The Scourge That Cleansed the Temple

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: WarminIndy

There is no more need now of the temple there, because WE are now the temple with Christ as the High Priest and sacrifice.

I'm trying to remember all this. Letter to Hebrews, the true tabernacle (tent), his body.
1 Corinthians: There is one body with many members.
probably Ephesians and Colossians also.

So would you say that the Church (body of Christ) is married to the greater deity through sacrifice?

Remember, the kingdom is not meat or drink. To keep thinking of it in natural terms,

Then the kingdom is now? Coexisting timewise and locationwise(body, where two or more are gathered in the name). Then it's a matter of flesh and spirit working together. "What you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven"

If so then you believe in mystical union. Then to insult you is to insult Christ, because you are his. That could be a conversation breaker.

Please excuse me while I adjust my attitude.

Yes, the kingdom is now and has been since Jesus came out of the wilderness preaching "Repent and believe the Gospel for the kingdom of God is at hand".

I did say I was not Orthodox like most Christians. Is that good or bad?

a reply to: WarminIndy

I did say I was not Orthodox like most Christians. Is that good or bad?

It's good because you are already out of the box. You are free to change opinions. Basically between you and your God.

Some advice: There is much idle chatter that goes on in the forum. Try to let it slide off. It's easy to get distracted by inconsequentials. That's kind of a waste of time and energy. Give yourself time alone to think and feel.

a reply to: pthena

I'm going to go with, the large majority of it all was made up. Perhaps innocently enough, in some cases. I personally have no more reason to believe Christianity, than I do Islam, Hinduism, or any other religion. It boggles my mind how followers of a particular religion can point out all the flaws and obvious mythologies of other religions but never place the same standards on their own.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: WarminIndy

I did say I was not Orthodox like most Christians. Is that good or bad?

It's good because you are already out of the box. You are free to change opinions. Basically between you and your God.

Some advice: There is much idle chatter that goes on in the forum. Try to let it slide off. It's easy to get distracted by inconsequentials. That's kind of a waste of time and energy. Give yourself time alone to think and feel.

Thank you for that good advice.

I am currently back for a while, I take time off several month at a time to write and get my brain focused on what I really do in life.

I don't think you realize, I am a disabled person with MS so many days when I am between doing things, I really have little else to do. That's why I can afford being on here so much recently.

I do study a lot and write when my brain can focus.

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

It boggles my mind how followers of a particular religion can point out all the flaws and obvious mythologies of other religions but never place the same standards on their own.

It's psychologically difficult to get far in and at the same time look at it from a distance.

I've been thinking that the people who are called "lukewarm, deadwood" etc. by the religious enthusiasts are actually at a more psychological sound place.

a reply to: WarminIndy

Bless you,

I didn't realize. I guess I imagined you young, overflowing with energy, and furiously playing wack-o-mole on the forum.

I have my own disability, at least 3 undiagnosed psychotic breaks, finally diagnosed bi-polar delusional. I don't relish psychotic breaks, takes decades to actually figure out what triggered it. Seems like a lot of wasted time to me.

Here's Neil Diamond again.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: WarminIndy

Bless you,

I didn't realize. I guess I imagined you young, overflowing with energy, and furiously playing wack-o-mole on the forum.

I have my own disability, at least 3 undiagnosed psychotic breaks, finally diagnosed bi-polar delusional. I don't relish psychotic breaks, takes decades to actually figure out what triggered it. Seems like a lot of wasted time to me.

Here's Neil Diamond again.

Hugs for you.

Dark night of the soul. You will get through it.

I love Neil Diamond.

a reply to: WarminIndy
Thank you,

I was looking and looking on youtube and found an oldie that I haven't heard in decades.

This is kind of a picture of Christians. I think people who have a hard time understanding Christians should maybe listen to it.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: WarminIndy
Thank you,

I was looking and looking on youtube and found an oldie that I haven't heard in decades.

This is kind of a picture of Christians. I think people who have a hard time understanding Christians should maybe listen to it.

Want to hear something funny?

When I was working as an English tutor, I was driving to work and as I pulled into the parking lot, this song was playing on the radio. Then less than half an hour later a student named Brandi came in for me to help.

I think some people call that synchronicity.

a reply to: WarminIndy

I think some people call that synchronicity.

Yes some kind of reminder for people.

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: WarminIndy

Yes some kind of reminder for people.

Cool dialog, you two. Cool and heart-warming at the same time.


Yes, synchronicity is a great reminder that we are all inherently connected, and the more I notice and persist in feeling into this vast field of relatedness we call life, the more I see this kind of "magic" happening.

We are literally all in the same boat or "event" and our presumed physical boundaries are obviously necessary, but our psychic feeling boundaries don't truly exist in reality. Love is inherently unlimited.

a reply to: bb23108
I never did get back to you on the other thread. This seems to be a good place however, cleansing of the temple and all.

I read your metaphysic and came to the conclusion that your view of underlying reality follows Parmenides/Plato.

I, on the other hand, am an Atomist from the Epicurean school.

Yet how is it that we can sit in the same seat watching a passion play together and both appreciate the same scene?

We are literally all in the same boat or "event" and our presumed physical boundaries are obviously necessary, but our psychic feeling boundaries don't truly exist in reality. Love is inherently unlimited.

We may just be on to something here.

originally posted by: pthena

I read your metaphysic and came to the conclusion that your view of underlying reality follows Parmenides/Plato.

I, on the other hand, am an Atomist from the Epicurean school.

Yet how is it that we can sit in the same seat watching a passion play together and both appreciate the same scene?

We may just be on to something here.

Actually I look at this based on the argument of non-duality - in which unqualified, unconditional Consciousness-Light (Reality) is the non-separate "medium" of all forms.

All apparently conditional forms are modifications of indivisible Unconditional Consciousness, and are merely stepped-down vibratory frequencies of that same Consciousness-Light.

Thus there is inherent Unity (non-separation), but also apparent multiplicity. However, multiplicity continually appears and disappears, whereas Consciousness-Light Itself is always present as indivisible non-separate Unity or Reality itself.

I believe that Jesus also taught a form of non-duality when he gave his two great commandments. How can one love God so fully unless they are in non-separate communion with the Divine Reality? Plus he said to love one's neighbor as oneself - also indicating that we are not actually separate from our neighbors.

So could Jesus be wielding his whip and running the vendors out of the temple, and all the while assuming his non-separation from them? Well that would be the question - and also my attempt to keep our diversion here on topic!

a reply to: bb23108

Blinded by the Light

Blinded by the light,
revved up like a deuce,
another runner in the night
. . .
With a boulder on my shoulder,
feelin' kinda older,
I tripped the merry-go-round

With this very unpleasin',
sneezin' and wheezin,
the calliope crashed to the ground
. . .
Mama always told me not to look into the eyes of the sun
But mama, that's where the fun is
-----------------
Now here is a song which to me portrays our lives as a full on carnival experience, very confusing as to who is who and just what is going on. The picture that especially sticks in my mind is the calliope crashing to the ground.

In all this confusion, the temptation is to look into the eyes of the sun, to see what may be real and important. That may be your experience.

Another kind of experience may be like this:

Against all good advice to the contrary,
there I was in the river swimming against the current.
Upstream was a city that dumped its waste into that river.
Rather unpleasant material made its way into my eyes and mouth.

A voice said, "Come up here on the bank and watch for a while."
So I swam over to the bank and climbed out of the river.
I sat and I watched for a while.

Finally I got back to my feet
when again I heard the voice say,
"Wouldn't you like to stay here?"

I was up and in the air half-way back into the river
and called back over my shoulder,
"Nope. That's where the fun is."

