[Joel Troxell]

JosephM, on Aug 23 2007, 01:53 PM, said:

Warm Greetings Joel,

It seems to me that 'sufferring' plays a major role in the "redemption" of anyone without exclusion. It seems to me that one doesn't even look for the 'kingdom of heaven' until one has discovered his residence is elsewhere. In the world, there are numerous kinds of sufferring. Redemption, by definition cannot take place unless one is rescued or redeemed from a condition. Without sufferring, redemption would not even be sought nor recognized. Redemption is meaningless to one who has not or does not suffer.

Just a view to consider,
Love and Peace,
JM

JM,

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Two more questions, if I may:

1) Do you think the world or universe is "hard-wired" to facilitate this process through something like laws of karma?

2) Do you believe that there are people who do not externally suffer, yet nonetheless see the need for redemption?

Peace,
Joel

[Cynthia]

Joel Troxell, on Aug 24 2007, 04:10 AM, said:

JM,

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Two more questions, if I may:

1) Do you think the world or universe is "hard-wired" to facilitate this process through something like laws of karma?

2) Do you believe that there are people who do not externally suffer, yet nonetheless see the need for redemption?

Peace,
Joel

1) I'd like to believe in Karma - and it does seem that "what goes around comes around" - but that may be my wish for fairness (hardwired per Scientific American Mind, Aug. 2007) more than realistic perception. :>

2) I think the perception of suffering is universal. Clearly the reality of levels of suffering allows for vastly different objective experience.

As for redemption, I think the comment about it being easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven is about this. If you don't have to turn to God, as a human being, you're just not very likely to do so.
Do some people? Of course. That may speak to their level of internal suffering or cognitive dissonance upon being exposed to other people's suffering - ex. buddha.

Godspeed. Glad the discussions are getting started again! I've missed this place.

This post has been edited by Cynthia: 24 August 2007 - 06:48 AM

[canajan, eh?]

JosephM, on Aug 23 2007, 09:37 AM, said:

Jen,

Yes I meant evolve as in evolution of consciousness. I don't consider them 'lesser' beings at all but rather at a different stage of evolution. 'Greater' and 'Lesser' have no meaning to me as they are subjective and relative terms. Also, I have by my comments, neither given or absolved pedophiles of their responsibility for their actions. Perhaps as with HATCHER, I do not 'see' them as really believing what they are doing is 'wrong' and neither is their actions a matter of society teaching or mentoring them 'a proper way to act'. Perhaps, They will learn from their sufferring as do all of us in time. Just a different view to consider which makes understanding and unconditional forgiveness easier for myself.... no more... no less.

Love and Peace,
JM

Perhaps, Joseph, you and I are using the word "evolve" in different ways from each other. When I read your comments, this is what I think you're saying: (please correct me if I'm wrong). You seem to be saying that pedophiles (for the sake of example) are acting neither with rightness nor wrongness, that pedophiles don't believe what they're doing is wrong, and that's okay with you. You see neither rightness nor wrongness in other people's actions -- you simply see a state of being, or a state of evolution, and that's okay with you.

The state of evolution you believe in involves suffering, and it's your belief that pedophiles (for the sake of example) will learn from their suffering, as do all of us in time. This understanding of a pedophile's consciousness (or evolution thereof) allows you to find unconditional forgiveness for them and others (do I have that right?)

So Joseph, I have to ask you . . . where does the pedophile's soul fit into this understanding? Is it your contention that the pedophile's soul is evolving? Is it your contention that the pedophile's soul doesn't care at all about the suffering he/she is causing while abusing vulnerable children? Is it your contention that God the Mother and God the Father don't care about the pedophile's actions? Is it your contention that God the Mother and God the Father are so unloving and so uncaring towards their eternal, heavenly, angelic children that they would purposely bring into a being a soul who is too stupid and too selfish to care that pedophilia causes incredible pain and suffering for all angels?

Do you wish to state in front of all the teachers and ministers and young people who read this site that you truly believe with all your heart and all your mind that "I do not 'see' them as really believing what they are doing is 'wrong' and neither is their actions a matter of society teaching or mentoring them 'a proper way to act'. " Do you believe that teaching and mentoring make no difference to the lives of human beings or other loving creatures (for example, family pets) on this planet? Do you believe that careful, kind, attentive, loving parenting of children makes no difference to a child's future life? Do you believe that some children are simply "fated" to be pedophiles because of the stage of evolution they're at?

I am a mother, and my children are the greatest joy of my life. I spent twelve years being a stay-at-home mom before I returned to the paid work force, even though I had an advanced education and an outstanding scholarly record before I (purposely) began a family with my then-husband. I am under no illusions about my son, who is now a young man. (My younger son, as you may recall, died of leukemia.) If I had abused my son, ignored him, told him he was unworthy before God because of original sin (which I obviously don't believe in), told him it was stupid for a boy to draw pictures, stupid for a boy to love books and history, then I imagine he might have turned out much like a young man he grew up with, who was using cocaine by the age of 18 and is unable to sustain a loving relationship with anyone. Instead, my son is a young man I'm very much proud of, because he's kind, and empathetic, and polite, and truly gifted as an artist, and he knows how to commit to a loving, monogamous partnership.

Naturally, I had help in the raising of my sons. There were wonderful teachers in the public school system here. We had caring physicians in our publicly funded health care system. We had neighbours who look out for all the younger children on the street where we lived. We all helped each other try to be the best people we were/are capable of being.

I live in a community I'm proud of. That's because so many individuals are trying their hardest not to "evolve" but simply to listen to their hearts (the Kingdom Within) and help look after each other -- and some even ask for God's help in doing so.

Love Jen

[JosephM]

Joel Troxell, on Aug 24 2007, 05:10 AM, said:

JM,

Interesting. Thanks for the reply.

Two more questions, if I may:

1) Do you think the world or universe is "hard-wired" to facilitate this process through something like laws of karma?

2) Do you believe that there are people who do not externally suffer, yet nonetheless see the need for redemption?

Peace,
Joel

Joel,

1. Yes, That would be one way to put it into language with minimal distortion.

2. It would be more accurate to say sufferring is internal rather than external from a human point of view. Pain 'may' be external but sufferring is from within the mind. Nevertheless, I would ask you....redemption from what? If one is complete at at peace without ANY sufferring, what need is there for redemption?

Love and Peace,
JM

[Joel Troxell]

Cynthia, on Aug 24 2007, 06:44 AM, said:

1) I'd like to believe in Karma - and it does seem that "what goes around comes around" - but that may be my wish for fairness (hardwired per Scientific American Mind, Aug. 2007) more than realistic perception. :>

2) I think the perception of suffering is universal. Clearly the reality of levels of suffering allows for vastly different objective experience.

As for redemption, I think the comment about it being easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven is about this. If you don't have to turn to God, as a human being, you're just not very likely to do so.
Do some people? Of course. That may speak to their level of internal suffering or cognitive dissonance upon being exposed to other people's suffering - ex. buddha.

Godspeed. Glad the discussions are getting started again! I've missed this place.

As for point 1, I'd have to agree. I don't see a sense of universal justice or karma in the physical universe. Pulling it into the Judeo-Christian framework, Job's three "friends" are a good personification of this view of suffering - "You are suffering because you have done something wrong!" When in fact, (and I'm putting this in trite terms) it simply came down to a wager between God and the devil.

I've been away from here for a while, too. From what I remember, this place was hopping with activity. Hopefully it will get back to that.

Peace,
Joel

[JosephM]

canajan, eh?, on Aug 24 2007, 08:52 AM, said:

Perhaps, Joseph, you and I are using the word "evolve" in different ways from each other. When I read your comments, this is what I think you're saying: (please correct me if I'm wrong). You seem to be saying that pedophiles (for the sake of example) are acting neither with rightness nor wrongness, that pedophiles don't believe what they're doing is wrong, and that's okay with you. You see neither rightness nor wrongness in other people's actions -- you simply see a state of being, or a state of evolution, and that's okay with you.

The state of evolution you believe in involves suffering, and it's your belief that pedophiles (for the sake of example) will learn from their suffering, as do all of us in time. This understanding of a pedophile's consciousness (or evolution thereof) allows you to find unconditional forgiveness for them and others (do I have that right?)

