The Minimal Facts for the Resurrection of Christ.

[Wyote]

Do you really want to know or are you just asking to ask?

I am genuinely interested

 

[aeon]

You make it seem like people should live their lives to be accepted.

Not at all. People can rightly live their lives however they wish.

That said, I do wish for people’s happiness, however they might define that. If I hear they are less-than-well, I hope for their healing, and growth, and well-being.

I like the idea of a person thriving, and breaking through imaginary limits and realizing potentials within them, but that is always on their terms, and rightly so, because it is their responsibility.

Categorization doesn't necessitate projection.

Correct, in the case when that which is known, is categorized. Absent that knowledge, projection is required.

Please provide an argument for why categorization requires projection.

In and of itself, it does not. Done in the absence of knowledge, projection must occur such that judgment and categorization may then occur.

Was Jung just projecting for all his theories?

No, because they were just that—theories.

Yet those theories came from knowing people for who they were, himself most of all.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[QuickTwist]

I am genuinely interested

Alright, feel free to read the first chapter of my book I wrote. You don't have to buy the book for this. You can just read the preview or whatever it is called. Almost the full first two chapters are in the preview. The first is where I talk about how my mind works and such. Again, you don't have to buy my book to read the whole first chapter. You just have to click on the preview or whatever it is called.

(FYI, it is called "read sample" not "preview")

Schizoaffective Disorder and Christianity: In Search of the Truth of God's Sovereignty and Human Will - Kindle edition by Dornfeld, Jesse . Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.

Schizoaffective Disorder and Christianity: In Search of the Truth of God's Sovereignty and Human Will - Kindle edition by Dornfeld, Jesse . Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.

a.co

 

[QuickTwist]

It is when you do the right thing in the right way.

if you do it the wrong way consequences happen.

that can be inside or outside the overton window so has nothing to do with political correctness.

Still not sure I understand...

Does it have to do with offending people?

 

[Wyote]

Alright, feel free to read the first chapter of my book I wrote.

Not what I was asking for or interested in but thanks anyway

 

[QuickTwist]

Not what I was asking for or interested in but thanks anyway

I asked you if you wanted to know how I think. The first chapter (which, I will repeat) is free to read on Amazon, which details how I think.

I guess you don't actually want to know then.

 

[Wyote]

I guess you don't actually want to know then

What I'm interested in is organic connection.
My question and curiosity was a vehicle towards that.
I can read your chapter and likely will, but it won't give me what I'm actually interested in, which is hearing your current frame of mind and today's version of how you perceive yourself as a thinking human.
It's a very different experience from reading something planned out and orchestrated with a purpose.

Also not very kind of you to brush me off like that.

 

[QuickTwist]

What I'm interested in is organic connection.
My question and curiosity was a vehicle towards that.
I can read your chapter and likely will, but it won't give me what I'm actually interested in, which is hearing your current frame of mind and today's version of how you perceive yourself as a thinking human.
It's a very different experience from reading something planned out and orchestrated with a purpose.

Also not very kind of you to brush me off like that.

You asked me how I think. I went out of my way to ask you if you really wanted to know the answer to THAT question. I provided a resource which you could read all about the answer to that question. If you don't read it, IDK what I am to think. I don't care if you read it or not. If you do actually want to know how I think, that is the resource to read.

 

[aeon]

It is helpful to know you have Schizoaffective disorder for the simple fact it provides a larger context for understanding.

My heart goes to you.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[QuickTwist]

It is helpful to know you have Schizoaffective disorder for the simple fact it provides a larger context for understanding.

My heart goes to you.

Cheers,
Ian

Thanks, I appreciate that. But, I don't need people's sympathies. I have it pretty good, all things considered. Again, I want to reiterate that in this thread, this thread especially, the I in this does not matter much. I'm not here, especially in this thread, to talk about myself or what is wrong with me, or what is right with me, or whatever else. It's not about me, especially in this thread. It's about Jesus and the resurrection. We have gotten so off topic here. I'd like to bring it back if we can, but as @John K mentions, since this is an NF group, the facts are not going to be the primary thing here. And, actually, I've been debating whether I am INTJ instead of INFJ recently. I don't think INFP fits me much except that I am messy IRL. But, the way I think is much more Ni than Fi or Ti and my Si is abysmal, just as is my Se. I am the worst at sensing. But, maybe it is my schizoaffective disorder that muddies the waters and I really am INFJ, just not a typical one. IDK, still trying to find that out. But, in the end, all that matters in this thread, is the facts for the resurrection. Please debate me on the facts, not whether I am a meanie head or whatever.

 

[meowzician]

I believe that because of how many time you have debated people online that you have somehow grouped certain people as being this way or that way from experience of some of the stuff you learned about them from those debates. In other words you now have in your mind a system of grouping or archetypes of the way people are. This is common way of thinking but neglects that each individual is not a category or can be attributed to groups in the way they have been.

I can see that because this might be the case it would be a form of unconscious stereotyping. All theists are like x or all liberals or all conservatives or all Christians or Jews or all people, that do not believe what I believe. You are searching for reasons why people act as they do, but you make it explicit and thus cannot relate to people at their level.

I will not say this way of thinking is bad. It is simply how your mind works to categorizes people by your experience. However it causes trouble because people do not want to be thought of as groups or archetypes or stereotypes. That is rare when it comes to such debates that we say: your team is x and so you are x. That be politics and not exactly what happens inside the person unless they feel attached to a team.

If I was to say that some kinds of things can be known by MBTI as example I could say such but its a limited tool. It gives us something to use but its a hammer and not everything is a nail. Same with religion is that even if some truths are in it it cannot be used outside the domain is is prescribed for. So if we say use that tool outside its domain we create false impression of what it means to be this or that religion. Religion can then be used to justify anything its not appropriate for. It can then be used by people to condemn them because everyone who is not in it is evil or wrong or whatever the religion says about outsiders. That is why most people reject it because people are individuals. Only in certain mindsets is it that people are all the same. That have everyone of x is always y but ignore the rest of the alphabet.

In more other words you are seeing things in a collectivist way. Individualism says verities of people beliefs and ideas exist and no one is cookie cutter so to speak. We are not all of the same mold. that treats people as objects on a manufacturing line. Not as beings who have had different life experiences. Collectivist thinking is not bad either it just doesn't work in contexts where people are aware of those circumstances outside the lines of normal cultural thinking.

I may have made a mistake saying things the way I have with emotional charge but to me being treated as an individual is most important from a cultural stance. I have thoughts and feelings and I am not an ant in an ant colony. I am not a stereotype or anything that my bring up race, creed or religion in the negative of all those people are an only X. You would not say that because I am partially black that I am a certain way or think a certain way. Where was I born, what languages do I know, how did my parents teach me to believe and relate to others. None of this is indicated by me saying I am partial black. You would be far removed to say You are not a Christian because of partial blackness so why say: you wanted intellectual stuff so became a jew. It has no context no regard for the individual it simply means you have no idea what a person is because of some idea in your head of them. Maybe I like KFC but I also like McDonalds and whatever else I like but its what I like and no one else. Reasoning is the same. Not everyone will reason the same if they believe the other person is not listening. People will not listen if you put them in a group of such and such. All atheist/whoever else reason like X

So basically the system of categorizations you learned have failed. It is a way of thinking that can be good in general but specifically individuals reason learn think speak and act in contexts of the life the had and what they are on the inside. The outside may show some things about them but it will not show everything. In the limitations of what can be written and shown here I will say that I hope to see people as people not groups even if thinking in group terms is what other do its not what I do. I try to avoid it as much as people. On the surface we could say I like brand X and so the recommendation engine will give me advertisements of brand Y - this is fine but always its halfway wrong. people are flawed when they think of others just like the algorithm is. No matter how much life experience you have had with people or a topic you can always be wrong is some way that matters to the people you interact with.

I hope I haven't said anything offensive, this is in general terms of how people and systems operate. When I took a shower I felt like vomiting because I self triggered my own PTSD - I was shocked by my responses earlier because I know I can become out of control emotionally. It was just that I do not believe anyone should think things of others that is not true because that leads to projection and especially if we are saying things about others the public sees as not true, in public others will call us out on it eventually as social workings happen in group dynamics.

This forum as all sorts of response emojis. I looked for one that said, "Wise." I settled for "Hug."

 

[meowzician]

Maybe I just should not assume what people are like. IDK what changes I need to make to do that, but it's really hard for me not to assume things about people, especially when I am first getting to know them. In this way, I tend to assume less and less about the person as time goes on. IDK how NOT to do this where I categorize people. It's a huge flaw on my end and I'm just not sure how to correct that.

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

I know I said I wasn't going to speak to you further, but when I read this, I couldn't help but feel the need to give you a hug. All of us have things we struggle with. I know I certainly do.

 

[QuickTwist]

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

True. The question is not about how to be less offensive, because I believe in many cases the truth is offensive. It's about how I can assume things less when conversing with others. @Fruiteloop is right that I have more or less just built up a bunch of "types" in my head that I reference as short hand for understanding people. And yes, this is all based on my experience. I don't think the issue is having categories for people. I think the issue is that I tell people how they fit in my "type" system. People don't like that. People like to pretend they are an enigma, for whatever reason. Maybe I can just not tell people that they fit X category i am thinking of? I don't want to be dishonest either. The truth is that most people fit into categories. I've been in enough conversations to know that. At the same time, I know that people are also individuals, and no category system, no matter how robust, will not have exceptions. But, again, it's inconsistent to say "I am X type in personality but not Y type in this other thing." It is not a perspective that makes much sense to me.

In short, people might gang up on me. That's fine. It's my battle to fight to determine if I have done something wrong or if it is just that the truth is offensive. I can't always judge these things accurately. We live in a cancel culture and if you say the wrong thing, people can gang up on you in mass.

So, I will try and balance being truthful and not assuming, and part of this is just not saying how I am categorizing people.

 

[meowzician]

I can't change who I am. I can try and change my behaviors, but I can't change who I am.

I can't tell you where the line is between what you are and what you do. I know that for me it has been extremely difficult. I have had decades of therapy trying to figure it out. At the risk of sounding cliche...
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change
The courage to change the things I can
And the wisdom to know the difference.

 

[meowzician]

oh so during shabbat you can go on a forum, when I went in Israel they couldn't even touch the button of the elevator.
And I've been there 3 times.

always glad to learn new things.

-Giammarco

Ohhhhh. LOL Basically, I'm not Orthodox, I'm Reform (in Israel this is called Progressive). Things I will do on the Shabbat that an Orthodox Jew won't do: drive, flip light switches, use a phone or computer, carry things outside the home, water my plants, write a letter, tear toilet paper, and yes even push elevator buttons.

Briefly, for an Orthodox, all 613 laws are laws and laws iz laws. For me, I group the laws into those of moral import, and those that are more about Jewish identity, what Christians often refer to as ceremonial laws. A law like "Thou shalt not steal" is a moral imperative because stealing hurts people. If I steal that's a sin. But a law like having a mezuzah on my door or refraining from pork or resting on the Shabbat? Those are part of Jewish identity. If I don't honor the Shabbat, I'm not sinning, but I am losing a small piece of who I am. Lose too many pieces like that, and you forget...

Truth be told, if I refrained from going online on the Shabbat I think my experience would be deeper and richer. So although I don't think being online is a sin, in the back of my mind, I have an aspiration that someday I will rest from tech on the Shabbat. But tech is like an addiction for me. I'm just going to take it one Shabbat at a time.

 

[QuickTwist]

I can't tell you where the line is between what you are and what you do.

I wasn't asking you to.

I know that for me it has been extremely difficult. I have had decades of therapy trying to figure it out.

The only thing I really got out of 90% of the therapy sessions I've been in is that most therapists want you to cry and that is about it.

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change
The courage to change the things I can
And the wisdom to know the difference.

A good prayer, but is a prayer for the self, not for God to answer, IMHO.

 

[meowzician]

Alright, feel free to read the first chapter of my book I wrote. You don't have to buy the book for this. You can just read the preview or whatever it is called. Almost the full first two chapters are in the preview. The first is where I talk about how my mind works and such. Again, you don't have to buy my book to read the whole first chapter. You just have to click on the preview or whatever it is called.

(FYI, it is called "read sample" not "preview")

Schizoaffective Disorder and Christianity: In Search of the Truth of God's Sovereignty and Human Will - Kindle edition by Dornfeld, Jesse . Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.

Schizoaffective Disorder and Christianity: In Search of the Truth of God's Sovereignty and Human Will - Kindle edition by Dornfeld, Jesse . Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.

a.co

This was important. I had no idea you wrestled with schizoaffective disorder. It is a helpful thing to know, because it helps to give context.

 

[meowzician]

Still not sure I understand...

Does it have to do with offending people?

It has to do with *needlessly* offending people. There actually is a time an place to offend.