Even if the greater reality is apart from the movement and flow, consider this:
If the static all being-ness chose to experience itself through apparent separateness and subsequent separate points of view, would it not be a disservice to drop out of character?

If I were watching a play, and halfway through all the actors just stopped, took off their masks and said, "none of this is real," then exited the theatre, I would feel inclined to ask for my money back.

So could Jesus be wielding his whip and running the vendors out of the temple, and all the while assuming his non-separation from them? Well that would be the question -

I think the answer just may be yes.

Notice that I had the audacity to call Jesus a hypocrite, a play actor. Now let's look at this scene again from another viewpoint. This is the same writer that has Jesus pronouncing woes on the Scribes and Pharisees, and using the term "hypocrite" in a rather pejorative manner.

Matt 21:14 The blind and lame came to him in the temple courts, and he healed them. 15 But when the chief priests and the experts in the law saw the wonderful things he did and heard the children crying out in the temple courts, “Hosanna to the Son of David,” they became indignant 16 and said to him, “Do you hear what they are saying?” Jesus said to them, “Yes. Have you never read, ‘Out of the mouths of children and nursing infants you have prepared praise for yourself’?”

So there is Jesus standing right next to the other people that he called hypocrites.

Thanks for the song! But are we not blinded by all the endless variations of the Light, rather than the Light itself, our true nature?

originally posted by: pthena
Even if the greater reality is apart from the movement and flow, consider this:
If the static all being-ness chose to experience itself through apparent separateness and subsequent separate points of view, would it not be a disservice to drop out of character?

One simply drops out of the play-acting when we see it is our suffering, for what is this identification with the actor anyway? It is a contraction of the being's energy throughout the body-mind - to insure a sense of separate self.

Also, it doesn't mean that life stops - quite the opposite - one participates more fully in life.

This very gesture of self-contraction is our own activity - we are doing this to ourselves and it hurts! In each moment that we see we are actually doing this activity of contracting our energy at every level of the body-mind, we will simply stop in that moment, and in that moment of recognition, we are released into our prior condition of feeling-awareness, Love.

This recognition must persist in each moment that we notice what we are doing to separate from our actual condition of connectedness, of unity, of relatedness.

It is indeed the case that when we are simply noticing our inherent relatedness to all, we are feeling connected and inherently happy. When we separate and internalize somewhere inside the body-mind, we feel contracted and uptight.

originally posted by: pthena
If I were watching a play, and halfway through all the actors just stopped, took off their masks and said, "none of this is real," then exited the theatre, I would feel inclined to ask for my money back.

LOL! Sure, but what if their gesture was so profound that everyone in the audience also took off their masks?

a reply to: bb23108
It sounds like a lot of Tzimtzum to me, which isn't particularly part of my vocabulary.

I'm sorry, I'm drawing a blank here. Maybe if I sleep on it?

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: bb23108
It sounds like a lot of Tzimtzum to me, which isn't particularly part of my vocabulary.

It is non-dualism, which if you are interested, I can supply you with various book titles about it.

a reply to: bb23108
Some time during the last 10 years, I did read a couple of books.

I've juggled Pantheism and Panenteism.

I had a friend who seemed able to logically hold the barest of abstractions in unity. I began to pretend to him that I could do the same. Pretense became dishonesty, dishonesty self-delusion, self-delusion hubris. When hubris was full blown, with Icarus, did I fall into the sea.

Perhaps some minds can handle the required level of abstraction, I don't know. But I do know that I can't.

The best I can achieve is a sense of sanctification of the mundane.

---------------------------------
ETA I changed some wording to make is sound more profound.

originally posted by: pthena
The best I can achieve is a sense of sanctification of the mundane.

We can certainly use as much of that as possible! And in Reality, the mundane is not separate from the Divine, so that is certainly one very valid approach to recognizing the Divine, although it also is an ordeal. But what isn't?

originally posted by: pthena
ETA I changed some wording to make is sound more profound.

LOL!

Best to you. I have enjoyed our exchange.