2007-8-9 03:39:00
My Friends,
Before I comment on your recent posts I thought I would post the rest of the dialog I had on White Magic. As you can see, even some ex-Mormons who consider themselves open-minded are not too friendly to the term.
Reader:
"No, you are totally missing the point. Try just stepping back for a minute. Let's take a look again at the parable of Jesus spitting on the ground and rubbing the mud in the eye of the blind so afterwards he would wash and be clean.
"So, here it is.... some mud for your eye.
"Notice how you, JJ, promulgated what that meant in a very literal way, notwithstanding it was to promote your idea of magic ritual (Jesus as the ultimate white magician).
"Now compare that to the parable... that it means that one is to see things differently... that one is to cleanse oneself from that which is earthly... one's view that the world is great, grand and something that is essential to life.
"And you say that symbolism points to unreality? Pretty funny."
JJ:
I'm also a big believer in symbolism, but I would never use symbolism to negate something written as historical fact.
Jesus healing the blind man may have some symbolism behind it but it was not written as a parable as was the Prodigal Son. It was written as historical fact and you take it upon yourself to alter a scripture into that which it is NOT stated to be.
How far will you take this?
Are all the miracles merely symbols and not history? Was Jesus just a regular guy who did no miracles but his teachings evolved into false stories? Was the resurrection a parable? Or maybe you are with the crowd that believes that Jesus was not a true historical character that his life was just a parable/story made up by the Romans.
I am open to the fact that any scripture could be in error but until I have a reason to believe otherwise I will accept historical presentations as they stand and as this story stands Jesus did use ceremonial magic.
It seems that if you do not like the way something reads you change it into symbolism that fits in with your preconceived notions.
Reader:
"You ought to come clean too and come out and tell where you have been.... into masonry big time, not much different than the Smith family, and that you believe it's what makes the world go around."
JJ:
You will have much difficulty putting me into a box. I am not a member of the Masons nor have ever I been. I have never been to a Masonry meeting nor sought membership nor have I ever had any interest in membership. I am not a member of anything, not even AARP. (Now that would be suspicious).
Reader quoting me:
"How about my real credo which is this: Follow the highest you know and move forward with pure intent. You will make mistakes but because your heart is pure you will correct them and then move upon the path with greater and greater accuracy until you manifest the fullness of the Son of God."
JJ:
You would think that it would be difficult to criticize such a harmless statement but you make this attempt:
Reader:
"Sounds good. Well, except that has kept a lot of people imprisoned for a long, long time."
JJ:
And which part of this statement imprisons? Is it following the highest you know? What do you do then; follow the lowest of your carnal mind?
Or does correcting mistakes imprison? If you believe this it would mean you stubbornly persist in spite of error. That is a strange path to liberation.
Reader:
"'True intent' is a credo that I think we like to lie about to ourselves and that we do such a skillful job that we come to believe it as our first article of faith."
JJ:
But I was not talking about false intent, but true intent. We may not all have the capacity to see true intent in others but we can see it in ourselves if we look.
Reader:
"There's got to be more. Our experience of the past should scream to us that this credo can't be right.
"Well, except it might be right for us. For a time.... for a time..."
JJ:
So you are so evolved you no longer need sincerity and to be true to yourself? Neither do you need to correct mistakes. You just believe in doing this "for a time."
That's quite an admission. It explains a lot.
Reader:
"I was trying to make the point that being sincere, or rather, believing that we are sincere, is one of the big traps we fall into. There's irony in this, because a few days back I posted a link to a devout LDS's website where he discussed this very thing... how we believe we cannot be mislead if we are sincerely sincere."
JJ:
The odd thing is that you made this response as a criticism of my credo and the word "sincere" was NOT even in it.
If you argue with me you need to use words and concepts that I do say, not what I do not say.
Just so your memory will be refreshed here is my credo (for want of a better word) again:
"Follow the highest you know and move forward with pure intent. You will make mistakes but because your heart is pure you will correct them and then move upon the path with greater and greater accuracy until you manifest the fullness of the Son of God."
Sincerity is a different animal than the quality of being pure in heart. One whose heart is pure does not have an impure mixture of ego and glamour corrupting the intent the seeker is attempting to harmonize with the spirit of Christ within the heart.
One who is sincere may be quite corrupted from the ego but it is still much better to be sincere than insincere.
Reader:
"The point I was trying to bring forth is that we were sincere Mormons, weren't we?... and now how do we see that? Most of us see our former haunts as a mistake and, doing that, do we not go off and make more of the same mistakes? Where does the truth lie, so to speak? Well, maybe it's embedded right there in our own sincere sincerity.
"No, I don't believe it's what we call sincere at all. It's pride. Pride is what it really is. But, we can't see that because we are too prideful to think of it as anything except sincerity."
JJ:
Sincere people may have pride or ego but to equate the two is akin to saying something like this.
Hitler liked dogs; therefore dogs are bad for they must have caused Hitler's behavior.
People who are sincere make many mistakes but the mistakes are not caused by sincerity.
Sincerity will lead us away from the ego, not deeper into it. It is illusion, ego and glamour that cause the problem you are concerned with here, not sincerity.
