6 Theodicy and ethics

"Belief in karmic retribution has encouraged the avoidance of deeds conventionally deemed evil, and thus supported conventional ethics; but karmic retribution does not entail any final resolution to misery. Only religious practice, whether conceived as self-power or other-power, holds out the prospect of final liberation, or at least the actualization of ones inherent enlightenment. In the meantime, one is to do good and avoid evil; more specifically, one is to adhere to conventional Buddhist precepts such as not killing, stealing, lying and so on. Similarly, veneration of ancestral spirits, including Buddhist patriarchs, has encouraged a respect for tradition and social order, while non-ego has been extolled as the basis of right action in both Japanese Buddhism and Confucianism. If we seek in Japanese Buddhist philosophy a coherent theory of ethics as a separate branch of philosophy, we find instead a variety of practical reasons; for a moral theory, we would have to refer to Confucianism (see Confucian philosophy, Japanese )."

Well..... Let me see how many atheist I can piss off today.

HELP ME LIVE MY LIFE THIS WAY

Ideas from a real good book by OG Mandino The Greatest Salesman In The World

After a time, sometimes we, without realizing it, dont put enough good thoughts into our heads, and thus allow bad thoughts to set up house. Here are some good things to make habits of.

When I feel bad, think only good thoughts.

I can only think one thing at a time. Why not make that thought one that enhances my life.

Anytime I have a bad thought, replace it with a good one.

Anytime I have bad feelings or thoughts, say to myself, "Cancel, cancel that thought!"

Abraham Lincoln said. "A person is just about as happy as he wants to be."

Never accept can't. Always realize can't never could.

Always realize, I am as everyone else. No one better than the other. No one worst.

Tell myself only the good things in life. Discard the things that dont make something or someone better off.

Try, hard as it may be sometimes, to feel no hate for another. And someday it will not be hard anymore.

Greet each day with love in my heart.

Bite my tongue when I am tempted to criticize.

Admire each person, for each has qualities to be admired, even though they may be hidden.

Love thyself. Zealously inspect all things that enter my body and mind.

Persist until I succeed. The prizes of life are at the end of each journey and it is not given to me to know how many steps are necessary to reach my goal. Failure I may still encounter at the thousandth step, yet success hides behind the next bend in the road. I will always take another step toward success.

I am natures greatest miracle. I am not on this earth by chance. I am here for a purpose and that purpose is to grow into a mountain, not to shrink into a grain of sand.

I will seek constantly to improve my manners and graces.

I will concentrate my energies at the moment at hand.

I am natures greatest miracle. I have been given eyes to see and a mind to think and now I know a great secret of life, for I perceive at last that all my problems, discouragements, and heartaches are in truth great opportunities in disguise. I will no longer be fooled by the garments they wear, for my eyes are open. I will look beyond the cloth and I will not be deceived.

With each victory the next struggle becomes less difficult.

I will live this day as if it is my last. I will not dwell on yesterday or tomorrow, only today.

Doubt I will bury with faith.

Today I will praise my loved one with sweet kisses. Tomorrow they will be gone and so will I.

I will live this day as if it were my last. And if it is not, I will fall to my knees and give thanks.

I will be master of my moods. My emotions will not be my master. For if my mood is not right I will be a failure. I will master my moods.

So that everyday is a happy day and a productive one, I will learn this secret of the ages. Weak is he who permits his thoughts to control his actions. Strong is he who forces his actions to control his thoughts. Each day when I awake, I will follow this plan of battle before I am captured by the forces of sadness, self-pity, and failure. If I feel depressed--I will sing. If I feel sad--I will laugh. If I feel ill--I will doubt my labor. If I feel fear--I will plunge ahead. If I feel inferior--I will wear new garments. If I feel uncertain--I will raise my voice. If I feel poverty--I will think of wealth to come. If I feel incompetentI will remember past success. If I feel insignificant--I will remember my goals. Today I will be master of my emotions.

I will understand the moods of others. I will make allowances for their anger and irritations of today for they know not the secret of controlling their minds.

