Skip to content

The Irrefutable Mirage (part three)

February 11, 2015

http://news.yahoo.com/rape-acid-attacks-kidnap-girls-face-rising-violence-152858945.html

GENEVA (Reuters) – High-profile attacks such as the abduction 300 schoolgirls by Boko Haram in Nigeria and the shooting of Malala Yousafzai in Pakistan are a fraction of what is suffered by girls trying to get an education, the U.N. human rights office said on Monday.

Many of the attacks are done in the name of religion or culture, while others are gang-related, notably in El Salvador and other parts of Central America, Veronica Birga, chief of the women’s human rights and gender section at the U.N. human rights office, said at a presentation to launch the report.

Such violence is on the rise, the U.N. report said, citing acid attacks and poisoning by the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan, girls from a Christian school in India abducted and raped in 2013, and Somali girls taken out of school and forced to marry al Shabaab fighters in 2010.

“Attacks against girls accessing education persist and, alarmingly, appear in some countries to be occurring with increasingly regularity,” the report said. “In most instances, such attacks form part of broader patterns of violence, inequality and discrimination.”

Many of the attacks in at least 70 countries between 2009-2014 involved rape and abduction, the report said.

“The common cause of all these attacks, which are very different in nature, is deeply entrenched discrimination against women and girls,” Birga told the news briefing.

In Mali, Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan “very strict dress codes have been imposed through the use of violence, including sexual violence on schoolgirls”, she said.

Some attacks were based on opposition to girls’ education as a means for social change and others because schools were seen as imposing Western values including gender equality, she said.

She warned that depriving girls of education has serious knock-on effects.

“They are more exposed to child marriages and forced marriages, they are more exposed to trafficking and the worst forms of child labour,” she said.

******************************************

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/02/06/mad-bill-donohue-demands-apology-from-obama-for-the-presidents-mention-of-the-crusades-and-the-inquisition/

“From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris, we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it.”
That’s not the problem; Donohue agrees with that. But what Obama said next made him turn purple.
“Lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.
Seems factual enough, right? Not to Donohue. He calls that sentence “ignorant,” “astounding,” and “pernicious” — and he demands an apology.

***************************************

We would like to chastise Obama for something. Not that he is “wrong” (although, in Essence, he is wrong, as SPIRIT does not murder, mutilate, maim and manipulate—meaning, if one is IN CHRIST, a place of Peace, he is not of this sentencing) … he is not providing the necessary impetus for change. It may be trite to the inexperienced in gnosis, but it serves anger when it could serve good, and might easily put a stopper in the mouths of many. Instead of saying:

People committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ … why not … People committed and commit terrible deeds in the name of Religion, as well as other foibles, and one can be specific on this as history shows us a great deal on when and where … for as you know, there are titles and names in history that tell us many of these facts—many having served as Political Magistrate (Adolf Hitler/the Nazi Regime, for example).

As gnostic of the Christ Way … we are hurt that people do not see or understand the difference between MAN murdering and enslaving for a Religious ideal within, say, the Roman Catholic Church, or the Orthodox Church, or the Puritan Ethic … and the actual premise of what Christ teaches … (note where the word “before” is written in Scripture). There is a very big difference; you see … to the gnostic of the Christ Way, the words—[24 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25 For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. 26 For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?]—are not harming in fanatical ways. Those who are murdering are not In the Spirit. Recall the commandments: Thou shalt not killthou shalt not covet … ? To tell the masses that it was IN the name of Christ teaches that it was in allegiance with something injurious and murderous, and this is far from the truth. People committing and having committed these horrific crimes is theft for the purpose of annihilation of one for another. It’s called Evil, and it would behoove the president to know its name.

MAKE HISTORY DON’T RECLUSE IT.

Man says a lot of things and a lot of it is dishonest for Religiopolitical Agendas.

If you don’t make this distinction (in the name of Christ—in the name of Religion/Political Agenda) what happens is nothing happens. It continues in the same old same old rhetoric. Nothing new under the sun? Now, if the intent is to dismantle and remove Christianity altogether, then I suppose the president might be carefully pushing agenda. But we do not care if those desiring to remove Christianity from Society accomplish this. We still have gnosis. Even if laws take away the “bibles”, deeming it dangerous … we have gnosis … because gnosis is of experience not requiring Religious fodder.

Politics is as Religious to us as any denomination or organization filled with manmade rules, and … we have shared repeatedly … we are not anti-religion, but we are against antagonizing in The Name of Christ.

And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marveled at him.

and from the previous essay:

But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.

Where we are of concern is if the agenda is to supplant one for another, especially one that puts woman into a medieval arcane position. What a rude deposition—yes? But it seems that all Religious struggle with just “where” to position woman. The miniscule mind of man … sometimes even at his finest … But, you see, under the stresses and expectations of the catholic mind, even woman does not know where to position woman. Sex sells, and those within this venture are quite certain of its finances. As long as mankind knows he can use woman as an IMAGE of ways and means … he can accomplish many, many things in the name of ‘his’ Religion, which includes his academia —the word academia always sounds like sprinkles to me—not sure why 🙂

Look at the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Roman Catholic Church knew how to use her for its wealth and celebration. They turned her into a magnificent whore. “Sex” sells—especially youthful, nubile sex. They cloistered her for the men—look but do not touch—she is Virgin, Sinless, Goddess … this is to remind you that your women can never be as She. Their montage sounds like: The men can be our Jesus and work in His Name doing whatever his superiors deem necessary for its ideology to win—but woman is of a lesser place of restitution. She is not clean enough because she is menstrual—merely a monthly fixation—and hardly of the elect. Use Goddess Mary to enlighten you—women having had intercourse with men are not worthy to be.

What mind came up with this? It’s called Roman Catholic hypnotics—Baby-lawn  finest.

You want a blistering attack … we will give you a blistering attack—————————————————-but no, emotions cannot rule even when the Abusers sell-sell-sell their children to Dogmatic Appeal. Ruff.

So, let’s look at some facts … take this comment from the same topic on DEATH in Religion’s Name-——

PsiCop February 9, 2015 at 12:48 pm
Re: “But the Crusades were a very belated war of liberation finally setting out to deliver brother and sister Middle Eastern Christians from the Islamic yoke.”

The Crusaders didn’t really do much to deliver anyone from “the Islamic yoke.” They didn’t really try to shore up the Byzantine Empire (which, at the time, was the chief defender of eastern Christendom). The First Crusaders won back some of Byzantium’s western Anatolian territory, it’s true, but then they made a beeline for the Holy Land and left Byzantium behind. Once in the Levant, they refused to restore lost Byzantine territory, and they failed to help the Byzantines refortify.

Oh, and once there, they ousted the local Orthodox hierarchs in favor of their own Latin hierarchy. They seized the very-Christian state of Edessa. A century after the First Crusade, the Fourth attempted to destroy Byzantium outright … and they very nearly succeeded, leaving it a shell of its former self.

The historical record is clear: The Crusaders were NOT champions, protectors, defenders, or liberators of eastern Christians. They were (largely) Frenchmen, far from home, embedding themselves in a place they had no rational reason to be. Had they actually wished to help eastern Christendom, they’d have signed on with the Byzantines and participated in their wars with Muslims, which by then had been going on for centuries, and which continued in spite of the presence of the Crusaders.

http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/06/obama-right-crusades-islamic-extremism-analysis/#comments

 

And then we have those of Judaism (both of the reformed and not reformed) “innocently” prodding along … still claiming themselves the chosen  … The chosen what? If you are of the heartmind to understand that Holy Scripture is largely SYMBOLIC—why do we still have Judaism? This is not a Christianity versus Judaism thing as we are not of Religion, and do not care about TRADITIONS for gnosis, at least not in the metaphoric sense. So, ask yourselves why we are still mopping the brow of the Religionist of Judaism? If Christianity is ever so changing from what is was, and moving toward a more Humanistic sense … why the need for Judaism? Practitioners of Judaism—why are you still here? Shouldn’t you have already gone to your Promised Land?

We can see the minds going … what the heck?

We are talking about UNITY, people—coming into the relevance of Truth. Unsure of what we are saying?

And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

😀   You see … the difference between what Religionists see and what one like us might hear. If chosen then one is of this Light, and active now, here, moving, growing, pleading in the courage of Spiritual Gift, and what comes after the flesh is just a continuation of what came before, and what is.

And the unapologetic Irenaeus just couldn’t wrap his head around this stuff and so he dialed 9.13 and said:

I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.

And the Roman Empire set forth upon the land and all the Seekers were banished from their kingdom. A-men.

It depends on where ( a place in the noetic heart that we call the HEARTMIND) you grow … UP … and not who your mummies and daddies were.

*I am just realizing now that I cannot see myself standing in the Greek Orthodox Church for Liturgy ever again. It would feel like playing at something. The standing, the sitting, reciting a creed … watching everyone but me go up to receive the Eucharist …

Another article on the topic of crusading:

http://marksilk.religionnews.com/2015/02/10/obamas-anti-crusade-rhetoric/

 

 

Back to what we started on THE PHILOKALIA  in the first two parts of The Irrefutable Mirage …

Gregory Palamas continues in Text 27 of Volume Four:

Nothing in nature is superior to the intellect, for if there were then it would constitute the divine image. Since, therefore, the intellect is what is best in us and this, even though it is in the divine image, is none the less created by God, why then, is it difficult to understand or, rather, how is it not self-evident that the Creator of that which is noetic in us is also the Creator of everything noetic? Thus every noetic being, since it is likewise created in the image of God, is our fellow-servant, even if certain noetic beings are more honourable than us in that they possess no body and so more closely resemble the utterly bodiless and uncreated Nature. Or, rather, those noetic beings who have kept their rank and who maintain the purpose for which they were created deserve our homage and are far superior to us, even though they are fellow servants. On the other hand, the noetic beings who did not keep their rank but rebelled and rejected the purpose for which they were created are totally estranged from those close to God, and they have fallen from honour. And if they attempt to drag us after them and to make us fall, they are not only worthless and disgraced but are also God’s enemies and destructive and inimical to the human race.

