(04-30-2017, 11:46 PM)4Dsunrise Wrote: Here's another group that doesn't mind the term "warrior". Why is it so troubling to some here?
I think the paradox is "warrior" for "peace".
If one says; I shall be a warrior, then I would say all is well.
If one says; I shall be peace, then I would say all is well.
If one says; I shall be a warrior for peace, then I might go :
![[Image: YAGpXPd.png]](https://i.imgur.com/YAGpXPd.png)
All is still well, but the intent seems paradoxal with itself as a warrior can only radiate outwardly its own inner turmoil, and were it to not have this turmoil then it would not identify with being a warrior. A warrior is focused upon conflict and as such energizes conflict, it also is dependant upon the idea of an opposite side and as such manifest its beingness. War becomes the significator of its drive and identity within Creation, and the warrior soul will wander battlefields until it finds peace within.
It's a fun game, but it only works if you are at war with yourself (mirror of One). Soul-wise I probably got quite my own glory there, so I wouldn't deny the right for another to be a warrior but if the intent as a warrior is expressed paradoxically, then it seems to hint that being a warrior is not what is truly desired and instead that there is a desire to find peace truly. At least, this is what "warrior for peace" hints at to me, not souls that desire to share peace but instead souls that themselves restlessly seek their own peace.