My knowledge of this secret will be my key to a greater understanding of life. Today I will be master of my emotions. Henceforth, I will recognize and identify the mystery of our moods in all mankind and in me. I will master my moods with positive action. And when I master my moods, I will control my destiny.

I will laugh at the world. No living creature can laugh, except man. I will cultivate the habit of laughter.

I will laugh and my life will be lengthened. For this is the secret of long life and now it is mine.

I will laugh at myself for man is most comical when man takes himself too seriously. Never will I fall into this trap of the mind.

Will my concern for this day not seem foolish ten years hence? Why should I permit petty happenings of today disturb me.

Four words I will train myself to say until they become habits so strong that immediately they will appear in my mind whenever good humor threatens to depart from me. These words passed down from the Ancients will carry me through every adversity and maintain my life in balance. These four words are: THIS TOO SHALL PASS . I will laugh at the world. For all worldly things shall indeed pass. When I am heavy with heartache I shall console myself that this too shall pass. When I am puffed with success, I shall warn myself that this too shall pass. Yea verily, where is he who built the pyramid? Is he not buried within the stone? And will the pyramid one day not also be buried under sand? If all things shall pass, why should I be of concern for today? I will laugh at the world. I will paint this day with laughter. I will frame this night in song. Never will I labor to be happy. Rather I will remain too busy to be sad. I will enjoy today's happiness today. It is not grain to be stored in a box. It is not wine to be saved in a jar. It cannot be saved for tomorrow. It must be sown and reaped on the same day and this I will do, henceforth.

Only with laughter and happiness can I enjoy the fruits of my labor.

I have the power to choose my own destiny.

Let me act now, even though my actions may not bring happiness or success, for it is better to act and fail than not to act and flounder. Happiness and truth may not be the fruit plucked by my actions, yet without action, all fruit will die on the vine. I will act now!

Never will I pray for the material things of the world. Only the guidance will I pray.

Help me count my blessing of today.

Guide me and direct me in the right direction.

Give me patience with others and myself.

Help me to live this day as if it is to be my last.

Help me to remain humble.

Allow me the courage to laugh at my misgivings.

Silence me from gossip.

Guide me in my words that they may bear fruit.

Discipline me in the habit in trying and trying again.

Bathe me in good habits that the bad ones may drown.

Grant me compassion for weakness in others.

Suffer me to know that all things shall pass.

Fill my cup with love to turn strangers into friends.

Guide me, help me and show me the way. Let me become all you planned for me when my seed was planted and selected to sprout in the vineyard of the world.

kathypilcher.files.wordpress

Six, Thank you for being here. Wow, how beautifully and well-stated that quote is, isn't it. Thank you for adding it here. Those are all of the thoughts that I believe promote positive Karma in our lives. They all negate thoughts and notions of evil acts and deeds to harm others. I try to live my life using those principles of ethics. I would love to read that book.

Thank you, again.

I hope other good, positive, thoughtful and kind people stop by to promote their good will towards others. People such as Kavika, tsula, 1st Warrior, Gunny, MalamuteMan, Dowser, Egilman, CM, JoAnne, Perrie, AMac, BadFish, Leo, Buzz, Neetu, Bitey, etva, Holly, Mike, MsA, John, Kara, jwc, Krishna, Petey, pokermik, Len, TC, Brolly, Thee Ox and all of the other good and ethical people on this site...I'm sorry if I accidentally left anyone out---I don't recall at the moment who all of those are that have a good nature, at the moment---but you know who you are--and that's what matters most.

I hope you all weigh in on your idea of how to be free of evil thoughts and what works best in having positive outcomes in your lives. Thank you in advance.

Sixpick - why on earth would anything in that posting piss off an atheist? You seriously do not understand the atheist.

You'll need chocolate ? I'm in !

I tend to lean toward luck and Taoism when it comes to eastern philosophy, but a good read none the less.

I hope you're correct Hal.

I do know every year on our family land in a big field our family has a Nativity scene.