Reader:
"Dogma lives and grows on the roots of sincerity and devout belief. Embedded within that is devout belief in sincere belief. That, I think, is where the lie is born."
JJ:
The problem of dogma is not caused by sincerity, but preconceived notions, intolerance and a closed mind. Sincerity will lead one away from dogma when the truth is found. Case in point: A sincere approach led me away from the dogma in the LDS church.
If one is not sincere then he must be insincere. Since you do not like sincerity then one can only surmise you embrace the insincere approach for yourself.
Reader:
"How many sincere folks do we find among our former LDS friends? Even those who are prone to lie openly do that with a heck of a lot of sincere belief that they are doing that because it's necessary."
JJ:
As I said sincere people make their mistakes but one who is pure in heart will not lie to promote a belief, else he would not be pure in heart.
Reader:
"At any rate, I think the paragraph that JJ called his 'credo' is a dearly-held dogma by a lot of folks."
JJ:
For the second time I challenge you to show us where the dogma lies and do it without corrupting and altering my words.
Sigh... You will not be able to.
Reader:
"I am suggesting that it might be questioned and I personally think that it's a big lie. I am glad JJ brought it up."
JJ:
Anything is open to question but there is no big lie in my statement; neither can you find one.
Reader:
"Let's get back to JJ's credo which might be summed up as to 'follow the highest within us...' being sincere to that which we find within. What's wrong with it? Well, back to the two aspects of innerness, so to speak. One of them constantly leads us without... back outside to the literal-sensual."
JJ:
You misquoted me again and the difference is significant. The highest within us is God and if we could all see and follow this all would be well, but there are veils between us and God and few are able to do this. Many are not sure if they are following God or not or on the right or wrong path. What are they to do?
They are to "follow the highest they know." (correct wording) Now the highest they know may still be wrong but if they continue on this path and follow corrections as they are revealed then eventually they will find the truth and the God (or highest) within.
Reader:
"Take that parable of Jesus spitting on the ground then anointing the eyes of the blind man. JJ claims that this is a 'fact' and that it is an example of ceremonial magic. Well, isn't that a literal interpretation of it? Compare that to the same story being a parable that's personally applicable."
JJ:
There is nothing wrong with seeing symbology in the story but to deny that the event was an actual happening and only a parable defies logic - that is unless you have received a personal revelation from God that the literal miracle did not happen and is deceitfully presented as an actual happening.
So did you receive such a revelation? If not then why do you reject this as probable history?
Reader:
"I think the literal interpretation of JJ's will bring suffering to the soul... more spit in the eye, so to speak, more blindness... because one fails at the last part... cleansing oneself."
JJ:
I haven't even given my interpretation so there is nothing you can disagree with here as much as you want to.
To take a historical event and say this is what happened does not involve any symbolic interpretation. Now for reasons unknown you seem to think that it was not a historical event but a parable only. Perhaps you have seen no miracles in your life and do not think they are possible.
Reader:
"Ok. So, if we can't rely on sincerity and what we see as the highest within us, then what? Well, for starters, I would say that a higher level is brutal honesty.... being brutally honest with ourselves."
JJ:
WOW!!! You spend many words taking issue with me and disagreeing with me and then recreating the credo I gave to Babel but in different words. There's got to be one of your parables in this.
In other words, you wind up recommending a pure heart and being true to ourselves just as I said.
The question is, are you being honest enough with yourself to even know whether you disagree with me or not? Or do you just feel you disagree because my vibration is so different than yours?
Reader:
"As a result of that, at least, we might be able to see how what we thought was being sincere, was never that at all.... it was merely an excuse... a lie that we believed... that kept us where we were... and that all of the many detours we took were the same thing dressed up in different clothing to fool us."
JJ:
Exactly as I said; Follow the highest you know and make corrections as they are seen, even if it is misplaced sincerity.
Reader:
"Take leaving the church and trying to find one's way afterwards. Look at the people around you. What are they? Still Mormons. Still believing in the same thing that they say they left. Nothing has changed except the venue. Consecration never happened. Giving up never occurred. Washing oneself of all of that reliance on what is outside of us never came to be."
JJ:
Agreed.
Reader:
"Honestly, do we really believe Christ is a witch? Doesn't that tug somewhere at the soul?... screaming to us... that there has to be something more great than this?"
JJ:
A witch is neither a white nor a black magician, just a wannabe magician. No one said Christ was a witch. Argue with what I do say, not with what I do not say.
Another reader wrote:
"Magicians (white or black) who exercise their own will are oblivious to the will of God, so you see, you will still run into the same exact unresolvable problems that exist in other belief systems (religion, politics, etc.)."
JJ:
A white magician must tune into the will of God or he will not be a white magician. A white magician uses the powers of God to accomplish the magical work of the soul to inspire others to seek the kingdom of God within. In following this path miracles may or may not happen depending on the need.
Intent alone is not enough to produce a white magician but he must be unwaveringly focused on the light and love of God within.
Reader:
"These 3 points you (Susan) posted below are a staple diet for any Satanist."
JJ:
I don't think so.
Reader:
"So, are you (Susan) and JJ, Satanists, Gnostic, eastern star?"
JJ:
No. Are you a cannibal or a vampire?
Copyright © 2007 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved