Why Was A New Covenent Required?

[Nearly Sane]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

It's up to him to refute my suggestion, then, and not you, by the way.

So that would be a no to any evidence then.

If it is OK just to make accusations with no evidence and then refuse to back them up, then in principle it would be OK for someone to suggest you only became a teacher because you wanted to molest children, and not provide any evidence.

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

Why, thank you!  Compliments are always welcome, whatever the source!

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

Why, thank you!  Compliments are always welcome, whatever the source!

Ok, I should have put a smiley by that to show you I was being sarcastic, but I thought the italics would have done that, but I guess your single brain cell couldn't cope with it.

I see you are very desperate for compliments to boost your waning self image and your lack of self worth. So, "You are doing very well considering your impoverished circumstances. Keep trying, don't give up!"   

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

Why, thank you!  Compliments are always welcome, whatever the source!

Ok, I should have put a smiley by that to show you I was being sarcastic, but I thought the italics would have done that, but I guess your single brain cell couldn't cope with it.

I see you are very desperate for compliments to boost your waning self image and your lack of self worth. So, "You are doing very well considering your impoverished circumstances. Keep trying, don't give up!"   

My single brain cell didn't realise you knew what sarcasm is!

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

I've just realised this gets us back to the OP. My motive in doing it was a psychological one. Mankind's psychic history is one of ever growing consciousness which meant that its relationship with the unconscious had to change. The ever renewing of the covenant by God with Its people was just the realisation of the prophets that things had changed for man's consciousness with the unconscious - which is where the idea of God has come from from the beginning - though they didn't perceive things in this way, of course. This would also explain why God has gone from a wild brute (instincts etc.), being as unpredictable as the wind, to being perceived as a more loving entity; as our consciousness has demanded a fairer deal with our animal instinctual roots. And in parallel to this our religions have gone from primitive paganisms with their debase and lowly outlooks to our more relatively rationalistic and civilised monotheistic set-ups today.

I just wondered how out Christian friends would account for the fact that God keeps shifting the goal posts, getting things wrong from the start and changing Its mind all the time to come up with another new covenant with Its people.

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

I've just realised this gets us back to the OP. My motive in doing it was a psychological one. Mankind's psychic history is one of ever growing consciousness which meant that its relationship with the unconscious had to change. The ever renewing of the covenant by God with Its people was just the realisation of the prophets that things had changed for man's consciousness with the unconscious - which is where the idea of God has come from from the beginning - though they didn't perceive things in this way, of course. This would also explain why God has gone from a wild brute (instincts etc.), being as unpredictable as the wind, to being perceived as a more loving entity; as our consciousness has demanded a fairer deal with our animal instinctual roots. And in parallel to this our religions have gone from primitive paganisms with their debase and lowly outlooks to our more relatively rationalistic and civilised monotheistic set-ups today.

I just wondered how out Christian friends would account for the fact that God keeps shifting the goal posts, getting things wrong from the start and changing Its mind all the time to come up with another new covenant with Its people.

God doesn't change the goalposts  -  men do.

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

Why, thank you!  Compliments are always welcome, whatever the source!

Ok, I should have put a smiley by that to show you I was being sarcastic, but I thought the italics would have done that, but I guess your single brain cell couldn't cope with it.

I see you are very desperate for compliments to boost your waning self image and your lack of self worth. So, "You are doing very well considering your impoverished circumstances. Keep trying, don't give up!"   

My single brain cell didn't realise you knew what sarcasm is!

You keep walking into them don't you?

So you admit you only have one brain cell. We can agree on that one.

I would never have assumed that your one brain cell would have had the capacity to fathom out what I understand and know, just as a child doesn't understand the adult world. 

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

I've just realised this gets us back to the OP. My motive in doing it was a psychological one. Mankind's psychic history is one of ever growing consciousness which meant that its relationship with the unconscious had to change. The ever renewing of the covenant by God with Its people was just the realisation of the prophets that things had changed for man's consciousness with the unconscious - which is where the idea of God has come from from the beginning - though they didn't perceive things in this way, of course. This would also explain why God has gone from a wild brute (instincts etc.), being as unpredictable as the wind, to being perceived as a more loving entity; as our consciousness has demanded a fairer deal with our animal instinctual roots. And in parallel to this our religions have gone from primitive paganisms with their debase and lowly outlooks to our more relatively rationalistic and civilised monotheistic set-ups today.

I just wondered how out Christian friends would account for the fact that God keeps shifting the goal posts, getting things wrong from the start and changing Its mind all the time to come up with another new covenant with Its people.

God doesn't change the goalposts  -  men do.

And round and round we go...

How do men do that?

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

Why, thank you!  Compliments are always welcome, whatever the source!

Ok, I should have put a smiley by that to show you I was being sarcastic, but I thought the italics would have done that, but I guess your single brain cell couldn't cope with it.

I see you are very desperate for compliments to boost your waning self image and your lack of self worth. So, "You are doing very well considering your impoverished circumstances. Keep trying, don't give up!"   

My single brain cell didn't realise you knew what sarcasm is!

You keep walking into them don't you?

So you admit you only have one brain cell. We can agree on that one.

I would never have assumed that your one brain cell would have had the capacity to fathom out what I understand and know, just as a child doesn't understand the adult world. 

Well, if I did only have one brain cell, it would still be enough to outsmart you.   

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

Poor old Basher thinks that because he's uneducated we all must be.

Prety lame, that.

You mean like your claim that I get my comments off Google?

And your great spelling?

