human nature - inherently good or evil?

[Lunitik]

No, it was not my conclusion, it was a conclusion based on your belief. My conclusion is: You can't make someone love you, nor hate you, for if you do then it is not really theirs. People will try to convince otherwise. My conclusion does not come from thinking alone, nor from any discussion with you.

I have not said it, so it has not come from me.

I also say that love cannot be possessed, not even by you. It works of its own accord...

Instead of answering my simple question to you, you refer me to a letter from Paul to Corinth, and you hope that I will use it to correct my thinking? Perhaps you believe Paul is a guru or an enlightened person?

You have pointed me to a book in this thread, I merely returned in kind to make a point. These verses say how we are all part of one body, and that no part is superior to another, each needs each other to function as a whole. It is an important concept in this part of the discussion, each organ is just as necessary as another, for without one the whole dies. You cannot say the liver is better than the heart, or lungs are more important than stomach. If any think themselves superior and try to go it alone, not only will they die but the others die as well. It is that these verses make my point for me that I have pointed to them.

My point is that the love you experienced with your grandfather(s) is entirely different than what you have been saying and claiming about love. Your grandfather(s) love involved a relationship with you: touching you, leaving an impression with you, as you've described it. If you appreciated how your grandfather(s) were loving to you: who are you touching today in the same manner? Are you, or will you be, that loving grandfather to someone?

As you found your grandfather(s) loving, I submit that their love involved the use of their heart, their mind, and their soul.

I simply say that love cannot function from mind at all, this is what we call infatuation. A lower form of love is that of lust, but at least this isn't possessive, it is merely raw desire for other. Mind possesses, it wants to gain something, it wants to gather and exert its power over things. This is why the love you speak of is disgusting to me, it is a form of manipulation. It objectifies that it might own, and uses methods to maintain that control - maybe guilt or dependence. It can be utterly outwardly good willed, but inwardly it is utterly gross, you are doing things to benefit yourself, to increase your control. You will say this person owes you something because you have given to them, it is not unconditional at all.

 

[Thomas]

Thomas: Have you encountered anything of the Spirit?

Yes.

Has there been anything that has happened to you to confirm directly the words of Christ?

Yes.

I would guess nothing has happened because your knowledge won't allow it, you are in your own way.

You see how full of judgement and prejudice you are?

God bless,

Thomas

 

[Lunitik]

You see how full of judgement and prejudice you are?

Can I ask what you have experienced?

Your words simply do not echo oneness, so clearly our experiences are not similar. You are constantly separating existence, this is the nature of my conclusions - flawed on my part, certainly.

Your primary separation is between this material plane and the spiritual plane known as heaven in your tradition. My understanding is that this is flawed, even on this plane it is possible to lose yourself utterly and become indistinguishable from the whole - Maitreya Ishwara explains that he has lost all notions of personal action. He still responds relative to his location, this is the only difference between this plane and the beyond - there, there is no relativity. You cease to exist completely as something separate.

I have experienced my own ceasing as if I have exploded and the beyond has entered, but it was temporary and remained relative to the bodies location. In Hinduism, there is the notion of seven planes of consciousness, but still all are part of existence... simply distinct layers you could perhaps say. My understanding is that I entered the 5th body briefly but I had not dropped ego and when it asserted itself I returned to the 4th. God is said to exist in the 7th, total void and incomprehensible from human perspective. We can enter during life, but we will perceive nothing at all and remember nothing of that place.

 

[radarmark]

My understanding is that this is flawed.

This is a good start.

Pax et amore omnia vincunt, radarmark

 

[Lunitik]

This is a good start.

Pax et amore omnia vincunt, radarmark

Have you been reading Gurdjieff?

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Have you been reading Gurdjieff?

Either him or one of his disciples who later also became a master was very stubborn about this - always own, never say it is absolutely so. If a disciple would word things wrong, he would simply stop them and insist they say "this is my understanding" or "I understood that you said this", always know your own perceptions are playing a role in the conclusion.

If you know, why are you with a master? Do not claim it is so, then you can be shown where your current flaw is.

I also find this very important

EDIT: Sorry, did you edit your post Lunitik?

 

[donnann]

Can I ask what you have experienced?

Your words simply do not echo oneness, so clearly our experiences are not similar. You are constantly separating existence, this is the nature of my conclusions - flawed on my part, certainly.

Your primary separation is between this material plane and the spiritual plane known as heaven in your tradition. My understanding is that this is flawed, even on this plane it is possible to lose yourself utterly and become indistinguishable from the whole - Maitreya Ishwara explains that he has lost all notions of personal action. He still responds relative to his location, this is the only difference between this plane and the beyond - there, there is no relativity. You cease to exist completely as something separate.

I have experienced my own ceasing as if I have exploded and the beyond has entered, but it was temporary and remained relative to the bodies location. In Hinduism, there is the notion of seven planes of consciousness, but still all are part of existence... simply distinct layers you could perhaps say. My understanding is that I entered the 5th body briefly but I had not dropped ego and when it asserted itself I returned to the 4th. God is said to exist in the 7th, total void and incomprehensible from human perspective. We can enter during life, but we will perceive nothing at all and remember nothing of that place.

Human things are important like MY true genetics. This shows where you really belong.
I do believe in GOD but I believe he exists in the heart of man and because of the wrong groupins it causes caos. A man cannot take the place of a woman and that works gentically as well. So when men interact with each other it should be as you would with a man and woman sisters ect. If you see a man trying to seduce you as a man with his body but using his eyes hes the problem Psychological , abuse is wrong. Psychological abuse is the worse. I am a woman I cannot protect myself against a big man and the abuse of women stems from that. It causes and imbalance in nature not only on earth but the whole universe. So me personally with my genetics there is a spouse trying to take my place.

 

[Lunitik]

I also find this very important

EDIT: Sorry, did you edit your post Lunitik?

Yes, but it is perfectly good you quoted beforehand - I simply felt I rambled, but clearly there is importance in what is said so you have preserved it

 

[Lunitik]

Human things are important like MY true genetics. This shows where you really belong.
I do believe in GOD but I believe he exists in the heart of man and because of the wrong groupins it causes caos. A man cannot take the place of a woman and that works gentically as well. So when men interact with each other it should be as you would with a man and woman sisters ect. If you see a man trying to seduce you as a man with his body but using his eyes hes the problem Psychological , abuse is wrong. Psychological abuse is the worse. I am a woman I cannot protect myself against a big man and the abuse of women stems from that. It causes and imbalance in nature not only on earth but the whole universe. So me personally with my genetics there is a spouse trying to take my place.

Here is what you miss in this post:

Biology observes the material evolution, it pertains only to the body.

There is another process happening, an involution. This is of spirit, and man is a sort of equilibrium between material and spiritual - exactly a balance between consciousness and physicality. Now, spirit has no sex, it has no race, nothing like this. It is utterly free from conception, free from identification. Liberation - moksha, karma - is not an escaping from anything, it is simply the result of dropping all that mind insists on - dropping ego.

Now, the nature of a man that is pushing himself on you is one who has tried so much to repress sex that it has exploded. He cannot contain it anymore, there is a violent outburst, you have become the personification of his frustration, the outlet for his obsession. If society allowed sex to be experimented with as soon as the desire arises in our youth, this would never be the issue. The earlier it starts, the sooner a more mature relationship can be pursued.

This is part of the problem with society and especially religions, they go on fighting something head on - they want to protect children from sex, so they create a curiosity by saying "don't pursue". Instead, you must simply allow, soon they will become sick of it and transcend the very desire. Now their desire is of love, not merely sex.

You are perfectly correct, the result is a psychological problem, but it is something society has caused - the man is not at fault directly, he simply cannot control himself. This is no justification, it is simply unfortunate because the man will be punished where really he needs treatment.

 

[Lunitik]

You won't want to accept this, but in reality it is this attitude of being subject to victimization that is creating any situation you may be hinting at. I do not say this at all to create guilt in you, simply be more aware of it. Do not give off vibes of fear and no one will abuse you, it is really as simple as this. Existence will watch over you, this doesn't mean I am recommending you try walking down dark alleys at night, be careful all the same but know you are perfectly safe if you remain mindful of this.

Trust in God, but tie your camel first.

 

[donnann]

You won't want to accept this, but in reality it is this attitude of being subject to victimization that is creating any situation you may be hinting at. I do not say this at all to create guilt in you, simply be more aware of it. Do not give off vibes of fear and no one will abuse you, it is really as simple as this. Existence will watch over you, this doesn't mean I am recommending you try walking down dark alleys at night, be careful all the same but know you are perfectly safe if you remain mindful of this.

Trust in God, but tie your camel first.

Because of the imbalance of male and female men and women(throwing out the language of scripture. So all the weather and everything there is men listening to a man ordering them around that shouldnt. Hes an individual. I believe that you guys can help.

 

[radarmark]

Brava, Lunitik. And Ann, go to the library and get some books on victimization (if nothing wlse, but you know what I would do). As a survivor of early childhood abuse and PTSD, they said a lot to me.

Pax et amore omnia vincumt, radarmark

 

[donnann]

Brava, Lunitik. And Ann, go to the library and get some books on victimization (if nothing wlse, but you know what I would do). As a survivor of early childhood abuse and PTSD, they said a lot to me.

Pax et amore omnia vincumt, radarmark

Yes I know all about it I am being victimized big time and so are my kids by someone who claims to be on the left but really isnt in it at all. I think my spouse is using his girlfriend but watch his eyes. There is a mirror that needs to be broken there. When he looks at me he thinks he hates women but he really hate his father.

 

[Lunitik]

Yes I know all about it I am being victimized big time and so are my kids by someone who claims to be on the left but really isnt in it at all. I think my spouse is using his girlfriend but watch his eyes. There is a mirror that needs to be broken there. When he looks at me he thinks he hates women but he really hate his father.

If you are in danger, if your kids are in danger, you must simply get out of the situation. If you think your spouse is in on it, leave him behind, you simply keep your children safe! No matter what excuses you might have, whatever government might do about it, the childrens safety must be paramount!

Do not depend on others, this is how you got into the situation in the first place: too much dependent on your husband or whatever social rules have put you in that home. You are strong enough by yourself to do something, do not make excuses why someone else needs to help you. This is merely prolonging your abuse, and is itself a very symptom of it: you stay because you do not think you are strong enough to go.

You are!

 

[luecy7]

I have not said it, so it has not come from me.

You did. You said: "If you love them enough, they will cease enmity towards you." Then your advice to donnann is a bit more flighty: run from your enemy to protect yourself and kids. I personally wouldn't recommend that either, but a little distance can be good.

These verses say how we are all part of one body, and that no part is superior to another, each needs each other to function as a whole. It is an important concept in this part of the discussion, each organ is just as necessary as another, for without one the whole dies.

So if donnann or her kids separate from her husband, they die? No. You regard people as physical entities that are dependent on each other, like organs, even as you have been teaching that it is bad to be dependent on each other. I submit that the degree of mutual dependence or independence is often a mutual choice, but then there is gravity: a man will not be fathering any children without a woman.

You cannot say the liver is better than the heart, or lungs are more important than stomach.

So the mind is equal with the heart. Yet, people do choose to use the heart with little use of the mind, or choose to use the mind with little use of the heart, or cut off a limb to save their body.

If any think themselves superior and try to go it alone, not only will they die but the others die as well.

So the victim is not superior to an abuser, and an abuser is not superior to a victim. However, they do possess something different.

I simply say that love cannot function from mind at all, this is what we call infatuation.

Hold on there sport: as you've said, the mind is on equal with the other organs. I don't think you can accomplish too much without the mind, can you? Try consuming massive amounts of alcohol, and lets just see how loving you are without your mind.

Mind possesses, it wants to gain something, it wants to gather and exert its power over things.

If that is what you set your mind to, then yes. It is good to take responsibility for the use of the mind, the heart, the liver, etc... No?

This is why the love you speak of is disgusting to me, it is a form of manipulation.

Who am I manipulating? You?

It can be utterly outwardly good willed, but inwardly it is utterly gross, you are doing things to benefit yourself, to increase your control.

I try to serve God and people, and I value others who are serving, including God. God is a servant.

You will say this person owes you something because you have given to them, it is not unconditional at all.

So you accuse me of being government: doing something and then enforcing the people to pay for it.

 

[Lunitik]

You did. You said: "If you love them enough, they will cease enmity towards you." Then your advice to donnann is a bit more flighty: run from your enemy to protect yourself and kids. I personally wouldn't recommend that either, but a little distance can be good.

The difference is this man is mentally ill...

So if donnann or her kids separate from her husband, they die? No. You regard people as physical entities that are dependent on each other, like organs, even as you have been teaching that it is bad to be dependent on each other. I submit that the degree of mutual dependence or independence is often a mutual choice, but then there is gravity: a man will not be fathering any children without a woman.

lol... you are the one regarding them as physical entities... they are merely dense pockets of energy. You cannot subtract or add to the whole, only change some part. I have used a Christian concept because you brought up a Christian quote and seem to be defending Christianity. It is a metaphor which you are taking literally.

Still, if something is taken away, the whole thing comes crashing down. Everything is utterly dependent on everything else, although on this plane it doesn't seem to be the case. When you die, nothing of you has been destroyed, it simply changes form. Your consciousness returns to the ultimate, your body returns to the earth - its energy is utilized again by something else.

So the mind is equal with the heart. Yet, people do choose to use the heart with little use of the mind, or choose to use the mind with little use of the heart, or cut off a limb to save their body.

Yes, and this is a sickness, choosing.

This is the whole nature of insanity, rejecting one side of you and empowering another. Everything you reject will go deeper and deeper into your unconscious and eventually it will explode - then you lose your sanity because you are lost in these obsessions, your mind becomes stuck.

So the victim is not superior to an abuser, and an abuser is not superior to a victim. However, they do possess something different.

Fundamentally they are exactly the same, yes. The only difference is that one has taken a position of being less, and the other as more. They have chosen these perceptions...

Hold on there sport: as you've said, the mind is on equal with the other organs. I don't think you can accomplish too much without the mind, can you? Try consuming massive amounts of alcohol, and lets just see how loving you are without your mind.

When I say mind, I mean thoughts and ego, when you say mind you include consciousness. I can say that consciousness is not of mind because you can watch mind with consciousness. This is your fundamental problem with understanding me. Mind is always the "no", heart is always the "yes", these are perfectly equal in reality, but the no empowers ego.

If you can act totally through consciousness, without bringing mind into the situation, you will actually find that you perform BETTER than if mind goes on trying to decipher this and that. I do not mean autopilot either, I have made this mistake before in describing it. It is simply that you respond to everything with an awareness. Drinking alcohol simply takes you into a deeper unconsciousness, but you are comparably unconscious right now compared to the enlightened ones.

If that is what you set your mind to, then yes. It is good to take responsibility for the use of the mind, the heart, the liver, etc... No?

No, because mind will identify with this control.

Who am I manipulating? You?

What else do you call wanting something in return for what you have given? That is exactly manipulation, causing others to behave a certain way by way of your own actions.

So you accuse me of being government: doing something and then enforcing the people to pay for it.

No, I suggest that the give and take you see as love is nothing of the sort.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

luecy7, please keep donnann out of your arguments.

 

[Saltmeister]

I was raised Southern Baptist. We studied the same bible that I believe Catholics teach from (minus the apocrypha and catechisms). I am by no means an expert on apologetics, but here is some key scripture supporting (IMHO) evil human nature:

Genesis 6:5 - "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

IG's comment: this scripture describes the situation before God flooded the earth to kill every single human on the earth (except Noah's family), sure sounds like evil human nature to me.

I think it has more to do with the "social environment" and culture in which people lived. If human nature was evil, Noah would have belonged to the same category as everyone else.

Romans 3:9-17 - "What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known"

I don't think things were that bad. I think this is just a statement of the general weakness and failure of the human race to do good, not that we are inherently evil. It is a kind of weakness and failure where even superficial statements of "good deeds" is hypocrisy, self-righteousness or phoniness. If we were inherently evil, there would be no point in God giving us commandments. It would be impossible to teach us to be "good."

