VonNoble
-
Posts
1,392 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by VonNoble
-
-
5 hours ago, Songster said:
Is Forgiveness necessary? ABSOLUTELY!!!
My spiritual/religious beliefs are based on immutable universal laws, the two most important being the "Law of Karma" and the "Law of Forgiveness". Most people are familiar with the concept of Karma (stated simply as "What comes around, goes around.") but not all are aware of the dire consequences for their actions. Karma demands payment in kind ("an eye for and eye...") for any spiritual or physical offense against anyone or anything. A Karmic debt not only effects the offender, but binds the souls of the offended and offender together, and is carried beyond the bonds of this life into the next, and the next, and the next.... until the wrong is righted, or the offender forgiven. Only by the application of the Law of Forgiveness can the offender be pardoned and released him from the retribution demanded by the Law of Karma.
Is Forgiveness necessary? POSITIVELY!!!
Not just forgiveness for our own sins but (more importantly) forgiveness of others for their offenses against you.
Forgiving another person (for their sins against you) may be done for purely selfish reasons.... Forgiveness releases you from the Karmic bond that would otherwise require you both to deal with the unresolved issue in the next life. Finally, Forgiveness need not be sought to be given... A willful offender, ignorant of Karmic penalties, may not even regret their act. Forgive them anyway. For YOUR sake.
FASCINATING! Thank you very much for this posting.
It will take me awhile to fully absorb it but it was a most captivating read.
Again, my thanks
von
-
2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
To my memory, "dating" -- at least in the beginning, was different. There was more talk and less sex. When there was sex, it was more gradual in unfolding. I found it more comfortable. I had a sense of what was expected. I had a sense of norms. There was a focus on getting to know more about each other. When people were not compatible, they found out more quickly, without things becoming more committed. Breakups were swift and less traumatic. People simply didn't date each other when there was nothing there.
Now, there are no norms. At least, I don't know of any. I miss norms.
There are days I miss the norms too.
You have hit something in here that may get to the heart of this topic better than the original posting
(thank you).....did the protocols we USED to use allow for expectations to be more comfortable?
Any two people (dating or not) at least had some degree of comfort because they had reasonable
expectations of how the initial exchanges would occur?
Interesting.
von
-
1 hour ago, mererdog said:
Etiquette is artificial. This means it is inherently imperfect. A little regular maintenance helps to ensure everything is running correctly. Checking your work for flaws is usually best practice.
Honesty is also subjected to equivocation. Which means the exchange can be
just as imperfect. So I am not sure the structure in either case one ups the other.
That regular maintenance would benefit from feedback.
Which requires working dialogue.
Perhaps from an imperfect foundation that both can at least understand.
Hence, maybe, requiring an agreement upon which they can build. Maybe
1 hour ago, mererdog said:What? Now you want me to apologize because you called me fat? How is that fair?
Fair? What's that?
von
-
On 5/21/2017 at 12:00 PM, cuchulain said:
That's true. Maybe they think they are right to try to change my mind, and I can accept that. I can still find fault with it, however, since it is my determination that they should not forcefully try to convince me. I don't mind when someone tries to explain their understanding and even try to convince me...but when the point comes where they have clearly failed, and they continually do so...it strikes me as harassment rather than enlightenment.
I can relate to this very much.
Recent exchange with very enthused Christian.
Christian: I must confess our church is one that goes out and knocks on doors
to bring the good news to everyone.
Me: I understand you are tasked with making sure that I KNOW the one true
right way to heaven. And I "get" that you are worried about my eternal soul.
Thank you. I have listened to you (and many, many others)
Now to ask you a question, if I may. Do you think it is in your power to give
me the gift of faith. My understanding is God grants that gift. I am happy for you
that you have received it. But if it is true that only God can give that gift - why are
you out knocking on doors?
Christian: To plant the seeds for God.
Me: if it did not take root and you continue to push - how is that different
than stalking?
At that point we both chuckled.
I am with you, chuchlain. Each person lecturing me - thinking either
they are the first one to tell me these things.
