I Am a Liberal Conservative...But I'm Not a Bad Guy...

Okay, so here it is. I'm "outing" myself, once and for all. Too many times I've seen the left taking jabs at the right, and I swallowed my words. Well, I'm out now.

I'm a Republican. *gasp*

Yes, I know. It's crazy, especially in this world today. We're the "bad guys." And it's all because of Bush, right?

Sure, no problem. Take all the jabs you want, but when it comes down to it, my beliefs don't make me a bad guy. Neither do Bush's.

While I might share the same opinion as many republicans on many different issues, I come to these conclusions for different reasons. Hence, I throw the word "liberal" at the front of the title. Sort of a way to disguise my intentions...heh...

Not everyone who sits to the right has a taste for blood, as it is so often portrayed by the left. For instance: gun control, while seemingly a good idea, only takes these weapons out of the hands of those who would use it for defense, therefore, limiting one's capabilities to defend oneself from those who obtain the items illegally.

Pro-war? Back and forth. I'm against the necessity of war. Does that make the need go away? Of course not. I know, I know, it goes against everything one can believe about human kind when we say that war is sometimes the necessity. But, I don't know if you were paying attention or not...but not everyone on this planet is here to see you succeed. There are some pretty mean guys in some pretty powerful seats around the globe, and sometimes - just sometimes - they get their sights on ending someone else's successes. And we absolutely must protect ourselves and others. It's as simple as that. Do I want to go to war? No. I'm ready for bloodshed to come to an end. Will it, just because of my wishes? Probably not.

I could go on about that.

Pro-choice? Absolutely not. If there's a choice, it should be saving the life. It's not just a mass of cells...it's a life. Why not just take birth control? Oh, yeah...that would make too much sense. What about rapes? I understand the emotions involved. I really do. But it is not the fault of that little life what happens before it's conceived. And I fight for life. Besides, adoption really is a viable option.

These are but a few of the whole. But just because I'm a Republican doesn't mean I follow all ideas of the party.

Tree-hugger? Yes...I even hate pulling the weeds out of my flower bed. Why? Because I'm CRAZY. Even plants scream when when you rip them from the ground. With polution, I recognize there are problems with the environment, and with nature, and very much wish to see these improve.

Pro-death penalty? Absolutely not. This basically eliminates any room for error in such a case. Someone's life is not really what I want to put up for a wager in a situation like this.

So whatever. I am a conservative.

I make reference to a comment I left on Jordan Stratford's blog site:

If a person is "liberal," then literally, it means that he/she is a
person
free of bigotry or prejudices and rule of the established norm.
However,
"conservativism" doesn't mean the polar opposite. I think Edmond
Burke's
definition is best: "conservatism is a disposition to preserve, and a
will
to improve."

Being a conservative in the political sense today almost
always groups you
in with those who are inevitably pro-death penalty and
pro-war. But this
isn't neccesarrily the case either, as "conservative
philosophy" is older than
"conservative politics." One can be conservative
and still side with the
"left" or the "right."

Okay, so now I'm done. You are free to attack. Keep in mind, though: I'm still not a bad guy.

- Joe

Savior Returned

Molded to my heart
Is the sound of your sight.
I hear your touch
And I feel your life.

I’m sober again
Once so drunken before.
Ignorance left me shallow
Fear left my spirit poor.

Light shown through
And the dark was smothered.
Shades of gray colored
Clarity was recovered.

Given the truth
A ray of hope shines
Knowledge of self
My path now unwinds.

My spirit is pulsing
Filled with rejoice
Longing to return
And give Silence a voice.

I recovered the quest
Now knowing the way
The savior is saved
There will be no delay.

Seekers will be sought
Knowledge revealed
Knowing the way forward
Herding sheep to the field.

Dependent on me
The rest of the fold
Spirits of light
They await truth to be told.

Awake sleeping souls!
It’s time to discern
All must find the lost
The guide has returned.

I will lead you to Him
Everlasting delight
For my yoke is easy
And my burden is light.


Original by Joe Daher

Interview With Gnostic Priest

Rev. Troy is a prominant member of the Ecclesia Gnostica, and he recently gave an interview at The Green Triangle. Below is the link.

Enjoy.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research

I've stayed out of this for a while, hearing the collective "liberal" side of the discussion from a few different perspectives - mainly gnostic at heart. Not bad opinions, but very liberal (which, hey, seems to be most of the gnostic world).

Well, I've classified myself as a liberal conservative, so I'm sure I can bring a flip side to this discussion. Here's my take.

An embryonic stem cell is basically a "master cell," one that it is capable of transforming itself into just about any type of cell in the body. Scientists believe that we can use these cells to help regenerate damaged organs or tissues that occur because of certain deseases.

How do we get these cells? Well, that's where the controversy comes from.

The stem cells form inside the inner wall of early-stage human embryos, called blastocysts, which hold anywhere from 50 to 150 cells.

These blastocysts form when the human embryo is about 5 days old.

So where's the problem?

The problem comes in when you try to extract the stem cells. Because of the amount needed to do the research, the extraction of stem cells kills the embryo. Hence, no life for the pre-baby.

This is where the moral issues come from. In order to do the research on the cells, they must kill the embryo. Killing the embryo must also mean killing the potential human baby that forms from the embryo.

Now, I've heard the claims that the mass of 150 cells can in no way be called a human. These claims are very valid. This lump of cells has no tissue, no nerves, no brains, no body. It is essentially just what it is - a mass of cells.

However, I *very strongly* beg to differ about the humanity of the situation. This same lump mass of cells originated each human being that is alive today. While you cannot claim that the cells are human, they certainly have an important role to play.

Only certain conditions can arise in order to produce a life. These certain conditions are important when they occur, because they do not occur all the time in every human. When the circumstances are right, life manifests itself. The manifestation in these circumstances are contributed from the male sperm enjoining with the female egg. Boom - life is made.

Imagine, for a second, if you're parents had stopped your birth from ever happening. Imagine if you stopped your kid's birth. Imagine that.

I find it incredibly flawed logic to insist that this "lump of cells" is so insignificant that we can just kill it - especially given its potential. This "lump of cells" could grow into a scientist with a cure for cancer, or a global leader that finally solves the dispute between Israel and Islam. Or maybe, just maybe, it's potential is something different. Maybe, just maybe, this "lump of cells" grows into someone's child, someone who is "unimportant." Maybe they'll serve the purpose of just being a human, and just loving someone else.

So what - it's my opinion.

Another idea - why don't we extract the cells from embryos that are already dying, such as aborted babies?

Well, here's my issue with that. While these aborted embryos are subject to be destroyed anyway (an issue I still have problems justifying, but I'll tackle abortion later), it doesn't present a problem to work on them now. However, I see a problem with this in the future.

If people can justify in their minds the act of aborting their unbegotten babies, then there will be more abortions. If people can say "hey, I'm helping science" then it can justify, in their minds, aborting the potential humans they carry within themselves. Immoral doctors can try to talk potential parents into aborting when it's not necessary. Oh, and don't be so naive as to think there's no such thing as an immoral doctor.

This, to me, is the inverse route we need to take. No matter how you look at it, or how you justify it in your mind, you have to kill a life. I realize the potential in this research, and that's why we need to take certain routes to investigate matters more closely. Just today, I read an article where a scientist might be able to extract stem cells without killing the embryo. Things like this are very important, and they have my full support.

I know, also, that everyone is real quick to jump on the "Down-With-Bush" bandwagon. I'm not so fast to jump on that buggy. Bush realizes the potential involved here, too, and that's why he's provided funding for this research - the only president to do so, I might add - and that list includes Clinton. Bush realizes the potential problems with it as well, and that's why the precautions are set up.

But hey, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe killing potential life is the best way to save life.

Maybe not.

The Role Of Sacraments

From Fr. Jordan Stratford's blog: Living Gnosticism: 20 Questions

6. If the sacraments don’t lead to gnosis, automatically or even eventually, what’s the role/need for the sacraments in Gnosticism?

