Thoughts about the mission of Jesus

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Busby

Really!! Personally I would hesitate to state such a thing - but one never knows...

You state and I consider the possible merits (and/or demerits) what you state - I state and hope you consider the possible merits (and/or demerits) of what I state - that's really the reason for engaging in meaning-full con-verse-ation (about any topic) isn't it, Busby?

[weareunity]

Hello David.

As a solitary ponderer post 46 has been in my mind taking shape for some time and not intended as a reply to any post--just further thoughts.

I think I do not understand your post 50, sorry.

All the best.

petex

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello David.

As a solitary ponderer post 46 has been in my mind taking shape for some time and not intended as a reply to any post--just further thoughts.

I think I do not understand your post 50, sorry.

All the best.

petex

Understood.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello David.

As a solitary ponderer post 46 has been in my mind taking shape for some time and not intended as a reply to any post--just further thoughts.

I think I do not understand your post 50, sorry.

Perhaps - only perhaps - if you 'read' what I wrote in response to your post (46) thinking that what I said in my post (50) was written thinking that your post (46) was a 'reply' to my previous posts - which, as you say, it wasn't - you might understand why I said what I said in post 50.

No need for 'sorry' (in any event).

[weareunity]

Hello David.

Oh dear, what a pickle!

The only way out I think is to for me to climb up on the honesty box in the corner of the classroom and to announce that I have not been doing the reading sent to me by post, nor have I followed up the reading recommended.

I had hoped to avoid this confession because I truly do not want to hurt your feelings nor to seem dismissive of your beliefs--as mentioned in the OP of this thread, this is no part if my intent in beginning this thread.

You see,( I hope), I have in the past tried to comprehend your missives on other threads--but quickly concluded--perhaps too quickly concluded-- that I would first need to share your beliefs concerning the ethereal, the cosmos, the there before and the hereafter,--in order to do so.

I think maybe when many in the class opted for those lessons I was already solitary pondering as to why that might be the case--that was a long time ago, and still I plod and stumble and observe (myself included) and analyse and attempt to understand.

Perhaps I have feet of clay, but hope I may be a little redeemed by attempting to fly on the wings of love and good intent. Who knows.

petex

[JosephineB]

Originally Posted by weareunity

Hello David.

Oh dear, what a pickle!

The only way out I think is to for me to climb up on the honesty box in the corner of the classroom and to announce that I have not been doing the reading sent to me by post, nor have I followed up the reading recommended.

I had hoped to avoid this confession because I truly do not want to hurt your feelings nor to seem dismissive of your beliefs--as mentioned in the OP of this thread, this is no part if my intent in beginning this thread.

You see,( I hope), I have in the past tried to comprehend your missives on other threads--but quickly concluded--perhaps too quickly concluded-- that I would first need to share your beliefs concerning the ethereal, the cosmos, the there before and the hereafter,--in order to do so.

I think maybe when many in the class opted for those lessons I was already solitary pondering as to why that might be the case--that was a long time ago, and still I plod and stumble and observe (myself included) and analyse and attempt to understand.

Perhaps I have feet of clay, but hope I may be a little redeemed by attempting to fly on the wings of love and good intent. Who knows.

petex

Waving from the naughty corner.

[Busby]

Originally Posted by davidsun

You state and I consider the possible merits (and/or demerits) what you state - I state and hope you consider the possible merits (and/or demerits) of what I state - that's really the reason for engaging in meaning-full con-verse-ation (about any topic) isn't it, Busby?

You have undoubtedly noticed that I refrain (in general) from what you call meaningful discussions. In fact it's quite possible that when reading between the lines that this is to what you refer. I understand your POV when you, in your own mind, have - let's call it a comprehensive view of life/universe/awareness or any other of the words we use to position ourselves in our condition - the one we call life I mean. I appreciate your tendency to refer to yourself as one of the knowing, for the amount of energy you put into your understandings it is probably right for you to do so. It is exactly this wished for comprehensiveness which is our undoing. (In my opinion). It's not difficult to see this if one even starts to read some of the topics floating around on SF and indeed in the whole of the suppositions, beliefs and philosophies attached tightly or loosely to this would-be science we call metaphysics.
Unfortunately the amount of evidence (not really the right word) stemming from human experience and experiences is so vast that without some sort of new or other input we can talk about everything until we are blue in the face and we'll still end up having no idea about anything.

This is where we are and it's understandable. Those of us, of the 8 billion, who trouble their heads about 'things' may well have a slight advantage in some form or another when it comes down to humanitarian common sense, one maybe much better defined as leading towards humanism, fed through worldly experience.

Referring ourselves back to two thousand years ago will get us nowhere (at least not where we want to be) only science (in the coming centuries) can do this for us, science being another word for the search for whatever might be titled 'the Truth'.

Originally Posted by Busby

You have undoubtedly noticed that I refrain (in general) from what you call meaningful discussions. In fact it's quite possible that when reading between the lines that this is to what you refer. ...

I wish I had the talent to properly Express / convey my thoughts through writing like you do .
In person I am an extremely good communicator and can convey the meaning of something better then most and can Express myself quite well in person just not so much over the internet lol.
Good post good sir .

[davidsun]

To petex and Busby - thanks you for clarifying you response-modalities.

I myself have found 'sharing' and exploring differences not just convergences between understandings to be a mutually enriching experience - i.e. even when I or someone else end up seeing things differently and (s) choosing to go our own (i.e. in different) ways - the way someone else looks and and sees what one 'sees' what one is looking at and 'seeing' always helps to 'sharpen' one's vision understanding. So I seek to engage in doing more of that.

As I said to Busby, I regard that as being the 'purpose' of engaging with others in con-verse-ation. What the two of you strike me as declaring you are and prefer doing is akin to just 'masturbating' in public (i.e. just 'massaging' one's own ideas without being interested in and relating to someone else's) in public, as I see it, that is, though my guess is you see it as being 'love' (of 'truth'?) in action. Much that goes on in this forum (not just in this thread) strikes me as being little more than that, though there have been and continue to be many quite significant/meaning-full exceptions (wherein others do engage in mutually meaning-full conversation.

Originally Posted by davidsun

No. It is my 'Theory of Everything', i.e. my 'Best Guess' in said regard. which incorporates (borrows from?) what I think Jesus meant by the various things he said (as alluded to and 'reported' in the Bible). If you ever read my treatise, which you may well not, you will see that there are other 'data' sources which this theory draws from and uses to support its validity as well.

You might(?) relate to what I say better of you think of me as a 'Knowledge Salad' Chef.

I think that too much value is attached to the idea of "knowledge"

because knowledge is information about the past and the past is no more only the present exists and although yes there are some similarities to the Past as I like to call it the echo effect nevertheless it is not the same as the past therefore knowledge in general is much like a computer sitting on a table in the middle of an empty room full of very important information and just sitting there by itself it's pretty much worthless unless a person comes up to the computer turns it on and finds the information in it and utilizes it

then it's value is benefited from and so likewise without proper understanding information not only has little value but can become detrimental towards ones Journey of awakening due to the misunderstandings/false Concepts/ and ideologies.

for instance no I have not read your "treatise" however based off of what you have already posted and commented on I have no desire to read it because I'm almost fully convinced I will not find anything of any use in that literature reason being your comments elude to the idea that you believe this Jesus person was a literal physical character that literally was on the Earth at a particular time which is a common standard Christian viewpoint and not a very accurate one at that and because of the fact it's commotn I do not want to waste my time reading common literature.