Conscientious objection.

Originally Posted by Honza

Do you conscientiously object to anything? I do. I believe that Christ did too. I sympathise with his conscientious outrage. The Christian path is one of following your conscience and being true to Christ. It encourages conscientious objection to evil and profanity.

The eastern path on the other hand encourages complete acceptance. Even of all the bad things. I AM accepts everything equally - both good and bad. It does not raise any conscientious objections to anything. Not even evil.

That is why I do not like I AM. It is too accepting of evil. It sees good and evil in equal light. I AM is a neutral path. Total acceptance and no resistance to anything. It does not raise any objections to anything.

I do object to all manner of things. I do not totally accept all things. I conscientiously object to evil and badness. I believe that Christ did too.

When did I AM become an eastern thing? As I recall, when Moses asked God for a name while he was standing in front of that burning bush, he was told to tell them "I AM" has sent you.

But now that I think about it, a bush that burns, but is never burned up, that goes by the title "I AM", that is called upon to bring freedom from bondage.....rather interesting. Perhaps there is a bit of eastern accent in I AM after all.

We often reject that which we fear, we fear that which we do not understand, we do not truly understand something until we have lived it, those who do not understand history, are bound to repeat it.

.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by ketzer

...
We often reject that which we fear, we fear that which we do not understand, we do not truly understand something until we have lived it.

.

Interesting ... It seems that "objecting to" (openly disagreeing with) something is seen differently that "accepting" (agreeing).

I believe they are the same thing.

Maybe it's easier to not say anything, and later to say "I thought so too", but then that's "not participating", which ultimately is still "accepting" by default, but with the added pejorative of cowardice.

In this last category I'd include those that have unrealistic / utopian expectations about the outcome, and don't assume responsibility for the consequences.

[quote=inavalan]Interesting ... It seems that "objecting to" (openly disagreeing with) something is seen differently that "accepting" (agreeing).

I believe they are the same thing.

Well, they are the same at least in respect that they both assume a knowledge and/or wisdom sufficient to make a judgment.

Maybe it's easier to not say anything, and later to say "I thought so too", ...

Maybe easier, but the only thing more annoying then a 'know it all' is a 'knew it all'.

[Honza]

Originally Posted by ketzer

When did I AM become an eastern thing? As I recall, when Moses asked God for a name while he was standing in front of that burning bush, he was told to tell them "I AM" has sent you.

But now that I think about it, a bush that burns, but is never burned up, that goes by the title "I AM", that is called upon to bring freedom from bondage.....rather interesting. Perhaps there is a bit of eastern accent in I AM after all.

We often reject that which we fear, we fear that which we do not understand, we do not truly understand something until we have lived it, those who do not understand history, are bound to repeat it.

You ought to know better than to interpret YHWH as I AM by now. There have been so many discussions on this. YHWH is virtually undefinable in the English language.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Honza

You ought to know better than to interpret YHWH as I AM by now. There have been so many discussions on this. YHWH is virtually undefinable in the English language.

Naughty Ketzer should know better

Moses probably got the name wrong anyway, inhaling smoke from that ' Burning Bush ' could have dulled his senses

Originally Posted by Honza

You ought to know better than to interpret YHWH as I AM by now. There have been so many discussions on this. YHWH is virtually undefinable in the English language.

Hey dude, don't shoot the messenger, I am just telling you what the Bible says Moses says God says. If you don't the believe what the Bible says that is no sweat off my back. Maybe Moses was shootin the bull or maybe the big guy was pullin a prank or something (noway yhawh). On the other hand, if you do believe what the bible says, then of all those discussions out there, which would be the definitive one? Who ya gonna believe, all those discusssors on this forum, or a burning bush that doesn't get burned up?

Originally Posted by sky123

Naughty Ketzer should know better

Moses probably got the name wrong anyway, inhaling smoke from that ' Burning Bush ' could have dulled his senses

Well, I suppose we have to cut Mo some slack, he didn't have the internet, google, and informed forums to check in with way back when. All he could do was wonder around in the hot desert sun and tell people about his visions.