So, following on from the past blog entry. Where I critiqued Davids video from a Law of One perspective. I also wanted to follow up on a few last pieces that do not, directly, reference the Law of One.
This subject will be finished when it is finished! Even though I would like to move on now. It is what is going on in my head after looking over the video. So it is what I will say!
Biblical references.
The first point of two, is that David spoke at length about the bible in that video. Originally I liked this. But after watching, I realised David doesn't have a great deal of consistency in his biblical beliefs.
Since David was first looking at this kind of thing. About 20 years ago. There has been the raising of a spiritual teacher called "Aaron Abke". Who has made many, many videos on the idea that the Apostle Paul was a false prophet. That the Apostle Paul, put forward an idea of Christianity that was nothing like what Jesus taught. That Jesus had more of a salvation by works doctrine, and that Paul opposed this with a salvation by faith Doctrine.
Aaron Abke has also done videos/ discussion, on the Law of One. I have seen discussions of him in that community, and other things he talked about. So this perspective, and his research, that is deep, has many references, many videos. Is understood in the same kind of community that David Wilcock is addressing.
I believe Aaron Abke. I think that the mainstream Christian framework of "salvation by faith" was created by a mass murderer, who could not face is crimes. That a lot of the problems with Chrisitianity ultimately come from this. This sense of unearned virtue. It is why you get a problem with people gaining a foothold in Christianity who have no virtue. Because they do not have to prove it by works.
It is a very powerful and deep argument, David trying to take the whole discussion back to the basic mainstream narrative of Christianity, potentially might not work that well.
Another quote:
Along with the general narrative I criticised in my yesterday post.
29:06: The great spiritual teachings tell us that you have to love yourself first and foremost.
OK... Who says that? Jesus gave two directions when someone asked him what was the best way to progress: One, is love the creator. Two, is love your neighbour as yourself.
The Law of One has similar ideas. It advises using mental exercises to get closer to the Creator in Session 10.14. But it talks a great deal about 'service to others'. Even though it does not explicitly state that that always means actually service others. Since it so often refers to things in a way referencing mystery. But even the chosen term 'service to others', suggesting serving others. Not the self.
He referred to this being about "acceptance". But if you are to accept yourself, who would assume that was automatically love? It might be, it is more loving than not accepting yourself. But if you accept things about yourself that are say... unethical, devious, delusional. Then the result of acceptance might be disgust and change.
Acceptance and Loving oneself are not the same thing.
I don't know enough of every single spiritual teaching. I read a large part of the Qur'an and did not hear anything about self love. I have looked into Buddhism a little. Non attachment is the key there. Nothing about self love. But I really do not know enough.
I think that this is yet another time when David just has an unresearched, emotionally preferred opinion. And assigns the opinion to some other source "the great spiritual teachings". To conceal the fact that they are exactly that. His opinion. And a not very compelling one at that.
No comments:
Post a Comment