Welcome to the About Words website. Below is a brief audio introduction to this site.
Did you know that one of the most popular words on the internet is God?
Repenting is simply to admit an instance of fear or being scared that one has been terrified or shamed in to hiding. Repenting does not require communicating with another person. I just notice that it is an instance of terror to say something like “what should not exist is stress hormones which can produce heightened alertness in animals including humans which we can call fright.”
Any rejection of some aspect of “God’s creation” as “a mistake” is arrogant sin. It is shame to say “that should not be.”
Further, shame should exist. We know this because it DOES exist. Also, repenting of our shame is simple and easy, but very rare. Immense amounts of energy can be invested in the avoiding of shame.
As for belief, belief does not replace understanding. When understanding is present, then faith is the automatic result (the fruit)… as in a faith that, even without already knowing, one can learn. That is a total contrast to “belief” or “positive thinking.” Those are typically methods that frightened people use to pretend not to be frightenened.
It is fine to be frightened. It is fine to ask for help or explore other new actions because of the motivation of desperation or anxiety. That is intelligent. Fear is intelligent. Even extreme forms of fear like paranoia and shame are intelligent, but they can be very inefficient.
The idea of being attentive to the actual physical experience (of stress or distress) as “the most effective form of repentance” is an important note that you added. Instead of being terrified of a physical experience as “shameful or sinful” because someone else might call it fear, we can recognize that in the lives of many people, we assessed that it was unsafe to display fear openly, so we repressed the display of fear (like in our facial expressions or our gestures). That anxious, ongoing repression of fear is paranoia.
Celebrate fear. Admit past paranoia. Admit any past condemnation of fear as “something that should not be.” That is all trivial and sinful. It does not matter now.
Recognize that there are times to keep one’s physical experience private as well as times when being attentive to one’s physical experience is uniquely valuable. Experience yourself with total respect. You are holy. Your past has always been perfect. You just were intelligent enough to hide elements of your past in shame when you experienced distress.
To be cautious in the midst of animosity is not shameful. It is wisdom. To disengage from trivial antagonisms is courageous.
Any past distress was perfect and holy. Any condemnation of the past was also trivial, sinful, perfect, and holy.
The above was written in response to the following: (published by Hope Johnson here: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10201647056817143&set=a.1268571653323.37765.1800792202&type=1 )
“For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God”. This is not a judgment, and it doesn’t mean anyone has done wrong.
Every child is conceived in God’s glory, and birthed into this environment where they are immediately impressed with fear – which is to sin.
Once fear is impressed upon the child mind, mental patterns are formed to continually create different circumstances that trigger the same fearful reactions throughout the lifetime. Every time there is a reaction to fear, sin is repeated, and ego (energy of fear) becomes more prominent as the child progresses through adolescence, adulthood and old age.
As most humans never come to realize that they live through childhood fear, they are like scared little children in that life circumstances…even seemingly adult circumstances like losing a job, home or relationship…trigger the same fearful emotional responses they experienced as a child.
If the child never repents for their sin, they suffer tremendously through the lifetime and especially in old age as their body deteriorates and passes away. This is because the structure of their physical body is made to house fearful concepts, whereby the mind can be easily and frequently hypnotized by evil spirits (fearful thought entities).
This makes repentance very difficult, especially since most religious organizations and spiritually minded people don’t understand it….
So how can one learn to stand firm in God’s glory and repent for their sin when all they know is to respond with fear to life’s circumstances? Through faith that what I’m saying is true, and willingness to pay attention to the messages coming through their own physical body in the moment they are faced with temptation to sin again.
There is no role for self judgment in true repentance…many times the child mind will fall back into its sinful ways…But every time sin is committed with awareness of Truth, factions of evil forces are being met with compassion and thereby dissolved. However, to keep judging oneself for falling is to perpetuate sin and thereby miss the point of repentance.
As one is released from the bondage of sin, wisdom arises in its place, and the child mind comes to recognize that strategies meant to manage fear are no longer useful, and so such childish things are put away….And the child mind is restored to its natural state of carefree, peaceful and compassionate….which is true maturity.
May every child mature in wisdom and be reborn in the Glory of God. Amen!
Repentance is a sincere turning away from sin. Focusing on the messages coming through the physical body in the moment the temptation to sin arises is the most effective form of repentance in my experience.
JR’s response to Hope began as follows and then included all of the above:
Hi Hope. I reject certain phrasing in your message as anti-fear paranoia. However, it is a very important topic and there are some great comments that you made. I invite you to consider a more precise and more empowering phrasing… as follows.
After all of that, Hope replied:
She moves slowly toward him through the crowd. Soon, if everything goes as expected, then the parents of the couple will be grandparents. She steps beyond the edge of the crowd and continues closer to him. When the couple finally does embrace, the crowd begins stomping on the ground and cheering and hollering.
However, not everyone was cheering. One youngster had been quietly lying in bed and listening to this story before going to sleep. Suddenly, the child sat up and asked a very serious question. Of course, this was a very important question, or the child would not be asking it, right?
These could be the kind of questions that required another glass of water first before they could be properly addressed. So, the child went to get some water while the storyteller consulted the sacred book of important stories and waited for the child to return.
“First of all, her hair was absolutely beautiful. For instance, her hair made the sunlight look very pretty- not just cute like your hair. Also, as she walked, each step made her hair dance on her shoulders. There was no wind at all, so you could really see the rhythm of her footsteps just by looking at her hair. Obviously, that is what is really matters. I don’t get it though because I thought you knew how this story should go.”
“This? Oh, well this is the sacred book of important stories,” said the storyteller. “It contains writing that repeats the stories that people used to say out loud.”
“Okay, yes, right. I know all about that book,” the child revealed. “Now that the stories are written down in to that book, is that what makes them so important?”
The storyteller flipped through the pages, looking for the sections on Isaiah or Jesus. However, this was not going as fast as hoped. So, the storyteller decided to check the internet.
“I’ll see if I can find the one thing about worshiping with lips. There is also the other thing about the truth being written in the heart. Just wait for a minute there while this browser loads, okay?”
The child was impatient. “How can a story be more important just because it has been written down? First, people say the story out loud, then someone writes it down and people read it loud or read it silently. It is still the same story, though, right? To say that writing it down makes it more important does not make any sense. That is like saying that the same story becomes important just because it is put on a website. The story may get to be well-known because someone records themselves reading it and loads it on to youtube, but that is not what makes the story valid as in valuable. The story is just as valid whether it is spoken, written, or recorded as an audio.”
The storyteller was impressed. “Again, you are quite right. What you said is basically the same thing that Isaiah said, except of course that Isaiah did not speak using our modern language.”
“Smarter?” the storyteller repeated. “In this case, what exactly do you mean by smarter?”
Suddenly, another child, whom everyone else presumed to have been sleeping, spoke up from the other side of the room. “How old was she?”
This was slightly off-topic, so the storyteller asked “do you mean the cow that was walking through the crowd up to the bull?”
“Yes,” said the other child. “I’m talking about the cow with the beautiful shoulder-length hair that walks up to the bull and then everyone stomps on the ground in celebration because they are about to mate.”
“What does mate mean?” asked the first child. “Is that related to boats like the first mate or is that related to chess like when I win the game by declaring a checkmate?”
“Yeah, but last year, there were at least 100 similar cases within 5,000 miles of us,” one child shouted. “Those cows must be mentally ill. They are hysterical. They are breaking the commandments of God and if we do not stop them right away, then they are probably going to spark another apocalypse!”
“Children, calm down,” said the storyteller, punctuating each word by smacking one of the children on the cheek. “Stop… arguing… right… now!”
“No, you idiot.” said the cow. “Those kids do have electric cattle prods and so they deserve respect, but that is not what concerns me right now. Can’t you see the clouds and feel the storm coming?”
The bull actually had been focused on the way that the cow was walking and had not noticed the dark clouds approaching. “Wow, that looks serious,” said the bull.
