Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davidsun
Here is a link to the post where I shared a footnote from my treatise where I talked about the fact that men in Jesus's culture wore nothing under their 'shirts' which were of the 'long' to their knees kind - hence if they took off their shirt they would be naked: http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...#post1 861215 |
Yes, that's the one I read of yours. Thanks for finding it. My view on what Jesus is saying re turn the other cheek, matches what Martin Luther King Jr says about loving your enemies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fs8vSsJg-A On a side note: I think it was coats not shirts so they wouldn't be naked.
Quote:
Jesus's statement were highly 'condensed' - he was talking at a time (like now!) when destinies determined by choices made over the course of many lifetimes were being 'sealed'. Here is the post which includes the parts of my treatise where I talk about that:
http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...#post178 4600
|
“Whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (Matthew 16:25-26)
My initial thoughts on this are, if we live our life only reacting through the ego. Not being in touch with our soul. ie lost. When he says "my sake", meaning the higher self/soul/Christ essence.
Quote:
What Elizabeth Haich is talking about is "tough love" 'cruelty' - yes, as many alcoholics and spoiled brat children who (only) 'woke up' to the need for them to assume a greater degree of personal responsibility after having been will testify, it can work (more so than the kind of 'kindness' which reinforces their 'habits' and enables them to continue their 'dereliction'), albeit because of people's recalcitrance it doesn't always work - I think that sometimes it only 'works' 'after the fact', in the context of their next life, i.e. after they have a smacking themselves on the head post-life "I could have had a V8!" kind of realization. You've heard of souls engaging in post-life 'reviews', I assume.
Of course, harshly 'jerking the collar' of a kid who can't (yet!) tie his shoelaces is not 'good' 'parenting'. Neither is 'indulging' a 'kid' who can but doesn't in the 'name' of 'kindness'. The latter presently applies to huge segments of 'humanity' which continue to rape and ravish aspects of our natural and social ecosystems as well as 'kindly'  'indulge' and 'ignore' others who also parasitically do so. Look at all the genteel 'stockholders' around you! The same applies to 'stockholders' in various personal-bliss/salvation oriented religious 'traditions' which are now 'behind the times' in terms of holding themselves and their 'fellow' believers socially and environmentally accountable, IMO.
|
Of course every circumstance is different. But cruel to be kind is more letting people get on with it I think, to figure things out for themselves. Yes, offer support/advice if asked, and most importantly lovingkindness. But at the end of the day they'll have to be left on their own. Shouting from the side lines "do it like this", "don't do it like that", or "that's stupid", I don't think helps.
Phew! Stressed me out a bit that David. All that studying!