Whose Fault IS It?

[satori001]

This is a reply to ozbirdau's question: "If we don't get healed, is it our fault?" The answer got too long for a post, and became its own topic.

Maybe some of you will find it entertaining. I do know what I'm talking about here, but I have no idea what I'm talking about. I did for a few moments, a long time ago.

Done editing for now. Additional changes will be in new posts.

--

The obvious answer is this: the "promises" in the bible are NOT promises as we understand them. If the "simplicity" were simple, there would be no discussion. "Simplicity" just doesn't mean anything when it comes to spirituality.

Pretty much every faith teaches that the physical world must obey the spiritual world.

You got cause. You got effect. Spirit is cause. The physical is effect.

Everything in the physical world is the effect of something else. So there is no true cause > effect relationship here in our world. Apparent causes are just the effect of another, prior effect.

Sickness is a physical affliction, so healing must be brought about either by a physical "cure" (an "effect" within the physical realm), or a spiritual decree (an external cause).

Wierwille didn't teach believing in a vacuum. There are plenty of biblical references, and his teachings, mis-teachings and mistakes are discussed and dissected by Raf, Jerry Barrax, and others you can easily find. (I haven't read them because I have no further interest in Wierwille's prose and cons.)

What should be OBVIOUS to everyone, including a dying, one-eyed cancer victim once known as "Doctor," or "The Teacher," or "VP," is there is nothing at all "simple" about spiritual power, if it exists.

By if, I mean "spiritual power" and other such terms are terribly misleading because we have defined them in a phyisical context, as "effects." We can only define something as an effect. We live in a world consisting only of effects.

Everything in our world is an effect of something else. So our concept of something spiritual is inherently wrong. Spirit may "exist," but NOT as we think we know it, NOT as an aspect of our world. Spirit does not behave as we think it should. It doesn't "behave" at all, for that matter. Behavior is part of our world, not the spiritual.

What is "believing?" It is supposedly the effect of: positive confession, prayer, single-mindedness, like-mindedness, "imagineering," "walking out on the promises," and a lot of other meaningless crap. (Not meaningless in our world, but meaningless, therefore ineffectual, to spirit.)

These "keys" are in turn the effect of your intention, or "will" (decision & desire in Wayspeak). They are the effect of your need, issue, problem, goal, etc. Which are the effects of circumstances, which are the effects of prior circumstances, those the effects of prior...

--

What is "spirit?" If you tell me you know what it is, you're a liar. Nah, not really. You're only repeating a lie. And not really a lie, but an illusion by which we are perpetually deceived. You have descriptions, you have definitions, you have images and impressions. All are the effects of what you've been "taught" (and I use the term loosely). But you don't know jack ...., do you? And EVEN if you did, you'd know better than anyone that words fail utterly to describe what you think you know.

And, class, out of what did Wierwille concoct his beliving formula? Words? Yep.

What is the bible, for that matter? Words? Yep... and not original words, but the approximations, of the gist, of the substance, of the vaguest inklings the competing committees of translators had of the prophet's original inspiration, if that's what it was.

And even the prophets were limited to words.

The fact of the matter is, even if God had revealed Himself today, not on parchment, but in digital high-def video and Dolby 5.1 surround sound, we STILL wouldn't get it, because we live in the physical world. And we interpret everything we learn through that experiential filter. We are the effects of everything that led up to this moment.

But spirit is cause. Not effect. We have no way to grasp true cause, a cause without a prior cause. We only know the chain of effect.

So... We can't do .... that isn't the effect of something else. Even our free will is an illusion, the expression of our accumulated baggage, which is what we "feel."

So you may ask, who am "I?" You are a little "assembly of gears," spun helplessly by countless other gears, great and small, and of which you have no knowledge.

"But, that's not what God intended!" your memory banks may output in protest. "I've been programmed to 'believe' I have free will! I refuse to update my software!"

You couldn't, so there's no argument, is there?

So where did this idea of "free will" come from? How did it get into our software?

That's where spirit comes in. We don't know what it is because our processors can't process anything original. Spirit exists beyond the machinery of our mental and physical existence. This is why we can try, try, try to make spirit do our bidding, we just can't. The effect cannot dictate to its own cause. Can it? How could the physical world command the spirit? Ridiculous. Even our little processor/brains can get that.

There is a way out.

Anybody care to guess?

-edited to help laleo get back in alignment and harmony-

Edited June 16, 2005 by satori001

[satori001]

If anyone is inclined to venture in, try to keep your replies short, as I will too. I don't want this thread to get bogged down in the usual morass of metaphysical muck, which these discussions generally become.

Regards...

[satori001]

Oh, about the thread title.

"Fault" is our word for responsibility, when there's a problem.

Responsibility means we "caused" the problem.