You have to go down this road to get to the land. This is private land and every year the sign has to be replaced many times that gives directions because it is destroyed and the spray painting on it always includes the words like you have posted as well as the the Atheist across the sign.

And I never here any of my brothers condemn, make fun, or even criticize Atheists, but just look up Nativity Scenes on google damaged and that is why I feel the way I do.

I would appreciate you putting an article or message to me explaining the way it is. My door is always open to learning something.

It's very simple actually - separation of religion and government. If someone is messing with a nativity display on private land, then they would be condemned by the atheist community. That is mere hooliganism.

I drive through Loudon County, VA every day to go to work. They are somewhat nationally knownfor their seasonal display controversies. It's not the Christmas nativity scenes that are being attacked, it's the atheist-oriented ones that got a permit to be inpublic spaces where religious ones usedto be. They all need to be disallowed from public space, regardless of religious affiliation or non-affiliation.There are more than enough churches in this country to find amplespace with exceptional high visibility, perfectfor nativity scenes. If they would just do that, then they would never have an argument from atheists about nativity scenes.

Nobody said they still can't enjoy them. Plenty of church property to go nuts with. As atheism grows in popularity, you have to expect that the tenet of separation between religion and government be respected, not continually ignored. Just think about it - if the religious proponents would agree to not using public property for displays ofeither kind, then they would be the only ones with any displays at all, since they are the ones with private property to exploit to their heart's content. Atheists don't have private property for such use, and the religious would never have to deal with this again:

I think that religious people need to read it more than non-religious people. Those who are stuck on Jesus don't have much capacity for honestly respecting other worldly religions that don't acknowledge Jesus as the savior of mankind, and vice versa. As a typical atheist, I have no problem with anyone wanting to worship anything they want. Where I do have problems is when that belief system tries to intersect with government, and is used to leverage policy.

I don't expect religious people to respect the non-believer, but I do expect them to at least respect different variations of each other. Unfortunately, religions are created that way by design. The doctrines dictates what you are to think of those who don't believe in the doctrine.

Oh...drat, I'm sorry Rescue; I don't know how I could have not had you in my mind!!

Six... Several good points in the video, Thanks!

Petey... Me too!

I think luck must be a part of Karma--we need the happenstance timing to be there for 'it' to happen.

Thanks for stopping by..

I know very little about Buddhism and have only read excerpts about it in the past. As for Karmic Retribution, I tend to think there is something to it mostly from what others have said about what has happened in their own lives. Simply, I think it's inherently a part of causation - cause and effect, subconscious and conscience, and to a degree, a result of nature and nurture (nurture preventing the nature's desire, then creating responses in their environment that bring it back--we essentially 'create' our retribution through our own actions. I don't think there is any magic, tenet or philosophy 'causing' it. Just my thoughts.).

It's those little things in helping others that add up to an overall impression, isn't it. All good ideas to influence and affect our own perceptions of what is intrinsically good, not just in those behaviors you mentioned, but moving closer to what I think the Buddhists want to achieve--less of a polarity.

____

Wiki --" In cultures with Buddhist spiritual influence, both good and evil are perceived as part of an antagonistic duality that itself must be overcome through achieving nyat meaning emptiness in the sense of recognition of good and evil being two opposing principles but not a reality, emptying the duality of them, and achieving a oneness . ^{[1] "}

I'm not sure how to interpret that, but I think there's some Karma being explained in that statement. If the conscious isn't in conflict with itself, it then might be able to focus away from 'self' that seems to dictate actions. If there is no 'cause' for harm, then good would be natural...just my interpretation. If good is all there is, then that is what we would bring back.

Thank you, John. I noted that book.

Religion is the ways that various peoples around the world expressed the perceived relationship between human beings and the something that exists that transcends human understanding.

I like that statement and have said something similar in the past.

I don't know if this makes sense to anyone other than myself due to being brief, but I think it's because of both subjectivity and objectivity. There's a subjective need to relate that 'causes' a universal 'effect.'

