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

Re: [existlist] New to the List

Expand Messages
  • vanessa.vangelder@knowledgeobjects.biz
    na it can t possibly be good! David Leon ave.com cc: Subject: Re: [existlist] New
    Message 1 of 59 , Feb 27, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      na it can't possibly be good!



      "David Leon"
      <dave@placeofd To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      ave.com> cc:
      Subject: Re: [existlist] New to the List
      02/26/03 10:33
      PM
      Please respond
      to existlist






      Vee,
      Ok, I tried to write before. It got scrapped when my program failed on me
      and I hadn't saved it yet. That's probably good...

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <vanessa.vangelder@...>
      To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:36 PM
      Subject: Re: [existlist] New to the List


      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Vee,
      > hello David again :-)
      >
      >
      > I think for starters it's just my unease to make it sound like I dont
      think
      > my own sister is "religious enough to not be gay".
      > --------> is your unease coming from the inability to put christian + gay
      > together...

      Ok, no. See, since I tried writing the first time, I thought about this and
      thought of somethign to say here. It's more like my unease came from never
      dealing with my sister and philosophy in the same breath. I mean, in the
      sense that I dont talk philosophy with my sister, I deal with her in the
      way
      I deal with her. But when I made the associations to what you were saying,
      it made me think about my sister, but it felt odd to be supposedly talking
      more philosophically and wordily, but all the sudden have the idea of my
      sister pop up in my head. It's interesting; it's cool. It's..well, it adds
      to the experiences I have gotten in life, you know. But, I think that was
      more the reaction...mixing sis and philos...and that was wierd. I dont talk
      to my sister ..like in this way at all really.

      >
      > why do you think people become gay, or do you think they born gay or do
      you
      > think both?
      >

      I think that they may have some factor about their body/person which lends
      for THEM to be gay perhaps. But it's not as if a male baby is commonly
      sitting there thinking "I'm going to have some kind of intimacy with my guy
      friend someday more than a woman," right after birth, at least any more
      than
      he's gonna even think about literally trying to get intimate with . But I
      think that the association with the OPPOSITE sex comes ..first or primarily
      to a same- association, and at least more commonly.

      >
      > That's silly, and disgusting...and is not me. You should question me
      more,
      > or even try to draw
      > things from my other posts regarding God or ANYthing to see that's not
      me.
      > I
      > started feeling like I guess I hadn't had experience in pulling apart the
      > two issues of like...homosexuality I guess and "christian experience" or
      > whatever, in regards to my own sis. And it was as if I was stuck almost
      > combining them just now, and...it's not like that. I really DO "believe"
      in
      > this stuff, or just know or learn some things about it, about "the
      > christian
      > experience" that I talk about. I would be...my best guess would be
      > something
      > "bisexual" if I were not "the kind of christian" I am. And that's not
      about
      > disciplining myself to live by (the) rules, whoever's they are supposed
      to
      > be.
      > ---------------> i see where you are coming from, i struggled with that
      for
      > a long time, i lived a str8, but was unhappy in my
      > relationships...eventually i got so pissed off with God and the whole
      > Christian (we'll pray for you set up), must say it took a long time to
      > break down that conditioning, now that i have accepted it i have so much
      > peace about myself, and i prayed for that peace, so God whoever God is,
      or
      > my mind/spirit soul finally let go of that prison of conditioning...
      >

      I mean, some of that my sister could connect to. But also, I've learned
      just
      now to separate what I'm doing here: I'm not just associating you with my
      life or my sister or anything, but talking philosophy too. It's just
      interesting.

      But, there is that frustration...I think ..when some things that you sorta
      expect out of your self, your feelings, your body even, aren't exactly
      what...happens, or it's not that easy, it's like..."Wait a minute. Am I
      fooling myself on something." I mean, I dont have all kinds of ins and outs
      but I do know a few basics of what my own sister at least has experienced
      at
      times and could have experienced. I mean, I understand...or what I know of
      it, or her, of her life really. It's not just about like "understanding
      this
      dumb gay thing"...it's just understanding some of what she's gone through
      and how she's dealt.

