maturing beyond sinfulness

Sin = ANY error  (not just moral violations) or ANY act of misconduct (including even a failure to take responsible action)
3 types of sin (in the tradition of the ancient Hebrews): negligence, shame, and malice
You are soul. Soul is attention. Attention is the source of words. Words are your creation, not your source. Words can direct the attention of the young and impressionable, but, when the soul matures, attention is stabilized beyond words.
It is an error to believe in words. Belief in words is the root of all malice or ill will. In particular, people may identify themselves with or against certain words. That is the root of all psychological suffering (guilt, anxiety, depression, etc…).
That misidentification with linguistic labels is also the root of idolatry, which inovlves mistaking a word like “sacred” or “holy” with Divinity itself. When one is ignorant of Divinity and then labels as “holy” some mere word or phrase or idea or physical object or pattern, that is idolatry. The word Divinity is not what is symbolized by the word Divinity. Worshiping the word Divinity or even a particular scripture (including the US Constitution) is idolatry.
So, sin includes ignorance, negligence, shame malice, as well as the resulting actions. While some uses of the word sin refer in particular to actions, that usage diverges from the traditional Jewish (Hebrew) or Greek usages, as well as the words of the most famous religious figures such as Jesus, Buddha, and Isaiah.
Sin is not just a category of action, but also the source of some behavioral reaction. Consider this translation of a famous heretical prophet: “you have been told that to put someone to death is sin, but I say to you that even to be angry or hold ill will toward another is sin,” as well as other famous instructions: “Condemn not,” “Judge not,” “Let the one among you without sin cast the first stone” and of course “Forgive one another.”
Ill will requires language. Resentment does not arise from action or inaction, but from the language that we can use to ongoingly produce an experience out of our commentary and imagination relating to a memory. Resentment requires first creating shame from a past incident, then blaming someone else for our experience (while we mature in the capacity to accept the experience). In other words, our challenging experiences are part of our development.
The cultivating of antagonism through language is the root issue. From antagonism, many actions may arise, such as war, murder, rape, theft, fraud and so on. However, as Jesus said, it does not require the action of a murder or rape for antagonism or jealous lust to be a disturbance to one’s well-being.
First, we are totally ignorant. Then we begin to learn but still are developing discipline and thus are subject to negligence (which can also be viewed as any failure to be responsible for our reputation). Next we construct linguistic rationales to blame others for our results, which is malice or ill will or resentment, but also shame and pride. We create pride as a barrier to accepting responsibility for our overall results (by focusing on particular results while we ignore the rest of our results, of which we may be quite ashamed and quite hysterical if anyone attempts to direct attention at those results for which we may have been constructing a linguistic identifying or labeling as shameful). In other words, on the foundation of shame, we may develop malice toward those who fail to agree with us about our prides and shames.
That experience of malice might be called hell or purgatory. There may be access to “heaven” at a later stage.
These are the three basic stages of human socio-linguistic development: ignorance, shame, and malice. Next, however, is maturity. A comprehension of the role of language in the constructing of shame and malice allow for an attention to that linguistic process, the realization that inattentiveness or negligent language itself is what creates the malice, so the only remedy required is to cease the negligent language and remain attentive, and that is freedom from sin. That is spiritual rebirth.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

34 Responses to “maturing beyond sinfulness”

  1. hell-raising Love Monster Says:

    I feel real stupid, but what is the relevance that all those things are just words? Maybe my brain is just tired, and I need to read or listen to this again. I find that I have a hard time concentrating.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      You are that which is referenced by the word Divinity. However, you may focus on that word and claim that “I can’t be that which is referenced by the word Divinity because the word Divinity is just a word and I am not just a word.” Of course, that “justification” is illogical, but a lot of what people say is illogical (stupid).

      Who is it that recognizes and labels something as “feeling stupid?” You are not the feeling. You are the source of the feeling. You are that which is referenced by the word Divinity, though you can certainly construct a variety of words to label yourself instead, like “stupid” or “shameful” or “numb” or whatever. However, you cannot be the label because you witness the label and you also witness that labeling yourself cannot alter that you are earlier than the label, beyond the label, and the source of all labeling. Even the witnessing of labels has a source.

      Stop concentrating. Stop needing to read this again.

      Just read it or not. Witness the words that arise for you (as in the voice that says “what voice? I do not have a little voice inside my head!”), including witnessing the identifying of a me AS the words. “I am these words but not those. In the absence of words, will I disappear, too? I AM just words, right?”

      Who is the witness of the identifying? Who is the witness of the language and the shapes on the screen and the sounds in the room?

      • hell-raising Love Monster Says:

        OK. I can notice that I do all that, and just get that I am not that.

      • jrfibonacci Says:

        You are certainly not JUST that which you notice. Divinity is said to be the creator of the world, including all the words that “populate” the world as well as all other sensations and perceptions that report to the Divinity. As a tree includes both the roots and the branches, perhaps you are also the branches and the trunk, but you are not JUST the branches (nor JUST the trunk).

  2. hell-raising Love Monster Says:

    OK. there is a lot that I don’t know about myself.

  3. Bird Says:

    I think the only word in all of these comments I actually could understand completely was “pickle”. And the actual article…well, I’m going to have to read this again when my brain is better rested…I got lost in both the article and the comments…

    It sounds intelligent, researched, sophisticated, and I’m thinking that I don’t exactly agree with it. But I’ll re-read it again in a bit to make sure.

    — Bird

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      Thanks for your interest, Bird. You are welcome to go to the home page ( ) and look for some of the short ones like “the gospel of santa” or “the secret of society” or “introduction to language.” Some are very poetic and some are very dry and academic. They all point to the same issues, some with humor and personal stories and others with scripture quotations, plus there are several other issues (of “applied” spirituality, like my piece on “the meek inheriting the earth”). Another that I like as an introductory piece, if you want to invest at least 10 minutes, is the video “the greatest sock puppet.”

  4. why I do not believe in the existence of atheists « JRFibonacci's blog: partnering with reality Says:

    […] same source presents  This material again deals with some linguistic issues, this time in the context of an […]

  5. comment on a pingback « Skeptical Humanities Says:

    […] same source presents  This material again deals with some linguistic issues, this time in the context of an […]

  6. The Silent Language Says:

    Hello there,, It nice to get in touch with you,
    I guess you are interested in language development and its thinking.
    May I know your major?
    I’m Firman, From Indonesia;

    Thanks a bunch

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      I got a bachelor’s degree in 1992 in Interpersonal Communication, then entered a PhD program for Sociology (Social Psychology) and dropped out after 18 months.

      • The Silent Language Says:

        Are you working as teacher or what?
        I got a bachelor degree in 2011 majoring English education. Now I take master degree in the same field and is on my second semester. Where do you live?

  7. freestonepeaches Says:

    You say at the beginning of the article that attention is the source of words, and that attention is the soul. It seems to me that there is something in the middle between attention and words. Like there is something attending, and then something speaking. Can you expound?

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      Any “something” is an identifying in words. The presence that you are does not require words for it to be present. You are present even when sleeping, but then there is the awareness state or perceiving state of dreaming or awake, etc….

  8. freestonepeaches Says:

    So the big question is, “Who am I?”

    Can I even be defined?

    I don’t think I am attention. I muscle tested it, and it tests weak.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      Literally, we can agree that there are various words including attention and I. Further, the consciousness or being or whatever that you are is self-evident and no label “contains” it. It (you) “contains” all language.

  9. freestonepeaches Says:

    It must be like the Tao, that which can’t be defined.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      It is the Tao. That is you. You are it. It is (you are) not in the realm of words, but operate as the source of that realm or reality or context.

      See the 20 minute video here:

      I make direct reference to how you are the Tao in that piece, and within a context. What I did not say is that when God used language to first label a divide of Heaven from Earth and Earth from Heaven, what we are is Heaven. Heaven is the place from which the world or earth is perceived. That “falling” of God the perceiver was not really a falling for God as long as God knows that God is in Heaven and God is Heaven, but when God identifies exclusively with the earth or matter or the body, that is “the fall.”

  10. A muslim african-american is following Bonju Blog and I don’t like him « THE WORD WARRIOR Bonju Blog Says:

    […] Pingback: maturing beyond sinfulness « JRFibonacci’s blog: partnering with reality […]

  11. Freedomborn Says:

    A Differant perception of reality jrfibonacci but still man’s understanding seeking to explain logically what we can only understand Spiritually and that only by The Spirit of God The Heavenly Father our Creator.

