Kekle.

Your description resonates. IMO, there is a wide spectrum of language and terminology that with some variance and nuances in emphasis, essentially describe the same things. And, just as the map is not the territory, it's valuable and relevant to not get too attached to particular 'maps' aka terminologies and the conceptual structures they seek the express. Rather, there is value is recognizing that the reality one seeks to describe exists beyond the cognitive framework. Personally speaking, I highly value fluidity in this area of expression and articulation.

(From a professional perspective too, my work involves being able to transcend such language-based outlines and connect to what lies beyond the language.)

Regarding left and right, there are multiple perspectives one might look at this. As far as I understand it, historically, in the political context, Left and Right stem from the two sides of the court in the National Assembly at the time of the French Revolution. The Left were the radicals, who wanted more change and who rejected the Monarchy, the Right upheld the Monarchy and wanted less dramatic change.

However, from a theological perspective, Left and Right can be seen in the central event of the crucifixion. The thief on the right affirmed Jesus innocence, and confessed his own sins. The thief on the left mocked Jesus, and accused Jesus instead of recognizing his own crimes.

in this case, the right is thus the God-affirming, and the left is the God-denying.

Despite popular theological interpretations, its a fact that the crucifixion resulted in a split. Spiritual salvation was accomplished, whereas physical salvation was not, and was postponed (until the conclusion of providence). This is symbolized by the tear in the curtain in the Temple separating the Holiest Place and the Holy of Holies.

Where does this dual [holies + holy of holies] structure come from? it comes from the design the Lord God imparted to the Israelites in the desert, in designing the tabernacle which was a portable, symbolic for of the Temple.

Interpretation: God created humans (like all things) with an internal aspect and an external aspect. We commonly refer to these as mind and body, or flesh and spirit.

Both flesh and spirit were claimed at the Fall, and thus God had no vessel to manifest in human life. The tabernacle, and the Temple after it, are a symbolic representation of Christ, the Messiah, who comes with restored spirit and flesh.

By worshipping in faith and attending to the tabernacle, and the Temple, the Israelites were to set a condition of attending the Messiah before he arrived. The intent was so that their foundation would stand them in good stead and they would receive and unite with him when he arrived.

In the tabernacle, and the temple, the holiest place represents the flesh/body, and the holiest of holies represented the spirit/mind. The flesh was created to be God's instrument in the material world, but the spirit was created to be God's dwelling place in the spiritual world. Thus, the flesh was to be a holy place, but the spirit, the holiest of holy places.

Due to their faithlessness, however, The Israelites lost their way. Despite all Jesus efforts, they rejected him, as a whole, and persecuted him. Thus, a price became necessary to forgive them and forgive humanity, whom they represented. The price was Christ's flesh. Thus, on the cross, the flesh was sacrificed in order to win the victory of the spirit. The curtain was torn, Christ rose above the barrier dividing spirit and flesh. Then standing in the center, the right side, representing the spirit, confessed to and affirmed God and Christ, while the left side rejected and mocked God and Christ.

Since that time, the spirit (of the faithful) comes under God's jurisdiction, and has been receptive to God (or the universal consciousness, if you prefer that term) but the flesh still struggles, because it still comes under satanic jurisdiction.

Thus, in the current universal context, Left represents the Flesh, and as the Flesh, is more susceptible to being corrupted and used by evil, while the Right represents the Spirit, and is less susceptible to being used by evil.

BUT, as we can see, both can be corrupted. Also, ultimately, both must be restored. HOWEVER, there is a correct order that must be preserved for them to find harmony. And that is that the Spirit, or the Right, is in the subject guiding position, and the Flesh, or the Left, is in the receptive responsive position. Centering on a common purpose, they should harmonize and cooperate.

The principles behind all these manifestations also pertain, I would say, to the Left brain Right brain dynamic. The Right brain should actually be in the driver's seat for many things, with the left brain responsive and serving. The point is not which is superior or indeed primary. The point is what the purpose at hand is. That said, the correct order of purpose is that the mind, or spiritual life, which is eternal, has priority and should be the subject position, while the flesh, aka material life, has a role to serve and facilitate the spiritual growth and life, and thus is in the object position. As a broad, universal principle.

The intellect can fall into the trap of thinking it knows everything. However, the intellect has its blind spots, spots it CANNOT know or see. Thus, the sense - the intuition or the Heart, which sense the whole and accepts the wholistic approach, is capable of overcoming the blind spots because it allows for self-transcendence. Thus, an intellect in service to the Heart is an intellect that finds and knows its true home. It is guided and when necessary, kept humble by the heart, the spirit, the intuition.

Despite all the above rigamarole, the point is to affirm your basic points in 3 4 and 5, but to ideally add some further expansion by alluding to other contexts and correlations in historical, scriptural, spiritual and cosmological ideas.

Kekle.

Your description resonates. IMO, there is a wide spectrum of language and terminology that with some variance and nuances in emphasis, essentially describe the same things. And, just as the map is not the territory, it's valuable and relevant to not get too attached to particular 'maps' aka terminologies and the conceptual structures they seek the express. Rather, there is value is recognizing that the reality one seeks to describe exists beyond the cognitive framework. Personally speaking, I highly value fluidity in this area of expression and articulation.

(From a professional perspective too, my work involves being able to transcend such language-based outlines and connect to what lies beyond the language.)

Regarding left and right, there are multiple perspectives one might look at this. As far as I understand it, historically, in the political context, Left and Right stem from the two sides of the court in the National Assembly at the time of the French Revolution. The Left were the radicals, who wanted more change and who rejected the Monarchy, the Right upheld the Monarchy and wanted less dramatic change.

However, from a theological perspective, Left and Right can be seen in the central event of the crucifixion. The thief on the right affirmed Jesus innocence, and confessed his own sins. The thief on the left mocked Jesus, and accused Jesus instead of recognizing his own crimes.

in this case, the right is thus the God-affirming, and the left is the God-denying.

Despite popular theological interpretations, its a fact that the crucifixion resulted in split. Spiritual salvation was accomplished, whereas physical salvation was not, and was postponed (until the conclusion of providence). This is symbolized by the tear in the curtain in the Temple separating the Holiest Place and the Holy of Holies.

Where does this dual [holies + holy of holies] structure come from? it comes from the design the Lord God imparted to the Israelites in the desert, in designing the tabernacle which was a portable, symbolic for of the Temple.

Interpretation: God created humans (like all things) with an internal aspect and an external aspect. We commonly refer to these as mind and body, or flesh and spirit.

Both flesh and spirit were claimed at the Fall, and thus God had no vessel to manifest in human life. The tabernacle, and the Temple after it, are a symbolic representation of Christ, the Messiah, who comes with restored spirit and flesh.

By worshipping in faith and attending to the tabernacle, and the Temple, the Israelites were to set a condition of attending the Messiah before he arrived. The intent was so that their foundation would stand them in good stead and they would receive and unite with him when he arrived.

In the tabernacle, and the temple, the holiest place represents the flesh/body, and the holiest of holies represented the spirit/mind. The flesh was created to be God's instrument in the material world, but the spirit was created to be God's dwelling place in the spiritual world. Thus, the flesh was to be a holy place, but the spirit, the holiest of holy places.

Due to their faithlessness, however, The Israelites lost their way. Despite all Jesus efforts, they rejected him, as a whole, and persecuted him. Thus, a price became necessary to forgive them and forgive humanity, whom they represented. The price was Christ's flesh. Thus, on the cross, the flesh was sacrificed in order to win the victory of the spirit. The curtain was torn, Christ rose above the barrier dividing spirit and flesh. Then standing in the center, the right side, representing the spirit, confessed to and affirmed God and Christ, while the left side rejected and mocked God and Christ.

Since that time, the spirit (of the faithful) comes under God's jurisdiction, and has been receptive to God (or the universal consciousness, if you prefer that term) but the flesh still struggles, because it still comes under satanic jurisdiction.

Thus, in the current universal context, Left represents the Flesh, and as the Flesh, is more susceptible to being corrupted and used by evil, while the Right represents the Spirit, and is less susceptible to being used by evil.

BUT, as we can see, both can be corrupted. Also, ultimately, both must be restored. HOWEVER, there is a correct order that must be preserved for them to find harmony. And that is that the Spirit, or the Right, is in the subject guiding position, and the Flesh, or the Left, is in the receptive responsive position. Centering on a common purpose, they should harmonize and cooperate.

The principles behind all these manifestations also pertain, I would say, to the Left brain Right brain dynamic. The Right brain should actually be in the driver's seat for many things, with the left brain responsive and serving. The point is not which is superior or indeed primary. The point is what the purpose at hand is. That said, the correct order of purpose is that the mind, or spiritual life, which is eternal, has priority and should be the subject position, while the flesh, aka material life, has a role to serve and facilitate the spiritual growth and life, and thus is in the object position. As a broad, universal principle.

The intellect can fall into the trap of thinking it knows everything. However, the intellect has its blind spots, spots it CANNOT know or see. Thus, the sense - the intuition or the Heart, which sense the whole and accepts the wholistic approach, is capable of overcoming the blind spots because it allows for self-transcendence. Thus, an intellect in service to the Heart is an intellect that finds and knows its true home. It is guided and when necessary, kept humble by the heart, the spirit, the intuition.

Despite all the above rigamarole, the point is to affirm your basic points in 3 4 and 5, but to ideally add some further expansion by alluding to other contexts and correlations in historical, scriptural, spiritual and cosmological ideas.

Kekle.

Your description resonates. IMO, there is a wide spectrum of language and terminology that with some variance and nuances in emphasis, essentially describe the same things. And, just as the map is not the territory, it's valuable and relevant to not get too attached to particular 'maps' aka terminologies and the conceptual structures they seek the express. Rather, there is value is recognizing that the reality one seeks to describe exists beyond the cognitive framework. Personally speaking, I highly value fluidity in this area of expression and articulation.

(From a professional perspective too, my work involves being able to transcend such language-based outlines and connect to what lies beyond the language.)

Regarding left and right, there are multiple perspectives one might look at this. As far as I understand it, historically, in the political context, Left and Right stem from the two sides of the court in the National Assembly at the time of the French Revolution. The Left were the radicals, who wanted more change and who rejected the Monarchy, the Right upheld the Monarchy and wanted less dramatic change.

However, from a theological perspective, Left and Right can be seen in the central event of the crucifixion. The thief on the right affirmed Jesus innocence, and confessed his own sins. The thief on the left mocked Jesus, and accused Jesus instead of recognizing his own crimes.

in this case, the right is thus the God-affirming, and the left is the God-denying.

Despite popular theological interpretations, its a fact that the crucifixion resulted in split. Spiritual salvation was accomplished, whereas physical salvation was not, and was postponed (until the conclusion of providence). This is symbolized by the tear in the curtain in the Temple separating the Holiest Place and the Holy of Holies.

Where does this dual structure come from? it comes from the design the Lord God imparted to the Israelites in the desert, in designing the tabernacle which was a portable, symbolic for of the Temple.

Interpretation: God created humans (like all things) with an internal aspect and an external aspect. We commonly refer to these as mind and body, or flesh and spirit.

Both flesh and spirit were claimed at the Fall, and this God had no vessel to manifest in human life. The tabernacle, and the Temple after it, are a symbolic representation of Christ, the Messiah, who comes with restored spirit and flesh.

By worshipping in faith and attending to the tabernacle, and the Temple, the Israelites were to set a condition of attending the Messiah before he arrived. The intent was so that their foundation would stand them in good stead and they would receive and unite with him when he arrived.

In the tabernacle, and the temple, the holiest place represents the flesh/body, and the holiest of holies represented the spirit/mind.

Due to their faithlessness, however, they were lost. They rejected him, as a whole, and persecuted him. Thus, a price became necessary. The price was Christ's flesh. Thus, on the cross, the flesh was sacrificed in order to win the victory of the spirit. The curtain was torn, Christ rose above the barrier dividing spirit and flesh. Then standing in the center, the right side, representing the spirit, confessed to and affirmed God and Christ, while the left side rejected and mocked God and Christ.

Since that time, the spirit (of the faithful) comes under God's jurisdiction, and has been receptive to God (or the universal consciousness, if you prefer that term) but the flesh still struggles, because it still comes under satanic jurisdiction.

Thus, in the current universal context, Left represents the Flesh, and as the Flesh, is more susceptible to being corrupted and used by evil, while the Right represents the Spirit, and is less susceptible to being used by evil.

BUT, as we can see, both can be corrupted. Also, ultimately, both must be restored. HOWEVER, there is a correct order that must be preserved for them to find harmony. And that is that the Spirit, or the Right, is in the subject guiding position, and the Flesh, or the Left, is in the receptive responsive position. Centering on a common purpose, they should harmonize and cooperate.

The principles behind all these manifestations also pertain, I would say, to the Left brain Right brain dynamic. The Right brain should actually be in the driver's seat for many things, with the left brain responsive and serving. The point is not which is superior or indeed primary. The point is what the purpose at hand is. That said, the correct order of purpose is that the mind, or spiritual life, which is eternal, has priority and should be the subject position, while the flesh, aka material life, has a role to serve and facilitate the spiritual growth and life, and thus is in the object position. As a broad, universal principle.

The intellect can fall into the trap of thinking it knows everything. However, the intellect has its blind spots, spots it CANNOT know or see. Thus, the sense - the intuition or the Heart, which sense the whole and accepts the wholistic approach, is capable of overcoming the blind spots because it allows for self-transcendence. Thus, an intellect in service to the Heart is an intellect that finds and knows its true home. It is guided and when necessary, kept humble by the heart, the spirit, the intuition.

Despite all the above rigamarole, the point is to affirm your basic points in 3 4 and 5, but to ideally add some further expansion by alluding to other contexts and correlations in historical, scriptural, spiritual and cosmological ideas.