This is http://www.essayz.com/b0506051.htm         
Previous-Essay      <== This-Essay ==>     Following-Essay
Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words.
{Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.}
==========================================================
%FALLEN POWERS THAT BEING MEANS SALVATION INTEGRITY 050605
%ORIGINAL SIN ADAM EVE TREE SEXUAL KNOWLEDGE GARDEN 050605
%DISOBEY CONFORM EVIL DEVIL TEMPT MAGIC CURE RESCUE 050605
%COSMIC CHAOS TECHNOCRATIC LEGALISM SCRIPTS SCRIBES 050605
%MANY ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS PANDORA BOX PARADIGM WAYS 050605
%DONT THINK ELEPHANT GEORGE LAKOFF FUNDAMENTAL PATH 050605

     What are the means by which humans enjoy personal and
communal integrity;  salvation?

     The  above is a difficult double question to frame!

     Is  personal  and communal integrity the  essence  of
salvation?    If so, salvation-from-what?   A cosmological
"FALL"?    If so when did the "FALL" occur?    Why did the
"FALL"  OCCUR?   Who is to blame for the "FALL"?    Who is
to "fix" the "FALL"?   For each individual"?   In a cosmic
sense?   "Is "magic" involved?   Is "technology" involved?
Are "technocrats/priests"  involved?   Are they "special"?
Good?  Evil?

     Is/was there any "FALL"  from which we as individuals
must be "saved"?  If NOT, what is the nature of the source
of dysfunctional relationships?  Of "evil"?  How are we to
deal with dysfunctional relationships?  How are we to deal
with "evil"?    How are we to identify "evil"  in  helpful
ways?     How   are  we  to  deal  with  "evil-people"  as
distinguished from "good-people"?  How are we to deal with
"technocrats"?      How  are we to deal with  domineering-
people?   With "The Domination System"?

     Are  we dealing only with one question?   How can  we
frame  the questions in  ways  which are not biased,  not-
prejudicial, not a denial of "due-process"?

     How  many different essential-questions must we  deal
with?   How can we frame all of the essential-questions in
ways which are not biased, not-prejudicial, not-denials of
"due-process"?

     How  do   various   religious/political   leaders-of-
integrity  deal with Pandora's Box full of  different ways
to  frame the essential-questions of life-and-death?  With
the various-responses to what we find in Pandora's Box?

     Are we inside, or outside, of Pandora's Box?  Of "The
Cosmic  Egg"?     In  either case,  what does it  mean  to
"crack"   the Cosmic Egg"?   What does it mean to  "crack"
Pandora's  Box?    Can we truly/honestly think outside  of
Pandora's  Box?    Can we truly/honestly think outside  of
the Cosmic Egg?     What difference does it make,  whether
or  not we try?   What difference does it make as  to  who
tries? Who has  authority to say what should be said?   Is
the  person  who has authority a domineering  person?    A
True-Lover?     What  difference does that  make?     What
difference  does  it make ---  as to who decides to think?
To  speak  truth to The-Powers-That-Be?   What  difference
does  it  make  whether The-Powers-That-Be  are  "fallen"?
Redeemed?   What has Walter Wink said in "The-Powers-That-
Be?"    Read and think and speak your complementary truths
to "The-Powers-That-Be".

     Can  we deal wisely with "The-Powers-That-Be"   while
keeping  silent  about traditionally taboo-topics and  how
they are intimately-inter-related in-repressive-ways?

                              Shalom!

                         (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in
                      "Search for Honesty and Integrity"
                    (On Being Yourself Whole and Healthy)

==========================================================