RE: COVID-19: "Post-COVID World," Losses Mount, and now "Phase Four?"
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Up well before 🌄 (here) @valued-customer, first let me thank you for an "epic" (the "kids" today seem to love this word ...) comment. Deserves a post of its own, for your benefit, with a link to it in here on this post perhaps!
Second, I always value input, whether I agree with it or not, as long as it is civilly and respectfully (at least for the most part) stated. Yours certainly fits that description. Therefore, in my view, it adds value to this post, for the benefit of others who may read it. Someday ...
Beyond that, I suppose I could write my own post in response, but time does not permit that. We have points on which we largely agree and those on which we don't. Good communication is always beneficial, from my long life's experience, in at least reducing "the gap" on the latter, so maybe I'll just make a couple of brief points, each of which could be greatly expanded upon:
"... the problem we face is political ..." - From my system of belief, every problem we have is ultimately spiritual, as touched on briefly in the post I published last night. And it is all "down hill" from there, beginning with politics ...
"Decentralization is literally freedom." - Depending on how you define this, I would say not likely, as your input conveys support for the commonly used word "anarchy." Which, in turn, is contrary to what I believe to be "the natural order" of our world. Based upon hierarchies of authority. Which can be "good," but far too often are "bad" ...
The "natural order" ... In ancient times, we have the biblical record of the Hebrew people and details of their opportunity to live in a "decentralized" state of existence. They rejected it and clamored for a KING! So, they could be like everyone around them ...
In more recent history, based upon a proper appreciation for "the human condition," in their associated wisdom and integrity, our American Founding Fathers produced the greatest form of government seen. Described by the incomparable Benjamin Franklin, in response to a question about what had just been created by "consensus agreement" - "A Republic, if you can keep it ..." The greatest modern form of "decentralization" ... Which "we the people," much as people from ancient times, have demonstrated we will not do what is necessary "to keep it." We have progressively decimated all of the "checks and balances" established in 1787, to keep us free of the inevitable, tyrannical nature of centralized authority. As in ancient times, we clamor for the "Almighty State" to be our source of safety and security ...
In both instances, "we the people" suffer the consequences of their decisions. We are still, in my judgment, in only the very early stages of finding out what that is going to be ...
P.S. Interesting to me "in here" that what is left of the blessings the American people have historically experienced draws such admiration from our Korean friend, @silvergrifin007 ...
It is reading your kind responses to @silvergrifing007 that gained my regard for your writing and knowledge.
As to anarchy, hierarchy has always been necessary to our species because war disrupted security. Modern security technology that is able to be manufactured by individuals - and technology far in excess of what is presently available will be soon - eliminates this necessity.
Given that for most members of a hierarchy, it is a 'necessary evil', I reckon most folks will extract themselves as able.
You rule yourself every day. Everybody does. Autarchy is a fact of life. While I am familiar with the Bible, I am not willing to discard my God-given reason to worship what is in all likelihood a man deified in the Roman manner prior to his followers being used to conquer the world.
That is not a use to which I intend to be put.
Jesus was a great guy, and taught men like us how to live. That is the victory over the globalist tyranny I foresee, like a prophet of ancient days. Good folks making what they need and helping each other, and the hierarchical structures that profit parasites be damned.
Thanks for the courtesy of your reply, and know that mine is intended to encourage, not radicalize.
Be well.
Well @valued-customer ...
... it is kind of you, in turn, to ascribe some kindness to my efforts, as I am not accustomed to "hearing" that. While far from perfect, I do make a conscious effort, so thank you.
I appreciate you investing some time into a response. Whether I agree with what you have to say, I know you write "from the heart" and are very earnest in what appear to be your strongly held beliefs.
This characterization of yourself underscores what I just wrote, from my perspective.
Beyond that, before deciding what (if any) more to say, I want to be crystal clear about what you intended to convey with these words:
They are confusing to me. Would you mind expanding on this sentence?
Insofar as we are what we are, in order to cement our mutual understanding of that fact, I refer to what we are as God given. We have not created ourselves, but are provided to our selves to do with as we will.
My capacity to comprehend the significance of evidence based on my experience is not some denigration of God, nor denial of faith, in any way. It is as God given as my fingers or any other aspect of my existence. Therefore I am obligated to the Creator of that gift to me to use that capability forthrightly to interpret evidence. That is the purpose of reason and understanding we are availed.
In Rome at the turn of the common era, it was the common practice of that culture to deify great men upon their demise. This was done to Jesus, as Christianity was imposed on Rome and twisted into a weapon of imperial conquest that produced the Holy Roman Empire and that antithesis of Jesus' simple teaching of communal love and treating others no less kindly than oneself.
From the 12th Century and the genocide of the Albigensians, the weaponization of Christianity developed by the Catholic Church became refined into one of the most egregious cultures of torture and elimination of human rights in history, producing the Inquisition. We can observe parallels to our American government today, as the rhetoric of revolution and individual freedoms is twisted into support for a police state surveillance imperial institution that features indefinite arbitrary detention, torture, and assassination even of an American child named Awlaki without any accusation whatsoever of wrongdoing by US President Obama.
This is the source and etymology of Christianity today. It is not derived from the teachings of the Albigensians, because they were eliminated by genocide. The Reformation was a rejection of this weaponization, but was a response to that utterly Antichristian institutionalization that produced merely reformed institutionalization of Christianity, and was not a restoration of the original teaching of Jesus, which was simply to act personally to love the others in your community.
It is this demonstration of a good person, Jesus, of his loving and kind actions in life to bless his neighbors and community that is significant to we today, as those were acts mere men such as we ourselves can undertake, not the acts of an omnipotent and omniscient God whose pretense at suffering on a cross being tortured to death has zero relevance and meaning to mortal men. It is this desecration of Christianity and it's replacement with polytheism that has driven world conquering Empire that I cannot accede to against that gift of reason I am bound to honor by fully using it to understand these facts.
I find your inquiry regarding this point revelatory of your own cognizance of that blessing of intellectual functionality we are delivered of God, and the import of this particular point. I will but offer to recommend you undertake to debunk the individual reasons underlying this understanding of Christianity should you find insuperable it's ultimate conclusion, to best enable you to bless me with insightful criticism should you find it necessary to your own faith to refute my understanding.
Thank you for investing your time into providing a response to my question @valued-customer. We can certainly agree on this:
From my belief of what follows, this statement extends beyond "we" to the world around us. As recorded for us in the first couple of chapters of the Bible and its description of the Garden of Eden. While making no claim to knowing much about them, this simple fact seems to have been opposed by the Albigensians. A people which you have referenced in your response ...
In "googling" more about these people, I found this statement in the Wikipedia post:
I don't know if you agree with this statement, but your response indicates to me that you do. Tied to the Catholic church, the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc. While historically an issue, no doubt, for anyone seeking to understand the Truth, I am not sure how you make the leap from referencing what happened to these people to "tying that around the neck" of all of Christianity today ...
For whatever it may be worth:
I raise these quick points to simply to say that I, like many, many others, have had my own experiences with legalistic, self righteous, hypocritical people. And very familiar with the "stumbling block" they represent to anyone seeking to know the Truth. That is certainly an important aspect of my own life's "story" ...
Perhaps it is so with you as well? Perhaps not ...
If our "conversation" holds any interest for you continuing, I would like to return the focus of it back to Jesus Christ. Who He was and what His "story" represents ...
In agreement with your own characterization of Him, it is quite common that He is referred to as a "good person." In whatever way that basic idea is conveyed. In His time here on earth, here is what He said of Himself:
Whatever these words mean to you, my next basic question, then, if you have ever heard of it in any form or fashion, is what the word "Gospel" means to you.
Of course, my desire is this be a "two-way street" conversation, so if you have any questions for me, please feel free to ask away ...
P.S. Please take the above as my response to you saying - "... to recommend you undertake to debunk the individual reasons underlying this understanding of Christianity ..." Upon reading it, if you think I have misunderstood / ignored / ?...? what you have written, please feel free to restate it. While I don't perceive this to be an issue, please set aside any concern of "offending" me, with whatever you feel led to say ...
I am happy to receive your reply. I am also quite glad you expect not to be offended by my opinions. As you might expect, not all folks this topic comes up with are so measured in their responses. I endeavor not to offend, as some seem to think that I seek to abuse them if I do not share their faith. Conversion by the sword seems too easily adopted by some.
I note Jesus spoke in Aramaic. Translation through several languages, which has necessarily been undertaken to create English Bibles, tends to subtly at best shade meanings. It is certain that the imperial church, through which your theology has been delivered, since it did not simply spring forth out of nothing, but must have been derived from prior theology, has undertaken to spin Christianity into a weapon of world conquest.
I believe the statement above is an example of how that was done. I note Jesus did not ever directly and forthrightly state he was God. Why? Because he was just a man, and this is why his acts have significance to mere men. If God can be perfect what is that to us? We are not God. We are men, and if a man can live as Jesus did, we can know we can also. This has meaning to us, as an example mortal men can follow.
When called good, Jesus said 'Why do you call me good? Only God is good.' He clearly differentiated between himself and God. Every sect of Christianity today has derived from the Catholic Church, including the Mormon faith. The temporal powermongers that used theology to turn churchgoers into armies that conquered the known world without doubt twisted Jesus' words to do so.
His acts demonstrate humility, compassion, and love for his community, not authority, lordship, or power over them. This is the example we should follow to be Christians IMHO. The Romans deified Jesus to create worship, which abnegates reason.
Jesus never sought worship.
He sought followers of his example.
More than this gospel I reckon confounding and destructive of what Jesus sought to do. Empowering Popes and Pastors to wield authority over their communities was not what he did in life, nor does that support his example of loving service to the community he lived in.
Institutions are Antichrist. They are undead, undying, inhuman and inhumane. People are who Jesus reached out to, and who matter. Whatsoever of our power and authority we deliver to institutions, we take from God and counter His purpose with. If we use our power and authority to help people, we undertake to do as Jesus did, and follow the way of God, who gives to us our existence and all the blessings in it without expectation or demand of return on His investment.
There is no god but God. Men, even good and incorruptible men, are not God. When all men do as Jesus did, they save one another from the harms that plague us, and themselves.
This is what Jesus meant when he said 'I am the way....', and the manipulators of mankind who weaponized his statements to wage war of conquest by crafting armies using them deliberately twisted what he said to cause them to abandon reason and lovingkindness until they could burn innocent people alive in the name of Christ.
To call Jesus God is desecration, polytheism, and turns his love of humanity into a weapon of brutal war. This is what I observe from history. This is what my reason supports from the dichotomy between how Jesus lived and what institutions twist that to achieve.
This is also why I am hesitant to discuss this with Christians, who seem sometimes to cast away the beneficence their faith in God blesses them with if the unquestioning belief in the deity of Jesus is challenged.
Very good @valued-customer ...
... then we are, at least on this point, "on the same page." And, on that basis, although you do not explicitly say so, I will assume the reverse to be true, i.e. that you have not and will not take offense to my replies.
While I can ask further questions to, in as positive and constructive a manner as I can manage, provide you with "food for thought," I would largely do so, as I have done above, based upon what I believe God's word clearly states vs. providing just my opinion.
Therefore, this statement creates a challenge for me, going forward ...
... since I have dealt with this before, primarily (which you may or may not have some experience with yourself) in my past conversations with the Mormons. At any point in talking with them, where there might be the challenge of dealing with the meaning of any portion of what God has to say to us, they simply dismiss it as "incorrectly translated" ...
Ohhh ...
Well, that quickly leads into a "bottomless pit" of trying to determine what then God actually did ever say about anything, what "proof" anyone would base their assertion of that claim on, and why that is correct, etc., etc ...
So ... When you say ...
... you have, in a manner of speaking (which is just fine with me ...), passed "judgment" on what I hold to be true, which is the word of God. How would you describe the source of whatever has led you to the conclusions you have shared with me? And upon what does your confidence rest that (whatever the answer may be) instead is True?
I have read a reverse translation from English to Greek, to Aramaic, which I don't particularly have great confidence in as producing an accurate reconstruction of Jesus' words, but that reveals just how significantly such translations affect meanings.
Further, my reason is my rock in my opinions. It may not be sufficient, but it is what I am availed, and as I undertake to abandon false understanding when apprised of it, do the best I reckon I can with it.
No one I know that gives much thought to Christianity maintains that Jesus was not a man. Christians practically universally also ascribe to him Godhood. I know a lot of men, none of whom are gods, and expect this is as universal as any physical law - by which I mean the rules that God established to order the functioning of the universe, as in physics.
Men are not gods, and it was in the roman transition to a Christian empire that Jesus was deified. There is little reasonable basis to understand Jesus as God and obvious and substantial evidence that he was deified for political purposes.
I should say there is no reasonable basis to understand Jesus or any man is the Creator of the universe. When considered just on reason, the idea is preposterous and absurd beyond doubt. That he was a holy man seems more than apparent, from the extensive interest in his acts, and the nature of reports of those acts. But holy men are not omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent beings.
The political application of his deification to create hordes of warriors willing to do every vile cruelty to those their prelates sent them after well explains the subtle twisting of his words.
Finally, it is the utter irrelevance of his torture and death if he was that immortal God that convinces me he was only a man, and that his deification is not only contrary, but contradictory to Jesus' message and example. Instead of inspiring humanity to emulate his example, it couches that transcendent love that encompassed his torturers even as they killed him as something only God can do.
Jesus did this as a man, and this means to men they can elevate their own selves to love transcendentally, which is what Jesus stated would save the world and allow the meek to inherit it.
God is no liar or trickster, to fool us into believing He suffered and died. It is a lie, and the utter refutation of a forthright loving God to claim God could die on a cross. Men can do what Jesus did. I have seen men die in agony, yet die well, and die for the love of their people.
Perhaps you have seen the photograph of the Buddhist monk who set himself afire to protest the Vietnam War.
I will not be offended by anything you ask or say regarding theology or religion. You seem to take exception to the sole possibility of where Christian theology derives. Is there some other route than through the Catholic Church through which it has been passed down?
Very well @valued-customer, you have clearly spent a lot of time investing in and reflecting upon what you believe to be true. I both appreciate and respect that, as that indicates a rare "depth" to you. That is a lot more than I can say about most of the people with whom I might have a similar conversation. At least in this day and age ...
Having no idea how often you might have been "tested" in the soundness of "my reason is my rock in my opinions", to be concise I'll just make some brief (as I can manage ...) points, each of which could be a post / book / ?...? on their own, if one was so inclined. And, as with you, they come from "my own story:"
Intelligence is not the same as wisdom. I would suggest to you reason and logic are more closely tied to the former. While God tells us properly understanding Him begins with the latter. In either case, however, we are told His is infinitely greater than ours.
The first point leads to our inability to simply rationally, logically, "reason out" the Truth. It is revealed to us by God. The pride of man is his eternal undoing, as he does not want to accept this, as very clearly stated here. God's Word is not a text book. We cannot simply pick up, read it, and pass some sort of the "comprehension" tests we became accustomed to in school, as children.
What does God reveal to us? He starts with Creation itself, as referred to here and proclaims we are without excuse, as a result. You clearly believe that there is a God, so you do well in coming to that realization. As we both know, there are many who do not.
As children, I believe our natural state is to be inquisitive and creative, much as our Creator. It is easy for a child to experience the world around them and believe that there is a God who created it. What happens as we age? The word used in the scriptural answer is we become "hardened" ... To what?
Distilling the essence of the answer down to the two most basic questions I know, we find the answer:
Over my long life, I have come to believe, in whatever "twists and turns" one takes to try and avoid facing it, the "hardening" of man's heart comes in his wrestling with his Creator's answers to these two questions. If he can manage his way past the answer to the first one - "bad!" - then he simply will not accept there is nothing he can do on his own to get to a better place.