You have restated what I have written as accurately as one could expect without quoting. You have stated it correctly but we are working with a limitation of words and their meaning as pertains to individual souls and I cannot say if you have the understanding 'right', but I will say yes for convenience.

From eh?:

So Joseph, I have to ask you . . . where does the pedophile's soul fit into this understanding? Is it your contention that the pedophile's soul is evolving?

Yes.

Quote

Is it your contention that the pedophile's soul doesn't care at all about the suffering he/she is causing while abusing vulnerable children?

No contention here Jen. The pedophile "knows not what he/she is doing" . If they 'knew' ... they would not do it.

Quote

Is it your contention that God the Mother and God the Father don't care about the pedophile's actions?

Again, no contention here Jen. God is well aware of all actions as 'all knowing' includes knowledge beforehand of these possibilities. It's not a case of 'caring' or 'not caring'. God loves the pedophile no 'greater' or 'less' than me or you. In my view, God is not human that he is limited by our understanding of 'caring' and divine justice will rectify any perceived 'problem' one may have with pedophiles. It is not a question of will they evolve but when.

Quote

Is it your contention that God the Mother and God the Father are so unloving and so uncaring towards their eternal, heavenly, angelic children that they would purposely bring into a being a soul who is too stupid and too selfish to care that pedophilia causes incredible pain and suffering for all angels?

God knows all that is by virtue of being ALL That IS. Perhaps your understanding of unloving and uncaring is limited by your mind. (no offence meant as this applies to all of us) There are no accidents in this world and your question is too loaded for me to answer except by this statement.

Quote

Do you wish to state in front of all the teachers and ministers and young people who read this site that you truly believe with all your heart and all your mind that "I do not 'see' them as really believing what they are doing is 'wrong' and neither is their actions a matter of society teaching or mentoring them 'a proper way to act'. " Do you believe that teaching and mentoring make no difference to the lives of human beings or other loving creatures (for example, family pets) on this planet? Do you believe that careful, kind, attentive, loving parenting of children makes no difference to a child's future life? Do you believe that some children are simply "fated" to be pedophiles because of the stage of evolution they're at?

Jen, I have already said what I have said in front of whoever has read my posts. They do not need dramatics or rhetoric additions even in the form of questions. Perhaps, I have triggered something inside of you which you have given to me as power which I have no desire to excercise in you. There is no requirement for one to agree with me.

Quote

I am a mother, and my children are the greatest joy of my life. I spent twelve years being a stay-at-home mom before I returned to the paid work force, even though I had an advanced education and an outstanding scholarly record before I (purposely) began a family with my then-husband. I am under no illusions about my son, who is now a young man. (My younger son, as you may recall, died of leukemia.) If I had abused my son, ignored him, told him he was unworthy before God because of original sin (which I obviously don't believe in), told him it was stupid for a boy to draw pictures, stupid for a boy to love books and history, then I imagine he might have turned out much like a young man he grew up with, who was using cocaine by the age of 18 and is unable to sustain a loving relationship with anyone. Instead, my son is a young man I'm very much proud of, because he's kind, and empathetic, and polite, and truly gifted as an artist, and he knows how to commit to a loving, monogamous partnership.

Naturally, I had help in the raising of my sons. There were wonderful teachers in the public school system here. We had caring physicians in our publicly funded health care system. We had neighbours who look out for all the younger children on the street where we lived. We all helped each other try to be the best people we were/are capable of being.

I live in a community I'm proud of. That's because so many individuals are trying their hardest not to "evolve" but simply to listen to their hearts (the Kingdom Within) and help look after each other -- and some even ask for God's help in doing so.

Love Jen

Teaching and mentoring is part of evolving. Every experience plays a part in the whole. Perhaps you have read too much into your restatement in your original paragraph, of which I have concurred is correct in word. Consciousness evolves as an interplay of All That Is. That excludes nothing and thereby I have included sufferring.


Love and Peace to you Jen and All,
JM

[Joel Troxell]

JosephM, on Aug 24 2007, 08:01 AM, said:

Nevertheless, I would ask you....redemption from what? If one is complete at at peace without ANY sufferring, what need is there for redemption?

I would say that I'd first have to disagree with the assumption that the universe is hard-wired for justice, and that suffering plays a part in personal redemption. While I wish I could agree with the idea that when a person is free from the experience of internal suffering, they have reached some sort of spiritual homoestasis with the world around them, I can't buy it for a few reasons:

First, we are talking about personal experience. To make experience and one's existential perception of the world one's measure of where one falls in the process of redemption seems to make one person, who is very small in the scheme of things, their own absolute. There is an Absolute beyond our sense perception and even the physical world itself, and it is this Absolute that determines the need for personal redemption, or lack thereof. A person is capable of figuratively yanking out his or her moral compass, experience life free of any internal suffering, and yet commit some of the most atrocious acts known to man. Although this person may not experience any inner turmoil, they are very much in need of redemption.

Second, oftentimes suffering has no observable redemptive quality whatsoever. Sometimes, it is by blind biology and chance. For instance, the victim of molestation or some other crime who must endure years of therapy and counseling even though they are guilty of only being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or people with schizophrenia. They often suffer tremendously, and they are only guilty of inheriting bad genes. There is no order to suffering. Sometimes bad people get off the hook and good deeds get punished. I'm a social worker. I can tell you from experience that the good liars get what they want and honest people get the shaft, and oftentimes there's little I can do about it.

Third, what does such a view do to the person of Jesus? No one was more righteous, yet no one suffered more. He endured the allegation of being a bastard, was mainly only understood by evil spirits and misinterpreted by those closest to him, was followed after in order to see magic tricks and food multiplications, had nowhere to lay his head, and ultimately was rejected by his own people and crucified by Roman authorities - all while not even reaching 40 years of age. The dialogues we have preserved in the gospels portray a man with tremendous internal turmoil and loneliness. According to this view, there might not be anyone more in need of redemption than Jesus.

What we need redeemed from is another question altogether, and if you like I'll take a stab at it later, but the possibility that a person who is free of suffering and at peace within himself is not in need of redemption is not something I would agree with. While it sounds like a nice way to experience life, I think they are not exactly dependent on one another.

Peace,
Joel

[JosephM]

Joel Troxell, on Aug 24 2007, 10:05 AM, said:

I would say that I'd first have to disagree with the assumption that the universe is hard-wired for justice, and that suffering plays a part in personal redemption. While I wish I could agree with the idea that when a person is free from the experience of internal suffering, they have reached some sort of spiritual homoestasis with the world around them, I can't buy it for a few reasons:

That's fine Joel. We are each free to have our own view.

Quote

First, we are talking about personal experience. To make experience and one's existential perception of the world one's measure of where one falls in the process of redemption seems to make one person, who is very small in the scheme of things, their own absolute. There is an Absolute beyond our sense perception and even the physical world itself, and it is this Absolute that determines the need for personal redemption, or lack thereof. A person is capable of figuratively yanking out his or her moral compass, experience life free of any internal suffering, and yet commit some of the most atrocious acts known to man. Although this person may not experience any inner turmoil, they are very much in need of redemption.

I believe I understand where you are coming from. However, it is my view that in time you will not see the world or universe as so big and yourself as so small. In fact, it is my view that the opposite is true but I offer you no proof as it must be experienced for yourself and become self evident.

To commit 'atrocious acts' or those that injure others, it would, in my view, be impossible to experience no inner turmoil or sufferring. Whatever is done to another is done to oneself. This is a great spiritual truth. I cannot hurt you and be at peace inside just as darkness cannot exist in light. Nevertheless, you are entiltled to disagree. I take it by your statement that you have not yet realized this connection I speak of.

Quote

Second, oftentimes suffering has no observable redemptive quality whatsoever. Sometimes, it is by blind biology and chance. For instance, the victim of molestation or some other crime who must endure years of therapy and counseling even though they are guilty of only being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or people with schizophrenia. They often suffer tremendously, and they are only guilty of inheriting bad genes. There is no order to suffering. Sometimes bad people get off the hook and good deeds get punished. I'm a social worker. I can tell you from experience that the good liars get what they want and honest people get the shaft, and oftentimes there's little I can do about it.

Yes, oftentimes suffering has no 'observable redemptive quailty when looked at with the conditioned mind and eyes of flesh. Also, though you may not agree, there are no accidents and it would be impossible for you to be at the 'wrong place' at the 'wrong time'. Perhaps you do not believe that God is in control and things are not as they seem? Is not every hair on your head numbered? Some believe God is at war with another called Satan who seems to be winning but I can share no such view and know of no shaft that I have as an honest person received.

Quote

Third, what does such a view do to the person of Jesus? No one was more righteous, yet no one suffered more. He endured the allegation of being a bastard, was mainly only understood by evil spirits and misinterpreted by those closest to him, was followed after in order to see magic tricks and food multiplications, had nowhere to lay his head, and ultimately was rejected by his own people and crucified by Roman authorities - all while not even reaching 40 years of age. The dialogues we have preserved in the gospels portray a man with tremendous internal turmoil and loneliness. According to this view, there might not be anyone more in need of redemption than Jesus.

How do you know that no one sufferred more or was more righteous than Jesus? Did you receive this from reading or did God reveal this to you?
As far as Jesus being portrayed as with tremendous internal turmoil and loneliness.... then why is it recorded he said "My Peace I give unto you" and "Let not your heart be troubled" and "Take my yoke upon you for my yoke is easy and my burden is light" ? Perhaps his words are spiritual and you are looking with eyes of this world?
In my view, Jesus was redeemed and in need of nothing as long as he remained in the spirit and kingdom of heaven which was at hand even then. He was not in inner turmoil when others in the boat were frightened for their lives. No, Jesus was a man who was complete in God and in his divine nature. You can be also.

Quote

What we need redeemed from is another question altogether, and if you like I'll take a stab at it later, but the possibility that a person who is free of suffering and at peace within himself is not in need of redemption is not something I would agree with. While it sounds like a nice way to experience life, I think they are not exactly dependent on one another.

Peace,
Joel

That is fine Joel my brother. Hopefully, I have given you another view or understanding to consider on your journey.

Love and Peace,
JM

This post has been edited by JosephM: 24 August 2007 - 01:20 PM

[Joel Troxell]

JosephM, on Aug 24 2007, 02:07 PM, said:

That's fine Joel. We are each free to have our own view.

Certainly.

JosephM, on Aug 24 2007, 02:07 PM, said:

To commit 'atrocious acts' or those that injure others, it would, in my view, be impossible to experience no inner turmoil or sufferring. Whatever is done to another is done to oneself. This is a great spiritual truth. I cannot hurt you and be at peace inside just as darkness cannot exist in light. Nevertheless, you are entiltled to disagree. I take it by your statement that you have not yet realized this connection I speak of.

The "great spiritual truth" you mentioned aside, we are still talking about experience. Although all things may be connected at a deep level, the question is whether or not a person actually experiences pain when they do harm to another, regardless of what is actually happening spiritually. I can tell you from personal experience that I have at times harmed others and took a deep sense of satisfaction and enjoyment out of it. I have witnessed others do the same. Read Chairman Nao's diary. He described the first time he saw Soviet Communists beating a man as something almost orgasmic in his body. You are attempting to describe somethign as a law, be it spiritual, scientific or otherwise. For a law to be true, it must be true 100% of the time, and I can tell you that my own experience says otherwise.

JosephM, on Aug 24 2007, 02:07 PM, said:

Yes, oftentimes suffering has no 'observable redemptive quailty when looked at with the conditioned mind and eyes of flesh. Also, though you may not agree, there are no accidents and it would be impossible for you to be at the 'wrong place' at the 'wrong time'. Perhaps you do not believe that God is in control and things are not as they seem? Is not every hair on your head numbered? Some believe God is at war with another called Satan who seems to be winning but I can share no such view and know of no shaft that I have as an honest person received.
How do you know that no one sufferred more or was more righteous than Jesus? Did you receive this from reading or did God reveal this to you?

*rolls eyes* Ok, now you are telling me through which "eyes" I am viewing the world?

Let's look at the passage you alluded to in this response:

Matthew 10:29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. 30And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows (NIV).

Sounds comforting, no? Keep it in context. All but one of the men Jesus spoke to here went on to die horrible physical deaths. There were countless others that were burned or fed to the beasts in the Coliseum. It is best interpreted in a general sense about death. The Father's will is that all physical things eventually die and decay. Sparrows fall to the ground, people die, garments grow old, "the grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of the Lord will endure forever (Is. 40:8)." It is in this general sense that the Father wills these things, simply because until the veil of this life, of this flawed order, is pulled away, there is no way to see the light.

But to assume that God is directly responsible for every act of suffering makes him into a monster. God actively wills the molestation of children, presumably because they karmically deserve it? God actively wills people to be born with chemical imbalances? God actively willed the Holocaust? Job's three friends said the same thing about Job's plight. They assumed the universe to be fair and just, so Job must've done something wrong. But in reality it was little more than a divine wager, and Job's friends were forced to eat crow for speaking of God in that manner.

JosephM, on Aug 24 2007, 02:07 PM, said:

As far as Jesus being portrayed as with tremendous internal turmoil and loneliness.... then why is it recorded he said "My Peace I give unto you" and "Let not your heart be troubled" and "Take my yoke upon you for my yoke is easy and my burden is light" ? Perhaps his words are spiritual and you are looking with eyes of this world?
In my view, Jesus was redeemed and in need of nothing as long as he remained in the spirit and kingdom of heaven which was at hand even then. He was not in inner turmoil when others in the boat were frightened for their lives. No, Jesus was a man who was complete in God and in his divine nature. You can be also.
That is fine Joel my brother. Hopefully, I have given you another view or understanding to consider on your journey.

Love and Peace,
JM

As for Jesus being a man completely at peace, I'll leave you with this passage from Isaiah 53:3-5

He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

The author of I Peter (likely Peter himself) quoted a portion of this passage to refer to Jesus. This would seem to affirm an eyewitness perspective of Jesus as a "man of sorrows." Let us not forget Jesus' affinity for social outcasts and desolate places, or the garden of Gethsemane. By his own words about foxes having dens and birds having nests, but teh Son of Man not having a place to lay his head, we can see that Jesus was a man not at home(literally and figuratively) in this world. As for the passages you quoted: perhaps they are Jewish statements and you are reading them through a different lens. It was an allegory of the time that when a person became a rabbi's student that they had taken that teacher's "yoke" upon him. All Jesus was saying was that his teaching and discipline was not stern or harsh. But the discipline of the world and the so-called just system of karma that you are suggesting, that yoke is burdensome and cruel. God is fundamentally alien to it, and remains hidden from plain view. He must be found through other means than introspective observation of cause and effect.

Peace,
Joel

[JosephM]

Joel Troxell, on Aug 25 2007, 05:49 AM, said:

Certainly.
The "great spiritual truth" you mentioned aside, we are still talking about experience. Although all things may be connected at a deep level, the question is whether or not a person actually experiences pain when they do harm to another, regardless of what is actually happening spiritually. I can tell you from personal experience that I have at times harmed others and took a deep sense of satisfaction and enjoyment out of it. I have witnessed others do the same. Read Chairman Nao's diary. He described the first time he saw Soviet Communists beating a man as something almost orgasmic in his body. You are attempting to describe somethign as a law, be it spiritual, scientific or otherwise. For a law to be true, it must be true 100% of the time, and I can tell you that my own experience says otherwise.

Interesting response. You might be surprised but your phisical experience is not differrent than mine. The question is of course ..... Who really are you. Are you the physical temporal Joel Troxell having a spiritual experience or are you spirit man having a physical experience? To the carnal mind there is indeed a level of temporary pleasure experienced in many during 'atrocious acts'. That which is flesh is flesh and spirit is spirit which you well know. Do you reckon yourself dead to the flesh or spirit? The peace I speak of cannot be touched. The suffering you see is for but a season and if one is dead to it and walks in the spirit, justice is seen in it all.

Quote

*rolls eyes* Ok, now you are telling me through which "eyes" I am viewing the world?

Let's look at the passage you alluded to in this response:

Matthew 10:29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. 30And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31So don't be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows (NIV).

Please don't take offence. It seemed obvious to me which 'eyes' you were viewing the world from. If I am in error, point taken.

Quote

Sounds comforting, no? Keep it in context. All but one of the men Jesus spoke to here went on to die horrible physical deaths. There were countless others that were burned or fed to the beasts in the Coliseum. It is best interpreted in a general sense about death. The Father's will is that all physical things eventually die and decay. Sparrows fall to the ground, people die, garments grow old, "the grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of the Lord will endure forever (Is. 40:8)." It is in this general sense that the Father wills these things, simply because until the veil of this life, of this flawed order, is pulled away, there is no way to see the light.

OK. Point taken with the exception I see no "flawed order". Also, To him/her that is in Christ there is no death and that has more reality than temporal physical life.

Quote

But to assume that God is directly responsible for every act of suffering makes him into a monster. God actively wills the molestation of children, presumably because they karmically deserve it? God actively wills people to be born with chemical imbalances? God actively willed the Holocaust? Job's three friends said the same thing about Job's plight. They assumed the universe to be fair and just, so Job must've done something wrong. But in reality it was little more than a divine wager, and Job's friends were forced to eat crow for speaking of God in that manner.

No such assumption here. Merely pointed out his divine order and preknowledge of all things. Also pointed out the apparent injustices you spoke of are not injustices at all. Perhaps life and the things you see may not be as you suppose.

Quote

As for Jesus being a man completely at peace, I'll leave you with this passage from Isaiah 53:3-5

He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

The author of I Peter (likely Peter himself) quoted a portion of this passage to refer to Jesus. This would seem to affirm an eyewitness perspective of Jesus as a "man of sorrows." Let us not forget Jesus' affinity for social outcasts and desolate places, or the garden of Gethsemane. By his own words about foxes having dens and birds having nests, but teh Son of Man not having a place to lay his head, we can see that Jesus was a man not at home(literally and figuratively) in this world. As for the passages you quoted: perhaps they are Jewish statements and you are reading them through a different lens. It was an allegory of the time that when a person became a rabbi's student that they had taken that teacher's "yoke" upon him. All Jesus was saying was that his teaching and discipline was not stern or harsh. But the discipline of the world and the so-called just system of karma that you are suggesting, that yoke is burdensome and cruel. God is fundamentally alien to it, and remains hidden from plain view. He must be found through other means than introspective observation of cause and effect.

Peace,
Joel

Yes I am aware of those writings.

Yet... It seems to me that God is not hidden from view at all. His presence is available everywhere and in this moment. Personally, I must confess that there has never been a time when God was not present with me. I hear what you are saying but in spirit cannot relate to your conclusions. Perhaps you see that which is here and gone as a vapor as more meaningful than I? Perhaps my reality lies more in the unseen than the seen? Where you see sufferring and death and atrocious acts, I see a divinely balanced and harmonious dance of creation unfolding. Do I experience pain? Of course, but what difference does it make? Pain, grief and sorrow may be a part of human exisitence but suffering is a choice. Peace and love is always available, even in the midst of 'great turmoil'. Just a view to consider. No more... No less.

Thanks for your response Joel,
Enjoyed sharing with you and reading your responses,
Love and Peace,
JM

[canajan, eh?]

JosephM, on Aug 24 2007, 09:48 AM, said:

Jen, I have already said what I have said in front of whoever has read my posts. They do not need dramatics or rhetoric additions even in the form of questions. Perhaps, I have triggered something inside of you which you have given to me as power which I have no desire to excercise in you. There is no requirement for one to agree with me.

I assure you, Joseph, that I have given no power to you. I wished to be clear that I understood your statements, and that others who read this site would also have the chance to better understand your statements. You often speak in vague and abstract terms, Joseph, and this necessitates that others must sometimes ask you for clarification and specifics.

It is probably clear to everybody by now that you and I couldn't differ more greatly in our views of the soul and of God. You believe the soul is evolving; I believe the soul is created in a state of beauty and perfection by God, and that our human problems stem from our unwise use of the human brain. I don't want to repeat the other points you and I have made. I just want you to know, Joseph, that I've been closely watching what you say, and you frequently contradict yourself when it suits you.

When you're willing to begin to discuss specifics about how to live a life of love and trust as a Progressive Christian, perhaps you and I will find some common ground.

All the best to you, my friend.
Jen

[JosephM]

Jen,
Thank you for your best wishes.
Love,
JM