      And it's not that the christianity thing at the core really conflicts or
      agrees with homosexuality issues. It's more like it's a whole other world,
      in a way. I mentioned my uncle, and I'm not saying that he just "got
      religion" - that's more of an expression from those who haven't
      experienced,
      dont know what I'm referring to. But...it was honestly at that point no
      more
      really
      an issue for my uncle to be gay. I'm not saying he instantly "religiously"
      turned his back on himself or his prior life. But it's just that some of
      these lifestyles and perceptions of things can fairly commonly melt away
      with just a little time..and understanding just changes and even "is"
      something different, when this christian...walk really..starts to take
      place. Things just look different - it's not just instant understanding of
      everything, but more like as an individual begins to cope with this new
      life-changing thing he has, and this 'walk' he's realized, his
      understanding
      at least tries to adapt to the repercussions of it all in his life and what
      he does, practically. It's not just corporate religion, even if that still
      works its way into things when we're blind to the differences between this
      inner walking religion and the outer blurs that are out there and are
      "heavy" and have taken place historically too. But I just know my sister
      hasn't ..undergone..begun that kind of walk thing. So...you see for me,
      right in this moment, for what I know along with my life including my
      christian walk thing, I know that I dont really want to be gay or even
      bisexual, and it's really just about my life happening to include this
      sense
      of God and this experience within which it just does not make sense to be
      gay...to really even worry about sexuality, in one crazy sense. So see
      that's kind of a whole other issue in a way, than just sitting here saying
      that I dont like gays. Without my christian experience, I dont really care
      if anyone's gay..or whether *I* am or not. But with that, personally, I
      ..couldn't be that, really. There, I could speak for my uncle also, and say
      "That just isn't me anymore..when it ever really was." But it's a
      simplistic
      thing I'm saying, not a judgemental/weighty thing.

      >
      > You see, as for the theological angle, I think that we experientially
      > get these ideas in us that when (parents for instance) expect things from
      > us, that equates to God's expectations. And it's not a matter of "Oh
      well,
      > I
      > can do whatever I want, because God is loving." In reality, when you come
      > more into the experience of this God and his love, it's like "Yes, he has
      > 'rules', but those are only bound or DEFINED by his love," and that's how
      > they are not men's expectations - they are not restricted by some
      person's
      > (lack of, and lack of the understanding of) love. An understanding of
      love,
      > comes more deeply from an experience of love. The deeper experience of
      > love,
      > comes "from above" as the allegorical statement goes. That can be the
      > christian experience, as you walk through it, but it's not just available
      > at
      > any moment fully like that to any man. One must first turn around on
      > himself
      > and initially repent (again, turn around) within himself, because he
      cannot
      > say that "the world should repent..but I do not need to".
      > -------> now why would someone need to repent for being gay? who are you
      > hurting, is that not about love?
      >

      This fucking program is getting annoying. It shut down on me again, and I
      lost the paragraph I wrote in reply to this part right here. Damn. :) I
      also
      lost some of the material finishing or touching up the paragraph above.

      What I was trying to say in this portion of my reply was something like...
      It's not a repentance against being gay. It's something else. Hopefully
      some
      of this (more like from the outside looking in, but still) is getting
      across
      from what I'm writing in this message. If you were to repent from being
      gay,
      and that's that, you'd have to convince me you weren't just being
      emotional,
      having to react, having a bad breakup recently, or being a little suicidal
      almost - things like that. You might kinda "scare" me for a sec. But..the
      thing..the repentance I was describing wasn't about that. It's not about
      one
      little sin or one little thing that we do that's wrong and we should just
      change it. It's not judgmental in that sense, like I said. It's about all
      of
      life together. It's about how we perceive ourselves and love, which is like
      the same thing as whether we are or are not in relation to God in a real
      sense. And it's not about ...Well, dont "let" me over-philosophize it
      either, so that you think I work myself up into a frenzy in order to talk
      about all this. (Bill I'm sure has to toy with that idea.) :) Well, like a
      girlfriend I had once who was not a christian...not having this christian
      walk thing. And I really didn't see things anything like that simple at the
      time, so I wouldn't have said this...this material in this attitude that I
      try to and try to ever-refine now. And when naturally we would try to talk
      about some things or face some things together, she ..would think that I
      was
      just judging her and she's supposed to like change this or that in her
      life.
      But you see, ultimatly or inevitably it would become like some infinite
      list
      she's supposed to measure up to, and that's really the old idea in
      christian
      history that we cant be infinitely concerned about correcting every little
      thing, and where do the rules come from so that we know anyway, and no
      matter how hard we coudl try, it WOULD be effectively infinite, and so
      therefore "we all fall short of the glory of God", right, as the biblical
      phrase goes and gets quoted, but "the gift of God through Jesus is eternal
      life". And even though that passage in that context isn't directly talking
      about the same feel for measuring up that I'm applying, even other people
      have used it thus, because of the similar principle, or because of how, no
      matter if its in guilt or in some idea of "glory" or the Greak idea (at
      that
      time) of some heavens (hence the "glory"), it's still using the same idea
      of
      not quite ..making it just by sitting here or deciding to, or by being
      human
      or saying that I'm a nice person.

      Anyway, that started taking a direction I didn't quite expect, but ..it's
      still the same material in there.

      Maybe that's an ok thing in a way because you may have run into some of
      that
      in your "fundamental" influences...except I'd be willing to bet, without
      explanation, if even it included any reality much behind it that I'm
      speaking of.

      Anyway, it's not about little sins. In a way, it's not even about sins at
      all. It's like...there's a backdoor or bigger way of saying that it's about
      a reality of a walk, and whatever that might bring to or for you, if you
      are
      actually experiencing it, is therefore what christianity is (within your
      current circumstances, history and understanding). So...it's kinda ever so
      simplistic, like as if there's this life...we're born. Then there's this
      "experience" this walk after being in one language "born again", and then
      there's just a matter of where an individual's (and in a connected way we
      would say where humanity's understandings) understandings are at. And
      that's
      life...science...and philosophy. Or just about anything, in other words.
      That's sort of why *I* personally have made use of the term
      'existentialism'
      recently. Like as if to say that even as an extension of especially
      Kierkegaard, if you want history, it's just my take ..we're here, and
      there's life and that's it - existence. And in a way everything you see in
      front of you is just ..life...that's it. Anything you feel, experience, or
      see in this moment or any other - that's just simplistically what there is
      to life and what there is to philosophize about. And from there, it's just
      a
      matter of the understanding that we have collectively, or that any and
      every
      individual has about different aspects of ..pretty much interpreting
      whatever and anything that is in front of his eyes or in his feelings or
      anything. And my simplist views finally combining science, religion,
      christianity, people's reactions to guilt and religions and whatnot, for
      once

      [fucking shitbag program crashed on me again. this message may be a little
      large, too, you know. asd;lfahdf;ldhs]

      I was saying that my simplist (or simple, because we need simple in the
      end)
      views combining a lot of things, for once make sense of both a basic
      spiritual AND philosophical approach to a lot of things, like with life and
      religion, or guilt, or the "dealing with things" that could be said to BE
      philosophy broad, the philosophy of the anyman or the commonman. And then,
      I'm sure I'm missing a little bit, but I also said something about this
      being a lot of angles to swallow. But I'm not expecting you to "comprehend"
      everything. Not saying anyone is particularly stupid either and that I am
      god listen to me, I'm starting a cult tomorrow. But just that I'm sharing,
      and even if you could begin to feel something I'm saying or just start out
      thinking about somethign broken down a little differently or understand
      something I'm saying that's fine. And anyway, that there's a difference
      between "under-stand" and "com-pre-hense" in the breakdowns and histories
      of
      the words anyway, you know simply. Also for our use of the words,
      understanding or even beginning to is more the like "I might start to get
      this or I really do get some basic about this finally because I'm kinda
      humbly under the thing itself", where "comprehension" is sometimes more
      like
      the sticking with the matter itself or keeping pace instantly or being
      beside is somehow.

      Anyway...

      > He can only
      > experience it for himself, so this is why he must first turn on himself
      and
      > recognize that, to say it one way, he was selling himself short for a
      cheap
      > contrived love instead of experiencing it...instead of initially
      > recognizing
      > or experiencing "God". It doesn't start or happen unless it happens, and
      > people are certainly different when or after it does. But they aren't
      like
      > instantly "perfect" or something...and many have misunderstood in various
      > capacities what DID just happen or start in them, when that happens to
      > them.
      > We do that...misunderstanding or lack of answers to (again, to
      > expectations). I did it when I first "repented" as a young kid - thought
      > that I was supposed to like miraculously "want to do right" or ...what
      > mommy
      > might have expected of me. But it's not that - it's not an instant bed of
      > roses not requiring any understanding. It is an understanding in itself,
      > and
      > is an experience..
      >
      > I'll almost quit now. But my sister wouldn't technically be gay, if she
      had
      > this kind of experience, no matter what variety or where she personally
      > would be at in her thinking at a given moment. My uncle used to be
      > gay..before he...whatever, changed in this fashion, actually. If you read
      > my
      > recent post to Lorna..the one today (or more than one if it becomes more)
      > on
      > the thread "Nature of Belief"...anyway, it talks a bit about some of my
      > take
      > or current learning about doctrines, faith, christianity (christian
      > experience) "versus" religion or rules in a sense, to apply it that way.
      > ---------------> but isn't that unrealistic? we are all mere humans
      > struggling with perfection, or our perception thereof, to be loved and
      love
      > perfectly, isn't that a farce? do you really think human beings are able
      to
      > really love unconditionally...

      I give up. I fucking give up. I tried replying, and I cant believe I didn't
      save it after writing a paragraph or so in reply to this part. I just
      fucking give up. I talked about the reality of experiencing or learning
      about unconditional love, perhaps, but within the christian walk,
      experience..explained that a little more. But screw it...

      > i dont think being gay or str8 is something
      > set in stone, to be honest i think most ppl are prone to bisexuality, the
      > percentages vary but it depends on the persons soul, and when we go to
      that
      > other place after the death of our mortal bodies would that not be where
      > perfect love is and there it doesn't matter what your sexuality is,
      > actually i wonder if we even have sexes up there or whereever there is?
      >

      Here I was starting to say that it was just a matter of poetry I guess to
      me. You can use such talk to illustrate a point sometimes, but then a lot
      of
      that thinking is a bit outdated also (to me) - literal heavens and all. I
      also had a short reply to the parts closer up there to the bisexuality
      issue. but nevermind. sorry.

      >
      > These things are real to me, because they're what I've learned so far. I
      > dont just "believe" them in that sense. Bill Harris has helped push me
      over
      > on not using the word "believe" so flippantly sometimes lately. But I
      dont
      > really like faith or "believe in" :) "blind faith" per se, so ..I dont
      use
      > the word "believe" to mean that I ..believe as much in what I dont
      > experience. I'll close.
      > ---> what star sign are you dave?

      Libra.

      I'm closing...I gotta leave this one to the gods where it stands..

      Dave



      Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
      (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

      TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
      existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
    • vanessa.vangelder@knowledgeobjects.biz
      na it can t possibly be good! David Leon ave.com cc: Subject: Re: [existlist] New
      Message 59 of 59 , Feb 27, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        na it can't possibly be good!



        "David Leon"
        <dave@placeofd To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
        ave.com> cc:
        Subject: Re: [existlist] New to the List
        02/26/03 10:33
        PM
        Please respond
        to existlist






        Vee,
        Ok, I tried to write before. It got scrapped when my program failed on me
        and I hadn't saved it yet. That's probably good...

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: <vanessa.vangelder@...>
        To: <existlist@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 11:36 PM
        Subject: Re: [existlist] New to the List


        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Vee,
        > hello David again :-)
        >
        >
        > I think for starters it's just my unease to make it sound like I dont
        think
        > my own sister is "religious enough to not be gay".
        > --------> is your unease coming from the inability to put christian + gay
        > together...

        Ok, no. See, since I tried writing the first time, I thought about this and
        thought of somethign to say here. It's more like my unease came from never
        dealing with my sister and philosophy in the same breath. I mean, in the
        sense that I dont talk philosophy with my sister, I deal with her in the
        way
        I deal with her. But when I made the associations to what you were saying,
        it made me think about my sister, but it felt odd to be supposedly talking
        more philosophically and wordily, but all the sudden have the idea of my
        sister pop up in my head. It's interesting; it's cool. It's..well, it adds
        to the experiences I have gotten in life, you know. But, I think that was
        more the reaction...mixing sis and philos...and that was wierd. I dont talk
        to my sister ..like in this way at all really.

        >
        > why do you think people become gay, or do you think they born gay or do
        you
        > think both?
        >

        I think that they may have some factor about their body/person which lends
        for THEM to be gay perhaps. But it's not as if a male baby is commonly
        sitting there thinking "I'm going to have some kind of intimacy with my guy
        friend someday more than a woman," right after birth, at least any more
        than
        he's gonna even think about literally trying to get intimate with . But I
        think that the association with the OPPOSITE sex comes ..first or primarily
        to a same- association, and at least more commonly.

