untitled
viviti

OML Archives- 
 
Re: [wisdom] One - Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:20:12 -0500


Date: Thu, 2 Nov 1995 10:20:12 -0500
From: pore@mainelink.net
Subject: Re: [wisdom] One
To: alanpog@ax.apc.org, orgonomy@webcom.com,
Sender: owner-orgonomy@webcom.com

Alan,

Here is an  example of a header that arrived from wisdom@webcom.com which 
is another mail list. If there is a way to have the oml to reply always to 
orgonomy@webcom.com like they do with wisdom@webcom.com I think we would 
see more use of it. Right now when someone hits a reply button it goes only to 
the person known that is in the reply header. Let me know what you think. 
.............................jogg
    Web Page is at "http://www.mainelink.net/~pore/"
   Email is at "pore@mainelink.net"  
Slow mail: PORE/po box 1383/Windham,Me 04062-1383 USA

P.S. The messages from that mail list is interesting and sometimes boring 
but the below one was fairly well said of religious effects on individuals not 
requested when we are born but shoved on us.




<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
Received: from mail.webcom.com (mail.webcom.com [205.199.112.25]) by 
maine.mainelink.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA26934 for 
<pore@mainelink.net>; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 05:07:06 -0500
Received: from mail.webcom.com (mail.webcom.com [205.199.112.25]) by 
maine.mainelink.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id FAA26934 for 
<pore@mainelink.net>; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 05:07:06 -0500
Received: from localhost by mail.webcom.com with SMTP (1.37.109.15/16.2) id 
AA297364169; Tue, 31 Oct 1995 02:09:29 -0800
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 02:09:29 -0800
Message-Id: <9510311005.AA18737@highway1.com.au>
X-Sender: dbeale@mail.iinet.com.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: wisdom@mail.webcom.com
From: David Beale <dbeale@highway1.com.au>
Subject: Re: [wisdom] One
Sender: owner-wisdom@webcom.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: wisdom@webcom.com
X-UIDL: 815185757.003
Status: RO

At 04:08 PM 30/10/95 -0800, Doug wrote:
> 
> 
>David, if possible, please let me know what 'being a Christian' means to 
>you.  I can't quite see you as what I would call a *Christian*, since the
>definition of the word means a follower of the teachings of Jesus. 

"Chris·tian

  (krís´chn) -adj.  1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following 
the religion based on his teachings.  2. Pertaining to or derived from 
Jesus or his teachings.  3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Christ; 
Christlike.  4. Pertaining to or characteristic of Christianity or its 
adherents.  5.  INFORMAL. Neighborly; decent.

 -n.  1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the 
religion based on his teachings.  2. One who lives according to the 
teachings of Jesus. [ME Cristen < OE < Lat. Christianus < Gk. Khristianos < 
Khristos, Christ.]  Chris´tian·ly adv.

The American Heritage Dictionary and Electronic Thesaurus are licensed from 
Houghton Mifflin Company.  Copyright (c) 1986, 1987 by Houghton Mifflin 
Company.  All rights reserved.  Based upon The American Heritage 
Dictionary."


Doug, I subscribe to enough items in the list.  But not to the bit after 
the "or" specifically "following the religion." Not the Religeon. As for 
the "teachings" I believe they are dynamic and available to anyone alive as 
equal to anyone else and don't need a power-structure with penalties and 
threats.  The two sides alongside the "or" are getting to be mutually 
exclusive........"Christian Religeon" is somewhat an oxymoron to me.  
"Professing belief in Jesus as Christ" can even get into too much 
wordmongering over the meaning of "Christ" for people who think only of 
petty social structures. To me the word "Christ" applies to the whole of 
Creation rather than its more common use ---- certainly belongs to more 
than just one historic figure and even in the Xian religeons there is 
belief in the "Holy Spirit"......they think they own it!

Another quote from the same CD  "Bookshelf":

"general semantics

 -n.(usedwithasing.orverb). pl.A doctrine proposed by Alfred Korzybski 
(1879-1950) that presents a method of improving human behavior through a 
more critical use of words and symbols  

The American Heritage Dictionary and Electronic Thesaurus"

and 

"se·man·tics

  (sí-mán´tíks) -n.  1.  LINGUISTICS The study or science of meaning in 
language forms, esp. with regard to its historical change.  2.  LOGIC The 
study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent.

The American Heritage Dictionary"

I love that bit in the definition, about "historical change".  Any Truth 
can be sold and regurgitated until it's bullshit at an ever-rising price. 
We've just finished killing the world (nearly --- it's going to Live) in a 
unique (a long enough time for us to not know how long since some other set 
of fools did the same thing) effort to prove that a god loves us and the 
evidence is wealth and ownership and this insane equasion of how big a heap 
of gold we can gouge out of the ground regarding one's "worth".  We've just 
finished worshiping ownership and had a whole gigantic religeon built 
around posession and "power" and are getting into holistic thinking and 
equality that treats the world with the same love as we should now be able 
to learn to treat ourselves and each other with.

So we're really talking about "semantics" with regard to the word 
"Christian" --- I certainly find I have to use "X" in place of a sacred 
name, when talking about various social and political groups who get 
power-kicks out of inventing "churchs" that they use to disempower (and 
rob) people with.........yet within these organisations one can see the 
parallels to life in general and human-beings in general with their shades 
of grey.  In our own way we probably all think our grey is "white" and 
someone else's is "black" according to our own scales.  So I can't join in 
with the usual run of cults and social clubs because I tend towards 
believing in a "Universal" church thing ---- Ralph put it so well: "a 
Universe, not a Monoverse".  Many times I've gone on about how we can have 
individuality bigger when we "loose" it into being closer to "oneness".

Probably if I was born elsewhere except four miles form Perth Western 
Australia, I'd be some other "religeon" other than a Christian. I might 
perhaps think I'm not an Xian but look at it from the point of view of 
someone who has beliefs even stronger than the average Xian ----- I 
wouldn't be seen as anything except one of Them; yet the Xians would string 
me up at least for believing what I believe.

I was born in a place where everyone lived within about 1/2 mile of a 
railway track and everyone went to church on Sundays. Catholics were evil 
because they went on too much about "Hell" and surely god is kinder than to 
design us for infinite torture for an infinite amount of time. The 
non-catholics of a different sect were preaching the same shit about 
infinite torture ---- perhaps they are secretly pushing Hitler as a viable 
alternative at least the Nazis were by comparison angels straight from 
heaven compared with their "god".  "The Methodists were not of the true 
religeon" anyway "only the Anglicans were real Xians". There were one or 
two other churches that were far down in the pecking order. And we all sang 
...d Save the King/Queen and prayed earnestly for our masters' wellfare 
while sending butter to England to be sold cheaper than we could buy it and 
while borrowing money at high interest rates (from the English) to grow 
wool to send to England for processing (we weren't allowed to process 
wool)......and when I found out countless anomolies like these about all I 
could look forward to was unpleasantness (not from parents but from about 
everything else) for being such a troublesome little shit for questioning 
the authority of g-d's word.......so I ended up with lots of disparity 
about the beautiful people I met at Church and took ages to work out that 
there are plenty who don't go to church because after years of brainwashing 
it takes time first for a kid to work out that (a) people who aren't rich 
aren't poor because g... doesn't love them (b) people who aren't Xians or 
don't go to church aren't Evil...then the same kids have to work out 
alternatives to the brainwashing only to find that everywhere there are 
just layers within layers of brainwashing and countless belief-systems 
often just designed around the personal egos and power-systems of males 
(most of whom subscribe to a person who wrote some very nice helpful notes 
to friends but these notes are now called "the incarnate word of ..d" yet 
the person seems to have hated women).
> 
>Maybe there isn't such a church within the world of Christianity."

There is and little bits pop up whenever two or three or so gather together 
in some way, to be "together" in a loving way ----  it's multi-dimensional 
and it's a Universal Church and anyone can belong even those with the 
disability of not being able to fit in with the majority (who in this 
Born-A-Wasp's case happens to be the Xians) and there's no male in charge 
and no fees no building....it's part of the Universal Now in EveryWhen and 
EveryWhere.
> 
>I'm curious because I've struggled with this dilemma for many years, and
>finally got to the point of just admitting that since I don't believe in
>the same things or approach life the same as most Christians I know or 
>have known, then I am not a Christian."

Being a "Christian" gets some meaning back when one takes the first-in-line 
definition (above) but how does one in the same word disassociate from the 
"or" meanings and just apply to the Person then also get away from the 
rather tiresome definitions of "Christ" .......and if we get into that I'll 
also take back what I said about being a "Christian!"  --- depends on what 
dictionary one is using.

"I feel no need to fit
>in to the predominant religion in my country."  I agree on that lots.  OK 
for me to choose all details of birth etc and the "ride" included being 
born into a town when there was no alternative to being an Xian.

>And, since you say many of
>the same things I believe, and now call yourself a Christian, I'm slightly
>confused, like I'm missing something.  (Cognitive dissonance?)"

I really would like to write about the "why" I call myself a "Christian" 
very much, now; but there is a limit to disclosure of one's personal 
experiences before the threat of white coats and cages becomes real --- 
can't volunteer for being seen as a equivalent to a black-Jewish-lame 
person in a world still run by Nazis.......they weren't inventors of 
hatreds and it's only mildly below the surface of "polite" society as it 
usually shows itself?  I'll think more about it and write later when I've 
worked out how to get it into words ---- seems simple living it but there 
are no words for some aspects of the "knowing".

Cheers.



David Beale             dbeale@highway1.com.au
phone +61 9 293 1512   fax +61 9 257 2383
52 Chaucer Way  KALAMUNDA 6076
Western AUSTRALIA

--

To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe" in the body of a message to
"wisdom-request@webcom.com".



<----  End Forwarded Message  ---->


 


Many thanks for Geocities providing this free space
Get your own Free Home Page


Web Hosting · Blog · Guestbooks · Message Forums · Mailing Lists
Easiest Website Builder ever! · Build your own toolbar · Free Talking Character · Email Marketing
powered by a free webtools company bravenet.com