Hal,

First, thank you for your thoughts, here.

As for Buddhism, I think every source I've read about it (which aren't very many) state it as being a philosophy rather than a religion. My understanding is that Buddha was not a God or supreme being. In that light, I would say it's more a system of ethics in how to live one's life without self-imposed retribution.

I do agree with your opinion that Faith tends to be a part of government, but indirectly, as I view it. By that I mean, on the surface, I don't think they are literally 'proselytizing' their denominations; but rather, bringing the moral precepts of decency and humanity into their decision-making in legislation...or should be. The problem is money speaks louder than words influencing favoritism toward Canon Law and other effects such as military responsibilities. Those are the times that I view a lack of principles.

But, there is another view I have that you might disagree with: As stated by another, to the effect, A government in the absence of Faith, is sure to become the Religion.

In other words, there would be a central government, which I think is also a very unprincipled approach.

perhaps reading the second posting might be helpful in refocusing.

Okay, let's see here .... how did that one start? Oh yeah,

Well..... Let me see how many atheist I can piss off today.

So, please tell me - how does beginning a message of positivity with a statement like that fall in line with the tone of this article? I believe that the reason you didn't bother calling out six on that comment is that you have a clear bias towards those who are not non-believers. If it wasn't for that statement I more than likely wouldn't have entered this discussion to begin with.

I'm a Neotantrist and have been for about eight years now. I don't believe in good or bad Karma per se other than to say, Karma is Karma.

Karma, I believe, is a sublime, if not ethereal identity where will is not locatable. We ascribe 'cause' to shifting bodies and fields and think they are the ultimate origin of the change associated with them. In fact, the composite change is nonlocal and general.

When people release notions of 'cause' and stop identifying shifting fields and bodies as origins of cause, then true responsibility becomes evident, karma (action) drops away as an epiphenomenon, and liberated thinking becomes possible.

Hi APax, nice to see you here, too.

I had never heard of your philosophy you follow, so I did go to your link. It seems to be a combination of a type of meditation and certain type of sexuality, as I interpret; tho I didn't extensively read tantra or the main page. Thanks for the info.

__

Just to note, I see a strong similarity in your comment to what I was wanting to point out with "cause" and effect.

I don't believe in good or bad Karma per se other than to say, Karma is Karma.Karma, I believe, is a sublime, if not ethereal identity where will is not locatable.

Yes. I know up above I implied that I think if the principle was applied, then 'good' Karma would be the result; however, I also realize that 'good and bad' are a perspective and relative to the individual and the situation...some situations can be good for one person, but bad for another. So, in those types of situations, then as you say, Karma is Karma.

For me, I've been wanting to present Japanese Karmic Retribution to enlighten not 'good vs. bad' Karma, but rather harmful vs. unharmful Karma...which I do agree as they point out is relative to 'self' and 'ego' as the 'cause.' Also, I think most of us agree with 'what is harmful' which can be different from 'bad.'

A natural disaster caused by weather, tornado, earthquake or non-premeditated fire, something we cannot control, is also harmful, but if the harm is not caused by a natural catastrophic even, then I do believe it was caused by an ego.

To prevent that type of harm towards others, we need to move past 'self and ego' so that all that is left is natural causation---which is only good or bad, depending on the person interpreting the natural event.

Very rarely are the athiest the agressors. Its been my experience that the extreme Religions have started most of the wars. Killed more people and justify that they are fighting Heathens or athiest or many other names. Its time we all get along and fight the evil ( DRUGS ) ( Corporations going around or over the Law ). Feed the poor, treat the sick, treat all religions and athiestwith respect eliminate racism and scorn due to nationality. If only Americans could live by these guidelines all would be the better for it.

AHMEN or Right on. The article was proposed to or expected to piss off people with certain beliefs. I tried to bypass that but Hal A. Lujah I agree with you. Many of the commenters tried tosuggest the tolerance side while others took offense and the Athiest are not the ones taking offense. I agree Religion is personal and has no business in Government. Our fore fathers were concerned thatwas to likely be the case and they just left Europe where those biases and hatreds made life dangerious and unbearable.

