There is a concept on the spiritual.

It seems in most thoughts to be the biggest fault of anyone of spiritual thought, and the cause of problems for many people that think they are of some religion or another.

It is the concept to think that some material well being, or set of material circumstances define some condition of spiritual grace.

Quite simply, the distortion of the spiritual is to think it is seen and measured by the material. Although there are many times material things happen or don't happen from spiritual interaction, to think that some material condition is the way it is suppose to be, is to remove any concept of improvement from society. Some think any person that gets hurt or a disease, or has any material hardship, some think that is some judgment on them, and those groups that think that can never be helped without being destroyed, and that is a problem, and not what the better side does. So some would say that is what happened to me, not knowing that 'bad actions of people' can do that, and also it can be done 'trying to help someone by showing some error that causes problems'. I have never had much of an issue of self righteousness, nor was my situation due to errors on my part, nor did I think like that when a wrong group tried to make my life tough by trying to take my beer and travel money.

Or to make it easier to understand. Many of the well off think they are that way by divine edict, and use that to justify not having to feel for anyone else.

The easiest trap is to see some condition, and say that is how it is suppose to be, or some effect like a blessing, or a fall from grace. It allows for no empathy, and self righteousness, and is in most cases a delusion to allow a person to rationalize any condition.

It is a doctrine to blind people of how they can make conditions for many people better, and carry their share of the weight of the difficulties that are part of a growing society.


It is the most difficult of situations because it uses an effect to then define a cause, to rationalize that effect.

Some think that if you have something, and probably shouldn't by your heart and minds view, or if you did something that gets you something not in the best ways. Then they can say it is a divine gift for them to have it, then suddenly, they don't have any thought of what can help people. Instead they think everyone would be helped if they were suppose to be helped. And they don't have to think on how or why they might have something.

It is the difference of the spiritual being around to help a few 'special people' and the spiritual being around to help people help all people. It is the difference of if people matter or not.

Steal from a pension account, an investor, bank, or worker. Then if you feel a twinge of guilt, just think that you only were able to do that by some divine advantage, and therefore it is correct. It is far better to think on if some allocation makes sense in an equatable distribution based on many factors. And most religious people understand that, since most religions speak about social justice and concepts of inequity as important issues for people to think on.

Religion offers much good in life, as does spirituality, but it is also a trap for many with much, including much in many forms, since it is really easy to think it is something a person is suppose to have, and not think on the best ways to use such things. The movie Devils Advocate said that guilt can just be set down and not worried about. Many use claims of divine grace or advantage to do that very thing. And that is a problem.



I think about that because of "which connection to cut". The very side that made my life difficult, although that is more to view injustice in many places, is not a spiritual judgment from some better source, but an action of a few people that think they can claim any action they do is spiritual inspired, and then from that just say some bad effect they created was for some 'divine plan' or just reason. I know the wrongness done against me is not of a better divine plan, because it used unjust uncompassionate methods of smear, fear, and deception, against better thoughts of justice and compassion. But if you can say everything is how it should be, then you can not accept the wrongness of that situation done against me, and more importantly the far worse wrongness done against many other people worse off then me.

The connection I been cutting, is those that by wrong try to pull many down to worse situations, and some are Orwellian that claim some divine edict is guiding them, and some are just messed up. But while cutting the ropes trying to pull the actual down, the actual itself is not left behind, but is brought back up to be in balance with the thoughts.

By keeping your feet on the ground, and head in the clouds.

So added to the drawing, of thoughts about thoughts, just to express a thought I find interesting, and because it feels like a fun thing to post :D






And a song I think about around that concept.

Eagles - Peaceful Easy Feeling
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44A9iDQNrss

And another great song by Peter Gabriel.

Peter Gabriel - In Your Eyes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zrzr4R3LpsQ


A few blockers, have to see past them :) They are in your eyes.

So it is the concept of not following what tries to bring you down, not about abandoning such things.

It is not noun based but verb based in imagery.

Other side note.
I criticized the concept of say anything. The bad side of that concept as a trap, is that what you do doesn't matter, if that is the intent of that concept, it is bad. Although there is a different way to see that.

If say anything is that any attempt can make a difference, or at least speak, then that is different. In that case it is trying to do something even if you are not sure what you can do.

The Say Anything of speaking out, is the good version of Say anything, the bad side is thinking what you say is not part of an effect, since it is in part the intent and the effort that makes a difference even when what is said is not the only effect.

So from the perspective of Say anything, as in don't be silent, that I agree with that.


And this is a really great song.

Peter Gabriel - Solsbury Hill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fF8wU4Nl9Y

Some think it is permission to sin.

Some think it is forgiveness after some sin to allow for growth and learning.



It is an important question. There are some that think in terms of 'sin' being what is 'allowed' that is the 'I can' group.

I don't think sin is about 'offending God' by how a person thinks of God. It is not like someone could offend God that way, that is thinking of God as proud not loving. I think sin, and not loving God, is when people don't help other people or when a person is hurting another person, and hurting another part of the spirit of God.

Although there has to be heart and thinking to figure out a best choice of actions.

And many think there are many competing Gods like a game, and only some are in 'there group' with us or against us idea.



In one view if you think God told you to wipe out some enemy of his, then that would be him giving grace to do that. However that would show God as limited by needing someone to do harm for something he wants to have happen to happen.

In another view, if you think he wants you to do that, and later learn that is wrong, he would give grace in the form of forgiveness to remove the feelings of guilt, so you can learn and move forward.


Or to make it simpler, grace could be because nobody is perfect and God is forgiving. Or some think it is some allowed to do some things others are not.

However once you decide that you can do something because you have grace to do it, you can say anything fits into that.



Then again, what is sin is a huge topic also. I actually think it is more about the spirit that is in a person then the actual things they do, so it is more about intent. Except in obvious cases where people are hurt, which would create sadness.

But then there is the whole thing about the concept of some bad to protect against worse bad. But that goes screwy when people project future events based in part on delusion. So it is complicated, and really takes thinking and feeling. And then there are errors of calculating by thinking in ways of calculated worth of people.

There is even a group that says a pacifist is a coward for not doing the 'hard' things needed to protect people, but many things claimed to be about protection are about self interest.

Since almost all wars would be unnecessary if consolidations were broken up, and a better system of distribution existed, because nobody would have an overwhelming desire to go to war against someone with not much more then them. But it is easier to go to war to defend consolidations, so pacification forces the correction to the problem by stopping a war that does not have to occur. And that war would not occur if the base problems were fixed, that are not addressed when people go to war.

So an example of broken application of grace.

Some rich guy shoots someone for trying to steal some food from a gated community. He says it was his right to be violent, and believes such a thing is under grace for his 'divine edict of allocation' of his claimed wealth. When he would not have to shoot someone if he helped the poor without work or food.



And I am due beer and travel money and many experiences.

I don't believe in god, so I don't believe in sin either. There are morally wrong and self destructive actions, of course, just not offenses against god. So I guess I don't really need spiritual grace.

The things that happen don't necessarily happen as the result of the will of a higher spiritual power. Sometimes, they happen despite that higher power's will. With the gift of free will also comes the responsibility for the outcome of those choices.