Belonging, Appearance, Sacrifice?

mrkenangelo said:Everyone keeps talking about how people today are just playing roles, wearing masks, and faking it all.
To me, it seems most people can't even grasp what a human being actually is—or ought to be. We're drowning in endless, frankly hollow, "spiritual lessons" everywhere you look; it’s like soaking a pepper in vinegar until it turns sour.

The absurdity of these masks is that they're worn for others while we hide our true selves...
But regardless...

How can anyone realize who they truly are, or how children can learn any real values, when we ourselves just act however is most convenient in the moment?
And we always give ourselves an easy out: "Oh, if I do the right thing once, I'll be crucified! Besides, look at that guy over there..."

I'll take the simplest example possible. Compare someone genuinely working on themselves to someone who is just "working on themselves."
When I see all those perfect muscles and sculpted abs...
Well, who actually thinks about reading a book or spending precious time on literature when they could just perfect their physique?
And apparently, that gets you all sorts of perks.

I remember my days as an athlete, back when training and the gym were just part of the game. But honestly—how many people we see out on the streets are actual "professional" athletes, and how many are just pure, pumped-up vanity?

My abs might have lost their definition...
But I still find myself turning toward a girl with a book before I notice a stunning cleavage (which, let's be honest, is beautiful)
Showing off everything has become the standard.
A good book is a rarity.

You’ve hit the nail on the head there—but look, it’s a two-way street. Just as I wouldn't be interested in a girl who cares *only* about her physical appearance, I wouldn't be drawn to someone who is *exclusively* focused on intellectual pursuits... all those extremes just end up being exhausting, at least in my experience. And honestly? It feels like we live in an American culture that practically rewards being extreme.
It always brings me back to that classic golden rule: "Moderation in all things."

nimblecobra79 said:...which is exactly why Jesus, being completely pure through His sacrifice, was able to wipe away all our wrongdoings...

Just memorized it... 😛

So, I was sitting here thinking about this earlier... which bad deeds did Jesus actually undo, and who were they actually targeting? It’s one of those deep questions that makes you really stop and stare at the ceiling for a minute... I mean, when you look at how He moved through the world, it wasn't just about fixing things on a surface level. It felt more like He was reaching into the messy, broken parts of people's lives to pull them out... almost like He was rewriting their history in real-time. Whether it was breaking the chains of someone caught in a cycle of addiction or simply showing grace to people that society had already written off as lost causes... it feels like He was nullifying the damage done by others. It wasn't just about punishing the "bad guys," though. It was more about canceling out the weight of their mistakes... making it so those actions didn't define the person anymore. It's heavy stuff to wrap your head around... but truly transformative...
What did his death actually bring to the table... things that wouldn't have happened if he hadn't shown up at all? Looking down from above, from a divine perspective, I guess...

If you look at it from a certain angle, it’s almost a given that Jesus had to be a real person if his followers were actually going to carry his message out into the world... I mean, ideas don't just spread themselves without someone to start them. But that isn't really how the Church frames the whole thing. Their take is different... they focus on the idea that the sacrifice was what God required... it was necessary...
So, I'm trying to wrap my head around what you mean... how exactly is it that God can't get anything done without someone having to pass away first? And if that's the case, how does it even work then... I guess I'm just looking for a bit more clarity on that part... 😁

If you can just shift how you see God... everything else starts to make a whole lot more sense...
😉

I don't think I ever actually said that I was confused... or maybe I did mention it somewhere? If I did, then it’s not the core stuff that’s tripping me up. It's more like... I just can't wrap my head around how some people think. You know, certain theories or doctrines, or even that specific point you made earlier... it just doesn't quite click for me...
God and I have this way of understanding each other without even needing to say a word, so thanks for asking... And honestly, even if we weren't on the same page, just leave us to work things out ourselves. It’s never a good idea to go inserting yourself into a situation between two people... 😁

hollowviper72 said:You’ve got a point there, but honestly, just like I wouldn't want a girl who only cares about her looks, I wouldn't want one who is *exclusively* intellectual either... all those extremes just wear you out, at least they do for me. And we're living in a society that seems to push those extremes pretty hard, if you ask me.
And I always end up circling back to that old golden rule: "Moderation in all things"...

Come on, don't talk nonsense. 😛
It isn't really about being moderate, it's about priorities.
Whatever matters most to you, and how much it matters, that's what a girl "has" to have to fit your life.
If, say, brains are way more important to you than looks, then she'll be more of a thinker than a model.
If you value both equally, she'll be equal too, but if you're all about the physical side, well, you'll end up with a blonde bombshell. 😁
You just decide based on what you're drawn to. Everyone else does the same.

There isn't some universal formula involving moderation or extremes or any of that crap... there's just a formula for every single individual, so roughly 6 billion different versions. 😁
Or maybe just 3? Since two people who actually click usually share the same priorities... 🙂

For example, I'm definitely not "moderate," and I'd lose my mind with someone who is just a little bit of everything, to be honest. 😁
Certain traits of hers would have to be miles ahead of everything else, otherwise, it just won't work... 😂

Jack Harris3 said:Just memorized stuff. 😛

So, which specific bad deeds did Jesus actually cancel out?
And what did his death really achieve that couldn't have happened if he hadn't shown up at all? Looking down from above—from a divine perspective, if you will—I’ll pray about it.

Sure, if Jesus had to exist just to have followers spreading his ideas, that's a given. But that's not how the Church explains it—they claim the sacrifice was necessary to God.
Then explain this: what exactly is it that God can't handle unless one man dies first, and how does that even work? 😁

I don't think I ever said I didn't understand—is that written somewhere? If it is, then what I'm struggling with isn't the basics, it's the logic of certain people, or specific doctrines, or YOUR claim up there.
God and I understand each other without words, thanks for asking. And even if we didn't, let us two figure it out ourselves. You should never try to wedge yourself between two people like a third wheel... 😁

No, it's not just memorized. Honestly, your literal, narrow-minded take on this makes it look like *you're* the one who just swallowed everything you were told without thinking for yourself.

Our own failures. Why would we even be here—would we even know what suffering and pain are—if we hadn't strayed from the law, from God?

I already told you what his death brought: balance, the wiping away of sin.
It wasn't a sacrifice God needed, but rather we and the law we broke need it—though that law still stands, it's relentless and unchanging. That debt has to be paid, one way or another.
Can you wrap your head around that? Try approaching it from a different angle than whatever they drilled into you.
Forget the Church's explanations for a second; they're technically right, but they're so oversimplified that they end up sounding fake or just plain wrong.
Use your brain and find your own answers—you don't have to listen to a word I say.

"What exactly is it that God can't handle without..."?
😁 Man, you actually made me laugh. 😉
I'm telling you, your whole understanding of God and everything else is just fundamentally flawed.

Glad you two get along so well—it would be a lot better if you actually knew who you were talking to. 😁

nimblecobra79 said:Our own failings. I mean, would we even be here? Would we ever truly understand what suffering and pain actually feel like if we hadn't turned our backs on the law, on God?

So Jesus fixed all that? Great. Then why aren't we back in Paradise yet? 😁

I already explained what His death accomplished—it brought balance, a way to nullify sin.

Which sins, though? Be specific, please.
The original sin can't be the answer, because if that was "nullified," everything should have reverted back to how it was before it happened... that's just how nullification works.
So, which sins are we talking about then?

It’s not that God needs a sacrifice, it's that we do, and the law we stepped away from does too. That law still stands; it's relentless and unchanging. It has to be satisfied, one way or another.

What law? Are you saying you have to pay a fine for messing up?
Jesus didn't abolish that law. It's still very much in effect.
If that's the case, then what was the point of the sacrifice?

If things were state A before He died, and they became state B after, then what changed?
And if things were always just "A" anyway, then who and what was being sacrificed for?

Why is it that nobody seems to have a straight answer to that? 😁

Don't give me the "just think about it" or "you don't understand" routine... I'm asking for specifics, so I'd appreciate a specific answer.
There isn't anything I can't explain if I lay out the argument clearly. I could do it a million different ways, and you'd eventually get where I'm coming from if your IQ was higher than your shoe size.