We agree Hal.

..Whatever it takes for avoidance of evil or mean-spirited actions..

..That would be a perfect world, wouldn't it.

Thanks for coming by, Six.

As you probably know I'm not Buddhist, so I don't believe in Karma per se,

Thank you, la chat, for discussing religious interpretation of karma vs. instant karma, as well as how the free will concept is affected for some. I didn't know that about Catholicism and the eventual outing of the concept by a Pope. Interesting.

Intuitively, IMO, reincarnation (& "karma") probably do exist-- although I'm not totally sure of that.

That's exactly what I have wondered many times, especially when deja-vue and certain dreams happen.

Religion is the ways that various peoples around the world expressed the perceived relationship between human beings and the something that exists that transcends human understanding.

I would tend to qualify that a bit to:

Religion is the ways that various peoples around the world depend upon "church authorities" (i.e. "religious authorities") to express the perceived relationship between human beings and the something that exists that transcends human understanding.

Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) said:

Neither shall men say, Lo here, or lo there: for behold, the kingdom of God is within you. --Luke 17:21

To find God, one must look within. (It may take some doing, however). He did not say that you must look outside yourself to some Priest, minister, rabbi, imam, guru, or other "expert/authority" to find it.

Which is why I'm not a big fan of most religions as they now exist. any of their actual spiritual techings are great-- but they haven generally been corrupted by "religious authorities" whose original purpose had been to help people "know God" into their purpose now being to have power and authority.

There are some exceptions...but not many.

There are people that are tired of the hypocrisy coming from a good many Christians. So the immature version of these folks is likely taking a bit of their frustration out on symbols rather than actual Christians... Thus the defacing of your Nativity scene.

Yes-- its the good 'ole concept of "collective punishment"- blaming an entire group for the actions of a few (or actually punishing an entire group for the actions of a few). Its actually a form of bigotry (negatively stereotyping an entire group).

Rescue...... You selfish son of a gun. You do things for others so you can feel good. LOL

I'm only kidding. I think you are absolutely right on!!!!!!!!

I like to feel good too.

Flame,

I agree with many of your thoughts-- especially in the presence of "authority," and what the consequences of that means...generally. I also agree that to accept doctrines without examination and understanding could be considered a disservice to oneself.

When Krishna stated the Catholic Church once believed in a form of Karma, it started me thinking about that, and I realized that is what I learned - without realizing it at the time..although the doctrine I learned wasn't about 'coming back,' but it wasn't like traditional denominational "authority," either.

In other words, the belief was about freedom and free-will, most faiths aren't. Yes, they did interpret certain ways of life as moral or immoral, interpreting harm towards others, which their goal was to prevent...but the overall doctrine is --freedom and freewill to teach taking 'responsibility for one's actions.' The reasoning, as I interpreted it, was to make a good Act of Contrition, and keep trying to be better 'here,' rather than coming back several times to try again.

..My point with all of that was to explain that Catholicism's premise was not to infringe on free-will, but rather to aid free-will, conscience and moral choice....not all Religions are designed to be authoritative. ...But, it went political and commercially financial...allowing 'authority' to intervene and undermine. That's part of why I am no longer associated with it.

___

If you're interested, here's another explanation to support mine in why the Church promotes freedom in choice (even though I don't agree that our choices are ever "free"--they are determined as a combination of our genetics and past experiences along with the environment we're in that allows or disallows our nature have what it wants)... The Church's point is that you are responsible for what happened even though the 'nature' and circumstantial determinants were there.

There's some Karma being explained there, as I see it.

Here's an excerpt from the article I reference:

but they haven generally been corrupted by "religious authorities" whose original purpose had been to help people "know God" into their purpose now being to have power and authority.

I couldn't have said that any better..

I'm a Neotantrist and have been for about eight years now. I don't believe in good or bad Karma per se other than to say, Karma is Karma.