A.

The Seven Sacraments of the church are to be recognized as ceremonial for the most part, and ritualistic as a lesser part. While the sacraments themselves do not confer gnosis, knowledge, grace, or wisdom, they are understood to be a symbolic manifestation of such, and should thereby be treated as an important step in the spiritual life of the subject.

If there were no sacraments, Divine awareness would still be extant. However, as a traditional practice, and as a guide for the seeker, the sacraments are in place to allow those seeking the path a way to allow themselves in a conscious manner to succumb to the fruits of Divine grace. I would equate it to turning the TV off to think clearly.

So the Seven Sacraments, while not necessarily needed, are not altogether useless either. From a traditional standpoint, they serve the goal of being a way to ceremonially proceed through the spiritual life.

I've been looking more into the sacraments from a traditional standpoint in my studies with the AJC. There's a big emphasis on the sacramental tradition, and I'm slowly understanding more of this "churchy" stuff. I hope to better understand the role that the sacraments play as I continue my lessons and hope I can portray a better understanding to the community.

I AM

And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

(Exodus 3:13-14)


I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

(Revelations 22:13)


For I am the first and the last.
I am the honored one and the scorned one.
I am the whore and the holy one.
I am the wife and the virgin.

(Thunder: The Perfect Mind)


I am not your rolling wheels
I am the highway
I am not your carpet ride
I am the sky
I am not your blowing wind
I am the sky here
I am not your automn moon
I am the night

(Audioslave: I Am the Highway)

Okay, so that last one was from a song. But it still counts. ;-)

Expressing Gnosticism

From Fr. Jordan Stratford's blog: Living Gnosticism: 20 Questions

4. How do you express your Gnosticism in your daily life?

A. I try to apply it several different ways.

First, I slow down. Too many people miss the simple pleasures in life because they’re in such a hurry to do everything. I try not to rush too much from place to place, because I don’t want to rush through my sensations. I like my sense of smell, personally. I love to smell the roses that bloom in my yard, to smell the trees around me, and take a big breath of fresh air.

I like to also show compassion wherever I go; my wife often yells at me because I’d rather put the spider outside instead of stepping on it. This isn't always easy, however. It's usually easier to be the apathetic stranger who never helps anyone. I go to blood drives. I donate money. When possible, I try to volunteer my help (doesn't have to be to charities; just helping someone move is enough).

While it is often a struggle, I try to realize that most people are affected by their surroundings, whether positive or negative. Therefore, when I’m around other people, I try to be a positive force, so that they will take that bit of positivity to the next person. If I can brighten up someone’s day on Tuesday, that might keep them from killing themselves or someone else years later.

Babysteps.

Everything I practice flows naturally from within. I don't force myself to be the way I am. As the saying goes, "I AM THAT I AM." Gnosis expresses itself. You just have to allow it to do so.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no saint. But I have a terrible attack from my "conscience" whenever I don't follow through with my initial feelings. The Gospel of Thomas gives an excellent saying regarding the conscience (at least that's my take):

If you bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do not bring forth will destroy you.

Gospel of Thomas
Saying 70

Pax

Honor Thy Gnosis

"What makes us free is the Gnosis"

Credo
Apostolic Johannite Church

I'm constantly finding myself in a struggle to define in terms what "Gnosticism" is. Because of this, I'm put in a position to rationalize the experience. While this doesn't lead to automatic suppression of any such experience, it can when the gnosis is ignored for the Gnosticism.

With this in mind, I've almost found a definition of Gnosticism that I'm happy with. Through silent observation of dialogue over at Jordan Stratford's blog, I saw a good opportunity to actually sum up in words what it means. Sorry, Jordan+, if I'm stealing any such definition.

Gnosticism comes from the Greek word "gnosis." Gnosis is a universal experience of the Divine that exists within and around every religion. Gnosticism is a specific religion designed to amplify and enhance the experience of Gnosis.

There you have it.