Or that they will be the one to finally crack the nut.
In doing so they fail to recognize that I have availed myself of every
opportunity to share their belief. Yet. I do not. So end of story for this
round. I listen. I thank them. I restate their position so they know I was
listening but they simply will not STOP when politely asked to do so.
Therefore, I no longer waste my time respecting their rights and views.
I walk away.
But I sure understand your feelings. After a half a century of this behavior
one does get fatigued at the rerun of it all.
Being polite does not equate to being a doormat.
von
-
My father was Roman Catholic.
He believed that the practice of confession as outlined by Catholicism was necessary.
Is it?
Is actually telling someone out loud you did wrong/committed a sin ...and hearing
them forgive you.....is that component (verbal declaration and verbal forgiveness)
necessary for human balance?
What role does the need to seek forgiveness play in our human experience?
von
-
On 9/14/2017 at 2:55 PM, mererdog said:
Then there's going to a live Rocky Horror Picture Show screening... A sort of best of both worlds experience, complete with having strangers throw food at you.
I recently went to a PLAY version of Rocky Horror.
All of the antics were in play there as well.
I always feel a bit sorry for the custodians after one of those events.
Especially so in a nice carpeted theater. Yikes.
You make an excellent point of being able to at times more engrossed in a film.
I wonder if the "close up" nature of film enhances the one-to-one feel of the experience.
I rarely make eye contact with actors during a play.
But the close up with corrected camera angle makes it appear that an actor might
be looking at you with some approximation.
Rather enjoyed the Rocky Horror midnight showings of long ago.
What a crazy bunch would gather for that cult classic.
I think I sometimes see the next generation at Walmart in the very wee hours
of overnight.
von
-
13 hours ago, LeopardBoy said:
Some of us have also been raised in different cultures, either as immigrants or by immigrant families, with our own social conventions and manners. I've gotten some weird looks because my reflex is to bow instead of shake hands when I meet someone for the first time. Table manners also vary widely between cultures, and what passes for etiquette to one may seem rude (or barbaric) to another.
Yes. I have made more than one blunder in this regard. However, learning the best approach is
easily handled with open dialogue and graciousness.
My mother told a story of someone handling something "wrong" when at a formal dinner with
the Queen of England. The Queen's response when the long formal table fell silent - was to
opt to follow the manners of her guest and put down the spoon or whatever was happening and
pick it up with her fingers for example. The first rule was to be gracious to the guest.
Your point is well made and has validity.
von
-
14 hours ago, mererdog said:
But the normal, unthinking, habitual reliance on etiquette trains us to treat the needs and desires of the person in front of us as less important than an arbitrary set of rules. It becomes a sort of twisted social contract where we assume that as long as we stick to the script no one is allowed to complain about what we say or do.
So etiquette does not provide a framework for learning the needs and desires of other people?
It is not a framework for each to engage in dialogue?
The rules are a starting point to assure equal time if to speak and listen if it is done correctly, maybe?
Sticking to the script allows us to begin to learn, no? After initial contact,
relationships develop by gradually finding a comfort zone, no?
von
re: calling you fat
...either of us has an option to ignore what we heard by pretending we didn't, no?
There is little obligation, as a responder, to send verbal cues.
Sometimes no response is the best response, maybe
-
On 9/14/2017 at 4:11 PM, the Hearthwitch said:
Some of us do, and are. My youngest is currently in a charter school where this is emphasized (which is good, because Thing Two is dense, when it comes to social cues, and has demonstrated an aptitude for pugilism unseen in our family since his great-grandfather's lifetime). In theory, this is also being taught in our public middle school, too, but I don't credit Thing One's social skills to their teachings.
As a parent, I can tell you that the best way to teach 'em is to make every mistake a teachable moment- interrupt (intervene), make 'em stop and think it through, and then allow 'em to proceed with reaction/action of their own. Same goes for manners in general. If you want your children to NOT be "those kids" at the restaurant, you start taking them out when they're really little, and you demonstrate how they need to behave. They fail to do that, you take them out. Repeat until the lesson takes. It doesn't take long. They want to succeed. It's not that difficult- it just takes some attention and awareness. You just have to be invested in making sure that they're going to grow up to be...well, adults.
All very helpful. Thank you.
von
-
On 9/14/2017 at 1:16 PM, cuchulain said:
Misunderstandings happen. But here's the thing, we all control how we react or respond to those misunderstandings. No matter how big the misunderstanding, or message that we haven't figured out is a misunderstanding, we can all take a second or three and think about our best response to it.
Agreed.
Communications is as dependent on the responder as the sender.
Good point.
von
-
On 9/13/2017 at 11:29 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
Some of the old rules were helpful. Even when we ignored the rules, we knew what they were.
What did happen to dating?
I don't know exactly.
I have noticed that the divorce rate has climbed steadily.
Not sure the slower process of mating, by way of formal dating norms, is involved in that.
One is not indicative of the other. So probably no correlation. Other than somewhat loosely on a timeline sort of.
von
-
8 hours ago, mererdog said:
Are you calling me fat?
Perhaps you did not hear me correctly?
Perhaps I explained it poorly.
Perhaps I was inquiring about your health.
Perhaps I was noting you looked jolly.
Perhaps I am clueless (I will vote for that one)
von
-
Every human at some point has learned the value of cooperation.
Each by adulthood has also endured more than a few misunderstandings.
OFTEN these are simple communication errors.
We thought they said this or that - and we heard it incorrectly.
THEY intended something completely different than our conclusion.
WE did not communicate our idea clearly.
Both sides did not ask enough questions.
Both sides jumped to conclusions.
IF any or even most of that is true - why is it we spend so little time
cultivating communications skills? Why do we not incorporate that
as part of everyone's formal education? How do parents better their
own skills in order to teach their children? How DO they teach such
things to kids? Without some formal "learning" in this area how do we
get feedback to know if we are effective as the sender or the receiver?
Hummmmm......I need to work on this even though I HAVE HAD the
benefit of formal training.
Did we lose something when we stopped having some old school, boring,
social conventions? Like how do we all agree introductions should
take place? How do we interact (a bit more formally) in the first
few minutes of a conversation? Did polite society have some conventions
that had worth we are now lacking?
Pick and choose on this one.....it seems worthy of discussion to me.
Von
-
Referencing sporting events - a recent college football game reminded me that a
LIVE event has the interaction of those around you to push your mood along.
It can provide more intensity than sitting along in my recliner and it did.
i was seated above the marching band section. THEY were comical so I sort of
had two events in one. With the fist fight that erupted behind me - I had three
events in one.
I think I prefer the stop action close up of a replay on TV (at home - in my recliner)
but then again - there was some heightened sensory feel to a live event. I went
home smelling of beer and I don't drink it so there was even THAT as a residue
reminder of an action filled event.
von
-
On 9/9/2017 at 2:23 PM, Brother Kaman said:
Gilbert & Sullivan are by far my favorite.
Oh how did I forget them! ALWAYS an enjoyable night out for me.
Thanks for the push to remember some wonderful past events in my life.
Good choice.
von
-
On 9/11/2017 at 6:00 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:
I would be thrilled if such proof of the soul actually existed. That would be wonderful. As it is, what did they prove? That death brings about physical changes? I can contain my excitement.
Even if they found the receptor site where the soul resides -- they call this proof?-- it still remains to establish that something continues to exist. Seriously? A dead body loses it's quantum state? It's called decay.
jonathan H.B. Lobl,
First thanks for making me chuckle - you position mostly mirrors my own but i
loved your panache in summarizing it.
PASTOR DAVE: Thanks for bringing this to my (our) attention - I will do some
digging around also. It was a good slice of information to ponder and
worthwhile to do so.
When I was new to the FORUM....I was taken to task by a then "ruling" atheist of
the joint
for wondering out loud if anything survives us in death....some spark
of matter that carries our DNA into the decay process and beyond.
After thinking that over for a decade or so - my conclusion is that it has no
merit for me (just speaking for me) to ponder that any longer. What does it
matter what happens next? I'll find out if and when there is a "next" existence.
Just do what I can to be useful now - and let later take care of itself.
I do know, for sure, that the lasting impact from this life is in our actions
(or lack thereof)
Thanks to all - good thread
von
-
6 hours ago, Dan56 said:
You left us hanging in suspense
.. So what did the judge decide to do?
I'm sure your Mom was a compassionate woman, but how would she feel if the judge had took her advise, only to learn later that the man she felt sorry for had later killed someone else while driving drunk? Quite the conundrum eh?
* The judge said under normal circumstances he would have sent the man to jail.
However, the judge noted since my mother (who like your sister suffered permanently and forever because of his
actions) - since mom had asked that he NOT go to jail - the judge would honor her request. He did NOT go to
jail specifically because of my mothers opposition to it.
* Not sure if the drunk driver quit drinking...I sort of doubt it. He did telephone my dad a couple months after the trial
to apologize for the damage caused. His wife sent my mother a thank you card every year thereafter My mother sent
the family a care package every Christmas - we didn't have much but they had less.
* Although the drunk driver might not have quite driving drunk (again I do not know) but I DO KNOW...my father
never took another drink. He promised God and the world, on his knees in the hospital chapel - if she lived (he was
told by the doctors she would not live the night)....dad promised IF she lived he would never drink again and he did not
* My father became a livelong advocate against drunk driving. They entertained still and served alcohol but had guests
check in their car keys when they arrived
* Since more than one of my siblings ALSO battle (present) or battled (past tense as in they quit too) .....my mother, who
was a very intelligent woman......she understood Alcoholism is a disease. She addressed it as such and I don't think she
would have accepted that jail cures anyone of a disease. So my guess (she died in 1991) - my guess is she would have
opposed still a sentence of jail time...even then...to treat disease. She was a pretty big believer in life unfolding as it
is designed to unfold.....our job was - in her view - to master enough character to face whatever was coming with grace,
affording dignity....giving respect. She CERTAINLY advocated there were far worse things in life than death.
Dad might have been bargaining with God for her to stay.
When she did die - when she knew she was dying she was fine with it.
She didn't want to die by any means. But one of the last things she said to me was she did her best to
do her job as a mom. She believed she did that job to her own satisfaction and we would be okay.
She felt she left the world better by making sure each of the five kids could support ourselves. And that
we be decent world citizens.
They were the old couple in many ways - dad would have probably said anyone else killed was God's will.
She would have kept true to the doesn't matter when your life ends...or how...it only matters HOW you
live and who you helped along the way. Mother didn't believe in the notion of sin. She felt we learn BY
making mistakes. She often said - make new mistakes. That way you know you are learning.
von
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Dan56 said:
Cruel? Tell that to the dead victims of the drunken driver.
I see your point
I have held the hand of the dead victim's family at funerals.
From car crashes, drug over doses, accidental gunshots and out
right cold blooded murder.
Interestingly enough - I don't think any of the family members at any
of those funerals (more than ten years of them) ever expressed this
sentiment
Maybe that was just unique to the people in our congregation.
von
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, RevBogovac said:
Then there is something wrong with the conditions in the first place. Doesn't condone cruelty in any shape, way or form...
The most convincing argument for the approach used in the Netherlands is the fact it works.
I have not kept up in the last couple of years however when I was active in prison ministry
the Netherlands were certainly cited for their many successes.
von
-
1
-
-
In 1962...many cars on the road did not have seatbelt.
My father installed them in our old station wagon to keep us safer.
My father was a heavy drinker in those days.
So were lots of people.
A drunk driver crossed the median on Highway 101 in California and hit
my mom and dad's car - even wearing a seatbelt my mother went through the
windshield in one spot and came back through another spot.
She was a mess and we prepared of her to die. Nutshell of scope of her
injuries would be 31 stitches in one of her eyelids. Her face was never
the same. Most of her was never the same.
At that time my parents had four children. The driver that hit them had four children.
When they got to court....my mother took the stand.
She answered everything she was asked.
The judge then asked her if she wanted to add anything for him to consider.
She told the judge: " ....sometimes my husband has driven while drunk too
....the wife and kids of this man did nothing wrong. To deprive them of a father
and wage earner would punish five people who never took a drink. I could be
that wife and my kids could be her kids...please consider that, your honor
....I do not think him sitting in jail would do much for any of us...."
Like most kids I am proud of my folks. Especially of the fact no one was ever
beneath my mother's dignity radar. She set a very good example for us.
von
-
1
-
-
Having done some ministry in more than one prison - my observation
(no facts to back it up - sometimes we see what we want to see)
.....teaching another way to deal with life seemed far more effective
than rotting in a cell.
It was difficult getting a couple of tough guys to go through paperwork
to get GEDs however they were motivated by special perks if the did so.
And even more after earning their own GED - if they served as tutors for
others.
In (18) months in a "lifer's prison" those original two - taught ten more
enough to pass their GEDs as well.
The warden rewarded all graduates with a grubstake to start their own
mail order business. The money earned FIRST went to pay back the warden
for supplies NEXT....they started paying a few pennies of their earnings
for rent. NEXT the paid restitution...and as the business grew they
eventually paid for rent, for their own Rx and so it went.
We are talking LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE. ....but the incentives to do
something for themselves sure seemed to make life much easier
around the prison for everyone.....especially the cards...
Just an observation.
To break this up (and get to the point of dignity there is a follow up notation)
Von
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Key said:
I still, to this day, have trouble following Shakespeare. Miller is fine.
The name for some reason eludes me at the moment, but I do enjoy a more recent contemporary. I research and get back to you.
As far as written plays go, I do love "Death of a Salesman" and "Hasty Heart". Much underlying meanings and exploration of psychosis or psychology there.
Did you ever notice in" Death of a Salesman".....we never know what Loman is selling?
Thanks for sharing. I'll look forward to additional notes in this thread from you.
I did not peek but I am thinking "Death of a Salesman" was a big award winner for Miller.
von
-
8 hours ago, RevBogovac said:
Goethe, whenever I feel a bit pessimistic his work just reminds me we were screwed up long before any of this...
GREAT approach. I read this a couple of hours ago and I am still chuckling. Thanks.
von
-
1
-
-
While I was recently tuned into a conversation about Broadway
productions - it occurred to me I had read a great number of
plays (scripts) in my life time.
Which one would be my overall favorite.
Not so much the production but the writer.
Sophocles, Shakespeare (spell check accepted that version,) Ibsen, Arthur Miller?
Ya got a favorite?
von
Forgiveness is necessary?
in Freethought, Secularism, No Religion
Posted
Release anger? I don't follow.
I have been wronged and felt no anger at the situation or the person.
At times I have felt compassion (at times anger too) but often it is more
feeling sorry for them ....often...not every wrong was intentional....and
certainly many happen because of ignorance of the facts.
I am not sure how many people feel anger over being wronged. I don't
think I quite get that.
I rather agree with Songster - I have an option to forgive regardless of
receiving a request for it, no?
I am not entirely sure making amends (restitution for example) is exactly
the same as forgiveness....(doing penance is not the same thing as
rendering unconditional acceptance or love) ...maybe
Even though I had some trace amounts of Catholic doctrine floating around
an otherwise pretty liberal home growing up - I am not entirely sure
that the Catholic Church regards God as the injured party but I get your
drift.
I think (one of the Catholics can help me out here) - I think the notion was
more that YOUR ACTION might have damaged YOUR character or
for want of a better word your relationship with God. You cut yourself
off from being part of the good guy club to a greater or lesser extent
and you had to KNOW that you screwed up and say so to get back in.
Maybe that is half-baked but that is what I got out of what I heard.
It was more for you having a way to regain grace and set yourself
on the right path anew. How do you avoid doing the same stupid thing
unless you take a break and recognize the folly of your actions?
Oh well - I am on very think ice at this point so I will yield the floor
to someone who can shed some actual verification of beliefs in
this regard.
von