PG. 48 Posted 09/06/09
No. 1
If a man wants to eat, he will swallow.
No. 2
To desire to blame, condemnation, and justify in the sense of failure, is do to the unfulfilled desire and expectation (by the way the original definition of Hope is desire and expectation). But who’s desire and expectation is to be fulfilled and valued? I believe is the true question.
No. 3
Is it the selection by that which does yield to the instruction of Life that does survive the resistance to the presence of Life? Or is the dominate force, the universe and it’s resistance to the presence of Life?
No. 4
Morality can be between two in a hand shake of I won’t seal form you and you won’t steal from me. Or this line represents my property and yours and one will not cross the line without the permission of the other. Which has nothing to do with religion, but everything to do with living with one’s neighbor.
No. 5
It’s love of self, love of others, or Love of Life, that one lives. And hearts minds and bodies are merely means to an end.
No. 6
In a man’s refusal of that which he knows to be true, integrity is not found.
No. 7
Is it better to be at peace where you are? Or is it better to be in hell for not being somewhere else?
No. 8
Do you value punishment or correction? If one values punishment then one takes consolation in the payment for. But if one values correction, then all parties involved benefit. But if one perceives punishment as correction then the punished remain the same as they were before they received punishment. But if correction is perceived as punishment, it is only perceived by the one that is being corrected, that correction is punishment, and will not receive the benefit thereof, and remain the same as before. But if the corrected embrace the correction then all benefit. The rebel hates correction, and therefore it is punishment for him. But the repentant embrace correction for it is Life unto him.
No. 9
Just because the few are; Does not automatically prove the many are wrong for being the many. On the contrary, to be different for the sake of being different does not constitute being righteous nor just by virtue of being against the rejection of the many. To be different for the sake of the many might have merit, according to the verifiable case. But to be different just to accuse the many by witnessing their disdain for your difference, proves only, that you have disdain for those that are not like you, the many.
No. 10
Man’s love for means nothing, but God’s Love for means everything. And God the Father’s Love would have to be the fulfillment of His Will for His Son.
No. 11
There is gun fire, and there is misguided gun fire. Wouldn’t it be wise for a captain to insure that his men fire arcuately, recognize the target, and understand orders of when and when not to fire? Is gun fire evil, if used to put needed venison on the table? Or to maintain the safety of a household in the presence of a threat to that safety?
No. 12
How can one not be guilty of what he does, not matter what he does? Unless he holds on to blame, condemnation, and justification? But yet, it is impossible to not be guilty of what one has done.