    God tells us that He inspired the Scriptures and only The Holy Spirit can give us full understanding of them, not man and that includes the mystery of life.

    God also tells us His Children….

    2 Timothy 3: 15 – 17 And that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto Salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

    Kind Regards from both of us – Anne

  12. jrfibonacci Says:

    The Holy Spirit does give full understanding. The Holy Spirit does not require scriptures. The Holy Spirit produced the words which were later repeated as oral traditions and were eventually written down in to scriptures and then translated in to other languages. Prophet after prophet has repeated the same ideas in different languages and parables or metaphors.

    However, you were just repeating words which you do not understand. That’s okay, but it is arrogance on top of ignorance, though very common and just a mistake or error that is easy to make.

    When the Holy Spirit is present, you will know what you cannot know now. All scripture is given by inspiration of God for the same purpose. That means not just four thousand year old scripture, and not just two thousand year old scripture, but all of the communication issuing directly from the Holy Spirit.

  13. Sebastian Says:

    Interesting post! Thanks for the link to my post and blog, God bless!

  14. Freedomborn Says:

    It seems jrfibonacci you missed the main connection in regards to the Holy Spirit and the Scriptures which is they are all inspired by God.

    Kind regards – Anne

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      Maybe so. Or, maybe you do not know what the Ancient Prophets meant by what we call the English word God. You can read the latest post on the front of my homepage (religion: study in language) for clarification. You lack faith because you are just a believer. You do not know God within your heart. God and Holy Spirit are just linguistic idols that you worship. Or, am I wrong? Do you reject the ancient idea that God is within you and you are within God? Do those words seem mysterious and confusing, or simple and obvious and even “no big deal at all?”

      Beware of vanity. Mark 7:7 😉

  15. Freedomborn Says:

    Yes you are very wrong, I have a deep personal relationship with my Abba Father, Jesus is my Eternal Spiritual Husband and Best Friend and The Holy Spirit is my comforter and through His empowering Jesus my only Teacher having asked for and received His wisdom, Teaches me all things. They are The Godhead and what ever you want to call them they remain The Great I Am, past present and future…yes Eternally.

    Perhaps it is your fleshy understanding that has puffed you up, if so you need to humble yourself and repent, we will pray for you if you want this but of course God will not go against your free will.

    Christian regards from us both.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      What I am is not exclusive to me or to any specific body or organism. A tree may have many branches.

      A personality may glorify their personality, their accomplishments and so on. God does not suffer when a personality claims personal glory. God does not benefit from a personality giving glory to God.

      The one that is “the only I am” is “no respecter of persons.” Pride and humility are not important for the Eternal One. The Eternal One does not have a special personal relationship with anyone in particular, but the experience of personal relationships can of course arise. The Eternal One is the author of all, including all communications.

      From within a personality, the personality can communicate from divisiveness and comparison, like the subtle condescension of “maybe you should ask us to pray for you. I already understand everything there is to understand and I like to publicly glorify myself in that.”

      See also:

  16. Freedomborn Says:

    jrfibonacci Says: Pride and humility are not important for the Eternal One.

    God Tells us…

    Luke 18:14b for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

    Philippians 2:7-9 But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a Name which is above every name:

    James 4:6-7 Wherefore He saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble. Submit yourselves therefore to God.

    1 Peter 5:7 Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble. Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time:

    James 4:9-10 Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He shall lift you up.


    I think a word can not be said as a crime, because in a word must contain a meaning. A word can not influence a person just like that, all of us back to each one.
    He was, indeed to an including a folly and sin is an act resulting someone because negligence. But we can not deny the man would not escape from sin unintended or on purpose, and I think that sin can not be in the measure of the size of the negligence or fault of the person, because we all know “The Sky Seeing You”, and we live for a living.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      The word sin in English is category than can be used to include subcategories, like “original sin” and “cardinal sins.” With attention to the specific use of a particular word, we can recognize the function of how the word is being used in a particular case. Sin, to me, includes being inattentive or presumptive to how words are being used. Sin, originally, refers to an error or mistake, as in the Greek language origin of the word “sin,” which is captured in the saying “missing the mark” or “missing the point.”

      Sin, like the sanskrit word “maya,” can reference “missing the point.” Do you get the point? 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: