The Followers & The Challengers

12 May 2018 Saturday 3:55pm

“Dear Neale…I have been wondering about the role of personality in the mechanics of the mind and system of the soul. I observe that some people have personalities that seem to make it easier for them to operate successfully in our culture — i.e. follow rules and religious doctrine while others are challenging rules and not accepting of structures that govern and make the rules. Can you discuss the role of personality?”

This was on Neale’s website. Neale wrote an explanation but it’s sort of complicated for my kind of intellect.

What is your kind of intellect?

Um…I’m simple? I’m of a simple intellect.

No, dear. You wouldn’t have come as far as you have with just a simple intellect. The soul is simple but complex.

But I just said that Neale’s reply to the query was complicated. And now you’re saying my intellect is simple but complex. If I was also complex then I would have understood what Neale was talking about.

I said the soul is simple and complex. The soul knows no rules. I’m sure you’ll agree with me when I say that rules make life complicated. Therefore the soul is simple because the soul is free. The soul is also complex because the soul knows everything. The knowing of everything is immense, to say the least. And isn’t the soul life? Isn’t life complex? Therefore the soul is also complex. Now, let me ask you – do you always know exactly what your soul is up to?

No.

Why do you think that is so?

At first, I think I know what I’m doing because I’m thinking of the conscious purpose of what I’m doing while I’m doing whatever it is I’m doing. But later on, I’ll realise that what I was doing had a different purpose altogether. It was a subconscious or even superconscious purpose – the purpose of the soul. Does that make sense?

Read it again – what you just wrote. Does it make sense to you?

Yeah, it makes sense.

You have just created a simple explanation of something complex such as what the soul is up to. The soul is me. The soul is capable of anything. In your world, the body, mind and soul have to act as one in order for you to experience your life agenda. It is these acts which are the physical evidence or components of your personality. Your personality is actually what others observe of you. When others see you act out kindness, they will say you have a kind personality. When they see you act out gratitude, they will say you are thankful or polite. When they see that you’re a forgiving person, they will say you have a generous or tolerant personality. When they see you act out violence, they will say you have a violent personality.

Woah! That was quite a leap there. From kindness to gratitude to forgiving to generous, then bam – violent! C’mon, you gotta ease me into it, God. Maybe put in anger or resentment, or piqued in there somewhere before we jump into violence.

My apologies. But you must agree, dear one, that violence in your world does show up violently out of nowhere sometimes.

I agree. Anyway, we haven’t really discussed the real query – what’s the role of one’s personality in connection with one’s mind and soul? And why are there personalities who prefer to practice religious beliefs & doctrines as compared to those that challenge them?

Let me quote the exact words used because they are key in explaining exactly what the topic is about – which is about personality. The exact words are “some people have personalities that seem to make it easier for them to operate successfully in your culture — i.e. follow rules and religious doctrine while others are challenging rules and not accepting of structures that govern and make the rules.” Do you know of any personalities who are examples of the first group of people mentioned? Let’s call them the Easy Followers.

Um…

Never mind. It doesn’t matter. How about the other group of people? Let’s call them Challengers.

Yeah. Neale and his friends, I guess.

Are you one of Neale’s friends?

I like to think so.

He does too. So do you call yourself one of The Challengers?

Like yeah.

Have you always had a personality that is a trait of being a challenger?

Nope. I’ve only just recently become a challenger. Like about 5 years ago. That was when I realised my life purpose. Before that, I would have called myself an Easy Follower because at that time I was operating by following rules and religious doctrines.

You forgot the word “successfully” in there somewhere – operating successfully by following rules.

I don’t think so.

Fair enough. So to get back to the query: What role does personality play in being Easy Followers or in being Challengers?

I’m not sure. But I think one can already deduce by what we call each group. Which I think is not very nice of us to do so.

Do what, dear?

You know, call people names by their personalities.

What do you think the names mean?

One name may mean that the personality of the person prefers to follow rules because it’s easier – easy life. While the other is not so easy – a challenging life.

Don’t you consider yourself one of the Challengers?

Yes.

Is your life challenging at the moment?

At this very moment, yes! This conversation we’re having is really tough! I’m afraid of offending someone.

You, afraid?

Always.

But tough?

I try.

Would you consider the role of your personality as being afraid and being tough when it concerns the “mechanics of the mind” and the “system of the soul”?

I suppose so. Being afraid is of the mind. Being tough is of the soul. Afraid and tough – that’s an odd personality combination, though.

Not really. Love and fear go hand in hand in your world.

For now.

Yes, dear. For now.

Foetus vs Child

2 April 2018 Monday 11:03pm

…but a woman knows how to make decisions. And if she gets pregnant, then she gets pregnant. To me, having a baby is a blessing. There are women out there who would sell an arm and a leg just to be able to conceive. And yet when a child is conceived out of wedlock it is considered a curse. A child is a blessing whether its parents are married or not. Am I mistaken about that?