“Wait, how did you know that I was quietly condemning those human children?” the bull wondered. “I never said anything out loud about them at all.”
“I know you,” said the cow. “I could see it written on your face.”
“What?” said the bull. “I looked in the mirror a minute ago when the kid went to the bathroom to get some water. There was nothing written on my face.”
“You can be so literal sometimes,” said the cow. “I don’t mean written on your face like with a marker. I mean your facial expressions. It’s in your forehead and in your shoulders. You are nervous about those kids and their electric cattle prods.”
“No!” said the bull. “I mean, why would I be… hey, you’re not saying that I am scared are you?”
“What kind of a bull are you? I need a real bull who is going to treat me like a real cow deserves to be treated. You have read too many books and listened to too many lectures about how to get to heaven. Today, when I need a real bull, you are here talking about who is to blame for the storm that is coming!”
“Honey, I thought…” said the bull, “look, isn’t this is what you wanted? I was just trying to please you, dear.”
“Stop!” said the cow with the beautiful shoulder-length hair. “Just stop trying to please me all the time. Where are your balls?”
“What did the bull do wrong?” asked one of the human children. “How was the bull even supposed to stop the clouds from raining on them?”
The other child said, “it was not that the bull was supposed to stop the clouds. That is just the topic that the cow used to distract the bull. The bull was already confused and then the cow used that pre-existing confusion to lay a huge guilt trip on him as she withdrew. By cultivating confusion, anxiety, and disorientation in the bull, she symbolically castrated him with shame and paranoia.”
“Well,” said the storyteller, “if the cow was just messing with the bull’s head on purpose, then that would have been deceptive and dishonest. Do you really think that a cow would do something like that?”
“Cows are always nice in all the stories that I have heard,” answered one of the children. “I cannot imagine a dishonest cow. That is impossible. I reject the idea as invalid. No further research is relevant. I already know it is all a bunch of bull crap. Also, what does castrated mean?”
“Oh, castration is kind of like decapitation,” said the storyteller. “Do you know what that is?”
“Well, there could be other meanings for that word,” said the storyteller. “However, it is close enough to say that in the end of the story, it was almost like the cow was knocking the bull’s cap off of his head as she ran away so that he would pay attention to his cap and not to her. Does that make sense?”
“Okay, but how old was the bull? Had he ever been married before? If so, was he still married or had he gotten a divorce. I am only asking because my own father ruined my life by divorcing my mom 5 years ago and then marrying some slut with shoulder-length hair which is how all sluts wear their hair.”
“Thanks for asking. The bull was also 16 and had never been married,” said the storyteller. “Now, you need to go to bed and stop accidentally knocking the decapitations off of your younger sister’s head.”
“But that’s not what you said last week,” said the other child. “You said that the bull was married to 4 other cows already.”
MP shared this photo (and made this comment: “Yes, for all the children – all ages, even us when we are triggered and regress to age 2, 4, 6 – what lies beneath, fear, scarcity, loss of… the unmet need.”)
So back to the managing of human resources, when a herd of organisms is being managed by a bureaucrat, the bureaucrat is attentive to their own guidelines and short-term results. Their caseload may not correspond to studying health or focusing on individual cases and long-term results. Their job is may be to make measurements of the organisms and sort the organisms, then implement other interventions such as to prevent certain results amongst “high-risk” organisms.
A parent can say to a public school teacher “I wish that the system was how it should be, which is obvioulsy not how it is.” A teacher can say in repsonse, “yes, and I think it is all because of the Switch, which resulted in the disabling of the other thing.”
Some people experience a “need” to define some pattern as “wrong” and then focus on preventing it or interrupting it (if perceived as present). That can be defining the behaviors of others as wrong, like “stop bullying or else I will spank you and then make you hold a humiliating sign on the street corner!”
People can campaign for the latest political salvation. Often, grievances and grief is the root of their campaigning. The other popular reason for campaigning is “for-profit campaigns” like when a group hires lobbyists to get some government to give them an annual cash flow of $500,000,000,000. When “for-profit campaigners” can enlist a huge mass of “emotionally-driven” campaigners, that can dramatically improve the results of the for-profit campaign.