Whoever wrote this (whom Paul is quoting) is simply disgusted with the "depravity" that they are seeing, which wasn't really so deeply entrenched in humanity. That "depravity" was conditional and depended on environmental conditions like poverty. This was an observation, not a universal statement or tautology.

Mark 7:20-23 - "And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man."

IG's comment: sure sounds like evil human nature to me.

This isn't even a statement about human nature. Look at the context. Jesus is talking about what makes a person "unclean." Many people in those days believed that what made a person "clean" was whether or not they washed their hands before eating. Jesus was saying that your greed and hatred makes you corrupt. That implies that you are not already corrupt. You can become corrupt. That isn't about your nature; that is about your state of mind.

What scripture do you reference as support for your idea that "human nature is inherently good"; that humans can be "good" without knowing God/Jesus? I agree that pride & envy are bad and bring us low. But where in the bible does it say than humans are inherently good? Everything I read says humans are "evil, sinners, etc" (substitute your favorite negative word) without knowing God/Jesus. If all humans are inherently sinners, aren't therefore all humans inherently evil? Why do humans have to be "saved" in order to be good?

Scripture is pretty negative about humans and that's because most of it is about people living in worse living conditions than today. Living conditions have a big influence on how people behave. Poverty is a effective way of getting the worst out of people and a good test of the true character of a person. This is when people show their true colours: when they are faced with a choice.

The "goodness" of the present generation of people in the modern, developed societies of the 20th/21st century is an illusion. Life is easier and therefore we aren't faced with tough choices. When people participate in riots and voice fear of immigrants and Muslims, I wonder how much of the claim that we have "an evil human nature" may be true, even though I think it is a claim that has been exaggerated.

It is true that when faced with tough choices, we are likely turn on our own blood, but to say we are thoroughly evil is going too far. There have been many exceptions to this, where people have sacrificed their life or dignity out of love for another person. Through tragedy we discover our "true friends."

For me, all choosing is a sin

It is impossible to not choose, just like it is impossible to eliminate your ego. The attempt to stop all "choosing" requires a choice. Because it is impossible to defeat the ego and therefore not to make choices, I think it is better to focus on better choices.

You are not Christ, you are not God, because there is no longer a you. Ego is gone - the I, the me - and the Holy Spirit has occupied its space. The ego is like a blockade: it won't allow God in; it wants to protect itself, it wants to remain distinct, it knows it cannot if God is allowed in. The nature of free will is exactly the ability to choose when the blockade is taken down - God will not force it.

All faiths speak of the process of dropping that blockade in their own ways.

I think don't it is possible to make the ego disappear. I think people should focus on redirecting their ego toward doing things that help other people, rather than things that only help the self.

God, and in the moment with the fig tree, Jesus, are both full of desires. Buddha has said the nature of suffering is exactly this type of thing. This is exactly why Buddha says he has come to teach God's and men, because God must be suffering seeing how far we are from his desire. I find it difficult to understand how people can read these scriptures and be utterly comfortable with it.

Eliminating desire, just like anything that involves the self or ego, is impossible. I therefore consider it acceptable for Jesus to have desire. He is, after all human.

Jesus was hungry and the fig tree has not provided for him

I would think that this cursing of the fig tree was symbolic. Why do you think the Gospel writers put it in there? The Gospel writers would not have written down everything about Jesus. If they put something in there, it would have been pretty important. This wasn't filler material.

in the Temple God has desired love and he is not being provided with it - they point at the same thing. Still, it is very petty, very vengeful. They want existence to bow to them completely, and punish when they do not.

How was it about bowing to God? What did Jesus teach us to do? Love your neighbour, don't be judgmental, self-righteous and hypocritical. Be humble. What does God want? The message has been pretty consistent: follow his commandments. The Temple was obviously not being used for that purpose. It was instead a base for organised crime.

Another huge problem I have with the Bible is the nature of saying men are sheep and Jesus is the Sheppard. It is hugely insulting, and it holds man down. If you are merely a sheep, always reliant on the Sheppard for everything, you will never mature. In society, we frown upon children that never become independent, that continue relying on their parents into their 20's but yet this whole religion is founded on the same principle - become a sheep, become totally reliant on another.

This was before the Internet and Gutenberg's printing press. The shepherd concept is a anachronism based on an education system that was the most effective in its time. The reason why it seems "enslaving" to you is because you live in a different society. Back then it wasn't slavery. It was liberation. Jesus was like a knight-in-shining armour who came to save the princess. Women today don't need to be saved, but back then, that was your duty as a man.

Back then it was great having someone who could teach. That concept continues to some extent today. People still go to school. They still study at university. They buy books on weight loss.

Why not learn from someone who is further along the road than you? That's what you do when you want to learn fast and don't want to waste thirty years experimenting with ideas that don't work. Why not learn from a reputable person? Jesus was like Dr. Phil to that generation.

Again, of course, this is not acceptable to you because of what you have been told your whole life. Have you ever been near a master, an enlightened one? Then there is no metaphor necessary, you can feel their vibrations, you can sense yourself taking in their being.

Why do I have to meet the guy? Why can't I just read a book about him and learn from that? If I really needed a guy to be present with me to learn something, then his teachings are practically useless.

It is perfectly good as a device to remember, but people go on remembering his death. Mansoor Al-Hillaj died a much more gruesome death for his attainment to the ultimate, but he is not remembered. Everyone dies, why remember how this individual died? Remember his love, remember his teachings, but his death only shows the way of human nature: the establishment feared change so they had him killed.

It's because this was the way many Greek and Roman demigods died. This was the best introduction to the Jewish God the first followers of Jesus had in mind.

Vegetarianism or veganism cannot work in society today, we give all our grains and the like to animals to create our meat. We can certainly eat more fruits and nuts instead of roots and animals but if all began doing this we would die. I am trying to engage in such a diet, and I choose housing where I do not have to commit any violence in the upkeep of the home, but I am not going to cause family a burden because of this - if they happen to serve meat at a family function I will still eat it.

I am glad you're not a full vegetarian. I dislike being accused of desecrating animals' bodies by eating them.

This isn't my point at all, I am simply saying: acknowledge your violence in these acts. If you become more and more aware of it, you may stop it yourself. I am not trying to tell you what to do, I simply say do not justify things and explain them away as something they are not.

We can't defeat the ego. We just have to be more aware of what it does.

 

[Saltmeister]

My grandfather is dead, I love him dearly for all he has done for me in my life. This statement is absurd to me, just because they are dead I should cease my love? Love doesn't end just because the other has died. If it can, it simply wasn't love in the first place.

The chief difference between Jesus and your grandfather that luecy7 didn't seem to have pointed out is that you weren't alive when Jesus was around. How can you love Jesus in the same way as your grandfather?

You could not possibly have met Jesus like you could your grandfather. Your grandfather gave you gifts, Jesus didn't. How can you love someone you never knew?

 

[Lunitik]

It is impossible to not choose, just like it is impossible to eliminate your ego. The attempt to stop all "choosing" requires a choice. Because it is impossible to defeat the ego and therefore not to make choices, I think it is better to focus on better choices.

I tell you it is possible to not choose, because choosing like ego is a result of mind. Through the practice of meditation, this is achieved.

Now, you are perfectly correct that there is a choice to begin meditative practice. You are not choosing to war with mind though, you are not to engage in a battle with ego or anything else. Simply choose meditation and the rest takes care of itself.

I think don't it is possible to make the ego disappear. I think people should focus on redirecting their ego toward doing things that help other people, rather than things that only help the self.

When you function of ego, you cannot do truly good acts, it is always something which will benefit you. There is always a purpose, you don't simply act. Mind is utterly concerned with past or future, it is always a pendulum and meditation can help it to stop its constant swinging.

Again, the choice is whether to take up meditation.

Eliminating desire, just like anything that involves the self or ego, is impossible. I therefore consider it acceptable for Jesus to have desire. He is, after all human.

Desire is a projection into future, an outcome you have decided you want from a set of actions. Again, it is of mind, this is the obstacle. Ego forms through mind based on conclusions, but most importantly through the perception of accomplishment.

Meditation can assist you in dropping this.

I would think that this cursing of the fig tree was symbolic. Why do you think the Gospel writers put it in there? The Gospel writers would not have written down everything about Jesus. If they put something in there, it would have been pretty important. This wasn't filler material.

I have said why it was put there, it is to show that all should bear fruits else they will be punished. Then, Jesus is never depicted as a meditator, in the West this has even dictated our notions of meditation! In the West, meditation is a type of contemplation - this is false. Meditation is simply taking time to sit in utter silence, doing absolutely nothing. Watching all that goes on around you, inside you, but identifying with none of it... just remaining a spectator.

You cannot transcend mind by utilizing mind, this is perfectly correct. You can trick mind into creating a space for a flowering, but all devices are to escape the confines of mind. Meditation is another device, it is merely a way of ignoring mind - not fighting, merely not feeding - and so eventually it will stop trying to assert. We do this with animals too, if they are hyper it is because they want attention. If we ignore, the animal will become calm and go lay down, now the animal is more manageable. It is much the same principal, mind is active because we continue allowing it to become hyper.

How was it about bowing to God? What did Jesus teach us to do? Love your neighbour, don't be judgmental, self-righteous and hypocritical. Be humble. What does God want? The message has been pretty consistent: follow his commandments. The Temple was obviously not being used for that purpose. It was instead a base for organised crime.

Was Jesus humble, loving? He judged quite outwardly, aggressively. For me, this act is exactly hypocritical. You have stated some of his judgments to justify his actions, this is quite telling - clearly you love him so you do not want to see his flaws, you do not see him as a full person.

This was before the Internet and Gutenberg's printing press. The shepherd concept is a anachronism based on an education system that was the most effective in its time. The reason why it seems "enslaving" to you is because you live in a different society. Back then it wasn't slavery. It was liberation. Jesus was like a knight-in-shining armour who came to save the princess. Women today don't need to be saved, but back then, that was your duty as a man.

Sorry, but you don't liberate by creating dependence.

Why do I have to meet the guy? Why can't I just read a book about him and learn from that? If I really needed a guy to be present with me to learn something, then his teachings are practically useless.

You cannot taste his energy from a book, you cannot merge with his being if he is not there. You can learn plenty from a book, but you have gained nothing. This has to be understood of religion: mind is exactly the problem, and by learning you are strengthening it.

Now, brain is still useful, and you will maintain consciousness, but there will not be a constant movement that you know as mind. Thoughts will cease entering and leaving, swaying you this way and that. You lose nothing you have learned, but it does not keep coming to the forefront by itself. If you watch, through an average day, you will see that constantly random things come to mind - from where? A master is merely one who has overcome this randomness, no longer is anything about him accidental.

It's because this was the way many Greek and Roman demigods died. This was the best introduction to the Jewish God the first followers of Jesus had in mind.

I am simply saying that the way he died, why he died is not useful at all other than to create a love for the man... it is an important device in the type of religion Christianity is, but it won't help you transcend.

I am glad you're not a full vegetarian. I dislike being accused of desecrating animals' bodies by eating them.

Well, but you are... it is highly violent. I simply acknowledge this and am grateful to the animal for giving me its nutrients. Nothing in this life is absolutely bad or good, no act... all acts are ultimately irrelevant, temporary.

What is important is to be fully aware of what is going on, this meat you are eating, it has come from a beautiful creator, it has had its life force taken away so that you might be sustained. Do not simply ignore this, every bite remain grateful to the creature.

Out of this awareness, you may decide meat is no longer something you wish to consume, you may decide you don't want to stop eating it - this is not important. Just be aware...

We can't defeat the ego. We just have to be more aware of what it does.

This is a device of ego, it is protecting itself by saying it is indestructible. You are not ego, you are not mind... how can you know? In the very awareness of what it is doing, simply notice that there is a separation. What is watching the ego play these games? You can watch every thought that enters your head, what is watching it? You can watch every action of the body, what is watching it? That watcher is you, but you do not remember.