I have 16 years of personal experience with the Pentecostals and I know how these hypocrites use the Bible to justify about anything. I was SO glad when I was no longer forced by my parents to attend.

Thank you, Kelly.

Quite right. “There’s nothing Christian when people are killing.” I enjoyed your post on the connectedness and pervasiveness of ignorance, power and greed. But who put those idiots in power in the first place? (I shuffle about uneasily and look at my feet when I ask myself that question!)

Personally I would avoid joining with your argument since it may be a way of attributing blame for something for which we are all responsible. The appointment of those “idiots” as you call them is down to us too. Following their words without question is also a matter of our responsibility. Saying “*They* made me do it,” takes us back to the age-old problem. They are the words of war criminals everywhere.

Sorry to sound a little harsh there. But if we want a different sort of world without killing, it’s up to us. There is no one else to blame.

Tamera

I don’t know what it is quite about you and me but whenever we exchange thoughts and feelings I always find myself *compelled* to go off and write something! I wasn’t entirely sure what the “Golden Rule” was. In everyday psychology terms, I am opposed to the notion of “saving” and “rescuing” behaviours. They are entirely unhealthy, they don’t work and *hell* is exactly where they may lead! I’ve had a couple of skirmishes with acquaintances who see their mission as rescuing or saving others from unhappiness, brokenness and despair and overall I find them quite scary! I am going to put this one on my ever-growing list of subjects to write about on my “Love’s Passage” blog. I feel the need to explain why I am opposed to rescuing and saving, as many (not you) might regard me as seeking to undermine their *acts of goodness*.

I take your point too about doing and not doing to others. As a person with good self-esteem (most of the time!) I had not considered that wisdom as deeply as I should have done. It is a common thread between religions, however. Your point about the Confucian inversion of that notion is entirely valid, I believe. There is a real cognitive difference too.

I should have learned that particular lesson well by now. So often, have I been on the receiving end of people doing to me as they would wish to be done to them, where what they would wish for themselves might be unhealthy and damaging.

When I wrote that I was considering it as a notion predicated upon love, both for others and for oneself. Even then it is complex as the nature of love is not some innate “given”, but something that resides in our consciousness, both as individuals and in the values, belief systems and cultures of our social world. I am not sure that it represents simplicity necessarily. You say, “it cuts out a great deal of unethical behavior”. This is essentially a value judgment. I have no problem with that but it might require one to examine or state the basis and source of one’s ethical position in the context of one’s own personal and social consciousness. Nevertheless, I vote with Confucius!

Thank you for your interesting and thoughtful words, Tamera.

I also read your comment about the Golden Rule. This one I have struggled with for years. It is bittersweet, for can not this also mean “saving” all non-followers of one’s own religion into one’s religion? The intention being the good thing to do in the behavior of “saving”. Do many not operate on “good intentions” without asking their fellow humans if it is what they wish? As has been stated, “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions”.

With so many struggling to learn to accept/like/love themselves, there are many things they would choose to do for me that they would wish for themselves (in a state of non-acceptance of themselves), and of which I really do not want them doing unto me! hehe. I tend to stick to the more ancient rule stated in various ways, and one version comes from Confucius, about not doing unto others that which one does not wish done unto oneself. For me this represents simplicity, and it cuts out a great deal of unethical behavior through a more general framework. Many claim that the two Rules are similar, yet I find vast differences. However, this is still something that I ponder about…wonder about….and, contemplate in the context of world events. My cognitive “jury” is still out for the vote. :o))

Thank you for a great post, and a wonderful “read”!