Is everything permissible?

[angellous_evangellous]

Oh yeah..I would also have sex in public..Again as long as no one was around.

Blessings

Dallas

Diogenes the Cynic and his wife Hipparchia did that!

EDIT: "When no one else is around" really is not "public."

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Hey Now!! Are you insinutaing I lack wisdom!!! :drool:....LOL!

I think sometimes we are just not thinking or being selfish and temproraily loose sight of how our actions affect or can possibly affect negatively that of the greater good...

Blessings

Dallas

Running a red light would illustrate the point nicely.

 

[DallasApple]

Running a red light would illustrate the point nicely.

Am I the only one who will confess????/ :bonk:

Blessings

Dallas

 

[lunamoth]

From studying the law.

OK, guess I'll have to acquiesce to your authority on this.

Are you sure about that? What harm to you want to impose on someone that is checked solely because you've been told it is "unlawful"?

Just because I sense an internal moral ethic does not mean that this can not also be considered a 'law.' I think divine 'laws' are an outward sign of our attempts to live out our inner sense of morality in a social context. So, I think that the fruit of the Spirit is very much the fabric of our life, an outpouring from God, and that the 'laws' are manmade expressions of this.

It's the secret mystery of the personal remedy. The symbols point inward.

I'm not getting you.

Why "must" they? What would you do if not constrained by the law?

Because although we are individuals we also live in societies with people who do not always agree with us about everything; life is not all black and white. We benefit from our life in community, but that life comes at the cost of us getting to do everything we want. The collective will of the community can be 'highjacked' when we decide to submit to a central authority for the benefits it can give us (protection, efficiency, leisure), and when that happens renewal is needed through the voice of prophets.

Rules and laws are a sign of a lack of faith in unconditional love ‑ and a symptom of the decline of life. Does that mean everyone is free of all rules and laws? That’s part of the secret of the message: freedom from the Law is only for one who awakens to life, and it has nothing to do with the obligations or perceptions of others. Inevitably, all remedies are personal and internal. To talk about them "objectively" or propose or view them as affecting movements, ideologies, communities and institutions is to strip the awakening of its essential meaning. The Kingdom of God is within . . . and it's right now.

This I wholeheartedly agree with. :yes:

The “fruit of the Spirit” Paul describes in Galatians 5 (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control) become manifest the more I am awakened to the spirit of love carrying my thinking and my identity past my self - not because of obligation, but because this fruit is the natural product of a life lived abundantly.

The Law never was and never will be an adequate substitute for life lived in fullness. That's what Paul is getting at in Chapters 7 and 8 - the sin nature (self awareness) depends on the law. But the spirit moves us beyond our self and into unity (with others and with “God”) eliminating the separation mythologically indicated by “the Fall and its fruits - judgment, shame and fear - mediated through the law, rather than the direct experience of the Divine.

And I agree here too (and with the Tao, although I snipped it).

Brendan, it seems that the only place we differ is in that I see Love and the Spirit as gifts to us from God and see God as Something More & Other, where you see these things as emanations of your inner self (correct me where I am wrong).

 

[DallasApple]

Diogenes the Cynic and his wife Hipparchia did that!

EDIT: "When no one else is around" really is not "public."

Well how is that any different than running a red light when no one else is coming ??

Blessings

Dallas

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Well how is that any different than running a red light when no one else is coming ??

Blessings

Dallas

No pun intended I am sure.

 

[DallasApple]

No pun intended I am sure.

What???

Blessings

Dallas

 

[doppelganger]

I'm not getting you.

I know. And this divergence is the point at which we cease communicating with one another.

Brendan, it seems that the only place we differ is in that I see Love and the Spirit as gifts to us from God and see God as Something More & Other, where you see these things as emanations of your inner self (correct me where I am wrong).

I see either, both and neither.

 

[BruceDLimber]

>Is everything permissible?

Not in any civilized society I've ever heard of!

Let alone in any organized religion.

Peace,

Bruce

 

[doppelganger]

>Is everything permissible?

Not in any civilized society I've ever heard of!

Let alone in any organized religion.

Peace,

Bruce

Perhaps you aren't listening very carefully, Bruce.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Dopp,

Is everything permissible?If there's anything I want to do, can't it always be justified and called an outgrowth of "the truth"? Are the only constraints those of practical expediency? What about those who stand outside the consequences of betraying the adherence to social reality . . . .the sovereigns like kings, presidents, and multi-national corporations? Are they only constrained by the perception people have of them? And if that perception is fluid and controllable through symbols, groupthink and mythology, is that any constraint at all upon the sovereigns' decisions?

Not clear about your REFERENCE point.
personally no one stands outside his karma and so inescapable.
Love & rgds

 

[doppelganger]

Not clear about your REFERENCE point.
personally no one stands outside his karma and so inescapable.
Love & rgds

Wise as always zenzero. The essence of the question is bringing to light the mind's habit of dissociating its self - through the appearance of "moral" choice - from its karma.

 

[Ozzie]

What constrains sovereigns Dopp? Bush was constrained by his advice, Obama is a loose cannon in that respect.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Ozzie,

Soverigns are also human so is Obama or Osama.
Karma is same for everyone.
Love & rgds

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1 Cor. 6
"Everything is permissible for me"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"—but I will not be mastered by anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1 Cor. 10
"Everything is permissible"—but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible"—but not everything is constructive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Often attributed as the last words of Hassan-i Sabbah
"Nothing is true; Everything is permissible"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dostoevsky via Ivan Karamazov
"Everything is permissible"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tao te Ching
The Tao doesn't take sides;
it gives birth to both good and evil.
The Master doesn't take sides;
she welcomes both saints and sinners.

Is everything permissible? If there's anything I want to do, can't it always be justified and called an outgrowth of "the truth"? Are the only constraints those of practical expediency? What about those who stand outside the consequences of betraying the adherence to social reality . . . .the sovereigns like kings, presidents, and multi-national corporations? Are they only constrained by the perception people have of them? And if that perception is fluid and controllable through symbols, groupthink and mythology, is that any constraint at all upon the sovereigns' decisions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sun Tzu, The Art of War
The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete
accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him
regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.


Quote:
"The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders--tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." -Herman Goering, (Reichsmarschall, Marshal of the German Empire)

"What luck for the rulers that people do not think." - Adolph Hitler

Then there's Jim Steinman:

Everything is permitted.
Everything is allowed.
All our gods we have outwitted.

"Everything is Permitted," from Meat Loaf's Dead Ringer album.

We are free to do whatever we would like to do. We just have to be ready to accept the consequences. As Zenzero said, "Karma is inescapable." If we are unable to accept that, than we are already creating our dogma and putting ourselves outside the social reality. Those who put themselves in this position and seem to get away with it (kings, presidents, corporations, and the like) run the same risk and may well be none the happier for it.

As the Tao Te Ching makes the point that when wealth fills a hall, it cannot be kept safe, so is it true for guilt (which still exists in the social reality no longer occupied by the guilty).

(By using guilt, I run the risk of losing an argument for moral relativity--but guilt certainly still exists within any individual that must interact socially, even if they put themselves outside that society.)

 

[BadBeast]

Everything is permissible. There is no real authority, only things which you choose to submit to. (It is permissible to ''not submit'' too)
However, just because everything is permissible doesn't exclude you from having to accept the potential consequences of your actions.