Does that go beyond karma? In other words, do you try to avoid judging not only karma, but but things in general?

. We ascribe 'cause' to shifting bodies and fields and think they are the ultimate origin of the change associated with them.

Not sure I understand completely what you are saying. Is it that usually we think we know the cause of events, when sometimes (or often, or even always) the fact is that we do not actually know the cause?

the composite change is nonlocal and general.

A change in any atom anywhere, on a subtle energetic level in some ways effects every other atom in the Universe? (Sort of like "The Hundredth Monkey" theory?)

When people release notions of 'cause' and stop identifying shifting fields and bodies as origins of cause, then true responsibility becomes evident, karma (action) drops away as an epiphenomenon, and liberated thinking becomes possible.

So, then-- what do you think is cause?

And, on a somewhat different note-- do you believe that we have free will?

I agree with this, Krishna:

A change in any atom anywhere, on a subtle energetic level in some ways effects every other atom in the Universe?

..reminds me of wave motion.

All very good questions! I hope APax sees your two comments and will stop by to address them.

I agree with this, Krishna:

A change in any atom anywhere, on a subtle energetic level in some ways effects every other atom in the Universe?

I think that some people feel that forms of energy (for example light) is composed of particles, others feel it is waves. Apparently one of the problems for scientists is that sometimes light exhibits characteristics of waves, but sometimes characteristics of particles.

Sometimes I think of it as, maybe,both: cute lil' "wavicles" ( ?)... lol).

Interestingly, some of the recent developments in Quantum physics seem to be quite similar to the teachings of ancient Hindu mystics (that on some level the "Physical" universe is an illusion -- its all only a "dance of energies"; "Maya" ).

The word origin of my is derived from the Sanskrit roots ma ("not") and ya, generally translated as an indicative article meaning "that". The mystic teachings in Vedanta are centered on a fundamental truth of the universe that cannot be reduced to a concept or word for the ordinary mind to manipulate. Rather, the human experience and mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth. In this tradition, no mind-object can be identified as absolute truth, such that one may say, "That's it." So, to keep the mind from attaching to incomplete fragments of reality, a speaker could use this term to indicate that truth is "Not that."

In Vedanta, my is to be seen through, like an epiphany, in order to achieve moksha (liberation of the soul from the cycle of samsara). Ahamkra (ego-consciousness) and karma are seen as part of the binding forces of my. My may be understood as the phenomenal Universe of perceived duality, a lesser reality-lens superimposed on the unity of Brahman. It is said to be created by the divine by the application of the Lil (creative energy/material cycle, manifested as a veilthe basis of dualism). The sanskaras of perceived duality perpetuate samsara.

Maya is usually quoted as "illusion", centered on the fact that we do not experience the environment itself but rather a projection of it, created by us.

(Link)

And we now return you to your local stations:

Sometimes I think of it as, maybe,both: cute lil' "wavicles" ( ?)... lol).

lol, ohhhh... "lil wavicles"...that's so cute!

The mystic teachings in Vedanta are centered on a fundamental truth of the universe that cannot be reduced to a concept or word for the ordinary mind to manipulate. Rather, the human experience and mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth.

I like that statement, tho I might not be interpreting their exact meaning. I think their statement says something similar to what I did up there somewhere...that I think we as humans start something with a subjective cause that creates a universal effect.

The possibility of the existence of an illusory universe is a bit mind-boggling.

Or... maybe it's a giant brain...and we're just a bunch of ...hmm.. 'lil neurons?

I'm not so much into free will as reasonably priced will ...

The Church historically, very quickly became about authority and who exactly was going to control the newbody of believers. In other words politics intervened from the start. There's even a story or two in the epistles to confirm this.

Sort of funny because this struggle for authority almost always ends up being prioritized over the message that gatheredthe righteousin the first place.

Yes.

But I think it often happens in other religious organizations as well. In fact, any organization be it religious, business, government, etc.

The idea is that eventually the purpose of an organizations changes from it original purpose (whatever it may have been) to the de facto purpose of survival of the organization.

