The Four Horsemen

Imaginos1892 wrote:

cthia wrote:It is hilarious that the multitude of things that we learn has always had a tendency to make many of us feel as though we know more than our parents. True wisdom has never had that effect on us. No matter if the parent is our birth parent, or our creator.

Every generation learns more than the one before — IF they take the trouble to do so, and IF they are not held back by a 'faith' that denies inconvenient facts.

I am wearing two shoes: Faith and Reason. I can go much farther much faster by wearing both of them than I can by wearing just one. The Bible is what it is, a collection of myths, parables, campfire tales told to scare the children, all with the purpose of conveying Spiritual Lessons. It is not the definitive Science book or the real and totally accurate History of the Middle East 3588 BC-500 AD.

Truth is NOT fact necessarily. Fact can be distorted until it bears little resemblance to truth. I was taught that The Bible was inspired by God, therefore it cannot be false. Which, of course is either false logic or a deliberate attempt to decieve (aka lie) Inspired by is NOT dictated by.

If you have ever actually studied A Course In Miracles, the first 100mpages or so is whatever she is channelling trying to clear her of her junk to be able to actually get herself out of the way of the message. If you actually believe that stuff.

You speak of the message received and correctly transcribed as if it is a given. Copied absolutely correctly not to mention translated properly from whatever languages these tales were orally told until somebody actually wrote them down in. Then were translated into Greek then into Latin then into "the Vernacular".

So many chances for minor errors.

Cthia, I believe that you are confusing knowledge with wisdom. I've known some very knowledgable people who would win any Trivial Pursuit game but lacked any sense and never succeeded in life. As the pool of human knowledge grows, and access through Google and such becomes easier people (if they want to) will have much more knowledge. I am concerned by the growing urbanisation of the human race though. Young people will grow up developing less practical skills without access to untamed countryside.

Daryl wrote:Cthia, I believe that you are confusing knowledge with wisdom. I've known some very knowledgable people who would win any Trivial Pursuit game but lacked any sense and never succeeded in life. As the pool of human knowledge grows, and access through Google and such becomes easier people (if they want to) will have much more knowledge. I am concerned by the growing urbanisation of the human race though. Young people will grow up developing less practical skills without access to untamed countryside.

Not confusing the two. Knowledge is only knowledge. Wisdom is the "correct" reasonable assembly of that knowledge -- which is why I referenced "true wisdom."

I understand that it is most difficult not to believe in only the things that can be seen or felt with the senses. We can see the sun, the moon and the stars. We can even feel the warmth from the sun. How many of us have carried on our own personal experiments as kids standing in the cold of an early winter morn awaiting the sun to rise and measuring the time it takes to feel the warmth from its rays, against the ~ 8 minutes that science says it takes the light to travel the distance? Though we can not touch them, except for the moon, where somebody touched it for us. We can not see air, but we can feel it against our faces. And breathe it into our lungs. This thing called a God, we cannot see or touch it. Which makes it difficult for a species reliant upon its native senses to believe in a God. That is the rudiments, and impediments, of science.

When it comes to the metaphysical, science accepts that there is a metaphysical "realm," which we also cannot see or measure with scientific instruments. Humanity has a metaphysical soul. Some branches of the metaphysical asserts that it (the metaphysical) is the most fundamental of all sciences. If that is so, then how can science assert that a claim by a metaphysical being is poppycock when science accepts the metaphysical plane without metaphysical instruments of measure?

In fact, how can science accept the metaphysical world without accepting that there may be metaphysical beings living in that world? Some part of man is indeed metaphysical.

Yet, someone in the past has claimed to have seen God in the flesh. It is said that Moses had a chance to look upon God but couldn't because of... well, I suppose we could, at least partly, attribute it to the specifics of science. Pure bright light. Moses didn't have a pair of polaroid sunglasses on.

We can't measure God with instruments, we can't see God. We can't touch God. Are we lost? No. Why? Because we can "feel" God. He who opens his heart will truly know. It is a feeling indescribable, from a power that is infinite. True wisdom is he who spiritually sees.

"How do you know that that "feeling" that you feel isn't unrequited love? Unrequited because there does not exist anyone to requite it?"

Fair question. I can't answer that for you, because there are no words to describe the metaphysical truth that a Christian just "feels" and knows. It is as if a Christian is given an instrument to feel and see the metaphysical aspects of reality. A Christian cannot loan you this instrument. It cannot be sold. It cannot be bought. It cannot be borrowed. It can only be experienced naturally, spiritually... one soul at a time. Open your heart, (the metaphysical instrument given unto you) and you too shall see.

It has to be earned. You must be worthy to receive. The only thing one must do to earn it and to become worthy is to "believe." To have "faith." But to first accept and believe that Jesus was God in the flesh and died for your sins. That is a lot to accept, I agree. It is a very long limb to climb out on, I agree. But the rewards are great.

Those who do not see also fail to open their eyes. Not the objects on either side of your nose. But the eye in your heart. You cannot see the metaphysical with your eyes. You see the metaphysical by using a metaphysical instrument. The heart beats in tune with the metaphysical and the non metaphysical as well. The corporeal and the non corporeal. It is indeed the bridge between. It doesn't work if it is hardened. As was Pharaoh's.

