How did knowing God change you?

[marjoram_blues]

Thanks, doc. Appreciate the swift response. I am tired now but will reflect on this later.
Hope all is going well with you and that your wife recovers well from the surgery.

Doc - I am going to be busy this week and don't have the time necessary to look into the various passages you provided. As you say, there can be various interpretations - the one thing I remember from my previous 'life' ( or chapter thereof) was being shocked by the apparent suggestion that people should be willing, if asked, to give up their family, to put Jesus first and foremost in their lives. To be willing to kill a son - seems to be a favourite test of ?love.

The promise is that giving up of one's own life ( metaphorically) - to be reborn into the Christian faith - to lose the life you lead and love in the real world will gain you eternal life. Whereas, if you hate your life (? is this what atto means by first having to HATE your life ( ? a life led by a nonbeliever who doesn't convert to Christianity), then you have this ? unpeaceful life for eternity. There is no hope of peace or joy for an non believer, ever ?
Atto seems to think that non believers need to see their lives as hateful ( ? because of the tests by 'it', or manmade tests ) before heaven ( ? on earth or above) can be attained.

So, the command is to Love Jesus and gain Peace on Earth and Heaven, For ever and ever. Amen.

However, even non or ex-believers can achieve some kind of a peaceful perspective re any life trials, and do not expect or wish for more of the same for ever and ever. It seems to me that there is an implicit/explicit threat to non believers that they will be forever in some kind of a Hell.
It's simple bribery and seduction into a religious cult, isn't it?

Take your time, a well thought out response is better than a hurried or rushed one, and worth waiting for. Your initial thoughts are good, so you're off to a good start.

Hello doc - thought I'd take a quick peek in to the PN forum. And really wish I hadn't - ( Walker and all the ongoing hostilty)
I will be extending my time out, to deal with other matters. Thanks for your positive input. I no longer feel inclined to participate on this thread but my train of thought will continue. Best wishes.

[Walker]

Hello doc - thought I'd take a quick peek in to the PN forum. And really wish I hadn't - ( Walker and all the ongoing hostilty)

In future, if you use me as a way to get to someone else, I will take my revenge.

When I heard that I thought it sounded like a projection of personal tendencies and sure enough, t'was.

That's okay.

Good news, Doc sounds more easy-going than your vengence.

The hostility originates from NEIN.

[Hobbes' Choice]

(Keeping in mind humor, the s...yap yap yappity yap.

[Walker]

(Keeping in mind humor, the s...yap yap yappity yap.

You keep telling the same joke. You made your point. You're an idiot filled with hostility. Fine.

You know what the Pentacostals say about barking people.

[Hobbes' Choice]

(Keeping in mind humor, the s...yap yap yappity yap.

You keep telling the same joke. .
.

That's because you keep yapping.

[marjoram_blues]

Hello doc - thought I'd take a quick peek in to the PN forum. And really wish I hadn't - ( Walker and all the ongoing hostilty)

In future, if you use me as a way to get to someone else, I will take my revenge.

When I heard that I thought it sounded like a projection of personal tendencies and sure enough, t'was.

That's okay.

Good news, Doc sounds more easy-going than your vengence.

The hostility originates from NEIN.

Instead of scattering your little pellets of so-called 'Neinism' around the PN threads, and disrupting decent discussions, I invite you to produce a positive alternative. If you have any kind of honour and genuine philiosophical interest, take responsibility and start your own dedicated thread with a clear statement of your position and justification for it.

If threads are continually being disrupted, and personal attacks take over ( not just by you, but it seems you are the initiator), then positive participants in the PN forum will wonder if it is worthwhile contributing their thoughts and time.

The amassing mess of smelly droppings is a real turn-off. You know you can do a better job than this...seriously.

[Walker]

Hello doc - thought I'd take a quick peek in to the PN forum. And really wish I hadn't - ( Walker and all the ongoing hostilty)

In future, if you use me as a way to get to someone else, I will take my revenge.

When I heard that I thought it sounded like a projection of personal tendencies and sure enough, t'was.

That's okay.

Good news, Doc sounds more easy-going than your vengence.

The hostility originates from NEIN.

Instead of scattering your little pellets of so-called 'Neinism' around the PN threads, and disrupting decent discussions, I invite you to produce a positive alternative. If you have any kind of honour and genuine philiosophical interest, take responsibility and start your own dedicated thread with a clear statement of your position and justification for it.

If threads are continually being disrupted, and personal attacks take over ( not just by you, but it seems you are the initiator), then positive participants in the PN forum will wonder if it is worthwhile contributing their thoughts and time.

The amassing mess of smelly droppings is a real turn-off. You know you can do a better job than this...seriously.

So far, NEINISM is gaining structural strength. It’s an evolving philosophy and everyone contributes to the formation, even you, which we will get to in a moment.

And I think this is a good thing, a yes thing. Can you seriously do better than work with what you are given? All situations are workable and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You see, out of negativity can arise something constructive, which in this particular case of the dynamically-evolving philosophy is a consistently accurate assessment of a synergetic fork-in-the-road mapped as either yes, or no.

For example, I view your captioned words as YES. Likely you will view this as good news.

You are on the yes road with your response. It is obviously your intent to make your world a better place. So you are taking positive action. You are offering me suggestions of behavior that you think will make your world (here) a better place and in turn, my world a better place. You are honest about it.

NEINISTS also honestly convert their interpretation of phenomena, but into no rather than yes. In the evolving philosophy, what differentiates your view from NEINISM is virtue, in the Greek sense. For this reason.

I notice recent religious discussion that identifies atheism as amoral, and theism as a basis for the virtue of a yes-pursuit. Unfortunately for amoralists, and unfortunately for the evolution of all life towards no-suffering, virtue with a basis in morality can only be existent as a limited imaginative effort for amorality.

Currently, evolving NEINISM theory indicates that within the context of most situations, NEINISM manifests as a knee-jerk no. That perception may change.

Anyway, time to get on with it.

Have a nice day.


The one you write to exists in your mind.
The one who writes to you does not.


*

I am curious though.

Do you really consider this posting disruptive?
(Frankly, you sound hostile, and that can be disruptive if not received with graciousness.)

[marjoram_blues]

Interpret 'hostility' as you will, as part of your grand theory of 'Neinism'.
If your curiosity is genuine, you need to re-read the thread and look at where the disruption of topic begins.

OK, I am ending this now. Any other questions can be directed as part of an honest and clear analysis of your theory.
If you care to present this as I suggested, it might prevent any misunderstandings and misinterpretations.
That would be in everyone's interests.

End.

[Walker]

Interpret 'hostility' as you will, as part of your grand theory of 'Neinism'.
If your curiosity is genuine, you need to re-read the thread and look at where the disruption of topic begins.

OK, I am ending this now. Any other questions can be directed as part of an honest and clear analysis of your theory.
If you care to present this as I suggested, it might prevent any misunderstandings and misinterpretations.
That would be in everyone's interests.

End.

At this point, as NEINISM is evolving ancillary to other contributions and conceptually firming under the conditions of real-time postings, if NEINISM is to be subjected to qualitative analysis it would appear that NEINISM is a somewhat obsolete (for civilized folks), survival-oriented human tendency from the good old cave days. Like building an open fire outside for cooking and warmth is good to know, but a significant portion of humanity no longer needs the knack.

I think the present evolution of conceptual NEINISM, in the form of “little droppings,” as you have cleverly characterized Philosophy, is suited to conditions we find in an open forum situation involving emotional outbursts, conceptual attachments, irrational defensiveness, assorted wise folks, assorted maniacs, and predictable knee-jerk reactions of “No.” I think if you examine the record you find that disruptions are not caused by the truth presented by yours truly, but by hysterical and emotional reactions to truth. I mean my goodness, there are actually people here barking like dogs and trying to pass that off as philosophical dialogue, when actually such psychic displays are just something to slough through if one is not entertained and amused by such things, or after the chuckles subside.

The one to whom you write exists in your mind.
The one who writes to you does not.

(Is that proper grammar for my evolving tag-line, and can you think of a more economical phrasing?)

((This is how it originally appeared, with a little help and cooperation. Maybe it sounds better to just keep the transcription rather than tweaking it. What do you think?))

The one you write to exists in your mind.
The one who writes to you does not.

[Walker]

Did it make you a better person? Calmer? More at peace? Did it give you the ability to love all mankind? Did it make you healthier? Did it make you richer? Did it improve your relationships with people? Did it take away your anger? Did it take away your anxieties? Did you develop skills? Did it make you more focused? Did it give you extra strength? More tenacity? Did it take away your frustrations? Do people respond better to you now? Did it make you more attractive to people? Did you get promotions you did not expect? Did it make you more successful? Does food taste better now? Does music mean more to you now? Do you appreciate your fellow men and women more now? Do you think of all men as being equal now?

What changed in real life after you found God?

In direct answer to the premise of this thread topic, everything one expresses here is evidence of what one is, or what one has been changed into. What one has been changed into, as determined by the evidence of action, is an indication of how knowing God changes, or how knowing anything else changes one into. However, for change analysis, one needs to reference memory of what was, and memory is quite often tainted by delusion and attachment to self-cherishing.

Other folks have described knowing of God for second, third and fourth party reference in such terms as … I was blind and now I see. This description can be interpreted literally or figuratively depending on how one defines seeing.

The one you write to exists in your mind.
The one who writes to you does not.