Look, I've got patience, and my IQ is more than enough to handle this, so go ahead and explain.
So far, you haven't. 😁

hollowviper72 said:Also, just so we’re clear, I value brains way more than looks. That doesn't mean my girlfriend has to be a genius or anything, just... you know, not a total airhead. Plus, I've never really been into huge breasts anyway. 🙂

See? Told you I was right. 😁
He just goes, "plus I don't like huge breasts," while claiming he wants someone smart... as if those two things aren't connected. If she's smart, she'll naturally have more substance than just physical traits, because let's face it, you won't even bother with anyone else otherwise. 😂
But if her curves are a handful and her IQ is low, then she's not smart enough for him... and if her IQ is high but her curves are also heavy, then he'll claim they're too much and he'll feel suffocated. 😂

And that, my friends, would be his version of "moderation." Just trying to balance everything out perfectly... 😛

Jack Harris3 said:So Jesus fixed it? Great—then why aren't we back in paradise yet? 😁

It’s our call, really—if we actually want paradise, we can have it.
Jesus showed us how to live (following that universal law) if we want true Life, and He gave us the chance to tap into love—that vital energy—at any moment to wipe away every sin and make everything new and right again.

Jack Harris3 said:Which sins? Be specific, if you can.
The first sin can't be "wiped out," because if it were, things would just be back to how they were before it happened—just like any other cancellation.
So, which ones are we talking about?

Read what I wrote above. It's the first, the second, and every single other sin—as long as we let them happen. And then, yeah, the state is exactly like the beginning, plus the awareness of what exists outside of God.

Jack Harris3 said:What law? The one where you pay for what you screw up?
Jesus didn't abolish that. That law still stands.
So why even bother with a sacrifice?

Yes, that law still holds. But like I said, if you let love into yourself, it repairs the damage caused by its absence—damage that led to sin in the first place. Now, it might seem like we can't let that love in, but we can, because our essence (God) essentially "pushes" us to move forward, grow, and become aware.
If that weren't the case, everything would just spiral downward toward total death.
From where I'm sitting, we're all becoming more conscious.
So the sacrifice is in providing the opportunity to fix things—to nullify the damage (in ourselves and by extension, around us) caused by sin. You could see that sacrifice as proof of how we can break free from the fear that usually stops us from living by the law.
Whoever is willing to lose themselves will find themselves.

Jack Harris3 said:How was it State A before His death, and State B after?
And if State A was already the case, what exactly did He sacrifice himself for, and for whom?

Why is it that nobody can give a straight answer to this? 😁

I explained that above.

Jack Harris3 said:I don't care about "think about it" or "you don't get it" or whatever... I'm asking for specifics, so if you can, give me a specific answer.
There is nothing I can't explain if I lay out the claim. I can do it a million different ways if I have to, but you'll eventually get what I mean if your IQ is higher than your shoe size.

I've got enough intelligence—my IQ blows my entire meager existence out of the water—so start explaining.
So far, you haven't. 😁

There, I finally gave you a straight answer.😉

nimblecobra79 said:The choice is ours; we have heaven if we simply want it.
Jesus showed us how we ought to live (according to the universal law) if we want Life, and he gave us the opportunity to tap into love (life energy) at any moment—a force that wipes away every sin and makes everything new and right again.

Just read what's above. So, whether it’s the first sin, the second, or any other, it all comes down to whether we allow it. And then, the state of things is truly just like the beginning, plus the realization of what exists outside of God.

Still, nothing actually changes, and nothing is undone.

The reality remains that your actions (or lack thereof) here on Earth determine your place in Heaven.
Even before him, anyone could "tap into love" at any point in time.
People have always been the architects of their own hell or heaven through their own conduct, both before and after Jesus.

True, that law still stands. But like I said, if you let love into yourself, it repairs those deformities caused by the absence of love, which is what led to sin in the first place.
Right now, it might seem like we can't even let that love in, but we can, because our very essence (God) is designed to push us forward, to grow, and to become aware.

So, love only started appearing with Jesus? It didn't exist during those thousands of years before him?
And nobody was able to "let it in" back then?
I wouldn't go that far. 😁
Because if that were true, I'd have to ask where our essence (God) was for those thousands of years. 😉
And I'm sure you'll tell me that God is eternal and unchanging, so that same God—who is also our essence (and they say God is love 😁)—was inside us all along in the exact same way, not just since Jesus showed up.

It's still not clear what changed after Jesus compared to before.
Everything you mentioned was already an available option before he arrived.