This is as simple a definition as I can give without trying to TELL someone what Gnosis is (a task that can prove quite difficult). As well, I think it honors the experience of gnosis as being central to Gnosticism.

Peace.

It's Not Said Enough...

I love you.

Three simple words that have so much impact on another person's spirit. Even if we know how another person loves us, it is of great comfort when we hear the words come out of their mouth.

And yet, we still have problems saying it often. We don't think about saying it to our loved ones because we take them for granted. We don't realize that they might not be here tomorrow.

Intellectually, there's some pressure to say "I love you." If it's a spouse or a dating partner, it can come fairly easy after the first time it has been said. If it's a relative or a friend, it can feel awkward. And why? Because we don't like letting our guard down. Because we don't like feeling vulnerable. Because when we express our emotions, we let down our exterior blockade of sensitivity and reveal our true self.

I love you.

People have often felt regret when a loved one has passed and they didn't get to say "I love you" before they died. And yet, they continue through their lives without saying it to the people they can still express it to. They still live in their shielded box, guarded from emotive interaction.

Here and now, I say it to you all.

I love you.

My friends, my brothers, my sisters, parents and lovers: I love you all. Each one of you. I may disagree with you, I may believe differently from you...but I will never stop loving you.

To those who would call themselves my enemy...I hope you know that I will continue to love you, even if you attack me. If my plane is driven into a building, I will still love you.

If my country and my government fights with yours, I will still love you.

If you call yourself my friend, I love you still. That bond will never be broken. No trespass will ever stray my feelings. I love you still, now and forever.

If you call yourself my brother, or my sister, I love you.

If you call yourself a stranger, I love you. If there's ever anything I can do to help you, just ask. I will always be here for you. I love you.

If you think you're too strong for my love, I'm here when you fall. I love you, and I'll never abandon you.

I only want to help. I am sorry if I offend. I hope for the best, and I see God in everyone. Each person is good, no matter their crimes or trespasses. Everyone deserves our love.

I love you.

My Fight With Guilt

Yesterday, my long time friend - Jeremy Mixon - died.

Little background:

Jeremy and I have known each other for about 7 years. We met when he was 14 and I was 15, and we shared an apartment when we both moved out of our parents houses. We've been the best of friends. We've gone through a lot together - girlfriends, jobs, family issues, our apartment getting broken into, marriage, etc. He's been an important part of my life over the last decade.

When I got married (a little less than a year ago) we started to drift a little, mainly because I was now married and he was still leading the "crazy" single life.

Jeremy had Meningitis, which is a bacterial infection in your blood stream that can cause seizures. His sister, Amanda (and also one of my ex-girlfriends), found him in his bedroom on August 11 having a seizure. They told me the first seizure he had lasted almost an hour, causing serious damage to his brain. It knocked him into a coma, and he had seizures on and off.

The doctors said he had about a 5% chance of survival. There wasn't anything else they could do. His mother, knowing his intentions, respected Jeremy's wishes - he never wanted to be a vegetable. So, yesterday morning, she decided to take Jeremy off the life support.

I talked to her the day before she did it. I tried not to be too forceful, but I did express my opinion - I think life should always be given the chance. I don't think I fought for him enough.

However, in trying to remain tactful, I do feel obligated to honor the decision that was made.

I felt guilty for not being able to influence situations that were unfolding right before my eyes. I felt helpless for not being able to extend my hand to help Jeremy. I felt guilty.

After a few corresponding letters to Rev. Ken+ of the AJC, I have been helped back to my path. I realize now...the guilt is pointless. My range of influence has limits, and I can only extend my aide to those that now need it - his family. This is the role I need to be in right now - not feeling guilty about situations that I cannot help.

I love Jeremy, and he knew it. He was a brother to me without ever having been a brother. I will miss his company, his jokes, and his goofball approach to life. It's time to let my own selfish guilt go, and help those in the present - the ones who are still within my sphere of influence.

Jeremy Lamar Mixon

Jeremy Lamar Mixon

July 22, 1985 - August 16, 2006

Friend, side-kick, and brother. We will miss you very much. Good luck to you in your next adventure to this earthly realm.

I love you, my brother.

Do not stand at my grave and forever weep.

I am not there; I do not sleep.

I am a thousand winds that blow.

I am the diamond glints on snow.

I am the sunlight on ripened grain.

I am the gentle autumn’s rain.

When you awaken in the morning’s hush

I am the swift uplifting rush

Of quiet birds in circled flight.

I am the soft stars that shine at night.

Do not stand at my grave and forever cry.

I am not there.

I did not die.

I Did Not Die

Melinda Sue Pacho

Living Gnosticism: Question 3

From Fr. Jordan Stratford's blog: Living Gnosticism: 20 Questions

3.
(a) As a Gnostic, have you achieved gnosis?
(b) What is your experience of gnosis?
(c) If gnosis is “knowledge”of the Divine, do you believe in God?

A.
(a)I believe I have, but in sprinkles. It came the first time when I stopped trying to find gnosis outside of myself. When I stopped saying "now I'm going to find gnosis", it came. You don't find gnosis...you realize it.

(b)For me, Gnosis is not a “knowledge” per se, but more of a realization of the spirit in relation to the rest of reality. When focused, I can center myself on just my consciousness, and feel the difference between that awareness and mere bodily sensations. When gnosis is realized, you know that what we normally define as "reality" is the mere illusion of electrical impulses to the brain (I know, sounds like another Matrix cliche, but it's the truth). When you can differentiate between the sense of bodily reality and the actual *conscious*, then you are there. This is the greater consciousness.

(c) To be in touch with that part of your consciousness - to truly be aware of reality - is to have that communion with the Divine. To this end, there is no need - or room - for“belief” in God. Belief requires faith. Faith, by its definition, requires that you hold true to ideas that you cannot undoubtedly know beyond doubt. You don’t need to believe because you *know*.

Living Gnosticism: Question 2

From Fr. Jordan Stratford's blog: Living Gnosticism: 20 Questions

2. Is Gnosticism a distinct religion, an approach to religion, or a sect within another religion?

A. Gnosticism can be all three. For me, it is a distinct religion. I practice my daily routines while trying to maintain an outlook on life through my own gnosis. For someone else, it can be an approach to religion: you can have gnosis, which for the individual is very concrete awareness - yet you can believe anything about that awareness and its relationto reality. Still others look at Gnosticism as a sub-sect of Christianity, because the two grew together within the same roots.


Gnosticism can be absorbed through many approaches.

For some, Gnosticism is the "true" Christianity, the religion that Jesus really intended Christianity to be, but instead it got corrupted into what the current form is today. These Gnostics often refer to themselves as Gnostic Christians, which seemingly makes it a distinct sect of Christianity but still a Christianity nonetheless.

Others, of the modern day philosophy, tend to encompass Gnosticism as an "approach" to religion, being able to apply a Gnostic perspective to any set of beliefs. With this form, one can believe absolutely anything about Gnosticism, but Gnosis is always the key ingredient. For instance, you can follow Islam or Christianity with a search for the "truth," which can be applied aptly as "gnosis."

For me, Gnosticism is a distinct religion. *Most* Christians will not associate with the term "Gnosticism," as this seems to bring the ancient words of "heretic" and "blasphemer" back to the table. The modern day definition of "Christianity" has become so far gone from what I hold to be true that I don't even call myself "Christian" anymore. I still identify with the Christ, but not to "Christianity." And of course, the Jews and the Muslims don't really identify with Gnosticism either.

We really, then, have no choice but to accept Gnosticism as anything other than valid through the minds and beliefs of its own followers, which would make it a distinct religious view and practice. It seems to me that it is easy to bring a Gnostic perspective to any religion, as Gnosis is really the base to any spirituality, but you can't bring any religious perspective to Gnosticism.

Of course that's just my opinion.

Living Gnosticism: Question 1

From Fr. Jordan Stratford's blog: Living Gnosticism: 20 Questions

1. What’s the difference between gnosis and Gnosticism?

A. Gnosis is a realization of awareness; an understanding of reality. Gnosticism is the approach to life with the understanding of Gnosis.


Gnosis, in its original Greek form, is "experiential knowledge." The Greeks, when using this word, often used it in reference to "knowledge of the Divine." While I don't actually believe this is a great definition, it is a fair one. In fact, Gnosis is a "knowledge" with "Divine" intuitions. But I would rather use the word "awareness." After all, gnosis is not a knowledge that you seek outside of yourself, such as "intellectual knowledge." You can't read about gnosis and suddenly understand what it is. There is no school that helps confer this special "experiential" knowledge unto you.

It's like reading a book about brain surgery. Read all you like, take as many tests as you like, but you will never be able to perform brain surgery unless you have the adequate knowledge - that is, experience. So with this understanding of gnosis, I bring you to this definition: Gnosis is awareness of the self within reality and the relation of the self with the rest of reality.

That being said, Gnosticism and Gnosis are two different animals.

If a Buddhist practices Buddhism, does it automatically make him/her enlightened? Does it necessarily mean that they even understand what enlightenment is? No. But it is an active approach to enlightenment. The same principle is true of Gnosticism.

Gnosticism is (1) an active approach to gnosis, and (2) a view, interpretation, and overall effect on life through the experience(s) of gnosis. One does not necessarily have to HAVE gnosis in order to practice Gnosticism, which is seemingly a common misinterpretation from people both inside and outside of Gnosticism, and even some clergy members. The idea that you can't practice Gnosticism without having gnosis is just unfounded, and in my opinion completely defeats the purpose behind a Gnostic movement.

Gnosticism is a practice, through which is helpful for realization but not totally necessary for the experience of gnosis. One can realize gnosis, and never actually practice Gnosticism. However, Gnosticism is practiced mainly and chiefly through the quest for and the experience of Gnosis.

My Job and My Passion

I'm tired.

No, really.

I've just finished working 12 days straight, maybe 130 hours or so. Management changes within one of the regions that my company operates have left the need for some well trained managers to "step up," as the company puts it.

So I work. I go where I'm needed, stay at the grind all day, and go home. No one asks my opinions, but everyone wants my help.

I come home, and my wife - God bless her...she's so beautiful. She's three and a half months pregnant, and she is trying so hard to help me. She washes my clothes, cooks me dinner...she's great. She puts up with my long hours at work, and listens to my ramblings about my job and my religion. She cares nothing about Gnosticism, other than what it means to me. She tries to act like she cares, but I know she doesn't. It's not her fault. It's my thing, not hers.

So I study. I write my own little opinions on things that I am told to reflect on, and then I read and study some more. It's brain work, but it's what I need.

I go to bed, and then I wake up and do it again the next day.

I realized this afternoon, while I was working out in the sun, that my job was pretty pointless. There's no real need for the line of work that I'm in, as it's just another mindless job that appreciates hard mucles. For those who don't know, I am a field manager for corporate owned carwash company.

Pretty brainless work, I might add. I work, I help my customers, and I tend to my employees. My job could disappear off the face of the planet tomorrow, and nothing in this world would change.

This is my outlet - Gnosticism. Where I change into something different is here, away from my job. I am Joe, a private practicing Gnostic with aspiring hopes to join the Priesthood of the Apostolic Johannite Church, an esoteric gnostic communion. This is where I will make the difference that I seek in the world. This is where my work becomes important. This is what I have a passion for.

My job is important to me and my family. It helps me sustain a respectable atmosphere in the community with ups and downs. It is my job.

Gnosticism, however - that's my life. Gnosis is my passion.

Gnostic Buddhism

From wikipedia.org

The Four Noble Truths

1. Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death is suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering.

2. It is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there; that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination.

3. It is the remainderless fading away and cessation of that same craving, the giving up and relinquishing of it, freedom from it, and non-reliance on it.

4. It is this path that ends suffering - right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration."