Surprised by Goodness

I try not to be surprised by badness: but badness is usually pretty predictable. :)

I much prefer to be surprised by badness. My world view doesn't require me to look on my fellows as flawed creations of some psychotic, authoritarian father figure so I don't.

The root of the verb "to sin" is also the Latin for "to be". To me, this means that we will "sin" simply by being, by living. For Pagans, there is no "sin" to be punished for, just the rules "harm none" and "whatever you do comes back threefold."

When it comes down to it, all of life can be summed up by one concept: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Nothing religious or spiritual about it - just treat others as you would like to be treated. If they treat you like dirt, it's their problem, not yours.

As for response to natural disasters and war, that is also a part of being Human. We cannot control nature, as much as we try to, She always has the upper hand. It is up to us to help our fellow beings in times of crisis. Again, do unto others. The life you save might be your own someday.

Surprises, Bgone, are the *best* part of life. I don't think Pagans are surprised by goodness.

Or shouldn't be.

There's someone married into our local community who did a Christian stranger a solid about some Christian stuff he'd lost and said friend went out of his way to track down. Said Christian *was* surprised when the answer to 'What Church do you go to?' was, "I'm a Jew."

He was apparently surprised by goodness enough that he didn't even know what to say.

And that's the thing, really. If anyone thinks, never mind spends a lot of time *claiming* 'goodness' is copyright *anything anyone says in places like this,* then they're gonna be surprised by goodness every time.

Cause maybe they don't live so close to what's out there.

If I didn't believe there's goodness out there in all of us, regardless of creed, I bloody well wouldn't be here talking about it. I'd be holed up somewhere.

People get *surprised* by it when they spend a lot of effort indulging a system that involves calling everyone else *bad.*

No wonder they tend to think our Earth is a write-off.

But, really.

This *is* Planet Earth. We are *all* survivors, and *we* are going to continue to be survivors until we either fail to survive, or stop having to think of it that way.

Life *is* good, of itself, Bgone, and not because of some fearful 'alternative.'

Just is. Sometimes it takes dying in one way or another to see that, but, people who are 'surprised by goodness' often are so surprised because they just don't define *life* that way.

[Christian] social scientists aren't surprised by sin while Darwinian social scientists are likewise not surprised by crime? I'm only surprised people can say things like that and still cling to the notion sins are violation of laws laid down by supernatural beings. Sins and crimes are the same thing. In the kingdom of God where God is the government there are no crimes, just sins. In governments of man where man is the government there are no sins, just crimes - unless of course the governor happens to be the "son of God."

Life is good? That's what Don Coreleon said as he died. No matter how bad life may seem to be it beats the unavoidable alternative. There were survivors of the Nazi concentration camps and the massacre at Wounded Knee too. Yet this is planet earth where there shall be no survivors. Probably has something to do with time.

Maybe scientists, social types and regulars need to fine tune their cases a bit? Otherwise the last one of us is going to die, some criminals and some just ordinary sinners. Is there another alternative?

**A social scientist once told me that he never found sin to be a surprise. For a Darwinian social scientist, crime is not a mystery. The mystery for him was why people got up everyday and tried to support their families with a minimum wage job and why only a relative few turned to lives of crime.**

"Goodness" doesn't surprise me. All species that live in groups have some sort of basic hard-wired understanding that what's good for the group is good for the inividuals within that group. If you go killing off the other members of the pack, who will protect you from other packs?

Sometimes this wiring short-circuits within an individual, and s/he doesn't understand that while certain actions at the expense of others may benefit him/her in the short run, they don't in the long run. Or if we fail to adequately care for all the members of our packs, they are left to fend for themselves and it's not surprising that they feel no loyalty to the pack.

Dor some species, this amounts to females caring for the orphaned infants of other females. For our species, it includes getting up every day and going to your sucky job in order to make sure your pack is fed and sheltered.

Joseph K is really me. I had to change my moniker because the Post's censors have been blocking my posts because I dared to use the word Po-e instead of Pontifex Maximus in the above post.

If the Post ever fires its censors, they can always apply to Putin for a job, but they'll have to become more effective than they are now.

Best to all.

Former Christian wrote:

"But here's a question for you that I've never understood, since you are an expert on Catholic theology?

"Why would you believe that God would rather people avoid birth control instead of protecting future generations from disease and death? I'm specifically talking about Catholic Charities in Africa who will never hand out a condom to prevent thousands, maybe even millions of children from becoming orphans so that God will not be impeded from working his will in the area of reproduction?"

"What makes you think that God would much rather have 2-3 million more orphans than use birth control?"

ANSWER: Because the Pontifex Maximus said so, and he's infallible when he wants to be.

'Nuff said!

The wing and a fine time.

Listening to the
sound of a delicate
hovel, and recalling
a wonder, I see
magic profiles near
the heart of a
luminous pine-tree;
the wind fades
away, the care of
a blackbird describes
and emotion and
always, in silence,
your beautiful mind
returns in the sky.

TO FORMER CHRISTIAN:

You wrote, " And so we can conclude that as far as "kin" are concerned, we are instinctively drawn to care for members of our family", but do we instinctively come to the conclusion that All of Humanity is One Family, Our Family?

Just because someone calls themself a "christian" does not mean that they are one.

Just because someone knows every chapter and verse in the bible does not mean that they know anything about God except for His Name.

I am no theologian but I have met God and He is a Trinity and He is Pure Love. Jesus is Who He said that He is. God has a Plan which is for All of His children, humanity, to be with Him in The Kingdom.

We have free will and it is important what we do and why we do it and what we know. God is a searcher of hearts and minds, not of religious affiliations or lack thereof.

By the way God is not a male or a female or an it but a Being of Pure Love, God-Incarnate tho was a Male.

I am just a messenger, the New Testament Moses, to proclaim the "Good News" which is what the word Gospel means.

As the angel announced at Jesus"s birth, "This is Good News for All People" and "Peace to whom God's Favor rests", two seperate statements and both true.

God wins Total Victory, satan loses, a tie is unacceptable.

Take care, be ready, see you in the Kingdom.

Sincerely, Thomas Paul Moses Baum.

I think 'why more people don't turn to crime' is simple enough, if you aren't too attached to the idea that people are inherently 'sinful' or 'evil' unless constrained by a religion.

Religious faith and practice can help us be mindful of and stronger in our better natures, ...but when it starts taking *credit* for our better natures, it often has a way of denying people, particularly others, inclusion in that very humanity that is so powerful, when given the chance to be.

Dear Mr. Reese,

You stated: A social scientist once told me that he never found sin to be a surprise. For a Darwinian social scientist, crime is not a mystery. The mystery for him was why people got up everyday and tried to support their families with a minimum wage job and why only a relative few turned to lives of crime.

A very interesting statement and one easily answered using evoluation as a model. You see, we still retain many basic instincts that all species have -- whether animal or human -- and we also have evolved complex social networks. Let's start with basic instincts.

Did anyone have to teach a mother to love their child? Shortly after a new baby is born, the cries of the baby are enough to stimulate milk production and in almost all cases, the mother will start to feed, will love and care for that baby.

These simple acts are, like milk production, physical and emotional responses that have evolved over millions of years. We don't have to teach mothers to produce milk and we don't have to teach parents to love their children. In fact, the response to a new born baby is very similar to that of every other mammal in the world. And so we can conclude that as far as "kin" are concerned, we are instinctively drawn to care for members of our family. Whether it's getting up and hunting a rabbit to feed one's family or getting up to work at minimum wage to feed one's family, the basic instincts of loving and protecting our families has been built into us over millions of years.

As someone who questions Darwinian theory, it may not seem obvious to you that the best way to pass down your genes to future generations is to select a mate that can reproduce, who appears healthy and to provide for that mate, especially during child rearing years. What's so strange about that?

But here's a question for you that I've never understood, since you are an expert on Catholic theology?

Why would you believe that God would rather people avoid birth control instead of protecting future generations from disease and death? I'm specifically talking about Catholic Charities in Africa who will never hand out a condom to prevent thousands, maybe even millions of children from becoming orphans so that God will not be impeded from working his will in the area of reproduction?

What makes you think that God would much rather have 2-3 million more orphans than use birth control?

Seems to me, there's no biblical support for this position and I'd really like to know the names of people to whom God has spoken and made his wishes clear. Is this the same God, by the way, that told George Bush that God wanted him to invade Iraq?