Somewhere along the way we have to ask ourselves: Was Einstein on to something when he said that you can’t solve a problem by using the same energy that created it?
Can you bring an end to violence with violence? Can you bring an end to war with war? Can you bring an end to someone else’s anger with anger of your own?
There is a delicate balance here that begs to be struck. To sit back and do nothing after the witnessing of abject cruelty and rampant violence — even though it may not involve or affect you directly — may simply not be tolerable to the mind of a person of conscience.
If you saw a woman being attacked in an alley as you happened by, would you keep on walking, reasoning that it doesn’t involve you or affect you, and therefore you should do nothing?
Likewise, if you saw men, women, children and even babies suffering cruel and agonizing deaths after being attacked with chemical weapons, would you look the other way, saying that it doesn’t involve you or affect you, and therefore you should do nothing? Or would you risk getting involved — and involving others who are even less affected than anyone, being third-party removed — in the name of what feels “right” to you at the depth of your being?
There is a delicate balance here that begs to be struck. This is precisely the balance that U.S. President Donald Trump is trying to find in response to events in Syria.
Is it our job to “police the world,” making sure that its leaders do what we think is right and just and good, even if it could cost some of our own their lives?, people in the United States are asking today. Is it our place to let the rest of the world sort itself out without our intervention at any level that involves force, so long as the violence is not inflicted on us?
This appears to be the question of the moment in the minds of many. Yet the posing of that question in that way suggests that all this is what is often called a “Zero Sum Game” — or a proposition in which one participant’s gain exactly equals another participant’s loss, producing a balanced outcome.
The challenge here is that there is more than one way to produce such a balance, where the pendulum rests squarely in the middle, or the scales hang evenly, or the seesaw winds up perfectly level. To produce such a balance, one would have to use equal force, for sure, but would it have to be identical force?
In the case of nations, some would argue that economic force could be as impactful as physical force. Yet if one participant’s economic condition is buttressed and supported by a third party, the second participant’s use of economic force could wind up having no effect whatsoever. (The same could be said about physical force, for exactly the same reason.)
How, then, does one’s intervention stop from becoming meaningless? Or worse yet, harmful to oneself?
This is what keeps occupants of the Lincoln Bedroom in the White House up all night. It is what turns the hair of Presidents noticeably grey noticeably quickly after taking office. It is why being the Chief of State of any nation in the world can be an endlessly thankless job.
What is the spiritual solution to the world’s dilemmas? Is there even a good one to be considered? This is a question that I am asked a lot these days. It is a question I ask myself a lot. And that brings me back to Einstein. Was he right?
I’d like to put the question you to, here — and the specific issue of what, if any, an effective response, spiritual or otherwise, might be to the use of chemical weapons in Syria — before I offer my own observation.
I shall read your comments below with great interest.
Comments
1,224 responses to “A Voice in the Wilderness
WAS EINSTEIN RIGHT ABOUT ENERGIES
THAT CREATE AND SOLVE PROBLEMS?”
We’ve talked about this very same issue before. Syria, 2013, etc.
A lot of wisdom and fair observations at those times.
Some conclusions, as I remember:
– Only true or accurate observations about what is happening can heal or solution ill things.
– Denial is not the way of awareness.
– Rampant violence can not solve rampant violence.
– The USA has NOT to be the policemen of the world. Less, if they’ve acted so many times as the delinquent.
– UN or an actual, democratic UNION of countries with equal rights, voice, and vote, is the way for resolutions that could be applicated to any leader of the world that act as a bully. (That’s not the case by now. As CWG book 2 stated, the UN is absolutely unefficient.
– Of course, it is to be observed that in recent issues (50 years ago until now) countries such EEUU or others that attack others don’t do it by ‘good will’, or trying to stop violence or ‘evil’. Just the contrary, they act JUST by their self economical and geopolitical interest, and the rest are just excuses. Deluded or false alledgments for making interventions or attacks, and of course, more violence and war arises from that. Irak, Vietnam, Chile, Iran, Nicaragua, Panama, Yugoslavia, Palestine, Somalia, Lybia, Afghanisthan, El Salvador, Grenada, Y emen……. …….. ……. you name it. Failure in observing this is the first reason in why this continues.
– Corporate media is puppet of global corporate interests. They don’t serve truth’s agenda but ‘the ones in charge’s agenda.
– As Neale said once, paraphrasing: “the trouble of the world is that the very few who rule it, are really very few but they are organized and have a common agenda, meanwhile the vast majorities that could change things, are NOT organized NOR have a common agenda”. And I’d add, from CWG2: ” [talking about people with beliefs in ‘free market’ and stablishment ‘truths’] “they are terribly mistaken and don’t understand nothing about what happens in the world”.
– “We Are All One” is the main cultural meme that would have to inspire every rule, law, agreement, negotiation, or conflict resolution efforts. But the majority of the world still believes in: “the strongest: the ones with the biggest gun, win and take it all”. So, we still live in this primitive concept. We’d have to change that, but education, media, religion, and politics are absolutely formed in “the winner takes it all” vision. Very hard work to do.
– Never give up HOPE.
Well, that’s what I can recall by now.
EInstein was right in my oppinion, but almost anybody believes him… So, here we are again, new US Presidente, the very same politics.
Help us God! (God is ALL of humanity and beyond).
Surprisingly, the answer is easy. There is never anything wrong going on. A wrong decision or action does not exist. We are here, on Earth, to put our hand in the bee’s nest, and from there on evolve, as a law of nature. We can not, whatever we do, miss out. Some will intervene. Others will not. Some are meditating no matter what. Some reach “enlightenment”, making their way home, and won’t help out. Nothing is wrong. Hitler went to heaven… Death is a better place… Any suffering, regardless whom, or how bad, is something inside which you need to resolve yourself… As a human, this is very hard words to put down. But I also know, from another point of view, it is the truth.
There is never anything wrong going on? A wrong decision or action does not exist? We are here on Earth to put our hand in every bee’s nest 🙂 ? 🙂 I don’t know about those. Doesn’t a honey bee have one honey, so to speak? Okay back to the point? I just. have a hard time agreeing with those lines. Also, I want to overcome death. .I want to experience it so much, havingt come close on a couple f occassions. .actually there at least three near deaths almost jumped in a bottomless pit, brain tumor, car hitting head, too, so yeah. not my year. At any rate, I believe we cannot discuss Neale’s topic if we truly believe nothing is ever wrong going on anywhere. Relaltively speaking, we ain’t in heaven I guess that’s the problem Sorry to disagree, but I can’t help it. What are we here for, but to engage in debate 🙂
Dont apologise for sanity and the truth. Its backwards!!!!
Xx
wouldn’t think of it 🙂 xxoo
You have a very high vibration, Rainbow. I love it 🙂 And I don’t mind disagreements. Especially not on these issues. It’s not more easy for me than for anyone else. But christ was crucified for a reason (if that story holds water). The real truth is often painful. Do not stop being you 🙂
🙂 hmmm I’m working onthe vibe and it is up and down, so to speak. At any rate, what can I add to that. . there seems to be a deep comment I cannot grasp the extent just yet . .. .I’m working on it. ..Christ died on a cross…and it does hold water..so wow you got me once again 🙂
When your baby gets killed by a bomb or by a madman with a gun, we’ll see…
Any action I choose to pursue, or anybody, is right. There is no other way to find out, “learn”, and evolve.
How many times must you repeat or witness the same event before learning from it and evolving past it? How many thousands of years must humanity keep on shedding its own blood before no longer having an appetite for it, or for hatred, or greed, or persecution, and everything else that makes life rather challenging for so many?
We can learn the hard way, or the easy way. The hard way is usually chosen by the unintelligent. It is not wrong to be unintelligent, but it gets old after a while.
Well said. Sometimes it must go to the absolute worst, it seems, before it can turn for the better. (Like the atrocities of the Nazis and the shock it gave the world). Just heartbreaking.
I agree, it is sad.
Hitler did not go to heaven, because heaven is not a place. It is a state of mind, a dimension of consciousness. Hitler, as everyone else, did not go anywhere…he found himself “residing” in his own state of consciousness, until he (hopefully) healed his own suffering and evolved, as we all must.
Physical death doesn’t equal enlightenment or spiritual liberation…and the spirit world is no more “heaven” or “hell” than the physical. Wherever you are, there you find your own state of consciousness. If it is fearful, you experience fear…If it is hateful, you experience hate…If it is loving, you experience love, regardless of whether you are in the physical or spiritual dimension.
Perfect reply Mewbob. One would assume Hitler was in a Hell state of consciousness.
And Sam, your reply would be insulting and hurtful to many. The word wrong exists because good people observed the actions of others, the opposite of right or just (neutral) and came up with a word to define those things as. Same as the word evil…people needed a word to define the intolerable acts they observed in others, like intentionally causing suffering.
The only place wrong and evil dont exist is an Eden, a step up from a Heavenly state of mind, where the individuals are unaware of wrong or evil, because it cannot access them, so they are oblivious to it as a concept. Like all animals and children should be. The word innocent refers to this…those who have no concepts of wrong…righteous people.
Dont be brainwashed into thinking words, and their meanings dont exist!!
Take care,
K
Thanks Kirsten…I will frame it and hang it on the wall.
Yes we have been given a conscience…to do something with it, such as knowing right from wrong. There is always a spiritual price to be paid for taking a life without cause, even an animal life…the price is, we go down the ladder rather than up, towards ignorance rather than enlightenment, and fear and separation rather than love and unity.
It’s not a matter of divine rewards of punishments, but of “vibrations”, of spiritual energy and resonance. We attracts what we are.
Yes, you should frame it!! Along with your wallmart diplomas.
Even better idea… go onto vistaprint website where everyone gets business cards from. You can order logo pens, tshirts etc. You can have tshirts with MEWABE SPIRITUAL CONSULTANCY..occasionally right, once perfect, for your follower groupies.
Cant get cooler than that, unless of course, you get coffee cups too!
Xx
PS re conscience. Did you know righteous people are oblivious to wrong, so dont really have a conscience, they dont need one?. They can only become aware of wrong in observing others. Then generally think wtf??? No concepts of cheating, arguing, stealing, deception, abuse, ugliness, drinking too much, turning a blind eye etc but are real fighters when they encounter wrong or evil.
Right and wrong are judgments that are useful to people who need a code of conduct. We need such a code when we have no understanding or knowledge of true love. Love is the ultimate and highest law, and we need no other when we understand its meaning. When we don’t, we need judgment (from our own conscience).
Thus Spoke Zarathustra aka mewablob
PS: don’t make fun of my Walmart diplomas, you hurt my feelings…
If you say there is a need for such a code, you’re right, because there is no wrong. Pursue your idea, use it, for how long it takes, and change it if/when you find a better one. That is the scientific way. A “failed” experiment is right, as all necessary for the process of finding out.
What I say does not matter…none of what anyone writes here or says anywhere else matters. It’s what we do that matters.
But since we are playing with words and ideas here, let’s play. I personally have no need for rules, codes, laws and judgments. I never have. But I understand that many people have such a need, which is why we have laws and the means to enforce them, because such people’s actions are not always inspired by love, to say the least.
“What I say does not matter…none of what anyone writes here or says anywhere else matters. It’s what we do that matters.”
I am sure the power of the pen has an influence too, and especially for the one writing/talking.
“But I understand that many people have such a need, which is why we have laws and the means to enforce them, because such people’s actions are not always inspired by love, to say the least.
Of course. The current method, in lack of something better. We are really learning it well. And why we can improve it to the next level, and with time scrap it altogether. Whatever we do, and repeat, is from not knowing better, until we, from discontent, and the urge for better, finally do.
It is a very slow process…it shouldn’t be, but there are so many stragglers, and even so many who now want to go backward! Patience has to be the ultimate virtue…
Tshirt arrived, thanks. I love the Mewtrump logo as well. Score getting Walmart as your sponsor.
Something very odd is going on in here, Neales moderating, post I put up re 2012 and peace has gone. That was pro Neale, very odd.
Later Fessorpro Wabeme,
Kbobinskistein
“Yes we have been given a conscience…to do something with it, such as knowing right from wrong.”
Then why the misery in the world?
What kind of misery are you referring to? Mental, physical, emotional, all of the above?
The kind to occur without the guidance of the conscience.
Unconditional love should be the first and only guide…our conscience is the default guide, that comes into use when love is not well understood or suppressed.
The bottom line is always love…its absence, distortion or acknowledgement. Our conscience can only take us so far, dealing with concepts of “right” and “wrong”, which are limited judgments and lead to doing “right” out of guilt rather than love, as do religious rules.
Rules and concepts of “right” and “wrong” can be useful as guidance for the unevolved. But they quickly become an obstacle to evolution.
I kinda like this explanation 🙂
Who says heaven isn’t a state of mind?
To state, as Neale did, that “Hitler went to Heaven” seems to imply, correct me if I am wrong, that Hitler went to heaven after leaving his physical body.
Neale wrote this to make a point…that there is no judgment after death. I agree that there is no judgment. But it also implies that physical death means enlightenment (reaching an heavenly state of mind). That’s completely inaccurate, and that’s why it is misleading if you take his point literally.
Physical death would not provide a magic ticket for Hitler to “go” to a heavenly state of mind. Death is not enlightenment. Your consciousness will not change upon your death…you will remain who you are until you evolve. You will be in a different environment, easier to deal with in many ways, but you will still be you, with your beliefs, your personality, your desires, your wounds and fears, and your limitations.
“I agree that there is no judgment. But it also implies that physical death means enlightenment (reaching an heavenly state of mind). That’s completely inaccurate, and that’s why it is misleading if you take his point literally.”
I find your point misleading. Full enlightenment is a given. Death is a process of unlearning your limitations, and again be your full and absolute self. And then decide, knowing everything, what you will do next.
“You will be in a different environment, easier to deal with in many ways, but you will still be you, with your beliefs, your personality, your desires, your wounds and fears, and your limitations.”
This is the absolute first moment after death. You soon move on to higher levels. It only takes some time getting used to.
We will have to agree to disagree.
If full enlightenment was a given after death, people would not carry negative “baggage” (unresolved issues, fears or terrors etc) from one life to another, they would be born each time with a clean slate.
Earth, and a body, is another dimension, and somewhat like putting on a suit. Only then you get the old feeling back. Full enlightenment is essential for the making of informed choices, to understand where you been, in the context to where go next.
If you automatically gained full enlightenment after death, you wouldn’t need to go anywhere after that, especially not come back to as dense and difficult a dimension as that of the earth!
That’s precisely what is taught in the east, in the Vedanta philosophy, in yoga and others disciplines…enlightenment is pursued so as to not have a need or desire to come back and repeat the same endless cycles of birth and death.
“If you automatically gained full enlightenment after death, you wouldn’t need to go anywhere after that, especially not come back to as dense and difficult a dimension as that of the earth!”
If you take away free will, then you are here by force? And not the need to go anywhere? How nice, but not for an endless eternity 🙂 And exactly why the “difficult dimension” was created. “Can’t live with it, can’t live without it”. You come back for more.
“That’s precisely what is taught in the east, in the Vedanta philosophy, in yoga and others disciplines…enlightenment is pursued so as to not have a need to come back and repeat the same endless cycles of birth and death.”
Life in the old days was really tough. This notion fitted right in. You never need to come back, but you do by choice. Also because each lifetime usually gets a little better, and you have progress. You will go far, like HEB’s, and way beyond. But the universe will collapse, and start over. And so will you — by choice. The road is the goal — an endless circle.
We disagree on those points….
Indeed Hitler went to heaven (no one is going to hell) 🙂
“Now I am going to repeat something I said in Book 1, and I know that it was very, very difficult for some to grasp, to understand.
Hitler went to heaven.”
“First, he could not have gone to hell because hell does not exist. Therefore, there is only one place left to which he could have gone. But that begs the question. The real issue is whether Hitler’s actions were “wrong.” Yet I have said over and over again that there is no “right” or “wrong” in the universe. A thing is not intrinsically right or wrong. A thing simply is”- “Conversations with God” book 2 by Neale Donald Walsh 🙂
“There is no such thing as “getting to heaven.” There is only a knowing that you are already there. There is an accepting, an understanding, not a working for or a striving.
You cannot go to where you already are. To do that, you would have to leave where you are, and that would defeat the whole purpose of the journey. The irony is that most people think they have to leave where they are to get to where they want to be. And so they leave heaven in order to get to heaven—and go through hell.
Enlightenment is understanding that there is nowhere to go, nothing to do, and nobody you have to be except exactly who you’re being right now. You are on a journey to nowhere.
Heaven—as you call it—is nowhere. Let’s just put some space between the w and the h in that word and you’ll see that heaven is now… here.” – “Conversations with God” book 1 by Neale Donald Walsch 🙂
With the understanding that “Heaven” is a “state of being” 🙂
“Heaven is not an actual place, but a State of Being. ‘The other side’ is not a location in the cosmos, it is an expression of the cosmos. It is a way of being. It is ‘being in heaven’ through the process of self-expression–which is the expression of Divinity Itself, in, as, and through the Self.” – “Home with God” by Neale Donald Walsch 🙂
Bless ALL 🙂
And who in hell can interpret all that? 🙂 No, I wasn’t swearing 🙂
I like to get to the point of things, and to simplify. So, what it says is:
It’s great to be alive! It’s heaven!
Complicated is for intellectuals 🙂
The Law of Gratitude is Given 😀
Bless ALL 🙂
I love all the quotes. I think they are true. I am still trying to understand how Hitler got pure but I am sure that God has a method for purifying the body, mind, and soul so that the only remainder is pure essence . Using the whole being that he is. . .he/she/it whatever we call it God is pure consciousness/goldenest light so there is a dividing energy that expresses the dim energy from a plane of existence that holds malcontent energy or energy with intention of malcontent for many.
That there is a distinction between an HEB’s, highly evolved positive energy and energy on earth that is creating chaotic events like Syria’s chemical weaponry against human or any brutal killing anywhere, we have to ask how one can say that there is no right or wrong. If God said in the latest book that God has preference and certain desires, we surely don’t think God desires the killing off of human.
But, thank you for the quotes. I appreciate rereading them.
God has no preferences.
In the new book, he said to Neale that he had desire. I don’t have my kindle book open or I would quote it. in between 5 and 7 somewhere. .I’ll try to find it. I am taking the word “preference” as the synonym for desire. If one has a desire, one has a preference, right?
God lives in want of nothing. Anything God wants, God can have. Yet God does have desires. It is Devine desire that powers the universe. CWG 4 second paragraph page 12.
thank you :)) I couldn’t locate it. .you saved me :)) my cords blow out of the wall usually. . .no lie..I have to buy a new kindle cord. they pop out for no good reason. wow God is pure desire. Where would we be without it :))
Where would we be without God? Talking about a different entity, or the same entity by another name.
there are many versions that go by the same name. .it’s a pyramid scheme, i guess :))
Violence begins when there is a quest for power. Whether in the animal kingdom or the human world, when dominance is sought, violence erupts.
We will end violence when we no longer strive for dominant power, it is as simple as that, whether in the prison yard or between or within nations.
We will no longer strive for dominant power when we are no longer fearful.
We will no longer be fearful when we no longer feel separate from everything and everyone else.
And we will no longer feel separate when we no longer believe or think we are. Period.
The suffering that we see in the world is the creation of fear, which is the direct product of the thought and experience of separation. Look at it this way: the mightiest weapons are the voice of the greatest fear. The most powerful military on earth is the obvious expression and creation of a most frightened population, of the most frightened minds, of the most deluded minds, deluded by the thought of separation.
I’d like to highlight this:
” Naivety is as dangerous as ignorance, and often originates from it, or from a desire to use denial as a buffer against despair.To
believe in the good intentions of the authorities no matter what
(regardless of evidence to the contrary) usually originates from a
relatively authoritarian upbringing (not infrequently religious). I have
noticed such a tendency in Neale, surprisingly (to grant the
authorities good intentions regardless).”
I don’t think Neale is naive nor out of data. I think he knows well.
Well, why do sometimes he speaks as such? You’ll have to ask him… 😉
Perhaps he strives not to alienate his audience politically. Or else he thinks giving people in authority the benefit of the doubt is a spiritual approach. My gut feeling is that he is relatively conservative, middle of the road on many topics. In any case, denial is never helpful…to heal a cancer, we first have to acknowledge that it is taking place.
Not being political, what exactly is conservative or middle of the road? Is this another way to say more accepting or not as quick to anger? Middle of the road meaning highly willing to look at both sides? Politicians seem to have their own language.
Criticism does not imply anger, but the ability to discern truth from falsehood. Criticism is a mental, not an emotional process. Politically, middle of the road means “establishment”…respect for the “authorities” and the status quo, while perhaps wishing for some minor changes and progress on some limited social issues. That’s where many Democrats stand.
Conservatives (the rightwing) are usually authoritarians and reactionary, but some of the left is getting increasingly authoritarian and intolerant as well. Authoritarianism is spreading rapidly…
I do not know Neale, but I am always surprised at his willingness to believe the lies of the mainstream media and of government. That was my point…everything is rather irrelevant.
The point was not important, I actually just wanted to understand the words better. Thank you.
We have been welcomed to feel and think about many different things here. Do we try to help the girl being attacked? Of course. Likewise, if I saw men, women, children and even babies suffering cruel and agonizing deaths after being attacked with chemical weapons, would I look the other way, saying that it doesn’t involve me or affect me, and therefore I should do nothing? Or would I risk getting involved? If possible I would be of assistance to the victims. I may urge others to do the same.
In the case of ordering bombs in Syria, my immediate response is to say no, I would not bomb anyone or anything. There is a delicate balance here that begs to be struck. A delicate response that cannot be responded to by one person alone. There are times when war can and cannot be avoided and there are rules in our world for this very problem, below is a brief description.
What is a ‘just cause’?……..
…There must be a just cause for the war. War must be waged only in response to certain, grave and lasting damage inflicted by an aggressor.
…The motive for war must be advancement of good or avoidance of evil.
…The ultimate objective of war must be to bring peace.
…Revenge, revolt, a desire to harm, dominate, or exploit and similar things are not justification for war.
…Every possible means of peacefully settling the conflict must be exhausted first.
…There must be serious prospects of success; bloodshed without hope of victory cannot be justified.
…The war must be declared by a legitimate authority. Private individuals or groups should seek redress of their rights through their governments, not by acts of war.
…The war must not cause greater evil than the evil to be eliminated.
…Non-combatants (civilians) must not be intentionally harmed.
…Prisoners and conquered peoples must be treated justly.
I cannot disagree with the above. If wars must be waged then they must. I am still reading awaken the species. There’s always a chance the world could awaken and we would not need to be faced with such questions. Be it chemical warfare or bombs or bullets or rocks. Whether a person is an adult male, female, child or baby, I am saddened by the needless violence. We have the ability to give equal amounts of everything to everyone. There’s no need to have wars if people would just wake up to that.
It isn’t our job to police dog other nations. We can intervene on behalf of the victims, but only if we have ten to twenty other nations as a back up. Who are we if we don’t come together and sit down at the table and attempt conversation first. Is it okay to come out and beat the drum of another nation without any other members in the band? We need more in a band than just one nation banging on a spoon when there are many other spoons to bang a tune of peace offering to the other supposed enemy nation. It really must be something of peace rather than fear that we model to the rest of the world. If we can’t come together and support each other as a united front of nations and at least sit down at a table to discuss viable options, then what are we as civilzation? Civilized countries speak softly and carry a big stick. .how does it go? We need to walk softly and carry no stick, in my view.. We have to be united as a world against a terroristic world threat. It takes more than one to convince the rest of the world that this is necessary. Without the rest of the world’s support, there will be more late nights at the Lincoln bedroom in the future. In my view, rather than stay up all night in the Lincoln bedroom worrying, I suggest the leaders get together, have meetings, maybe ome dinner together, some pasta, a few glasses of wine, even a martini or two. Seriously, it doesn’t hurt to join together and discuss with people relaxed rather than hair afray and eyes aglaze with stern indignation and fear. I am not being facetious. I really believe when we play together, we share ideas. We can’t ruffle our feathers, like peacocks, and assume the world will respond favorably. Response is one thing and reaction is quite another.
