Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 24, 2005 - 09:23pm PT
|
God is omnipotent, therefore He can be exactly in touch with us by His words. His words and He are not different. That is omnipotency. Omnipotency means in everything relating to God has the same potency.
Just like here in this material world the..., if you want water, you are thirsty, if you want water, then this water, simply calling, simply saying repeatedly, "water, water, water, water, water," will not satisfy your thirst. Because this word has not the same potency as water itself. You require the water as it is. Then your thirst will be satisfied.
But in the transcendental, in the absolute world, there is no such difference.
These personalities, either God or son of God, who come from the transcendental world, they keep their transcendental identity without being contaminated by this material world. That is their omnipotency
Now what?
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
May 24, 2005 - 10:49pm PT
|
Jay wrote:
"Paraphrasing you said “God cannot be contained in the constructs particular to a creed –of that we may be sure.” Why are you so sure? Have you seen proof of that? Are you saying the Bible is wrong or inadequate in it’s depiction of God? That’s pretty bold. No one can argue successfully either way without a strong enough premise, and who has that kind of premise but God?"
What you're arguing for here is the propriety of a map–namely, you're chosen map, the religious map furnished by the Bible, while at the same time daring me to provide another map that has more authority, truth, verity, than the Judeo-Christian topo. What I believe you're missing here is that I'm not referring to a map at all, and for good reason: the map, no matter how divine, has never been, is not, and never can be, the territory. The map, by it's very structure, is second-hand information provided by someone who has "been there," much as a Supertopo is a map of a wall that contains accurate information, but not ALL the information, nor is the Supertopo the wall itself. If the map was the territory, or the Supertopo was the wall, there would be no need to climb at all.
I'm talking about the territory itself, and if you ever chose to go there I can guarantee you that you won't experience a map, rather the territory itself. Living off the map is called "religion," and there's certainly no harm in that providing there's no judgement or hierarchy involved. Exploring the territory is called "spirituality," and it's 5.13 all the way.
You asked me, "Why are you so sure? Have you seen proof of that?" I have. If you're interested in finding out for yourself, you'll have to make that adventure alone, and it will start the second you step off the Map of the Known.
If you're honestly searching--which would amaze and astonish me--backchannel me.
JL
|
|
poop*ghost
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 01:26am PT
|
Hello to my frieds on the S. taco.
Quite a discussion and beat poetry session going on! nice brutus!
I'll have to first point out...
Karl -
"But it's obvious that any being that created a universe that takes light millions of years to traverse"
Okay Karl, first point is just the little inner geek. Light will never be able to traverse from one side of the universe to the other. The universe is expanding faster than the speed of light. Sorry - very geeky I know.
Largo -
"... and it will start the second you step off the Map of the Known"
Very poetic, honest and very hard for people to do.
I think a point that has been made in many ways is that nobody has THE answer. You can have YOUR belief - that God is THIS or God is THAT - but it's simply a guess. Each and every one of us gets our own free guess at what the whole ball of wax is about, where when why and most definitely HOW?!
Some people like their guess enough to either never take a step off that map or just don't care to... it could make their guess look silly in hindsight.
As for the fella way up in the top of this thread asking about an airplane popping outta garbage... what you're really asking is if entropy is one directional? Do things go from an ordered to unordered state or vice-versus?
Let me ask you this? How did tiny little bits of sand end up becoming the computer that you are typing on? Things can certainly move from less ordered to more ordered... but it takes energy. And as mentioned above, c squared is the constant leaving us with Mass and Energy being two sides of the same coin. If you've got Mass, then you've got energy and things WILL happen because they can.
I'm getting long winded here, and the question was what?!
J.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 01:47am PT
|
Modern "science" has created an imaginary world where there is no soul, there is no need for any higher intelligence, a world where everything can be explained by the chance interaction of material elements. A world where the life force does not exist at all, it is simply a manifestation, a reaction from a certain chance chemical combination.
Their whole world is evolution. Evolution is the most fundamental belief that practically all of today's science is built on. And there is evolution also--but it is the consciousness that evolves or devolves--not the body. All the bodies of all the 8,400,000 species of life are existing--if not in a physical form in a subtle form--and when a particular living entities' consciousness matches a particular body he is awarded that type of body. But all the individual species exist eternally. It is the individual souls who are evolving and devolving up and down through the different species of life, not that one species is evolving into another species by "natural selection."
