DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3336--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Kerry Date: November 25, 2015, 3:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Piper link=topic=387.msg3332#msg3332
date=1448471364]
Ha. Kerry. They've come between my daughter and I so many
times, always full of "love" for her and open disdain for me,
telling her openly they did not like me "from day one"---at
which time I was the shy 15 year old girlfriend of their
brother. However, for all their great love for my daughter,
they disappear very quickly when she has problems. My daughter
seems to crave their approval, but, yes, when her life becomes
messy, she comes to me. They won't help her. And, she
generally wants to maintain the illusion with them that her life
is under control. Appearances. Pretense.
People are so strange.[/quote]Life can be strange. You gave me
the critical detail there I was wondering about for the sake of
this discussion. When someone needs real help, they aren't to
be found! If you need words and more words, they can certainly
help since they're experts on everything.
It is one of life's lessons that people need to learn but alas
it seems so hard for some. Some people can be influenced so
easily by flattery and pretenses of love. Then they wonder
where the flatterers went when trouble strikes. When will
people learn to trust the people who stand by you in times of
trouble even if they aren't always flattering you or oozing fake
love at you?
I see this as one of mankind's major persistent problems. We
see it on open display in politics and religion; and how easy it
seems for the manipulators of mankind too -- all they have to
offer is talk. How many people really pick their religion or
politics for the right reasons? I don't say as a criticism of
them although criticism might be justified; I say that out of
sorrow and sympathy. The world appears very troubled now,
perhaps on a crash course to a global war. I say that because
of how I see elections going, and it seems to me people in many
countries are trusting the most untrustworthy politicians.
A prime example of this is in France. The leaders there knew
about several threats to national security and did nothing about
them. That's a fact because after the disasters, they had a
list of suspicious characters to arrest. They also knew about
the dangers of allowing just anyone into France. They pursued
an unwise course of non-action. Then after disaster struck
under their watch, they stirred up emotions of the French people
by promising to solve the problems by getting tough. They even
ratcheted up their bombing of sites in Syria. Most of that was
propaganda meant to lull the French people into thinking they
were capable and concerned leaders. So are they credible? I
think not. I go by their actual record which is dismal.
People are tempted to believe promises about the future even
after they can see what kind of leaders they have. Wishful
thinking -- often based on flattery which appeals to pride.
I believe it was in the Netherlands where a few thousand
refugees were being sheltered in tents. What does that tell me?
It tells me that were a national disaster to strike there,
they are completely unprepared. If a million or even ten or
twenty thousand Dutch people suddenly made homeless, the
government couldn't deal with it. Do the Dutch people care?
It seems not, not as long as it's refugees in tents and not
them.
It is an old problem that seems to go back to Eve in the Garden.
God had provided everything she and Adam needed. It was very
good. But along comes the serpent, and she is seduced by
flattering talk and false promises.
What's astonishing is that some people keep falling for the same
con game again and again, seemingly never learning from the
unfortunate events of the past.
#Post#: 3340--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Piper Date: November 25, 2015, 5:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[font=trebuchet ms]Kerry, Kerry, Kerry . . . meet me in
PM's?[/font]
#Post#: 3342--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: bradley Date: November 25, 2015, 6:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Piper link=topic=387.msg3333#msg3333
date=1448472135]
[font=trebuchet ms]Wise words, Brad. Not all, but many of our
burdens, we create by our own poor choices. Refusing good
advice, being impulsive, bad decisions, trying to live a
lifestyle we can't afford . . . spells trouble for many
Americans.[/font]
[/quote]
Oh yes, we create many of our own burdens, I was just admitting
that Christ's burdens are light. And yes, lifestyles of those
wanting to be rich and famous nearly always step on the razor's
edge of trading the desire to follow Christ less than the desire
to be of the rich and famous. I call it vanity and lack of
wisdom and humbleness.