Truly, perhaps, it’s too late, but maybe not. I mean, we can band together and call for many nations such as the United Nations to sit together and talk. What do the United Nations do anyway? Has there been a meeting amongst at least ten or twenty, nations, or is this only one nation’s decision. We need this to be a joint held meeting and a joint decision. It shouldn’t weigh on just one president–to act or not act. To be the iron fist that hammers down the gamut that unleashes the energy that ignites a blast into a plume, a mushroom of indescribable, inutterable devastation–WW III. Having many foreign leaders talk it over first and weigh the pros and cons. .discussing what can be done asking questions like is it economically feasible even? We already send our business overseas; medical care system, social security and on and on are skyrocketed. We have our share of impoverished people here. Can US afford to be police dog for any country other than itself in an act of self defense?.
Force should be last choice. , always and I don’t even like the word force except in defense, it could be necessary, i guess. If someone is having a field day at my door, I might use self defence and certainly a country is given support by many if they sit down at a table and first agree on things. We put too much pressure on our one nation to act, to save the world, and all of that. It isn’t our job to do this alone. This breeds animosity in other nations. Not good foreign policy, in my view. I think, we have a new president and we need to give it more time before we jump to a war trigger button.
I believe the most powerful countries in our world have to disarm at the same time .What kind of message would that send to the world ? Sending out a different or opposing energy as Einstein suggested !!
Imagine they just decided to scrap all weapons and not build anymore.A collective effort to not use violence and persue killing ,a decision based on ENOUGH of the waste of life ,on the observation that it’s not WORKING to create a world we all say we want to live in.
I know this is a pipe dream but the major powers that are perputrating the most violence are at the same time being complicit in orchestrating wars then washing their hands of any wrong doing . My country for example the UK sells billions of £’s of weapons, military hardware to any regime that wants it ..Saudi Arabia who are using it to wipe out an entire country Yemen.Over 20 million people require food aid as 90% of the food is imported ….guess what they bombed the ports to restrict food access using bombs made in the UK. No wonder Scotland wants independance from England to decide on its own future a nuclear free and peaceful country .
We need to find out the truth about the chemical weapons used possibly Sarin manufactured some say in the UK . Those who ordered the use of this have to immediately arrested and put on trial as crimes against humanity.However so many terrible things are going on the courts would be full and many would be politicians and people in authority who we have trusted ?
CAAT (Campaing Against Arms Trade ) is an organisation in Scotland that are are shining the light of truth on what’s going on in the desire for profits from war which causes strife and suffering . The profiteers claim it’s just business as usual and are doing this for the economy and to support jobs.
My comment was deleted???
It was the first comment in this post.
I never saw it…things have been happening lately. A bug?
Maybe that it was for connectivity issues…
I copy it here again:
We’ve talked about this very same issue before. Syria, 2013, etc.
A lot of wisdom and fair observations at those times.
Some conclusions, as I remember:
– Only true or accurate observations about what is happening can heal or solution ill things.
– Denial is not the way of awareness.
– Rampant violence can not solve rampant violence.
– The USA has NOT to be the policemen of the world. Less, if they’ve acted so many times as the delinquent.
–
UN or an actual, democratic UNION of countries with equal rights,
voice, and vote, is the way for resolutions that could be applicated to
any leader of the world that act as a bully. (That’s not the case by
now. As CWG book 2 stated, the UN is absolutely unefficient.
–
Of course, it is to be observed that in recent issues (50 years ago
until now) countries such EEUU or others that attack others don’t do it
by ‘good will’, or trying to stop violence or ‘evil’. Just the contrary,
they act JUST by their self economical and geopolitical interest, and
the rest are just excuses. Deluded or false alledgments for making
interventions or attacks, and of course, more violence and war arises
from that. Irak, Vietnam, Chile, Iran, Nicaragua, Panama, Yugoslavia,
Palestine, Somalia, Lybia, Afghanisthan, El Salvador, Grenada, Y
emen……. …….. ……. you name it. Failure in observing this is
the first reason in why this continues.
– Corporate media is puppet of global corporate interests. They don’t serve truth’s agenda but ‘the ones in charge’s agenda.
–
As Neale said once, paraphrasing: “the trouble of the world is that the
very few who rule it, are really very few but they are organized and
have a common agenda, meanwhile the vast majorities that could change
things, are NOT organized NOR have a common agenda”. And I’d add, from
CWG2: ” [talking about people with beliefs in ‘free market’ and
stablishment ‘truths’] “they are terribly mistaken and don’t understand
nothing about what happens in the world”.
– “We Are
All One” is the main cultural meme that would have to inspire every
rule, law, agreement, negotiation, or conflict resolution efforts. But
the majority of the world still believes in: “the strongest: the ones
with the biggest gun, win and take it all”. So, we still live in this
primitive concept. We’d have to change that, but education, media,
religion, and politics are absolutely formed in “the winner takes it
all” vision. Very hard work to do.
– Never give up HOPE.
Well, that’s what I can recall by now.
EInstein
was right in my oppinion, but almost anybody believes him… So, here
we are again, new US Presidente, the very same politics.
Help us God! (God is ALL of humanity and beyond).
I agree…history keeps repeating itself over and over again. And very few seem to even be aware of it! They think that everything they see and hear is new…”a new crisis”…”a new conflict”…all of these things are so old they should have been buried long ago! Everything we do, think and believe is obsolete. Our global civilization is dying…and it needs to die, to be replaced by something completely different.
Here we go again, your comment vanished once more. Let’s call it the vanishing comment.
(“Awaiting moderation”…for what? Was it undercooked?)
I don’t understand neither… :-/
I’ve been in spiritual action since the news hit of the chemical weapons attack. It has triggered many thoughts, feelings and actions.
First, there is whether what we hear as the news is true, not that there was an attack, but who was behind it. Unfortunately, one can no longer take the “news” as fact without bias. I have heard that it was Syria’s government that used the nerve agent. I have heard it was his opposition, in order to “create” a reason for more U.S. involvement. I have heard it was a cooperative effort to keep the money flowing in a long-term war. I have heard that it was Russia without the condoning of the Syrian government. Take your pick. Until more is known, we cannot be certain who it is that’s responsible for using chemical warfare.
Second, there is the huge geo-political game of war that’s been ongoing now for centuries. In this instance, who are the real players? The money behind the war is as important as the actual soldiers. I feel the soldiers, and parts of the government, are all pawns in a much larger game: how to make the rich even richer.
The scenarios Neale has put before us all have one thing in common: they are all opportunities for us to choose who to be in relation to them. In each case, I would choose unconditional love and compassion. Always.
From that position, I would unconditionally love and feel compassion for all involved. I would act from love by trying to intervene on behalf of a woman being attacked because that’s what I believe love would do. I have, in fact, done so in the past. I have also acted from love when it comes to the chemical attack by first going inside through meditation to send love to all parties involved, including those who engaged in chemical warfare. I believe their view of the world is limited, and I pray for them to have clearer insight into what it is they think, say and do. I’ve been staying away from social media, but in this case I am going to speak up when I have the right words to say. They haven’t come to me yet, but they will.
I certainly believe this is a time for the U.S. to decide who it is we choose to be. Many believe this was a purposeful attack far beyond the borders of Syria; that it is one more step in destabilizing the region in order for Israel to have enough support to retake all of Jerusalem, rebuild the temple, and bring on Armageddon. The U.S. has played a major role in establishing and legitimizing Israel, I believe for this purpose. We are, in the majority, a Christian nation. Many might not make that connection, but I believe those in power behind the powers that be understand it.
I have also been signing as many petitions against war as I possibly can, as well as keeping in touch with World Without War and other peace-oriented organizations. I write my congressmen nearly daily, advising caution and love (though in political language). I attend Evolutionary Church (nondenominational, run by the Center for Integral Wisdom) nearly every week, where we pray as a group and as individuals. I allow myself to feel the pain of those suffering in their grief for as long as I can, then make sure I take breaks for my own emotional health.
What the U.S might coose to do in the long term is still to be seen. The bombing of the airport was a knee-jerk reaction to prove that the U.S. has military strength and isn’t afraid to use it. But this wasn’t an attack against the U.S. In my view, it was an attack against everyone. As all is One, we are all affected by what each of us does. That means we can all affect the outcome. I know many in the spiritual communities who are gathering to meditate, pray, and put our loving energy into the situation.
It all begins and ends with each of us. The actions we take as individuals affect the whole. I stand with love, and I will not change in the face of violence.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Love, Compassion. Yes, I agree.
Also Awareness, Consciousness, Truth.
All part of the very same ONE.
About awareness in this topic, I observe that it is the very same script used in many countries, included Syria, just some years ago: a false attack flag, used for stablishing hegemonic power. In this case, USA, NATO and its allies. Just like in Irak, Afghanistan, Lybia, Yemen, Vietnam… you name it.
So, in the very first place, if we are not capable of just observing just what it is happening, and who does what, we can’t heal nor solve things.
If you see the woman or child raped, ok you can pray for the child, woman, and even the rapist, but if you can’t see who the rapist is, or if he is disguised to see as your husband for example, and your husband is shot by police and the press, so everybody believes your husband is the rapist, and the true rapist is free, nothing will stop him from raping again.
Perhaps meditation or prayer makes that the rapist gets an instant enlightment, it could be, but sincerely, I think that won’t work too much.
Awareness, truth, and actions based in truths is what will make us free.
Not delusion nor denial.
Blessings…
Victor,
I don’t pray and meditate for “instant enlightenment” for others, but to send the love that is so obviously needed for someone to kill others with chemical weapons. I pray for clarity for all involved so that the appropriate people are held responsible, if that’s what we choose. I pray for temperament in my own thoughts, words, and actions. I pray for the strength to feel my feelings fully, but to not have them rule me. I don’t believe any of these actions are ineffective, or unnecessary.
Many can imagine the awful deaths. Can you imagine yourself as the bomber who, following orders, maybe not even having known his plane was filled with chemical weapons, hearing about the pain and suffering of small children caused by what they did? Can you imagine the soldiers who outfitted that plane with chemical weapons hearing the same? Do you believe that they’re unaffected? I pray that they are not. I know that they are human, capable of feelings, and I believe it’s our seeing ourselves as the other that may save us.
Once again, I see that it’s separation that’s the underlying cause. The moment we determine there is an “us” and a “them,” we make “them” as somehow less—less deserving, less human, and much easier to let starve or kill.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
I deeply respect what you’ve said, Annie. I just would like to understand a little further.
You say that you don’t pray for the instant enlightment of others -a little joke by my part-, but you do pray that soldiers get affected by their actions or bombers don’t get unaffected, etc.
I find little difference here, if we look at it. You’d be praying for someone doing something that wouldn’t do in the very first place.
Soldiers are trained for just killing for the ‘good’ reasons. Or bombing, etc., for ‘good’ reasons. God, motherland, orders, superiors that know better, etc. And of course, if you believe you’re bombing and destroying who you’ve been told is killing babies with chemicals, you as a soldier, will be very ‘glad’ in killing them…
So, what I notice here is that there is no too much coherence between intentions and means for a result.
In other terms, Gandhi, or Mandela, or Martin Luther King, didn’t just pray or held spiritual truths. They did something, organized people, organized themselves, presented facts in undeniable ways, confronted who they had to confront -without seeing them as the ‘enemy’-, denounced lies, half truths, manipulations, and all kind of violence from ‘those in charge’.
I return to my analogy: if you see a rapist trying to rape your daughter, or a neighbour’s daughter, ok, you’re one with the rapist, but ALSO you’ll do something to stop him. Or not?? But if you can’t, because hi escaped after commiting his crime (or won’t you call it a crime?), yes you can pray for you, for the girls, and for the rapist also, but ALSO, you’d try to know who he is, identify him, and to prevent that he could rape again. You’d try to put in jail, and put an end to other such horrible events. Or not?
But for doing all that, you would have to see the truth. Someone could say that the rapist is your husband, or your brother. And they’re not. But if the rapist has enough power he could implicate any other person. Is that too strange in this world?
So, the first thing is to find the truth. And after that, to act according to that truth.
Yes, help us God, for deciding and creating the most enlightened answer or guide for all that.
But just praying is not enough.
My oppinion.
Blessings…
Victor,
Truth was the very first thing I mentioned in my original post, if you noticed. It takes time for investigation, fact checking, witness statements.
If I were to see one human being harming another, I would (and have) physically intervened, but not with more violence. Ive placed myself in between people fighting violently. Gandhi, Mandela and Martin Luther King, Jr. spent a lot of time in solitude, prayer and meditation. I believe it’s what gave them the strength and insight to do what they did. How else do you think they were inspired?
I’m sure soldiers are brainwashed as to the justifications for their actions. So are we. What I pray for is that they understand the law of cause and effect, and their effect in particular. I send them energetic love because I don’t believe any soldier is completely unaffected by what they do. I base that on the experience of our own soldiers, including an ex who literally did kill women and children in Vietnam.
I didn’t say I don’t or won’t act. I do, and I am. (BTW, I consider prayer and meditation as actions.) I have my congressmen’s fax numbers and send letters electronically nearly every day. Signed, and with my address, email and phone number. My strongest voice is through writing, but I haven’t quite found the words yet for social media.
Action doesn’t always mean military action as a response. Violence is a choice. It’s not mine.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
I fully agree with you, Annie.
If you notice, I have written almost the same as you, just with other words.
For example, I said, “In other terms, Gandhi, or Mandela, or Martin Luther King, didn’t just pray or held spiritual truths”. In other words, I agree with you that they achieved their inspirations for action, via spiritual means.
I don’t mean in any way, that violence is the way of action. By the contrary, I’ve written in this very thread, that violence can not heal violence.
Thank you very much for your inspiring thoughts,
Blessings.
About this specific topic, I was able to find this article, from 2013. Exactly the same script. Obama failed in achieving a direct intervention. He just could support ISIS/DAESH, as Hillary Clinton and others aknowledged.
Now, whith a brand new administration, things can start the very same again. Delusion, denial, and forgetfullness, besides the ‘don’t-see-nothing-as-negative-don’t-be-judgeful’ New-Age by-pass thing, will facilitate everything…
August 27, 2013
Another Western War Crime In The Making
by Paul Craig Roberts
Washington and its British and French puppet governments are poised
to yet again reveal their criminality. The image of the West as War
Criminal is not a propaganda image created by the West’s enemies, but
the portrait that the West has painted of itself.
The UK Independent reports that over this past week-end Obama,
Cameron, and Hollande agreed to launch cruise missile attacks against
the Syrian government within two weeks despite the lack of any
authorization from the UN and despite the absence of any evidence in
behalf of Washington’s claim that the Syrian government has used
chemical weapons against the Washington-backed “rebels”, largely US
supported external forces, seeking to overthrow the Syrian government.
Indeed, one reason for the rush to war is to prevent the UN
inspection that Washington knows would disprove its claim and possibly
implicate Washington in the false flag attack by the “rebels,” who
assembled a large number of children into one area to be chemically
murdered with the blame pinned by Washington on the Syrian government.
Another reason
for the rush to war is that Cameron, the UK prime minister, wants to
get the war going before the British parliament can block him for
providing cover for Obama’s war crimes the way that Tony Blair provided
cover for George W. Bush, for which Blair was duly rewarded. What does
Cameron care about Syrian lives when he can leave office into the
waiting arms of a $50 million fortune.
The Syrian government, knowing that it is not responsible for the
chemical weapons incident, has agreed for the UN to send in chemical
inspectors to determine the substance used and the method of delivery.
However, Washington has declared that it is “too late” for UN inspectors
and that Washington accepts the self-serving claim of the al Qaeda affiliated “rebels” that the Syrian government attacked civilians with chemical weapons.
In an attempt to prevent the UN chemical inspectors who arrived on the scene from doing their work, the inspectors were fired upon
by snipers in “rebel” held territory and forced off site, although a
later report from RT says the inspectors have returned to the site to
conduct their inspection.
The corrupt British government has declared that Syria can be
attacked without UN authorization, just as Serbia and Libya were
militarily attacked without UN authorization.
In other words, the Western democracies have already established
precedents for violating international law. “International law? We don’t
need no stinking international law!” The West knows only one rule:
Might is Right. As long as the West has the Might, the West has the
Right.
In a response to the news report that the US, UK, and France are
preparing to attack Syria, the Russian Foreign Minister, Lavrov, said
that such unilateral action is a “severe violation of international
law,” and that the violation was not only a legal one but also an
ethical and moral violation. Lavrov referred to the lies and deception
used by the West to justify its grave violations of international law in
military attacks on Serbia, Iraq, and Libya and how the US government
used preemptive moves to undermine every hope for peaceful settlements
in Iraq, Libya, and Syria.
Once again Washington has preempted any hope of peaceful settlement.
By announcing the forthcoming attack, the US destroyed any incentive for
the “rebels” to participate in the peace talks with the Syrian
government. On the verge of these talks taking place, the “rebels” now
have no incentive to participate as the West’s military is coming to
their aid.
In his press conference Lavrov spoke of how the ruling parties in the
US, UK, and France stir up emotions among poorly informed people that,
once aroused, have to be satisfied by war. This, of course, is the way
the US manipulated the public in order to attack Afghanistan and Iraq.
But the American public is tired of the wars, the goal of which is never
made clear, and has grown suspicious of the government’s justifications
for more wars.
A Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
that “Americans strongly oppose U.S. intervention in Syria’s civil war
and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports
that Syria’s government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are
confirmed.” However, Obama could not care less that only 9 percent of
the public supports his warmongering. As former president Jimmy Carter
recently stated,
“America has no functioning democracy.” It has a police state in which
the executive branch has placed itself above all law and the
Constitution.
This police state is now going to commit yet another Nazi-style war
crime of unprovoked aggression. At Nuremberg the Nazis were sentenced to
death for precisely the identical actions being committed by Obama,
Cameron, and Hollande. The West is banking on might, not right, to keep
it out of the criminal dock.
The US, UK, and French governments have not explained why it matters
whether people in the wars initiated by the West are killed by
explosives made of depleted uranium or with chemical agents or any other
weapon. It was obvious from the beginning that Obama was setting up the
Syrian government for attack. Obama demonized chemical weapons–but not
nuclear “bunker busters” that the US might use on Iran. Then Obama drew a
red line, saying that the use of chemical weapons by the Syrians was
such a great crime that the West would be obliged to attack Syria.
Washington’s UK puppets, William Hague and Cameron, have just repeated
this nonsensical claim. The final step in the frame-up was to orchestrate a chemical incident and blame the Syrian government.
What is the West’s real agenda? This is the unasked and unanswered
question. Clearly, the US, UK, and French governments, which have
displayed continuously their support for dictatorial regimes that serve
their purposes, are not the least disturbed by dictatorships. They brand
Assad a dictator as a means of demonizing him for the ill-informed
Western masses. But Washington, UK, and France support any number of
dictatorial regimes, such as the ones in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and now
the military dictatorship in Egypt that is ruthlessly killing Egyptians
without any Western government speaking of invading Egypt for “killing
its own people.”
Clearly also, the forthcoming Western attack on Syria has nothing
whatsoever to do with bringing “freedom and democracy” to Syria any more
than freedom and democracy were reasons for the attacks on Iraq and
Libya, neither of which gained any “freedom and democracy.”
The Western attack on Syria is unrelated to human rights, justice or
any of the high sounding causes with which the West cloaks its
criminality.
The Western media, and least of all the American presstitutes, never
ask Obama, Cameron, or Hollande what the real agenda is. It is difficult
to believe than any reporter is sufficiently stupid or gullible to
believe that the agenda is bringing “freedom and democracy” to Syria or
punishing Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons against murderous
thugs trying to overthrow the Syrian government.
Of course, the question wouldn’t be answered if asked. But the act of
asking it would help make the public aware that more is afoot than
meets the eye. Originally, the excuse for Washington’s wars was to keep
Americans safe from terrorists. Now Washington is endeavoring to turn
Syria over to jihad terrorists by helping them to overthrow the secular,
non-terrorist Assad government. What is the agenda behind Washington’s
support of terrorism?
Perhaps the purpose of the wars is to radicalize Muslims and,
thereby, destabilize Russia and even China. Russia has large populations
of Muslims and is bordered by Muslim countries. Even China has some
Muslim population. As radicalization spreads strife into the only two
countries capable of being an obstacle to Washington’s world hegemony,
Western media propaganda and the large number of US financed NGOs,
posing as “human rights” organizations, can be counted on by Washington
to demonize the Russian and Chinese governments for harsh measures
against “rebels.”
Another advantage of the radicalization of Muslims is that it leaves
former Muslim countries in long-term turmoil or civil wars, as is
currently the case in Iraq and Libya, thus removing any organized state
power from obstructing Israeli purposes.
Secretary of State John Kerry is working the phones using bribes and
threats to build acceptance, if not support, for Washington’s war
crime-in-the-making against Syria.
Washington is driving the world closer to nuclear war than it ever
was even in the most dangerous periods of the Cold War. When Washington
finishes with Syria, the next target is Iran. Russia and China will no
longer be able to fool themselves that there is any system of
international law or restraint on Western criminality. Western
aggression is already forcing both countries to develop their strategic
nuclear forces and to curtail the Western-financed NGOs that pose as
“human rights organizations,” but in reality comprise a fifth column
that Washington can use to destroy the legitimacy of the Russian and
Chinese governments.
Russia and China have been extremely careless in their dealings with
the United States. Essentially, the Russian political opposition is
financed by Washington. Even the Chinese government is being undermined.
When a US corporation opens a company in China, it creates a Chinese
board on which are put relatives of the local political authorities.
These boards create a conduit for payments that influence the decisions
and loyalties of local and regional party members. The US has penetrated
Chinese universities and intellectual attitudes. The Rockefeller
University is active in China as is Rockefeller philanthropy. Dissenting
voices are being created that are arrayed against the Chinese
government. Demands for “liberalization” can resurrect regional and
ethnic differences and undermine the cohesiveness of the national
government.
Once Russia and China realize that they are riven with American fifth
columns, isolated diplomatically, and outgunned militarily, nuclear
weapons become the only guarantor of their sovereignty. This suggests
that nuclear war is likely to terminate humanity well before humanity
succumbs to global warming or rising national debts.
Update:
The war criminals in Washington and other Western capitals are
determined to maintain their lie that the Syrian government used
chemical weapons. Having failed in efforts to intimidate the UN
chemical inspectors in Syria, Washington has demanded that UN Secretary
General Ban Ki-moon withdraw the chemical weapons inspectors before they
can assess the evidence and make their report. The UN Secretary
General stood up to the Washington war criminals and rejected their demand.
The US and UK governments have revealed none of the “conclusive
evidence” they claim to have that the Syrian government used chemical
weapons. Listening to their voices, observing their body language, and
looking into their eyes, it is completely obvious that John Kerry and
his British and German puppets are lying through their teeth. This is a
far more shameful situation than the massive lies that former Secretary
of State Colin Powell told the UN about Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction. Colin Powell claims that he was deceived by the White
House and did not know that he was lying. Kerry and the British,
French, and German puppets know full well that they are lying.
The face that the West presents to the world is the brazen face of a liar.
Paul Craig Roberts is a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. His latest book The Failure of Laissez-Faire Capitalism. Roberts’ How the Economy Was Lost is now available from CounterPunch in electronic format.
Thanks for posting this victor!
“A delicate response that cannot be responded to by one person alone.”
We cannot achieve anything worthwhile alone unless our only goal is to change ourselves. “The only thing we can change is ourselves” is not totally true. Every time we share a thought or create an action we take a risk of changing somebody elses view of the world or maybe themselves. Paying attention to others is how we have become who we are, changing our thoughts based on someone elses opinions and actions. A worthwhile conversation cannot be had alone. Many conversations in this place are conversations with another to try and tweak the way a person is thinking about something, to change the way a person is thinking spiritually. Anti-CWG, Pro-CWG, God exists, god doesn’t exist, life after death, energy after death, awareness after death, anything after death, no death at all. Facts are facts, theories are facts, beliefs are facts, everything we know is a fact, we are people trying to make sense of it all and that’s a fact. Prove it!