(Survival and its power and growth)

Then as a hierarchy develops, it shifts to ensuring the survival of anything that the organization believes to be the organization-- eventually it comes to believe that the hierarchy is the organization.

So then as an organization evolves, its de facto purpose becomes to ensure the survival (and growth) of the hierarchy.

Interestingly, IMO this also applies if you change just a few letters in the word: organization --> organism.

As organisms evolve to higher life forms...

So, I suppose that my point is that, the leaders of the Church were focused on leading along a path they didn't understand with any clarity. So the message surrounding karma and choice comes from an authoritative viewpoint -- believe this or you can't be one of us.

Can't really picture Christ pushing that idea at all.

Inherent in the notion of believing in Karma (in the classical sense) is a belief in reincarnation. The Church dogma once included that belief-- but then a Pope changed it.

Although I would not necessarily view what the Church regards as karma to be like the original Eastern concept, there is a similarity. Namely that your actions (good or evil) affect it-- the afterlife. and that implies freewill-- your choices determine whether, up down death, you are moved "Downstairs" (where its hot as Hell)-- or "Upstairs" to a nicer climate

But only one afterlife for all eternity-- not a continuing cycle of deaths and rebirths.

So the message surrounding karma and choice comes from an authoritative viewpoint -- believe this or you can't be one of us.

Can't really picture Christ pushing that idea at all.

I'm pretty sure he did not teach that, and in fact would disagree with that.

I view him as being the same sort of person as Socrates, Descartes, Kant.

I think more or less the same thing-- except that IMO he was even much more spiritually evolved than they were.

He was a philosopher. And his message was high-jacked almost from the beginning of any formal church organization. The reasons for this are varied but in the case of the apostles, is primarily because they never really understood the meat of Christ's message, and thus tried to follow the rote learning. There was no deep synthesis of Christ message that allowed them to adapt to new situations.

I think that's true. And IMO to this day, most believers-- even Christian clergy-- don't actually understand his teaching. At the risk of appearing arrogant, I can say that I think I do mainly understand his teachings. LOL!

Partly due to an ex-girlfriend who was Catholic, but who had a different interpretation on much of this than the Church taught. Influenced by and various forms of mysticism, both eastern and western. (Both the Kabbalah and the Kybalion, Sufiism, the Gospel of Thomas, the important Jewish concept of "Tikkun Olam" (which might seem to be inconsistent with the Gospel of Thomas but IMO is not), some forms of both Hinduism and Buddhism). We had long discussion about Theology...mostly me learning from her.

This type of synthesis from Christ's message happens only rarely in my view. MLK Jr. might be a case in point.

I think many Americans don't realize how deeply King was influenced by his religious views. In fact, that is what motivated him to fight racial injustice. (Not just that he was "religious"-- but that he actually understood the essence of Christ's teachings).

The price for "will" should be about the same as the price for "won't" . Otherwise things just get too far out of balance .

You pretty much answered your own question when you talked about coins . Paper money is too much to pay .
In any case "won't" is often free , especially if you're trying to hit on a woman ...

I got into a big argument with DSLSCA on free will over on NV. Essentially my point is that if will isn't free then it's sort of pointless to talk about it. Since we can choose to talk about it even though it's pointless seems rather to point to the idea that we actually have free will, and are not simply pieces of a vast clock.

LOL ...I follow your point on why it's pointless. As you say, our Justice system is based on everyone having free will. It wouldn't make sense to go to an opposing system, because it would be difficult to place responsibility in the same way the Church does.

When I was going through one of the series of discussions on the vine long ago by one of my favorite authors there, feeling the pointless conflict you describe, it became clear towards the end that the author had a method to their madness in wanting to prove there is no free will:

1) they wanted to identify that there is no 'self' as a third entity, always stating that we didn't create ourselves - essentially proving that we would be incapable of independent thought from our genetics and neuroscience; 2) they wanted to establish the 'responsibility' issue when we consider we have determinants controlling us; 3) the sexuality angle, to include proclivities....which appeared to be what they were leading up to as a conclusion to the series.

