Double edged sword

[Meno_]

Jesus Biggest Gamble



http://www.chapelwithoutwalls.org/sermo ... iples.html

[Meno_]

Pope Francis:

‘Desiderio Desideravi’:



"Here lies all the powerful beauty of the liturgy. If the resurrection were for us a concept, an idea, a thought; if the Risen One were for us the recollection of the recollection of others, however authoritative, as, for example, of the Apostles; if there were not given also to us the possibility of a true encounter with Him, that would be to declare the newness of the Word made flesh to have been all used up. Instead, the Incarnation, in addition to being the only always new event that history knows, is also the very method that the Holy Trinity has chosen to open to us the way of communion. Christian faith is either an encounter with Him alive, or it does not exist” (10).

[Meno_]

A Psalm] of David. The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The LORD is the stronghold of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?


John 1:15

:" And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. "






"“All the darkness in the world cannot extinguish the light of a single candle.” ~ St. Francis Of Assisi

[Meno_]

"“Faith is not for overcoming obstacles; it is for experiencing them—all the way through!”



Richard Rohr



>>>


https://www.catholicworldreport.com/201 ... re-part-1/




>>>




https://www.montfort.org.br/eng/veritas ... historias/

[Meno_]

https://www.ncregister.com/commentaries ... oman-curia

[Meno_]

Again , Richard Rohr:




https://cac.org/news/statement-from-fr- ... e-francis/




https://faithinireland.wordpress.com/20 ... y-gnostic/

[Ichthus77]

False teaching.

[Meno_]

The devil made him do it?


Got a great deal on The Deal, but would take inconsiderable time and space. but slow real slow as schezezarade thinking of pairing up with salome.( last dance last veil?- Nah)
Daniel still purring the lionized kitty's.
but net still on the deal.
pope clementine still in an extraordinary connection with all them little people in millions congregating , hopefully.

None of them knowing for sure, perpetually pleading for reverse aleatory messages.

[Meno_]

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/genrel-early/

[Meno_]

Are you down with Spinoza & panentheism? Would he say all these waves have their being in necessary Being and so do not make Being finite and are still contingent, or does he say more? Still haven’t fully studied him.



No, only that miracles which manifest by exegesis. , when heuristic processes overstep their limitations do such redundant/necessary relations begin to make sense.Eschatology , history demonstrate the formation of the process which entangles this relation, by an transcending the imminence into formative repetitious signs(images)' reintegrating.


Just thinking aloud

[Meno_]

Are you down with Spinoza & panentheism? Would he say all these waves have their being in necessary Being and so do not make Being finite and are still contingent, or does he say more? Still haven’t fully studied him.



No, only that miracles which manifest by exegesis. , when heuristic processes overstep their limitations do such redundant/necessary relations begin to make sense.Eschatology , history demonstrate the formation of the process which entangles this relation, by an transcending the imminence into formative repetitious signs(images)' reintegrating.


Just thinking aloud

Bad faith: the result? Man's reduction of his special sense of relating to his originally intended place in a world based on a prior all consuming relationship .

How have the actual limits imposed in his reason effecthis own personal shutting down of access toward the benevolent energies which for so long have been able to sustain him?

That progressive delimitation created the inauthentic doubter, the faithless fool.

[Ichthus77]

God puts questions in us to draw us into dialogue (relationship) with himself.

[Meno_]

Matthew 18:3

[Ichthus77]

Once upon a time, there were two men in debt to the same moneylender. One owed him fifty dollars and the other five. And since they were unable to pay, he generously canceled both of their debts. Now, which one of them do you suppose will love him more? (The one who is forgiven more loves more.)

***

But the one who has little to be forgiven has only a little love to give.

[Meno_]

Once upon a time, there were two men in debt to the same moneylender. One owed him fifty dollars and the other five. And since they were unable to pay, he generously canceled both of their debts. Now, which one of them do you suppose will love him more? (The one who is forgiven more loves more.)

***

But the one who has little to be forgiven has only a little love to give.

One has to be forgiven for big debts, in order to return a great love.

Right. So love is like a. wager on the values exchanged, but great love deserves forgiveness on a larger, higher level.

Then those increasingly obliged to forgive more will cause the debtor to experience a congruently deeper love.

So quantity is not redeemable by how much value is traded, but how deeply such values are buried treasure.

[Ichthus77]

It is not a tit for tat situation, but a self=other situation. Forgiveness births gratitude - a happy soul that loves life. If it is received, it will be extended to others. If not extended, it shows as not received. And all who ask, receive. Even if you didn’t have the words.

It is a repeating theme throughout the Bible (history) and is alive. There is a dialectic birthing a synthesis (NOT new), so it requires advancing up (or deeper into) levels/parts/stages of understanding that, when put together and compared, birth understanding of the Whole that was always already there. The Whole is Love, unearned grace, peace, mercy (not real without demonstration). Justice is in line with the Love, hence the phrase, “The fires of hell are made of the love of God,” and he loves us despite the mud we wallow in, but (being Love) he does not leave us there. When we forget… we return to the vomit like a dog… we can expect fire.

I pray you are wise as a serpent, and innocent as a dove. Innocent does not equate to naive or weak… hence, wise. And wise does not equate to impure or corrupted. The weakness of being enslaved… is burned away… and we are freed to be vulnerable because we have the integrity (strength) of the Whole. He fills in our gaps. “Man is not an island” - not if fully alive! We’re never there, but we’re there in his eyes… so we’re on his Way. The Way is Home.

Can you fathom Being who is all-wise, not naive, not impure, true strength, completely innocent? We will fathom and enjoy Being forever. He will burn away our dross/nihil the further up/in we lean.

Every knee!

[Meno_]

Ichtus77 says:

"Can you fathom Being who is all-wise, not naive, not impure, true strength, completely innocent? We will fathom and enjoy Being forever. He will burn away our dross/nihil the further up/in we lean."



That was the idea, but it came down to an invisible being, who also has to play by conventional rules to survive. In a sense it morphed into this necessary dual aspect of everyone and no one and everyone won out.

By reason's limit, that Jesus the emissary was borne to redeem that Idea.That Idea transmitted and survived by miraculous means, are we here today, as signs of It's power and might.

Transvaluation failed to positively convince anyone, of what is coming, .

AI appears to have to prove that The Word can still substantiate It's Self.

(That is, if the substance could again become an alchemical transformation, through the incredible energy that can move mountains.[of diubt]).

[Ichthus77]

Please define:

“Transvaluation”

“Anyone”

“What is coming”

We just might agree.

[Meno_]

"Transvaluation failed to positively convince anyone, of what is coming, ."

[Ichthus77]

not enough context

cuz why

[Meno_]

"Transvaluation failed to positively convince anyone, of what is coming, ."

Reversely reductive of it's meaning( sign)

1 what is coming

What is coming may or may nit predicate on the idea behind 'The Word' The Word' is really synonymous with conscious self consciousness that is a necessary aspect of the transmission of images. The primal image of 'Man' non reductive eschatologicaly , therefore, it can not demonstrate a willful power's application toward It's transcendental reality.
In other words, the sustained image , as non transcendentiable can not be sustained, and is reinforced by the 18th century, as limited to a degree that would prevent such transmission.
That image as an idea through representation does not necessarily void the image as insubstantive, rather, it only reduces the image as represented within the reaches of receding spans of accountible signs .

This shortening of signs, nihilize the design that ultimately could reveal the interrelated gaps, that could substantiate the Word.

That self conscious relation to the imagination behind representation within the eschotologically proximate 'situation' progressively devalues meaning through deontologically 'fall' into classical and primitive structures of ideation.

This will suggest what is coming, more of the same, and really near to the idea of civilization becoming a totally reabsorbed presumption, held onto by the same idea that has been used of late to support the idea if God, that is 'if He does not exist, He should be created.

That God is Man's of the church's creation , has been advanced less vigorously by Frazer, and it is tempting to consider his point of view on a more moderate level.

The basic dynamic of reaching that far back to support a growing bubble between growing assymptotes of divergence is reaching a limit as well

[Meno_]

not enough context

cuz why

Working on it.

[Meno_]

"Transvaluation failed to positively convince anyone, of what is coming, ."

Reversely reductive of it's meaning( sign)

1 what is coming

What is coming may or may nit predicate on the idea behind 'The Word' The Word' is really synonymous with conscious self consciousness that is a necessary aspect of the transmission of images. The primal image of 'Man' non reductive eschatologicaly , therefore, it can not demonstrate a willful power's application toward It's transcendental reality.
In other words, the sustained image , as non transcendentiable can not be sustained, and is reinforced by the 18th century, as limited to a degree that would prevent such transmission.
That image as an idea through representation does not necessarily void the image as insubstantive, rather, it only reduces the image as represented within the reaches of receding spans of accountible signs .

This shortening of signs, nihilize the design that ultimately could reveal the interrelated gaps, that could substantiate the Word.

That self conscious relation to the imagination behind representation within the eschotologically proximate 'situation' progressively devalues meaning through deontologically 'fall' into classical and primitive structures of ideation.

This will suggest what is coming, more of the same, and really near to the idea of civilization becoming a totally reabsorbed presumption, held onto by the same idea that has been used of late to support the idea if God, that is 'if He does not exist, He should be created.

That God is Man's of the church's creation , has been advanced less vigorously by Frazer, and it is tempting to consider his point of view on a more moderate level.

The basic dynamic of reaching that far back to support a growing bubble between growing assymptotes of divergence is reaching a limit as well

2.Anyone / anyone



Here is the crux of the difference between the origin of our species as an apparent disjunct between Creation conceived through the transmission of The Word, and it's apparent antithesis as a mere development signature more in terms of a unique set of circumstances, which have more to do with adaptability then representational of basic formative sequences to enhance the overwhelming powers of nature to limit such adaptations.

Were the limits themselves self imposed or were they as far reaching as to stop progress at that limiting point be an axiomatic self reflected , method, by which man should nit venture above?

And here is where 'where we have come to- infringes on man's critical self absorbing or aborting efforts to choose it wager on a direction to take.
The every man versus Every Man is the sub caregorical choice where man&Superman can not remain in the same realm of relevance, and the final question is ether irrespective of man's individual choice, he is condemned to be kicked into a super/ supra natural state or can his will to survive necessitates him into a status quo.

[Meno_]

not enough context

cuz why

Working on it.

[Meno_]

"Transvaluation failed to positively convince anyone, of what is coming, ."

Reversely reductive of it's meaning( sign)

1 what is coming

What is coming may or may nit predicate on the idea behind 'The Word' The Word' is really synonymous with conscious self consciousness that is a necessary aspect of the transmission of images. The primal image of 'Man' non reductive eschatologicaly , therefore, it can not demonstrate a willful power's application toward It's transcendental reality.
In other words, the sustained image , as non transcendentiable can not be sustained, and is reinforced by the 18th century, as limited to a degree that would prevent such transmission.
That image as an idea through representation does not necessarily void the image as insubstantive, rather, it only reduces the image as represented within the reaches of receding spans of accountible signs .

This shortening of signs, nihilize the design that ultimately could reveal the interrelated gaps, that could substantiate the Word.

That self conscious relation to the imagination behind representation within the eschotologically proximate 'situation' progressively devalues meaning through deontologically 'fall' into classical and primitive structures of ideation.

This will suggest what is coming, more of the same, and really near to the idea of civilization becoming a totally reabsorbed presumption, held onto by the same idea that has been used of late to support the idea if God, that is 'if He does not exist, He should be created.

That God is Man's of the church's creation , has been advanced less vigorously by Frazer, and it is tempting to consider his point of view on a more moderate level.

The basic dynamic of reaching that far back to support a growing bubble between growing assymptotes of divergence is reaching a limit as well

2.Anyone / anyone



Here is the crux of the difference between the origin of our species as an apparent disjunct between Creation conceived through the transmission of The Word, and it's apparent antithesis as a mere development signature more in terms of a unique set of circumstances, which have more to do with adaptability then representational of basic formative sequences to enhance the overwhelming powers of nature to limit such adaptations.

Were the limits themselves self imposed or were they as far reaching as to stop progress at that limiting point be an axiomatic self reflected , method, by which man should nit venture above?

And here is where 'where we have come to- infringes on man's critical self absorbing or aborting efforts to choose it wager on a direction to take.
The every man versus Every Man is the sub caregorical choice where man&Superman can not remain in the same realm of relevance, and the final question is ether irrespective of man's individual choice, he is condemned to be kicked into a super/ supra natural state or can his will to survive necessitates him into a status quo.

3.Transvaluation



This concept is either forged by man's idea as representing an aesthetic coming through an image of overcoming everyman's image of himself in relation to a yet to be defined hope fir a future of himself , belonging in an eternity, where his imminance is the illusiin, within which he condemns himself to a unique but only chance to self concieve, or to Any One, who remains as conceiving his self image as the illusion that participates in the mystique of eternally forming and reforming.

This irony is the crux that brings mankind into the basic moral and ethical dilemma which perpetuates the near certain game of toying with his own extinction.