Interesting
the Torah, the Bible or the Quran,
make sure to add another comma after the Bible
For words are but arrows; arrows that point to ideas. And if those arrows are no longer pointing to the same ideas, then we are no longer reading what was written.
That was a really good analogy I like that quite a bit
The word baal is synonymous with the words lord, master and husband. Essentially though, we understand all these words to mean owner.
I would still see that it fits well with lord/master, but not so much husband as back then I can see a lot of these text used as a way to justify undermining and suppressing women. For example if you were to create a piece of artwork or an idea (intellectual property) you would be considered the owner of such. Therefore being that we are "God's/Allah's" creation he would be our lord/master.
I'm not so interested in religion, but am highly spiritual also reading this really makes me think the future of books/movies. Directors and authors can now write chapters at a time getting feedback far more easily nowadays then they used to. Or use NFT's or altcoin holdings in order for their supporters to direct the narrative and plots within a book/movie.
!PIZZA
I can create a fart, but it doesn't mean I own it. I don't subscribe to any notion of property, intellectual or otherwise. Even this book, when it is finished. I might have wrote it, but if someone else wanted to create a PDF of it and sell it on Amazon, they could. And yes, I suppose I could sue them, if I recognised the authority of the courts, but what does ownership really mean if I need to go and petition some external authority to prove that it belongs to me? However, if I wrote a book that was read often, and the ideas I shared in that book led to the deaths of many people. Well, that would be my fault for choosing to share the ideas - and that is a definition of ownership that has substance.
I think we humans lack humility and realise not that we've never invented a single thing. We do not create ideas, but discover them - or are gifted them by the spirits that possess us.
I used to loathe the title Lord, as a word for God. In fact, my distaste for it was so intense that I used the name Lordless as a moniker. But I believe now that it was my misunderstanding of what ownership really meant that bothered me so much about it. I did not like the idea of being owned in the sense that one would own a sock or a shoe. It made me hate the idea of God. But, now I understand that God is called Lord, because God is responsible for us, much the way a father is responsible for his children - hence the repeated analogy of God being the Father.
There is a lot more I have to say about this issue, but I already intend to speak on what I would write now in the next chapter, so I will just do that. But, I appreciate you commenting your thoughts. It is easy to lose the motivation to write when it seems like no one is listening, at least for someone who is as weak as I can be.
What's the Pizza thing about?
Hmmm interesting perspective so you don't believe in the idea or word of ownership? Or what does ownership mean to you? I think personally we are just talking semantics.
No problem good luck on your book. Yeah I definitely understand the part about losing motivation to write when you feel no one is listening. It can mess with my anxieties sometimes on this site as I ask myself if any of it is worth it as I prefer engagements over the upvotes at times. Well you seem strong in your ideals and belief system. I think weak itself is a subjective term too and hope all goes well for you.
The pizza thing is just another community on here (another "altcoin" of hive so to speak) and I just try to do it to show misc support for effort I see around this platform
I understand what ownership means to the average person. But I do not believe the average person understands what ownership means to them. If they did, they would realise that just as money is only worth something because we all agree that it has value, things only have owners because we all subscribe to the notion of property. It is nothing more than a collective hallucination - a fantasy.
Many of us inherently understand that money isn't really worth anything. But, too many are yet to realise that they don't really "own" anything. They are just the current holders of users of things. None are in a rush to experience this revelation, because too many of us have been led to determine our worth as a person based on the amount of things we "own" rather than the choices that we make in life.
But while the idea that one owns a house is only tangible if everyone or most others also believe that person owns the house, ownership in the sense of responsibility is true regardless of what others may believe. This what I meant by the book analogy. I can write a book and claim I own it in the modern sense. But in order for me to own it in that way, I need you and everyone else to agree that it belongs to me and no one else should be able to print and sell it. But an intelligent "thief" could convince you all that they were the one that actually wrote the book - and then you would all believe they are the only one permitted to "sell" it. So, my ownership of this book I have written, by the modern sense of what it means to own something, is reliant upon group consensus. However, if that book I wrote leads people to behave in a destructive way and cause harm to one another - regardless of whether you all believe that it was the cunning thief that wrote it, the blame, the responsibility for the destructive behaviour manifesting in the world because of the words I decided to write down and then share with the world, lies with me. And it remains there regardless of what the rest of the world believes.
So, it's not really the case that I do not believe in property. It would be more accurate to say that property doesn't exist, and that I refuse to pretend it does just because everyone else has decided to.