The legal reasoning of jurisprudence isn't going to change - so I guess we have no hope for ever getting the Judge to agree with, the Devil made me do it.

To note, I agree with your thoughts on Christ; he was a philosopher. I too would put him in the same category with the others you mentioned, based on moral philosophy. I enjoyed reading your further thoughts about the apostles and the consequential lack of depth. I hadn't thought about that before.

On the Church's authority, it wasn't until I became an adult in my late twenties, that it was apparent. I had very little exposure to their Hierarchy, and had no reason until that point in time to be involved with it. It was very enlightening.

So the message surrounding karma and choice comes from an authoritative viewpoint -- believe this or you can't be one of us.

Can't really picture Christ pushing that idea at all.

Exactly where my thoughts ended with them as well.

Thanks for the nice discussion, Flame.

...and here I thought you meant an estate will.

I think businesses actually do put a price on that . Accountants include goodwill as an asset with a $$ value .

Ill will of course if freely available.

Tell me about it !

You do not piss me off, Six. Words, however, mean very little in the course of one's life. What can be said in a thousand words can often be felt in the simplest and most concise of thoughts.

lol, no I wasn't wanting to end discussion. Sorry to have given that impression. It's just my personality to thank everyone for their time and energy...free time can be hard to come by. Time is valuable.

___

It's the notion of 'no self' that affects my view of karma. In my view, 'self' would be - nature and ego - as a label, not as an independent entity. To that end, is why I agree that Karmic Retribution is self-created, not created by someone else as a 'cause.' In effect, when our nature or ego, depending on the circumstances, is disallowed its needs--when that happens, it sets itself up for retribution. My point is that I agree with the gist of the article - even tho I don't have background in their philosophy and might not fully understand them! LOL

If you talk about some of this stuff in person, folks start looking at you like they wished they were carrying a pitchfork or a torch.

Hahaha... probably. It can be pretty easy to let out our deepest thoughts and silly ideas on the internet.

except that a perception exists that if a lot of people believe in bullshit thenthe crapolaactually gains value in some way.

Yes. Many sheeple are highly motivated by the desire to go along with the herd-- to do what's politically correct (or in this case what's "theologically correct").

I think your answer would make many atheists happy.

Most of us like the "love your fellow man" quote as long as there was a fellow woman included.

Make your choice and enjoy.

Neetu you know I was only kidding anyway. I'm only concerned with the words that came after that crappy heading I put up.

You mean like only posting negative articles about Islam, for example?

Well, if you are implying that there are too many negatives articles about Islam here-- or for that matter too many negative articles about Israel-- I would agree.

Bur-- is it a coincidence-- or karma? Only a few hours ago this was posted on NT!!!

Arab-Jewish Schools teach mutual respect & understanding

Most news sites focus on problems, not solutions. In fact, the focus is often on "finger pointing"-- placing blame entirely on one side or the other...in any conflict.

One area where this is true is in the conflict between Arabs and Jews in the Middle East. Its rare to find an article that doesn't obsess with focusing on, even greatly exaggerating, the problems. And most do focus on placing blame exclusively on one side or the other. If you just looked at the mainstream media, you could get the impression that the situation there is totally hopeless, and that there is no one sincerely looking for solutions. However, that is not the case.

In fact,there are many such projects. One is the creation of schools such as these-- amazing stuff!

( LINK to post here on NT-- highly recommended! )

IMHO, what is so interesting about that post is that its one of the few that doesn't demonize either group. And, perhaps even more importantly, rather than just complaining about how all the bad in the world is due to the "other side" ..it takes a totally different tack-- looking at solutions rather than focusing on how bad problems are, on placing blame!

(And of course that also applies not only to Israel/Palestine, but also to liberal/conservative article & comments as well).

Imagine people shifting from focusing on problems to discussing possible solutions-- what a wonderful world it would be!

And hey-- imagine if more people on NT did that...hmmmm...