 

The grand scheme of Religion pervaded the sentinels and caused a great upheaval in the Land of Cain. Some disappeared from the Earth while others became giants. It’s all in there, ya know—the Story—it’s all shown through Prophesy—an active synergia. It’s not waiting for a Messiah. In the beginning was—now—and ever shall be—So be it. Man just couldn’t wrap his head around it? Why is that? Because the vastness of the Divine is so great and Man so immense-fully small, it is beyond his relegated positions of stardom. If you give a mouse a cookie, what happens? He wants milk. If you give a mouse milk, he wants … weeeeeeee … spiraling up, or spiraling down, depending on the place of human carriage. Nothing new under sun? Watch what comes forth next … All things known by God? If God is Creator of the noetic in all, why then wouldn’t He know all things? But where is choice in this scenario? It’s groovy, baby …

Allow us to explain …

Light travels differently from the milestones of mankind, but in order for him to acknowledge its existence, he needs a means of measurement. The instrument for this is the rod—the staff—also understood as the ‘road’ (seen in the one less traveled as well as the Parable of the Lost Son). This instrument is of a Divine Symbol. It carries weight only ‘in’ its source, and this would be its permanence—its continuance. Within this weight is what we call knowledge, often SPIRITUAL ‘IN’ NATURE (meaning, Spirit filtered through Human hands, and can be … through use of other living forms). All other weight is temporary to the gnostic (on Truth), because it comes, goes, changes, rearranges … and evolves, but in Symbol it represents something already having occurred. God knows this. Spirit Relevance knows its own, but all else is … what? Dust? Immaterial? Unworthy? What remains within the constant flow of the evolving is what is relevant to the noetic mind—if ascending heart to mind, which is a finding not self as comrade; it is a finding of WISDOM within the courtship through God’s Essence—our Name IN Christ. 

Oops, do we scare anyone on that last? Jesus did call Saul to Paul and Levi to Matthew … was this a changing of the Guard on the matter of Spirit? Did one refuse while the other received? Did Religious rule and practice get in the way with all its throwing of stones rather than stone building?

People exhaust understanding. It becomes un-renewable (old wineskins? old garments?). Sounds strange, but if of the understanding of the Renewing vessel or carriage, some things having been used become inexcusably malfunctioning (unreliable for reasons we will not get into just now because people are in denial of this for the most part). Take the figure of Mary. Somewhere in the mind of Religious man was searching for a feminine presence that said more than just birth of child. Theotokos speaks on this more than the Immaculate Mary (but not as it should). Why? Because to allow for Mary to be Human, even if She is angelkind (Mystic, Prophet, even Church as Peace—all representing Light for noetic performance necessary for Spiritual movement—coming out of stagnant and un-resolving places), She is given the road—the rod—even the well to fill, and in this presence, She is given the impetus to come to Father. To deny her this rod, and this includes her ability to be the purveyor (see previous essay) as WOMAN, keeps her a cake topper and not much more. God can only use those He chooses—the chosen—and if Ms Mary isn’t available to the catholic mind to be RELEVANT in this active Light, then she is unreliable for Purpose unto God. Who made Her inexcusably malfunctioning? Religious Man can’t manipulate Spirit, just as he cannot read minds, despite his craftiness. Good grief! Who does he think he is! Therefore, he cannot play Mary as immaculate. That hand just doesn’t work in the “worthiness” on Truth. There is nowhere for Ms Mary to go. She is stagnant—much like those yard statues … poor Mary, usually looking down …

I am sure the Catholic minds are going—you are nuts! No, you are unaware of how Spirit operates. You are so used to allowing your Doctrines (along with the titles of these) to de-form you—and not only is it unreliable, it’s flat out milk (gone sour?). Those robed titles went out centuries ago, along with the theology. It won’t even cut the cake as it is not of the Sword spoken of in Matthew 10.24 and Luke 12.51, but in Luke we hear what? Division? Why? Why would this bring division? Does schism ring a bell? Are we needing to remove something?

“History” is on a collision course with itself. Why? Because it’s big, and heavy … and it just won’t move.

 

Man in black: Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

 

Peace and Love

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements
2 Comments
  1. opheliart permalink

    http://www.religionnews.com/2015/02/13/pope-francis-diversifies-cardinals-will-clout-counts/#comments

    —-comment from the article

    Betty Clermont February 14, 2015 at 2:41 am
    Art Deco makes a valid point. Francis’ “reform” of the Curia means he has replaced his predecessor’s loyalists with his own, none of whom can claim a higher moral ground than former Curia members. (Francis had no more choice than Benedict in making the Vatican Bank conform to international financial standards in order to stay in business.)
    Will the new cardinals have “clout where it counts”? No. Power rests with access to the throne (as always), not with title – as in Chaput and the pope’s closest advisers in the Vatican.
    Re: New cardinals. Numerically, the highest number are from Latin American and Asia/Oceania, both areas of economic opportunity for the Church’s plutocratic “donors.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: