Worthless Perfection

I guess since I was unable to finish a thought during the discussion tonight at Prayer Meeting, I will finish here, where no one will hear and especially no one will interefere, interupt, or stop me from finishing. Matthew 5 is one of the most famous passages of all Jesus recorded sayings and perhaps includes a synopsis of almost everything He did say. After climbing to a spot from whence He could be heard He began with blessings, blessing which we today utilize as instructions to our behaviour and attitude and guidance for our relation with God. Then the lesson was probably as true but perhaps not as poignant as the possible personal connection Jesus was making to the majority of the individuals probably present in the mass of teeming flesh which was following Him and pressing Him at every turn. After this series of blessings Jesus began to teach concerning the familiar Rabbinic topic of the Ten Commandments. Perhaps feeling a common acceptance by the masses of the importance of respect of parents, and knowing that many present felt ostracized from true worship of the Father, and perhaps even intimidated into a feeling of worthlessness concerning their attempts to worship, or at best a frustration with their material lack of receipt and the ostensible inequity of God's Graces as the social, political and religious powers of the time both local and foreign tended to keep the proverbial heel of the boot to the neck of the downtrodden. He attacks all the so called keepers and interpreters of the law as too lenient in personal application and lacking in true understanding, pointing out that anger is murder and the epithet of 'worhtless waste' is no worse than the term 'fool'! The thought is as pregnant as the deed in terms of sin and separation. Finishing the diatribe against those who were able to, by position and circumstance and careful adherence to the letter of the law while skirting the intent of the law, show appearance of perfection and thereby foist themselves upon the public as examples of God among us by encouraging all of us to go with this new and expanded understanding and be perfect.

I think He finishes with the admonishment to perfection because God always finsishes with a positive note however strongly we might think that He should be pessimistic.

But right now I know that I am probably the least likely to be understood, but, if understood, then most likely disagreed with, but more than likely I will not even be considered. Raca that I am. Thankyou for your time.

RobeFRe

Wheels grind slowly to make correct change

">Link

Ostensible Christianity

While touring Dr Roark's orchards for his most current fruit I found this one, not so recent, but, which has a poignant aspect to it for me. When I was in HSchool, I and two other well meaning witnesses purposed to form a group whereby voluntary organised Christian Fellowship could be found somewhere in the halls of the public school which we attended. I, the congenial, all accepting one, the young lady, a potent strictly thinking future 'church lady', and the warrior, no holds barred full steam ahead 'twist their arm till they repent', type began to debate first what it was that would bring us together. The one wanted to seclude ourselves and demonstrate our faith in a passive way so that others would see the Grand Effect in our behaviours, another wanted to choose particular individuals and go at their beings with all the might the Spirit could bring through our selves so that prospects could not help but to be affected as we would want them to be. I wanted somefolks I could rely on as a source and haven of Christian affirmation and activity. We never were able to get beyond definitions, intents and tactics to establish a time and place or modus operandi, so it never actuated. A short time later, some group began to meet early, before classes and pray around the flag pole, I hear they still do that. I was one of the first to stick a smiley face to my notebook cover, I actually recieved grief over that! (A continuous smile could not be real!) I wonder about those fish on the backs of some people's cars, how many lemons have been sold to an unsuspecting public under the auspices of Christian Tradesmanship? Many times I raised my index finger, pointing to the sky, informing and reminding others of the 'One Way' through Christ, but I never (at least I hope I never, and its my story so I never) repeated that awful mantra coined by Flip Wilson for us "The Devil made me do it!". If God is truly relative then surley He means for me to do my very best to glorify Him, realizing when I fail to do a superb job of it, He will forgive me, He will forgive not only me, but any one else who acknowledges in their heart His being and effort on our part. So when He says in Matthew 6:1 "Beware of practicing your righteousness before men to be noticed by them; otherwise you have no reward with your Father who is in heaven.", how does He expect me to glorify Him, through silence and inaction? For surely men will notice my actions and inactions both--aha it is the attitude, and not that I should judge the actions or results of others, nor expect that people even passively know my righteousness. I should do these things to make God known and certainly not to further my own self centered cause before others. If somone else is promoting God who am I to tell them they should not promote God because I know of their duplicity, hypocracy or outright deceit? That speck in their eye, and the log in my own what of that? Paul did say, and I am too lazy right now to find the scripture and verse, that we should do those things for which we could be proud. God Himself will judge that for its truth.

entelechins

What is intelligence?

Recent readings indicate it has its origin in a contained purpose of being. So if purpose is innate and discovered, realized and conveyed, remembered and displayed, then intelligence must also be ability, effectiveness and reliability. But that leads to the question," if you can't see it is it there?"

Plaristo

I love the opportunity to display my ignorance.

Plato describes the idea(-l) as the co-existance by three characteristics in man, 1)ration, 2)appetite and 3)spirit to effect a subjectified (quantifiable), understanding of truth, beauty, and reality(God somewhere out there?)or qualitative metaphysics, depending upon the chariot driver's competence of rationale.

Aristotle expounds the reason(s) for that subjectivity in metaphysical description as a consequence of faulty syllogism. Limited perception, poor observation, leaping surmisal.empirism and particularity over all, through all and in all.

Too simple, I am sure, and no where near the original authors' true intent.

Both seem to think reason able to explain all there is, or if it doesn't, then something is wrong.

I am not sure I understand the juxtaposition of Metaphysics to Empiracal and Particular in describing the differences of Plato to Aristotle.


this is also posted at http://aintsobad.typepad.com/ikant/