I think at some point, whether i want to or not, i might become a christian accidently, like when i'm 95 years old. I might fall off a precipice, or down an abandoned well, and have no way of getting up and out, and suddenly I'll become a christian. I am terrified of this. I can't help believing that there's something interesting going on with christianity, but oddly enough christians are almost by definition people that do not get or accept the metaphors involved.
“I am my father.” What does that mean besides “i am speaking nonsense” or “I have an ego the size of the earth”. I am my father is equivalent to “i am my creator” which could mean something benign like “the forces that created me are forces i am intimately familiar with.” I'd like to think it means something sensible like that or else something open-ended and relevant, that is intended metaphorically, speaking as if. hoping beyond hope that the words will not be literalized. The “law” verses the “spirit” argument. The literal wording verse the spirit of the words. As if to say “do not listen to and literalize what i've said, you dumb fool.” But that's exactly what they do in church, which is a church he in fact requested to be built. So maybe literalization has its place. Literalization is the body. The vehicle in which the flash-point is contained. To drink of the fire, we need “ears to hear” and a mind attuned to relevance. Really, i sometimes think Jesus screwed up terribly by never writing anything down, so that sentiments that might have been intended poetically, something like “i am the creative spirit that causes me to exist” became in the hands of generations of powerful men, “i am the literal god, obey me or perish in flames.” Then again, if the flames be healing, then the flames have their place, and i shall welcome them in.
Powerful people tend to literalize, to make solid, to make practical and useful for the sake of obtaining advantage. Science is based on literalization. And its power is awesome. But when we literalize religious concepts, we run into a problem, because we soon become the puppets of our own fucked up subconscious. (imagine something akin to the concept of sin, and blame that sacred scape-goat for everything that's wrong). The possibility is key. Focusing on the possibility of good traits and abilities in ourselves and others and the possibility of good things that we need or want to see happen. But never becoming an ambassador of goodness and perfectness, never denying the darkness that balances the mind and the heart sometimes as well, to drink of the flame, to drink of the blood, is to live forever in the space of a day. But what does that literally mean, you say. Well, literally it doesn't mean anything. Or what it literally means is beyond me, literally, and I praise the gods for that.
One thing that troubles me about the jewish and christian bibles is all the “fear god” and be afraid of his wrath stuff. It baffles me as to why fear of god would be helpful. And also, all the constant warnings, “woe unto those that...” or “who unto those that do not...” Why all the warnings? Why all the fear? To gain the attention of his audience by cheating? What is fear? What is the difference between fear and worry? Fear is attention to the moment, awareness of what's important. Fear as coming into the moment. Fear god literally means be afraid of god and cower before him. But spiritually, fear of god means be awake to this moment, and listen to the extent you are capable. As if to say, please listen up, but for the love of the gods, don't you dare listen literally.
But there's still the problematic truth that the vast majority of “religious” types, seem to embrace the literal and look towards the recorded facts for comfort over the spiritual relevance, law over spirit. And even go so far as to say that the literal meaning is the only thing, and any incidental metaphors ought to be stamped out like wildfires. And they believe that if there is a problem in the world, that an enemy be blamed as soon as possible, and that the enemy be beaten down and bloodied and contained. And around and around they go, forever doing that to each other. And somewhere underneath all of that: The weird eternal dance between the power of the literalists and the spirituality of the meek. The literalists seek to make spirituality a kind of free energy source for building more and more cock-shaped towers of bravery, pride and victory over others. Towers somewhat like dams to prevent the rudeness of their world view from overwhelming them with pain and the other uncomfortable sensations related to being a fucking asshole. There is no right way to read a metaphor. It is never an arrow pointing at a single target unless someone in power is forcing it to point towards “become a slave to power / intuit the will of the father” instead of become your own self as you would choose to or “be alive again, god damn you” or something else entirely. In conclusion: true metaphors are always open-ended, otherwise they're not really metaphors they're just codecs.
“I am my father.” What does that mean besides “i am speaking nonsense” or “I have an ego the size of the earth”. I am my father is equivalent to “i am my creator” which could mean something benign like “the forces that created me are forces i am intimately familiar with.” I'd like to think it means something sensible like that or else something open-ended and relevant, that is intended metaphorically, speaking as if. hoping beyond hope that the words will not be literalized. The “law” verses the “spirit” argument. The literal wording verse the spirit of the words. As if to say “do not listen to and literalize what i've said, you dumb fool.” But that's exactly what they do in church, which is a church he in fact requested to be built. So maybe literalization has its place. Literalization is the body. The vehicle in which the flash-point is contained. To drink of the fire, we need “ears to hear” and a mind attuned to relevance. Really, i sometimes think Jesus screwed up terribly by never writing anything down, so that sentiments that might have been intended poetically, something like “i am the creative spirit that causes me to exist” became in the hands of generations of powerful men, “i am the literal god, obey me or perish in flames.” Then again, if the flames be healing, then the flames have their place, and i shall welcome them in.
Powerful people tend to literalize, to make solid, to make practical and useful for the sake of obtaining advantage. Science is based on literalization. And its power is awesome. But when we literalize religious concepts, we run into a problem, because we soon become the puppets of our own fucked up subconscious. (imagine something akin to the concept of sin, and blame that sacred scape-goat for everything that's wrong). The possibility is key. Focusing on the possibility of good traits and abilities in ourselves and others and the possibility of good things that we need or want to see happen. But never becoming an ambassador of goodness and perfectness, never denying the darkness that balances the mind and the heart sometimes as well, to drink of the flame, to drink of the blood, is to live forever in the space of a day. But what does that literally mean, you say. Well, literally it doesn't mean anything. Or what it literally means is beyond me, literally, and I praise the gods for that.
One thing that troubles me about the jewish and christian bibles is all the “fear god” and be afraid of his wrath stuff. It baffles me as to why fear of god would be helpful. And also, all the constant warnings, “woe unto those that...” or “who unto those that do not...” Why all the warnings? Why all the fear? To gain the attention of his audience by cheating? What is fear? What is the difference between fear and worry? Fear is attention to the moment, awareness of what's important. Fear as coming into the moment. Fear god literally means be afraid of god and cower before him. But spiritually, fear of god means be awake to this moment, and listen to the extent you are capable. As if to say, please listen up, but for the love of the gods, don't you dare listen literally.
But there's still the problematic truth that the vast majority of “religious” types, seem to embrace the literal and look towards the recorded facts for comfort over the spiritual relevance, law over spirit. And even go so far as to say that the literal meaning is the only thing, and any incidental metaphors ought to be stamped out like wildfires. And they believe that if there is a problem in the world, that an enemy be blamed as soon as possible, and that the enemy be beaten down and bloodied and contained. And around and around they go, forever doing that to each other. And somewhere underneath all of that: The weird eternal dance between the power of the literalists and the spirituality of the meek. The literalists seek to make spirituality a kind of free energy source for building more and more cock-shaped towers of bravery, pride and victory over others. Towers somewhat like dams to prevent the rudeness of their world view from overwhelming them with pain and the other uncomfortable sensations related to being a fucking asshole. There is no right way to read a metaphor. It is never an arrow pointing at a single target unless someone in power is forcing it to point towards “become a slave to power / intuit the will of the father” instead of become your own self as you would choose to or “be alive again, god damn you” or something else entirely. In conclusion: true metaphors are always open-ended, otherwise they're not really metaphors they're just codecs.