No, you are not. Once again rules of society are at play when it comes to how women should treat their bodies. At the moment, women are fighting for the right to have a say in what decisions they choose for their own bodies, especially when it concerns pregnancy. Your beliefs are the powers that be that have a say on how women should treat their bodies. Abortion is one of your biggest issues at the moment. The irony of it is that when a child is conceived out of wedlock – the situation and condition that the pregnant woman is in, is considered unacceptable in society’s eyes. Anything that which is borne out of wedlock, is also considered a sin. But it is also against your beliefs to get rid of that which is borne out of wedlock – which is abortion. So what is a woman to do?

She can abstain from sex, that’s what she can do.

That’s another one of your beliefs – sex out of wedlock is also a sin.

Well then, there’s the logic, isn’t it? Being pregnant outside marriage is a sin. So having sex out of marriage is also a sin. As for abortion being a sin, it’s like murder to some – murder is a sin.

And yet you have a thing called death penalty.

But that’s because of a heinous crime. A baby hasn’t committed any crime!

Isn’t a criminal in death row once a baby?

Argh! I don’t know where you’re coming from sometimes!

I’m coming from the truth, my child. So do you still think there’s logic in those beliefs?

Wait. What is “logic” anyway? Hang on. Okay. Logic means “a particular method of reasoning or argumentation.” Sample sentence is “We were unable to follow his logic.

So do you still think there’s sound reasoning with those beliefs? That it’s a sin to have sex outside of marriage? And that it’s also a sin to get pregnant outside of marriage? And then if the woman gets pregnant out of marriage, it’s also a sin to abort the foetus? So what is a woman to do if she’s already with child?

Wait a sec. First you called it a “foetus” and then next, you called it a “child.” So which is it?

Is there a difference?

The dictionary defines “foetus” as “the young of an animal in the womb or egg, especially in the later stages of development when the body structures are in the recognizable form of its kind, in humans after the end of the second month of gestation.” As for the word “child” the dictionary says it’s “a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl.” But the dictionary says that the word “child” also means “a human foetus.”

So is there a difference between the word “child” and the word “foetus”?

Um…Yes and no. No, there’s no difference because a child in a womb is a foetus. And yes, there’s a difference to the meaning we give each word.

How so?

To me, “foetus” sounds like it’s not a person yet. As in, it’s not fully human yet. When it comes to the word “child” I feel like it already has its own mind. Or maybe even a soul.

Everything has a soul, my child – even plants. Anyway, I get where you’re coming from. Now imagine this – there’s a group that says they are for abortion. Let’s call them the Anti-Foetus Group. Now imagine another group that says they are against abortion. Let’s call them the Pro-Child Group. And these two groups are always at each other’s faces, shouting at each other, protesting that their group is right. Who do you think will win? The Anti-Foetus Group or the Pro-Child Group?

I have no idea. The word “foetus” & “child” mean exactly the same thing.

Precisely. Both groups are not fighting for the foetus or the child. They are fighting for the meaning they are giving to the words. It’s all about the meaning. And what is a meaning? A meaning is a thought. You are all fighting over a thought.

But a child in a womb is not a thought. It’s a living, breathing entity.

It’s not breathing yet.

Well, it has a heartbeat, that’s for sure.

So you’re Pro-Child?

Since you put it that way, maybe I am. My purpose is for all children after all.

As in living, breathing children?

Yes—wait. Haha. Nice trick. So are you saying that a foetus that isn’t breathing yet is not a child?

Didn’t we already discuss the meaning of the words “foetus” and “child”?

Fine. So are you saying they’re the same but they’re not the same?

Let me just say this – words can help you or words can destroy you. And it’s all because of the meaning or meanings you give each word. And most of the time you are all fighting over the meaning. And as I have said, a meaning is a thought. Most of the time you are fighting over a thought. Does that make sense to you?

I don’t know. Sometimes, nothing makes sense in this world anymore.

You can make something make sense with any sense anytime you wish, my child. By giving it meaning.

Oh no. I’m not going back there again. Meaning is a thought, thought is meaning, fighting over a thought which is the meaning. It’s a losing battle!

That’s the problem. Why does it have to be a battle? Why can’t it be a discussion?

Don’t ask me! I’m just writing stuff here.

I know, dear. I know.

God Is Not Separate From Us

I just read this article (link) by Neale on his FacebookPage about his conversation with a listener on  talk radio.

The listener argued:

 “Of course God is separate from us. What do you think, that God is the same as we are? Sorry, but it’s that kind of muddled thinking that creates what you call the “problems in the world today.”

Kudos to Neale’s response.

I’m thinking—another answer to that listener’s question would be another question:

How can we believe (in fact, most of us do) in such a selfish god who would bestow upon each of us power that is less than what a True God truly possesses?

GOD LOVES US.

Think about it.