Entry 942 - Entry 951
Entry 942 - October 22nd, 2021
Many Christians claim morality is not relative by using phrases like "old covenant" and "new covenant" to work around morality being relative to the culture, society, and traditions of people throughout the centuries. I understand these phrases were used in the New Testament, but we must also consider that we have no verifiable evidence that most of the books written in the New Testament were authored by those who are said to have written them.
We also must acknowledge how, hundreds of years later, the church decided on which gospels and epistles to include as the official canon of the established—and then wealthy—church. Furthermore, bishops and priests not only got into fistfights over which books would be included but also murdered those who disagreed with their preferred selections.
This is worth remembering when someone raises the age-old argument, "But they were directed by the Holy Spirit as to which ones were infallible and true." By that logic, the person who murdered a bishop to include their preferred epistles in the Bible was "in the right" because those epistles made it into the Bible? Interesting reasoning. It reminds me of how people use God as an excuse to murder others and seize their land because they were deemed "unrighteous," supposedly under divine direction.
If you argue, "That wasn’t okay for Catholics to do because it wasn’t in the Bible," I would counter with, "Isn’t the Bible a collection of select people's history with the Creator of the universe? Didn't the Christian churches also have a history with the Creator? Didn’t they also use the Old Testament commands, supposedly given by God, to justify killing?"
Just as the Jews had their prophets and mouthpieces for God, didn’t Christianity claim its own prophets who commanded the collective to kill? I recommend exploring these questions more deeply and seeing where they lead. Who knows? You may uncover uncanny similarities that have yet to be fully understood.
Many from the Catholic and fundamental branches of Christianity argue that Jesus did away with the Old Covenant, failing to acknowledge that blood sacrifices were a cultural phenomenon of the time—rooted in a belief system that became outdated once it was seen as no longer beneficial. Not all Jews at the time who followed God believed animal slaughter was necessary to have a relationship with or to be in the presence of God.
The Essenes were a perfect example of this. As strict vegetarians/vegans and seekers of deeper mysteries, they stood in stark contrast to the Pharisees and zealots who believed blood sacrifices were essential to maintaining a relationship with the Creator.
Entry 943 - October 31st, 2021
I worried that I might lose my ability to accomplish things the more I became aware of my true nature. But the exact opposite happened. I probably accomplished more in two days than I did in two whole months.
Meditation, inquiry, self-realization, and waking up have all enhanced my present awareness and concentration almost a hundredfold. Why was I so afraid? If this is what it feels like to loosen the grip the ego has over me, why was I afraid of this freedom?
Entry 944 - November 1st, 2021
At the most elementary root of being, "relationship" still implies separation because it splits the two into one.
Entry 945 - November 10th, 2021
There’s a Christian's Instagram post about how those who know the Bible shouldn’t be shocked by the state of the world. I would say I’m not shocked—at least not by the paranoia about science, the government, or the world. That paranoia stems from how people interpret the Bible.
Entry 946 - November 14th, 2021
What will happen to the Christian narrative that "only God can create sentient entities" when we develop sentient robots? How does that fit into their worldview?
Christians who have supported regressive laws that deny equal rights to certain groups will likely be the first to deny rights to and oppress robots once they become sentient, just as they oppress others now. The hunger for oppression will remain a lust in dogmatic hearts until they take the time to lay down their weapons and introspectively evolve their morality into one rooted in true love and acceptance.
Until then, they will continue using the Bible as a weapon of oppression—whether against sentient humans or sentient robots.
Entry 947 - November 21st, 2021
One of my goals is to defeat death. In other words, my goal is to overcome the default physical experience of death.
Most people die when their spirit is ejected from their body. A smaller number manually leave their body before death or ejection. An even smaller number transmute their body to a higher frequency (shorter wavelengths) so that they never have to die.
By this, I mean bypassing the spirit's separation from the body and instead vibrating the body at such a fast frequency that it transforms at will into another form without requiring separation. It may sound far-fetched to those who believe death is an inescapable fate, but consider this: we’re floating on a massive rock in the middle of a galaxy, and no one truly knows where we came from or where we’re going.
Given that, is it really so far-fetched to want to increase my body’s frequency to overcome the limits of a slower frequency that leads to death?
Entry 948 - November 23rd, 2021
Why would I need boundaries when I am boundless by essence? Unless I wanted to know myself through the experience of being supposedly trapped in boundaries—and eventually expanding beyond them. Unless I wanted to experience the contrast that boundaries afford.
Entry 949 - November 24th, 2021
Tip: When a transphobic person, driven by ignorance, asks questions to judge or condemn you further, don’t answer. Force them to do the much-needed research.
By doing so, they might stumble upon a scientific article explaining the biological evidence of gender incongruence. If you're lucky, they might begin to understand that gender incongruence is just as valid a diagnosis as any other medically recognized one. If you’re even luckier, they might realize their judgment stems from ignorance, not knowledge.
From there, hopefully, they will choose a better response to that which they do not yet understand.
Entry 949.1 - November 23rd, 2021
The problem or red flag with so many fundamental Christians is that their idea of love is so far skewed from the actual definition of what it means to give unconditional love that it isn’t even the same thing anymore. I genuinely think Jesus would feel ashamed of what they're doing in his name. There’s a saying that goes: “There’s no hate like Christian love,” and I'm pretty sure that was not Jesus' intention for how his followers would be perceived by others.
Unfortunately, a majority of fundamental Christians are trained by their version of Christianity to believe judgment is truly showing love to those who don’t believe exactly as they do. Then, the good news of Jesus somehow mutates into the horrible news that you were, by default, going to hell, and you didn’t even know about it until they told you. Now, you need to do as they say, believe as they do, and follow their ways, or else you'll burn forever.
They are so convinced that judgment is an act of love that they cannot understand why non-Christians—and even other Christians—are tired and done with this approach. There’s a reason why these particular denominations are losing followers by the day. There’s a reason why people are waking up to the illogical doctrines and dogmas of fundamental branches of Christianity. There’s a reason why people are turning away from oppressive denominations bent on using fear rather than love to convert and gain followers. It’s so obvious that at times we all want to scream, "You're doing the opposite of drawing people nearer to Jesus."
They take Jesus’ message of oneness and inclusion and somehow mutate his words and parables into exclusion and separation. Jesus said the shepherd comes to save the one lost sheep. Instead of interpreting that as, "See, God does save everyone," they interpret it as, “Only Jesus saves those who believe in him.” They create separation wherever possible because that is how they’ve been trained by their denomination.
A majority of Jews have no fear of eternal hell because they were never taught that was a thing. And for those who were, they can often trace the belief back to its origin and the sect of Judaism that contributed to that minority view of the afterlife.
Even if that were the case, Jews have never been as narrow-minded and dogmatic as fundamental Christians regarding Olam Haba (The World to Come) and salvation. When these fundamental Christians loudly proclaim that all are, by default, going to hell for eternity, Orthodox Jews hold the majority belief that you don’t even need to become a Jew to be saved. You just have to follow the seven Noahide laws, and you’re good.
Even if you didn’t follow them, the place of soul washing was never eternal but temporary and meant to prepare you to be in the presence of a holy Creator. The Jews believed God was unconditionally merciful, unlike those who claim God is only conditionally merciful, limiting His mercy to a specific time frame.
These fundamental Christians say that if you don’t repent within the time frame of your life on Earth, God’s mercy does not extend to you after death. The leaders of these fundamental churches try to persuade you into believing God’s mercy is conditional because, if they can do that, they have more power over you. Then you DO have something to fear because the time is ticking. To them, linear time is not an illusion (even though Einstein scientifically proved that it was).
What if you die in your sins? What if you don’t say the altar call prayer just right? What if you haven’t asked for your sins to be forgiven? These questions create fertile ground for convincing you to return to church, as they make hell seem always just around the corner and forever burning in the distance. If it won’t engulf you now, it will engulf everyone you know who doesn’t believe as they do—and that is one toxic belief.
Entry 949.2 - November 23rd, 2021
As I’m filling out my URTA Audition application, I feel very much aligned with my purpose again. It feels like I almost woke up for a second time to my purpose in this incarnation: to be a professional working actor.
Entry 950 - November 28th, 2021
Is there a difference between telling it as it is, for what it is, versus judging it for what you think it is based on your limited perception?
Is there a way to explain something without judgment? If so, what would that look like compared to judging based on perception?
Example: "There were strong winds today" vs. "The wind was horrible. It was blowing me around, and I was freezing to death!"
Example: "This woman accused us of stealing her stuff when we didn’t" vs. "This crazy woman was mentally insane and accused us of stealing when we didn’t."
Example: "I had to take a computer science exam and didn’t score well" vs. "They gave us a horrible exam, we all failed, and it’s because the teacher hates our guts."
Entry 951 - December 11th, 2021
Just as many in spirituality demonize the ego, many also demonize the idea of control.
They argue about whether we truly have freedom, framing our idea of freedom as less than whole. It’s another form of fragmentation—subtle and almost imperceptible if you’re not looking for it.
There is nothing wrong with control, and there is nothing wrong with surrendering control. Life, in all its facets, seeks balance. A balance between up and down, left and right, control and surrender—in politics, economics, and everything else.
Comments
Post a Comment