We all agree that there is something going perfectly wrong in our world in the midst of a life where nothing is wrong or right and everything is happening perfectly because it just does. I am not in a spirit state, I am in a physical state, arguing with a trilogy of mind, body and soul. I have found no perfection in that argument, only a need for conversation and actions that “I” view as correct. I do not view war as correct. I am not insulted by a chemical attack any more than any other means of needless killing.
The world is arguing which way is best to kill another human and not arguing that the killing itself is wrong. There is something wrong with that!!
Yes, there is apparently a correct, civilized way to blow people to pieces (including women, children and babies), such as with drones and cluster bombs, or to vaporize them as with nuclear weapons…or kill them slowly and horribly, as with white phosphorus…or deform their babies and children, as with depleted uranium. But poison gas is a no no…that’s very naughty. That is not civilized!
Torture however is civilized, because we civilized people say so. And so is the death penalty, this glorified form of revenge in which we, civilized people, engage as well.
And polluting the environment with deadly chemicals that kill people and animals slowly (more or less) is civilized as well, I almost forgot.
Oh Mewabe!
Why are you so judgmental, negative, lier, biased, and sarcastic?
You’re not a spiritual man, surely.
Why don’t you see that all you’ve mentioned is perfect, good, and beautiful?
Why are you so judgmental with whom ” blow people to pieces (including women and children), such as with
drones and cluster bombs, or to vaporize them with nuclear weapons…or
kill them slowly and horribly, with white phosphorus…or deform their
babies and children, with depleted uranium”, etc…? Don’t you see that you’re impulsing an ‘us vs. them’ mindset?? Man! See the perfection! There’s nothing bad nor evil in all this.
Ahh! Just except in what corporate press says. That is bad, very bad indeed!
If corporate press says that Al Assad bombed his own people with chemicals killing babies and women, that is bad, very bad!, and we better do ‘something’ about it… Something as bombing them with ‘humanitarian bombs’ two days after corporate press said what they said. Just because we say so.
No matter that corporate press and his owners lied before with similar alledgments: Irak, Afghanistan, Lybia. No, those were simple, innocent mistakes. But mistakes that were very good in the long term! because we terminated Saddam Hussein and gave back democracy and freedom to those countries! Praise the Lord!
So be spiritual, man! Don’t see as truth nothing of what you say. That’s just illusion.
Al Assad bombing babies, oh!, that’s not an illusion at all, that’s the pure truth! And if we bomb him and many die from ‘collateral damage’, so be it!, those souls agreed to die for it. All is good.
Except what WE say IS bad.
Ha ha…yes, I am the devil (everybody else is God, I like to be different)…for refusing to go where the propagandized populace is told to go, straight to supporting another “righteous” war!
Can you believe the mainstream media bovine excrement comments about Trump’s actions?
“Beautiful”
“Decisive”
“There’s a new sheriff in town”
“Bold”
“Presidential”
I don’t watch television or any of the corporate media, because I do not want to regurgitate my meals. Do you have access to TYT on the internet? You might like it…
lol I think God is part devil :))
I can live with that! 🙂
me, too :))
Thanks for the head’s up on TYT. It’s on YouTube.
Hahahaha.
You evil monster.
Xx
According to CwG book 4 The biggest distinction between our current world & that of HEB’s (Highly Evolved Beings) is there is absolutely no violence of any kind. None.
IT’s interesting that you say this, Marko. This is something I am trying to understand, too. In the new book, Neale asked about the Invitation and God began talking about HEB’s being near us on our level to help and he said that they engage in our physical realm, sending thoughts and interacting and my point is how do they avoid engagement with the violence as they help us. . is it an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth or something else and they are invisible or what. .I wonder how they do what they do to help in this physical realm avoid violence and catastrophe hmmm
My understanding is, that they engage most by inspiring thoughts to us. They can put it out into the collective unconsciousness/consciousness & when we are receptive, we pick up the radio signals so to speak.
Neale referred to Einstein in his column, and Einstein contributed to our understanding of particle physics and how forces and particles work in our natural world.
Until these HEBs explain how they manage to affect the particles in our heads – which would be required to provide “inspiring thoughts,” then this can be nothing but woo. The brain is not a radio receiver, so to speak, or we would know that by now. We know what it takes to manipulate particles in order to fire synapses and generate thoughts. There are no such fields. This is woo. Quantum mechanics deals in probabilities, and as I understand it, QM tells us that the probability of these woo forces existing is about the same as having a pink polka dotted dinosaur manifesting in your living room this evening. Don’t wait up.
The idea is so outrageous, and having nothing to support it, that the one making the claim must provide the evidence, or they should not be taken seriously.
Then don’t take him so seriously……… 🙂
I don’t, though it’s clear others do.
I’m unsure as to whether he’s a scoundrel who found an interesting way to make a career for himself, or simply deluded. His success leads me to think he believes in his conversations with himself, and belief is contagious. It’s easier to sell something you believe in. For me to sell this HEB stuff, I’d have to have some evidence, and would ask God for some. I haven’t read the book – did he ask his god for evidence?
Thank you Neale Donald Walsch for bringing this up again 🙂
There is indeed a spiritual solution to Syria and every other thing 🙂
I remember 4 years ago I made the following comment in response to your article (dated August 27, 2013) titled “HUMANITY: THE IMPOTENT SPECIES“:
I wrote “I hear you Neale Donald Walsch and I am sure GOD (GREAT SPIRIT!) has heard you too 🙂 Thank you for bringing this up 🙂
Bless ALL :)”
I am responding again 🙂
It is important for all not to jump to any conclusions in reaction to any event 🙂 All sides must seek to know first with integrity 🙂
And a reminder:
“Every conclusion you come to about the Illusion is, therefore, based on the Illusion. And so, every conclusion is an illusion.
Let this be your new insight and your constant reminder:
Every conclusion is an illusion.” – “Communion with God” by Neale Donald Walsch 🙂
The spiritual “solution” brings us back to the approach you took the last time in your article titled “IT IS TIME NOW TO PRAY. ALL TOGETHER AND FOR THE SAME THING.” (dated August 31, 2013). Below is an excerpt of the approach you took and it worked 🙂
“Members of the vast spiritual communities that are spread across our planet are asking today: What can we do? In the face of the possibility of this latest and seemingly never-ending use of violence in the name of bringing an end to violence, what can we do?
The answer is that we now have to use, intently and with passionate and mighty focus, the most powerful force in the Universe — a force more powerful, even, than all the missiles and all the bombs and all the chemical weapons in all the arsenals of all the military establishments of all the governments of the world.
Prayer.
Prayer is intentioned Thought, and Thought is one of the Three Tools of Creation given to us by our Creator. Those tools are: Thought, Word, and Deed. Of these, Thought is the most powerful, because Thought is the least physical. Therefore it is the least dense, and thus the most far reaching, permeating all physical bodies, barriers and constructions.
I believe the prayer of the day should be that Congress votes against a military intervention — even a limited, air-power-only intervention — by the United States. The reasons for my belief are found in the lengthier commentary in the news article to the lower left of this website’s Home Page, under the column title Interpreting Conversations with God.
I hope you will read that article at once, and then I hope you will join me and Marianne Williamson in the Global Collective Prayer Initiative, Monday, September 2, at 16:00 GMT (that is 9 a.m. Pacific Time). We will pray solidly and intentionally for ten minutes that the U.S. will not launch air strikes on Syria, and that the larger Syrian conflict may end, at last, with peace and harmony prevailing.” – Neale Donald Walsch 🙂
Why not again?
🙂
And here is the evidence that this approach works according to the following quote from Dr. John Hagelin’s website permanentpeace(dot)org:
“What’s the Evidence?
The power of peace-creating groups to decrease warfare and terrorism has been tested repeatedly. The results produced by temporary peace-creating groups (lasting weeks or months) have been consistently positive—with nearly immediate reductions in war deaths averaging better than 70%. In addition, the one peace-creating assembly that lasted for several years was accompanied by a history-transforming wave of peace around the world. Most of these studies have been carefully scrutinized by independent scholars, then accepted for publication in mainstream academic journals.
Reduced warfare in Lebanon: During days of high attendance at a group of peace-creating experts in Jerusalem, war deaths in neighboring Lebanon decreased by 76%. Increases in attendance at the peace-creating group also correlated strongly with reduced crime, traffic accidents, and fires, and with improved economic indicators.
Replication on warfare in Lebanon: During seven different peace-creating assemblies—in a two-year study of the nearly continuous fighting in Lebanon during the mid-1980s—war deaths decreased by an average of 71%. Some of these assemblies were large (7-8,000 peace-creating experts) and distant (as far away as Fairfield, Iowa, USA)—indicating that the peace-creating effect can radiate worldwide.
Reduced worldwide terrorism: During the three largest peace-creating assemblies ever held in the West, statistics provided by the Rand Corporation showed a 72% reduction in worldwide terrorism.
Wave of global peace: During the one large peace-creating assembly (8,000 experts) that continued for several years (1988-90), major conflicts in the world all came to an end—including the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, a seven-year war between Iran and Iraq that had killed millions, and, most notably and unexpectedly, the Soviet-American Cold War that had threatened the world with nuclear annihilation for forty years.
Scientific acceptance: Time after time, independent scholars have judged this research to be sound. These scholars have been impressed because the findings have been often repeated, based on open public data that other researchers can check, with strong correlations between peace-creating attendance and reduced social violence, lead-lag analysis supporting a causal interpretation, and alternate possible explanations ruled out.” – permanentpeace(dot)org 🙂
“Today we urgently need a new, more fundamental approach to peace that can neutralize the very basis of terrorism and war.” – John Hagelin, PhD, President, Global Union of Scientists for Peace 🙂
“I think this research evidence on a new approach to peace, and the theory that informs it, deserve the most serious consideration by academics, policy makers and concerned citizens alike.” – David Edwards, PhD, Professor of Government, University of Texas (Austin) 🙂
“In the studies that I have examined on [peace-creating groups], I can find no methodological flaws, and the findings have been consistent across a large number of replications. As unlikely as the premise may sound, I think we have to take these studies seriously.” – Ted Robert Gurr, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Government and Politics University of Maryland 🙂
“I have been following the research on peace-creating groups as it has developed over the last twenty years. There is now a strong and consistent body of evidence showing that this innovative approach provides a simple and cost-effective solution to many of the social problems we face today. In my view, this research is so strong that it demands action from those responsible for government policy.” – Huw Dixon, Ph.D. Professor of Economics, York University, England
“The glory of Transcendental Consciousness can be experienced directly and recognized as the ultimate reality. The mind can be led systematically to the subtlest limit of relative experience and then, transcending this subtlest experience of the excited states of creation, it can reach the field of the ultimate, absolute, unmanifest state of least excitation—the unified field of all the laws of nature.” – Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, Founder Transcendental Meditation program
“The stuff of the world is mind-stuff.” – Sir Arthur Eddington, First physicist to verify Einstein’s general theory of relativity 🙂
Bless ALL 🙂
I have taken small clips from most who posted (sorry if i missed you) below to form a message that makes sense to me anyway. While it could be tweaked to make it flow better, untouched just seems more fun. Some may enjoy it, it’s entirely random and in order of newest post at the bottom older at the top…
As a human, this is very hard words to put down. But I also know, from another point of view, it is the truth.
The suffering that we see in the world is the creation of fear, which is the direct product of the thought and experience of separation.
There’s always a chance the world could awaken and we would not need to be faced with such questions.
A collective effort to not use violence and persue killing ,a decision based on ENOUGH of the waste of life ,on the observation that it’s not WORKING to create a world we all say we want to live in.
Awareness, truth, and actions based in truths is what will make us free.
The biggest distinction between our current world & that of HEB’s (Highly Evolved Beings) is there is absolutely no violence of any kind. None.
In each case, I would choose unconditional love and compassion. Always.
“A delicate response that cannot be responded to by one person alone.”
“IT IS TIME NOW TO PRAY. ALL TOGETHER AND FOR THE SAME THING.”
cool! I would add a line cuz you missed me 🙂 right after “Awareness, truth, and actions based in truths is what will make us free.” like this:
Truth. . Eternal Truth is different from the relative truths used to create random violence and killings of any kind. Every faction expressing violence thinks they act in a version of what is “true” for them, but is it really Eternally True. What we need to pray for is an Eternal Truth that expresses through all praying.
The whole purpose was to show even the slightest of messages when everyone’s thoughts are combined. Can you imagine what the energy of prayer must sound like if we could hear it? Adding our thoughts after the fact doesn’t have the same effect. I could not find your post that responded to Neales post above. It wasn’t easy to keep it all organized going up and down and reading too. The longest posts are usually the thoughts of people responding to Neales topic.
It just seemed like fun, like a renga. .a poem where everybody adds a line and I just added one 🙂
And it was wonderful.
you’re welcome :))
I forgot to mention my favorite part of your post. .the prayer part. everyone here could pray as they read and then see if we can lift light to syria and all love from t..well..call me spidey-t or spidey-b and I’ll link my line of light to ya and all here for the light from here to the core of the earth where I prayed today with a powerful golden bee energy damn it was powerful for me anyhoo. I could see the light at the core of the earth radiate outward. ..it kinda got stuck at a certain level and I got a message to stop right away. .it was happening too fast. .prayer is weird. it’s got to be timed just right. I’m all for focused prayer. We did it before. I was on that call when was it 2011 or 2012. It was Powerful with a capital. .all caps for emphasis… .
The prayer part belongs to awareness. Be careful with that nuclear prayer stuff, sounds like you almost exploded the earth with a golden bee bomb! It got stuck at a layer of rock in the earth untouched by fracking. Direct it towards the ring of fire next time, it penetrates deep and the energy will flow out better for you. Again be very careful. That area is already plagued with earthquakes. All caps for sure…POWERFUL!
is fracking the same as a fractal? what is it exactly?
You sound awesomely blessed! I love being in some earthquakes. Living next to a railroad track is a lot like having many mini earthquakes, like being on drugs without the drugs.
I am 🙂 there is a blessing in a curve of every golden arcing track, especially the kind that steam engines full ahead without ricocheting needles and spoons or mini earthquakes through parks next to all railroad tracks.
I have yet to witness the ricocheting of any items, But a steam engine did pass by full steam ahead and blew its horn all the way through the area. I think the spoons and needles are scarce enough that they remain in the hands of those who don’t feel earthquakes mini or many. As scarce as they are there seems to be too many. No parks, yet it’s funny when a train passes the whole town parks.
i used to live next to tracks in college. .the park behind my house had a festering of needles I found one day next to playground..used to paint and draw there, always loved the hot sun beaming there but couldn’t stick to that town…sound of the train passing through always too loud
The other side of the tracks is traditionally run down here. The train isn’t as bad as it’s horn which should be against the law. I do actually enjoy the gentle shaking. I’m looking forward to paying all of this off, selling it and moving out of town. I prefer neighbors I can’t see from my driveway. The town supports me well as I have many customers but I’d still rather be… out there. Some think I already am.
The other side of the tracks are usually that way everywhere, aren’t they. I don’t mind the horn as long as it’s Sunday. Used to live in a old house near the tracks. There was a nice sepia colored mold stain on the ceiling. . looked just like a Daumier painting lol old claw bathtub in the backyard. you get the picture. .college days. whew at any rate, i’m out there, too, and no customers to boot 🙂
Sounds wonderful! I don’t mind the horn as long as it’s not am or pm. Mold stains add character anyway and like snowflakes, each one is different!! Clawfoot tubs are going from 300 to 3000 depending on the person selling it. they do add a little to a bathroom… or a backyard.
that class act bathtub in backyard added character and made for some good black and white photography. The horn is nice if it’s not right in my backyard, so to speak
As for the other side of the tracks everywhere, No. People here on the other side of the tracks say that the other side of the tracks look pretty good.
it’s always that way on the other side of town.. tracks are always looking greener on the other side of the track
It’s funny isn’t it? We are always looking somewhere else and deciding that it’s better than where we are. I’ve heard the grass is greenest over the septic tank. There is a lot of truth in that. Regardless of the color of the grass or the weeds the same soil is there waiting for us to make it what we wish. The grass can be green wherever we are, if we choose to care enough to make it green… or greener.
of course, it’s always green where we are if we learn to tip toe through the marshland where the greenest grass grows…don’t step on a septic tank..those things leak and oooh marshland is always green and growing over the septic tank though I prefer not having to look at them. would rather not have them at all and just water the grass myself. It’s much prettier 🙂
From Dennis Kucinich
There has been a rush to judgment over the origin of the chemical weapon attack in Idlib, Syria. Conclusions were drawn with no investigation, no gathering of evidence, no forensics, no independent international inquiry, only charges followed by military action. It is extraordinary that when anyone so much as asks for an investigation they are attacked politically. When a verdict is arrived at without facts how can we be sure?
Consider what happened in Ghouta, Syria in 2013. A chemical weapon attack killed nearly 1,000 people. The finger was pointed immediately at the Assad government. But an on-the-ground, at- the-site investigation revealed something quite different.
Reese Ehrlich, in his 2014 work, “Inside Syria,” writes: “. . . if UN inspector Sellstrom, as well as professors from MIT and Tesla Labs, are correct on the rocket trajectory, the rockets were fired from areas very near to or under rebel control.”
Since the world may be moving close to a wider war precipitated by the gas attack at Idlib, it would behoove world leaders to investigate the source of the attack. That is, if facts even matter in the current environment.
Right on. Bull’s eye!
Facts do not matter because the agenda of “regime change” in Syria was formulated almost 2 decades ago. Next will be Iran, and a “terrible event” will ever be lied about, caused or exploited to drive the American public into a proper emotional frenzy of blood lust to justify an aggression against that nation, which has also been on the same Neocon imperialist list for “regime change” for just as long.
I do think there is responsible mainstream media coverage & have seen it & witnessed it. That said, they certainly went for the Iraq war & that was horrible.
Responsible mainstream media coverage is as rare as Big Foot sightings…but it might exist…the exception that confirms the rule!
And please don’t forget South AMERICA also…
Venezuela specially is under this very kind of media attacks, particularly now. Bolivia, Ecuador, and others too.
Please don’t forget that Venezuela has the largest certified oil reserves in the world. And has policies that differs deeply from Washington and the global mainstream.
A very good candidate for false flags attacks, economic hit men, and etc.
I’m very glad that this oppinion was permitted here.
I quoted something very similar but its current state is still “Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by The Global conversation”
This quote (thank you, Awareness):
“Enlightenment is understanding that there is nowhere to go, nothing to do, and nobody you have to be except exactly who you’re being right now. You are on a journey to nowhere.”
It can look a little cruel. About Syria, etc., the enlightened one couldn’t care less. Doing nothing whatsoever—not even a give it a thought—seem to be preferred. And I wonder if there is something with the human dimension that will create negativity no matter what, just by participating. If we all go together and pray/meditate for peace, in Syria, then what is the underlying thought? Of course, that something bad is going on. So, this is what the universe is picking up from us: Something bad is going on, something bad is going on, something bad is going on. And so, we are the ones who create that something bad is going on. I am not sure that we, as humans, can ever stop creating exactly what we want to stop. In a physical world this seems to be irrevocably linked together.
Hi Sam, I get your point I think. Humanity would like to stop war from happening. Humanity is saddened by acts of war and the majority of humanity would agree, even those in charge of the attacks. What action or thought could stop that which we call bad from occurring in the future? I’m trying to not sound insulting but are you suggesting humanity quit thinking about all that we see as bad regardless of what is going on all around us,to ignore that which we call bad, and that by doing so the bad will go away on it’s own? Or will humanity just become accepting of such acts as that in Syria by changing its thought about it?
“What action or thought could stop that which we call bad from occurring in the future?”
We have to let go, and have peace with it, no matter what, or we become an amplifier for bad, thinking about it, making it crystal clear and real.
But, unless living in a closed off cave, with no distractions, I’ll say it’s impossible. We can’t help ourselves having motions, act on them, and have consequences. And, I think it’s supposed to be like that, in the making of a road to walk, making yourself acquainted with a lot of experience.
For progress, there are no wrong turns, experience leads to wisdom — eventually.
Rather than doing nothing, in any challenging situation I think we can choose to have peace with it, and rather than acting on emotions (mostly stirred up by the lies of the hysterical mainstream media, without which we would not know what is happening on the other side of the globe), we can act from that inner space of peace.
Acting on emotions such as anger or fear usually gets us in trouble…the peaceful warrior is a person who lets go of the outcome but still does what needs being done, from peace and love rather than inner emotional turmoil.
Action and peace are opposites. One can’t act in peace.
Do you actually believe this? Then you haven’t reached peace! Peace comes from the mind…action is calm, clear, simple and decisive when coming from a peaceful mind.
Peace is motionless. Something other than that, and you are fooling yourself.
immobility and peace are two different things. But then I see what we disagree again, and I don’t want to get into a debate…whatever works for you!
“immobility and peace are two different things.”
Still, one can’t act from that inner space of peace. It’s a contradiction.
Peace does not mean immobility but an absence of conflict. Conflicts arise in the mind…a peaceful mind, a non-conflicted mind, is not a dead (immobile) mind.
First example: I was once literally grabbed by a powerful wave while surfing in Redondo Beach and dragged away from the shore to the bottom for quite a while, tossed like a cork at the bottom, before being thrown back towards the surface…quite a lot of action. Where was my mind? completely at peace…without fear whatsoever. I did not resist or struggle, and because my mind was calm and peaceful and I went with it, I didn’t get hurt or even out of breath. I did not get a “rush” out of it either…I was calm throughout.
Second example: I was once hiking (I never carry any sort of weapon or spray or anything with me while hiking) in a dense forest in Oregon, and met a mother black bear with two cubs, from behind a large tree…they were very close, about 20 feet. Every hiker’s nightmare, so they say. The two cubs immediately climbed the nearest trees, while the mother stood on her back legs looking and sounding very confrontational. A lot of action…Where was my mind? Completely at peace. I sat down on the ground, sideways in order not to look at her directly while she was still acting and sounding upset, and began sending them reassuring thoughts, such as that they had nothing to fear from me (I also softly sung a Native American song that had to do with bears…). Within a few minutes, the mother was clam, the two cubs came down, and they went on their way.
I have also calmed down a mountain lion on another occasion, as well as a charging doberman…and I also calmed down a carjacker in LA…I was driving a porsche at the time (I can’t believe it either!) and he definitively wanted it…I did not respond to his threats and his weapon but looked straight at him and remained totally calm…because I have a peaceful mind and heart. Whether my body is in motion or not makes no differences…no inner conflict, a sense of unity and kinship with all life and love are the keys to peace and fearlessness!
wow :)) I love the bear story. .I can see you singing to the bears in the forest. the bear, a mother bear and her cubs are a pack, and the mother is very cautious about her baby. It is cool that you were able to sing to them and ease the tension ;)) now sing to syria :))
Thanks, I’ll try :))
I’ll try, too :)) with a little adele in the background or my favorite yeha noha. ..that always works :))
Wonderful, mewabe, my friend!
I have also calmed animals with my inner peace, but most often the human kind. The younger, the more easily it’s done, but I’m also adept at stopping drunks from getting into fistfights.
I managed to not be gang raped after being lured to a dorm room when I was much younger. How? I calmly insulted the strongest until he kicked me out. It was the first time it felt like calm descended on me and surrounded me rather than dissociating or freaking out or having to seek it first. (I had already been meditating for a few years.)
My best friend used to call me when she was upset. She told me she didn’t even need to talk about why she was upset. It was the mere sound of my voice that calmed her, she said. I believe it was the loving energy I feel towards her (yes, even now after she’s passed over).
Inner peace and unconditional love are vibrations that can be felt, and have an effect.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Thanks Annie…you are amazing and have achieved so much on your healing journey! I hope you are working on your book, it will be an inspiration for many…
Unfortunately, I have had to spend my time with other matters. But it’s growing into something more that hasn’t quite taken shape in my brain yet. More hands-on help along with the inspiration. ?
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
“Peace does not mean immobility but an absence of conflict.”
Peace has the effect immobility, or it isn’t peace. Any movement needs motivation, and peace has none. Peace are either way, but in the middle resting, not moving.
“Conflicts arise in the mind…a peaceful mind, a non-conflicted mind, is not a dead (immobile) mind.”
Conflicts comes from motions. What you attached to thoughts. Thoughts without attachments is peace. Far from dead.
“First example: I was once literally grabbed by a powerful wave while surfing in Redondo Beach and dragged away from the shore to the bottom for quite a while, tossed like a cork at the bottom, before being thrown back towards the surface…quite a lot of action. Where was my mind? completely at peace…without fear whatsoever. I did not resist or struggle, and because my mind was calm and peaceful and I went with it, I didn’t get hurt or even out of breath. I did not get a “rush” out of it either…I was calm throughout.”
And many stories like it. You go beside yourself, or outside yourself, so to speak, and let things go as they may, and have peace. I’ve been there myself. What should be the disagreement?
Again, movement does not mean an absence of peace. Motion does not mean conflict. Conflict comes from resistance (mind resistance). Without resistance, there is no conflict, and there is peace.
You need to look into Taoism to understand what I mean.
“Again, movement does not mean an absence of peace.”
Peace has no motivation—exactly the opposite—it can’t move anything, and shouldn’t, or else you won’t have peace.
“Motion does not mean conflict.”
Motion does not mean conflict, but conflict comes from motions. I hope you see the difference.
“Conflict comes from resistance (mind resistance). Without resistance, there is no conflict, and there is peace.”
Well, yes, and with other words, just let go.
“Peace has no motivation.”
Do you have a belief in some sort of divine source or something of that nature, a creative source?
If you do, would you say that one of the characteristics of this source’s ultimate nature is absolute, perfect peace?
And yet this source created the universe, if this is something you believe. Would you say it had no motivation in such a creation? That it could not or should not move anything, or else it was not at peace?
Would you say that this source, by whatever name you know it, is no longer at peace because it is now the ultimate cause behind all movements, all life, all motions?
Again, we disagree…but I am at peace with that.
You say God and peace is the same thing? I say God, as you and me, can choose to be at peace or not. Well, we humans need a little more practice, I reckon 🙂
“Again, we disagree…but I am at peace with that.”
Somewhat 😉
Completely!
On another note, where are you located on the planet? Just curious…
Haha, “I reckon”? 🙂
I am from, and live in Scandinavia. My girlfriend, well, a lil on and off, lives in Florida. A loooong distance relationship. I pick up some words 🙂 Btw, she is a Trump fan and very stubborn. Kill me now 🙂
Sam,
I have to disagree. First, I don’t think one must be sitting motionless in the lotus position emptying one’s mind of thoughts to be at peace. I feel peaceful watching a sunset as I walk down the street. I feel peaceful watching a newborn child. I feel peaceful while doing chores around the house.
After I meditate, that inner peace stays with me afterwards, for varying amounts of time. But, while it lasts, everything I do is action from that peace, whether it’s taking out the trash or paying the bills or talking with a friend or posting here. I’m acting from peace for as long as that peace lasts, and when it stops, I do what I can to regain it.
Yes, emotions move us. They can also be understood and accepted, not allowing them to rule our actions. And who’s ruled out feeling peaceful as an emotion that can also move us? I haven’t.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
“First, I don’t think one must be sitting motionless in the lotus position emptying one’s mind of thoughts to be at peace. I feel peaceful watching a sunset as I walk down the street. I feel peaceful watching a newborn child. I feel peaceful while doing chores around the house.”
Good for you, and of course.
“After I meditate, that inner peace stays with me afterwards, for varying amounts of time. But, while it lasts, everything I do is action from that peace, whether it’s taking out the trash or paying the bills or talking with a friend or posting here. I’m acting from peace for as long as that peace lasts, and when it stops, I do what I can to regain it.”
Yes, I think even assassins make use of this technique. It can be effective.
“Yes, emotions move us. They can also be understood and accepted, not allowing them to rule our actions.”
All actions are from either love or fear; emotions.
“And who’s ruled out feeling peaceful as an emotion that can also move us? I haven’t.”
I do.
You never feel peaceful? Feelings=Emotions.
Good question. It’s an expression which for me isn’t quite true. I am peaceful, is how I would express it. Free from emotions/commotions.
the body at peace is motionless, but is the mind at peace motionless? I’m thinking of meditating. .in those moments of peace, my mind is not completely still…there are moments of peace where I leave the body during meditation but the mind is somewhere else in motion, at least for me
Thoughts are not moving, only changing. What moves you are feelings.
change is motion, isn’t it?
In the physical world, change has the illusion motion.
I don’t get it. If something is changing in a physical world, it is in motion isn’t it. If not, why not. please elaborate
what’s the velocity of a thought in motion, depends upon how many are of the light countering how many from how many differing sources that aren’t, so it is sometimes feeling like it is not moving but it is
Too complicated for me 🙂
well, reread it. maybe it’s better maybe worse. .it’s a thought 😉
there you go. . we have to let go of dwelling on the consequence and act. spot on it 🙂
Thanks Rainbow…:)
“We have to let go, and have peace with it, no matter what, or we become an amplifier for bad, thinking about it, making it crystal clear and real.”
Ok, we let it go and have peace with it, but it’s there, it exists. What do the people who are there experiencing it needing to do with their thoughts about it? Is empathy not correct when we think of those people or even sympathy? Most of earth says that’s what we do when we care.
“But, unless living in a closed off cave, with no distractions, I’ll say it’s impossible. We can’t help ourselves having motions, act on them, and have consequences. And, I think it’s supposed to be like that, in the making of a road to walk, making yourself acquainted with a lot of experience.”
I almost agree, we have these human bodies to tend with, but I think your on the right track, I mean choosing how we think about it, which in turns creates the action we take. There is certainly a better action than a shipload of bombs being sent to “any” location.
“For progress, there are no wrong turns, experience leads to wisdom — eventually.”
I would like to believe that experience leads to wisdom, it actually does, but the amount of violence seen in our world is as old as humans. Wisdom is outdone by fear and greed, they keep it going. It will take quite a widespread change in the way people think to stop it.
“Is empathy not correct when we think of those people or even sympathy? Most of earth says that’s what we do when we care.”
Empathy is something human, and an important stepping stone for self-development and what impact this has on the world — in my view. But, in the state of enlightenment, or God, it seems they are beyond something of the sort. Because, as it can seem, even empathy has some darkness in the background you will be carrying on to as well; still feeding the phantom you want to beat, in some degree. And for our human dimension I think this is unavoidable. It’s linked irrevocably together. Only as enlightened you be all shining pure, all the way a flipped tile, as one piece in the mosaics of the world.
From what you wrote: good points 🙂
I get your point that when we are so focused on bringing light to a negative situation that there is a possible downside of creating more energy around it, but the situation that has no contradicting wavelength goes on and on. It doesn’t get level without a countering force of positive light energy focused at it. If we are aware, we have thought around anything we are aware. It is impossible to not think,or is it? I mean we can act from a high level of being, but that sometimes requiring action without too much thought on negative consequences for our little body here, such as running into a burning building to save a child. I think that point was brought up in the new book.
“I get your point that when we are so focused on bringing light to a negative situation that there is a possible downside of creating more energy around it”
What I think, is that the “possible downside” is always there, and why progress is very slow. Why make an effort, and a change towards good, unless you think there is something bad? The underlying thought is that bad exist. It’s like we are chanting it every day, pumping it out there, almost overloading the atmosphere, making it the most real thing we know. Bad is something *we* keep alive. And to make less of it, is almost impossible, when we are feeding the phantom we fight at the same time, and especially then.
“I mean we can act from a high level of being, but that sometimes requiring action without too much thought on negative consequences for our little body here, such as running into a burning building to save a child.”
Why would we want to save someone from death, unless we think that death is something bad?
“Why make an effort, and a change towards good, unless you think there is something bad?”
The universe does not exist in a static state if we are alive at all. Life is change. If we are moving, we are either going upwards and in a positive spin or downwards in a negative spin, so take your pick but I always said to do nothing is still doing something, the consequences of which may be worse than positive action in a conscious state of knowing we are moving.
“Why would we want to save someone from death, unless we think that death is something bad?”
Too much thinking man. Just you’re putting too much thought in it. If my kid were in a burning building, there is no thiought. I’m in. Forget it. No thought to it. If you came home from work one day and saw that your house caught fire and your kid still trapped inside, would you say “ah better get the lemonade out. It’s just death. .a part of life. .nothing bad?” I doubt it.
“Too much thinking man. Just you’re putting too much thought in it. If my kid were in a burning building, there is no thiought. I’m in. Forget it. No thought to it. If you came home from work one day and saw that your house caught fire and your kid still trapped inside, would you say “ah better get the lemonade out. It’s just death. .a part of life. .nothing bad?” I doubt it.”
I doubt it too, and not my point either 🙂 Even if all automatic, I think the reaction must include an awareness of something bad happening, or else we wouldn’t dive into it. And as a human, I say thank god. But from another point of view, there is never anything bad happening for real, it’s all an illusion, for the sake of experience alone. Don’t crucify me 🙂
glad to hear you’re part human 🙂 yeah…we’re all working on a dream as the bruce springstein song goes :))
Sam,
I don’t know that someone who’s enlightened “couldn’t care less” about violence. Enlightenment, in my mind, isn’t a dissociation from love, but rather immersion in and expression of being love itself. I believe an awakened person (or one on their way to being awakened) would therefore feel, think, speak and act as love towards all parties involved. This is much different from dissociation.
The quote, if I remember right, has most often been used to explain there are no requirements being placed on us by God. There is nowhere we have to go, nothing we have to do and no one we have to be in order to gain God’s love. There is also nowhere we can go, nothing we can do, and nothing we can be to cause God to stop loving us unconditionally.
I also believe that the sponsoring thought in this situation can be love for all concerned with Syria. That statement of preference doesn’t contain the overriding of what’s seen as “bad.” Improving a situation doesn’t mean judging what is as “bad,” but rather simply states that the situation can be improved. Sending energy to all those involved states we’re not picking sides.
Those are my thoughts on it…
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
While Neale specifically addressed the issue of chemical weapons, that’s just a symptom that has little to do with the core problem, to my way of thinking. I think the solution is to have a global conversation. How about that! This is how I think it has to start:
A large group of influential Jews, including politicians, Rabbis, scientists, bankers, athletes, media stars, journalists, archaeologists, musicians, etc. sign a treatise in which they acknowledge and call upon their fellow Jews to acknowledge that there is no justification for holding to the idea that the Jews are the “chosen people” or that they were granted a “promised land.”
We know beyond reasonable doubt today that the early bible is myth, much derived from earlier pagan religions (Yahweh was a god of war, for example). We know that there was no six day creation, no two-person DNA bottleneck, no global flood and most important for the Jewish signers to this document – no mass Exodus from Egypt and no conquest of Canaan. Israel’s leading archaeologists came to this conclusion some time ago, and they were given access to fully research the possibility of these events in the places they were supposed to have happened. Nothing. Not a shard of pottery, a wagon wheel, a spear tip, a sword – nothing. 1 – 3 million people would have left something. They came to the conclusion that it was a myth; one with powerful stories to tell, but purely mythical from a historical standpoint.
If a large group of very influential Jews admitted this, it might force the discussion we have to have, because all the Abrahamic religions are based on these same things. No six day creation, no literal Adam and his original sin, no global flood, no Exodus and no conquest – what else do the Abrahamic gods rest upon besides pagan mythology? The major religions have to have this discussion in an open and very public way. The Jews started this mess, they are the perfect candidates to start the global conversation we have to have if we are to resolve it.
This doesn’t mean they have to pack up and leave. The UN gave them their land, not some imaginary, invisible being that lives in the sky. But we have to have the conversation, if we’re ever to have any hope of peace between these highly destructive Abrahamic religions, including all the sects they spawned. Ultimately the war in Syria is driven by one sect of Muslims vs. another. All of them are killing each other over a god whose foundation has washed away. We have to have this discussion in my view. Einstein says energy is never lost, but it can be redirected. This is a new direction.
Regarding the current event, I’m withholding judgment. I’m unconvinced that enough facts were in place to justify that flashy response in such a short time. We had enough evidence to blow up the airport it was delivered from, but not the shop where it was manufactured, so what did we accomplish from a practical standpoint? What I did notice though, is that the issue of the 260 some odd people we apparently “accidently” killed in Mosul has dropped out of the news as well as brain drivel talk of how many people were at the inauguration, how many people voted illegally, how Obama wiretapped Trump Tower, etc.
Patrick,
First, let me say that I have waited an hour or so since first reading your comment. This is not a knee-jerk reaction, but I will admit that I am still a bit emotional about some of what you wrote.
“The Jews started this?” Really? They asked for the wholesale slaughter of villages, the pogroms, the mass executions in their own homelands that drove their need to have land upon which they could live their lives without the powers-that-be burning them out of their homes (I’m talking pre-world wars)? They asked ships laden with their people to be turned away from “civilized” countries when they fled the Russians, Nazis and others who wanted them exterminated in WWII?
The problem didn’t start with the Jewish people. It started with the first group of people who decided another group of people were unacceptable because they were unique, setting up an “us” versus “them” separation that allowed humans to treat other humans inhumanely. It started when the first human separated him/herself from the rest of creation, or Divinity.
Geopolitics didn’t start with the Balfour Declaration, and the Western Wall is no figment of the imagination.
And where do Americans, who slaughtered nearly an entire nation of Native Americans to steal their land, get off telling anyone else that they don’t have a right to their own homeland?
I’ll stop now. I think you understand where it is I’m coming from.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Surely you can’t be so obtuse, Annie. I was quite clearly referring to the start of the Abrahamic religions and all the pain and damage they have given us over the millennia – some of which you mentioned. Yes, they started it. They took a pagan war god and turned him into the one and only god, and the rest is history. They antagonize the people, their neighbors whom they are ancestrally related to, and they say that they wiped out their ancestors in a genocidal war ordered by their god, that they are the “chosen people” and that they are entitled to the “promised land.” Yes they started this. They started the Abrahamic religions.
Our society is based on the Abrahamic religion they started. You can try and twist me into any demon you like, but you cannot escape that fact. It is what it is. They started it, and they are in the perfect position to start the discussion that may finally end it. It’s all make believe. It’s time to be adults. Don’t throw that holocaust crap at me. You know that’s not what I’m talking about. You’re smarter than that, and you’re intentionally trying to denigrate me. I can take the gloves off again…
‘They’ never recruited you or anyone to their family God!! That was your decision, just as it is for every Christian and Muslim.
My french Jewish ancestors were forced to Catholicism in England, while those in their communities were killed like animals for being Jewish. The protestant movement was all that saved them, with many Jews taking the opportunity to colonise and resettle in New Zealand, although my family personally didnt return to practising Judaism. But we do have a hatred of Catholicism, flowing through my blood. Jews have been persecuted for thousands of years, often by Christians.
K
Patrick,
I may have three sides, but that doesn’t mean I’m obtuse. I know you were talking about the start of the Abrahamic religions. I am human, though, and I’m tired of people scapegoating the Jewish people.
It was also a test to see if you would even acknowledge or comment on the rest of my reply, which stated, in part:
As I expected, you ignored this part of my reply, as well as my mentioning Americans believe they have the right to decide the fate of others.
Do you really believe that before the Abrahamic religions there was no war? Surely you can’t be that obtuse. Before Constantine, Rome was waging war everywhere, trying to conquer the world. Then there was Genghis Khan in Asia. And the Egyptians. And the Ottoman Empire. And the British Empire. Religion isn’t necessary for war.
I don’t believe war is part of human nature, or even if it were that we don’t have the choice to not use it. Humanity’s ability to see others as so different we delude ourselves into believing we have the right to take their lives started war. Humanity’s choice to see itself as separate from and yet somehow special in creation started us on the path. No religion, Abrahamic or otherwise, needed.
BTW, you can’t both deny and use the Torah. Saying that “they say that they wiped out their ancestors in a genocidal war ordered by their god” really just doesn’t work.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Come on Annie, you tried to turn me into a racist.
Our current problems do not trace back to the pagan religions that Judaism emerged from. The Israelites encoded their myths in books that prevailed, while the others did not. That makes them the source. They did away with the proliferation of pagan gods, and chose the war god, Yahweh to be their one and only god. They wrote the book that all the other Abrahamic religions are ultimately based on. They invented the myth of the mass Exodus and conquest of Canaan, which are two of the primary pillars for their pagan god. It’s time to admit it.
The woo stuff about early humans separating themselves from divinity is not part of the discussion in my view. It’s nonsense. We evolved from animals to humans; there was no “separation” from the divine. It was a very slow and gradual evolution taking millions of years, culminating in a small pool of several tens of thousands of early primates 100 – 200,000 years ago who began to evolve higher intellect, greater self-aware consciousness, an ability to use tools and fire, and the ability to talk. Which of these evolutionary advances was the separation from divinity? Leaning to talk I would imagine!
Did I say that there was no war before the development of the Abrahamic religions? Please quote where I said that.
Mankind clearly evolved a need for violence. So do many other animals. It’s in our DNA. Those who fought and won, passed on their genes, and the others did not. Why we are the way we are, is pretty obvious, but we did evolve intellect and a higher sense of self-aware consciousness along the way, so we are in a position to modify our path if we choose to do so. We developed contraception in order to modify the path to destructive overpopulation that our evolved sex drive gave us. We can overcome our religions and issues with race and prejudice if we choose to. We need to decide to do this – not imaginary HEBs. Of course that gives us an out. If we screw it all up, we can always blame it on the HEBs who failed to help us come up with solutions. OK, you don’t like my solution – please present one of your own that does not include separation from divine woo, but includes concrete steps we can take to work towards peace in the region and elsewhere.
Yes, I can both deny and use the Torah or any part of the bible. I can use it to illustrate how ridiculous it is, and I can deny that it describes the history of our origins and the origins of the people who wrote it (fake Exodus and Conquest) in any historically accurate way. It’s a book of myths, and needs to be accepted as such. Once that is acknowledged, then we can look at how to move forward.
Patrick,
Get real. Where did I try to “turn (you) into a racist?” Proof, please. (If I have to provide it, then so do you.)
Hmmm… How is it that there was already a “war God” for the Jewish people to turn into a monotheistic God? Could it be that war was already prevalent?
Now, let’s get really real. People aren’t going to give up their religions on someone else’s say-so. (And, being Jewish is being part of a race of people—an ethnicity—not just membership in a religion.) Even with archaeological and other scientific proofs that parts of the Torah, Bible and Q’ran aren’t literally true, religious belief is a personal choice. If the most respected elders of all the world’s religions were to declare that their religions are based on (at best) half-truths and should be abandoned doesn’t mean the people themselves will do so. To think they would is, I believe, naive.
Why not just leave religious and spiritual choice out of it altogether? Since it’s personal, let it be and use another approach.
I prefer the idea of building rather than deconstructing. I would like to see the powers-that-be of all of the world’s nations (the elite, the politicians, and the religious and spiritual leaders) come together to have a truly global conversation. I would prefer to approach it from a point of building on commonalities rather than differences. We could start with:
We all have a right to life by virtue of having been born, so killing of all kinds should stop.
We all need to breathe, so it’s in our best interest to not destroy the air with noxious chemicals and nuclear mushroom clouds.
We all need to eat, so it’s in our best interest to not deplete the soil with harmful chemicals, or destroy it with land mines, or cause fissures with underground nuclear weapons testing.
We all need shelter, so it’s in our best interest to not destroy buildings with bombs.
We all need water, so it’s in our best interest to not pollute our rivers and oceans with the waste of war.
Those are ideas human beings can get behind. Not just one religion or another (Abrahamic or not). Not just one sect or another. There could be global inspection teams to ensure no one is acting against our best interests. (I’d prefer the honor system, myself.) Then we could move on to other matters in the interest of humanity, like global warming, petroleum pollution, etc.
Prejudice:
Noun
an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.
any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable.
unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding an ethnic, racial, social, or religious group.
such attitudes considered collectively: The war against prejudice is never-ending.
damage or injury; detriment: a law that operated to the prejudice of the majority.
Verb (used with object), prejudiced, prejudicing.
to affect with a prejudice, either favorable or unfavorable: His honesty and sincerity prejudiced us in his favor.
Idioms
Without prejudice, Law. without dismissing, damaging, or otherwise affecting a legal interest or demand.
Are you prejudiced? You tell me. Do you think your stance against religion, in all its forms, is prejudicial? I can see where some might accuse you of that, using the “detrimental” definition. People who aren’t as vocal or confrontational as you might be injured by the way you phrase some things. I don’t see you that way, though. I just see you as stubborn as a Missouri mule.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Very important dialog here.
Thanks Annie and Patrick.
I think Patrick has a very important point in common with Neale: we have to trascend coercitive, sectarian, fundamentalist religion. Undoubtedly, for doing that, humanity will have to reject the most part of the Bible, Quran, and other religious texts, as just, primitive texts. Just as CWG proposes.
Have you read “The New Revelations”, or “God’s Message to the World”, Annie?
The point is not abandoning or destroying all religions, or all of it, but transforming their dysfunctional dogma, and embracing Oneness spirituality. That is in the very core of every religion. But for doing that, we’ll have to aknowledge that VERY MUCH in religion and its ‘sacred books’ just don’t work.
I agree with Patrick that our culture has a BIG cornerstone from Abrahamic Religion. a HUGE part. Also from greek-roman culture, etc., but jewish-crhristian culture is a deep root.
Of course that has to be changed, transformed.
Our separation culture didn’t originate from Abrahamic religions. It came from before, of course. But abrahamic religion sealed it almost ‘forever’. In our cultural inheritance.
Yes, a very hard work to do, but it can be done.
Because our real essence is Oneness, and we can’t deny our very essence forever.
Blessings…
Victor,
I’ve read all the books, but it’s been a while and I don’t have them to refer to anymore since losing my possessions when homeless.
Neale doesn’t propose abolishing religion, but suggests that they shed their rigid dogma and return to their Spiritual cores. In doing this, they can then become adaptable, changing with the times. Otherwise, they stagnate.
Religious texts have both things that are beneficial and things that are not. The same goes for religions. I can’t see throwing it all out, disregarding the parts that are beneficial, like love and charity and prayer and community.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Yes, that’s what I’ve said, if you didn’t notice.
Blessings
Patrick my friend, If we could just get people to stop being so prejudice, they could keep the Gods they desire to have so badly. I’m not willing to dump all of this on a race of people though.
This is how I think it has to start: A large group of people, including politicians, Rabbis, scientists, bankers, athletes, media stars, journalists, archaeologists, musicians, etc. sign a treatise in which they acknowledge and call upon their fellow people to acknowledge that there is no justification for holding to the idea that any people should be homeless or hungry given the amount of buildings being torn down that could be fixed or the amount of food being thrown away daily because they could be sued if a person chokes on it. Being born on this planet should be a guarantee that we would never go hungry and every person will have a small piece of “promised land.”
Just a thought…
Jethro disappears and Charles appears, and the writing style is very similar. Interesting.
Well Jethro/Charles or whoever you are, I said nothing about a race of people. I said nothing about racism or prejudice. I spoke of a religion. They cannot keep the god they desire to have so badly if they want peace. If we all want peace, then the gods must be reckoned with and called out on the carpet for their bad behavior. All of the Abrahamic gods need to be called to the carpet, but the Jews started it. They should go first and set the example.
The Jews started the Abrahamic religions, and they are all based on myths. It’s time to admit that, and since they started it, they are in the best position to bring about the discussion we all need to have.
If I must be called by a fictitious name any further make it “the artist formerly known as Jethro” I never kept my real name a secret, just got tired of having real conversations with a fake name. I had a feeling you would call it, Patrick my friend…
The only thing I said about prejudice is, If the prejudice would stop, many of the problems would go away. You were not accused. The Jews may be responsible for the book, or was it Constantine? Anyway, The entire world to this point has played a fair part in creating hatred against differences.
And it didn’t even require a religion in most cases, but religion wasn’t helping anything.
Haha. Cept no one calls you Charles in real life either!!!
