Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] music

Expand Messages
  • David Leon
    ... From: Sue McPherson To: Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:29 AM Subject: Re: [existlist]
    Message 1 of 136 , Jan 31, 2003
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Sue McPherson" <sue@...>
      To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:29 AM
      Subject: Re: [existlist] music

      > I can't quite get the gist of what you say about spirituality.

      It's probably better than saying you have it when you dont or dont really
      seem to care if you do. By the way, I'm sitting here, and I just started
      making a snack for myself...it's a Friday for one thing, that's kinda funny
      in itself. But anyway, I just tasted my over-a-day-old-not-very-sealed-up
      pinot noir..wine...and...i dunnot yet if it can be warped into a decent
      experience or not. Whaddaya think? Not sure if it's my taste buds and all
      the variety of approches you can bring to especially something like wine, or
      just..it's changed or old or whatever. Either way, it seems a little

      Anyway...I'm not saying anyone's supposed to instantly get some real (and
      more than imagination) personal connection to this, but spiritual was like
      that pyramid thing, probably, to me. We dont become "the same" in some
      personalities and in things we shouldn't give up while being each of us, but
      while travelling up the pyramid, you are reaching for the head. In the
      christian example, so far at this point in history anyway, it's not so much
      knowing that you are "climbing to the top"..but maybe that you are able to
      travel a little bit farther and a little bit farther, from top to bottom and
      all around. That's a cheap analogy. I think so, honestly. But I was just
      trying to ..still use it to talk about probably about the biggest danger I
      guess of the picture, and perhaps the biggest danger in one sense, in
      christianity. So let me say it like this: climbing "to the top" is a
      personal thing. It's inner, and such and so and back and forth - feelings
      that bring out a meaning in the word "spiritual". And if it's made social
      first, it brings out all but excuses for up to the at-a-distance seeming
      plain horridness of Hitlerian kinds of thinking or regimes.

      A few things, now that I'm locked into this stupid analogy of mine.
      One concept in christianity was Jesus as a "chief cornerstone", in the
      language of authorized English translation of the books in the Bible, year
      1611, at least. I've heard people talk about some cornerstones in
      architecture somehow supporting just about "the whole structure"
      or..some...junk like that. ..At the moment, I dont really care if there IS
      anything to that (I guess basically cuz now I dont think there is..Did I
      ever..really?). But..if you look at "chief" in the English thinking
      there..and take it to mean somewhere in the range of just that: "top", then
      you can have the "chief cornerstone" meaning the more/most prominent stone
      on/in a corner. Hey hey.... If you take a pyramid, if you're getting my
      drift now...the capstone is the prominent cornerstone anyway. Whether that
      has anything to do with what Paul was saying, I ..well, I cant know or think
      of some honest or backed opinion on everything at once, anyway, right?

      People can be different kinds of christians...even apparently evil ones,
      maybe. But the fact is that whatever good you might learn with, from, or in
      christianity, and whatever you might get out of it that you use in some plan
      or action that seems twisted to other (murder even; whatever), there is also
      a "spiritual" kind of christianity that has rather driven ..the biggest
      changes in churches and movements, and..perhaps even politics in a way,
      indirectly, in the long run. Modernly at least, there have been some
      interesting christians, in their own rite, who are not these kinds of
      christians that are "spiritual" so much. Different people get different
      things out of christianity. BUT...one step closer to connecting with people
      and not so much "getting different things", is the whole concept of actually
      experiencing "redemption" for one's self. From then on in someone's life, if
      this person gets to go deeper in anything in life, that anything gets tied
      right into like an idea or story of redemption, to develop this feeling
      inside right along side observations of and learning about the world around.
      What it is, is a just about ultimate setting out on one's own, individuality
      realized, but connected back into the world in a new way..the cosmos, even
      people to an extent within that. That's because of God. And the reason that
      prior to bringing this out, I mentioned different "types" of christians,
      though, is because ..not everyone who follows something about Jesus or gets
      something out of christianity ..knows this...that I'm talking about..or has
      gotten it, experienced it. ..Most haven't. (That's opinion: what I project,
      from what I see.)

      I'm only repeating over what some of the wierd preachers of the world, long
      as they have actually experienced this, have already preached - about
      repenting or hell or whatever. Some of them actually know or have known what
      they're talking about...to their extent.
      I'm just putting it in my own little terms, that I've learned or
      experienced. I actually, in turn, put more focus on these changes, as I
      study them I guess scientifically or whatever, more than a lot of these
      preachers ever have, in the sense that ..I've even gone as far as to, at
      this point, throw out heaven and hell and the special inspiration of the
      Bible or maybe other things, fairly completely. In my own way, I could say
      that I'm honestly more open about and toward and respectful of, the Bible,
      though...or that I almost "feel" or express heaven and hell "more", or I
      have expressed.

