A story of intuition

[slomo]

"The reasoning for the master/slave comment is exactly the same as Jesus' "turn the other cheek" and "render unto Caeser" namely, it isn't worth getting upset or fighting about anything that happens in this world."<br><br>Well, yes, in principle I agree with that. But given that most human beings do not have the time and/or inclination for spiritual self-cultivation, the only possible interpretation for most of us is that of an injunction to obey your master. <p></p><i></i>

[scollon]

Paul was writing very specically to Christians, no one else. <br><br><br>It isn't that bad advice anyway. In Roman times you might be dead for disobeying you master, in America you end up sleeping under a bridge. <p></p><i></i>

[Dreams End]

I think slaves should disobey their masters whenever possible. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[scollon]

"I think slaves should disobey their masters whenever possible."<br><br>Sure, but the masters make the rules and rule 1 is "do what you're told". Every wage slave knows that and lives in fear of disobedience whether they are aware of that or admit it to themselves.<br><br>Rule 2 is "do what you're told" as well by the way.<br><br>Rule 99 is "do it now"<br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=scollon>scollon</A> at: 12/24/05 1:05 pm<br></i>

[scollon]

I am very bad at doing what I'm told and have been known to get very violent if spoken to in a less than totally polite fashion <p></p><i></i>

[jenz]

care to flesh out the experience on the walk and its relation, as you see it, to the premonition? <p></p><i></i>

[meekster]

There's not a lot I can say about the experience, because it's a "you had to be there" kind of thing, and when I read what I write about it, it sounds rather cliche and I don't have the writing ability to really give it the significance it deserves. I remember feeling very loved and comforted, by an all encompassing personality. Before this experience, my belief in the (somewhat) steady, evolutionary progress of mankind had been totally shattered, and I was beginning to suspect that the cataclysmic end portrayed in the bible might be a more accurate description of where the world really was heading. <br><br>So it gave me a bedrock experience from which to judge things. The way the book fell into my hands after that had symbolic meaning for me, and in fact, my sensitivity to the symbolic meaning of everything went way up. It just happens that The Da Vinci Code is a book of symbols, and it was easy for me to grasp a deeper symbolic message then what was on the surface. It was as if God was saying "OK, you want to know who is the antichrist? Well from this book and from this belief system is where he comes."<br><br>It was a very strange premonition, because as I said before, I wasn't particularly Christian, mostly because I had such a negative experience from the church because of my homosexuality. Now I've spent a good deal of time researching the British Israeli movement, royal bloodlines, the legend of King Arthur, the elite bankers, the Masons, the rise of the divine feminine, the occult currents that run just beneath the surface of all of this, and also popular entertainment, where these ideas are promoted by movies like the Matrix and Lord of the Rings, and my mind boggles at the hundreds of threads being so elegantly and consistently tied together at this time. <p></p><i></i>

[Floyd Smoots]

Little more to add to the title of the post at this time. Just keep on peeking behind Satan's curtain, as God allows you. Hope the eyeful you get doesn't shake your faith.<br><br>Peace and Love,<br>Brother Floyd<br> <p></p><i></i>

[Biggie]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Dreams End, not that I won't get back to you on other sources, but, just for starters, see any and all of Jeff's posts on Ritual Abuse and Pedophilia. I have read many books, published articles, and well stated medical studies and papers that assert that homosexuality is not inborn, as much as it is inculcated in very young children when they are trying to discover who and what they are, by "loving" adults who abuse their positions of power and authority over said children. For the most part, they ARE rebuttals to those in the psychiatric and psychologocal community who promulgate the existence of a homosexual gene.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>That may be true, but how does that explain homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom? <p></p><i></i>

[Biggie]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>In my view (which is controversial) homosexuality, reified as a phenomenon and institutionalized as a valid alternative lifestyle, is a byproduct of empire. Men have always "burned with lust" for other men, and this is completely natural and nothing wrong with it in-and-of-itself. But a population that has sufficient excess resources to be able to support a large number of people seeking to marry persons of the same gender (which can occur only when community survival is taken for granted) probably has stolen those resources from some other subject population and is well advanced in its corruption. So, institutionalized homosexuality becomes a symptom of empire (certainly not its cause). In context, I think the Romans passage reflects this issue.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>I don't understand what you're getting at here, particularly the part about having excess resources. To me it seems that two men who partner up with one another would use the same amount of resources if they married women. Also, homosexuals can't have children so it's seems like a large gay and lesbian population would use fewer resources in the long run because population growth would slow.<br><br>I don't agree with your statement that homosexuality can only appear when community survival is taken for granted. Even though they can't produce offspring, homosexual can still contribute to the community in a positive manner <p></p><i></i>

[scollon]

The reason Paul doesn't mention the life of Jesus is that his letters were almost certainly written before the gospels. <br><br>The gospel lives of Jersus follow pretty closely the pattern of other man/Gods like Mithra /Hermes Trismegistus/Osiris. It's Paul who makes reasonably obvious and open reference to the Greek and Egyptian Mysteries.<br><br>Another thing about Paul is (as he constantly repeats) that he is to bring the message to the gentiles and the other Apostles to the Jews although he is a Jew himself. Paul is the one who never met Jesus in the flesh but has a meeting with the risen Christ on the road to Damascus.<br><br>Having very recently read Matthew's gospel it is clear that Jesus is a Jewish teacher talking to a (more or less) exclusively Jewish audience in Jewish messianic language. It is that language that fires up modern fundamentalists to invent apocalyptic scenarios (along with Revelation of course).<br><br>I prefer Paul to the gospels because it's pretty obvious they were invented (around previously laid down myths) 100 years after the death of Jesus. It may be that the Gospel of Thomas (discovered at Nag Hammadi ) is the famous source 'Q' said to be the origin of the synoptic gospels in which case the message in the four books accepted as the sayings of Jesus are somewhat (but not by any means totally) corrupt.<br><br><br>The Gospel of Thomas <br><br>The Nag Hammadi Library <br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html">www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>As for homosexuality. I imagine Paul saw it as a gross distraction from spiritual fulfillment in the face of an imminent return of the Master. <br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=scollon>scollon</A> at: 12/27/05 1:05 am<br></i>

[meekster]

FWIW, I love Paul. I've found many anti-Pauline diatribes in various conspiracy theory, end-times focused Christian web sites, and I suspect they do this because Paul is totally grace focused, not works, and they don't appreciate the message getting in the way of eternal torment for reptilian (or whoever) sinners. <br><br>Paul calls himself the "worst of sinners", and while people think he's just playing modest, it is good to remember that he was the Rumsfeld or Himmler of his day. Saul oversaw torturing "confessions" out of people, and killed them if they wouldn't, and he felt totally justified by God in doing so. The fact that he didn't kill and torture as many people as the villains of our time is more a condition of his limited technology than any lack of desire. Then he has a close encounter with Jesus that lasts maybe 10-20 seconds, and he is transformed into Paul - the most amazing evangelist the world has ever seen. Some read that as totally unbelievable, but I read it as being proof that in God, all things are possible. <p></p><i></i>

[scollon]

" I suspect they do this because Paul is totally grace focused, not works"<br><br>Yes and that is (for me at least) the truth as Paul hammers home time and time again. It's grace that leads to good works, not the other way around. As Jesus said, only God is good.<br><br>"the most amazing evangelist the world has ever seen"<br><br>Yes and arguably the greatest mind, inventing as he does a <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>universal</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--> religion based only on the resurrection of Christ. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=scollon>scollon</A> at: 12/27/05 1:25 am<br></i>

[Sepka]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>In my view (which is controversial) homosexuality, reified as a phenomenon and institutionalized as a valid alternative lifestyle, is a byproduct of empire.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>That's an interesting argument. Certainly if you have too many homosexuals, the birth rate will fall, and a society's productivity will suffer accordingly since replacement workers aren't being raised. That would be a really extreme outcome, but I suppose it might be the case in a primitive society with a very high infant mortality rate that you could reach a point of negative replacement with only the classic ten percent or so of homosexuals. A society that marginal isn't likely to last long enough to leave any mark on humanity's collective morals, since almost anything (a drought, an epidemic, etc) would tip them over the edge. Even if they did manage to hold on for a long time, they're so busy staying alive that they have little time to propagate their memes.<br><br>I think a fairly strong argument can be made that a certain percentage of homosexuals has a positive outcome on a society's survivability. A healthy adult, gay or straight, produces more than he personally needs for survival. This is the basis of being able to raise children - the surplus production goes to sustain the next generation of workers until they're old enough to fend for themselves. The gay couples are putting more into the economy than they're taking out, which gives the child-raising couples a bit of a safety margin.<br><br>In other words, if *everyone* is putting all of their surplus production into raising children, then if anything goes wrong, everyone's in trouble. If you've got some members of society whose surplus output isn't already spoken for, then you've got some slack for emergencies.<br><br>-Sepka the Space Weasel <p></p><i></i>

[slomo]

Quote: "I think a fairly strong argument can be made that a certain percentage of homosexuals has a positive outcome on a society's survivability. A healthy adult, gay or straight, produces more than he personally needs for survival. This is the basis of being able to raise children - the surplus production goes to sustain the next generation of workers until they're old enough to fend for themselves. The gay couples are putting more into the economy than they're taking out, which gives the child-raising couples a bit of a safety margin."<br><br>This makes sense, and certainly finds its expression in a limited number of pre-agrarian societies (e.g. the berdache phenomenon in some Native American cultures). But for "gay culture" to exist there needs to be a certain critical mass of gay-identified individuals, and that can usually take place only in larger population centers.<br><br>I'm not advancing the specious argument that humans would die out if everybody were gay, since homosexuality is never taken up by a majority. I'm kind of arguing the converse: that in a small to medium-sized tribe, there are too few individuals for gay identity even to manifest.<br><br>So what is my agenda here? As a gay man who sees our empire waning in the near future (5-25 years) I think it's important to understand what gay people bring to the table for the survival of the larger community. Your quote above is, I think, part of that understanding. <p></p><i></i>