Why, thank you!  Compliments are always welcome, whatever the source!

Ok, I should have put a smiley by that to show you I was being sarcastic, but I thought the italics would have done that, but I guess your single brain cell couldn't cope with it.

I see you are very desperate for compliments to boost your waning self image and your lack of self worth. So, "You are doing very well considering your impoverished circumstances. Keep trying, don't give up!"   

My single brain cell didn't realise you knew what sarcasm is!

You keep walking into them don't you?

So you admit you only have one brain cell. We can agree on that one.

I would never have assumed that your one brain cell would have had the capacity to fathom out what I understand and know, just as a child doesn't understand the adult world. 

Well, if I did only have one brain cell, it would still be enough to outsmart you.   

Delusional to the end, how sad! 

[BashfulAnthony]

"Delusional to the end, how sad!"   I'm glad you've come to the end;  but there's no need to be so hard on yourself.     

[Jack Knave]

"Delusional to the end, how sad!"   I'm glad you've come to the end;  but there's no need to be so hard on yourself.     

And now incoherent babbling, a real sign that Basher's single brain cell has overloading.

[BashfulAnthony]

"Delusional to the end, how sad!"   I'm glad you've come to the end;  but there's no need to be so hard on yourself.     

And now incoherent babbling, a real sign that Basher's single brain cell has overloading.

Is overloading, or has overloaded?  It's always so difficult to follow what you say, even with my high intellectual capacity.   

[Dicky Underpants]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

Prove that I am ill-read!  If you cannot pass that test, apologise.  Can you pass the test?

Incidentally, since when does reading Jung qualify you as being well-read?

I am an admirer of the great Russian novelists and writers: Gogol, Dostoyevsky, Pushkin, Turgenev, Chekhov, Tolstoy.  Have you read them?  If not I consider you are not well-read.

[Nearly Sane]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

Prove that I am ill-read!  If you cannot pass that test, apologise.  Can you pass the test?

Incidentally, since when does reading Jung qualify you as being well-read?

Prove your accusation about plagiarism against Jack Knave otherwise apologise!

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

Prove that I am ill-read!  If you cannot pass that test, apologise.  Can you pass the test?

Incidentally, since when does reading Jung qualify you as being well-read?

Prove your accusation about plagiarism against Jack Knave otherwise apologise!

He hasn't even denied it.  So altruistic of you to stand up for him, and you being so well-known for apologising so often yourself.

[Nearly Sane]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

Prove that I am ill-read!  If you cannot pass that test, apologise.  Can you pass the test?

Incidentally, since when does reading Jung qualify you as being well-read?

Prove your accusation about plagiarism against Jack Knave otherwise apologise!

He hasn't even denied it.  So altruistic of you to stand up for him, and you being so well-known for apologising so often yourself.

implicitally he has, but leaving that aside, you have asked for proof of an accusation but are unwilling to offer it despite being asked for it multiple times. And that I raise it is of no relevance, your position doesn't even manage to be a tu quoque but is an irrelevant bastard child of a tu quoque and an ad hominem. Fallacy squared.

[Jack Knave]

"Delusional to the end, how sad!"   I'm glad you've come to the end;  but there's no need to be so hard on yourself.     

And now incoherent babbling, a real sign that Basher's single brain cell has overloading.

Is overloading, or has overloaded?  It's always so difficult to follow what you say, even with my high intellectual capacity.   

Well yeah. But this is pointless. If you want the last say on this, to save your pride, go ahead and do it.

[BashfulAnthony]

"Delusional to the end, how sad!"   I'm glad you've come to the end;  but there's no need to be so hard on yourself.     

And now incoherent babbling, a real sign that Basher's single brain cell has overloading.

Is overloading, or has overloaded?  It's always so difficult to follow what you say, even with my high intellectual capacity.   

Well yeah. But this is pointless. If you want the last say on this, to save your pride, go ahead and do it.

I agree.  Have a word with NS as well.

[Jack Knave]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

Prove that I am ill-read!  If you cannot pass that test, apologise.  Can you pass the test?

Incidentally, since when does reading Jung qualify you as being well-read?

Prove your accusation about plagiarism against Jack Knave otherwise apologise!

He hasn't even denied it. 

Because I wasn't going to stoop to your low level. It was a stupid and ignorant comment.

[BashfulAnthony]

I think Job is also forward-looking.

Very much so. But I'm sure you know that Jung didn't think those ancient scribes came up with any satisfactory answers to the problems it poses

We still don't have answers.   

I can suggest two:
"There is no God" and "Shit happens".

Jung would have seen it in archetypal psychological terms so the issue of God was not present as such but only as a symbol and image of the collective unconscious, and that the 'action' was between consciousness and the collective unconscious and so was not subject to the whim of random causal events. What caused Job was the advancement of consciousness and its push back against the rule of the unconscious/instincts in man's life. I.e. a more of a cooperation between the two in the machinations of man's psyche and life.

Where was that googled from?

since are accusing the writer of plagiarism, any proof of that? It's quite a serious accusation, so care to justify it?

I don't suppose for one moment the ill-read Bashers has ever picked up a volume of Jung in his life.

Prove that I am ill-read!  If you cannot pass that test, apologise.  Can you pass the test?

Incidentally, since when does reading Jung qualify you as being well-read?

Prove your accusation about plagiarism against Jack Knave otherwise apologise!

He hasn't even denied it. 

Because I wasn't going to stoop to your low level. It was a stupid and ignorant comment.

Go on, stoop to my level!