“I need to feel like my life has real meaning.” Really? Not false meaning, but real meaning, right?
That is not regression to an infantile or animal state. That is not even true at all. It is just repeating some slogan in language. It is totally a pretense.
When people are avoiding their own grief, they “need” strategies to maintain the suppression. I personally have never felt any grief, so please understand that I am just repeating something here that I was taught in a room full of people once. Everyone clapped for me when I stood up and repeated the popular slogans.
“We’re all in this together!” Then we all dispersed and several years later we occasionally interact on facebook.
What really bothers me though is that other people grieve. Isn’t that just some kind of immature regression? That is why I do not even like those people. They are not how they should be. Oh, plus they saw me grieving once and I am just not that kind of a person.
You act like I must have been afraid a long time ago in the past just because I am displaying a desperate tantrum of hysteria right now, right? You are arrogant and analytical and a Pittsburgh Steelers fan, which proves your lack of credibility. This should not be like this!
That is what has been going on since time immemorium. There are also waves of various kinds of excess, with each wave of excess leading to a reactionary conservatism, then moderation, then eventually excess again.
There is no “generation” that does not have bias (think of itself as right). What is interesting is that within EVERY generation, there are some who are aware of human psychology and recognize the vast distinctions between things like a ranting arrogance and a calm courage.
The arrogant insistence that “_____ should not be how it is” is the foundation of all “suffering” (in the Buddhist sense of the word). However, that arrogance is itself simply an effect of a form of terror.
No one is born terrified of violations to their expectations. Why? because no one is born with expectations at all!
To distract others (and myself) from shame, I can say “look over there: ____ should not be how it is!” Such terrified, arrogant condemnation of reality is totally optional, but immensely popular.
People can attempt to drown their shames in alcohol, music, their careers, celebrity gossip, political fanaticism, or gambling. All of that has some value (like as a band-aid), yet only so much.
The only way to fully relax our condemnation of reality is to admit it and then withdraw it (to repent by admitting to our past terrors… without adding a condemnation or apology about our past terrors). This is rather clearly stated in the New Testament as well as in the scriptures of many other traditions, but the naive arrogance of the vast majority of people may tend to “bury” those “embarrassing” passages amidst a bunch of fluff and controversy.
Let’s review the word origins: Matrimony means “motherhood” (or, more specifically, an expectation of motherhood/pregnancy/procreation).
c.1300, from O.Fr. matremoine, from L. matrimonium “wedlock, marriage,” from matrem (nom. mater) “mother” + -monium, suffix signifying “action, state, condition.”
Eventually, that word evolved in to “marriage.” Then, recently, gay couples who want to have a wedding ceremony used the term “marriage” as if it means nothing more than “wedding.” (Of course, this may have been encouraged by certain political groups aiming at stirring trivial but emotional controversies.)
Any parent who does not want to be a grandparent can tell their kid(s) that exclusive homosexuality is wonderful. That is their loss. They can promote “lesbian motherhood” or “celibate motherhood” or “male motherhood” whatever they like.
I was adopted. Adoption is not the same as procreation. Kind of like reading a scripture is not the same as comprehending the simplicity of it.
O.E. weddian “to pledge, covenant to do something, marry,” from P.Gmc. *wadjojanan (cf. O.N. veðja “to bet, wager,” O.Fris. weddia “to promise,” Goth. ga-wadjon “to betroth”), from PIE base *wadh- “to pledge, to redeem a pledge” (cf. L. vas, gen. vadis “bail, security,” Lith. vaduoti “to redeem a pledge”). Sense remained “pledge” in other Gmc. languages (cf. Ger. Wette “bet, wager”); development to “marry” is unique to Eng.
O.E. weddung “state of being wed” (see wed ). Meaning “ceremony of marriage” is recorded from c.1300; the usual O.E. word for the ceremony was bridelope, lit. “bridal run,” in reference to conducting the bride to her new home.
