As you mentioned earlier, it's OK to interpret scripture but altering it to
fit that interpretation goes too far. Buck should have never followed it with *
Mathew 18:20*. In my view, FWIW, scripture is supposed to be a fixed point,
like the north star and interpretation should move around it according to the
times and the capacity of those that read it, understand it. Charlie Lutze
spoke about the meaning of the *cross*, that it was more than a symbol of the
crucifixion. It was a vertical bar with a horizontal bar. The horizontal
represented life, beginning to end and the vertical was life's depth. Where
they intersect is where we are.Is it high or is it low? Scripture can mean
different things to people based on their *awareness*, so it should never be
altered.
From: authfri...@yahoo.com authfri...@yahoo.com
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 8:00 AM
Subject: RE: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: The latest shooter liked to meditate
Thank you, Mike. Nice to get some agreement for a change!
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Dit-dit- dit-dittos!
From: authfriend@... authfriend@...
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 12:08 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] RE: RE: The latest shooter liked to meditate
There has been a great deal of twisting by TMers of Christian Scripture
(including by Maharishi) to make it appear to be consonant with the TM
teaching. I'm strongly against that. The TM teaching ought to be able to stand
on its own.
There are plenty of naive TMers who buy into it, and I think it's important to
be scrupulous about our use of Scripture so as not to mislead them. As I told
Buck, he could easily have cited what he wrote as a free paraphrase or loose
interpretation of Matthew 18:20 according to TM, and let everyone decide on
their own whether that made sense, rather than citing it as Matthew 18:20..
In mainstream Christianity, Jesus is not Christ Consciousness or the One
Self or the Unified Field. Granted at this point he wouldn't be embodied,
but he is understood as a divine personal being to whom one can relate
directly, not just a type of higher consciousness.
I also think to equate There am I in the midst of them with The Unified
Field will be found multiplied in effect is a huge stretch, especially since
the Unified Field is impersonal, whereas Jesus is personal.
If you make it abstract enough, you can equate just about anything with
anything else, no matter how far apart the concrete versions are. At a certain
point, that sort of attempt becomes underhanded and deliberately misleading.
And it shows a lack of respect for the original.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Buck is being playful. Does anyone really imagine that the following quote
could be lifted from the New Testament? “Where two or three are gathered in
effective transcending meditation there the Unified Field will be found
multiplied in effect”.
And, as happens, as an interpretation of what the New Testament writer was
getting at, Buck's is an arguable (loose) interpretation. For where two or
three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Matthew 18:20
in effective transcending meditation= together in my name. . . What are
the Christians doing together in his name if not praying, ie, meditating?
Matthew isn't talking about singing third-rate hymns.
the Unified Field will be found multiplied in effect= am I in the midst of
them. . . The I here does not refer to Jesus, a particular first-century
rabbi, but to Christ Consciousness, ie, the One Self, ie, the Unified Field.
Perhaps Buck should do a complete translation of the Bible . . .
PS: rereally needs to come to FF and see what a real bliss ninny is like!: if
we could go back in a time machine to AD 50 it would be funny if all the early
Christians we met were in bliss ninny mode.
--- In fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com, sharelong60@... wrote:
Exactly Jason! Buck was simply being playful. It's clear to me he wasn't
lying because it was not his intention to deceive. Nor was he blaspheming as
Xeno suggested. Maybe Xeno was being playful too? Anyway, Buck wasn't even
being a bliss ninny. If anybody thinks somebody on FFL is a bliss ninny, that
anybody really needs to come to FF and see what a real bliss ninny is like! I
stand with Buck and Col Leed. Sgt. Share