They love evolution because it enables them to believe that everything happens by chance, that there is no authority, there is no higher intelligence above them. They do not have to surrender to anyone, they do not have to serve anyone. This is the real point of science. To provide a world-view where there is no necessity for a God or any form of higher intelligence. That way humans are at the top of the ladder and the most powerful, and free to do as we like.
We could speculate for millions of years but it would not help. We can not see what is going on and we can not see how the machine is working or what is making it work. These things are simply beyond the power of our senses to perceive. We can never understand the universe in this way.
Now go find the holes, you will become frustrated ............
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 02:18am PT
|
To address Claude's question higher above:
He asks how can God be part of God's creation?
Imagine this analogy. You dream at night. You create a whole world filled with many beings in your dream, all out of your own awareness. Are you a part of them or not? What else are they composed of? Are you a personal God for them or are you just their substance?
See how simplistic answers don't apply? Although everything in your dream is created out of your own conciousness alone, you still exist transcendent of the world you created. Everything in your dream world is made of you, and yet you are both personal, yet also abstractly present in the dream, and the contents of the dream reflect on you as well.
The dream has a beginning and an end that's not the same as your beginning and end, yet the dream people still emanate from you and dissolves back into you.
It's not a perfect analogy but the spiritual world can't be modeled in our terms easily.
After all, think of this, "Eternity" is beyond time. If God is Eternal, he has no beginning or end. That means time is ony real for us in the creation of God, but God's existence is in a whole different (non)framework,.
Peace
karl
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 03:08am PT
|
Now go find the holes, you will become frustrated...
Well, I don't think frustration really enters into it; your beliefs are that - unsubstantiated beliefs not provable by any means - so it's not so much frustrating as fascinating.
Modern "science" has created an imaginary world where there is no soul, there is no need for any higher intelligence, a world where everything can be explained by the chance interaction of material elements. A world where the life force does not exist at all, it is simply a manifestation, a reaction from a certain chance chemical combination.
"Modern science" hasn't created worlds of any kind and certainly not one that claims to understand all or even many aspects of human conciousness. While possessing a fair understanding of the basics, science has far more questions than answers when it comes to conciousness, or even "thinking", let alone "being". And looking out into the universe it does look as though the conditions that allow for life (as we know it on earth) are a result of a series of simple, but nuturing, statistical outcomes.
Their whole world is evolution. Evolution is the most fundamental belief that practically all of today's science is built on.
Nothing could be further from the truth - if anything our understanding of evolutionary processes has been utterly primitive prior to the development of almost every other area of science. Particularly the quite recent rise of genetic sciences has allowed us to see evolutionary processes and consequences more clearly than even 20 years ago. Hell, it turns out that most of our taxonomies (family trees) of life, especially plants, were completely screwed up and based [mistakenly] on things "looking" alike when in reality they were genetically quite disimilar and distant.
And there is evolution also--but it is the consciousness that evolves or devolves--not the body. All the bodies of all the 8,400,000 species of life are existing--if not in a physical form in a subtle form--and when a particular living entities' consciousness matches a particular body he is awarded that type of body. But all the individual species exist eternally. It is the individual souls who are evolving and devolving up and down through the different species of life, not that one species is evolving into another species by "natural selection."
Well, that's certainly one belief - on what evidence do you hold this belief? That you were simply told [as a disciple] it was so? If that is the case, then what drove you to believe that particular story over any of the other religious/aboriginal creation story? That you liked the idea, or the people who told it to you, or both? By your choice you are contributing to the "fitness" and survivability of your particular theology in a rather vicious evolutionary fight among various religions to survive for yet another generation in a world that has buried and forgotten more than a few of them.
They love evolution because it enables them to believe that everything happens by chance, that there is no authority, there is no higher intelligence above them.
I know no one in science that holds this perspective; they may believe there is no "higher intelligence", but that has nothing whatsoever to do with their affinity for the theory or science of evolution; that has more to do with plausibility than purpose.
They do not have to surrender to anyone, they do not have to serve anyone.
Life (and death) represents, if nothing else, inescapable and relentless service - biologically and ecologically speaking anyway, all organisms serve a collective whole. I don't know any scientists who wouldn't acknowledge that simple reality, especially if they survive off grants and endowments.
This is the real point of science. To provide a world-view where there is no necessity for a God or any form of higher intelligence. That way humans are at the top of the ladder and the most powerful, and free to do as we like.
I don't think there is a "real point" to science beyond establishing a thoroughly incomplete "worldview" or collection of independently verifiable facts, some of which help us, many of which do not. And I certainly don't consider humans the "top" of anything beyond exploitive tool use. I happen to share a worldview that sees all organisms on the planet as simply the current ["fruiting body"] expressions of an underlying global pool of DNA that is relentlessly churning species to keep pace with the physical and biological realities exhibited by our planet at any given time.
Maybe we are the "best" survival vehicle for the moment, but I suspect our impact and consumption patterns over the long haul may be creating a world where we will actually have a higher "value" as a [transitional] food source than as a durable survival vehicle. That role could easily revert back to "lower order" species without any great loss to the overall diversity of the underlying [gene] pool. Simply put, from a pathobiological perspective, it's just not necessarily an advantage to be the "last man standing" as other "higher order" species vanish in a world rapidly losing natural habitat and biodiversity...
We could speculate for millions of years but it would not help. We can not see what is going on and we can not see how the machine is working or what is making it work. These things are simply beyond the power of our senses to perceive. We can never understand the universe in this way.
Well, most science-oriented folks would agree that with our limited senses and capabilities we are never going to have anything remotely like a complete "worldview" or "collection of facts" about existence, certainly not in the remaining time this sun is going to burn suitable for life on earth. What "science" does do is encourage people to think up interesting and plausible answers to questions without them; what it doesn't do is give people [within the admittedly limited context of "science"] permission to pass off any imaginable answer as "the answer" or as a "fact" without some means of others being able to independently verify it [at will].
And if god or any other "higher intelligence" existed, then one could presume they have powers far exceeding yours yet you and I are able to communicate directly both in person or over time and space via the Internet; I find it remarkable that such an entity seems unable to do the same at the very least - or have I simply been underestimating Juan all this time...
P.S. Brutus, when it comes to primates pushing plastic my hat's off to you for that last post...
|
|
Jay
Trad climber
Fort Mill, SC
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 11:51am PT
|
Nice invitation JL, I was wondering if it would come to this. For those paying attention I must say that I haven’t been completely forthright in my beliefs because they really don’t matter all that much. What matters is the truth. What authority do I have to tell other people what to believe by claiming my own? The only authority I feel comfortable to use in such a forum is the Bible. No other document is quite like it. It’s extremely logical in content and meaning unbeknownst to many people. Many think it a wild fairy tail, which I can understand why. But most of those people have never read it, or they’ve rebelled against it early on because something has left a bad taste in their mouth. Most people who’ve read it see it differently though; even those who don’t “believe” it. It’s elegant and strong. It’s not the world’s best seller for nothing. Some people hijack the Bible to say all kinds of crazy things. And others are gullible enough to believe someone’s whacked out plans with it. I hope that’s not the case for all of you. Don’t let anyone tell you what to believe. Guard your heart and don’t cross any bridges you haven’t been lead in spirit to cross, or haven’t checked out thoroughly.
I notice an extreme amount of inaccuracy and misconceptions about the Bible spoken here and all over the place. It’s not my job get you to believe anything in particular, but given my studies and experience in learning from the Bible I think it’s my duty (to some extent, I’m not your teacher and you aren’t my student) to at least present the Bible for what it says. It’s up to you to make what you want with it once you’re aware. My hope is that you’ll actually read it, and pray for truth and enlightenment in the process. What have you got to loose by doing that? Let the Bible speak for itself.
JL calls it a map. Would you sail accross the sea or venture into the winderness without a map, compass, or some kind of guiding instruments? How do you know what kind of terrain you're going to run accross. And what is your desired destination? There are many maps. I say the Bible is a darn good one. But don't take my word for it. Find out for yourself. You can read a map and not go on the adventure. But man, what an adventure you can have!
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 12:38pm PT
|
"It’s elegant and strong."