Cyclone due to hit tomorrow, after three floods already in a month as we talked about. Weve never had a cyclone before, but its rained all day anyway. You’re the drain guy..plan Z works well! Hire a concrete cutter, cut a trench path out of the driveway and 20cm deep, and give the neighbours a new waterfall garden feature!! Theyre Chinese and I havnt seen them once in 3 years so wont know, its no where near their house!!!!
When we were talking about it, go on to Stuff NZ website and scroll down latest info on cyclone cook. Theres a pic of a house with waterfall features down steps, thats what we had, although not that extreme but exact same front yard design!! Not good for climate change!!
Take care,
K
Hello Kirsten, Charles is my legal name, the one on my birth certificate, my real name. The next time I close the account it will be final.
I looked at the site but didn’t find the picture. A trench sounds like the right answer, If you can’t stop the water from coming in help it leave. Hopefully rerouting occurs as well. I’m wishing for the best for ya.
Hi ya,
I know, re names. Kirsten is on my birth cert as well but Ive never been called it that I know of, Ive been Kirsty since a baby…stuck with a baby or pole dancers name forever! When you close a discus account all your posts are deleted, leaving threads of people talking to themself. Dont do that.
Break in rain now before it all starts at lunchtime. Yay.
You take care,
K
Lol, leave people talking to themselves, I have already used those post to remember what I was talking about. You put a new dimension of humor in there… thank you…. and sorry. I just realized your a victim. Ouch. I hope you make it through without damage!
You take care too,
C
You’re American…Ill acknowledge your apology the American way..you hurt my feeling (yes I have one somewhere, just one), so my lawyer will be in touch to email you his bank details, in South Africa somewhere, via his Readers Digest bank account for compensation.
Although I much prefer our Kiwi way…unless we are severly abused our attitude is to eat some concrete and toughen up. Or tell people to ring Dr Give A Sh.t.. Different attitudes in a country where you cant sue people other than the government for real compensation, each dollar accounted for. Oh, and proven defamation where you can prove financial loss but thats near impossible. The victim attitude just doesnt form, theres no gain so we bypass that and just deal with it. We’re so laid back that our Prime Minister, a Catholic maths teaching farmer with 6 kids just made worldwide news for putting tinned spaghetti on pizza for his tribe of kids. Yes, we actually do that but usually on burger buns not pizza base! Scandal and about as exciting as it gets. Now that would unite the world snd bring world peace. A huge spaghetti pizza day, comfort food for everyone. My solution!
My cyclone hasnt arrived yet, but an island an hour ferry trip away is getting a battering.
Im not a victim, I just get water in my house!!!
K
Concrete it is! Belch!!! I feel better! I know my lungs are full of the dust. Self inflicted does not equal victim. Still hoping for no water in your house!!!!
A handful of authors wrote the Old Testament religion of the Jews. Constantine came in much later, as he pulled together early Christians who selected the “proto-orthodox” view of Christianity, which later became the Catholic Church. Competing views were declared heretical and stamped out – using the same justification as is found in the Jewish scriptures.
The issue I raised has nothing to do with race and prejudice – other than to the extent that the Abrahamic religions endorse those things. The issue I raised, was the admission, by those whose ancestors started it, that the religion of their ancestors is strictly mythical and can not have any bearing on current world events. We have to leave religion out of our differences, and in so doing, I suspect we will end many of our differences – particularly in the middle east. That’s my hypothesis. Feel free to debate it, but don’t pull racism and discrimination into the discussion, please. That’s not what it’s about.
At what point did I pull racism into it? The word “Prejudice”?
I’ll give you benefit of doubt, Note here I am not speaking of racism. I’m talking about more than one group of people coming together and admitting that there is something not beneficial to humanity in their way of thinking. Not just the Jews. All people and all ideas of all religious views.
Prejudices are not only localized to race.
Sorry, I think I mentally combined your comment with some others that seemed to be accusing me of this. No you did not mention racism, but you mentioned prejudice, and of course that is often associated with racism.
What’s interesting is that nobody has told me why this is a bad idea yet.
No apology needed, I knew there had to be a misunderstanding and wanted to know you understand. Thank you.
It’s not necessarily a bad Idea but there are too many Gods left over when that one dissipates. Which is why I stated, “I’m talking about more than one group of people coming together and admitting that there is something not beneficial to humanity in their way of thinking. Not just the Jews. All people and all ideas of all religious views.” I would much rather see all people come together to decide.
Why am I having so much trouble being understood?
I’m only suggesting that the Jews be the ones to start the conversation, since they were the ones that started the bloody Abrahamic religions in the first place. They are also the ones using imaginary gods to assert a claim to a piece of land in the middle east. They have that land because of the UN, and not because of any imaginary gods. If they would just admit that, it could start the “global discussion” we all need to have.
How would you go about starting this or some other discussion?
I think I am beginning to understand some of the objections. If we acknowledge the non-existence of the Abrahamic gods, what gods are next on the chopping block? Neale’s god is certainly primed to be decapitated by science.
You have a problem being understood because your proposition has little to do with the conflicts and wars that are going on right now.
Your agenda is to question the existence of what people call “God”. Nothing wrong with that, but it has nothing to do with why people persecute, oppress and kill each other. Religion is not the cause, it is just a tool used to work people into a frenzy of blood lust, and it is the ultimate justification.
But the cause is elsewhere.
I understand you Bubba, I had to go to work I’ll get back at you later
“Why am I having so much trouble being understood?”
Because your only desire seems to be the removal of God, absolutely nothing else. Removing Gods will not cure everything, It might change an excuse for bad behavior but it won’t stop the bad behavior.
“I think I am beginning to understand some of the objections. If we acknowledge the non-existence of the Abrahamic gods, what gods are next on the chopping block? Neale’s god is certainly primed to be decapitated by science.”
In this one statement you have developed a conspiracy theory against everyone because Neale’s God might be in danger. You appear to blame every problem in the world on some God. Neale can make any correction to what I say here because I don’t know what Neale actually believes. Neale’s conversation is with his voice of reason. I was trying to get that across last week when I asked you, “who do you think Neale is talking to?”. You said himself, but you continue to say his God. You wouldn’t listen to me at the time, you went on about no Gods.
Actually you said, “Why would god tell me he doesn’t exist, and tell Neale he does? Why would such a god have any credibility, and why would he set up one or the other to be wrong? Sounds pretty evil to me.
No gods are telling me they don’t exist. The output of the scientific process has come to that conclusion.”
You were stuck on me saying God exists rather than me telling you no God was involved. Why would I tell “You” of all people here that God was actually talking to you?
How would I start the conversation? One person at a time, with a touch of acceptance and kindness for another persons thoughts!! I’ve already started the conversation…
Many of us have. 🙂
Sure, I would like to see the removal of gods and a turn to rational thought, logic and critical thinking. I think that would be good for us, but the subject was the middle east. Neale asked for our solutions – in particular the chemical attacks – but as I said, that’s just a symptom. The solution is to start the conversation in a meaningful way. You talking to another person to start a global discussion is very Kumbaya sounding, but will be completely ineffectual, right? That kind of thing has been happening for decades with no discernable results. What is needed is for someone – in my view, a large group of influential Jews – to take responsibility, to proclaim that Israel, while controlling their land by virtue of the UN giving it to them, does not hold it as “chosen people” and it is not their “promised land” and the reason for this is because the events in question that put this notion in place never happened. All I’m suggesting is some truth for a change.
Muslims will be delighted with the abandonment of the “chosen people/promised land” concept, but they will be chagrined at the acknowledgment that their own god has no foundation either. It should make for an interesting discussion if we can just get it started.
Frankly I was a bit astounded at the opposition to this idea, here on this site. I thought people here would want to jump into that new conversation and replace the Abrahamic god with their NAG (New Age God). I would certainly debate against that got, but everyone should get a seat at the table. Call it a conspiracy theory if you like, but I can’t really understand the strong objections I’m facing here to this idea. I thought the whole idea of this forum was a “global conversation” and I’m being castigated for trying to put one in place. I certainly understand the objection from Jews, Christians and Muslims who all stand to lose, but New Age stands to gain if the Abrahamic gods fall. However science will play a role in the conversation and New Age will not fare well in that discussion.
Patrick, when I logged in here the first time, I didn’t know new age from jack. You seem to keep putting the problem on Gods just like a christian makes God responsible for miracles. Gods are not the problem. Peoples thoughts about them are the problem. Ugly people are not the problem, it’s peoples thoughts about them, fat people are not the problem, it’s peoples thoughts about them. Rednecks are not the problem, it’s peoples thoughts about them. Jews are not the problem, it’s peoples thoughts about them.
I was driving into another state the other day, I looked on my GPS and seen a dotted line. I commented to my wife that I seen no dotted line in the middle of the river, we laughed a little, we were bored. Then i said there is no evidence that we moved into another state except the sign. We had only moved into another state based on peoples thoughts about them, otherwise, it was one state was exactly like the other one. Borders are borders because of peoples thoughts about them.
Here’s a starting question… What created so many borders and why do we need them. I don’t think it had anything to do with economics.
“Here’s a starting question… What created so many borders and why do we need them. I don’t think it had anything to do with economics.”
Borders are like laws and rules. A sharp warning of mistrust. “I live here, my turf, my body, don’t violate it, or else”.
Agreed… A sharp warning of mistrust. We have an idea that nobody can be trusted. So we confine ourselves to a location to protect the very ideas that keep us separated.
I’m wondering what we can do to remove that distrust. Why do we keep protecting that?
Borders don’t always have to deal with mistrust. Borders, like fences can help make good neighbors. We have little mistrust of Canada, and most of us have little mistrust of Mexico, and surely there are nations in Europe whose borders do not represent mistrust. I would like to see those borders open, so we can walk over them, just as we can hop the fence or go through the gate to visit neighbors, but I’m not convinced borders are necessarily bad.
There have been some who have argued that many of the borders in the mid-east are unnatural as they split up religious sects that would have normally been together, and thus created friction by having majority/minority sects in different countries. The ruling party and it’s god dictate the rules and prosecute those whose god suggests something else. Better borders might have reduced violence in the middle east, by more carefully dividing these mutually exclusive religions, but we are where we are, and I haven’t heard a better idea about how to kick off a discussion that hits at the heart of the matter.
“Better borders might have reduced violence in the middle east,”
A better thought process from the humans that created the borders would eliminate the need for them… acceptance maybe that not everyone is the same.
When people are killing each other over them, then gods ARE the problem. Yes, it is people’s thoughts about gods that are the problem so making those people face the fact that the evidence says the foundation for their gods has eroded. That is the process of changing people’s thoughts about gods, or at least the Abrahamic gods. I’m calling for enlightenment, that’s all.
Why do borders exist? All sorts of reason, including geographical landmarks that divide regions, but religions also play a key role. The border in Ireland, for example, divided religious sects, just as many borders in the middle east do the same. Some borders do have to do with economics. Why do you think we have a border with Mexico? That border is also reinforced by some amount of racism, but probably not so much religion, as in the middle east.
No, it’s not just the Jews, and I didn’t meant to insinuate that, but they started it, (the Abrahamic religions), so it makes sense to me that they should be the first to step up to the plate and acknowledge that it’s all based on mythology. Ideally, this would be followed by similar actions by Christians and Muslims, and the brouhaha to follow would surely start a “global conversation” that might help get us headed in a new direction.
Nuclear mushroom clouds work too, but not to try this, or something similar, first, seems like a poor choice to me.
In defense of all Gods everywhere, It’s the people causing all the fighting and arguing. No gods needed. No Gods Involved and you know that because no gods exist… Right? If we remove Gods it would be race, If we remove race it would be traditions or borders or language or fashion, Removing God is not in itself the cure for war or even bad behavior.
Sorry, Jethro/Charles, but that strikes me as a defeatist attitude. No guts, no glory.
What are they fighting and arguing about in the middle east? Religion and gods, right?
It sounds like you are saying we should not remove one problem because it leaves others behind. So we should do nothing? We should let the situation continue to fester until it breaks out to full scale regional war that pulls us all into it? We shouldn’t try?
It’s like having a car with a flat tire and an empty gas tank. It makes no sense to fix the tire because you’ll still have an empty gas tank? No. You fix the tire, then you go find some gas for the gas tank. If ration and logic works to mitigate the religious problem, then the same tools can be used to mitigate any race problem – but race is a bigger issue in our minds here than it is over there. In that area of the world, they have always had a larger mix of different people’s and races, given that it’s the crossroads between east and west.
Maybe my idea is not the best one, but I haven’t seen any other proposals. Kumbaya and woo nonsense isn’t going to cut it. Maybe these HEBs are putting “inspiring thoughts” into my head (to use Marko’s phrase), and they are telling me to spread the word, that if we’re going to seriously change our circumstances we have to start with what’s broken. just because that won’t solve everything, doesn’t mean we don’t want to solve anything, does it?
Many of the Muslims fighting each other are the same race, so they will have to fight over property and water and other “real” things that at least make sense; but what sense does it make to continue killing each other over imaginary beings? The Abrahamic lunacy started by the ancient Jews has to be resolved if we’re going to move on.
There is more than a belief in God or a disbelief, at work here. Mewabe is saying it better than I am. Remove God and the fighting will continue. What do we remove next? The discussion is finding the core problems, not the excuses used to create one problem.
We know the core problem. People are killing each other over imaginary gods. Maybe people will keep killing each other, or maybe after a couple decades of serious discussion, the fighting will abate.
What I’m hearing is “So what. It’s too hard. Nothing can be done about it.” In that case the “nuclear option” is probably next up on the agenda. Do you have a better idea?
Patrick, people are not just killing each other, they are oppressing and persecuting each other! The common denominator are a quest for dominant power, control and to establish authority. This is universal. Religion fuels it because it offers the greatest possible justification…but so do ideologies, and almost anything humans can come up with to validate their animal instincts. Religion is a tool of dominance and a validation for authority…but it is not their cause. Why not go at the cause?
“I am not sure how we can cure authoritarianism, but we need to at least become aware that it is a universal problem and the cuase of most of our conflicts.”
I can’t help but notice we have more men in politics universally speaking than women. ..maybe put me in charge. ..cat fights not welcome but let’s just put more women in charge. What do you say guys? ARe you really willing to move over and see what happens if women rule the world?
I totally agree and have mentioned this often. Interestingly, it is a taboo subject here. There is never any response…I am glad you mentioned it!
However the social structures of the world need to change. Have you noticed what changes when a women heads a corporation or the EPA? Absolutely nothing, because the hierarchical and exploitative structures of the corporation or of these institutions demand that she serves the patriarchy (or else she is out).
If I could save time in a bottle and I could make wishes come true, I would act like an heb and if I were the leader of the world, the first thing I would do is to spend a day with all leaders of every country in one room and I would pass out a box and have them write out a list of things they wish most for and then we would read each other’s list. They would write down everything they feel they need most. Then I would ask all the leaders of all the countries if they have a lot of any one thing on another country’s list of needs and then we would start sharing, and we would have to share something and all would begin to be a little more loving. there would be wine and dance, enough to go around and then we would dance again and write a second list of things we can do without and that woiuld be like war and famine or animosity or judgment against themselves and then we would share again and speak about results that come from war and famine and animosity and judgment and show pictures of war (like when you’re getting your driver’s license how they show effects of car wrecks and on and on) and then effects of judgmental ones against others and more pictures of war and after effects. .did war ever change a thing for the better? Look at history. No. No. No. it never changed a thing, so maybe we would discuss an alternative to killing and then try to give each other more freedom to be without animosity and judgment from across the globe and then we would share each other’s culture and share recipes and I’m not facetious. .I am real.. .but, if you were to attack my kid, I don’t leave out the possibility of my reaching for another kind of trigger. ..I’m not going to lie, so just cuz I’m a woman doesn’t mean I’m weak like that. .think of me as a gladiator who prefers soft gentle rain carving the earth. . .
I like it… you have my vote!
thanks, mewabe 🙂 I’m running 🙂 I’ll let you know when I get to where I’m going :)) let’s just write to mr. president :))
hmmm what do we do about the corporate mentality? that’s going to take a double cafe au’ lait 🙂 I’ll have to think on it, and I’ll be back. ..
But what is at the root of this issue regarding women’s second class status in our society? Religion. Abrahamic religion.
Ffs, change the record. God tells men to be good husbands, obviously the story with Eve as an example indicated women can make decisions, Deborah was a judge, Rebekah basically ran Israel, God said women can get a higher education.
Abrahamic religions may be at the root of your personal problems, but not the worlds.
If you want to say something just say it…say Mohammad or Muslims, leave scripture out of it. Grow some balls, go onto a Muslim site and have your say on their culture, but its not of God!
That one was a rotten tomato in the food fight you wanted. Beware…….I might find coconuts!!
I don’t accept the proposition. Europe threw off the religious blanket that had been smothering it since the Iron Age, and most of the European governments could not be described as “authoritarian” in my view.
If you want women to have a greater role, and I’m all for that, then you’ve got to address the Abrahamic religions which all insist that women are second class citizens.
Authoritarianism is never far off…much of Europe is currently moving to the right politically, and towards authoritarianism, towards neofascism in some instances.
Even in Europe, you still have hierarchical social structures that are patriarchal in nature. That’s a form of authoritarianism. After the loss of religious influence, much of England’s and other European governments took their clues from the Greek philosophers (Aristotle, etc) who regarded women as being basically irrelevant. That’s another form of male authoritarianism…same old problem.
Yup, and that’s because religion in the form of Muslim immigrants is changing the landscape. It’s a visceral reaction to a violent religion, in my view.
I did offer a concrete solution and dance and wine are included and did I mention food, good food? that always gets men, doesn’t it?
Seriously, how do we address women as second class citizens across the globe? hmmm let me think on it. .i’ll be back…I have to make coffee 🙂
OK. I’m listening. Tell me how you would address this problem.
I’ve provided a concrete, proposal to address the Syrian situation as well as the rest of the middle east violence that is centered on religious beliefs. You disagree that this is the problem. OK. How would you go about removing authoritarianism from our genetic makeup?
The solution is starring us in the face, but we are so conditioned to accept the status quo that most do not even understand what the problem is.
First of all, I would make it a widespread understanding that the problem of authoritarianism exists. Check out the book I previously mentioned. It should be read by everyone…Secondly, I would invite women into the conversation. Our world is completely out of balance because of the ultra competitiveness of men, and their tendency to seek to dominate and take control by force.
Women need to re-balance the world with more cooperation, more compassion and tolerance, and a more gentle and loving approach to life. They would need to change the social structures of the world, which are currently hierarchical and outdated, to create cooperative, equalitarian social structures that emphasize these feminine qualities.
HOW would you make it ” a widespread understanding that the problem of authoritarianism exists”? How are you going to “make” this happen?
I proposed a way that is quite feasible, in which the problem of religion (which in my view leads to the authoritarianism you detest) can be brought to the forefront of a global conversation. You have not presented any such solution. It would require an authoritarian figure to “MAKE” it a widespread understanding, wouldn’t it? Your choice of words was authoritarian! How are you going to force people to come to this understanding? Are you going to “force” everyone to read your book? In that case, I get to force everyone to read “The Big Picture” by Sean Carroll. I have no idea how I would “make” that happen, but perhaps you have an idea for how to “make” us all read your book…. ???
I already invited women to the conversation. I want them to be included in the many notable Jews that I propose initiate this conversation. Women have suffered disproportionately because of the Abrahamic religions. Of course they should participate, and take a very active role.
What you provided was a Kumbaya solution in my view – not a real solution. Try again… Neale wants to know how we should address the use of chemical weapons in Syria. You can start with that, but I think the larger problem is self-evident, and I propose getting to the heart of the matter. I’ve proposed a way to do that. I’m still waiting for your plan.
Whatever you say…you are the boss and you decide what is correct and what is not. Gather your followers and change the world!
I espouse and voice this view whenever I can, in various blogs, including our local newspaper.
Neale asked for solutions. As best I can tell, I’m the only one who has offered up one.
Agree that this blog is probably not what Neale had in mind. He’s a Kumbaya guy, not really into solving problems using concrete practical methods (unless it brings in revenue).
Neale spells out the “Five Steps to Peace.” They are:
1. Acknowledge that some of our old beliefs about God and Life are no longer working.
2. Acknowledge that there may be something we don’t understand about God or Life, the understanding of which would change everything.
3. Be willing for a new understanding about God and Life to come forth, and allow this understanding to produce a new way of life on Earth.
4. Be courageous enough to explore and examine this new understanding and if it aligns with our inner knowing, enlarge our belief system to incude it.
5. Live our lives as demonstrations of our highest beliefs, rather than denials of them.
(From The New Revelations, page 14.)
Specifically addressing Syria, all could come to the table and discuss these steps to peace. Not all would agree, but it’s a conversation.
And, BTW, Neale continues to put forth these five steps, as do others, without any monetary consideration.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Neale gets no monetary consideration for selling his books? Seriously? I find that rather unlikely.
Neale put forward these five steps 15 years ago in his New Revelations book. What progress has been made in implementing them? What changes have they brought forth? What global or even regional conversations have been sparked as a result of them? How are you going to shake the world up enough to start his conversation? Has the situation improved since he proposed them?
These ideas, however are one reason I would have expected New Age to like my idea. Neale has railed against the legacy religions right from the start. One might expect that he, and other New Age folks would welcome the questioning of the legacy religions that I propose, given that it provides an opportunity to pitch his feminine god, as a replacement.
The problem, of course is that the group of people who I suggest be the ones to initiate such a discussion, are going to be rational, critically thinking, pro-science types, and his god will not be given a free pass. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who recognize that their legacy gods are myths, but who still, like yourself, hold to some nebulous consciousness god. I have no confidence that your god exists, but at least it’s a lot better than the Abrahamic gods who are violent and evil. You seem to be making every attempt possible to keep these violent gods in place.
One doesn’t have to buy Neale’s book in order to have access to these Five Steps to Peace. First, they’re provided here, by me, for anyone to copy. Second, they’re one of the things that volunteers in one of his free organizations (to which he donates financially) leave in public places and share on social media on what’s called “Awakening Day” on the 12th of every month. Neale will gain no monetary income from them being copied here, or from printed copies left by the volunteers, or from social media feeds.
There’s no way to track how many conversations have begun as a result of people reading them from those sources. The volunteer organization leaves these, among other things, in places where they will be noticed—park benches, sign posts, bulletin boards, etc. Some of the volunteers even paint rocks with the word “peace” as a paperweight so they don’t become litter.
I have also personally mailed these to local churches, synagogues and mosques, with a cover letter, and emailed them to people on my contacts lists and places like the archdiocese, the Vatican, my legislative representatives and other organizations I’ve looked up online or in the Yellow Pages.
I don’t see a problem with what you call “legacy gods,” or rather their related religions, if they are willing to evolve and change, focusing on their Spiritual centers rather than staying attached to their sacred texts as literalists. Some are already doing so, although they aren’t mainstream. Others may be willing to do so, and some will not.
I’m not “making every attempt to keep these violent gods in place,” but rather encouraging the religious institutions to which they’re attached to evolve and change.
It’s certainly an alternative to your Pie-in-the-Sky Kill Religion plan.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
we’re trying to save the world here. Neale is busy writing books…why doesn’t he chime in his two cents 🙂
Neale is too busy cutting down trees for his books, climate change is sooooo much fun for the wealthy. Lots of $$$$$ to be made.
Well, I got mine on audible at amazon for free and I then bought a kindle version so I don’t keep anyone up late with neale’s voice in my ear 🙂
Not everything in the Torah has been debunked by science, only parts. Others have not. Patrick just speaks as if it’s all been proven wrong.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Patrick has an agenda and found a new controversial angle to bring attention to his personal crusade. His determination to impose his views on others is quasi religious, which is not surprising coming from a reformed Catholic. But t gets old…
How am I imposing my views? What authoritarian power do I have in place to do that? Please tell me, because I’ll use it if I can!
If it’s getting old, why does the discussion continue? I’m actually OK with this. I want to hear challenges to the proposal, but everybody wants to go after me, instead of my idea, a typical symptom of cognitive dissonance.
You were the first to offer up a half-hearted objection to the idea. I addressed it, and you let it drop. The results of this discussion are affirming for me that I’m on the right track. If I knew enough influential Jews to write and propose this idea to, I would do it, because nobody here has given me a good reason for why it shouldn’t be tried. I see cowardice, apathy and defeatism in most of the responses so far. It’s too hard, so we shouldn’t try anything? We should instead have little Kumbaya sessions in cities on the other side of the world and this will solve the problem of people killing themselves over their gods in the middle east? That’s the only alternative I’ve heard so far.
You have an obsessive need to be right and prove everyone wrong, have you noticed that about yourself? In order to do this, you use any bogus argument, such as that the current conflicts in the Middle East are caused by religion. That is false. I have no sympathy for any religion, but don’t tell me that the US invaded Iraq and created the mess we are in in the name of religion, or that we are trying to oust Assad in the name of religion.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not about religion either…but about territory.
If you want to be taken seriously, you need to stop framing your argument so poorly. We know you want to erase the idea of God from as many people’s minds as you can, that’s the bottom line…why is that so important to you? How is this idea affecting your life? Are you trying to convince yourself in the end?
Yes, I will suggest that we invaded Iraq in part because of religion. George W Bush expressed the opinion that he hoped to usher in the return of Jeebus.
Yes the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is about territory – territory that the Jews claim as their god’s “chosen people.” That’s not about religion?
I’m not here to debate what’s important to me. I simply put forward a proposal to spark a global conversation. You don’t like it, but have nothing to offer in it’s place. As best I can tell, we’re done her.e
No I have not!
I have been explicit in stating the things that have been debunked (and I appreciate your acknowledgement of that!), but you are starting to straw man me again. I NEVER said “everything in the Torah has been debunked by science,” did I? Quote please….
There was probably a King David, an early temple, and there is a historical basis for some of the other leaders and events in the book. What I said has been debunked, on more than one occasion here is:
1. There was no six day creation. I assume you accept that.
2. There was no two-person DNA bottleneck. This is a new finding that has emerged in the last couple decades as we’ve enormously grown our knowledge of DNA and how it is passed on. This is primarily of concern to Catholics, who can’t have original sin if there was no literal Adam.
3. There was no global flood. I assume you accept this obvious truth.
4. There was no mass Exodus from Egypt. Sure there were workers who returned home, and maybe a small group had a vision following the consumption of magic mushrooms – I have no idea if there was some legendary event that started the idea of a mass Exodus – but we know beyond reasonable doubt that this did not happen. Fundagelicals will agree that there is no evidence, but they will always respond, that a lack of evidence doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. While logically, this statement is true – hard to prove a negative – it’s an extremely weak argument. Just because there’s no evidence that the moon isn’t full of green cheese, doesn’t mean that it’s not full of green cheese. Who is going to accept that line of argument?
5. Similarly there was no conquest of Canaan by these 2-3 million Israelites. Israeli archaeologists with full access to the places this genocide was supposed to have taken place, have found only evidence for Persian invasions.
Aside from that, what else in the Torah did I say was debunked?
I said specifically, “speaks as if.” I carefully phrased it, knowing you would come after me for it if I got it wrong.
You do, as a point of fact, speak as if scientific discoveries will make the entire Torah moot, thus ending Judaism. There’s more to the Torah than just the six day creation, the Garden of Eden, the floor, and the Exodus.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Yes, but those are the pillars upon which the Abrahamic god is based. I’ve read the bible several times. There are no other significant pillars for the existence of Yahweh besides these that I can find.
You’re playing word games… I never made any mention whatsoever that the rest of the Torah had been proven wrong. You don’t want to debate my idea, you’re back to wanting to debate my person. I’m not going to sit still while you attempt to misrepresent me.
” Patrick just speaks as if it’s all been proven wrong.” No I have not. That’s a lie.
I missed something. What is a “day” when the space-time fabric is rapidly expanding, starting to form clusters of dust that then turn into the stars and galaxies and planets? I can’t agree or disagree with a “six day creation” unless I understand what a “day” is in a rapidly expanding universe.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
The word in the bible is “yom” and it can mean:
1) a period of light; 2) a period of 24 hours; 3) a general, vague time; 4) a point of time; 5) a year.
Google it yourself: Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days. The answer is essentially, yes it does.
“The issue I raised, was the admission, by those whose ancestors started it, that the religion of their ancestors is strictly mythical and can not have any bearing on current world events.”
Kinda kills your declaration that it’s not about the entire religion instead of what you’ve laid out as the “pillars” of the religion.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Where did this quote come from? I can’t find it in the preceding text, so I can’t tell, first of all, whether you took it out of context. I appreciate your level of nitpicking, though. It reminds me to be aware of what I’m writing – which can slip a bit when slamming through a bunch of responses in a hurry.
Of course it’s about the whole religion. The traditions and cultures can seek out ways to survive and even prosper, while acknowledging the mythical underpinnings to the religion. With the pillars gone, the religions as we know them must change or go away. I don’t see them going away any time soon, but their influence in politics and other social decisions must change. Their effects on us are deleterious as Neale has made abundantly clear. All I’m doing that he hasn’t done, is propose a way to shake things up and get the conversation started.
In like fashion, I call upon Neale and his other New Age buds to put their reputations on the line and organize a large-scale consciousness experiment to provide objective evidence for their beliefs. They will never do that though – they already know it won’t work.
Patrick, I didn’t go looking for a comment from you so that I could quote you. I merely ran across it while trying to see if I missed reading any comments to which I hadn’t replied, or wanted to reply, and remembered your adamant reply to my comment here. If I see it again, I’ll let you know where it is.
Neale has developed at least two global not-for-profit organizations, that I’m aware of, to promote the ideas gifted during his Conversations with God experience. I’m fairly certain one of them gained enough signatures on a declaration of our Oneness to present it to the UN. (They were very close when I landed in the hospital, which began my homelessnes, and I’ve had other things that have needed my attention.) Neale also donates to those organizations a portion of his profits. He’s also made available one of his books free on this site, and has begun sharing his newest book free on his Facebook account.
So, you’re absolutely right. All you’ve done is make a proposal, and I think I remember you saying you’ve signed some petitions and written letters to the editor.
You seem to believe that the subjective experiences that thousands of people have had can be made to happen on demand, which I’ve explained before isn’t necessarily true. In fact, under the duress of being placed in a scientific experiment, they may be less likely to occur. It’s been my experience that they are always spontaneous.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Those experiences are ALWAYS subjective. We can’t trust subjective experiences to relay valid information.
Patrick,
Now, there’s an appropriate time for you to use “I” instead of “we.” You’ve made it abundantly clear that you don’t or won’t trust subjective experiences to relay valid information. I can, and do. Others can, and do, as well.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
I’m confused. First you propose an experiment about subjective experiences, then you say that subjective experiences can’t be trusted.
You may not trust subjective experiences, but I do, as do others. It’s been proven to me, time and time again, that the experiences I have are real and contain information and knowledge that is real. I’ve briefly mentioned some of those experiences here. It would take too long a comment to write one out that would provide the detail that would help you understand why I trust my experiences. And I know it would be written off by you, anyway, based on your last reply.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
I assume by “experiment,” you refer to the suggestion I have made several times in the past that a consciousness experiment be set up on the web utilizing a large number of people who would focus all their consciousness energy on an “objective” goal – to stop a clock, significantly affect the output of a random number generator, or something similar, overseen by unbiased scientists. That would not be a subjective experiment. Like the previous prayer experiments that attempted similar things – like the outcome of heart surgery patients who were prayed for by large numbers of people, conducted by the Templeton Foundation, I would similarly expect a consciousness experiment to yield no significant results; but it would be an objective experiment.
I stand by my statement – we can’t trust subjective experiences. The brain seeks patterns, and outputs things that aren’t real, quite frequently.
Patrick,
Thank you for your reply. I love and agree with what you say. Also small results can be statistically valid but small as a consequence of the experimental limitations. e.g. results you mention are similar to those that found aspirin effective. Also, non-believers in such experiments drastically reduce positive telepathetic influence – as one should expect.
I now realise (the hard way here), that any conversation such as we are having now is likely to be trashed by the moderator – as rightly it is off target. My fault sorry! So I must stop here,
Hope you like my book.
God Bless,
Bruce
“I propose getting to the heart of the matter. I’ve proposed a way to do that.”
No, what you’ve proposed is the lopping off of one branch of a tree that is rooted in millennia of growth, hoping the tree will die. The tree of Spirituality will continue to grow regardless.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
I agree. Authoritarianism and separatism are the problems.
And I also agree that religion fuels them.
So, I think that a good thing to do is to trascend authoritarian, separatist, hegemonical religions. At least as a strategy. A very important one, I think.
Of course, other aspects of the trouble would have to be addressed also.
People are killing each other over imaginary gods… And what else? Just Gods? That’s it? Really? imaginary Gods? It’s going to be too hard if we actually think the only reason humans are killing each other is because of Gods.
I’ve already addressed this. The topic is Syria and the mid-east. I think acknowledging the non-existence of these gods will benefit all mankind, but the challenge from Neale was to address the middle east situation. It is there that people are killing each other over imaginary gods – not in the Walmart parking lot over a case of beer. Enough with the straw man arguments.. I did not say that the only reason humans are killing each other is because of Gods. I never said that. Stop putting words in my mouth like that. It’s unethical debating.
If Gods are not responsible for all the killing, who is and why?
That’s a different topic. We’re talking about the mid-east. Humans evolved traits that allow them to survive, and being willing and able to kill other humans was a trait that allowed some genes to survive, while those killed did not pass on their less violent traits. Religions, like politicians, leverage that ingrained, evolved trait, for their own purposes.
Yes it is a different topic, i keep bringing it up because its that human thing I am talking about and you keep insisting that a belief in Gods are the problem. I think that Gods are just an excuse. Neale used Syria as an example but we know Syria is just the point of an entire needle.
The topic is actually…
Was Einstein on to something when he said that you can’t solve a problem by using the same energy that created it?
Can an attack be removed with an attack? We don’t have to go far to study that one! And don’t mistake that as a comment about you.
Neale said: “I’d like to put the question you to, here — and the specific issue of what, if any, an effective response, spiritual or otherwise, might be to the use of chemical weapons in Syria — before I offer my own observation.”
I expanded on his question because the chemical attack is just a symptom of a greater problem – I doubt many would disagree with that.
As for Einstein, in my original post I said, “” We have to have this discussion in my view. Einstein says energy is never lost, but it can be redirected. This is a new direction.”
I’m happy to go down that road though. The energy that created the Abrahamic religions was derived from fear of the unknown, ignorance about the natural world they lived in, and hope that this is not all there is. The new energy is truth, that these religions are based on myth. The new energy is knowledge of the way our natural world works, and understanding that the biblical events upon which the Abrahamic gods are based, has washed out to sea.
We still have the issue of hope, and hope is OK. It’s faith that is the problem. It’s pretending to know things you don’t know that is the problem.
“It’s pretending to know things you don’t know that is the problem.”
Maybe it’s just the opposite—pretending we don’t know what we really do know. That every human being has a right to life by virtue of having been born, and no one has the right to take the life of another. That most of our universe consists of space, whether the space in atoms or the universe, and that science knows what it knows from a small percentage of that space, or rather the matter in it. (I’ll leave out all the “woo” and “Kumbaya” just for your sake.)
(And I thought you were going to work on using “we” instead of “you.”)
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Old habits, and in any case, I wasn’t speaking of “you” in particular, but “you” as in the group of believers who pretend to know things they don’t know.
What we “know” are things we have objective evidence for. We “know” more than most people think we know. Science has to do a better job of educating people about our current state of knowledge. This, I suspect, is what concerns you about my idea. It gives science, logic, reason and critical thinking, a seat at the table, and that’s bad for any and all gods, including Neales. I know you disagree. We’ll have to leave it there.
Scientific knowledge doesn’t concern me whatsoever, so long as there’s a caveat that there is much that science has yet to discover. I understand that you have invested in the theory that subquantum discoveries will prove we’re unaffected by the energies at that level. I’m not convincted to that, but rather believe there are other possibilities—energies that affect us in ways yet to be discovered as technology continues to develop, allowing science to look more deeply at both inner space and outer space.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
I was just reminding you that you indicated you were going to try to use “we.” I didn’t take it as meaning me, personally. You thanked me at the time. I’ll not do it again.
I agree that the public at large knows far less than scientists do about all the things for which there is objective evidence. Science could do much better at helping spread news of their discoveries, in layman’s terms especially, as some scientific publications are often hypertechnical. I would guess that some know less than the five year’s worth of science I took in High School.
I personally happen to like science, logic, reason and critical thinking. I also like inspiration, creativity, being empathic, believing in possibilities, and my own personal understandings of who I am and what Divinity is.
Speaking for myself, I know more than those things for which there’s objective evidence. You just don’t accept that these are things I know, dismissing them entirely. So, your suspicion is incorrect.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
“All of them are killing each other over a god whose foundation has washed away.” Even if they acknowledge that their God would be fake do you think that acknowledgement would be a reason for them to stop what they are doing?
They obviously have ulterior motives and those reasons would fill in the void that the crumbling of they religion had created.
Like Charles/Jethro, you seem to share a defeatist attitude. What do you propose?
Yes, I think it’s probable that violence would trend down. That’s what happened in Europe as they became increasingly secular. That’s what happens everywhere that religion gets pushed to the side.
Certainly the tyrants who rule them use religion to oppress their own people if they are not of the ‘favored’ sect at the time. Removing religion as an excuse to prop up their power could lead to better governments. Remember that in Muslim countries, religion and politics are intertwined; they are one and the same. Iran is ruled by a religionist, for example. If his religion is debunked, on what basis does he maintain that cruel and despotic rule?
Religious zealots will deny evidence using the most insane reasons possible. I find it unlikely that your scenario would ever happen unless tomorrow evening a space saucer lands at the UN headquarters and a ET pops from it and claims that there is no God. Again highly unlikely but even if your scenario would unfold the despots would always find a way. Just look at “modern religions” like Scientology.
The human mind is truly a wonder.
So you’re of the school that it makes no sense to try? We should adopt a defeatist attitude?
John Kennedy said, when speaking of going to the moon, “We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”
That’s human spirit. That’s what we need to be about if we are to survive. We have to do it because it is hard. Or we can tap out and launch Armageddon; it’s a viable solution to solve the problem in the middle east, but we may not be around to enjoy it!
I am actually pretty sure old religion has it’s last days numbered by natural selection.
So do I. Given this, why wouldn’t it make sense to jump start that process by opening the global conversation as I’ve proposed?
How do you plan to persuade people?
Read my original post that started this discussion. I suggested that an influential group of prominent Jews lay out the evidence that debunks their right to be referred to as “chosen people” who were granted a “promised land.”
The idea is to just start the discussion on a global scale. Muslims will react positively to the acknowledgement that there are no chosen people or promised land. The conversation will get more difficult when it gets to the debunking of their own Abrahamic god since he rests on the same foundation.
The idea is to start the conversation and see where it goes, hopefully with lots of input from science as well as all others with a vested interest. The use of evidence is how I would go about it, but there may be other methods that work better.
Yeah I was refering to how do you get “I suggested that an influential group of prominent Jews lay out the evidence that debunks their right to be referred to as “chosen people” who were granted a “promised land.” <– HERE
good point. What do you think are these ulterior motives or reasons that would fill in the void?
First, let’s assume that the basic problem of religion is, beside being based on old myths, a sort of authoritarianism which leads to dogmatism, intolerance, and persecution of those who refuse to submit or are different. All of which eventually leads to conflicts and frequently war.
For the sake of progressing further in the discussion, I will assume that you agree with this premise.
My question to you is: do you think that religion is the cause of such authoritarianism? That’s what Neale seems to think…Or do you believe that authoritarianism is a human trait that uses religion as a validation for its full expression?
I personally think authoritarianism is a human trait that precedes all religions. Religions are simply used to legitimize such authoritarianism…what better justification than a boss in heaven who grants you the mandate to rule the earth by brutal force if necessary?
However authoritarianism is also found under atheist political regimes such as communism, and at all levels and in all spheres of society. It is currently spreading everywhere rapidly, like a virus, the reason being (I think) that in times of greater global uncertainty, people seek the reassuring qualities of strong dogmas and ideologies and the presence of strong, “law and order” types of institutions and leaders.
I have already mentioned this book elsewhere here, but you might be interested. It is called “The Authoritarians”, by Bob Altemeyer, a retired psychology professor. He uses the scientific method of social study. The book is free in pdf form…and it will give you great insights as to why you cannot get through fundamentalist types, of any religion! It will also help you understand (or confirm what you already know) what is currently happening in the world today, and in America (by “authoritarians”, the author means both followers and leaders, and examines and studies both).
I think our attraction to religion is an evolved trait, as is a drive for some to become authoritarian. I don’t think religion “causes” authoritarianism, I think it is utilized by those people for their own purposes. That’s why I suggest taking that tool out of their arsenal.
You have to be careful in referring to “atheist political regimes,” because these are ideological political regimes that in many ways are just like religions, only with worship given to the state or leader. Nobody ever kills in the name of atheism, do they? Isn’t it also true that the more secular a country or region is, the less violent that it is?
Again, in the comments to my suggestion, I get the feeling that the consensus is that we should do nothing because nothing can work. It strikes me as very defeatist and un-human. We make things work. That’s what humans do. We figure things out. It’s in our DNA to learn and discover; and we are smart enough to figure out how to solve this if we don’t quit before we start – which disturbingly seems to be the general trend in this thread!
Nuclear war is certainly an option on the table. Is that a better option than starting a global conversation about our religions and what they are doing to us?
I love your last line. I agree religion is used more often than not as a defense to strike at another group of people in the name of God, for God’s sake and none of it makes common sense, does it? The truth is God is unconditional love somehow but we can just use the name love and call it pure and call ourselves atheists but truthfully I don’t think we can even say “nobody ever kills in the name of atheism” because some atheists can be extremely opionated..it’s a crap shoot. We’re all what we are and need to, as you say, have a global conversation :))
Being extremely opinionated does not necessarily result in killing others. Please list a few of the killings in the name of atheism that have occurred in recent decades…. I don’t know of any.
yea but do you believe in love and its power and magic?
I think that love is a condition that results from a particular mix of hormones and chemicals in our brains that produces a certain effect that we find pleasing, and which acts as a social lubricant to form relationships.
This has nothing to do with the topic at hand, however.
lubricant or not, the world needs more of it 🙂 it is very on point of the subject
I meant by “subject” the proposal I put forth to start a global conversation that addresses the proven mythicism of the Abrahamic religions. Love has nothing to do with that. It’s a matter of science, and archaeology, and geology, and physics and cosmology and evolution, and so on.
and love is all of that and more (ie matter of science, and archaeology, and geology, and physics and cosmology and evolution. ..you nailed it 🙂 )
And history and stories handed down from parent to child and so on and so on… which was handed down in the name of love.
um Hitler was supposedly anti-religious, so there isoh so big an example for ya
Hitler was a Catholic. Nazi belts all said “God is with us” in German. The myth that Hitler was not religious is fully debunked. He had some issues with the Catholic Church, but he understood and used some of the things they used, in order to control the sheeple.
Hitler never claimed to kill in the name of atheism.
oh wikapedia said he was anti-religious, not that wikapedia is great but I am no historian per se. At any rate, the most strong held opinionated ones amongst us tend to be the least likely to look at opposing points of view and that does not a round world make 🙂
I would suggest that it is those who hold the strongest beliefs who are least likely to look at opposing points of view. As an opinionated person myself, I have to understand the other viewpoint(s) if I am to debate against them successfully. Because I prefer to “think that” instead of “believe in,” it makes it much easier to look at opposing views. That’s how I got where I am. I started off as an indoctrinated Catholic, just like Neale. If I had not challenged my beliefs, I’d still be in fear of their evil god.
The problem we have as a society, and this is discussed in many psych papers these days because it’s a big problem, is that people holding strong beliefs, when faced with contrary evidence, will suffer cognitive dissonance before challenging those beliefs. The consensus seems to be that people have to see contrary evidence for a couple years before they will begin to let it seep in. We’re trying to understand this condition; because it’s hard to depend on society to make rational decisions if a large portion of the population is suffering cognitive dissonance, which manifests as angst, anxiety, fear, hostility – everything we see around us. Almost all of it is tied to our favorite Abrahamic god. We’re being faced with the news of his demise, and we don’t want to accept that. Some jump to a new god like Neale’s god, and become equally tied to their new beliefs, but most seem to hunker down and deal with the cognitive dissonance as best they can; but bit by bit, till there’s a critical turning point, the truth will prevail. All I’m suggesting is that we kick-start that critical turning point, and move it to a global scale…
alright, you claim to be willing to look at opposing views. Here is one. I think we can become a peaceful world and still allow any religion to exist. …it’s not like you can force that change in belief system by denouncing all Abrahamic religion anyhoo. ..the reason I say it is okay is religion doesn’t kill, it’s the false radical nterpretation of the religion that kills and we can interpret anything in any way but even atheism can be interpreted falsely as a diehart excuse to kill. .it’s the tendency to react rather than respond to the other and all that is needed is critical thinking skills and willingness to address the concerns of the opposing side. . .other than anger management for all leaders, especially men who have a lot of hammerdown testosterone, which I love on certain occassions, I think we should do what I said and share.. .okay. ..and that is love. .like I said love is what the world needs now and more of it and no woo to it it is real .
My last post apparently crashed the system and it wouldn’t load, so this will be short. I wish you were right, but these religions are mutually exclusive. Each teaches that only it has the true pipeloine to god. The only way to fix that is to show that all of them are bogus – and that’s because they are. There is overwhelming evidence that they are wrong.
How in the world can atheism, which is simply defined as “a lack of belief in personal gods” be interpreted as a “diehart excuse to kill?”
I’m all in favor of critical thinking skills. How do you think we determined that these religions were bogus in the first place?
How are you going to force “anger management” on leaders without being authoritarian in the first place?
there can be a radical “theoist”, a radical anti-theoist”, a radical “atheist,” a radical “anti-atheist,” a radical big mac lover, a radical anti big mac lover. .I mean the list goes on. .anyone can be a radical anything about anything radical even. It does not matter what the subject is…anyone can be a diehart radical about it. Take it or leave it, that’s my point. You can’t expect to solve the world’s crisis by simply taking always and forever mankind’s love of God or religion or whathave you. Freedom is free will and free choice.
How are you going to force the Jewish leaders to accept science over their faith and ancestry?
I’m not suggesting we “force” anyone to do anything. I only suggest that we kick off the conversation in a big splashy way with lots of very prominent and influential people involved in admitting the truth. Let it go from there, where it will.
Nobody “forced” leaders to let women vote and have (mostly) equal rights. Nobody “forced” leaders to talk about rights for the disabled and LGBTs. It all starts with a discussion, but you have to get the discussion up to the level of the leaders who are using those ancient beliefs to justify their killing of each other.
If you look at the statistics, you’ll find that the general public holds a belief in god, at a higher level than most Jews. Jews are famous for being well educated, and educated people are going to struggle with the blatant nonsense in the bible. It’s not just the Jews. Muslim leaders are going to have to talk about this as well, in order to make progress. Having the Jews admit that they have on divine claims is a start that I think they would welcome. As mentioned before, with that boon, they will also have to face the reality that the foundation that washed out the Jewish god, also wipes out the Islam and Christian Abrahamic gods.
The Christian church of course will also chime in, since their god will be washed away as well; but they are in deep trouble anyway, given the DNA discoveries that debunk original sin. I participate in Catholic blogs, and various authors are starting to beat around the bush, talking about the challenges that they have no response to – like the scientific data. It’s going to get interesting in the decade ahead.
Nobody said it would be easy. Nobody said it would happen quickly – I figure a couple generations at least. Or we can do nothing and wait for the radioactive fallout.
OK, what prominent Jewish leaders, etc., are willing to do so, especially in Israel, since it’s about the middle-east? Do you know of any? Are there prominent Jewish archaeologists who would agree?
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
in my view, we can get cognitive dissonance when we finally meet God lol
I must suggest the science of psychology. Now the funny part is, when we go to send an addicted person on a new track of thought, we suggest a higher power. The trick is we don’t suggest God! Just something higher than the self. I know of one person who selected a tree. it represented life to this person. A tree. Not god. I often wonder if that person ever moved on to mother earth, and then a God.
Psychology is from the word psyche, meaning of the soul. Soul is the old word for The Sun, which represents The Source, where our souls are from.
Haha, nice try.
I’m doing my best here! keep up the critiquing, how else shall i develop a higher understanding? Thank you.
as stated above… A popular image of the Nazis is that they were fundamentally anti-Christian while devout Christians were anti-Nazi. The truth is that German Christians supported the Nazis because they believed that Adolf Hitler was a gift to the German people from God.
Hitler frequently referenced God and Christianity both in public and private. The Nazi Party Program explicitly endorsed and promoted Christianity in the party platform. Millions of Christians in Germany not only enthusiastically supported and endorsed Hitler and the Nazis but did so on the basis of common Christian beliefs and attitudes. Hitler Was Not an Atheist…
A popular image of the Nazis is that they were fundamentally anti-Christian while devout Christians were anti-Nazi. The truth is that German Christians supported the Nazis because they believed that Adolf Hitler was a gift to the German people from God.
Hitler frequently referenced God and Christianity both in public and private. The Nazi Party Program explicitly endorsed and promoted Christianity in the party platform. Millions of Christians in Germany not only enthusiastically supported and endorsed Hitler and the Nazis but did so on the basis of common Christian beliefs and attitudes. Hitler Was Not an Atheist…
Agreed.
once again it’s the interpretation or the interpreter who needs checking, not necessarily Christianity itself. Hitler’s perceptions of Christianity are what is at issue not the faith itself. He was pretty damn skewed, don’t you think, guys, so his ideas about it are not trustworthy 🙂
None, probably. How can that be? After all, millions and millions of people died in Russia and China under communist governments — and those governments were both secular and atheistic. So weren’t all of those people killed because of atheism — even in the name of atheism and secularism? No, that conclusion does not follow. Atheism itself isn’t a principle, cause, philosophy, or belief system which people fight, die, or kill for. Being killed by an atheist is no more being killed in the name of atheism than being killed by a tall person is being killed in the name of tallness.
I’m not sure what this is in response to, but we are in complete agreement on this point.
In response to, “Being extremely opinionated does not necessarily result in killing others. Please list a few of the killings in the name of atheism that have occurred in recent decades…. I don’t know of any.”
Meaning that nobody ever said they killed somebody in the name of atheism. Many have killed in the name of God.
Erm….90% of murders are non religion based, generally domestic or gang related. Or do you have a way to put them against religion somehow? Perhaps Baptists in those odd length skirts are driving society nuts, like you! The general society is far more dangerous than any religions…your views are giving you dementia.
Hope you had a nice lunch with your son!! Id better go and pray, havnt clocked in for an hour, God might be missing me!
K
We aren’t talking about murders. Neale’s column was about Syria and the middle east. They are killing each other over there because they belong to different religious sects. They believe in slightly different imaginary gods. While we’re on the subject though, why is it that prisons have fewer atheists as a percentage of the total population?
Patrick, one more question. How do you propose “we take that (ie Religion) tool out of their arsenal” without becoming a dictator ourselves?
Through a global conversation. I wasn’t proposing that we literally force anyone to do anything. I am proposing a “global conversation,” what this forum is supposed to be about, only for real. A large scale global conversation centered around the acknowledgement that the Abrahamic religions are debunked. What might come of that discussion?
well, the people who are proponents of the Abrahamic religions might be offended, claiming they are not debunked and then it might turn into a festering food fight…i don’t know…but it’s true. It doesn’t hurt to try :))
Of course they will be offended. Of course there will be a festering food fight (but recall that many food fights end up in laughter and camaraderie). It’s a food fight we need to have. The Abrahamic religions have been fully debunked. The Bronze and Iron Ages have passed. It’s time to let them go.
It’s wishful thinking to suggest that we can stop war in the middle east without addressing the core problem – which is clearly the Abrahamic religions.
I’m always open to a better idea. I haven’t seen any here yet.
You speak the truth but I must say that it takes two opposing parties to fight!
I’ll sign up for a team. Team Isrealites and Jews, with an apparent mythological God, and no ancestors since apparently the scripture stories are all made up.
I’ll take eggs in the food fight. Patrick wont even see us there since my team doesnt exist in his world, but that egg on his face will sure make a point.
I do believe I just won a round in the food fight of words, the only weapon here.
K
Hey you food fighting trouble maker you… Is that a spiritual egg? or just a no see’um like the mosquito? HMMM…Can you boil a spiritual Egg? Spiritual deviled eggs, I don’t know. A one a food fight of words once but it was face to face. Never yell fabulous with a mouth full of crackers.
Cosmic eggs…they represemt cosmic chaos and consciousness.
Guess I won the food fight!! Perfect win on Easter Egg weekend.
That advice about fabulous is the best advice ever, you should convert to Buddhism, its that profound!
My best would be to never have a thickshake when you have chronic morning sickness. Puking cold milk out your nose is just gross. Or perhaps its all food fight training!
You win. I’ll go with that! I never related the egg with Easter… I must be getting old. Buddhism… My mother came to visit me in jail and said I look terrible in orange. That is a Buddhist thing, right? I’m out now and like the food better, setting on a toilet without an audience is nice too. puking cold milk from your nose can be a serious talent!! I think its training, gotta be, part of the whole predetermined life thing. Gotta be prepared!!
I’m learning to search some of what I think is just your humor. Cosmic egg… Whowouldathunk.
Humour is never just humour, nothing is just anything….our tboughts are of the soul, so everything we write is!!!
You sound like a guy who would look good in orange…now thats a gift!!
Heads being chopped off?
it’s like in Alice in Wonderland movie where the queen says “Off with your head: I couldn’t help it. i love that movie 🙂
Everyone does 🙂
I like it almost as much as elf cuz smiling is my favorite 🙂
I sense that about you! have you met Kirsten? She smiles a lot in her messages like you do.
yea she’s funny. I like to read her posts ;))
I do.
I’m not sure what you are referring to with this Mewabe. My comment about a chopping block is further down in the thread. I said, “I think I am beginning to understand some of the objections. If we acknowledge the non-existence of the Abrahamic gods, what gods are next on the chopping block? Neale’s god is certainly primed to be decapitated by science.”
Yes, the heads of the gods need to be chopped off. It shouldn’t hurt them much since they don’t exist.
Oh, wait. You’re suggesting that if we have this conversation I’m proposing, that heads may end up being chopped off. Well sure, but they are being chopped off anyway, and will continue to be so until it is understood that this chopping off of heads is in the name of imaginary gods.
“Neale’s god is certainly primed to be decapitated by science.”
You can’t know that. You can’t predict what discoveries will be made in the future. Unless, of course, you’re psychic.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
Neale’s god has already been decapitated, he just doesn’t know it yet. We’ve discussed this. There are no god, soul, consciousness, Essential Essence, Divine, ONEness or other energies or forces that affect the particles in our natural world.
What blows my mind, is intelligent, educated people willing to accept a “guru” with no particular training or education, over the word of physicists, mathematicians and other brilliant scientists who have determined how the particles in our material world work. The “guru” who makes a nice living selling his woo, has absolutely no objective evidence whatsoever, while the scientists have libraries full of such evidence.
Yes, we’ve discussed this. And again, in my opinion based on my experiences and those of thousands of others, there is a Divine Energy underlying all of creation and there are Souls. I can’t say with certainty that those, or consciousness or our Oneness, don’t affect us in ways science has yet to discover. There is that possibility.
I don’t see Neale as a “guru” by any means, nor even a Master. He regularly admits he hasn’t yet fully integrated all of what was gifted to him (and to us, through him) in his Conversations with God experience. I see him as a messenger, which is how he self-describes. (You, on the other hand, are sounding much like the “fundangelicals” you have derided here on more than one occasion.)
Not everyone places their entire worldview on only those things for which there has been objective evidence thus far discovered as you do. It doesn’t mean that we lack intelligence or education. It simply means we may believe in, or have had personal knowledge of, those thousands of subjective experiences. And, in the realm of possibilities.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
“I think I am beginning to understand some of the objections.”
Patrick, I don’t think you understood any of the objections. At all.
Im global, and conversing. How about my idea that everyone honours their National Anthems etc, and force a worldwide mass conversion to Judaism or Muslim? With thy shalt not kill, thy shalt not steal etc enforced. Executions in abundance, I especially like the bits in scripture about no cross dressing, it would be fun!!!!
Or doesnt my vote count because I believe in God, aling with over 50% of this planet whom CHOOSE religion for their own personal reasons.
K
Xx
I’m not sure I understand where you are being sincere and where you are being sarcastic. Yes, over 50% of the population believes in imaginary, invisible beings that live in the sky. I’m sorry, Kirsten, but your god has had his foundation washed out. It’s time we start discussing that reality.
There was no six day creation. Most people agree with this now. There was no two-person DNA bottleneck, no literal Adam and Eve. The DNA evidence confirms that we evolved from a pool of early humans numbering in a few tens of thousands. Even the Catholic Church is trying to figure out how to deal with this, as it kills original sin. There was no global flood. Surely educated people are all aware of this today. There was no mass Exodus from Egypt as described in the bible. Leading Jewish archaeologists have confirmed this themselves. They had access to places other archaeologists couldn’t get to for a long time, and similarly they have confirmed that there is no evidence for a conquest of Canaan by Israelites, although Persians sacked the place and did leave evidence.
These are the foundation pillars for the Abrahamic gods, and they have washed out. What else is the first Abrahamic god based on, other than the pagan gods from whence he came? You can research all this yourself, and if you give it honest effort, you really won’t have much choice but to accept it or intentionally and willfully reject the evidence. That’s where cognitive dissonance kicks in
This conversation I propose is going to be very painful, and full of anger. The Abrahamic gods came from a pagan god of war according to many religious historians, so I guess that’s to be expected. It will be an ugly conversation, but we need to have it, if we’re to mature as a species and it may be necessary if we are to save ourselves. I can think of no other hope for the mid-east, other than to change minds, over time, about religion.
Of course I am open to other suggestions for how to start the conversation, which believers very much wish to avoid, but we need to grow up and have that conversation.
The Catholics are my next choice because the DNA evidence debunks original sin, without which the Church has no reason to exist. However that still leaves Islam. Better to face the music, go to the foundation, and illustrate that it’s been washed out, and to have this announced by influential Jews whose ancestors started it all. That, I think, would be a very poetic way to change the future for those bold enough to do so, and it washes out the foundation for all three Abrahamic religions at the same time.
Finally, I’m not sure that a lot of people who refer to themselves as Jews, Christians or Muslims really believe the dogma and doctrine. I think many are traditionalists who enjoy the traditions but don’t really believe. I think they will be more open about expressing their lack of belief if they are given an example to follow. The traditions are wonderful, and there’s no reason to stop many of them, but killing each other over imaginary gods needs to stop, and the best way to do that, I think, is to admit that they don’t exist. As mentioned elsewhere, this is not a short term project, but the sooner we start it the better.
“Its time to start discussing that reality”…..haha, you are so wrong.
But I’m not discussing it with you, its time to watch paint dry…sorry you are just too damn boring for my threshold.
So glad you cant tell when Im sincere or scarcastic!!! You know I always speak or type with a smile, you work it out if its important to you.
Xx
Don’t say “our attraction to religion”, I always found religions repulsive (I know I might be the exception rather than the rule).
When I say atheist, It’s just a description of these communist dictatorships, not a criticism of atheism. My point is precisely that people will fill the gap left by an absence of religion and build authoritarian systems based on an equally rigid and intolerant ideology, because authoritarianism is a universal human trait.
I have already commented about taking action. I disagree with you on the conclusion that Syria is at fault, but that’s almost beside the point…whoever is at fault in this particular case, it’s the same old human power struggle repeating itself indefinitely. Interestingly, Syria is a secular nation, as was Libya before we also opened it up for ISIS and other religious extremists….Our dictator friends in Saudi Arabia however are religious maniacs. Iraq was also a secular nation…it seems that we are expert at taking down all the walls that kept the religious barbarians at bay in the Middle East.
When you say “nobody kills in the name of atheism”, you are not quite correct. The Chinese specifically targeted Buddhist nuns and monks during the invasion of Tibet, and killed them specifically because they represented something communism had stated was a poison: religious beliefs. The Soviet Union persecuted and imprisoned many Siberian Indigenous people, specifically the shamans of the Nenet and other tribes, because of their religious beliefs.
Again, the greater problem is neither religion not atheism, neither dogma nor ideology, but authoritarianism, in my opinion. Humans will use any justification to establish their authority and dominance, gather obedient and loyal followers, and oppress or destroy other groups.
Perhaps we do need to study authoritarianism a little further, it seems to be a widespread mental illness.
By “our attraction to religion,” I meant the human species as a whole. It’s a social construct that pulls a clan together and gives them something to center their lives on, and when it first emerged, it was the only option to explain the natural world.
You said, ” I disagree with you on the conclusion that Syria is at fault…” I don’t recall saying that Syria was at fault. I recall saying that we acted quickly, perhaps before all the facts were in. I also pointed out that this event clouded other things that had been in the news previously, including the 200+ people we apparently killed by accident in Mosul.
I would argue that the Chinese and Soviets did not kill in the “name of atheism” but rather in the name of their own ideology.
This is all interesting, but why won’t my idea work? Why shouldn’t we start the “global discussion” that this very forum is named after, and why aren’t the Jews the most obvious ones to kick it off? We can Kumbaya in this site all day long and nothing will ever come of it. Bolder steps are required.
I have nothing against your idea…I think that humanity needs to start communicating in meaningful ways about many different topics.
Abrahamic religions are definitively poison, in my view. Whoever starts the conversation does not really matter, but all 3 of these religions need to be at the table and challenged. At this particular point in history however, Christians and Jews have stopped killing non believers…the only ones left back in the 14th century are fundamentalist Muslims, however politically incorrect this statement might be.
My question to you then is, how do you get these people to abandon their authoritarian streaks? Have you spoken to an evangelist lately?…To an orthodox Jew or a Wahhabi Muslim? Once again, I am pointing you back to the problem of authoritarianism, which you appear to be dismissing as “interesting”…but not really important enough to discuss.
Once again, I will point out that religion is a tool used by authoritarians. What sort of global conversation is going to lead to authoritarians deciding to become regular Joe’s?
Pulling the religious rug out from underneath them may destabilize them, and remove the tool they use to get their clans to kill people in other clans. If people decide to stop killing each other because they acknowledge the non-existence of their imaginary gods, doesn’t it follow that they will be less likely to be so easily manipulated?
Have you ever heard the joke about the drug addict who goes to see an hypnotist to get rid of this drug problem?
It works, but then he start drinking. He goes to see the hypnotist again, who cures him again. But then he start overworking. More hypnosis…and he becomes a chain smoker. More hypnosis, and he start gambling.
At last, in despair, he wants to be completely cured of all of his problems. He goes to see a different hypnotist…who cures him. He then become a sex addict and lives happily ever after.
Getting rid of religion will do about the same. It will not cure humanity of its authoritarianism, of it intolerance, of its fanaticism. It will simply remove one of it primary tool, to be quickly replaced by another.
Got it. The problem is too hard, so we should wait for Armageddon and let the Abrahamists win.
NO! We are humans. We solve problems. We can do this. We managed to live with the fact that the earth is not flat and we aren’t the center of the universe. We can come to grips with the fact that our primary religions are entirely bogus, and we can put that behind us in a generation or two and move on.
Or, as noted above, we can just let Armageddon show up and kiss our butts goodby. That’s always a valid option, but it’s not human character to give up so easily.
So far, in this discussion I started, the answer seems to be that we should sit around and sing Kumbaya until the whole thing blows up, because it’s too hard to do anything about and anything we try to do is futile. What we need to acknowledge, it seems, is not that our core beliefs regarding the Abrahamic gods are misplaced, but that we are losers, destined to fail.
You may be right, but failing to expend the effort to try, speaks badly of us as an evolved species.
You are the one who keeps saying that addressing authoritarianism is too hard. Admit that your real agenda is to get rid of all beliefs in what people call “God”. that’s your crusade…not to actually cure humanity of its real problems, but to get rid of all religions. I am all for eliminating religions, but that’s only a delaying tactic.
Once again, Authoritarianism is the real cause, religion is a tool among many other tools. We can solve problems? Why would authoritarianism be the only problem we cannot solve?
When did I say addressing authoritarianism is too hard? Quote please?
I disagree that it’s the core problem, but I don’t think I said anything about it being too hard. I was being sarcastic with those who see any sort of practical response to the issues at hand, as too hard.
I’ll ask again – what’s your plan? How are you going to spark a revolution to remove authoritarian traits from the human genome? We can easily debunk the Abrahamic religions, but how would we go about debunking authoritarianism? It’s part of our genetic makeup. I understand that you disagree, and that’s fine – but once again, Neale asked for solutions. I provided one. Nobody else has. The consensus seems to be that it’s too bloody hard to try anything. The tire is flat, and the gas tank is empty, so it makes no sense to fix the flat tire? NO. You fix the flat and then push the car to the gas station and fill it up. You have to start somewhere. I provided a starting point. What’s your practical starting point that could generate global awareness, in the same way my plan proposes to do?
How are you going to get Orthodox Jews, Wahhabi Muslims and Evangelists to the table, to admit that their religions are all based on myths? I am waiting…
I thought I had been pretty clear about that. By starting the conversation on a global stage in a big way, with a big splash. All hades will break lose, but that’s the idea. We have to do something big on a big scale. In my view.
I don’t care if I come across as arrogant – I take lessons! I care about the idea I proposed. You are the first to actually take a stab at it, so I thank you for that.
The first thing it would do is let all the millions who already know this, but won’t come out of their religious closets, that it’s OK to do so now.
I would like to go into more detail, but my son is in from out of town and I’m going to lunch.
Let me try this again. My last post gave an error message saying Disqus couldn’t load it.
As I mentioned, I’m only suggesting a way to kick-start the conversation. It’s unrealistic to expect immediate results. If the discussion started tomorrow, I wouldn’t see results in my lifetime, and my son probably not in his either, but the generation after that probably will. When I grew up atheists and gay people could go to jail. Now atheists openly challenge the hitherto unchallengeable Abrahamic religions and gay people can marry. That was an incredibly short period of time. It’s not inconceivable with our growing access to internet, that in another half dozen decades, religion will have fallen out of favor, just like smoking cigarettes, another bad habit we really cut into in a short period of time.
I haven’t seen any practical proposals to begin to eliminate authoritarianism, which seems to be the alternative to my suggestion, so I’m not sure what it is that I’ve dismissed.
Is my plan naive? Perhaps so, but that doesn’t mean it won’t work, and in any event, every idea is designed to spark new ideas, better ideas, but none have been put forward here yet. You can’t use authoritarianism to eliminate authoritarianism, can you? Isn’t that like going to war to end war? I’m talking about starting a global conversation. I’m amazed that people on a New Age site would object so strongly to an admission that the Abrahamic gods are mythical. Hmm. Perhaps there are a lot more deeply held legacy religious beliefs lingering below the surface than I would have expected. Mewabe, I thought you’d like the idea. I’m frankly a bit stunned by your opposition.
that’s why I like my idea of having a box where leaders put their lists of needs and things they don’t want up for all to see, and the idea of making everyone share what they have a lot of with all, especially with those who have less. If extremists and authoritarians believe there is something to be gained, at least they will show up to the meeting, and that’s a start, then we can pour the wine,once people have shared.
How do you go about “making everyone share what they have a lot of with all” without being authoritarian in the first place?
they will want to share because I would also have them prioritize these lists. They would have to say what they need or want most, and then the country that has a lot of that would do the same and we would compare lists and see who has a lot of which thing to share and then share. All would have a vested interest in sharing because all would get what they want most. I would make sure that everyone walks away from the table with the thing that they desire most.
“…because I wold also have them…”
This plan only works if YOU have authoritarian power in order to make it happen. Isn’t that like making war to end war?
I’m looking for practical suggestions. Barring some kind of unimaginable event, you are never going to be in a position to “make” world leaders to anything, HEBs or no HEBs, right?
Neale asked for solutions. I assume he wanted something that was at least remotely practical. How is your solution practical?
In the beginning man gave names to all of the animals and I named it in the beginning of my post…”If I am the leader of the world this is what i would do. ..”
If it works, it works. How do y ou kknow but President Trump might be listening?
Like I said, I think Neale was looking for practical suggestions.
what’s not practical about all the world sharing all the world’s most highly held as value commodities? This is practical. In truth, placing a ban on all religions is Highly impractical, as you cannot dictate what a person chooses to believe in the privacy of his/her/its own mind, as long as those holding said religious beliefs do not harm another. How is your plan practical is the real deal question?
Explain how you would put that into motion.
I never proposed a ban on all religions. Why do people always put words in my mouth that I never said? All I have proposed is a way to kick start a discussion about the Abrahamic religions, that begins with the premise that the Jews are not “chosen people” nor were they given a “promised land” because the Abrahamic gods cannot be supported based on the information we have today. I don’t propose banning religions. They need to die out on their own as a result of the eventual understanding that they are simply bogus and that they do far more harm than good. All I’m proposing is a conversation. I really don’t understand all the objections to that, particularly from Neale’s site where those legacy religions have been bashed and battered for years by Neale himself.
Such an announcement, I think, would generate all sorts of discussion – or it may fall flat with no notice whatsoever – but if it gets the notice I would hope for, then it could start the discussion. It most certainly won’t be a Kumbaya discussion. It will be a long, hard, bitter discussion, but just as we started the discussion about LGBTs a while back, in time, people’s minds change. Someone had to suggest we talk about slavery. Someone had to suggest we talk about women’s rights. Someone had to talk about discrimination against the disabled. Someone has to start the discussion about religion. I’ve suggested a way to start that conversation. Please tell me how you anticipate starting your plan.
I didn’t claim tohave a plan to place into motion my plan. I just claim to have a plan worth putting in motion. Your plan is bog down forever with nothing in it but dead bugs because no one is about to die their love of God. I’m sorry. Religion is as long and old as life itself. You can’t die God or the love of God, no matter how aggressively you sp out your belief. If we start a conversation, we have to allow others to express, don’t we? Expressing means out of the equation with aggressive talk.
“I never proposed a ban on all religions.”
For real dude? You wish to banish all gods. Isn’t that the core of all religions?
I wish to start a discussion acknowledging what we now know – that the Abrahamic gods are debunked. The issue was Syria and the middle east. They are killing each other over Abrahamic gods. The Jews started the Abrahamic religions. They are in the best position to open the discussion that hopefully will lead to an understanding that it is futile to continue killing each other over imaginary beings who live in the sky.
That does not mean I want to banish the gods. I want them to die a natural death, as we come to realize they never existed.
I can see the “banishing” of certain Ideas about God, but Gods are cemented in. Though, you would get rid of Abrahamic gods. How? what would be the magic word for say, the pope?
Start the discussion. Lay out the evidence and discuss it The evidence debunking he Abrahamic gods is extensive, but poorly communicated. I don’t know what they teach now, but when I was a kid we were taught that the Exodus was a historical event. Back then the evidence was not so clear – today that would be a lie, a complete misrepresentation. We need to get influential people (Jews in my opinion, for reasons previously stated) to lay out the evidence as part of their treatise, announce it to the world, make copies of it available everywhere, and let the floodgates open.
This discussion takes place every day in scholarly circles. The discussion needs to be moved to the public sphere.
The religion does not belong to the Jews though. invented by maybe but not belong. every redneck from Maine to… oh make a guess it’ll be correct, has adopted the belief. I don’t think anything stated by the Jews will help. as a matter of fact it would help the persecution of the Jews to make such a statement.
