posted March 27, 2005 05:29 PM         

quote:

---

Sin is defined as "lack of love'

---

It is? By whom? A course in miracles? Sounds like just another religion to me.

quote:

---

THE OPPOSITE OF LOVE IS FEAR

---

The opposite of love is fear? Not sure I'm buying that either.

I'm surprised this thread, started nearly three years ago, still surfaces to the top now and then.

But anyway Amanda, I appreciate your efforts to spread the peace...at least that is what it seems like your post is trying to accomplish.

posted March 27, 2005 08:38 PM         

My point of the quotes is.... to think your being attacked is to give power to fear. Fear IS the opposite of love. I don't see where you fail to understand that simple quote. Since most people who want to spread love think that LOVE IS ALL, well than how can fear, hate, or anything that is not love exist EXCEPT BY OUR OWN ILLUSIONS MADE BY OUR EGO.
it's not even a religion as much as philosophically understanding the basis of love. To truly understand love is to be fearless because you KNOW IT NOW that love is everything AND DON'T GIVE POWER TO WHAT DOESN'T FUNDAMENTALLY EXIST. I think GOOBERZ delves in to this exact same idea so.........not sure the point you are trying to make other than trying to classify "A Course in Miracles" as a "religion". Funny how Linda Goodman talks about creating miracles, I have a dream about this book, walk up to it first time looking for it in a bookstore, it's about MIRACLES, BY THE FOUNDATION FOR INNER PEACE, and you fail to see any coincidences and label it as b.s. If the same quotes were Linda Goodman though, then what?????

i'm not saying it's another religion just trying to get to the fundamental meaning of love anyway......

By the way I think me quoting "A Course In Miracles" right after the line shows exactly who defined sin as a lack of love cmon wake up.

This book was supposedly written a group of people who heard a "voice" and proceeded to write it all down and this book is what enveloped.

posted March 27, 2005 08:44 PM         

Although Christian in statement, the Course deals with universal spiritual themes. It emphasizes that it is but one version of the universal curriculum. There are many others, this one differing from them only in form. They all lead to God in the end.
"A Course in Miracles"

posted March 27, 2005 09:06 PM         

This is a topic i could philosophise on for days.

Love IS the opposite of fear. To be saintlike - buddhalike is to walk in a such an extreme calm state of knowing that it creates a calmness for those people around them. That is absolute fearlessness, to mentally not even recognize the existence. That is the true divine free flowing love that is, a state TOTALLY OPPOSITE OF FEAR. Nothing is going to take a saint out of this total loving state because he KNOWS it's illusion and LOVE IS ALL.

posted March 28, 2005 04:27 AM         

quote:

---

So when the tables are turned and we start ruling the world religion will change completly.

---

That is merely an opinion presented as a fact. It is an assumption based on her own theories about life and where the youth is headed. Regardless of whether you or I agree with her, she has every right to belive whatever she wishes. And simply presenting her opinions as a fact does not make her full of malice, and it does not mean she posted it only to annoy others. Do we all need to preface every post with "this is only my opinion" ? Or, logically, can it be expected that, on a website where in we are all free to share our ideas and opinions that we would actually do that?

quote:

---

There won't be single thing you can say or do when that happens.

---

Again, I don't see malice or a desire to irritate or annoy anyone with that statement. It is also her opinion, stated as a fact. One could easily interpret the intent of the sentence to be that we would not be able to "say or do anything ( to change the situation )when that happens" in order to achieve more clarity. It is a bold statement and perhaps in some ways immature, but it is not malicious and neither is there some sort of a grudge being expressed in it.

Simply adding more words to a definition that essentially mean the same things ... because they are used to define the same word ... to suit your own purposes doesn't clarify the meaning of your interpretation of another's post. I could easily put a word behind anything anyone says and say it's supported by one of the words that defines the word I chose but, without actually using context, syntax, diction, imagery, symbolism, tone, etc. to support my choice of word then I really can't expect anyone to understand my choice, particularly when, once someone does take those other things into account, the word I chose seems like an exaggeration used to make my opinion more dramatic in its effect.

Also, using an Americentric perspective to interpret someone else's opinions is more than a little unfair. There is an entire world of people. Unless Starlover specifically stated that the youth in America feel like she does and that only in America would a change be caused ... why would you assume that she only meant in America? She did, in fact say, when the youth "rule(s) the world" so, in essence, what does it matter that "we" live in America and that in America people vote if she is referencing the youth of the entire world?

I also don't think her mentioning TV is in any way intended to iritate and annoy DarkAngel. Since you asked a question that suggests you didn't understand that portion of her post (ie, "why with the tv part?") I'll add my interpretation. She is essentially saying that she no longer wishes to continue a discussion with DarkAngel and that, going along with her opinion that she will one day be influential and famous in regards to her ideas and theories, the only time DarkAngel may hear a message from her that will be directed at her (or seemingly directed at her when in reality it will be directed to the entire audience ... "a different story") is when Starlover achieves a level of fame which will allow her to speak on television. I personally don't find it irritating or annoying to have someone that I'm insulting tell me that they no longer wish to continue a discussion with me. Nor do I find it irritating or annoying for them to tell me that if I ever hear from them again it will be when they are famous and on tv ... even if I think their ideas about their future are ridiculous and laughable, why in the world would them telling me that irritate or annoy me? Maybe I don't get as easily irritated as you do?

I've heard of A Course in Miracles. Isn't that somehow related to Alice A. Bailey? I'm glad you've found something you believe in. I do hope your intentions with those quotations was not to support you as being "right" in your beliefs because we could all quote any number of things that would be in disagreement to support ourselves. However, I'm not going to assume that that's what you were doing ... I was just wondering why you felt the desire to post that, of all places, in this thread on that post. Nevertheless, thanks for sharing part of what you believe to be true.

Personally, I believe the opposite of Love is Hate and that the opposite of Fear is Faith ... but that's just my opinion ... see, I'll clarify it for you. (You reminded me of Patrick Swayze and the gym(?) teacher in Donnie Darko with that, to be honest.) To truly KNOW Love you must have Faith and in order to have Faith you must vanquish your Fear, otherwise your Fear will lead you away from Love and closer to Hate. After all, it's not like you can Love someone or, in contrast, Fear them ... no, no, you can Love someone (one extreme) or Hate them (another extreme). Faith and Fear are rather like the vehicles that will move you from one extreme to the other. KNOWING is Faith, believing and hoping taken to a higher level ... it is the total opposite of Fear, which is full of doubts and disbeliefs. So when someone gets rid of their Fear and begins to KNOW (ie, have Faith) that separation is an illusion, then Love is ALL and Hate is nothing.

Blessed Be.

posted March 28, 2005 08:53 AM         

quote:

---

You reminded me of Patrick Swayze and the gym(?) teacher in Donnie Darko with that, to be honest

---

Right On, Eleanore. I do enjoy your posts.

If LOVE IS ALL, then that very equation negates having an opposite. To use your turn of phrase, JohnSmith, I don't know how you don't get that.