Back to Basics

1999-12-17 11:59:00

Glad to see new members and lurkers coming forward despite the conflicts we have been going through. Good to see you posting again BJ and also look forward to more of John Kosior. Welcome back Susi. I thought you had gone and there you were lurking in the background all along.

I apologize if my lack of answering your questions was the cause of your just about leaving. I cannot answer all the questions put to me and many wish I would answer fewer of them and just proceed with the planned teachings.

The questions I answer are pretty much a judgment call. Then too sometimes I put questions aside and by the time I get around to them the subject has moved on and the answer may not fit in with the discussion. The questions I do answer are those which I believe to be the most interesting to the group.

For those who wish to ask questions here are some suggested guidelines.

(1) Make the question(s) clear and brief. Some of you lately are asking a series of questions in one post that would take a book to cover thoroughly. Make your question clear and concise. Sometimes it is difficult to know exactly what you want to know.

(2) Try and keep your question in alignment with the current topic of discussion. If you have questions about a subject not under discussion it may be best to wait until we arrive at that subject.

There are exceptions of course.

Sterling, for instance, has arrived and sends the teachings on to his own mailing list group with an LDS background. He has several questions that are of import to a whole group and thus I felt it was worthwhile to leave the current subject of discovery for a while to help his group orient itself. Even so discovery of truth is a broad subject and his questions did fit in to a degree.

Nevertheless, I hope to guide the group to post more on subject as time goes on.

Susi says:
"JJ you mentioned that the list was side tracked with the principles of finding truth. This side track was caused by one of my posts. In this post I mentioned that it probably was not in keeping with your teachings.....and I do apologize for taking you off your intended direction of teaching."

JJ
No apology necessary. I don't remember complaining about you sidetracking us. Actually, you guided us toward an important subject that needs discussed and I am grateful rather than irritated.

Susi:
"JJ I have a question for you and I hope you will answer it. Does John or Rick or Xavier or any other person on or off list have your consent to speak for you or insinuate that they are? There have been times that others have done this and nothing is said by you...do you condone this behavior?"

If anyone taps into my thought through the Oneness Principle and believes they can speak my mind it is fine with me if they try. If they are wrong I will correct them. So far, (as far as I can remember) everyone who has tried it has been very close. The three you mention (as well as some others) have a good sense of how I may think on certain matters.

On the other hand, a number of members have misinterpreted my words. One misinterpretation lately was about my teaching on meeting emotion with emotion. Some seemed to think that I was suggesting that if one person gets emotional in a negative way then we should too. Nothing could be farther from the truth and if you will reread my post on the subject this should become clear.

My point was that if you are trying to reason through a subject that another feels very emotional about, that we must not use reason alone in communicating with the person. We must show the person we understand by responding with some feeling ourselves. In this case I am talking about guiding feelings with the mind which hopefully is guided by Spirit. In such a case there is communication and resolution.

The guiding point of all communication, even when we are communicating on an emotional level, should be the highest we can perceive. Remember, our feelings are a vehicle, not our real selves.