================================================ Subject: Thanks.. and included Scott Stapp's concept From: "Creed - 7M3 - Live" To: Date: Tue 29 May 2001 19:24:52 -0400 ================================================ Ewa, I liked your positive comments about my wording. (blushing-LOL) I agree with you on the concept of not having to change your concepts, just to keep the biochemical processes "swinging". I also agree with the statement that the "Swings" get more into the "Center" and slow down from the massive differences. But as to the Spiritual and knowledgable (given as fact)issues combined together. I feel that their are so many "Written in Stone" ideas that the issues are really hard to debate rationally. (Not referring to the ten commandments, which were written in stone). About Scott's views on spirituality. I think that I got from watching the VH1 episode. That his "turning point" against established religion was the result of "The truth shall set you free" line and the way that he told the admin at the college the truth and was "set free" in a way that he was not expecting. At least it opened him up to the realization that a lot of these religious institutes do not do as they preach. But are part of the "world" and filled with thier biases as to what is right and what is wrong. If religions would get away from judgements, since the time of "Judges" has already come and gone. since Our "Judges" are not inspired by the spiritual, But inspired by the political in this era. I think that it is apparent that the views towards the resolving the spiritual issues will have to wait for the time of "Enlightenment", where things are apparent and the false churches and doctrines are challenged and exposed for thier "control" aspects and not thier essence views. I left your views on Scott Stapps ideas and stuff through the music in the below message. since I think they are great the way they are. Jim fmn wrote: > Hey Jim! > > yep, that's what I mean, I feel like I haven't set in stone views yet. > I like the way you described it: > > < that and a spoon of the > other. We keep adding and taking out "ingredients" until we feel that it > "tastes good" to the mind.>> If I may remark, I like the way > you express yourself. I am this sort of a person who needs to be > filled with intellectual stuff. Otherwise I feel empty and > superficial. And the way you present things is just so... hmm.. > concise.. YEP! that's the right word for it... and I guess language is > supposed to show what kind of a character a person has. And I like the > impression I get from you. > > Coming back to the subject. I also love the imbalance - it would be > boring without it, right? Maybe we need the imbalance of thought in > regard to keeping our bio-chemical balance in our brains? (that's > pretty much what you've already said). But then again, this concept > has a major flaw: to keep your bio-chemical balance in the brain, you > don't really have to go as far as to changing your views all the time; > all you really need to do is to keep those thoughts "flowing" (sort > of: "exercise-your-brain-cells-to-keep-them-fit" kinda way). Another > thought of mine on this topic was that such "swings" of views > sometimes do stop (in most cases somewhere in the middle = the balance > principle); it's just that there are millions of such "swings" (each > one relating to a certain subject) to be settled down and I don't > think a lifetime is enough for us to become absolutely balanced. > Another question arises if you set out from the hypothesis: What if it > was possible to acheive a perfect balance (concerning our views)? > Isn't this meant by an "inner peace" many people talk about and strive > towards? Take Scott Stapp as an example (at last something Creed > related, huh? hehe...;-). In one of the interviews where Stapp talks > about him not being sure of his confession he says: "But if that > happened to me -- if all of the sudden there's a moment of > enlightenment and everything makes sense to me and finally it sinks > from my head to my heart, I'll tell everyone. Because I'll be at > _peace_. I mean, I'm like, 'God, get this crap out of my head'. I wish > I didn't have to think about this stuff all the time." So, what Scott > wants is inner peace and balance, I guess (I mean, he does - even if > not explicitly - talk about the contrary nature of mind and heart > which are rarely at balance - and he wishes for them to be in harmony, > in a way). But on the other hand, I don't think that this is what he > really wants (if it is ever possible to speak for someone and say what > he/she really wants, i.e. hehe ;-). But I honestly don't believe that > after experiencing a time of deep spiritual confusion (= battle of > thoughts) Stapp would prefer to give that up for a calmness of mind. > Because, in a way, this is what is so interesting, challenging, > beautiful and striking about "confusion"/ (better call it:) imbalance > that makes us humans flexible, intelligent and deep. Such battles of > thoughts are very rich experiences and you learn from them a lot. And > results of such "battles" can bring you closer to the objective truth > (- if there is such a thing in the first place, i.e.). At least that's > what I've observed. I must admit that some of my "swings" have come to > a nearly complete standstill. Or let's just put it this way: I already > have some stone views concerning a very general understanding of > different issues such as life. ............. to be continued > -- The human race never solves any of its problems. It merely outlives them. -- David Gerrold To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp