I hear you.
But is it really that bad? That depends on how we value "what is not" changing. Most of us are unable to change, if not, we would in constant bliss all of us right now.
For that particular post it wrote "will not change ..... Why should he?" Here lies a choice, he or she has choosen a certain pattern of communication, a change require another "will" that create a choice that in its turn yield a change. Whatcould be a reason for change? It is a valid question, nothing to get offended by. Is it?
First, J, this post wasn't referencing your post, truly.
Second, it isn't about being offended. Because to be sure, out there in the mainstream, I never bought for a minute that I was "going to hell", for instance. No need to take that kind of indictment to heart -- nor the one about "not changing". I was thinking more of those of us who might be in the business of -- either professionally or avocationally -- facilitating or encouraging change, growth, or transformation. If the ones with that occupation bolt the door on anyone's capacity to change, then ... what weight does that carry energetically for the individual? It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy after a while. (At least that is the thesis I was presenting.)
If the individual is a warrior, then s/he already knows that the opinion of another means little in the end --- that
everything which must be done, must be done on the path, alone, with no help, really, except perhaps from spirit. An opinion is a wisp on the wind compared to the work that must be done.
No, no, what you said "wasn't so bad", and to put it in personal terms, you have a point. Many is the time I set up situations for myself where I can maintain my comfort zone! We can (usually unconsciously) set things up in the environment, in our path-of-motion, to never have to change!
Example: I cannot negotiate 80mph highways. I take the back roads instead. Therefore, I never learn to negotiate 80mph highways.