The idea that the US government was previously more honest than lately has been a popular idea… for centuries. It is based of course on a particular perception about past honesty.
Those who independently study the nature of government may encounter some simple facts about all governments. (Note that in order to distract the masses from independent research, governments often make it a high priority to program the masses with pro-government propaganda through indoctrination systems of schools which may be government-regulated, or even government-funded or, in the most extreme cases, even operated by governments.)
The mainstream media is similar (though in the US, the media is not as socialized as the primary school system). If you care to research the history of US government pro-war propaganda, two good sources are War is a Racket by USMC Major General Smedley Butler (1935)
Throughout the years various men of military service have spoken up and….
There is also this book from 1928 in which the nephew of Sigmund Freud (who was also the founder of the PR industry) details how he invented inflammatory anti-German propaganda in order to incite antagonism in the US public so as to reduce the resistance to the first US invasion of Europe (what later became known as “World War One”)
Free… to be trapped?
I can condemn the past… or not
I can say I wish now it had been something different… or not
Fortunately, unlike other lesser humans, I was never naive.
Because of my unmatched excellence, everyone should be above average since we are in this together.
Don’t you just hate the kind of people who always complain about exagerrations?
“Responsibility begins with the willingness to be cause in the matter of one’s life. Ultimately, it is a context from which one chooses to live. Responsibility is not burden, fault, praise, blame, credit, shame or guilt. In responsibility, there is no evaluation of good or bad, right or wrong. There is simply what’s so, and your stand.
Being responsible starts with the willingness to deal with a situation from the view of life that you are the generator of what you do, what you have and what you are. That is not the truth. It is a place to stand.
No one can make you responsible, nor can you impose responsibility on another. It is a grace you give yourself – an empowering context that leaves you with a say in the matter of life.”
– Werner Erhard
When it is clear to me that [what Mr. Erhard called] “my stand” is a filter that *organizes* my recognition of “what’s so,” then I recognize my subjectivity as a simple fact. I cannot alter the fact that subjectivity is subjective. Further, the entire idea of wanting to eliminate subjectivity is missing the simplicity of what subjectivity is.
My perspective (at any given moment) is distinct. It is not better or worse than any other perspective. It will change over time.
Of course, it is only relative to a certain kind of perspective or filter that a labeling like “good or bad” arise. Words are all just interpretative labels. What in one culture is called evil or disgusting or disturbing may be common in another culture… or even sacred.
To relate to any element of the past as “how it should not have been” is valid, but totally optional. Personal shame is just a social construct. Why do societies shame individuals and create shyness? In our culture, we can respect that it is essential for an orderly classroom. 6 year-olds do not naturally sit quietly in chairs waiting for the holy curriculum to be delivered, right?
So, we have stories like that of Santa Claus in order to govern the behavior of children. Stories like hell and heaven might also be used to influence behavioral conformity. Through the media (including in advertisements), more stories and messages are used to govern perception and behavior.
We respond to our interpretation of “what’s so,” not to the data itself. We construct meaning from the sensory data. The meaning is not in the data. The meaning is a product of our perspective (or “stand”). That is why the school systems and media are so interested in governing the interpreative models used by the masses.
So our “ability to respond” is a function of our ability to recognize meaningful patterns accurately and quickly. 10 people can hear the same sounds, but if only one of them speaks Spanish, that one is the only one who can identify a precise meaning for those sounds.
All of this is very ancient wisdom. Since ancient times, the “human resources” have been managed using these principles.
Some may say reflexively: “but it should not be like that!” A culture’s propaganda can be very effective at hiding simple facts by programming the masses in “how things should be” (what to presume) and “how things should not be” (what to reject presumptively). “Propaganda should not exist” is a central slogan of idealists.
Many people throw around the word “cause” when all that they know about is a correlation. A “cause” would ideally mean 100% precision.
So, can a specific “bad” diet cause the effect labeled cancer 100% of the time? Can a specific diet can produce an effect 100% of the time (and not just in a sample of 50 city dwellers, but in a scientifically-relevant sample that includes many healthy humans of many ages- and, on the subject of skin cancer- many races)? Even if so, then there is the question of exactly how- what is the mechanism of producing the effect of cancer?
To me, cancer is just a simple label for a very simple phenomenon that is very simple to cause 100% of the time (and food is NOT the *primary* factor, but certainly is a factor). Further, when making a bold and plain statement like this, it is interesting how many people who may say that they are interested in understanding health will immediately flee (in terror?).
So, one of the first issues I raise is whether someone is willing to question the idea that cancer is a living organism that attacks another living organism, invades it, possesses it, and grows or spreads. In other words, are you willing to at least question the religion of demon worship that has been promoted through mainstream propaganda sources?
It is always interesting to see folks flee away from science toward their religion of worshiping “incurable” demonic possessions. They will invest thousands of dollars and months of their lives worshiping their sacred demon. Then, they may want others to invest hours of time with no compensation to “convince” them that the effect of cancer is just a simple physiological effect which can easily be produced or discontinued. Their hysteria is… totally hysterical.
Consuming something is distinct from digesting it. If something is not digested, it has no nutritional value even if it has lots of nutrients in it.
So, how many digestive systems on this planet are designed for digesting cooked foods? Zero is the correct answer.
High quality food sources are also an obvious factor in nutrition. Wild sea creatures tend to have more nutrients than any land creature. Wild tend to be far more healthy than captive. Grass-fed organic beef tends to be several times as healthy as grain-fed conventonal beef.
As an aside, all ranchers know that eating grains causes massive weight gain in cattle. That is how they fatten the cattle. Eating low quality carbs blocks the metabolism of fat (leading to rapid accumulations of stored fat). This is very old science. The obesity-promotion programs of the FDA were never scientifically credible (in regard to the propaganda used to popularize those programs of behavior).
So, in addition to high quality sources of nutrition, there are also issues like how it is chewed, the presence of stomach acid, and of course how it is prepared (like marinated with no heat, only lightly cooked, or sterilized and thoroughly charred to not only reduce nutritional value but create new compounds that may be detrimental to the digestive tract of any creature… human or otherwise, etc).
Meat does not need to be cooked or even chewed (though chewing makes for smaller bits and thus increases the total surface area, improvign digestive efficiency). However, meat *must* be thoroughly exposed to acid in order to break the proteins in to amino acids. My understanding is that foreign proteins that get past the stomach SHOULD be attacked by any healthy immune system. We can call that “an allergy,” but that is just a failure of the stomach to fully digest the protein. (So, diluting the stomach acid with any beverages during a meal also affects digestion.)
Many modern people have horrific overall health, such as Lance Armstrong and many other successful endurance athletes who suffered from cancer and cardiovascular crisis by their late 30s or early 40s (and often die before the age of 50). Mr. Armstrong was apparently very motivated to reform many of his habits (after the initial collapse in his health) and I understand that he dramatically changed his behaviors and thus created very different results.
So, not only do people cling mentally to the unscientific presumptions publicized as “medicine,” but they lack sufficient production of stomach acid. They may also lack attention to science and health, instead deferring to operations like the FDA and USDA to guide their behaviors and results. Or they go to specialists in the suppresion of the immune system (MDs) and interact with those specialists as if they are experts in promoting health. (I am sure that there are many MDs who have studied the promotion of health, including Terry Wahls and Jack Kruse- but I think they are quite rare.)
Back to the specific subject of worms, if there were farms of grub worms in which the worms were given anti-biotics and hormones, I would expect the nutritional value to be that much lower than “organically-farmed” grub worms. Of course, the worms are small, so they would never be given injections like cows and pigs and so on.
People who are squeamish about nutrition and health can proceed delicately. They may need to slowly nourish the bacterial garden in their intestines so that eventually they will have “more guts” and “more intestinal fortitude.”
(The above commentary was in response to a facebook post regarding the fact that McDonald’s has protected the use of the words “100% beef” in regard to their meat even though they [allegedly] use “filler” from meal worms.)