Expulsion

We don’t know … with any degree of certainty … that communication is limited to man-made constructs(ions) such as language.

Hi pilgrim-seeker_tom

I am very interested in what you are saying here.

Communication is defined as follows:

1 ► the imparting or exchanging of information by speaking, writing, or using some other medium.
2 ► means of sending or receiving information, such as telephone lines or computers.
3 ► means of traveling or of transporting goods, such as roads or railways.
Could I perhaps get more of an idea of what you mean? Please!

:smiley:

[b]

[/b]

[b]

[/b]

pilgrim-seeker_tom

Thank you. I myself do have an intuitive sense.

I loved Star Trek - mind melds sound awesome.

1 ► the imparting or exchanging of information by speaking, writing, or using some other medium.

We are talking about using some other medium.

[-o<

Most ‘prayer’ is egocentric … communication with oneself.

pilgrim-seeker_tom

I don’t know. I know that were not asking me a question but I don’t know about most prayer. I spend a lot of time away from people because of anxiety issues that I experience being around others. You are probably right though - it seems that most things that people do these days are egocentric.

I hope everything is OK with you - you don’t seem to be your energetic self.

Aaron … seems your comments have triggered the opening of a new horizon of thought … let me attempt to explain.

After my last post my memory went looking for an example of non egocentric prayer.

The second half of the life of Francis of Assisi came to mind … Francis persistently refused to join the Church militant … the institution of the Church … I understand 800 years later the Franciscans maintain this separation. Francis also encouraged his followers to preach the Gospel everywhere … even … using words … if necessary.

thoughtsofamisfit.weebly.com/tru … hists.html

His most ardent follower … St Clare of Assisi … is another example. She joined his movement(for lack of a better word) as a teenager and battled with the Church militant … the institution of the Church … until a few days before she died. Why did she fight so tenaciously?

The right to be poor!!

Imagine fighting the aristocracy of the Church for the right to be poor. A few days after receiving such a right … she died … Hmmm!

Ste Teresaa of Avila and St John of the Cross took up her struggle in the 16th century … a time of serious upheaval in the church … centered in Europe. Their successful reforms gave birth to a new sect of the Carmelites … Discalced Carmelites.

Discalced means … going barefoot … a symbol of poverty. Hmmm!

This may explain why a healthy dose of poverty … destitution … is maintained in the world … and kept high profile … in order to constantly remind the public that poverty is the scourge of humanity.

Why?

Imagine the public getting the feeling that poverty is a source of blessing(s) … joy … happiness … peace.

What impact would such an outcome have on the prevailing paradigm … prosperity is the only source of joy … happiness and so on. A paradigm where ‘privilege’ is enshrined in law.

This may also explain some current geopolitics … the perceived threat of Russia and China. Both nations were literally on their knees … rampant poverty and destitution … a generation ago … and today???

Expulsion is a form of violence … ???

Fighting for peace is like fornicating for chastity … ???

pilgrim-seeker_tom

I understand a number of things you mentioned like, the second half of the life of Francis of Assisi came to mind … Francis persistently refused to join the Church militant … the institution of the Church. I too refuse to join the institution of the Church, there are too many reasons to mention them all here - I might even make another thread for that at a later date. For me the problem comes down to the misinterpretation of the Bible mostly - Many things that are said in Church do not occur in the Bible.

The website you directed me to was a very interesting read - anarchy - who ever thought. I see where the author was coming from with his perspective on his immediate reaction being … “How disgusting!”. It is interesting the different views people argue that Jesus himself was an anarchist and some people even argue that Jesus was a Communist. The author rests on being convinced that St Clare certainly was an anarchist … and yet her legacy falls into that select group of the most “Christ-like” followers of Jesus . . . if history is accurate both St Francis and St Clare … and their followers … lived their life without possessions.

It could be said that one expels from oneself certain things in life . . .

Jesus himself even spoke about possessions, Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. When the young man heard this, he went away in sorrow, because he had great wealth. Hmm.

