A question about "love"

[frangiuliano115]

Fran, I don’t think it’s right to assume the illustration of the old man is meant that way. I just took it at face value!

Pallas, you wondered (rhetorically - and a good illustration) if God would place answers on an unplugged monitor or something like that and paradoxically you have a plugged-in one and He has intrigued you enough to look at this forum and find us motley crew here, such as we are on any particular day.

You spoke of life’s crevasses. Think of a bold explorer - Charles Blondin - and the feat of detailed planning (that must have taken him a long time) that got him across Niagara - how the rope was tied both ends, what his timing in crossing was going to be, what he was going to do about wind and rain, where he was going to put his feet as he went. Life is full of crevasses!

If spaghetti is something that gives you what you want quickly, will the child and spouse always do so if they have a bad day? A biggish child that has somehow decided to cause a lot of complications? The emotion will at any rate often follow the deed of love rather than precede it.

Knowledge in all fields is built up bit by bit. But if it’s on a personal matter, it is much slower (because we have to cope with its intensity).

You have had a fabulous, terrific, tremendous start in life! The rest of it awaits exploring, a day at a time. I address the same point to some of the responders!

The illustration is very good.

I have a reason for my question to the O.P.

I’m hoping he ponders it a bit and then replies. In a sincere way.
I mean about why he’s speaking to us here on this thread.

Fran

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

I hoped to give OP a chance to consolidate responses that have been given by Pallas so far. I already think the line of enquiry very intriguing.

I think talk of “sincerity” has only cropped up for a reason analogous to Blondin’s situation: clearly the locals of the Niagara region wouldn’t have wanted to help him if he hadn’t demonstrated interest in attention to detail. Hence my willingness to backtrack & review points here & there because I can already tell there is genuine intrigue in the questions. I hope talk of sincerity didn’t come over as accusatory.

It comes easier as life wears on (except if I have a bad day ). Forums are exactly for chatting things over & over!

 

[NovusFidem]

I hoped to give OP a chance to consolidate responses that have been given by Pallas so far. I already think the line of enquiry very intriguing.

I think talk of “sincerity” has only cropped up for a reason analogous to Blondin’s situation: clearly the locals of the Niagara region wouldn’t have wanted to help him if he hadn’t demonstrated interest in attention to detail. Hence my willingness to backtrack & review points here & there because I can already tell there is genuine intrigue in the questions. I hope talk of sincerity didn’t come over as accusatory.

It comes easier as life wears on (except if I have a bad day ). Forums are exactly for chatting things over & over!

Pallas is being sincere; she just doesn’t seem able to see from our point of view. The way she shrugs some answers leaves us with a bad impression, as if she’s not interested in learning what we think, and just wants to tell us where we are wrong.

One example from the previous page: (I’m using Vico because his answers are really concise)

Pallas wanted to know how God communicates with us (or “why isn’t He clear with his intentions”). Post #71 from Vico - he says conscience is (one of) the language God uses to communicate with us. Pallas answer (#74) - “there is no reason to assume it comes from God”.

I mean:

“How do you think God talks to us?” she asks.
“I believe He does so using our conscience.” he answers.
“There is no reason to think that.”
“It is what I think, and what I was taught.”
“He tells me to do things you say are wrong. So it can’t be conscience.”
“You need to pay attention. Conscience is not a ‘surface’ type of thought. You need to ponder on it.”

She seems interested, but there is something keeping her from understanding us. I am not ready to accuse her, perhaps it is us who need to understand her difficulty first.

However, I see that she could use some “pondering” on the answers. Not pondering as we usually do, seeking the holes in the other’s speech; I mean pondering as in trying to understand what the other meant by that.

What did Vico mean by Conscience? Either ask him, or research “Catholic tradition on conscience”. Use his tools (Bible? CCC?), understand his world: you are the one who is seeking answers from us, so you need to start collecting information, and not throwing it away. Don’t take them for real, but accept them as our Truth, and go from there.

A good teacher proposes the exercise, but you are the one who needs to lift the weights. Otherwise, you won’t get any stronger.

By the way:

So, let me reiterate: “God does not speak to me in a language I understand”. And if he is as smart as you insinuate, then he could choose the proper language. It is a wise saying that one size does NOT fit all. A good teacher tailors the message to the individual student.

Have you heard of zen koans? In practically all of them you’ll find out that the teachers never gives you the answers you seek. Instead, they present you with a question:

You can hear the sound of two hands when they clap together. Now, show me the sound of one hand.

Dizang asked Xiushan, “Where do you come from?”
Xiushan said, “From the South.”
Dizang said, “How is Buddhism in the south these days?”
Xiushan said, “There’s extensive discussion.”
Dizang said, “How can that compare to me here planting the fields and making rice to eat?”
Xiushan said, “What can you do about the world?”
Dizang said, “What do you call the world?” (Book of Serenity)

And you go find the answer on your own.

Otherwise, you’ll only get intelligent, but not wise.

Sometimes the journey (seeking God) is more important than the destination (understanding God).

(and I’m calling Pallas “she” because of the Greek goddess. I’m not assuming any gender here, it is just for the sake of simplicity)

 

[ynotzap]

Certainly. But there is no reason to assume that it comes from God… especially since my conscience “whispers” things to me which are different from what is “supposed” to be the “message” from God. For example my conscience sees nothing wrong with having sex for sheer pleasure, without the possibility of procreation.

The voice of conscience is nothing other than one’s mind reflecting on what it knows. What is knows can be erroneous or correct, false or true. So you are right, there is no reason to assume it’s from God, unless your mind is informed with His truths. A christian believes what he knows about the truths of his faith, to be a gift of “enlightenment” through grace from an encounter withJesus Christ, God-man. As a Christan any information coming into the mind, if it is direct conflict with his Faith, discerns the information is erroneous, and that the devil is the source. eg. Your conscience sees nothing wrong with having sex for the sheer pleasure, without it’s natural consequences. An informed christian would see this as this as an immoral act, one based on the proclivity of the sense appetite to indulge in sensual pleasure. To the christian, he sees this as being a prisoner to the sensual, and an impediment to spiritual freedom, and personal relationship to God. He see this as living in ignorance, often referred to as “darkness” and a puppet to the devils suggestions made to the mind that keeps the individual is “spiritual bondage” A christian knowing this can not judge that individual who has an erroneous conscience of sin, but he does know that the act is sinful, and contrary to one’s true happiness, the act is evidence of one who is a puppet, or a slave to the devils “erroneous suggestion” A christian also knows, or should know that Jesus Christ came to liberate captives from sin, and give them New LIfe (of grace) One can not give what he doesn’t have, so a christian can not judge a person and accuse him of sin, even though the act is sinful. Also a christian can not convert anyone, as that belongs to God alone. That whispering, if it is the conscience whispering, from a christian perspective is being influenced by a suggestion from the devil. Of course I don’t expect you to believe this, why should you, you can’t give what you do not have. There is only one place you can get it, and that is Jesus Christ. We can’t give it. Neither can reason, although reason can witness to it.

 

[Pallas_Athene]

How quick were you expecting, earlier in life, answers? Most of us get them in stages, which is why we have only got a bit of one.

Fifty, sixty years? You see, when I get a request from someone, and I can grant that request, and that request is beneficial to the requestor and it does not hurt anyone, then I fulfill that request IMMEDIATELY. What is the point of playing “hard to get”?

I recall a joke: The young hen is being chased by the rooster. She keeps running around the yard. One of the older hens asks her: “what is the point of running? He will get you eventually”. And the young hen answers: “I pretend to be hard to get, so he will not think that I am a cheap whore”.

You don’t see another side, but you’re asking people who not only see the other side, but think they’re on it, what it means to love a non-existent God.

Not really. I ask other people, who CLAIM that they know about the other side, and I ask them what kind of EVIDENCE can they provide for their BELIEF. So far not one iota of evidence has been offered. But that does not mean that there is NO evidence.

Jesus is just a mythological story, so we must just be a bunch of dummies but you still ask questions of us.

Please do not put words into my mouth.

Then you don’t appreciate something I said about atheists. I’m a pretty nice person, I probably just said that some atheists are not sincere in their questions and just want to debate.

You did NOT use the qualifier: “SOME”. And that makes all the difference.

WHY ARE we speaking to each other??

I don’t know why YOU talk to me. I am interested in other people’s thoughts, especially if we do not agree on the topic. I may learn something new.

Fran, I don’t think it’s right to assume the illustration of the old man is meant that way. I just took it at face value!

The story has nothing to do with the “other side”. It illustrates the behavior of the “do gooders”, who wish to run your life for you, who think that they know better what is good for you. Such a behavior is not respectful - to say the least.

Have you heard of zen koans? In practically all of them you’ll find out that the teachers never gives you the answers you seek.

That is exactly the way how one should NOT teach. How does one teach a child not to poke a wire into a live outlet? Leave a wire in plain sight and see if the child will try to insert the wire and electrocute himself?

Of course I don’t expect you to believe this, why should you, you can’t give what you do not have. There is only one place you can get it, and that is Jesus Christ. We can’t give it. Neither can reason, although reason can witness to it.

As I said many times before, I am ready to get a visit from Jesus, if he would choose to do it.

 

[NovusFidem]

That is exactly the way how one should NOT teach. How does one teach a child not to poke a wire into a live outlet? Leave a wire in plain sight and see if the child will try to insert the wire and electrocute himself?

Exactly what I wanted you to understand!

You are trying to achieve something that is not necessarily technical, aren’t you? We are talking about the “spiritual” stuff, something that neither of us can tell you how to do.

Better yet: we tried, but you didn’t get it yet.

Think of this like pushing a big boulder. Here we are, pushing the boulder, and you are looking and asking us how to do it. If I say “You just have to push it”, you’ll say “I tried, and I can’t push it”.

Just like we have proposed that you try to talk to God, and you come back and say you didn’t get any result like ours.

Your example pertains to practical things. It is practical to teach you what to do, what not to do, how to do.

But the **spiritual **is more than that: it is the strength and ability to do. It is needed to edify, to create, etc etc.

And, like any strength or ability, the only way a teacher can get you to achieve is by making you work for it. You have to train!

But if you insist that training is useless… well, of course you’ll never understand what we are talking about!

This is what God wants from us.

We, “enlightened ones”, who already “met God” (yeah, I’m being ironic here), are still seeking Him, daily, hourly, in every moment for some. We are “exercising” our “spiritual muscles”, trying to understand where God fits in everything, and HOW to fit Him in everything.

PS: you, again, just shrugged the method I presented, without stopping to ponder on what I said. You said it was a method one should not use to teach, instead of pondering in which situations that method might be useful.

Situation which I presented on said post:

A good teacher proposes the exercise, but you are the one who needs to lift the weights. Otherwise, you won’t get any stronger.

Once you get stronger, then you’ll be able to learn practical methods to push the boulder. Until then, I recommend training.

 

[ynotzap]

Fifty, si

As I said many times before, I am ready to get a visit from Jesus, if he would choose to do it.

Jesus chose to do it over 2000 years ago, and He has done it over the centuries. But not all have accepted His invitation. We accept His invitation by turning to Him, and turn from sin, or at least ask Him to show us the obstacle that prevents us from turning to Him, ask Him to Cause us to turn to Him. Christians understand that no one can come to Christ unless the Father calls him, and no one can go to the Father except through Christ. God moves first, that means He has to cause us to act to gain our salvation, we must sincerely desire it. " Knock, and the door will open, seek and you shall find…" There are many ways that cause a person to turn to Christ, and they require a person to be humble, and there are many ways to make a person humble, he can willingly submit to humbling himself, or some situation can cause him to humble himself( eg. sickness, failure, unhappiness, etc.) Accept the testimonies of Christians, read about the lives of the saints. Once they turned to Christ, they could experience the love Christ has for them and much more. He will pick the time of His revelation, and we must persist in our desires for it, and expect it.

 

[Pallas_Athene]

Exactly what I wanted you to understand!

You are trying to achieve something that is not necessarily technical, aren’t you?

Everything is “technical” in the greater scheme of things.

We are talking about the “spiritual” stuff, something that neither of us can tell you how to do.

Unfortunately you used another meaningless term: “spiritual”. I am willing to listen to “spirituals”, which are a very pleasing type of music. I am willing to drink good (distilled) “spirits”. Generally I am very upbeat, in other words I am in good “spirits”. But “ghosts” or “spirits” make no sense to me.

You have to train!

I have nothing against training. On the contrary. But you (as alleged teachers) have to show me “how” to train. What are the steps I must take to get “stronger”?

I went through this kind of conversation many times in my life. I was told to pray and ask (this is “technical”). I was told that “knock and the door will be open”. I tried, and NOTHING happened. Then the reply was the same I always receive: “you did not ask honestly”, or “you cannot expect God to jump when you ask something”, or “you were too impatient”, and so on. In other words, “I am the one to blame for dishonesty, for impatience, for wanting to impose what God is expected to do”… sorry… this is what I call baloney.

When you utter a prayer and ask FOR something, you are “required” to add “if it be thy will”. Which effectively is a “get out of jail free” card. The Muslims say: “Insh’a Allah”, God willing. This is called playing with a loaded dice, or saying: “if the result is heads, I win, if the result is tails, you lose”. If I pray for something and it happens - wonderful - God granted my wish. If I pray and nothing happens, I was too proud, too demanding, too impatient or prayed for the wrong things… in other words, I am to blame for the result.

This kind of attitude is a huge turn-off. I do not accuse you of ethical dishonesty, but I do accuse you of intellectual dishonesty. Let’s put God to the test… the test will always come back as negative… OOPS… I am not allowed to put God to the test. When you have a hypothesis and try to test it, the negative outcomes are just as important as the positive ones.

Sorry for being blunt. But you should ponder what I said.

 

[NovusFidem]

Everything is “technical” in the greater scheme of things.

Again. I said things aren’t always technical; you shrugged it off instead of pondering.

Unfortunately you used another meaningless term: “spiritual”.

You didn’t ponder on what I said. (besides, I put “spiritual” between quotation marks for a reason)

You claim to want to try, but I am not really seeing the effort. You proved my whole point by what you are saying here and on the next part.

Here, you just said you are willing to train:

I have nothing against training. On the contrary. But you (as alleged teachers) have to show me “how” to train. What are the steps I must take to get “stronger”?

And here, you admit that you gave up training halfway:

I went through this kind of conversation many times in my life.** I was told to pray** and ask (this is “technical”). I was told that “knock and the door will be open”. I tried, and NOTHING happened.

Here, you show that you were told why you failed:

Then the reply was the same I always receive: “you did not ask honestly”, or “you cannot expect God to jump when you ask something”, or “you were too impatient”, and so on. In other words, “I am the one to blame for dishonesty, for impatience, for wanting to impose what God is expected to do”… sorry… this is what I call baloney.

I don’t blame you for not getting it right. Most of us don’t, and those who do don’t get it right all the time. Some, like Mother Teresa (possible future Saint) went through years of exercise without any apparent result. Some of us heard Him once, and are content enough to go about in obedience even though we haven’t heard much from Him since.

When you utter a prayer and ask FOR something, you are “required” to add “if it be thy will”. Which effectively is a “get out of jail free” card.

You have trouble understanding why we add “if it be thy will”? Meditate on this. Think. Study. Ask, if you must.

Want my results from meditating on this? We add that tidbit in order to remember ourselves that it is US who must conform to His will. Life gets a whole lot easier to deal with when you realize that everything, including these atrocities around us, happens for a reason.

But, please, don’t focus on the results of MY meditation. Try to meditate on it, and reach it on your own.

If I pray for something and it happens - wonderful - God granted my wish. If I pray and nothing happens, I was too proud, too demanding, too impatient or prayed for the wrong things… in other words, I am to blame for the result.

Thankfully we are different from Muslims, huh?

If I pray for something and it happens: great! God’s will was done.

If I pray for something and it doesn’t happen: WONDERFUL! God’s will was done.

We rejoice because His will was done, and that’s it. That is a joyous Catholic life - we are happy all the time, because there’s always something to be happy about (thank God!).

This kind of attitude is a huge turn-off.

Thankfully that attitude is just how Muslims do it, and not how Christians do it, amiright?

I do not accuse you of ethical dishonesty, but I do accuse you of intellectual dishonesty. Let’s put God to the test… the test will always come back as negative… OOPS… I am not allowed to put God to the test. When you have a hypothesis and try to test it, the negative outcomes are just as important as the positive ones.

I try to disprove the Church’s teaching every time I decide to study them. I apply them to my own life, and think of what would be the result if I took the opposite action. So far, I have no reasons to doubt any of the Church’s teachings and, by a logic that only makes sense to Catholics (who believe that infallible Church = Jesus was right = God exists), I have no reason to doubt God’s existence.

So far.

Just as food for thought: on the matter of sexuality (because we love polemic issues), if people respected the first teaching on this (to not sin against Chastity), these are some of the things we wouldn’t have:

1. abortions;
2. single mothers/fathers;
3. infanticide;
4. STDs;
5. orphans;
6. unwanted children;
7. objectification of women/men;
8. rape;
9. broken marriages/families;

So, as much as I’d like to have a fun sexual life, I can see that there is no mistake on Church’s teachings on this: we do good by being Chaste. (and I feel great by being chaste, so there’s another plus)

Sorry for being blunt. But you should ponder what I said.

I did. There isn’t much pondering to do when you haven’t proposed anything new for me to think about. You use words like “meaningless” to refer to words you have no desire to understand (like “spiritual” - quotation marks), showing that you took nothing of what I said in consideration. You also resort to irony for some reason that escapes me for now.

Anyway, I tried. I usually limit my conversations with atheists to a few posts (which is why I eventually go missing from a thread), in order to stop my head from getting too big. I try to criticize myself from time to time, specially when I notice my answers are starting to lack charity. There’s a point where honest attempt to help you becomes a frenetic desire to prove you wrong. In Venerable Fulton J. Sheen words:

“Criticism of others is thus an oblique form of self-commendation. We think we make the picture hang straight on our wall by telling our neighbors that all his pictures are crooked.”

Aaaand I’d like to avoid that.

Peace!

 

[Pallas_Athene]

And here, you admit that you gave up training halfway:

Halfway? How long is “all the way”? Precisely, please!!

You have trouble understanding why we add “if it be thy will”? Meditate on this. Think. Study. Ask, if you must.

No, I have no problem at all. You add the phrase to let God off the hook.

Thankfully we are different from Muslims, huh?

No difference at all in THIS respect.

If I pray for something and it happens: great! God’s will was done.
If I pray for something and it doesn’t happen: WONDERFUL! God’s will was done.

So, if it is heads, you win, if it is tails, I lose… how convenient.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Hi PA,

This quote thingy does make me a bit crazy, aside from the fact that it takes forever, so let me try it this way.

First of all, I’d like to say that if the answers you’ve received from post no. 82 and forwards do not satisfy you, then nothing will.

You cannot judge God based on what people do. Infanticide, rape, and all that. People are damaged in nature and will not to the right things. Also, I must say, not all people follow the laws of God and thus we have many problems in our world. Misery comes from 3 sources:
Ourselves, Others and Nature. If we could just take care of the first two, we’d only have nature to deal with (hurricanes, etc). But, alas, that will never be.

You want to put God to the test and the test comes back negative. Maybe because you’re EXPECTING a negative answer. When approaching God you must be humble. He’d God and is not required to adhere to YOUR standards. This is imperative to understand before you could ever hope to attain any type of rapport with Him.

You got into sincerity a bit with Charlemagne back in post no. 54 and 55. This is a big issue of mine. I’m not sure there is sincerity here. I sometimes feel that what is really going on is that YOU want to make us understand how silly we are, or how much God is unwilling to let Himself be known, or how wrong we are and that we should join the ranks of atheists since there must not be any God. Maybe if you could change OUR mind, it would reinforce YOUR beliefs. I’ve been asking you to ponder why you’re speaking to us - well this is my reason for asking. Maybe you’re just looking for confirmation that you are correct and not us.

Novus Fidem and ynotzap have spent time on this and given you really excellent answers. Better than this will be difficult for you to find. You could try speaking to a philosopher who will be speaking about stuff I can’t even understand and many are believers and are happy to share - you might try the philosophy forum. OR you could just stop fighting it as Novus Fidem is trying to tell you. it’s, like, you want US to impart understanding to you.

LIke in the lifting weights scenario. It can-t work like that. We could explain ABOUT God, but then it-s up to you to accept. It doesn’t have to be some amazing conversion experience like Paul had, for isntance. Most of the time it’s just a matter of the will. You come to understand that something had to create everything, that something is God, God created man and has tried to give us some understanding of Him.

We accept some understanding, who more and who less, and we WILL to believe and to follow. It’s nothing more than this. Maybe you’re just expecting too much. You say when we pray we always say it’s God’s will whether He answers or not. Because that’s how it really is! Study up on God’s Providence. He’s not some dummy who just does whatever we ask. Maybe we’re not to have what He asks, maybe it wouldn’t be good for us, maybe He can’t be doing miracles all day long, maybe that’s just not how it’s set up to be. Do you really think youi’ll have ALL the answers someday? Don’t hold your breath. And read Job while you’re at it. Who does man think he is, anyway? We get back to the humility idea.

To answer your specific questions to me. You ask for proof which I cannot provide. First of all, I’M the proof. Since devoting my life to God, it HAS changed. I think of Him when having to make a decision, I can accept better what befalls me (and much has), the acceptance of sacrifice is of my WILL, not because I see Jesus every morning and He says, Go Fran! Also, I could tell you a couple of stories but I hardly think this is the place. How about that you’re sitting at a service and a preacher comes up to you and speaks to you of a problem you’ve been having? But I know, nothing will convince you. All good things come from God. Every time you heal from something, that’s God at work. But, for you that’s a problem too because then we must ask - why doesn’t He just heal everybody, everywhere, all the time. The Big Question P.A. Because we don’t understand how paint sticks to a wall doesn’t mean we should never paint a wall again.

You called Jesus a mythical story. And I replied that we must just be dummies for believing. And you tell me not to put words into your mouth. Well, listen - IF Jesus is just a myth and I believe He’s a real person, I’d have to say I’d have to be a pretty dumb person. Nothing wrong with saying it - it would just be true! If I tell you I believe in flying pigs, of course I’m dumb! Sometimes I think you just have to listen to yourself. Maybe it’s as simple as that.

Regarding the qualifier “some” when speaking of atheists. I’m sorry, I couldn’t find my original statement but it couldn’t have been that bad. The atheists I’ve spoken to are looking to debate, not really to have questions answered and/or accepted. Of course not ALL persons are the same, sometimes a qualifier should not be necessary because some things are obviouis. I mean, you do hang on to every word! You should pick better what words you hang on to!! Look at your last line to Novus Fidem. You throw EVERYTHING back at us. Nothing is pondered or absorbed.

To pretty much end, since I don’t know what else could possibly be added (as far as me, I mean), let me just say this:

It seems to me that there are two powers at play here, : God and Satan. The lines are drawn - make a choice.

Fran

 

[Pallas_Athene]

You cannot judge God based on what people do. Infanticide, rape, and all that.

Since all that happens with God’s approval I certainly can. I can already see your objection, namely that permission does not equal approval, but that is nonsense. If you disapprove of something, have the power to prevent it and still let it happen, then it happens with your “tacit” approval, and as such you are equally responsible for it.

You want to put God to the test and the test comes back negative. Maybe because you’re EXPECTING a negative answer.

Ah the infamous “MAYBE”. Maybe is not an argument. No matter what I expect the outcome to be - the litmus test will always show the acidity of the solution.

You come to understand that something had to create everything, that something is God, God created man and has tried to give us some understanding of Him.

That is bad philosophy. There is no reason to assume that all this shebang “had to be created”.

And read Job while you’re at it.

You managed to quote the story which is most repugnant to me (right next to God’s command to Abraham to sacrifice Isaac). To play chess with human pawns, to kill the relatives of Job to see how far can he be pushed is a horrible story. By the way it also shows that God and Satan are bosom-buddies, not adversaries.

It seems to me that there are two powers at play here, : God and Satan. The lines are drawn - make a choice.

Sorry, I see no evidence for either one of them. And I am open to evidence… always was and always will be.

You also asked, what is my purpose to be around here. I answered this kind of question several times, but I will repeat it: “I am here to learn”. And learn I did and do… every day.

 

[Aloysium]

It works something like this:

Let’s start with what is happening here.
The keyboard and the monitor have a sort of relationship going on, in that what is being tapped out correlates to what appears on the screen.
The keyboard exists as does the monitor; however, they in themselves, are not truly relating to one another.
They are components in a process, parts of a complex series of physical events.

With respect to you and I, what is happening is a lot more elaborate.
On the one hand, we both participate in a material world and my actions affect your perceptions in a manner similar to the keyboard and monitor.
However, this all takes place within a greater, more subtle and comprehensive reality.

We are relating as persons; we are communicating, sharing thoughts and feelings, the reality of what it means to be human.
The flavour of this encounter is determined by who we are, our intentions and the degree to which we give, take, enhance or deplete.
Although this is all happening in space and time, in this physical universe,
our thoughts, whether we agree, disagree or don’t have a clue about what is being said, and
our feelings of anger, gladness or whatever
are of a different order than, and cannot be described merely in terms of
the multitude of biochemical activity occurring in the brain.

This is a long-winded way of getting to the point that in addition to a physical nature, our being is relational.
Regardless of what solipsists paradoxically tell others and whatever The Matrix was about, we exist in relation to everything else.
Perceptually, we connect with the physical world - its being and our being are one as the mental phenomenon.
Perception is an aspect, a sort of building block in the fabrication of the greater cognitive construct that forms the experience of the world as it is happening right here and now.

Our feelings and thoughts of the world emerge from our relationship with what is, its meaning in the context of our lives.
We seek proofs, talk of litmus tests etc because of this way in which we connect (the rational soul) to the world and its Ground of being.

Events impact on us as a result of what they mean to us.
In response, we react accordingly, chosing our course through time.

To elaborate further, as relational beings, our true nature is that of being a “self-other”.
It is in our relationships, in our give and takes, that we mold who we are from what is given.
We do not bring ourselves into existence.

While I can determine who I will be, I am not causing myself to be.
I am brought into this moment, which is in a perpetual state of transformation, from the Ground of all being.
That Ground is what IT is. IT cannot be demonstrated or proven because everything is contained in IT, who is the One Source.
One can only relate to IT, Him actually, since ITs personhood transcends ours (sorry for these poor words).

All creation emerges through an act of Love.
The Source is Love, a giving to what is other in Itself - the Triune Godhead.

We, created in His image, relate to God
as Father,
as the Word by which we came into being, who is one with us in Christ, and the whereby we are able to join
through the Holy Spirit in eternal joyous communion with God.

In giving of ourselves to what is other, we participate in this eternal Font of all life,
thereby nourishing our spirit
bringing us unending joy and happiness,
even in the face of all the adversity we find in this world.

And adversity, we all will face.
Job is a great story, that touches the heights and depths of what it means to be human, in relation to God the creator of all this magnificence.
Humanity chose badly and so we find ourselves here, in opposition to God, eternal beings, tested and given a second chance for paradise.
So, this is serious business, no place for cowards and sluggards.
“Gird your loins”; there is much to do, and we, as God’s hands, are commanded to do His will to love.

BTW: God is all merciful; don’t fret, rejoice.

This is much too long; hopefully someone will read it and find it interesting.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Pallas is being sincere; she just doesn’t seem able to see from our point of view. The way she shrugs some answers leaves us with a bad impression, as if she’s not interested in learning what we think, and just wants to tell us where we are wrong.

One example from the previous page: (I’m using Vico because his answers are really concise)

Pallas wanted to know how God communicates with us (or “why isn’t He clear with his intentions”). Post #71 from Vico - he says conscience is (one of) the language God uses to communicate with us. Pallas answer (#74) - “there is no reason to assume it comes from God”.

I mean:

“How do you think God talks to us?” she asks.
“I believe He does so using our conscience.” he answers.
“There is no reason to think that.”
“It is what I think, and what I was taught.”
“He tells me to do things you say are wrong. So it can’t be conscience.”
“You need to pay attention. Conscience is not a ‘surface’ type of thought. You need to ponder on it.”

She seems interested, but there is something keeping her from understanding us. I am not ready to accuse her, perhaps it is us who need to understand her difficulty first.

However, I see that she could use some “pondering” on the answers. Not pondering as we usually do, seeking the holes in the other’s speech; I mean pondering as in trying to understand what the other meant by that.

What did Vico mean by Conscience? Either ask him, or research “Catholic tradition on conscience”. Use his tools (Bible? CCC?), understand his world: you are the one who is seeking answers from us, so you need to start collecting information, and not throwing it away. Don’t take them for real, but accept them as our Truth, and go from there.

A good teacher proposes the exercise, but you are the one who needs to lift the weights. Otherwise, you won’t get any stronger.

By the way:

Have you heard of zen koans? In practically all of them you’ll find out that the teachers never gives you the answers you seek. Instead, they present you with a question:

And you go find the answer on your own.

Otherwise, you’ll only get intelligent, but not wise.

Sometimes the journey (seeking God) is more important than the destination (understanding God).

(and I’m calling Pallas “she” because of the Greek goddess. I’m not assuming any gender here, it is just for the sake of simplicity)

Hi,

Didn’t know there were two meanings for “ponder”! I like meaning no. 2.

I reread your whole post. It’s perfect. All the concepts, especially about getting wisdom by discovering by one’s own means.

I have a friend who keeps saying that the only things worth anything in life are the ones that are difficult to obtain.

Now, this could mean lobster meat or mushrooms.

But it could mean more important things too…

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

The voice of conscience is nothing other than one’s mind reflecting on what it knows. What is knows can be erroneous or correct, false or true. So you are right, there is no reason to assume it’s from God, unless your mind is informed with His truths. A christian believes what he knows about the truths of his faith, to be a gift of “enlightenment” through grace from an encounter withJesus Christ, God-man. As a Christan any information coming into the mind, if it is direct conflict with his Faith, discerns the information is erroneous, and that the devil is the source. eg. Your conscience sees nothing wrong with having sex for the sheer pleasure, without it’s natural consequences. An informed christian would see this as this as an immoral act, one based on the proclivity of the sense appetite to indulge in sensual pleasure. To the christian, he sees this as being a prisoner to the sensual, and an impediment to spiritual freedom, and personal relationship to God. He see this as living in ignorance, often referred to as “darkness” and a puppet to the devils suggestions made to the mind that keeps the individual is “spiritual bondage” A christian knowing this can not judge that individual who has an erroneous conscience of sin, but he does know that the act is sinful, and contrary to one’s true happiness, the act is evidence of one who is a puppet, or a slave to the devils “erroneous suggestion” A christian also knows, or should know that Jesus Christ came to liberate captives from sin, and give them New LIfe (of grace) One can not give what he doesn’t have, so a christian can not judge a person and accuse him of sin, even though the act is sinful. Also a christian can not convert anyone, as that belongs to God alone. That whispering, if it is the conscience whispering, from a christian perspective is being influenced by a suggestion from the devil. Of course I don’t expect you to believe this, why should you, you can’t give what you do not have. There is only one place you can get it, and that is Jesus Christ. We can’t give it. Neither can reason, although reason can witness to it.