        >
        > That's silly, and disgusting...and is not me. You should question me
        more,
        > or even try to draw
        > things from my other posts regarding God or ANYthing to see that's not
        me.
        > I
        > started feeling like I guess I hadn't had experience in pulling apart the
        > two issues of like...homosexuality I guess and "christian experience" or
        > whatever, in regards to my own sis. And it was as if I was stuck almost
        > combining them just now, and...it's not like that. I really DO "believe"
        in
        > this stuff, or just know or learn some things about it, about "the
        > christian
        > experience" that I talk about. I would be...my best guess would be
        > something
        > "bisexual" if I were not "the kind of christian" I am. And that's not
        about
        > disciplining myself to live by (the) rules, whoever's they are supposed
        to
        > be.
        > ---------------> i see where you are coming from, i struggled with that
        for
        > a long time, i lived a str8, but was unhappy in my
        > relationships...eventually i got so pissed off with God and the whole
        > Christian (we'll pray for you set up), must say it took a long time to
        > break down that conditioning, now that i have accepted it i have so much
        > peace about myself, and i prayed for that peace, so God whoever God is,
        or
        > my mind/spirit soul finally let go of that prison of conditioning...
        >

        I mean, some of that my sister could connect to. But also, I've learned
        just
        now to separate what I'm doing here: I'm not just associating you with my
        life or my sister or anything, but talking philosophy too. It's just
        interesting.

        But, there is that frustration...I think ..when some things that you sorta
        expect out of your self, your feelings, your body even, aren't exactly
        what...happens, or it's not that easy, it's like..."Wait a minute. Am I
        fooling myself on something." I mean, I dont have all kinds of ins and outs
        but I do know a few basics of what my own sister at least has experienced
        at
        times and could have experienced. I mean, I understand...or what I know of
        it, or her, of her life really. It's not just about like "understanding
        this
        dumb gay thing"...it's just understanding some of what she's gone through
        and how she's dealt.

        And it's not that the christianity thing at the core really conflicts or
        agrees with homosexuality issues. It's more like it's a whole other world,
        in a way. I mentioned my uncle, and I'm not saying that he just "got
        religion" - that's more of an expression from those who haven't
        experienced,
        dont know what I'm referring to. But...it was honestly at that point no
        more
        really
        an issue for my uncle to be gay. I'm not saying he instantly "religiously"
        turned his back on himself or his prior life. But it's just that some of
        these lifestyles and perceptions of things can fairly commonly melt away
        with just a little time..and understanding just changes and even "is"
        something different, when this christian...walk really..starts to take
        place. Things just look different - it's not just instant understanding of
        everything, but more like as an individual begins to cope with this new
        life-changing thing he has, and this 'walk' he's realized, his
        understanding
        at least tries to adapt to the repercussions of it all in his life and what
        he does, practically. It's not just corporate religion, even if that still
        works its way into things when we're blind to the differences between this
        inner walking religion and the outer blurs that are out there and are
        "heavy" and have taken place historically too. But I just know my sister
        hasn't ..undergone..begun that kind of walk thing. So...you see for me,
        right in this moment, for what I know along with my life including my
        christian walk thing, I know that I dont really want to be gay or even
        bisexual, and it's really just about my life happening to include this
        sense
        of God and this experience within which it just does not make sense to be
        gay...to really even worry about sexuality, in one crazy sense. So see
        that's kind of a whole other issue in a way, than just sitting here saying
        that I dont like gays. Without my christian experience, I dont really care
        if anyone's gay..or whether *I* am or not. But with that, personally, I
        ..couldn't be that, really. There, I could speak for my uncle also, and say
        "That just isn't me anymore..when it ever really was." But it's a
        simplistic
        thing I'm saying, not a judgemental/weighty thing.

        >
        > You see, as for the theological angle, I think that we experientially
        > get these ideas in us that when (parents for instance) expect things from
        > us, that equates to God's expectations. And it's not a matter of "Oh
        well,
        > I
        > can do whatever I want, because God is loving." In reality, when you come
        > more into the experience of this God and his love, it's like "Yes, he has
        > 'rules', but those are only bound or DEFINED by his love," and that's how
        > they are not men's expectations - they are not restricted by some
        person's
        > (lack of, and lack of the understanding of) love. An understanding of
        love,
        > comes more deeply from an experience of love. The deeper experience of
        > love,
        > comes "from above" as the allegorical statement goes. That can be the
        > christian experience, as you walk through it, but it's not just available
        > at
        > any moment fully like that to any man. One must first turn around on
        > himself
        > and initially repent (again, turn around) within himself, because he
        cannot
        > say that "the world should repent..but I do not need to".
        > -------> now why would someone need to repent for being gay? who are you
        > hurting, is that not about love?
        >

        This fucking program is getting annoying. It shut down on me again, and I
        lost the paragraph I wrote in reply to this part right here. Damn. :) I
        also
        lost some of the material finishing or touching up the paragraph above.

