Hi,

To me protelization is offensive trying to force one to belive what the dont want to believe

alan

Hey Tim,

Yes it is good to see you here once again. Your voice certainly has been missed.

Love, Kathy

Unwelcome perspectives that are passionately shared are experienced as "proselytizing."  Welcome perspectives are experienced as "sharing" or "thoughtful reflection."  Pejorative language and unkind motives are projected on dissenters by those whose critical faculties are severely impaired.  A FAITH NOT WORTH SHARING IS NOT WORTH BELIEVING.  All perspectives reinforced by experiences should be welcomed and courteously debated if they are relevant to the afterlife.  This goal is unrealistic for a site like this.  But this site has been invaluable to me as an eloquent example of the need to "consider the source" before embracing an astral claim as credible. 

Don

  Funny, but i see both Don's and Tim F.'s perspectives as correct at the same time.   


Speaking more generally, any time we communicate with another individualized and unique aspect of our Total self, and we say to them anything which contradicts their own preconceived beliefs, feelings, etc., its a form of, a seeking, a desiring of converting.   

If we were truly and fully honest with ourselves, we might see that, and its true for the Yeshua's of the Universe to the Jeffrey Dahmers, whom by the way was a rather quiet and introverted person who it seems like never preached to people about anything--course not, he was too busy hunting some and later eating them. 

  There is quiet conversion, there is loud converting, and there are many shades of medium inbetween.   The best and most effective, particularly in a spiritual sense, seems to be primarily through pure example, livingness, or what Tim F. calls the "radiance of our presence", and not so much via words.  Kind of hard, though not impossible, to communicate on a I-net conversation forum.

  It's not in the converting in and of itself that is the problem, its the way and manner in which we do it and how we view the other as well as how we view ourself at the same time.    There are constructive ways and non constructive ways.   

  In the most broad sense, to even think of someone as being "stuck" in the first place, could be construed by the literalist as a form of "judgment", though it need not be in the spiritual sense of the term.   And yet the temporal reality of varying degrees of stuckness/limitation and unstuckness or rather limitlessness/infinity remain as both self evident and collective truths of experience and awareness. 

  Over passivity is in the end, much more harmful than over activity, even if that activity sometimes becomes temporarily non constructive.  Pure passivity was what enabled the condition of suffering even for Source itself in the beginning, and Source didn't become "happy" until it moved.   Be active in holistic service and you will eventually know the absolute as a self experiencing reality, or so our Elder Brother/2nd Father might have said.

  Good points Ian.