The Terms Spiritual Leader And Spiritual Messiah Are Oxymorons
Plato believed that conflicting interests of different parts of society can be harmonized. The best, rational and righteous, political order, which he proposes, leads to a harmonious unity of society and allows each of its parts to flourish, but not at the expense of others. The theoretical design and practical implementation of such order, he argues, are impossible without virtue.
Plato came to the conclusion that all existing governments were bad and almost beyond redemption. “The human race will have no respite from evils until those who are really philosophers acquire political power or until, through some divine dispensation, those who rule and have political authority in the cities become real philosophers” (326a-326b)---
Don't tell anybody; but our Judeo Christian heritage is out to lunch.
- a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).
The kingdom of Heaven is within is a true statement and it can not be found in another person other than or outside of yourself. Furthermore the kingdom of heaven is platonic/utilitarian in nature and anarchist syndicalist in its fundamental organization. Our bodies and our souls operate according to the greatest good to the greatest need and in accordance with the laws of nature and their own locally autonomous intrinsic nature. Nothing is imposed upon us from the outside of our beings. A person can be a leader or a messiah in every field of human endeavor except spiritual. Therefore the terms spiritual leader or spiritual messiah are unintentionally oxymoronic or oxymorons.
From a previous post(Or As I've Often Said):
A distillation of our Judeo Christian Heritage(actually a very short story) :
Okay. Don’t throw Christianity away just yet. After all, we have really committed an awful amount of effort over the years to insure its survival and continued influence upon humanity. It can help us in our goal toward political noncontradiction and a more harmonic human experience. Maybe that is what the Romans had in mind all along…before things got "Lost in Translation". Here’s how it goes: I can truthfully and honestly say that I accept Jesus into my heart as my personal savior so long as I know that the person or persons I’m telling that to understand the language I am speaking.
I don’t want to mislead anyone when it comes to matters pertaining to or concerning God. Might not be a good idea right? So, what does "Jesus" mean? What is it precisely that I am accepting into my heart as my personal savior? Meanings in Bible days were the important thing: especially when it comes to names. "Jesus".."Yeshua" or Joshua all mean the same thing: "Jehovah(or Yahweh) is salvation".
So what does Yahweh or Jehovah mean? What is it that is salvation? What precisely is it that is salvation that I am accepting into my heart? The meaning of JHVH or YHWH(Jehovah or Yahweh) is: "I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be"…it is the imperfect or future tense of the old "I Am That I Am" proclaimed by Moses. Therefore ergo, so forth and ipso facto: "Jesus", that I accept into my heart as my personal savior, actually and truthfully means …"I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be is salvation". Easy enough right? So why all of the problems everywhere? Maybe it's just poor leadership. That’s all I can figure. Maybe I need to take a History class. Maybe there is more to it. I dunno. Beats me.
Ipso facto is a Latin phrase, directly translated as "by the fact itself", which means that a specific phenomenon is a direct consequence, a resultant effect, of the action in question, instead of being brought about by a previous action. It is a term of art used in philosophy, law, and science
Comments
Post a Comment