I too try to maintain a minimum of possessions. I see so many people in a state of misery and yet they have everything. Having very little builds a certain type of character into a person . . . a character that is most rare in the rich.

That would be such a different world - for most it would be unimaginable . . .

Now this I totally agree with - it just makes no sense to me that any of us think peace is about fighting.

On a Biblical note, God did expel Adam and Eve from Eden:

I do not know what to think about this being violent however. It does however remind me of what WendyDarling quoted in the original post.

There are many case of violent expulsions throughout history and all around the world too.

I would suggest that the demise of Jesus was a violent expulsion - for disloyalty to one party, and loyalty to his father.

I have to admit that a part of me would want justice for the citizens seeking the expulsion - on the other hand I would not want any violence involved in that expulsion. It certainly makes one think . . .

:-k

Violence? What violence? The people would like to regain control of their government, how can criminals be removed from office with hugs and kisses?

For Pilgrim Tom,
God is not opposed to violence for He used it on many occasions, but if you can think of a non-violent way to remove corruption by all means…share.

WendyDarling

One thing is certain . . .

To remove criminals from office is not going to happen with hugs and kisses. I would like to see the people regain control of their government - we nearly ended up with a similar problem here - but there was a Royal Commission.

Average folks make up the Royal Commission or government agents?

WendyDarling

Yeah - it is complicated - a Royal Commission is a major ad-hoc formal public inquiry into a defined issue that leads to prosecutions involving corruption in which it examines how to reshape government administration to avoid future problems with similar issues. These commissions have been used for other things too like child abuse in churches, schools and other public institutions.

Here we have local members of parliament that we can take our concerns to - action has been taken on public concerns many times.

I noticed while reading about the US that things have been dealt with in state court, a judiciary committee and if I remember correctly the senate before that lead to expulsion. I could be wrong about the senate.

There must be some way for folks to get the ball rolling.

Our citizens can write and visit with our congressmen too, but it doesn’t amount to anything official, just complaints and there is no further process to police congress.

[b]

[/b]

Experience has taught me that new thoughts are like new wine(red) … they have to age for a while … sometimes a long while … before you know if they’re any good. :slight_smile:

[b]

[/b]

We don’t know, with any degree of certainty, it won’t work. :slight_smile: Some argue … don’t underestimate the power of love. :slight_smile:

[b]

[/b]

Nature … the universe is violent from time to time … earth quakes and so on … attributing violence to God may stem from the observation of nature.

Tom, are you in denial of the Old Testament? God was quite violent in the ways he made his points and they were not natural weather disasters either.

[b]

[/b]

Wendy … I know better than to argue with you. :slight_smile:

I also know you are attentive to “other’s” perspectives … at least from time to time. :slight_smile:

My understanding of the OT and NT has evolved into a more simplistic view. They are both intended as steps on a long stairway to God. Also seems obvious they have both given rise to a long stairway away from God. #-o

My personal experiences … especially the past 25 years are intimately connected to the OT and NT … and I’m still struggling to figure it out. I believe I had a major break through about 10 days ago … my “A Moment Outside of Time” OP.

If you’re curious you can read about it here … pilgrimtom.weebly.com/blog

:-" :wink:

I may check you out…again. Encapsulate what you got out of the old Testament regarding God’s behaviors, mentality, emotional states.

[Edit: I checked out your visit to the mosaic by the lady who gave you her briefcase and her story about Elijiah.]

Tell me about the OT God. Impatiently awaiting your return. :evilfun:

[b]

[/b]

The OT God is a helpful human rendition of God … a complicated and colorful mosaic … sprinkled with fact … adorned with the most eloquent garments of human imagination available at the time.

[b]

[/b]

The human rendition of the OT God is an “external” God.

The human rendition of the NT God is “A God Within”.

Seems logical the next and final human rendition of God will be the discovery (consciousness) of God within.