind as an intelligent entity or just a raw source of emotion in need of cultivating. This also creates conflict in The Spiritual Brain as created by Beauregard & O'Leary from their rsearch at McGill. Such etudes are considered by many to be spooky and just beyond them ... accomodating myth (beyond). If it is unfamiliar; would you believe it. What does mankind know? Does this vary collectively and individually to prove general emotional states as collectively we lose it and become apparantly anti-social and martyr-like in activity? Do powerful (judi'n) individuals believe no one else has any thoughts worth consideration? Is it possible most valuable stuff is really subtle in a blasted realm of emotions? Just wondering ...

 

For fun pick up a copy of Kevin Dutton's Wisdom of Psychopaths in which he discusses the mental state of a spector of mankind's intellect or the lack of it ... this is often convoluted appearance when you observe an intelligent person without any care for anything beyond themself as pas, or passè ... a timely occurance. This can really crank your pool ... wheted vortex?

 

Now I am not a professional psychologist, or psychiatrist but looking questioningly at studies on the human psyche ... it fits Dante's description of the Divine Comedy ... collectively we appear from isolated positions to be crazy. As a martyr-like thinker in an emotional setting ... I appear to be isolated, or shunned by many of my own people. An awful screwed up position to be in when you know you have a scrap of truth and it is lost to the population, "eM" or the paradigm that would be the "greater good" if all were cultivated! Could this be labelled Utilitarian or Mus'Ka Tier ... I wouldn't know as by religious law I am declared out of it because of processed intellect that dirties my soul ... why I shovel out this chit or bits of what I know in allegorical form as required by hue'd god in the trees ... dryads? These were W'odin in one tradition ... often burnt for warmth by fire/pyre maqon clans ... such blackens even a good stake ...

 

What do they call it when you take a bath in words ... heated darkness? Omega data's funny ... but if you consume even the odd things and digest eM ... what comes out of IT? The paradigm will say chit ... as what do they know any beta'n me ... nothing or the meat of the nut, very noodle'n like ... why one must from time to time step outside one's elf ... do it obscurely for th' eM won't believe what you come back with ... strange thoughts if they are ab. original!

1 John 4:9 … and did mankind en tomb de light? What if successions of generation cannot read into IT as buried in the tome, de lexis behaviour?

 

That just it though. There is nothing Obvious about it.  If you could find even 2 people who agree in every particular on which bits of that book are meant to be interpreted literally (or as history or metaphorically come to that) I'd probably fall over from shock.  Even members of the same specific church in the same denomination don't agree on that in every detail.