That's definitely an "eye of the beholder" sort of thing; I find the Bible quite a meandering mess and very, very weak because of it.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 12:40pm PT
|
Lol
Yes, very good ……. do not believe for one instance that I believe I’m enlightened, that is a true shackle.
There are two arguments being made Gods and yours now which will hold true?
Do not also jump to the conclusion thinking that I believe I’m god. One who thinks he is god is none other than dog.
The lord of all creation will see who really is in shackles here.
I know that I am ,without doubt, under the tight grip of the shackles of illusion …..are you?
|
|
Jay
Trad climber
Fort Mill, SC
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 01:13pm PT
|
healyje, have you read the whole thing? In a version you can understand without being a linguist?
|
|
Claude
climber
where I'll end up
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 01:52pm PT
|
well, in the end, despite our thoughts and perceptions, despite our progress and attempted manipulations, one thing is inevitable...
every knee shall bow, every tongue will confess.
Sooner than later i hope.
I love you.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
Venice, Ca
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 03:50pm PT
|
"JL calls it a map. Would you sail accross the sea or venture into the winderness without a map, compass, or some kind of guiding instruments? How do you know what kind of terrain you're going to run accross. And what is your desired destination? There are many maps."
Indeed thre are many kinds of maps. The maps I have found most useful are the ones that don't describe the territory so much as help steady you up once you get outside your comfort zone. That's like turning the roof on the Shield, and it can be very unnerving for the old ego.
JL
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 04:08pm PT
|
"healyje, have you read the whole thing?
No, it was simply too badly written and assembled with so many conflicting concepts, stories, and pronouncements I had to put it down about a third of the way through - if that is god's word s/he is in serious need of a proofreader, editor, and an instructional designer.
"In a version you can understand without being a linguist?"
Well, that is essential problem with religious texts, isn't it? Put a text through an intepretive/tranlation process that inherently includes biases and agendas every so often for a thousand years or so and the result is a mess. In this case the collection of starting texts appear to have been a largely incoherent mess.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 04:11pm PT
|
"I know that I am ,without doubt, under the tight grip of the shackles of illusion …..are you?
I'm just another spark in the dark, but as a dog - I know a bone when I trip over one and there's [almost] nothing I can't get right on the fourth or fifth try...
|
|
Jay
Trad climber
Fort Mill, SC
|
|
|
May 25, 2005 - 05:47pm PT
|
Healyje,
Yeah, I know what you mean. Which parts did you read? Sounds like you got bogged down somewhere in the Old Testament. That’s easy to do. It took me a few tries over the years to find that it’s not as messy as you think. It's long and depending on which book you read it could easily bore you to death. You should pick it up again. What do you have to loose? Do you think you’ll be manipulated? People do that. The Bible won’t.
If I were to recommend a good place to start for anyone interested in possibly giving it a try, or 2nd try, or nth try start with John, then Acts and Romans, in that order (funny I said that before). Go anywhere from there, but it’s also my recommendation to simply complete the New Testament after Romans. Then start back at the beginning with Genesis and work your way back to John. It’s not all that important to read it exactly in that order, but I do think it’s important to gravitate toward certain books to start with. It will give a better framework in which the rest of them have context.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 26, 2005 - 12:33am PT
|
Do you believe there is heaven? Hell? Satan?
Maybe better ask this guy?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
May 26, 2005 - 12:41am PT
|
Werner, I can't quite make out what he's saying, but he's definitely talking to you - waywards spirits before atheists...
|
|
akclimber
Trad climber
Eagle River, AK
|
|
|
May 26, 2005 - 01:02am PT
|
I do believe some of the more lengthy posts here(Karl's) are described by the old saying that "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh#t." Come on all of you, it ain't that frickin' complicated. If people want to think that everything evolved over 3.5 billion years, let them. I did some research a while back and found that even if evolution were true, there isn't enough time in the evolutionists model for all this evolving to take place. You guys that are trying to change their minds are wasting your time.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
May 26, 2005 - 01:24am PT
|
Oh no it ain't Dingus we got 100 more posts to go. Don't be runing away now. Let me tell ya whippersnappers all about it, err ...
I think I'll wait till tommorrow......
|
|
Ouch!
climber
|
|
|
May 26, 2005 - 01:29am PT
|
Come back in a year, or century. Same questions, same confabulation. This history was written long ago, by people who witnessed none of it.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!