lumen
|
|
response 1 of 17:
| 
Jul 21 19:47 UTC 1999 |
I'm not a pagan, and I think I may be biased, but I think it's important
to see how the two are related. I don't think it's impossible to have
both healthy interdependency and independent strength in our lives.
Consider:
We are biologically created in mortal form by two mortal beings. Thus,
there is a power greater than ourselves in the fact that we cannot bring
about our own birth.
As the homo sapiens sapiens species, we are born with relatively little
survival instinct as compared to other organisms. We are very dependent
on our parents to survive when in infancy, more so than other animals.
Research and observation seems to indicate that a lack of care for human
infants reduces their ability to survive, which may be as severe as death
or as simple as an inability to interact with the human society.
Based on these facts alone, the original step 2 may not apply if said
greater power is negligent. But the modified step implies that the human
being posesses a Divine Power within. Where does this come from?
Many theories and schools of thought suggest that humans possess an
essence that is an entity unto itself. Some call it the spirit, the
soul, or the life force. Gnosticism suggests that the Divine Power
exists within this essence-- a spark of intelligence. Buddhism and other
Eastern ways seem to suggest that this Divine Power is shared by all
living things, through an interdependent connection of these essences.
However, one must tap into the realization of this connection to access
this Divine Power. This is why they pray and meditate.
But then, where does this essence originate? Perhaps it comes from some
sort of matrix, or another entity that possesses such a matrix. From
some, this is a godlike entity-- God or Goddess. If such an entity
brings forth this essence, then perhaps it imparts this Divine Power to
it.
How are we then damaged within that we seek recovery? Perhaps it is a
blow to this essence. How do we access this Divine Power? It must come
from somewhere, and we must be able to find out how to unlock it by
returning to this source. How is that done? Perhaps, as I said
earlier, by prayer and meditation.
Some suggest that empowerment eventually becomes transcendentalist, and
that a transformation is possible once a human fully connects with a
source of the Divine Power. The atheist Arthur C. Clarke seems to
suggest this in his concept of the Star Child, in _2001: A Space
Odyssey_, although he does not believe in a deity being. He seems to
suggest such a transformation in other ways at the end of the book, by
vaguely describing mystical and fantastic beings.
My personal belief is that the greater power, whatever you see it to be,
is not like a monarch in that we simply bow down to. My experience has
been that it is a kind friend who seeks to untap the powerful potential
it has given me-- and its goal is that I blossom and become like unto it-
- to experience this transformation that I just described. Indeed, I do
submit, but I am permitting it to guide me to look within myself and to
see the strength I possess. This entity is a being I call Heavenly
Father, supported by a Heavenly Mother I know not yet, but that I shall
someday. Their names are irrelevant to this discussion, for they have
many names, including, I believe, Gaia Mother Earth, and Father Sun and
Sky.
I therefore do not believe the empowerment and the original steps are
mutually exclusive of each other in their definitions or applications. I
see it to be possible to interconnect the two.
|
i
|
|
response 2 of 17:
|
Feb 25 03:41 UTC 2001 |
By my reading, the "gods" of Arthur Clark's _2001..._, _2010..._, etc.
are not at all mystical, fantastic, divine, etc. They're just normal
members of an ultra-capable technological civilization that's some
millions of years ahead of us...it's about like a clever parrot trying
to understand the mathematics of our modern theoretical physics. Are
you familiar with Clark's Third Law?
|
i
|
|
response 6 of 17:
|
May 11 03:52 UTC 2002 |
Either i misunderstand your point or, by your definition, a cheap little
terrorist with a nuclear bomb is a serious God. Sorry, but *no* amount
of technological superiority or worldly power earns words like "god",
"divine", "moral", or "right" in my book.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 7 of 17:
|
May 11 08:11 UTC 2002 |
The Star Child wasn't anything like that.. he moved much too fast in
his regular existence..
oh jeez. this drift is really bad. I am dropping this, because it is
not helpful.
sorry walt, we need a few fw or we need to at least stay a bit more on
topic. You may not be in recovery, but a few people posting here..
the few that even are.. are.
|
i
|
|
response 8 of 17:
|
May 11 12:33 UTC 2002 |
I'd argue the Star Child bit, but i think you're right about drift being
bad in this context. Peeking a bit, it looks like "cfadm" is the only
fw of this cf. That probably explains why i (cfadm) have this cf in my
.cflist, but i'd have to dig more for the history. Having cfadm as fw
makes it clear who to call on for "the water heater died"-type problems,
but that's about it.
Tell me to shut up sooner next time. :)
|