        What I was trying to say in this portion of my reply was something like...
        It's not a repentance against being gay. It's something else. Hopefully
        some
        of this (more like from the outside looking in, but still) is getting
        across
        from what I'm writing in this message. If you were to repent from being
        gay,
        and that's that, you'd have to convince me you weren't just being
        emotional,
        having to react, having a bad breakup recently, or being a little suicidal
        almost - things like that. You might kinda "scare" me for a sec. But..the
        thing..the repentance I was describing wasn't about that. It's not about
        one
        little sin or one little thing that we do that's wrong and we should just
        change it. It's not judgmental in that sense, like I said. It's about all
        of
        life together. It's about how we perceive ourselves and love, which is like
        the same thing as whether we are or are not in relation to God in a real
        sense. And it's not about ...Well, dont "let" me over-philosophize it
        either, so that you think I work myself up into a frenzy in order to talk
        about all this. (Bill I'm sure has to toy with that idea.) :) Well, like a
        girlfriend I had once who was not a christian...not having this christian
        walk thing. And I really didn't see things anything like that simple at the
        time, so I wouldn't have said this...this material in this attitude that I
        try to and try to ever-refine now. And when naturally we would try to talk
        about some things or face some things together, she ..would think that I
        was
        just judging her and she's supposed to like change this or that in her
        life.
        But you see, ultimatly or inevitably it would become like some infinite
        list
        she's supposed to measure up to, and that's really the old idea in
        christian
        history that we cant be infinitely concerned about correcting every little
        thing, and where do the rules come from so that we know anyway, and no
        matter how hard we coudl try, it WOULD be effectively infinite, and so
        therefore "we all fall short of the glory of God", right, as the biblical
        phrase goes and gets quoted, but "the gift of God through Jesus is eternal
        life". And even though that passage in that context isn't directly talking
        about the same feel for measuring up that I'm applying, even other people
        have used it thus, because of the similar principle, or because of how, no
        matter if its in guilt or in some idea of "glory" or the Greak idea (at
        that
        time) of some heavens (hence the "glory"), it's still using the same idea
        of
        not quite ..making it just by sitting here or deciding to, or by being
        human
        or saying that I'm a nice person.

        Anyway, that started taking a direction I didn't quite expect, but ..it's
        still the same material in there.

        Maybe that's an ok thing in a way because you may have run into some of
        that
        in your "fundamental" influences...except I'd be willing to bet, without
        explanation, if even it included any reality much behind it that I'm
        speaking of.

        Anyway, it's not about little sins. In a way, it's not even about sins at
        all. It's like...there's a backdoor or bigger way of saying that it's about
        a reality of a walk, and whatever that might bring to or for you, if you
        are
        actually experiencing it, is therefore what christianity is (within your
        current circumstances, history and understanding). So...it's kinda ever so
        simplistic, like as if there's this life...we're born. Then there's this
        "experience" this walk after being in one language "born again", and then
        there's just a matter of where an individual's (and in a connected way we
        would say where humanity's understandings) understandings are at. And
        that's
        life...science...and philosophy. Or just about anything, in other words.
        That's sort of why *I* personally have made use of the term
        'existentialism'
        recently. Like as if to say that even as an extension of especially
        Kierkegaard, if you want history, it's just my take ..we're here, and
        there's life and that's it - existence. And in a way everything you see in
        front of you is just ..life...that's it. Anything you feel, experience, or
        see in this moment or any other - that's just simplistically what there is
        to life and what there is to philosophize about. And from there, it's just
        a
        matter of the understanding that we have collectively, or that any and
        every
        individual has about different aspects of ..pretty much interpreting
        whatever and anything that is in front of his eyes or in his feelings or
        anything. And my simplist views finally combining science, religion,
        christianity, people's reactions to guilt and religions and whatnot, for
        once

        [fucking shitbag program crashed on me again. this message may be a little
        large, too, you know. asd;lfahdf;ldhs]

        I was saying that my simplist (or simple, because we need simple in the
        end)
        views combining a lot of things, for once make sense of both a basic
        spiritual AND philosophical approach to a lot of things, like with life and
        religion, or guilt, or the "dealing with things" that could be said to BE
        philosophy broad, the philosophy of the anyman or the commonman. And then,
        I'm sure I'm missing a little bit, but I also said something about this
        being a lot of angles to swallow. But I'm not expecting you to "comprehend"
        everything. Not saying anyone is particularly stupid either and that I am
        god listen to me, I'm starting a cult tomorrow. But just that I'm sharing,
        and even if you could begin to feel something I'm saying or just start out
        thinking about somethign broken down a little differently or understand
        something I'm saying that's fine. And anyway, that there's a difference
        between "under-stand" and "com-pre-hense" in the breakdowns and histories
        of
        the words anyway, you know simply. Also for our use of the words,
        understanding or even beginning to is more the like "I might start to get
        this or I really do get some basic about this finally because I'm kinda
        humbly under the thing itself", where "comprehension" is sometimes more
        like
        the sticking with the matter itself or keeping pace instantly or being
        beside is somehow.

        Anyway...

        > He can only
        > experience it for himself, so this is why he must first turn on himself
        and
        > recognize that, to say it one way, he was selling himself short for a
        cheap
        > contrived love instead of experiencing it...instead of initially
        > recognizing
        > or experiencing "God". It doesn't start or happen unless it happens, and
        > people are certainly different when or after it does. But they aren't
        like
        > instantly "perfect" or something...and many have misunderstood in various
        > capacities what DID just happen or start in them, when that happens to
        > them.
        > We do that...misunderstanding or lack of answers to (again, to
        > expectations). I did it when I first "repented" as a young kid - thought
        > that I was supposed to like miraculously "want to do right" or ...what
        > mommy
        > might have expected of me. But it's not that - it's not an instant bed of
        > roses not requiring any understanding. It is an understanding in itself,
        > and
        > is an experience..
        >
        > I'll almost quit now. But my sister wouldn't technically be gay, if she
        had
        > this kind of experience, no matter what variety or where she personally
        > would be at in her thinking at a given moment. My uncle used to be
        > gay..before he...whatever, changed in this fashion, actually. If you read
        > my
        > recent post to Lorna..the one today (or more than one if it becomes more)
        > on
        > the thread "Nature of Belief"...anyway, it talks a bit about some of my
        > take
        > or current learning about doctrines, faith, christianity (christian
        > experience) "versus" religion or rules in a sense, to apply it that way.
        > ---------------> but isn't that unrealistic? we are all mere humans
        > struggling with perfection, or our perception thereof, to be loved and
        love
        > perfectly, isn't that a farce? do you really think human beings are able
        to
        > really love unconditionally...

        I give up. I fucking give up. I tried replying, and I cant believe I didn't
        save it after writing a paragraph or so in reply to this part. I just
        fucking give up. I talked about the reality of experiencing or learning
        about unconditional love, perhaps, but within the christian walk,
        experience..explained that a little more. But screw it...

        > i dont think being gay or str8 is something
        > set in stone, to be honest i think most ppl are prone to bisexuality, the
        > percentages vary but it depends on the persons soul, and when we go to
        that
        > other place after the death of our mortal bodies would that not be where
        > perfect love is and there it doesn't matter what your sexuality is,
        > actually i wonder if we even have sexes up there or whereever there is?
        >

        Here I was starting to say that it was just a matter of poetry I guess to
        me. You can use such talk to illustrate a point sometimes, but then a lot
        of
        that thinking is a bit outdated also (to me) - literal heavens and all. I
        also had a short reply to the parts closer up there to the bisexuality
        issue. but nevermind. sorry.

        >
        > These things are real to me, because they're what I've learned so far. I
        > dont just "believe" them in that sense. Bill Harris has helped push me
        over
        > on not using the word "believe" so flippantly sometimes lately. But I
        dont
        > really like faith or "believe in" :) "blind faith" per se, so ..I dont
        use
        > the word "believe" to mean that I ..believe as much in what I dont
        > experience. I'll close.
        > ---> what star sign are you dave?

        Libra.

        I'm closing...I gotta leave this one to the gods where it stands..

        Dave



        Our Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist
        (Includes community book list, chat, and more.)

        TO UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, send an email to:
        existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.