This thread is an invitation to glimpse the circus of our life from outside the rings, so to speak.

Yes, I'm your host clown.

-edited for grammar-

Edited June 13, 2005 by satori001

[satori001]

This isn't about offering yet "another gospel," of which there are too many to count.

It's about asking, "Have you ever really heard what the gospel is saying?"

How do you know? Are you too old or too tired to ask yourself?

[George Aar]

I am confirmed believer in the known laws of physics and not much else.

So through my "filter" words like "spirit", "God", or any metaphysical jargon you can come up with are simply poetic ways of conveying the same thing: "I don't know".

[Ham]

quote:

This is why we can try, try, try to make spirit do our bidding, we just can't.

That's one of my favorite points. And even somebody's guaranteed twelve-step self-improvement seminar is not gonna do it. "How to be a prophet in twelve easy steps".

Or even four years of intense study under the "master"- "Now you can be the MOG that you always wanted to be"..

One thing you can say, it failed miserably.

I don't think you can blame those of us who naively bought into it.

I would blame the claim of having the absolute.

It was really made to SELL.

[Ham]

Is that short enough Satori? Heh heh.

[satori001]

quote:

Originally posted by George Aar:

I am confirmed believer in the known laws of physics and not much else.

So through my "filter" words like "spirit", "God", or any metaphysical jargon you can come up with are simply poetic ways of conveying the same thing: "I don't know".

George, what is your basis for "believing" in known laws of physics?

Some of those laws we experience, like gravity, and the behavior of light. Others are only accepted (and demonstrable, if not provable) theory.

What constitutes what you know, versus what you believe? Is there a scientific consensus you accept as "gospel?"

[satori001]

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Hammeroni:

One thing you can say, it failed miserably.

I don't think you can blame those of us who naively bought into it.

Do you generally accept that there have been "real" prophets, and there exists a "real" spiritual realm?

1. If no, then "blame" passes to the con-artist, and some to ourselves, for not being more like those who gave PFAL the "sniff test" and walked away.

2a. If YES, then who's fault is it, NOT that we were convinced, but that it did not WORK for us, even though you accept the reality of "spirit?"

2b. Is it our failure to believe (whatever that is), or our failure to understand, and therfore to practice, what believing is?

[Ham]

quote:

Do you generally accept that there have been "real" prophets, and there exists a "real" spiritual realm?

Yes.

quote:

If YES, then who's fault is it, NOT that we were convinced, but that it did not WORK for us, even though you accept the reality of "spirit?"

I think the fault lies in the claim that an inferior product could produce the desired results.

To me, the very idea that we could be turned from a pig's ear to a fully functioning, all nine-all the time swiss army knife for the Lord if we followed five simple steps, or even five-hundred, is beyond ludicrous.

I also think it is a failure of the flesh itself. In my opinion, it CANNOT of itself yield spiritual results. Can't be educated enough, can't sacrifice enough- but you can hardly blame it either. It would be like criticising a chimpanzee for not being able to produce a Pulitzer-winning novel.

Maybe its a little simplistic, but I think either people "have it" or they don't. I have met those that did, and those who only convinced themselves that they did.

[satori001]

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Hammeroni:

Maybe its a little simplistic, but I think either people "have it" or they don't.

Isn't this saying that God is a respecter of persons? What does "respecter" mean, anyway?

Remember the brief thing...

[Ham]

quote:

2b. Is it our failure to believe (whatever that is), or our failure to understand, and therfore to practice, what believing is?

No.

If the Almighty sent an angel, and said- "the ship will be destroyed, but all will survive" I would have LITTLE trouble believing it. In a specific sense, you'd have to be "stupider than stupid" (sorry, heh heh) to miss it.

Genuine believing is way to hard to mess up, at least in my opinion.

[What The Hay]

quote:

Responsibility means we "caused" the problem.

I would say it largely depends on what you are implying by the word "we" - the individual or humanity. I imagine in most cases it is probably both.

[satori001]

Also, if it isn't "easy," why would certain verses in the bible make it so easy for Wierwille (and an unholy host of others) to teach believing, straight from the bible?

This is to any or all, not just Mr. H.

[satori001]

quote:

Originally posted by What The Hay:

I imagine in most cases it is probably both.

What, briefly, is meant by "both?"

And, briefly, why?

Is it a failure on God's part to make it more accessible to the average modern Christian?

[satori001]

My initial post was somewhat more detailed than the rest will be.

If you answer, try to do so in a way that allows your post to stand alone and be understood without re-reading the first one, but also briefly.

[Ham]

quote:

Isn't this saying that God is a respecter of persons?

Perhaps from a certain point of view. "Well, God just OWES it to me- me, me, me.." ah, the ego of man..

In some categories, yes, I think He is.

[Ham]

quote:

why would certain verses in the bible make it so easy for Wierwille (and an unholy host of others) to teach believing, straight from the bible?

Well, I don't think to teach it was THAT easy. Perhaps "skillfully crafted" would apply.

I think we got a homogenized blend of muck composed of faith, believing, blind obedience, and every promise conceivable, carefully wrapped and even tied with ribbons.

I still think believing works, specific only to context. Not the promise you the moon if you can believe big enough to get it nonsense.

[satori001]

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Hammeroni:

Perhaps from a certain point of view. "Well, God just OWES it to me- me, me, me.." ah, the ego of man..

Is this sense of "entitlement" wholly unjustified, or do you think the bible (in current form) may lead us to feel that way, with words like "whosoever" etc?

I find that religion begins with evangelism, promising much without qualification. But the longer you're there, the more its "leaders" retract, often with shaming remarks like, "'Well, God just OWES it to me- me, me, me..' ah, the ego of man.. "

--

Religion speaks:

To the unsaved: "You are special to God, He just loves you and would do anything for you!"

To the saved: "Is God supposed to treat you special or something?"

[satori001]

Originally posted by Mr. Hammeroni:

Well, I don't think to teach it was THAT easy. Perhaps "skillfully crafted" would apply.

I call this "shooting the messenger." Many of the verses quoted lead us to think it is "easy."

I think we got a homogenized blend of muck composed of faith, believing, blind obedience, and every promise conceivable, carefully wrapped and even tied with ribbons.

Too many vague generalities here - in the same number of words, what do you mean? A quick example?

I still think believing works, specific only to context. Not the promise you the moon if you can believe big enough to get it nonsense.

What do you mean by "works?"

Which context(s) to you refer to here?

Why would physical dimensions be a limitation on God's "promises" or power? Wasn't that the message of Jesus' mustard seed / mountain example?

[satori001]

duplicate post

[Ham]

quote:

Is this sense of "entitlement" wholly unjustified, or do you think the bible (in current form) may lead us to feel that way, with words like "whosoever" etc.

Yes, no, and maybe.

Lets see.. if the book is true, we are already heirs of God, joint heirs with Christ, have access to God's presence. What more do people think they need? I don't think God owes us another stinking thing. Not entitled to be a prophet, a healer, a this, a that..

But in a broad sense, I think we are entitled. Entitled to live a healthy life, to prosper, to enjoy life- or in other words, be joyful. In some ways, I think this is up to us. In other ways, obviously not.

[Ham]

As far as "whosoever" is concerned, I'm still working on it. Not every mountain I talked to walked off into the ocean.. I think it falsely appeals to the ego of man, the idea that you can go around bossing mountains around. Unfortunately, I think God wants most of them where they are at, heh heh.

[satori001]

Originally posted by Mr. Hammeroni:

quote:

Is this sense of "entitlement" wholly unjustified, or do you think the bible (in current form) may lead us to feel that way, with words like "whosoever" etc.

Yes, no, and maybe.

So much for "certainty." Wouldn't God be able and willing to be more consistent for his children?

Lets see.. if the book is true, we are already heirs of God, joint heirs with Christ, have access to God's presence. What more do people think they need? I don't think God owes us another stinking thing. Not entitled to be a prophet, a healer, a this, a that..

"Joint heirs" stand to inherit something in the future, upon the death of a benefactor. You wouldn't be able to spend an inheritance until you'd received it, so I'm good with that.

But what about this "direct access" stuff? What does this mean? If God is omniscient, and knows everyone's innermost thoughts (believer and unbeliever alike), how is being a Christian improve your "access" to God? In what ways?

But in a broad sense, I think we are entitled. Entitled to live a healthy life, to prosper, to enjoy life- or in other words, be joyful. In some ways, I think this is up to us. In other ways, obviously not.

Nothing's "obvious" to me. You need to give an example or two.

As for the part that is up to us, I'm talking about entitlement as a Christian child of God. What part of that is up to us? And by what means to we accomplish it. How is it different from the unbeliever's experience of health, prosperity, joy...

[satori001]

Mr. H,

You ask "What more do people think they need?"

Is that a serious question?

What about a 2-way relationship with their Heavenly Father?

How about a modicum of the wisdom and power we associate with Christ? How about the ability to heal your friends, feed the masses, and other selfless, benevolent, and really neat stuff attributed to the spirit of God?

--

I have invented a pill. If you take this pill, you will be in excellent condition and lose lots of weight, guaranteed. All you need to do is follow the instructions.

Instructions:

1. Buy my pills

2. Take a pill 3 times daily with water

3. Exercise 3-5 times a week with aerobic and weight training.

4. Eat a low cal, low carb diet

5. Follow instructions for 6 months.

Guaranteed.