sirguessalot

geisha...i know you are asking abi these things...but it is a public forum...so i hope you dont mind me playing a little here

If want to get somewhere and you go in the opposite direction, logically you are not going to make it to your destination. . . right?

no...this is not logical if you are talking about "going somewhere" along the surface of the earth

because you will eventually reach your destination...once you make it all the way around the globe

but yeah...it is logical if you are talking about a true straight line (if there is such a thing) ...so that you leave the earth's atmosphere and keep going forever

...unless of course the universe somehow works in a way that and you still end up coming full circle anyway

but even on paper...if you drew a line, then kept drawing the line as you flipped the page...then flipped the page again...

so you see why postmodernism asks "what do you mean by "go"?" ...and logically accepts your answer as the truth behind what you are saying ...on this occasion, at least

(rather than tells you what the word "go" is absolutely supposed to mean according to some law or logic...regardless of what you really meant when you said it)

postmodernism attempts to make some sort of object out of our subjectivity...by compassionate inquiry...the specialty of pluralism

...thus, we are able to compare our subjectivities in the light of day...and otherwise "see" each other...becoming "naked" by revealing our interiors

:o

So, how can there be so many truths?

the one big Truth (God, who is All in All..and IN whom we live and move and have our being) is full of many Truths

..."the One and the Many"...infinite wholes and parts unfolding and changing as we type ...all living and moving within The Whole Truth

...and one's subjective perspective is also a true reality in the universe..and must be included in the grand equation as "a truth"

(and not mistaken for The Whole Truth)

but the one big whole ultimate Truth is hard to miss...impossible to fully describe

because IT includes everything...all truths

but what we call it and how we describe and define and interpret our experience of IT is a different matter altogether

...which is a value of postmodern, relativist, and pluralist methodology

they recognize that the words we use in science are not the same as the thing/s which the science describes

the words in the bible are not the same as the thing/s which the bible describes

the words of aristotle are not the same as thing/s which aristotle describes

God has a name beyond all names

and "all men are liars"

so deconstruction allows us to detach the language we use from that which the language is pointing at

and become aware of the limitations of any one language-set

we may even become free indeed

to find new words to match new perspectives as they arise in our life

a new tongue

yet, of course, the absolute Truth (and truths) remain

as the objectivist knows

which is something postmodernists do tend to forget

as they get lost in the re-interpretations of IT

and are still smarting from whatever failures of modernity shattered their faith in it

but what also often happens prior to postmodernism

...is that we simply cannot bring ourselves to detach from the language we use to interpret our experience of the Truth (and all its infinite truths)

even the rational/objective ones often claim that the only absolute logical right way to define a thing is such and such

...often pointing to the words and books and classifications of some expert or specialist that they have come to trust

our sense of self is, in a sense, informed by an inner encyclopedia of symbols...and our anchor for meaning-making

so we may even feel our life is being somehow threatened to change the words we use...or if faced with alien words for God and truth and such

it may even feel like a sort of hell if someone provides information that causes us to have to rebuild our inner temple

our capacity to deconstruct is something we have to develop...we are not born with it

though sometimes the grace and grit of life simply forces us to burn our old inner book and start afresh

though there are also times when it is not really a choice we have to make

Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, He claimed He was the only way to the Father. . . . anybody who says this is either a liar or telling the truth. There is no excluded middle. Any attempt is a weak argument. . .

like Abi said...that is a common statement....anyone can say such a thing...why they say it is not an object...unless we find a way to transform subject into object

which, in the case of a historic Jesus...is difficult, at best

from everything i have come to understand about abraham and such from jewish wisdom...when Jesus said he was the only way to the father

...it was like saying "I AM is the only way to the Father, no one sees the Father but through I AM"

...which is a generic but profound statement of the perennial contemplative spiritual experience.

and as he was likely the only one on the gospel scene who was teaching and demonstrating and living this kind of reality/good news...this statement is true in that context as well

this ancient art and practice of realizing "I AMness" is "how human wisdom becomes sufficent enough to attain a spiritual knowledge of God"

though if we believe that only Jesus could say "before Abraham was...I AM"

such a statement from me or anyone else may seem blasphemous...does not fit our inner dictionary

...even though it really is old news to the world

such as how i've heard it described that when Jacob "saw God's face"

..it was as if he looked out from "the inside" of God's face...as if he wore God's face like a mask

...though he interpreted the experience in his pre-modern language

the more we bring the layers of our subjective perspective into our objective awareness

the more inwardly objective we become...and the deeper and wider our subjective position becomes

until all that is left is "I AM"

...or "God as my Witness"

or "God as my capacity to Witness"

so that all the layers of our mind and soul and heart and body are experienced as objects in this Spirit

like Abi wrote...

God is spirit and there is nothing concrete about spirit. God dwells in all of us and there is no way a black and white, concrete being could possibly do that!

yet ALL manifestation occurs in this radical infinite space and grace called The Spirit of God

and as such...and is described as the manifestation of this Spirit of God...even though this Spirit of God need not "act" in order to cause such

...simply Being is enough

well said, Abi

btw...to a nondual rabbi...the glass is not only both half full and half empty

...but also both fully full and fully empty

if one can wade through the jargon and odd names...this article on Postmodern Christianity might be interesting

for what its worth, Steve...

thanks for attempting to educate me...your sub story sounds quite interesting too

but please know...

...i am aware of and acceptant of the realities and dangers of spiritual entities and forces and whatnot...as well as many fearless eastern approaches to evil demons

...i feel your summation of early christian beliefs and experience regarding demons is way too simplistic for me

...i am familiar with the usages and definitions of deisidaimonia

...i am also a devoted christian with experiences of my own

but most of all...i hope i am not required to attempt to explain my opinion of Mike to you

in order to point out that you are declaring to others that another poster is being influenced by demons

and that this not only seems like a "very foul ball" here at the GSC...but in dialogue in general

and i am guessing you are quite dead wrong about Mike going away because of your posts

but carry on if you feel you must...ill try not to say another word about it

maybe someone will be interested enough

to find a mod interested enough

to check you

...

no sweat, dear brother Mike

just dont tell anyone...ya crazy

;)

dmiller...ive spent some time with mike

on the phone..in person...on the forums...i even posted on his first thread

Steve is not giving an "honest assessment" of his mental state.

as you are, he is claiming to know mike's intent

and trying to convince others that he is being influenced by demons

...on an ex-cult forum!

huge difference

besides...if i was posting rants about you (in 3rd person, no less) and your mental condition demonic influences to others

it would be against the rules

back on topic

the subjective pre-modernist might say..."i personally know for sure that hell is absolutely an otherworldy place for justice in the afterlife"

the objective modernist might say..."hell is a baby covered in napalm"

the inter-objective post-modernist might simply ask..."what does hell mean to each of us...and where did we learn such things?"

somewhat

sorry to interrupt...i hope we can be civil

but for what its worth...

postmodernism is not pre-rational

but post-rational

it is not a subjective perspective

but more of an inter-objective one

(where our subjective perspectives are becoming objects)

which may be mistakenly considered less-rational

for having moved beyond the natural limits of logic

but there is a common fallacy that mistakenly equates pre- and post-

simply for being non-

which is why rational thinkers typically cant tell the difference

...

and yes...like all development...the emergence of postmodernity has new problems along with new gifts

a few of its faults are

a rejection of all hierarchy...even natural growth hierarchies...while hypocritically claiming to be above other worldviews

...which is also a part of why post-modernity can do nothing against ego-centricity in social orders..."how dare you judge someone else"

but a few gifts of postmodernity...social and civil rights and equality...ethnic and cultural diversity ...and an open inclusive heart

and a capacity to use language more fluidly than previous waves...and so a capacity to hold and compare conflicting views

... digging deeper for personal definitions...becoming in touch with the vast contextual networks and influences that we are swimming in

in a way...postmodernism is like the later stages of life where we need to deconstruct and dismantle our unconcious habits and influences

...logic and reason aside...we are running out of time and want to reveal what is authentic and unique about us

as we become more and more self aware

and even though postmodernity has never been so mainstream until the last century

the great interfaith movements of history rode in on the emergence of a pluralist wave

some people of religion were able to relax their death-grip on language and gross reduction

and compare spiritual with spiritual so that they might find common ground

...ushering in many centuries of peace and good will

(yes...500 years of christian, jew and muslim collaboration to create europe's first hospitals

...why dont they tell this story in the middle east peace process?)

...

personally...i prefer what comes after post-modernism/pluralism

and cant wait for our society to grow past this post-modern funk

...if nothing else...so we can finally talk about human development

and how to stop putting childlike adults in executive positions

i may regret posting this...

but Steve L, regardless of how outlandish Mike's claims and methods may seem

your so-called spiritual diagnosis of him seems juvenile, supersitious, presumptuous, ineffective, personal...

...and quite soakingly contrary to the rules of this forum

what's next...a hypertextual exorcism?

:blink:

yeah Bramble

"How the Irish Saved Civilization" by Thomas Cahill

...another good pagan celtic title:

"The Celtic Way of Prayer: The Recovery of the Religious Imagination" by Esther de Waal

and anything by John O'Donohue or David Whyte

...

more thoughts re: sacrifice...

the natural way of the human ego is ascension, attainment, winning, success and accomplishment

but the language of "descent" is one of the overall themes of the Bible

...failure, powerlessness, vulnerability...as if we have to be taught how to "win by losing"

as if the sacrifice of Jesus caused more than a magical or mythical or literal or metaphysical change in the rules of the universe

but rather...it vividly and unforgettably reminded us of a very real something that us paleolithic spiritual human animals already know

...but tend to forget

nice, cman

hi abi and all

a stream of thoughts and feelings on a few of the verses...

mark 12:33 - And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.

To Love God, to Love the Sacred, the Love the everpresent Divine ...is to love All...because God is All in All.

To "be one with God" is about more than "being one in purpose" with God,

it is to sacrifice (kill) one's addiction to the human ego as the bounds of our identity.

And i often hear it said that "love neighbor as self" is an expression of the golden rule..."do onto others..."

...but like the first half ...it seems higher, wider, deeper than that.

To love neighbor as one's self...is to realize that same non-seperation from the Divine in the person of a so-called "other"

in both cases..."other" is the primary illusion we are to sacrifice

which naturally frees us and opens us up to a much more wider sense of care and concern

not merely friendship, or even Frienship...but FRIENDSHIP

reminds me of a prayer practice that was taught to me by a certain rabbi

where one prays to God for the wellbeing of an "other"

while gazing into the eyes of that "other"

completing the circuit "from God to me to you to God again"

thus, sacrificing one's primary identification with a human ego

romans 12:1 - I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

this reminds me of the perennial invitation to "die before you die, so that when you die, you will not die."

much like...

John 12:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

1 Corinthians 15:36 - Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die

self sacrifice = transcending the human ego ... and then wholly including it

so that God has a vehicle for service to All

...

as ive often said...most of the bible (both NT and OT) is a "jewish book of dying"

where contemplation = practicing "dying before we die"

and "death = enlightenment at gunpoint"

but contemplative practices are a self-initiated conscious way to make us "accident prone" to "falling into" a direct felt experiences of this way of being

as does the misfortune suffering and loss...and other occasions of radical grace

but it seems that...as with the 20th century

the first century had forgotten such ancient universal lessons...and were on a similar "flight from death"

and in our terror of dying...we often misunderstand and twist the content and context of ancient texts into exclusive and unconscious forms of religious oppression and dis-ease

but it seems Jesus sacrificed himself (by his death and life) to re-awaken personal, cultural, rational and social capacities to "die before we die"

and caused a pre-modern formation of monastic orders of practicing caregivers and midwives for "the soul"

fundamental to this type of life (monks, nuns, etc...in any language)

was that the caregivers FiRST examined and healed their own sense of selves in this regard (dying before they died)

so that they could hold space without having one's un-examined shadows foul up the scene

and help heal those who found themselves "doing all their homework at the end of life"

but when one has not endured some crucible of self-examination...and is not ego-aware...

or worse...foolishly thinks that they have somehow destroyed their ego

...we get "healers run amuck" ...which cause way more harm than good

i find this easy to discern in religions, sciences, medicines, dialogues, etc...

...just watch for the trails of smoking ruins..and a general increase in suffering...and it should be easy to say "that's not it."

nevermind

for what its worth, Tom

it makes a lot of sense to me

and not to blow smoke

but honestly, its one of the most enjoyable, instructive, authentic "little" posts ive read in the doctrinal section of the gsc

All Love,

Todd

What other things did he proclaim that were proven erroneous?

in addition to my short list at the beginning of this thread

it seems he got the Humpty Dumpty reference wrong

...

re: Speaking in Tongues...

perhaps not so blatant, but i cant help but see

that neither the PFAL version

nor the other non-biblical studies of glossalia

have much at all to do with the "tongues" experiences of pentecost or acts

though i still use the form of "glossalia" i learned in PFAL in my prayer life

and find value in it, in spite of the misunderstanding

i also "speak in tongues"

all well said, jeff

such paradoxes may even be an expression of "opposite goods"

as a way of giving us cardinal points for navigation through life's wildernesses

...

the admonition to be childlike reminds me of how, in developmental psychology, for example

once we outgrow our subjective view of God (lets call it "childlike")

and enter intersubjective ("cultural") or objective ("logical") or interobjective ("social") stages

...if we reject the role of subjectivity, we may lack our ability to find personal meaning in life

our capacity to wish, want, imagine and wonder is developed (or not) during those early years of life

augmenting (or not) all later stages

we may belong to a culture and find a communal good

we may be able to prove what is true and real and factual

we may be able to understand systems and processes

but we cannot find much beauty or awe in any of them

one may see the endless nesting contexts of scripture (and life)

but see them as endless layers of deception and delusion

...while another sees them as endless layers of truths and beauty

testing and purifying our faith 7x (from "faith to faith")

involves carrying forward the lessons of each stage

by swallowing them in later stages

not rejecting them

thus, the injustice of injuring a child's magical sense of subjectivity

...because we grow into cruel tyrants and adults suffering from meaninglessness

which causes A LOT of suffering in the world

if i do not find life meaningful

...i may assume there is none to be found by anyone else either

...

yet...the admonition to leave childish things behind reminds me of how, for example

as we become adults, if we do not differentiate between our subjective and objective view of God

we simply cannot tell the difference between exterior fact and interior fantasy

if we do not differentiate between our intersubjective and interobjective views of God

we simply cant tell the difference between exterior facts and interior fantasies

...

overall point

which is what i feel you are pointing to as well

is that each stage of our "God-view" is important

but if we are wounded at those stages

and the wound remains as we age

and our life keeps growing around it...casting a shadow across everything else

healing our view of God involves going backward and simply untangling that knot

...not cutting it out

...

somewhat playfully...all this makes me wonder if Christ looked forward in time and studied western psychology...also

thanks for the response, jeff

...not much time to post today

it also seems worthy of noting how Jesus encouraged both...

...having childlike faith, as well as "putting away childish things"

a lot of paradox like that in the bible

...and life

haha...thanks for letting me know

kinda hard to tell from the emoticons

thanks jeff...good to know

and yeah...so "push and breathe" was like a playful metaphorical wishing "Godspeed" on one's path of transformation..wherever it may lead

...like giving birth to, and being born into, new stages of faith

So in my mind this one thing is clear, any claims of seeing God need to be followed by truly good behavior otherwise we all have the right to say, "Hey, he's full of it."

indeed...agreed

real inner transformation to higher "stages of faith" if you will

whether brought about by practice...or some accident of grace (such as tragedy and loss)

is a one way trip

like having a seal broken...where there is no going back

one's "new heart and perspective" simultaeneously frees us from certain prisons

but also binds our hands ...where we are simply not able to act certain ways any more

"ruined" is a playful metaphor i have heard for this kind of change

or like "i wish i could be plugged back into the matrix and forget"

but motivations and priorities and morals shift quite radically..and irreversibly

and some sense of this is evident (or not) in the lives (and words) of those who make (or have made) such claims

whether the person is living or dead

with the opening of one's heart and mind to God

the circle and scope and bounds of one's care and concern keeps expanding exponentially

as does the circle and scope and bounds of one's view of "where God is at"

and from where "God's voice emanates."

from self

to family

to tribe

to culture

to nation

to humanity

to all living things

to simply ALL

yeah, cman...mercy indeed

like when the unborn flower screams "Lod have mercy! Please kill me, crack me wide open...and free me from this seed!"

...

sorry if i interrupted your thread, jeffsjo

...the direction you were asking in just happens to be one my passions

"to see God, or not see God..."

is certainly an important line of inquiry

...

in general...it seems that a large part of christian theology (currently and historically) concludes that only special rare people get to "see God"

and all or most of those special people are typically dead

meanwhile, there is also a large part of christianity (currently and historically) whose theology includes actually practicing "seeing God"

....as ordinary and vital as eating breakfast

and due to a theological permission to "see God"...the latter part of christianity has been free to develop effective arts, methods, disciplines, and exercises for actually doing so

...while the theology of the former is simply not able to ...mostly for not believing it is possible...and fear of demonic deception and such...even ethnocentric prejudices

...

the clearest, starkest difference between the two general attitudes...

...one is primarily interested in belief and finding a solid textual interpretation

...the other is primarily interested in experiencing transformation by way of actual living practices

(which the former tends to want to avoid, or dismiss as invalid, reserve for special people who are dead, etc...

...which seems natural, perhaps especially because of the influence of the "me generation" on christian thought and practice and avoidance of lineage and the abundance of bad examples of organized religion.)

the former is more or less limited to a small handful of stories and words and lives of those who have died...starting with the books

...the latter is living and experiencing what was written about...comparing it to the ancient records in the books

...

honestly...how many so-called christian teachers these days not only show us the hows and whys one might sit in silent prayer and fasting for 9 days

...but have actually done it themselves before claiming interpretive authority of Pentecost and Jesus and such?!?

(and not the magical "thank you God for giving me a parking spot" kind of prayer, either...but the "who am i? why am i here? where am i going?" and "what is the nature of suffering? how can i help? and how do i want to leave this world? " kind of prayer life)

btw...from what i understand...its not til around the 3rd day (if one makes it that far) that the body and mind experiences the first dramatic shift in self-awareness and insight

...

anyway...

Godspeed again

dont forget to push

and breath

great topic, jeffsjo

pardon the length...and looseness...i dont have time to reference things...

please know that while i dont quote the bible...it is still my favorite book and source of inspiration

perhaps you can see the verses you mentioned in what i wrote

or other sections of the bible

...

how i have come to understand this...

starting about mid story...a little after we are born...

we develop an ego...we first see God in our imagination

...as envisioned answers to all our raw honest questions arise within us faster than we can ask them

thus...the image of God we see is fantastic and magical..including talking plants, animals and creatures

...a subjective view of our own interior workings

we already want to resist and avoid the views of God which are coming

this is suitable for a child

but not for the leader of a religious culture

or for the president head of a nation empire

..."put away childish things"

...

when we grow up and learn our proper place in our family

our view of God changes from a purely subjective one

to an inter-subjective one

we begin to see God in the rules and stories and laws of our family

we begin to reject and avoid the silly magical views of God we once clung to

God is seen as purely human and parental

familial and cultural

...the parent of our parents

God is no longer seen in a solitary imagination

but in the shared imaginations of what is possible

mostly limited to the books and stories and legends and mythologies

passed from generation to generation to generation

remind us of our morals and values and common dreams

also causes a language and story-conflict between cultures

again...this is suitable for an older child

but not for the leader of a religious culture or corporation

or for the president head of a nation empire

..."leave the family"

...

when the family values begin to fail us

and its time to leave home and see the world on our own

our view of God changes again...we want to be objective

we reject and avoid the magical and mythical views of God of our past

and often try very hard to debunk them

while proving for ourselves what is real and true

God may no longer be as useful a word to us

...but our view of God opens to a vast undiscovered field of reality

We reach a point where we need to replace the subjective and inter-subjective views of God with a solid object

but it is not long before we realize that IT/God is simply too vast to see everything

so we settle on some specialized field of study...and go to college

here

some see God through a telescope

some see God through a microscope

the objective view of God reality is one of testing testing testing

and seeking the truth of the matter

if it were not for the tendency to want to simplify and reduce all experience to an IT

...i would settle for this view of God in a business, religious, or political leader

...

after leaving college and spending time in the real messy complicated world of people and suffering and information

we find that the objective view is not enough to navigate our experience of God/reality.

we can learn the secrets of our specialized field

and debunk all the myths and magic that we want

and try and settle on some absolute truth

but there is still something missing

...something deeper...something more authentic

our view of God becomes inter-objective

where we are more interested in the systems and networks and fields of infinite ITs

we find value in including all the many specialties...all languages...all fields

so language is seen as less solid..less reliable..less reducable to mere definitions

and more effective, honest, curious dialogue is required to compare our objective views

we enter the contextual wilderness of many jargons

variation, ambiguity, diversity, generalization...and paradox all become more valuable and valid

...process, methods, and arts all become more tangible and practical than some solid IT

ours and other's views of God are seen as constantly changing

so we trust them less and less...and are more interested in deconstructing views altogether

this is where the crusade to squash the human ego really kicks in

we see God/realities not as an IT

but The processes of life

God is seen as the rhythms and pulses of life

...

if we get far enough with our deconstruction before we die

our view of life turns ever deeper inward

beneath the layers of the body and emotion and thought

as if the more we dissolve and deconstruct...the closer we get to the soul and subtle layers of our life

we begin to see God/reality in powerful dream and vision experiences

as they relate to our own history and journey

we begin to see the values of our magical, mythical, rational and pluralist views of God

spelled out in vivid archetypes and "aha moments"

our purpose, or trajectory, or karma, in life becomes clearer and clearer

as we start re-prioritizing and crossing most everything off our "to do list"

we understand and respect all stages and states of our mortal condition

...which is why so many of the great artworks of religious history depict this

such as the christian "great chain of being"

these are the powerful visions that bring people to their knees

flashy, angelic, profound...awesome...terrifying

causes us to wake up and see and do things differently

and finally locate our wee selves on the grand map of things

scrooge, for example

except for that one little leaf ...we are almost fully naked in the garden

...

there is yet another view of God

and that is the one where God is, as described in the bible

... invisible...formless...and everywhere

and we simply "see" God as such

right now (or not)

all the previous views are seen as arising in this field of no-thing

which is seen as the cause of all effects

be still and know that i am God

be still and know that i am

be still and know

be still

be

which is why songs like this were sung by (and for) those who are dying

and at the final stages of deconstructing their life

true redemption...true salvation....not mythological, or magic

this "view of the presence of God" is the ground of spiritual practice

and the baby milk of many of the authors of the books of the bible

they devoted their lives to practicing "seeing the invisible God" in this very extra extra ordinary obvious way

using the mind to get free of the mind

using the ego to get free of the ego

using the body to get free of the body

they practiced being in the presence of God

witnessing their egos as God (who is no-thing) would witness it

self-examination = self-aware = naked and unashamed in the garden

no self-examination = weeping and gnashing of teeth in outer darkness

they practiced seeing the presence of God

and called it things like "waking up"

and being "born again"

and "consciousness"

they discovered that we are all already always soaking wet with this invisble everywhere present God

and there is a natural profound world-shattering experience of humiliation to realize that one has been looking for a God who is always already everywhere

this is "the coming of the lord"

this is what we experience when we die

...

but the world's first wave of such discoverers then felt the world of form was an enemy of God

so there was at least one more step to take...time to come down from heaven and be useful in the world

descend descend descend

...wise as serpents (ascending)

...but harmless as doves (descending)

so after this heavenly "spiritual" state/stage...

there may be a collapse of the enmity

and a union of form and formless views

where all of the above views are included

and value of the mystery of Christ

is that is forever UNsolved

and forever BEING SOLVED

God has no opposite...

all is in God

and God is in all

this is the abundance

this is the integrity

includes a subjective view

intersubjective view

objective view

interobjective view

aperspectival (all-perspectival) and unitive view

i recall how it took a seven-eyed seven-horned lamb to open all the seals on the book of life

...

to add...

the craziness of life also gives us peaks into any of the above views oF God

but if these peaks dont push us into the next step of our ego-trip

we will interpret the experiences from the stage we are at

this is why one can have a profound visionary dreamlike aha experience

and then claim it is a message to me to start an exclusive religion

...

thanks again for the thread topic

i'll be around

all space and grace

Todd

edited to add...

...and Godspeed

:B)

for what it is worth

as ive mentioned before

it seems there are at least 5 basic pespectives one can take when interpreting our experience

such as our experience of: the bible, God, Jesus, death...and Hell

loosely...

1st person subjective interpretation: the perspective of a very young child, or self-centered adults, or magical thinking. "my beliefs = absolute truth." I, me, my. God is interpreted via my fantastic imagination.

2nd person intersubjective = the perspective of a child waking to their place in a family, or law-abiding adults, or mythological thinking. "our beliefs = absolute truth." We, our, us. God is interpreted via our cultural story.

3rd person objective = the perspective of a young adult after leaving the family and entering college, or reasonable adults, or rational thinking. "proven evidence = absolute truth." It, this, him....God is interpreted objectively.

4th person interobjective = the perspective of one who sees our changing objective positions in time, or social adult, or pluralist thinking. "its all relative = there is no absolute truth." Its, these...God is interpreted as a flexible flowing system...the sum of all our objective perspectives.

5th person aperspectival = the perspective of one who notices our development (or not) through all the above perspectives. Each perspective is valid, plays a role, but is also partial and limited...but all perspectives are of the one and self-same occasion....and God is all in all. Truth, goodness, and beauty. Self, culture, and the cosmos. All perspectives work better together, than they do at war with each other.

as life goes on...we are developing (or not) our capacity to take each perspective, so there is a spectrum of possibilities (in depths and degrees) in each perspective. Using subjectivity as an example...one can loosely describe the journey as pre-developed subjectivity, developing subjectivity, and developed subjectivity (and all points in between).

same for inter-subjectivity, objectivity, inter-objectivity, and even aperspectival.

...

carry on

#1 One method would be meekness. I alluded to this before in my response to Mark in Post #633 when I said "We were shown how unbelieving scholars can read errors into the ancient scriptures by way of their methodology, right? " We were taught this in the class, remember? The assumption must be made before beginning that the text is right. Then you look for the answers on THAT side of the tracks, not on the side that you all are on, assuming that it's full of errors.

this statement of yours caught my attention, Mike...i hope you dont mind a few more questions

wondering....

to what degree you've applied such meekness to other sets of books on the planet?...new or old

and to the degree that you haven't, how could you know whether or not their contents can disclose the same interior consistency and life-changing info and such as the pfal series?

is it possible that someone has written something post-pfal that is as (or perhaps even more) profoundly important and vital to God and/or humanity?

how possible is it that others have experienced a similar depth and degree of insight, knowledge, love, power and such from other works?

feel free not to answer, btw

respectfully,

Todd

thanks RumRun...sounds like fun

ive met a few gscers in san diego before, too

...cant recall what we drank though

waysider..

for what its worth...

imho, vpw may have had some mystical experiences to interpret

but he was no "mystic," as the word is currently used

history has way too many "mystics" to compare him to

regardless tho...i hear ya...funny too

I love dialogue, but I do have a caveman tendency to want to defend my cave from aggressive invaders. your view may be more "wholesome" in that you're looking at a larger picture than I am able to at this time, having been immersed in my personal struggle for survival.

vpw's supposed revelation goes to the root of the things I've struggled with the past 20 years.

i can appreciate this potato...20 years is quite a layer of any one life

...there are many kinds of personal struggles for survival that can have little or nothing to do with food, shelter, clothing

so please forgive if any of my cliff-jumping is troubling in any way

...i try to be kind and clear and generalize in my posts so as not to push anyone off an existential cliff

i guess i feel it might be worth something to at least point out the cliffs i see

..."feeling useless" is a particularly bright wound ive lived with for decades

trying to usefully ponder outloud in a crowd is an art, i guess

maybe i should add this signature line to my posts:

...plz feel free to say "woah."

I really think that's the results of a "snowstorm" and a doctrine one does not have to "back up on"..

it's like carrying a large millstone.. don't "have to" back up on turns into "can't ever" back up on..

have to constantly polish it, adore it.. justify its existence..

and perhaps one can only back into a corner so far anyway

...like reaching the end of a line

or as one finds in caving/spelunking

...how there most often is only one way in and out of that hole

or where the millstone can also be seen as being inside out

...and we are inside of it, like being in a cave

i often wonder how "meeting christ in the air" is like "learning to fly"

...in a way that involves learning to jump from "line to line"...or "cavern to cavern"..or "branch to branch"

as if that one little trick alone grants us rapid access to explore the whole/holy tree/system

...like a flying squirrel...we are free to fearlessly explore any line to its natural end