[S.T.D.]

i would like to reply to this thread. i do not often post as i prefer not to interfer with the free will of those here to grow in their own way. however, i would like to post a reply to this thread with the following charge: that you accept this in the intent it is offered, that is for thought and consideration only; that you only accept that which you find resonates and leave what does not without any reservation; and that you go and find out for yourself the truth and not accept on belief or faith anything that i have to say.

with that being said i now feel that i can freely present what i desire to share. onething stated in their post "until you love all mankind, unconditionally - not as a command but from your own uplifted understanding - you are not living in heaven". that to some degree is a statement i find to be somewhat true. the portion that i call to question is the use of "unconditionally"

this is not consistent with the actions of master yeshua nor with the, what i find to be, intent of his charge - that we are to love one another as he loved us. that does not mean unconditionally as demonstrated by master yeshua himself.

unconditional love means that we will love and accept regardless of what the other may have done. this is the type of love a parent has for a child. it is the kind of love one receives from the one infinite creator. it is a passionate love.

unselfish love on the other hand is a loving and acceptance of another as being part of the one but it does not mean that i have to condone nor accept actions that are contrary to another's free will.

master yeshua demonstrated that he practiced unselfish love when he drove the money changers and others from the temple. if he practiced unconditional love he would have had to accept the acts of the others and still have loved them. instead he showed compassion for them by the manner in which he drove them out but yet he showed that he did not accept their actions. it is also a demonstration that actions based on inner emotional conflict is acceptable as long as it is within reason.

two further small pieces for you to consider. if you base your information on the translations of the material that composes what is referred to as the bible please understand that much of the material was not written by first hand witnesses. the only two gospels that were written by actual witnesses to master yeshua's teachings are matthew and john. the only two were written by those with a second hand knowledge of the teachings by having listened to those that had first hand knowledge.

secondly, be aware that the original transcription was done by catholic monks converting from languages that were not completely familiar to them. as an example the first word of the lord's prayer in aramaic is abwoon which was translated as "our father" but has over 125 derivative meaning that can be taken from the single word. why did they choose to translate it as our father? it also can mean the "one infinite source". makes you wonder what was actually meant, doesn't it?

there is nothing known that you do not know. it is only a matter of accessing that knowledge.

in the light and love,
asa