Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Originally Posted By: Ellis
... As you say there are many possibilities. In fact I think we may in fact be closer philosophically than at first seems possible!
This, IMO, demonstrates the value of dialogue--a spiritual attitude of win/win, often absent in most forums. Too often we allow the ego (the unconscious psyche) to determine how the drama if life plays out.

Trying to create a win win scenario is how the ego tries to isolate drama and control how life plays out.
Compassion is unconditional love and wisdom combined. It does not determine what is helpful and what is not helpful by getting emotionally attached to whether someone feels good about being ignorant of reality or whether they feel good about being enlightened.
Truth is not dependent on illusions of judgment based on whether someone feels they have won or gained something or lost something.
If someone loses their ignorance they win knowledge and that can lead to experience and wisdom. But if one decides to play moderator based on illusions of ignorance to keep everyone in the same playing field of ignorant awareness, that person does a disservice to himself and to others.

Some play too heavily in emotional attachments to how things look and try to control and manipulate based on definitions of social etiquette that is lost in the ignorance of ego.

Unconditional love sets no conditions. It supports the destruction of ignorance in favor of expanded awareness, and to the ego it never feels good, nor does the ego feel it wins anything, when its boundaries of ignorance and limitation are threatened.

That was also in the message given by Jesus in Matthew and in Luke:

Lk 9:60 Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

If you want to create a spiritual win win scenario then it would not include the soothing of the feelings and mindset of what he called the dead or those attached to the emotionalism of the body and the world around those emotions and feelings that are the ego. It would in fact require one to act as he did. Also exemplified in Matthew:

34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

The destruction of ignorance and of the ego is the spiritual sword that is wielded by God. This can never be accomplished by anyone with an ego. An ego cannot kill another ego for the Ego knows nothing of spirituality and God, and that is the greatest religious and philosophical boundary man lives with. Praching God without knowing God.
Spirituality is not true spirituality when manipulated or dictated by anyone with an ego that stands between spirit and the manifest and judges what is real based on personal philosophy and belief.

It's all God, so its all good. If it's all God everyone wins even when they think they are losing. In fact one stands to gain something greater if they lose what wasn't serving them in the beliefs that hold one to limitation.
Without being One with God, the ego projects degrees of God in their visual surroundings, and judgment is not of God but of belief and limitation.

Do you think you are without ego Rev. and capable of clearly recognizing a spiritual win win situation in everything, or do you believe God comes in packages that suit your personal definitions of spiritual win win scenario's?

Is your philosophy built of natural and universal laws that apply to everyone and everything or is it of a personal nature tuned to your beliefs and your ego?

I know your a proponent for what you call the Golden Rule, but is the rule "God's" rule or "ego's rule", and how would you tell the difference?

If you want to know if these are Rhetorical questions I would like to apply the dictionary definition of the word Rhetoric to imply these specific ideas:

2. the art or science of all specialized literary uses of language in prose or verse, including the figures of speech.
3. the study of the effective use of language.
4. the ability to use language effectively.

Keeping the personal out of language more effectively allows it to come from a deeper awareness of thought then the reactive surface of the mind and its emotional shortcomings.
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!