Back to reason, rational thought, and logic, I have long held that what one thinks is based almost exclusively upon what one believes. This, in turn, has a direct effect on what we "see" ...
Only God is going to help you "see" the Truth of, for example, what the Cross represents. Against the understanding of which we all are challenged with these sobering thoughts:
" For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18
"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus’ sake." 2 Corinthians 4:3-5
I'll close saying I will come back to Jesus, again, should you have an interest to continue. As I hope you will. I will do what I can to help you thoughtfully reconsider your statements about who He was.
If it helps any at all, you are not "arguing" with me. We seem to both at least be able to agree that there is a God. And presumably agree that He is greater than us. As the words above indicate, unfortunately there is another who is also greater than us. And against we are hopelessly and helplessly "over-matched" ...
Long ago, a man served as a "tool in God's hand" to help me understand these things. And eternally changed my "trajectory through life," as a result. During that time, I found great power in these words, that I believe are applicable to you now, as you reflect upon what I have written:
If He gives me the blessing of serving in any sort of similar way in this "conversation" with you, I will happily share whatever insights He gives me.
I find it too convenient to be let off the hook for my responsibility to be righteous by this argument.
I have appreciated too much, I think, our conversation here, as I dare not undertake it with most folks.
Be well.
Yes @valued-customer, in one way or another, this ...
... is where most want to "get off," as it is a stumbling block. Arguably the stumbling block ... It is a credit to you that at least you have a desire for righteousness.
Those similarly inclined most commonly use each other, as their reference for "how am I doing?" By what measure do you determine "how am I doing?" in your pursuit of righteousness?
You do not need to answer. I will pray that He helps you "see" that our standard of righteousness and His are very different. As He is the perfect and eternal embodiment of righteousness, He declares there is "none righteous". And, if it helps, we most certainly are not "let off the hook," but called upon to be Holy ...
Thank you for your time. I only am a part-time "engager" in here, but if you ever want to "talk" about anything in the future, give me a little time and I will look forward to it.
As far as I can tell, in this "virtual world," you seem quite sincere and honest. I appreciate that.
All the best to you and yours in getting through whatever is coming ...
P.S. "... whatever is coming ..." in my view has been ordained by God.
Up early 🌄 (here) @valued-customer, prompted to read through our exchange here, I first want to thank you for investing your time in it. As I have prayed about it, I feel led to emphasize my response to what I perceive to be central to yours - your pursuit of righteousness.
So, based on the liberty of this being my post, your encouragement that you will not take offense, and my wanting to ensure any other "eyes" on this exchange see this final emphasis, I will continue ...
The challenge before all of man is against whose standard of righteousness will we be judged? The unmistakably clear answer from God's Word (which far from letting you "off the hook" will place you on it):
"This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all."
1 John 1:5 [emphasis added mine]
"... who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen."
1 Timothy 6:16 [emphasis added mine]
"For all of us have become like one who is unclean,
And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment;
And all of us wither like a leaf,
And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away."
Isaiah 64:6 [emphasis added mine]
"because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin."
Romans 3:20 [emphasis added mine]
In a word, He is perfect. And we most assuredly are not. Not even close ... And there is no "yeah, well, okay, I'm not perfect, but I am pretty good, especially compared to that guy over there!" option available.
God has provided His answer to the problem. The ultimate answer. The historical figure you and I have both referenced by His given name - Jesus Christ. Both fully man and fully God, He paid the ultimate price for our salvation. As God, knowing that men would reject this Truth, as men always want their "works righteousness" to "pass the test." Their pride is their fatal undoing ...
He refers to this as a "stumbling block:"
"Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, ..."
Romans 9:32 [emphasis added mine]
"For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."
1 Corinthians 1:22-24 [emphasis added mine]
"But I, brethren, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been abolished."
Galatians 5:11 [emphasis added mine]
Note: "Circumcision" referenced here was the universally accepted word for "calling out" the Hebrews understanding of what I have called "works righteousness" ...