#Post#: 3349--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Kerry Date: November 27, 2015, 2:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=bradley link=topic=387.msg3342#msg3342
date=1448498109]
Oh yes, we create many of our own burdens, I was just admitting
that Christ's burdens are light. And yes, lifestyles of those
wanting to be rich and famous nearly always step on the razor's
edge of trading the desire to follow Christ less than the desire
to be of the rich and famous. I call it vanity and lack of
wisdom and humbleness.
[/quote]Pope Francis' talk about the excesses of capitalism seem
to annoy some people. He was talking about it again in his
visit to Kenya. From CNN
HTML http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/27/africa/africa-pope-francis-trip/:
Pope Francis waded into the heart of a Kenyan shantytown Friday,
spreading a message of acceptance and lashing out at the
nation's elite for neglecting the poor.
Francis' visit to Kangemi aligned with his message of service to
the poor during his three days in Nairobi.
In the sprawling slum filled with tin-roofed homes, he described
injustices against the less fortunate as "new forms of
colonialism."
The "dreadful injustice of social exclusion" leaves the poor
with an unfair distribution of land, lack of access to
infrastructure and minimal basic services, he said.
"Our world has a grave social debt toward the poor who lack
access to drinking water because they are denied a life
consistent with their inalienable dignity," the Pope said.
There are some "conservatives" here in the US who don't like
what he says. Their attitude seems to be if you have money,
you have the right to do whatever you want with it; and these
people also often say they're Christians. They also oppose
almost any law that regulates how people run businesses.
It seems to me that the world has entered a new era with the
increase of international trading. It used to be that a
government could pass laws against some practices that didn't
cripple business. Take safety rules, how many hours someone
can work, child labor laws, minimum wage. A government could
make sure the worst offenders couldn't thrive and make money at
the expense of workers. Such bad business practices also
injure good businesses since they aren't competing on a level
playing field. Today however, countries which allow bad
practices are now competing with countries which don't; and the
pressure is on. The sewing factories in the US closed long
ago with those jobs going abroad. Other jobs have also left.
Businesses now say they can't compete unless they're given more
freedom to do as they please; and there is an element of truth
in that -- if the US tolerates the importing of goods from
countries with bad practices.
What is the answer for Kenya? Often the proposed solution in
poor countries is to try to attract foreign investors. This is
like putting a band-aid on severed artery. It helps a little,
but it's no real solution since the profits go out of the
country. It also discourages rising wages if foreign investors
can make more money in poor countries where they can pay low
wages and threaten to leave if wages rise by law. The Pope
also mentioned corruption; and we all know that African
politicians and government workers are easily seduced by anyone
willing to offer them a bribe. Yes, foreign investment
encourages government corruption. It is evil if you ask me
when a company has "too much freedom" and particularly evil when
they achieve that "freedom" by bribery.
The situation in China may appear better than in Kenya at first
glance; and perhaps it is; but the Chinese Communist Party is
hopelessly corrupt. The "new" type of Communist is really an
entrepreneur who makes his money by being in the Party and able
to wangle regulations, inspections and the like to their own
advantage. If you want to build a factory, you simply tell the
farmers they have to leave. This is not that unpopular with
the masses who want the jobs being promoted and the promise of
a rising living standard. The result could be catastrophic in
more than one way since China is wrecking its own farmland and
growing more dependent on imports for its food. That is crazy
in my book since food supply is a critical national security
problem.
The result of all the international trade has been the rise of
what some call the 1% who own most of everything. The poor are
not benefiting. Increases in productivity do not mean workers
get paid more. The opposite is true in some cases. If you
can get three workers to do what four used to do, you don't
raise wages -- you pocket the difference -- and since more
people are unemployed, you can even reduce wages! Yet
increased trade was pushed and accepted by people in the
developed world because of the promise of lower prices in
stores. That did benefit middle and low income people
somewhat; but it also put some people out of work and resulted
in stagnating wages.
Our form of capitalism has also made some countries richer than
others. Some European countries have rather strict laws inside
their own countries for themselves while they take advantage of
other countries or foreign workers. Look at the controversy
in the EU
HTML http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/articles/working-conditions-labour-market-industrial-relations-business/controversy-over-german-minimum-wage-for-international-truck-drivers-q2-2015<br
/>over a minimum wage for foreign workers. I was also astounde
d
to discover the other day that in Saudi Arabia, only 37% of
people arrested are Saudi nationals. The rest are foreigners,
and it's known why so many foreigners go there. Germany of
course looks rich and is; but they don't have that many children
-- and that too is often a financial decision -- why have
children if it would cut into your lifestyle?
Then we wonder why there is such a flood of immigration from
poor countries to rich ones. Why wouldn't there be? When we
have richer and more powerful countries allowing -- or even
encouraging -- their investors to abuse people in poorer and
less powerful countries, it may seem smart to have all that
money being made in foreign countries flowing into your own
country; but it also is keeping people in those other countries
in poverty. So of course people in the poor countries will try
to immigrate -- and they're often not that happy when they do
immigrate but resentful. They aren't interested in blending in
with other people -- they often want to save money and return
home, or to work to send money home to their families. Clearly
many people who come to the US aren't interested in wanting to
fit in with other Americans.
The French should be quaking in their shoes right now. They've
abused foreigners for decades with ghettos filled with Muslim
immigrants and with Muslims who are French citizens but still
treated as second-class citizens. The government says there is
no discrimination and they point to the fact that they don't
keep track of anyone based on race, nationality, etc. The
government says they are blind to such things while
discrimination runs rampant. It's a breeding ground for
outbreaks of riots which they've seen or for terrorism which
they've begun to see. Let's also be clear that French policy
(along with the policy of the US and some other European
countries) helped create the problems in Syria. Russia isn't
being helpful, that's for sure; but at least Russia is not
trying to undermine the legitimate government there. I call
that "terrorism" myself. We can bemoan the tactics Assad has
used -- like poison gas while we forget cheerfully who sold him
the chemicals to make the poison gas -- an English company. We
can bemoan his using barrel bombs saying they kill innocent
people -- while we the outsiders are bombing sites which also
kill innocent people. This civil war might have been over by
now if no other countries had jumped in to support the rebels.
I doubt you'd get an honest answer from anyone on it; but I'd
say this is about the proposed pipeline from Israel to Europe.
Russia would like control of it; and the EU would too. So where
will it be built and who will control it?
The truth is sad indeed; but we know that Assad, while a
dictator, ruled that country with the firm hand that is needed
in a country that has so many factions. He tolerated all
religions and all sects impartially if they didn't cause
trouble. If you caused trouble, he was ruthless. Okay, barrel
bombs and poison gas aren't nice; but what is if you're fighting
rebels? Surely too it's true that innocent people get killed
in wars; but it's also true that more people can wind up killed
if you try to be "civilized" in a war. Wars drag on and on
when people try to be civilized. In the end, I think more
people die as a result; and surely you see more hunger and
suffering and more refugees. Sad to say, even sending in food
and medicine can prolong a war. Rebels are given more hope of
winning if they see people from the outside are willing to
support them. Wars are over when one side realizes it can't
win and gives up.
I've digressed, but I do think the problems in Syria are the
result of richer countries wanting too much freedom for
themselves to interfere there. One thing for sure is that
Christian leaders there want Assad in power. He protected them.
No one dared to try to start anything based on religious
discrimination. Why are we supporting people who want to topple
the Assad regime? Do we hope they'll be our puppets
economically? I think so. I don't think having more money
than the next guy should give you "more freedom" to act in ways
he can; and I don't think having more power militarily gives you
"more freedom" than the other fellow.
Let me digress a little more and come back to the Pope who is
going to visit the Central African Republic. What a tragic
situation there where Christians are the ones persecuting the
Muslims. True a Muslim terrorist organization is responsible
for the spark that started things; but now the Christian
militias are committing atrocities in retaliation.
#Post#: 3367--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Kerry Date: November 28, 2015, 12:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Speaking of freedom, here is an insight I gained from
Scientology. When they are talking to you and they aren't sure
where you stand or maybe if they want to change your mind about
something, they may keep asking you "why" you want to do
something or "why" you believe something. If you answer with a
"because", the conversation may go on and on "because" when
someone gives a reason for what he's doing or thinking, his
mind can be changed. If he says, "No reason, that's just the
way it is," that ends the conversation. You won't change his
mind.
Ultimately, I believe that is true. Your "free will" isn't
really "free" if you have "reasons" for what you do. Now think
about this. Children often do things for no reason at all.
They look at things in wonder, act spontaneously, and often
don't think about "why". They seem to be born without that
concept of "why". Then along comes the dreary concept of cause
and effect where everything you do has to have an explanation.
And they start asking the "why" questions. And no matter how
many questions you answer, they ask again, but "why" is that
true? Why is it raining? Because there's moisture in the
clouds. Why is there moisture in the clouds? Because it
evaporates from the sea and lakes. Why? Because the sun heats
it up? Why? Eventually the adult usually snaps and says, "I
don't know -- it's just the way it is." It's at this point the
child is picking up the idea that every event must have a cause;
and he begins to apply that to his own actions too.
But I say one of the beauties of life is that God gave us humans
an ability He has -- that of acting without any prior cause.
People often say God is "First Cause" and that's true; but I
also say He gave us a similar ability.
There are some basic ideas that no one can explain why they
believe them. You are "free" to believe what you want; and
then it's true for you. Does matter exist on its own, or is it
a projection of awareness? Does God exist? Is man basically
good or evil? However you answer these basic questions then
become your basic assumption about reality; and that's the
reality you live in. Your conclusions about other things will
depend, of course, on your basic assumptions. If you suddenly
change one of your basic assumptions, many of your other ideas
will crumble and fall down. For example, if someone who
believes men are basically evil changes his mind and believes
they're basically good, how he relates to others will change in
almost countless ways.
Now let me carry this "for no reason at all" a bit further in a
direction Scientology doesn't take it. If we do good deeds or
if we say we believe in Jesus hoping to gain eternal life, we
have a motive, a reason, a "why." We are saying I am doing
this now so events in the future will be the way I want. We're
still operating "in time." There is a higher form of good.
Yes, I believe so. After doing good deeds long enough, you
start to enjoy it and you start doing them just for the fun of
it.
You no longer need the commandment to love others if you can
experience joy now by loving now. You may hope others love you
in return, but that hope is no longer your motive. You love
others basically because that's what you want to do -- in the
here and now. You take no thought for the morrow; and you
aren't reckoning anything letting your left hand know what your
right is doing.
One escapes the shackles of time thus and enters the eternal
now, the perpetual rest of the saints.
What means it then when the Bible says to believe in Jesus?
There are decrees to belief, I think. Ultimately we should see
how he escaped the limitations of time by expressing Love. If
we could see that fully and see how His Nature is Pure Love,
surely we would be like Him. Such would be full belief in Him,
I think.
If we are in a bad mood, we can still do good and express love
for others even when we aren't feeling very loving. Just do it,
and we find our mood improves. If we have motives for doing
good and loving others, we can still go ahead and do the right
thing even if the motives aren't the purest. We should never
excuse failing to do good and acting in a loving manner because
we know our motives aren't the best. We can know what the best
motives are mentally and can act on them even when our emotions
are giving us less than pure motives. Do this, and mind and
soul begin to fall in line, and the unruliness of both begin to
fade away, replaced by purer motives as we choose to act in
accordance with them.
Mother Teresa did a variation on something Dr. Kent Keith had
written ; and her version reads:
People are often unreasonable, irrational, and self-centered.
Forgive them anyway.
If you are kind, people may accuse you of selfish,
ulterior motives. Be kind anyway.
If you are successful, you will win some unfaithful
friends and some genuine enemies. Succeed anyway.
If you are honest and sincere people may deceive you.
Be honest and sincere anyway.
What you spend years creating, others could destroy
overnight. Create anyway.
If you find serenity and happiness, some may be
jealous. Be happy anyway.
The good you do today, will often be forgotten. Do
good anyway.
Give the best you have, and it will never be enough.
Give your best anyway.
In the final analysis, it is between you and God. It
was never between you and them anyway.
#Post#: 3369--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: bradley Date: November 28, 2015, 10:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
While the Pope may be on target about many people too focused on
wealth accumulation and not helping the poor, the vatican has
access to a lot of capital that could help out the poor as well.
He could make it more real by making his own red cross type
organization, or business that helps "widows and orphans". And
if he has no control over the wealth the vatican has, perhaps he
should at least preach against his own who hold tight purse
strings.
#Post#: 3371--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Piper Date: November 29, 2015, 4:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
^ [font=trebuchet ms]I wondered about Vatican wealth, myself.
Remember, there are always two sides to every story.
This--written last May-- is worth a read, including the comments
following the article:
HTML https://polination.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/the-catholic-church-isnt-hoarding-wealth/
HTML https://polination.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/the-catholic-church-isnt-hoarding-wealth/[/font]
#Post#: 3372--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Kerry Date: November 29, 2015, 1:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The finances of the Catholic Church are complicated since the
Bishops control a large percentage of its money and the Pope
can't tell them what to do. He can twist arms and talk -- or
remove them as he removed the infamous "Bishop of Bling" who was
building himself a ridiculously expensive house. The twisting
of arms also embarrassed an American Bishop to put a halt to the
expensive house he had planned.
Some dioceses still have lots of money while others have gone
bankrupt. Some either wasted money on expensive houses for
their Bishops or lost court cases in sex abuse cases which
forced them into bankruptcy. Some had to close schools and
churches. There is a Bishop, I think in New Jersey, I'd love
to see given the boot. He was building a fine house for
himself while closing schools. His excuse for closing them was
the money a sex abuse case had cost the diocese; but one wonders
then where he got the money to build his house? I think maybe
(if memory serves me right) that Francis sent in an "auxiliary
Bishop" who's probably the one with the real power now. What
has amazed me in some of these cases is that richer dioceses
seemed so reluctant to support the poorer or bankrupt ones. It
seems to me many Bishops answer, "No," to the question, "Am I my
brother Bishop's keeper?"
Perhaps the worst abuses the Vatican got itself into involved
the so-called "Vatican Bank." If it had been run properly, all
would have been fine; but money-grubbers took over and previous
Popes seem unable or unwilling to come to grips with the
situation. Pope Francis has taken some steps, and time will
tell if he succeeded in bringing it under control. The Vatican
Bank was supposed to act like a bank for various dioceses and
charities where they could let money they hadn't spent yet sit
until they needed it; but we all have heard how it got used to
launder money for organized crime, etc.
I was amused however to read a news article about a store or
company that specialized in expensive items like fancy crosses
and expensive clothes for Bishops. They said sales were very
slow since Francis became Pope. People were too embarrassed
to be spending money on such things.
#Post#: 3377--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: Piper Date: November 29, 2015, 6:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[font=trebuchet ms]Very large church, the good and the bad, I
guess. :-\
The Catholic church I've attended, at least, is quite modest,
which suits me well. Extravagance generally doesn't sit well
with me.
But, I'm sure we could dig up dirt about other churches, too,
such as the Presbyterian church here that was being picketed
because one of their elders was an abortion doctor.
There is no perfect church, as we all know.
I am glad Pope Francis is a good influence, and that he's trying
to get things changed. Glad he's shamed a few people.
[/font]
#Post#: 3381--------------------------------------------------
Re: Complete Freedom?
By: bradley Date: November 29, 2015, 11:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
The Catholic church seems to me to be a bit like walmart
organization wise. The home office has lots of wealth and
capital, but individual stores can be just barely making it.
And I know its more capital than ready cash, but capital can be
liquidated if needs arise. And yes, I know there are many
organizations/hospitals/schools with Catholic church ties/helps.
It just looks bad when you see all that gold and silver and
jewels and priceless art littered all over the vatican and then
speak about the wealth of others being bad.
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page