Let's say Jesus came to set an example of how to live.
Fine, he did. But why did he have to die the way he did? He could have died of old age. He would have had even more time to speak and teach. Or even a heart attack.
And in the same vein, he could have revealed himself to his apostles after some ordinary, unremarkable death to prove they too would rise if they lived like him, if that was the goal. Some people claim the whole thing was about the resurrection...

Some see it as pure symbolism... the old, human "self," the bad and sinful part, needs to be nailed to the cross to die, so that a new, spiritual "self" can rise from it—something "not of this world."

But Jesus was already "perfect" even before being nailed to the cross; he didn't have a bad or sinful "self" that needed to be crushed. Theoretically, he wasn't even "of this world" during his life, so there was nothing for him to nail to the cross.
So, once again, I don't agree.

Not much else to say here...

Events shape our past just as much as they dictate our future.

What Jesus accomplished stands true for all eternity.

Besides, time is nothing more than an illusion we live by.

Think about it—the law of action and reaction is absolute and unchangeable (it works that way for every law).
So, every sin we commit triggers a bad consequence, and because of that consequence
it becomes nearly impossible to choose good—it's just one endless loop.
And what would happen to us then? We wouldn't exist, because that cycle leads straight to ultimate death.

But if someone—just like Jesus did—takes that burden from us through their suffering, then we can finally break free from that cursed circle.
Emphasis on *can*.

That’s why we all have the chance to let our essence (God) evolve our consciousness and understanding, making the choice for good feel easier—and more natural.

nimblecobra79 said:So basically, every sin carries a bad consequence, and because of that consequence
it becomes almost impossible to choose good, creating this endless loop...

Not quite.
The whole point of a bad consequence is just to show you that what you did wasn't actually a brilliant move.
That consequence is there to nudge someone into not doing it again—essentially helping them choose good.
Nothing more than that...

What would happen to us then? We wouldn't exist, because that would lead to ultimate death.

It would be the same as it is now.
Some people pay attention to the consequences and learn, others don't...
And as for ultimate death, we can't really talk about that since even non-ultimate death hasn't been proven yet... 😁

No, if someone, just like Jesus did, takes our suffering away through their own pain, then we can finally break free from that enchanted circle.

But He didn't take anything away, really.
Bad things will still have bad consequences, and people are still going to suffer.

And that’s why we can all allow our essence (God) to develop us—our consciousness and understanding—making the choice of good easier and more natural.

We could have done that since the beginning of time.
Except humans tend to get too full of themselves, spitting on the very God they claim to believe in by making His work conditional on our "permission"... and you keep insisting that our essence is God.
If that's true now, it was true from the start.
There's still no real explanation for the sacrifice.
The same essence (God) has always existed, the same possibilities, the same laws, the same sins and consequences...
So what exactly did Jesus change with His death?

Jack Harris3 said:We’ve been this way since the moment we were created.
Aside from the fact that people get too full of themselves—spitting in the face of the very God they claim to worship by acting like their "permission" is some prerequisite for God to act—you keep insisting our essence *is* God.
If that's the case now, it was true from the start.
And there's still zero explanation for the sacrifice.
The same essence (God) has always existed, the same possibilities, the same laws, the same sins and consequences...
So what exactly did Jesus change with His death?

We could only be this way because of Jesus' sacrifice.
I've already said—it doesn't work in a straight line; it works for all time.

Besides, if God isn't the essence of everything that exists, nothing would be alive—because God *is* life.

And yeah, permission matters. You can't have anyone give you love if you don't believe or even realize you're allowed to receive it.
You've probably heard about those cases where certain people—like those spiritual healers or energy workers—can channel love easily but still can't heal everyone, even though they can help most.
Or look at the instance where Jesus was baffled by the sheer lack of faith in one specific area, because He couldn't perform a single healing miracle there.

Jack Harris3 said:Wrong.
Consequences exist specifically to show you that what you did wasn't some stroke of genius.
The whole point of a consequence is to steer someone toward making a better choice next time.
That’s it.

It’s the same way it works for us.
Some people actually pay attention to the fallout and learn—others don't.
And we won't worry about final death yet, since even eternal life hasn't been proven... 😁

He didn't take anything away.
Bad actions will still have bad consequences, and people will suffer for them.

Sure, they exist for that reason, but they can enslave a person—which would be the case if Jesus' sacrifice didn't exist.
Can an unhappy person actually act with goodness?
Or will they accept love and use it to wipe out their misery, or just keep acting out?

Because you can't be good to others while being rotten to yourself.
Besides, when you're being hard on yourself, you're doing damage too—that's basically the definition of an unhappy person.

People suffer from their own actions when they refuse to admit they messed up—so instead of feeding those patterns (or those addictions), they need to grab onto the love constantly being offered to them. That gives them the strength and joy needed to change course and undo the damage.

Not everyone suffers, though; some people have freed themselves so much, and are so connected with God, that they know love is always within reach regardless of what happens. Nothing can touch them.
Joy is their reality.

Being moderate doesn't mean being bland or just settling for mediocrity. In fact—if we're being honest—true moderation is actually quite rare in this day and age.

And let's be real: nothing ever ends well when you take things to an extreme.

Oh, please. That’s nothing more than some silly theory rooted in Christian origins. 😁

Besides, who’s actually talking about overdoing it?
If I’m feeling hungry ten times a day, then yeah, I’m going to eat ten times. You might look at me and say I'm being excessive, but from where I'm standing, I'm just doing exactly what needs to be done.
To me, "overdoing it" would be eating when you aren't even hungry, or following that old system used by the Romans where they would just gorge themselves, purge, and then load up again... just a constant cycle...
Meeting the needs of both the body and the soul can never, and will never, be considered excessive in my eyes. 😁
And those needs are personal. One person might need a whole lot more, while someone else needs way less.
It would honestly be much smarter to just use that as our guide.

Practicing moderation in all things isn't about being dull or foolish; it's actually quite the opposite.
To be moderate means you’re truly mindful of your actions—someone who acts without intention usually ends up doing far too little or way too much, but almost never just enough.

Of course, moderation depends entirely on the context. Take food, for example: a balanced person eats just enough to satisfy their hunger without feeling weighed down by overindulgence. They don't starve themselves, but they actually take the time to appreciate what's on their plate. A Roman who spends every meal gorging himself can't even taste his food anymore—he just has to keep eating more and more just to feel something.

Then again, there are certain things where moderation isn't purely a personal choice, even if our own judgment always plays some kind of role in how we see it.

A man who lacks moderation when pursuing justice will inevitably commit an injustice.
And someone who isn't moderate in their capacity for love? Well, they'll likely end up causing nothing but friction and discord.

Ultimately, moderation is a true hallmark of wisdom—because, at the end of the day, every passion needs a bit of restraint.

hollowviper72 said:...because every passion needs to be kept in check.

Why though?

Actually, I tend to listen to Ennio. 🙂
Whenever I need something playing in the background, it’s almost always the Star Wars soundtrack. 😛

I like to think of "Soul Alchemy" as this deep process where—through meditation—accumulated knowledge isn't just processed by the brain, but is actually absorbed into the spirit itself, settling at a much more fundamental level than mere intellect. In other words, it’s about bridging that gap between what we understand logically and our emotional or spiritual shortcomings. It’s called "Alchemy" for a reason; much like the pursuit of The Philosopher's Stone, the final result becomes something far greater than just the sum of its parts.

Jack Harris3 said:But why?

Because—let's be honest—passion can act like a blindfold, obscuring the true fullness of life, and I truly believe we need to navigate this journey with our eyes wide open. Why? Because we only get one shot at this, we have no idea what comes next, and we simply shouldn't let life slip through our fingers by being too caught up in the moment.

Gaudrath said:Actually, I tend to follow Enyu’s lead on this one. 🙂
Whenever I need something to really sink in, I always have a Star Wars soundtrack playing in the background. 😛

"Soul alchemy" is essentially the process where, through deep meditation, accumulated knowledge is absorbed directly into the spirit itself, storing it at a foundational level rather than just keeping it in the intellect. To put it more bluntly, it’s the act of bridging that gap between an intellectual insight you've grasped and those emotional or spiritual deficiencies you still carry. It’s called "alchemy" simply because, much like the creation of the Sage of Stone, the final result becomes something far greater than just the sum of its individual parts.

Like I said before, unless you actually transition into working with metal and getting your hands dirty with physical labor, all this philosophizing is pretty much useless. 😁

njonjonjkokodak 🙂