Where were you when I was teaching my catechism kids about conscience?

It’s not as easy as one would think. What if you’re conscience is telling you it’s okay to steal that book? See. It takes a few lessons, and the most important aspect is formation. THEN you can listen to that little whisper - and with any luck, it’ll be God.

Good post.

 

[HelenRose]

When you (whoever you are) say that you love

your spouse
your child
your pet
a good dinner
a pleasant vacation
a good movie…

I understand what you mean by the word “love”.

However, when you say “I love God”, I have no idea what the word “love” means in that context. Enlighten me, please. I would like to understand.

What a great question! I will have to think about this a bit. I suspect the answers will be as varied and those who try to grapple with this.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Since all that happens with God’s approval I certainly can. I can already see your objection, namely that permission does not equal approval, but that is nonsense. If you disapprove of something, have the power to prevent it and still let it happen, then it happens with your “tacit” approval, and as such you are equally responsible for it.

Ah the infamous “MAYBE”. Maybe is not an argument. No matter what I expect the outcome to be - the litmus test will always show the acidity of the solution.

That is bad philosophy. There is no reason to assume that all this shebang “had to be created”.

Yu managed to quote the story which is most repugnant to me (right next to God’s command to Abraham to sacrifice Isaac). To play chess with human pawns, to kill the relatives of Job to see how far can he be pushed is a horrible story. By the way it also shows that God and Satan are bosom-buddies, not adversaries.

Sorry, I see no evidence for either one of them. And I am open to evidence… always was and always will be.

You also asked, what is my purpose to be around here. I answered this kind of question several times, but I will repeat it: “I am here to learn”. And learn I did and do… every day.

It’s good that you’re learning - even though you refute everything. If someone tells me Nigeria is in Africa, I check a map instead of saying: No it’s not.

I was going to give you a scripture in 2 Corinthians, but, if you really want to learn, you could go ahead and read the whole chapter. Even the whole book.

If you do end up reading Job (which you hate so why reread it?) pay attention to Chapter 38:4-7 and you could keep going a bit more.

Also, you should reread all of Novus Fidem’s posts. He gave it his best shot.

And if you’re into poetry, read all of Aloysium’s posts. Especially the one just before this.
Personally, I reread it a few times - it’s worth the time.

I hope you find what you’re looking for.

Fran

 

[frangiuliano115]

It works something like this:

Let’s start with what is happening here.
The keyboard and the monitor have a sort of relationship going on, in that what is being tapped out correlates to what appears on the screen.
The keyboard exists as does the monitor; however, they in themselves, are not truly relating to one another.
They are components in a process, parts of a complex series of physical events.

With respect to you and I, what is happening is a lot more elaborate.
On the one hand, we both participate in a material world and my actions affect your perceptions in a manner similar to the keyboard and monitor.
However, this all takes place within a greater, more subtle and comprehensive reality.

We are relating as persons; we are communicating, sharing thoughts and feelings, the reality of what it means to be human.
The flavour of this encounter is determined by who we are, our intentions and the degree to which we give, take, enhance or deplete.
Although this is all happening in space and time, in this physical universe,
our thoughts, whether we agree, disagree or don’t have a clue about what is being said, and
our feelings of anger, gladness or whatever
are of a different order than, and cannot be described merely in terms of
the multitude of biochemical activity occurring in the brain.

This is a long-winded way of getting to the point that in addition to a physical nature, our being is relational.
Regardless of what solipsists paradoxically tell others and whatever The Matrix was about, we exist in relation to everything else.
Perceptually, we connect with the physical world - its being and our being are one as the mental phenomenon.
Perception is an aspect, a sort of building block in the fabrication of the greater cognitive construct that forms the experience of the world as it is happening right here and now.

Our feelings and thoughts of the world emerge from our relationship with what is, its meaning in the context of our lives.
We seek proofs, talk of litmus tests etc because of this way in which we connect (the rational soul) to the world and its Ground of being.

Events impact on us as a result of what they mean to us.
In response, we react accordingly, chosing our course through time.

To elaborate further, as relational beings, our true nature is that of being a “self-other”.
It is in our relationships, in our give and takes, that we mold who we are from what is given.
We do not bring ourselves into existence.

While I can determine who I will be, I am not causing myself to be.
I am brought into this moment, which is in a perpetual state of transformation, from the Ground of all being.
That Ground is what IT is. IT cannot be demonstrated or proven because everything is contained in IT, who is the One Source.
One can only relate to IT, Him actually, since ITs personhood transcends ours (sorry for these poor words).

