2006-10-11 21:40:00
Larry quoting me:
You insinuate this going off in the spirit is a stupid thing.
Larry writes:
I most certainly did not do that.
You sure had me fooled. The whole tone of your post sounded like you were in a disgruntled mode.
Larry:
You yourself have taught that the "Masters" are not interested in spending their precious time informing us of facts and principles that are _already_ available - they have a lot more things to do, especially if we have not done our work in trying to find what is already available.
And what is it I am not aware of? I'm certainly aware of all you have written on it and have known these basics for many years.
Larry:
In the same way there are things that one can discern rationally about this subject and about which there are a great many resources already available. If one then understands these principles then one is in a far better position to seek spiritual confirmation.
The principles I have written about include all that you have written if one sees the core meanings. Remember a principle is worth a thousand facts. If I give a principle it is assumed one can write a thousand facts around it. I usually leave the thousand details for others to come up with. One of my points is you do not need to communicate the thousand details in the soul-to-soul communication.
Larry:
What I was saying very clearly (and not insinuating) is that you have never impressed me as one who has seriously studied what has already been written on these principles. I may be wrong in that assessment, but from what you have already written that is the conclusion I reach. You are not an earned authority in this area for me.
I may have not studied the exact same data that you have. So what? Judge me by what I teach, not what you think I have read. Where is anything I have taught on this subject that is not correct? Instead of pointing this out you accuse me of not understanding something, but not sure what.
Larry:
Whether or not it is unjust is a matter of opinion. I have observed your written and spoken views on the subject for at least 6-7 years now, and I do not think it is a hasty opinion arrived at only based on a few things you've said (or not said).
Then you should back up what you say instead of making a nebulous accusation.
Larry:
I think you have failed miserably in explaining the underlying principles.
Failed miserably? If I used such attack words with you, you would probably be offended for a month.
I think I have succeeded quite well in explaining what I wanted to communicate and there is no way to call such success failure. That which you probably think is a failure to communicate is undoubtedly something I never even intended to communicate.
I was attempting to give a new slant on the subject, not to reiterate what has been said in the past.
Larry:
The concept of initiating the use of force is extraordinarily key in understanding this issue. Simply talking about "going off in the spirit" for the answer as to when the initiation of force is justified does not explain the important issues and principles. There are however some very rational principles that do explain the issue.
Yes, much more could be said about it. My goal was to quickly give an insight without spending much time on the subject.
Larry:
Again, I remain unimpressed with your writing on this _particular_ subject. I am greatly impressed by other things you have written, but this is not one of them.
I think there are a few that saw the principle I was getting at and felt elevated by what they saw. Maybe you missed something by looking for the details rather than the core principle I was getting at.
This is the situation as the Hierarchy sees it today and with which it challenges all men and women of goodwill. They ask you to share in the conflict in some way, and remind you of the occult significance of those oft misunderstood words of Christ, "He that is not with me, is against me."
Externalization of the Hierarchy, Page 219
Copyright © 2006 by J J Dewey, All Rights Reserved