      Go figure about the words I'm about to mix, but in other words, if I could
      perhaps lazily put out some of this stuff however and to whoever about my
      scientific realizations of religion, just cuz I'm here and I'm interested in
      learing about it or couldn't help myself, then..well, it's an almost new mix
      right there! Science? Religion? A science about religion...a science that
      incorporates some of the wierdest of at least lasting or
      brought-to-modern-world-or-light kind of religious experience or
      ..phenomenon in culture, with some of these wierd christians who dont just
      get something out of some "christianity", but are actually different, and
      just kinda naturally separate at points, and dont seem interested in some
      things of this world, which they might also just happen to insist on calling
      sin or wondering about sometimes at least. You see...it is THOSE people and
      the influences of them, and the influences on them, that we have not been
      (certainly not commonly) been able to explain, or venture into, or put up
      with really all that much, scientifically. So...I dunno, here I am. I'm
      rather scientific about it all. I also experience it. If I didn't...I'd be
      missing out on really understanding ANYway.

      So, I'm not saying that it's something that I just sorta explain and
      like...that makes it into some kind of intellectual problem that we just
      sorta start to pick up, and so then it's ok - we're grasping it.
      It's..more..it's just a more complete..knowledge or experience, too. And
      it's the same stuff that other people hundreds and almost thousands of years
      before me, in this christian era, have ..said...experienced...been wierd
      enough to talk about, and we try to "explain" in our old psychological
      terms. I guess I'm just saying..that there's no other way at this point, to
      account for these things (maybe just tons of things in the world) and move
      on that much with science nowdays, without getting into the actuality of the
      experience here, that's behind christianity. And the reason it's
      "christianity" and not "some other religion, by the way, is just because
      christianity IS any other religion. I'm just talking about the spiritual
      part, which will take ANY religion or religious person, or non-religious
      person, or who cares who..to a ..different place. Add a little extra in.

      No "scientist" per se, has accounted for this stuff in the past...this truly
      spiritual stuff..or even the sometimes commonly known or read stuff in some
      literature that is passed all around, used for various agendas or random
      falsely brilliant ideas, and maybe pushed down the next poor fellows throat.
      But..moving on now, finally...

      > But yes, we are in an age of diversity,

      I effectively thank God for at least the little bit of that growing out

      > although it's not
      > always easy to comprehend or understand where other
      > people are coming from. I have a couple of books here -
      > Sacred Sexuality (Feuerstein) and Eisler's Sacred Pleasure.
      > I'm not sure what I'll find when I get to them.

      Who knows.

      It's interesting to me, though...I guess seeing how much I CAN understand
      people, when I grasp more onto a sort of "comparative spirituality". For
      ..ever...science, as it's come along or come into view, has built this war
      with religion...or religion with science. And ..it's probably just so silly,
      on whoever/whatever's part, that meanwhile, nowdays, I am sitting around now
      doing this work with the science of/incorporating religion, versus the
      religion of science, I guess..
      It can add to science anyway. Just another crazy Freud who thinks he can add
      to science in some wierd way...

    • Mark Tindall
      ... Ditto. ... clergy. A truer word has not been spoken! Hence the need for each individual to find their path. ... Hence Tillich s term of God as the ground
      Message 136 of 136 , Feb 15, 2003
        shari wrote:

        > I found Paul Tillich helpful.


        > Theology has to do with the survival of both the institution and the >

        A truer word has not been spoken! Hence the need for each individual to
        find their path.

        > Jean-Luc Marion adds more in this line. In 'God Without
        > Being' he takes God out of the realm of metaphysics. God no
        > longer is seen as a metaphysical "being," which is bound to
        > human limited thought. We must think of God, "outside the
        > box" of ontology, being.

        Hence Tillich's term of God as 'the ground of our being' by which I mean
        Being (with a capital B ... the same as that used by Spong).

        > He argues that any attempt to define God is to diminish God
        > and worship an idol fabricated by human thought.

        Yep! God is more than the combined human imgaination over all time and
        space can guess at.

        > God is transcendent, unreachable, unattainable,

        Yep, I think we experience but a shadow of God ... but that is still

        > as are other humans.

        I think finite people are experienced more fully than God but not

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.