All creation emerges through an act of Love.
The Source is Love, a giving to what is other in Itself - the Triune Godhead.

We, created in His image, relate to God
as Father,
as the Word by which we came into being, who is one with us in Christ, and the whereby we are able to join
through the Holy Spirit in eternal joyous communion with God.

In giving of ourselves to what is other, we participate in this eternal Font of all life,
thereby nourishing our spirit
bringing us unending joy and happiness,
even in the face of all the adversity we find in this world.

And adversity, we all will face.
Job is a great story, that touches the heights and depths of what it means to be human, in relation to God the creator of all this magnificence.
Humanity chose badly and so we find ourselves here, in opposition to God, eternal beings, tested and given a second chance for paradise.
So, this is serious business, no place for cowards and sluggards.
“Gird your loins”; there is much to do, and we, as God’s hands, are commanded to do His will to love.

BTW: God is all merciful; don’t fret, rejoice.

This is much too long; hopefully someone will read it and find it interesting.

I’m sure many have read it and find it interesting.

Your posts are very uplifting.

Poetry can never be too long.

Fran

 

[ynotzap]

What a great question! I will have to think about this a bit. I suspect the answers will be as varied and those who try to grapple with this.

To love God, who one can not see, to love A Divine Spirit, how can one, who is flesh, blood and spirit love a Divine Spirit. If one was snatched up in mystical ecstasy and God was revealed to one, one could readily understand how one could love God. It would be an all consuming personal experience, a unifying experience, a completely happy and satisfying experience.a complete fulfillment of all desires. This in not the case in our human existence, although it known that some have had some degree of this experience, but never complete. How can God make Himself lovable to flesh, blood and spirit? How to communicate, how to get to know Him, which is an essential requirement to love? God, by becoming flesh, blood, and spirit, like one of us. He did this in His Son. When we see, and experience Christ in our lives, because Jesus Christ is the perfect reflection of the Father, we experience God When we experience what He did for us, by personal experience, and the more, and deeper we are established in this truth, the more, by understanding, and knowing, grow in our love for Him. This is the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives. God loved us first, and that love caused us to love Him, to be united with Him, as all lovers tend to be united to the one that is loved. It is the purpose of our existence. This is in answer to the op, referred to by Helen.

 

[Vic_Taltrees_UK]

…

Unfortunately you used another meaningless term: “spiritual”. I am willing to listen to “spirituals”, which are a very pleasing type of music. I am willing to drink good (distilled) “spirits”. Generally I am very upbeat, in other words I am in good “spirits”. But “ghosts” or “spirits” make no sense to me.

I have nothing against training. On the contrary. But you (as alleged teachers) have to show me “how” to train. What are the steps I must take to get “stronger”?

To the two above points taken together: one of them is spend time getting the hang of meanings to words. Personally I don’t like to use the word “spiritual” much - but it means lots of the things you have in your life already, plus a few you can have. I’m 60 and I am learning all the time.

I went through this kind of conversation many times in my life. I was told to pray and ask (this is “technical”). I was told that “knock and the door will be open”. I tried, and NOTHING happened. Then the reply was the same I always receive: “you did not ask honestly”, or “you cannot expect God to jump when you ask something”, or “you were too impatient”, and so on. In other words, “I am the one to blame for dishonesty, for impatience, for wanting to impose what God is expected to do”… sorry… this is what I call baloney.

When you utter a prayer and ask FOR something, you are “required” to add “if it be thy will”. Which effectively is a “get out of jail free” card. The Muslims say: “Insh’a Allah”, God willing. This is called playing with a loaded dice, or saying: “if the result is heads, I win, if the result is tails, you lose”. If I pray for something and it happens - wonderful - God granted my wish. If I pray and nothing happens, I was too proud, too demanding, too impatient or prayed for the wrong things… in other words, I am to blame for the result.

This kind of attitude is a huge turn-off. I do not accuse you of ethical dishonesty, but I do accuse you of intellectual dishonesty. Let’s put God to the test… the test will always come back as negative… OOPS… I am not allowed to put God to the test. When you have a hypothesis and try to test it, the negative outcomes are just as important as the positive ones.

Sorry for being blunt. But you should ponder what I said.

About the sort of thing you relate in your last few paragraphs generally: on the one hand, pat portmanteau answers from “old hands” don’t suit newcomers like yourself. Overall, the church is insufficiently used to newcomers. It’s out and out wrong to accuse people of dishonesty about God when they haven’t been offered any catechesis.

About the portion I have placed in bold I don’t suggest Christians should propose details from the Muslim beliefs which don’t mix with faith in Jesus. We are not “required”. If we know about God’s will from much catechesis (if a church anywhere near you so much as offers any at all) we can begin to tailor our requests particularly to it which includes a huge amount of variety. Now I have raised the question of timeframes with you and I’d like to point out here that you have sometimes defined the absence of evidence of an answer as yet, to be evidence of absence. A farmer plants a seed which looks no different for a while.

As for you, instead of accusing you of being impatient I would say you are sentimental. Sentimentality is not supported by Scriptures, whatever some insiders to the church say.

As for negative outcomes, they can suggest further hypotheses.