DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**KneefeZes** · 07-05-2008, 05:15 AM

dazcox is right about the vagueness of our word love, at least in english. yes, even lower chakra desire and power lust is covered.

i think practically everyone feels the heart-love impulse, the bonding feeling on a personal level. so why isn't there world peace, etc.? because that requires some higher input, from the chakra associated with honor (thyroid?). that's the basis of making the progression to sto.

this progress to higher love is not without some cost at the personal level.

look at the gospels, where jesus is told his mother and brothers are outside and would like a word with him. (matt. 12:46-49, mark 3:31-35, luke 8:19-21) he famously replies,

"who is my mother and who are my brothers?" and stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "behold my mother and my brothers! for whoever does the will of my father who is in heaven, he is my brother and sister and mother."

talk about a smart alek remark! how many mothers (or wives!) that you know would take that kind of lip without giving the son/husband at least an earful -- possibly before the meeting was done?

then there's this:

"do not think that i came to bring peace on the earth; i did not come to bring peace, but a sword. for i came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. he who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. and he who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. he who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for my sake will find it." (matthew 10:34-39 nasb)

he is teaching not about making war (that's misusing his metaphor), but about the conflict that arises when one chooses universal love over personal loyalty. to be motivated by loyalty with no higher principle is to have the same level of morality as a gangster. sometimes the word "commitment" is used as a blunt weapon in these matters, when others are calling in their chips. but god is no respecter of persons, as cayce often said (quoting peter in acts 10:34).

jesus often said his truths in the most stark ways, as if for shock value. this was a rhetorical technique long used by the philosophers called the cynics. they were not people who took a dim view of human goodness (modern usage) but they did take a dim view of human convention. jesus' expression "be in the world but not of it" is very much in their line of thinking.

07-05-2008, 05:15 AM	#14
KneefeZes Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 436 Senior Member	dazcox is right about the vagueness of our word love, at least in english. yes, even lower chakra desire and power lust is covered. i think practically everyone feels the heart-love impulse, the bonding feeling on a personal level. so why isn't there world peace, etc.? because that requires some higher input, from the chakra associated with honor (thyroid?). that's the basis of making the progression to sto. this progress to higher love is not without some cost at the personal level. look at the gospels, where jesus is told his mother and brothers are outside and would like a word with him. (matt. 12:46-49, mark 3:31-35, luke 8:19-21) he famously replies, "who is my mother and who are my brothers?" and stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, "behold my mother and my brothers! for whoever does the will of my father who is in heaven, he is my brother and sister and mother." talk about a smart alek remark! how many mothers (or wives!) that you know would take that kind of lip without giving the son/husband at least an earful -- possibly before the meeting was done? then there's this: "do not think that i came to bring peace on the earth; i did not come to bring peace, but a sword. for i came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. he who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. and he who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. he who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for my sake will find it." (matthew 10:34-39 nasb) he is teaching not about making war (that's misusing his metaphor), but about the conflict that arises when one chooses universal love over personal loyalty. to be motivated by loyalty with no higher principle is to have the same level of morality as a gangster. sometimes the word "commitment" is used as a blunt weapon in these matters, when others are calling in their chips. but god is no respecter of persons, as cayce often said (quoting peter in acts 10:34). jesus often said his truths in the most stark ways, as if for shock value. this was a rhetorical technique long used by the philosophers called the cynics. they were not people who took a dim view of human goodness (modern usage) but they did take a dim view of human convention. jesus' expression "be in the world but not of it" is very much in their line of thinking.
	Quote