There is a danger, yes that an admission by the Jews that they are not chosen people given a promised land, would lead to more persecution, but I don’t think so. Muslims abhor the fact that Jews refer to themselves in this way. Acknowledging that this is not a valid position would be a positive move from their perspective. The problem is that in debunking their own god, they also debunk the Muslim god. So it will be a mixed message, but the conversation will be fun.
Now that’s an interesting point.
Great dialog here.
I think Patrick has a very important point in common with Neale: we have to trascend coercitive, sectarian, fundamentalist religion. Undoubtedly, for doing that, humanity will have to reject the most part of the Bible, Quran, and other religious texts, as just, primitive texts. Just as CWG proposes.
Have you read “The New Revelations”, or “God’s Message to the World”, friends? They talk about this.
The point is not abandoning or destroying all religions, or all of it, but transforming their dysfunctional dogma, and embracing Oneness spirituality. That is in the very core of every religion. But for doing that, we’ll have to aknowledge that VERY MUCH in religion and its ‘sacred books’ just don’t work.
I agree with Patrick that our culture has a BIG cornerstone from Abrahamic Religion. a HUGE part. Also from greek-roman culture, etc., but jewish-crhristian culture is a deep root.
It manifests NOT ONLY as religious dogma, but ALSO as cognitive, emotional, cultural background THAT APPARENTLY nothing has to do with religion. It’s like the ‘culturesphere’ that we breath since we’re born.
Of course that has to be changed, transformed.
Our separation, authoritarian culture didn’t originate from Abrahamic religions. It came from before, of course. But abrahamic religion sealed it almost ‘forever’. In our cultural inheritance.
Yes, a very hard work to do, but it can be done.
Because our real essence is Oneness, and we can’t deny our very essence forever.
Blessings…
I think a clue could be founded here:
As Mewabe said, now Christians don’t kill jews and crhistians don’t kill amongst them. Or not so much as centuries before. Christians just kill muslims now. A little advance! (bad joke).
How did we get this? How we get not killing jews or other christians for their beliefs? We’d have to research History to know.
One conclusion would be: they used PART of their core religious beliefs for that.
So, I think that we could use part of religion for debunking part of religion. Do I get understood?
Another idea:
Part of religion HAS debunked part of religious mithology. Many JEWS and CHRISTIANS, DO KNOW, that the Bible and religious beliefs are mitholoy, and nothing has to do with Love, Harmony, Peace, or other human values. So, we could work with these people that have debunked religious myths, but keep what they believe is the essence of religion: Love, Fraternity, Peace, Respect, Freedom, etc.
These religious people have advanced a lot ALREADY, in having global of diverse conversations usually named ECUMENISM.
I think Ecumenism could be an excellent tool for achieving what you’re proposing, Patrick.
Again, spiritual beliefs I think NEVER will be destroyed or abandoned, but yes, I think that we can trascend the authoritarian, sectarian, fundamentalist, and coercitive anti-values of religion.
Thank you for chiming in, Victor. I think the reason Christians and Jews don’t kill each other, is primarily because Christians got tired of killing other Christians. Religious wars of Christian vs Christian raged across Europe for at least 5 – 6 centuries. Coincidentally, Islam is about 5 – 6 centuries behind Christianity and they haven’t killed each other long enough to get tired of it yet.
What made America truly great to the Europeans was that we were the first western country to adopt a government that was not tied to any particular religion. That was very unique and different. We had a civil war over slavery, but we never had a religious war, such as the many that Europe experienced for centuries. It worked. Of course since then, and particularly now, there are certain religionists who would very much like to drag us back to those centuries, and they must be resisted.
Jews have always been in the minority, so mostly they were killed rather than killers, and given the mythology of the Conquest of Canaan, they weren’t even killers back then, even though they worshipped a war god. But they started the religion, and they are in the best position to start the conversation that could lead to less strife over time, if they admit they are not “chosen people” and they have no “promised land.’ The Muslims are going to like that. What they won’t like is the acknowledgement that the loss of the Jewish god, also means the loss of the Muslim god since they all rest on the same foundation – but it’s a starting point to talk.
The New Age folks, along with Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, scientists, etc. will all have a place at the table, but the focus, in my view, should be on the mythicism of the Abrahamic religions.
The only ONEness we have evidence for is the allegorical oneness of being part of the same universe, made of the same particles, the same star dust. The idea that consciousness, souls, gods, and so forth continue to exist after we die is, like the Abrahamic foundation, slowly being eroded, but admittedly it is not as far along. Spirituality will likely to continue as a human condition, but gods are not required to bring it about.
I think that it goes far beyond of “christians got tired…” We’d have to make accurate historical studies.
Authoritarianism and separatism are the problems, of course, supported and commanded for authoritarian, primitive, sectarian, fundamentalist religion and their ‘sacred books’.
I think that if you take away authoritarianism, sectarism, fundamentalism from religions, they perfectly could continue.
I have no trouble if somenoe wants to worship a god, a stone, a star, or a piece of wood.
The trouble is when that someone wants to impose their beliefs to others by violence, manipulation, or social constraints. That leads to war and more violence.
And when cutural memes, expresed in political, economical, social, etc., views have emerged from religious beliefs, it is a major problem.
Which is just our case.
Greetings.
You dont KNOW the Abrahamic God/s dont exist…you THINK that, because thats what you want to believe and actively seek out opposing information for personal reasons. Science doesnt work like that, it requires objectivity and acceptance. Scientists are cavemen stuck on the Tree of Knowledge, boring creatures! They still think our personalities are in our brains and we are nothing but physical matter. You are walking a backwards journey, watch out, you might fall off since you’ll be a flat Earther soon.
Change your name to Fred Flintstone!! Haha.
: )
I like Fred, he reminds me of John Goodman…. or is the other way around? Anyway, how did the rain treat you today? kindly I hope!!
I like Fred, too but I am more like Pebbles :))
I just want the girls cool dresses.
You cant be Fred, he’s a Freemason. You’ll get Patrick started on that. He’ll try to ban themm and their false God and non existant King Solomans temple, although they basically own the Western world, the US dollar and started education for all, and the libraries he must so love.
Fred has to be banned, he worships a false God!!!
Yes I think that with a high degree of confidence because we have more than sufficient evidence to confirm these points, but you’re turning to personal insults…. evidence of cognitive dissonance. You are also demonstrating a lack of knowledge regarding the current state of scientific research and knowledge. Unfortunately this is a rampant problem for which scientists themselves are partially to blame. My global conversation idea kicked off by your fellow Jews – and who know this – is intended to help with that problem as well.
But youve said before you like to antagonise, doing it to me deliberately a,though you know you cant, and that you cant be insulted.
Haha, round to me. Pkaying your game to get the exact reaction i predicted…sound familiar???????
Have I made any personal insults?
I said you cant insult me. But as a general rule, to dismiss the truths and experience of others, including history, as a load of crock would be insulting to people. As would saying their God doesnt exist, and their Jewish ancestors are liars and are at the helm of the worlds problems.
As Ive said, you wanted a food fight, and Im giving you one. Your way. At a very low level of dismissing your beliefs as rubbish. Isnt that the point?
Take care,
K
Well if we didn’t dismiss other people’s “load of crock” we would still be living in caves. It’s frankly, not my problem if you feel insulted because I talk about the religion that your ancestors started. I DID NOT SAY that the Jews are at the helm of the world’s problems. I said that the religion that they started, and not so much Judaism as the more evil sects that it spawned, are at the helm of many of the world’s problems, and in particular in the middle east.
“Someone has to start the discussion about religion.”
Actually, they don’t. The conversation could have its basis in the refugee crisis, territorial disputes, concern about authoritarianism leading us closer to nuclear war, the financial burden on countries to sustain wars and the reconstruction when it’s over… or even over the benefits of peace, our common suffering because of war, the toll on civilians because of war, or any number of other topics.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
We fundamentally disagree. We’ve tried to talk about all those things, but they ignore what’s at the core, at the bottom of it all, and that is, in my opinion, the belief in violent gods that don’t exist. You acknowledge that these gods don’t exist, but it seems to me that you assume these people are incapable of learning and accepting things that are true. I’m more optimistic.
You’ve gone on and on about what an uproar my suggestion would cause – but that’s the whole idea. Kumbaya has not worked, and in my view never will. Humans need to be shaken up once in a while. See Galileo, Bruno, etc.
We have tried to talk about “all those things?” When? Where? Who participated? I must have missed it. (And you’re ignoring that I left it open-ended with, “or any number of other topics.” I had not yet retrieved Neale’s Five Steps to Peace from my cloud storage, which to my knowledge hasn’t been discussed by global leaders.)
I do not “acknowledge that these gods don’t exist.” Who’s the Straw Man, now? I have been very clear, I think, that I don’t personally believe in Yaweh, the Christian God or Allah as they are presented in their respective sacred texts, parts of which archaeology and science have disproven. I think it’s entirely possible that they have been mistakenly recorded by fallible human beings, misunderstood, or misrepresented by those who have something to gain.
Yes, we disagree—about what the core issue is. I’m leaning much more towards mewabe’s suggestion that it’s authoritarianism, combined with territorialism.
I’d have no reason to sing “Kumbaya,” BTW, as the very next words are “my Lord,” and I don’t personally believe in the Lord God.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
“All those things” are the things you mentioned in your prior post, “refugee crisis, territorial disputes, concern about authoritarianism leading us closer to nuclear war, the financial burden on countries to sustain wars and the reconstruction when it’s over… or even over the benefits of peace, our common suffering because of war, the toll on civilians because of war, or any number of other topics.”
The world has been talking about “all these things” and more, for decade after decade, and ignored the core problem, which in my view, is religion. To some extent, at least, I anticipate that Neale would agree.
I have offered up a proposal to shake things up and get the conversation started about the core problem, rather than the symptoms, but you’re concerned that people will have their feelings hurt. I think that’s justified; you apparently don’t. We’re at an impasse. No sense in going further.
You are now “fine-tuning” your concept of the Abrahamic gods, adding caveats that I don’t recall being mentioned before. You didn’t talk about “presentation” in this thread until quite recently. Either Abraham was told that his people would be “chosen people” to be given a “promised land” or he was not (primarily because Abraham himself is almost surely a mythical person). It’s that simple. Admitting the truth, that there was no such meeting with Yahweh, there was no such promise, and on top of that the foundational pillars for Yahweh have washed away, is nothing more than stating the truth. I have more trust in truth providing the best path, I suppose, than others do.
You’re right—there’s no point in going any further. If a conversation can’t evolve and include different ways to express, then it’s dead. Not to mention your making assumptions and being dismissive.
I’m not “concerned that people will have their feelings hurt.” I’m concerned that the reaction to it would be violent, and your intention to kill religion might lead to more war.
“No sense in going further,” and then you go further. I’ve been clear that there may be misunderstandings or misreadings or manipulations about God from the start of my participation here. My words have evolved and refined, but my core concept has not changed.
Hi,
This is already being partially done, I think under UN. A decision was made that countries like New Zealand where I live, that have an abundance of water, would be official food producers, us mainly dairy and meat, for the rest of the world to save their precious water. We are even oumpung water from the ground for export, at a huge price, it was on the news last night. Consent granted to pump water from a world heritage park straight out to boats. Chiba and India were designated as big ‘factories’ to prevent pollution elsewhere, including being do called recycling centres for the world, when most rubbish sits on barges. Same deals with oil. We are currently being ‘raped’ by American companies fracking off shore, gas reserves seem to be the latest now we have ceased mining copious amounts of coal to ship to China. Indonesia and smaller islands are being ‘raped’ to provide the world with sand, especially for Singapore who need it as they extend their land mass with reclaimed land.
Its all happening, its called globalisation, and all officialised with agreements based on natural resources and the work force. With most these agreements arranged without our knowledge, they have also had to create an environment at high levels where there is a lot more acceptance of different races and religions. Its the middle class that make issues, often seeing them where there is none.
Take care,
K
Well, I think this is a good idea that we share what we have an abundance of. I don’t know about expleting the commodity completely, and I don’t think a country after sharing its valuable resource ought to have to continue doing so if that is endangering its resource in any way. I also think we should give new resources to countries so that they can devise more ways for producing often and more for themselves in the future .
take care,
M
You can’t use “M” chelle, you have to use “R” or “S” or “RS” for it to make sense. See why I’m using my real name?
lol I forgot that I’m in gnito 🙂 that rainbow god in my pic is a drawing I did. Picture doesn’t do him justice 🙂
It does only the justice you believe it does, be a little more proud of the time you put into it. I haven’t seen it and I’m proud of it. Man I hope it’s not a stick person!!!! LOL.
lI didn’t put that much time in it :)) He’s not a stick person lol He’s a firegod from a dream. ..I’m a working ona dream. .. I have a green one that is better but I can’t put him up yet. waiting on my new computer :))
When the time is right….
timing is everything :)) I’m getting ready to check on the earth zone, maybe blast some bee energy :)) what is fracking again :)) is it bad if I blow some gold somewhere in the earth’s core lol
Unload the gold wherever you wish, I hope I experience the outcome. I’ll let you know but it must come to me in a dream that I’ll never remember. I hate that! Bedtime for me. Nite
some I remember and some I just close my eyes and they roll but I’m drinking coffee now so I’m up for a bit. The gold is coming. .now I don’t want to explode anything. .weren’t you the one steering me clear of bonzaing the earth’s mantle ;))) I’ll just send it love with my honey b and be done. g’night
There are local ones in a lot of the larger cities. I sat on such a committee back when I was Admin of a church. We all went to meetings with open minds and hearts. I loved it, and it taught me a lot.
Love and Blessings Always,
~Annie
This is what is most needed…
I look forward to a plan for how you are going to start these discussions in Damascus, Jerusalem, Tehran, Baghdad, Cairo, etc.
Maybe if a large group of influential people acknowledged that they are not “chosen people” who were given a “promised land” you could start these sessions in the places they need to occur. However, if you have another suggestion, I’m all ears.
No Patrick, I am looking forward to your plan for how you are going to draw Wahhabi Muslims, Evangelists and Orthodox Jews into YOUR conversation, and get them all to think that they are all mistaken and that there is no God.
As far as Israel, you seem to have a bone to pick about that. Now please tell us WHERE the Jewish people, who were persecuted for many centuries by non-Jews, are supposed to live?
And do you realize that as an American you are living on stolen Indigenous land, that was stolen in the name of Manifest Destiny, a doctrine totally founded on Christianity? Do you see the hypocrisy?
I don’t know if we’re talking past each other, or I’m really that difficult to understand, or you’re being intentionally obtuse. My plan is to start the conversation with a global splash. It will be hard, it will take a long time, but what is the harm in starting the conversation in this way?
You and others have a liberal knee-jerk response in your minds that I have a problem with the Jews. If someone mentions Jews he must be an anti-semite. That seems to be the gut reaction and then the brain shuts down and can’t see beyond that. My problem is, once again, with the RELIGION that they started.
I have not proposed that the Jews need to leave their land, and have said that here repeatedly. They were given the land by the UN, not by their god. I don’t propose kicking them out, and never even insinuated that. Can I buy another STRAW MAN?
Yes, I realize that the US was taken as a result of the RELIGION that the Jews started!!!! If they had not named Yahweh as their monotheist god, there would be no Christianity to rape the undeveloped world. Without Yahweh, there is nothing for Jesus to save us from. He is moot. I don’t see how Christianity could have come into existence without the invention of Judaism first, but I’m open to how that might have occurred. Christianity and Islam are both outgrowths of Judaism. Do you somehow deny this? If so, you would be the first.
So would you get rid of science because if science hadn’t looked into the composition of matter and discovered the atom, Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have never occurred?
Don’t tell me that you do not see that you are using the exact same logic and conclusion about the Jews staring their religion and the conflicts happening in the Middle East because of it.
I am sure that in your mind in makes sense, but it really doesn’t. You need to come up with a better argument and a better plan to rid the planet of the God concept, as that is your quasi religious crusade.
Interesting debate going on…with little agreement.
Why is it that much of humanity thinks that differences equal conflicts, and that we all have to agree in order to get along?
We have already discovered, many of us, that we do not all have to look or act alike in order to “tolerate” each other, with the lessening of racist and sexist attitudes.
Why do we think that we all must have the same outlook and beliefs, or non-beliefs, in order to have peace?
Everyone is attempting to impose their ways on others…Except Jews, interestingly, and I mention this because Patrick thinks Jews started it all. When was the last time a Jew knocked on your door to discuss your salvation and conversion to Judaism???? Are Jews competing with American Evangelicals in Africa or in the Brazilian rainforest to gain converts? Are Jews setting up Sharia law courts In Europe and America?
The more intelligent and educated a person is, the less authoritarian they will tend to be, and the more tolerant. Jewish people have a tendency to have more humanitarian views (they allied themselves with the civil rights movement for example), and to be less authoritarian, accordingly (who was the last Jewish dictator?)
As a side note about the Middle East, I also want to remind everyone that Israel is literally surrounded by enemies, who from its creation as a state swore that they would drive the Jews back to the sea on a trail of blood. Who is the highly intolerant and dangerous party in this situation?
The problem might be, and I only invite you to consider the possibility, authoritarianism, which seems to originate from ignorance, from a lack of proper education, and perhaps even a lack of intelligence. By education I do not mean learning to become a cog in the machine, a specialized professional robot as in America, where for example you meet lawyers who can’t spell and have zero knowledge about history…I mean a well rounded education that emphasizes creativity, imagination and critical thinking.
There is absolutely no reason why we should all have to think alike in order to get along and have peace. Diversity, creativity and multiplicity are the very essence of life, of nature, of the universe itself!
Uniformity on the other hand is the wet dream of all authoritarians, who come in all forms and shapes, and can even be found on this blog.
Perfect.
You’re on a roll Professor, and thank you. Thank you fron my Jewish ancestors who cant defend false accusations against them. Accusations only made up, along with the myth that God created Christianity, because it serves the purpose of others when unable to express themselves alone. When you need an army, but cant round one up…whats plan B? Create false enemies and hope others will believe you.
Passivity is the strongest means to override dominance, when dictators and controllers realise the only person interested in their ways, is themselves, they will soon tire of attempting to control the person in the mirror. And lose their own need for control when realising that what they seek from others will still not serve their needs.
No dictator or authoritarian wants control or to be in their own ideal world alone. But ultimately, thats the only world they can get. A world of wet dreams!
Take care,
K
You are welcome KIrsten…hey I might have Jewish blood myself, from Northeastern Spain (Catalonia…I have a lot of mixed blood). I long suspected I did…
You are right about letting the controllers control an empty space. Among Native Americans, if a “chief” began to have Napoleonic tendencies, the whole camp would silently move away in the middle of the night, and he would find himself waking up alone on the prairies in the morning. I like the subtle humor in this.
We can’t move like this anymore (although I like and support the current California Independence campaign, to separate from the US), but we can refuse to participate. Passive non compliance.
Another strategy…I wrote this a while ago:
How do you overcome that which is obsessed with the ideas of might, of achieving near absolute supremacy, dominance and control?
You do not resist but grant it such power, until it becomes so burdened under its weight that it collapses from within.
(I think that it is what might be currently happening to America, a nation that has forgotten the lessons of the Roman Empire).
Take care!
Fopressor
Hi ya Mewabearwhisperer,
Israelite bloodlines! Yes you do, I can tell Israelites a mile off. I think well less than a quarter are Jewish now, and lots of Jews arent Israelites.
Most are mongrels, but its in our blood and spirit. Scripture states that. But many do carry the ‘pretty gene’, slimmer builds with cheekbones and a smaller chin. Plus a generally straight nose and higher eyebrows. Brown wavy hear is a thing too. We are born fighters and cannot tolerate injustice. Scripture states we are all tested for righteousness and justice, and certainly are. Thats what a cross represents. Don’t tell Patrick though…he asked for a food fight, Im giving him one but if he hears that about you, he might fire moldy bread at ya!!
I have an amazing peaceful surfing story as well. Much cooler than yours, of course. I was surfing in Hawaii when I was 9 and fell off. My sister called my name, so I turned to her, and bam, she surfed straight into my face and broke my nose.
Complete peace, no fear, just like you.
Oh hang on, mine was possibly that I had no time to feel anything, then was in pain shock.
And I have a drowning one too. Drowned in a barrel thing of roof lead paint when I was 1. Mum couldnt find me for ages, then obviously freaked to find me dead. Her screams bought a neighbour 3 houses away, a cop who had just done a cpr course, it was a new thing then. He did it, then the ambos did for ages, and I finally puked. Freaky to have been dead. Even freakier to have few long term effects of lead poisoning. Other than my 5 arms, 12 toes and the brain capacity of a baboon, with butt and body hair to match. I think my unfortunate looking head and missing parts are probably genetic.
Have a good Easter weekend, I know you’ll be in to it!!
Take care,
Kirstinasugarhangoverstate.
Good description…mongrel, slim, straight nose, wavy brown hair, all that. Damn you are good, when did you fly your drone around, I never saw it?
Face surfing takes some practice…you shouldn’t have given up so easily.
Drowning in paint? So you wanted to be an artist?…how was your near death experience? Did you see a big light at the end of the tunnel (or is that the last thing a deer sees on a highway?)
I once had a near birth experience…I saw the light at the end of the tunnel and though “no way, I ain’t leaving this place, you can’t make me, it’s too crazy out there”.
Hey I am burning the midnight oil on another deadline, and I was listening to poetry on Youtube (yup!)…I will share this one, inspiration for everyone…
Take care, Happy Mid April!
Mewannagotosleepzzzzzz…
Roll the Dice
by Charles Bukowski
if you’re going to try, go all the
way.
otherwise, don’t even start.
if you’re going to try, go all the
way.
this could mean losing girlfriends,
wives, relatives, jobs and
maybe your mind.
go all the way.
it could mean not eating for 3 or 4 days.
it could mean freezing on a
park bench.
it could mean jail,
it could mean derision,
mockery,
isolation.
isolation is the gift,
all the others are a test of your
endurance, of
how much you really want to
do it.
and you’ll do it
despite rejection and the worst odds
and it will be better than
anything else
you can imagine.
if you’re going to try,
go all the way.
there is no other feeling like
that.
you will be alone with the gods
and the nights will flame with
fire.
do it, do it, do it.
do it.
all the way
all the way.
you will ride life straight to
perfect laughter, its
the only good fight
there is.
Howdy Mehadsleepihope,
Re the other bit..thats great. Followed by by the poem Devil Went Down To Georgia. The one you sent should be a song, I hate poetry BUT believe that song lyrics are the cream of the crop with poetry.
I listen to music all day everyday…drums the rhythm of life, harmonies people working together to create perfection and allowing the kne shom is best to naturally take the lead role etc.
Listen to a Kiwi song One Day by Op Shop, youtube it with lyrics. Beautiful, as well as the lyrics alone. A similar story to the poem I think.
Sorry, I have no drone, and know nothing about you other than what youve said in here, although remember your Native American guide said something as a thought that I assumed was a name, that you said was close to where you life, and instinctly there is an adult daughter or daughter figure and an angel name, that could be yours. Thats it. Although I dont quite believe all your deadlines are for artwork for cereal boxes and things!!!!
Never had a nde that I recall, but I think Id respond the same as you. What I know is my comfort zone for now, even if my physical body died I think I would choose mortality, the thought of having to shift elsewhere, knowing no one, in a strange land without knowing how it works with just the clothes on my back is far too daunting to comprehend. Obviously not the travelling or backpacking type!!! All I know is going from home, to holiday at other ‘white man’ places in hotels! No interest in other cultures or worlds, I like my boring world!
Take care, and Happy Jesus Day. Haha.
K
I took out the poem because I did not know anything about this author, but read that he had Nazi sympathies…although he was supposed to be Jewish. Anyway, too much confusion!
It’s better on Youtube, in audio with music in the background, than in the written form. The guy who reads it has a deep Leonard Cohen type of voice and diction, perfect.
Yes the song (with lyrics) One Day is beautiful…
I can’t live without music either…except when I am in the outdoor.
There was a daughter figure, in truth a step granddaughter but she was like a daughter and very close to me (her actual father was a prick). Now part of my ex family…everyone went their own way. Anyway I was able to help and support her emotionally and psychologically while she was going through a very rough time…her life turned out good…And