So ... I appeal to you to reconsider your position. You stated above you have taken the extraordinary measure of going back to the original Aramaic to try and understand what God has to say to you. My appeal is that you do this again. With whichever of these scriptural references above you feel led to do so. I am fully confident that He will lead you (any of us) to the Truth, based on His promise to you (any of us), if you (any of us) earnestly seek it ...
"And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him."
Hebrews 11:6 [emphasis added mine]
"Seek the Lord while He may be found;
Call upon Him while He is near."
Isaiah 55:6 [emphasis added mine]
"for He says, “At the acceptable time I listened to you,
And on the day of salvation I helped you.”
Behold, now is “the acceptable time,” behold, now is “the day of salvation”
2 Corinthians 6:2 [emphasis added mine]
In closing, I want to take pains to say I am no different than you. And certainly no better. I have now completed doing what I hope you would do for me, if our roles were reversed. Sharing the liberating Truth shared with me long ago ...
For whatever our future holds, I wish you well, my friend, in your pursuit of righteousness.
As should be apparent from my discussion of reason, what standard I have of righteousness is God given. I know it is not some perfect understanding, as none such should be expected of an ambulatory bag of obscene glop. So, I am left with certainty that my standard must evolve as incessant failures instruct me what to avoid.
Granted the knowledge of my imperfection that precludes expectation of impeccability, and Jesus' own admonition to forgive as we would be forgiven and to thereafter 'go and sin no more', I am certain that my proper course is to learn from my mistakes and undertake as best I am able to not repeat them, and to do so unimpressed by anxiety. I have long sought regret and shame, along with criticism, as those are marvelous impetus to avoid repeating damnable mistakes.
As to faith in God, I find it immaterial to my journey, though some may enjoy it. Since I cannot know the perfect way, I do not bother to think I do, not even to claim to be granted it from the maunderings of holy men long dusty bones in mausoleums. I expect the human condition: bractice makes berfect.
So far, I am not disappointed in my expectations.
Let God know God. I am only called to learn of me, and that is more than I expect to perfect before I join the dead in providing the basis for my posterity to live on.
It is vast overreach to grasp at empire, and I will be content, in the end, with the grave.
I find the proclamations of prelates comparable to the claims of sorcerers, in the boastful ambit of their intent. In 'A Yaqui Way of Knowledge'(or one of the books in that series) Carlos Castaneda wrote that the sorcerer Don Juan told him 'a Man of Knowledge chooses his folly.'
In other words, that knowing we are imperfect requires us to accept imperfection, but the sorcerer claimed to be able to select what shortcomings he would feature. The masters of Persian rug-making also have fallen into this conceit, by deliberately incorporating one tiny flaw into their products, the 'Persian Flaw', so as to avoid perfection in that work and thereby offending Allah, which for some reason they believe to intend the universe to never feature His own nature.
I find these beliefs comparable to the magic of God's grace to erase our sins. Rather than offend my reason by believing in my ability to only sin as I choose, or that such error as I undertake magically being eliminated from history by grace, I simply trudge on from error to error, and seek to only make new mistakes as I go.
It seems to me the best I can expect of me. More than this I do not aspire to, nor expect of God. In the world to come, which I foresee not from spiritual enlightenment, which I do not claim, but from simply projecting forwards from the technological development ongoing and the nature of humanity, I shall be happy to be availed of that perfection in body and spirit that I am confident remains availed only through the perfection of purpose Jesus showed came from the knowledge that all life is one immortal creature.
From the least microbe beneath the sea, to our neighbors and their vapid interests, every living thing today is the endpoint of a chain of living cells reaching uninterrupted back to that primordial living thing, whose life we continue. We are all one, and it is only reasonable then to love each other as our selves.
We are all one life. When mankind goes forth into the heaven, as holy men have long prophesied, and today we develop the means to do, we will allow our terrestrial life to claim that barren starfield through our agency. Someday, when the tech has nominally developed and the time is right, we will rejoin that society, resurrected by means we might only understand today as magic, but potential in the laws of physics the author of the universe laid down as the foundation of creation.
Then, perhaps, such conceits as prelates, sorcerers, and craftsmen proclaim might apply.