Why should God show himself to enemies? Either you are for or against. In the "God Exists" thread, I asked a question that not a single person answered. It was a simple question, whose lack of an answer by non believers speaks volumes...

"If you have the choice of there being a God and there not being a God, which would you choose? IOW, Do you want it to be true that God Exists?" If the answer for you is no, then perhaps that is why you do not see. You do not want to see.

You do have that choice. Then you will see. And all sorts of evidence will manifest itself unto you. The moon, the stars, and the heavens will become even clearer. You will no longer see them as manifestations of science. But manifestations of God.

Faith is difficult. It is more difficult when blinded by science. Close your eyes and open your heart to see the unseen. Faith is difficult, yes. But only faith the size of a mustard seed is needed.

The last 95% of your post is alien to me, just does not compute, but good luck to you if it works for you.
I'm puzzled by your sun analogy though. The light speed lag of 8 minutes is irrelevant. Infra red travels at the same speed as the visible spectrum, so as soon as you see the sun it has started to warm you.

cthia wrote:We can not see air, but we can feel it against our faces. And breathe it into our lungs.

We most certainly can see air. Chill it to -220 degrees and it condenses into liquid nitrogen and liquid oxygen. You can see the difference because the liquid oxygen is blue.

cthia wrote:When it comes to the metaphysical, science accepts that there is a metaphysical "realm," which we also cannot see or measure with scientific instruments.

Metaphysical ‘realm’? That’s not science, that’s fantasy. Science deals with observable facts and phenomena which are, by definition, not metaphysical. If your metaphysical phenomena do not produce observable events in our universe, it does not matter whether they exist or not because they can not affect us. If they do, if those events can be measured and quantified, they are physical.

cthia wrote:In fact, how can science accept the metaphysical world without accepting that there may be metaphysical beings living in that world? Some part of man is indeed metaphysical.

Fine. Show me that part. Demonstrate its existence in some real, observable manner.

cthia wrote:If you have the choice of there being a God and there not being a God, which would you choose? IOW, Do you want it to be true that God Exists?" If the answer for you is no, then perhaps that is why you do not see. You do not want to see.

I want to know the facts. Facts are not conditional upon whether you want them to be true or not. They exist independent of your desires or opinions; indeed, they exist independent of YOU. Show me some independent facts that demonstrate the existence of your god and I will accept that existence. Nobody has been able to produce such facts in 2,000 years of trying.
———————————
I used to live on a farm. I know what bullshit smells like.

Imaginos1892 wrote:

cthia wrote:We can not see air, but we can feel it against our faces. And breathe it into our lungs.

We most certainly can see air. Chill it to -220 degrees and it condenses into liquid nitrogen and liquid oxygen. You can see the difference because the liquid oxygen is blue.

cthia wrote:When it comes to the metaphysical, science accepts that there is a metaphysical "realm," which we also cannot see or measure with scientific instruments.

Metaphysical ‘realm’? That’s not science, that’s fantasy. Science deals with observable facts and phenomena which are, by definition, not metaphysical. If your metaphysical phenomena do not produce observable events in our universe, it does not matter whether they exist or not because they can not affect us. If they do, if those events can be measured and quantified, they are physical.

cthia wrote:In fact, how can science accept the metaphysical world without accepting that there may be metaphysical beings living in that world? Some part of man is indeed metaphysical.

Fine. Show me that part. Demonstrate its existence in some real, observable manner.

cthia wrote:If you have the choice of there being a God and there not being a God, which would you choose? IOW, Do you want it to be true that God Exists?" If the answer for you is no, then perhaps that is why you do not see. You do not want to see.

I want to know the facts. Facts are not conditional upon whether you want them to be true or not. They exist independent of your desires or opinions; indeed, they exist independent of YOU. Show me some independent facts that demonstrate the existence of your god and I will accept that existence. Nobody has been able to produce such facts in 2,000 years of trying.
———————————
I used to live on a farm. I know what bullshit smells like.

Please do not strip the relevant part of my post. Do you not believe that man has a soul? Every other scientist does. Yet, nary an empirical experiment has measured it.

wiki wrote:There are two broad conceptions about what "world" is studied by metaphysics. The strong, classical view assumes that the objects studied by metaphysics exist independently of any observer, so that the subject is the most fundamental of all sciences. The weaker, more modern view assumes that the objects studied by metaphysics exist inside the mind of an observer, so the subject becomes a form of introspection and conceptual analysis. Some philosophers, notably Kant, discuss both of these "worlds" and what can be inferred about each one.

Some philosophers and scientists, such as the logical positivists, reject the entire subject of metaphysics as meaningless, while others disagree and think that it is legitimate.

Sorry for quoting wiki, but it is obvious you haven't read any works on metaphysics. I've studied the subject for years. You'll see credits given to me by Dr. Barbara Froeschle in her dissertation A Study of the Evolution of the Phenomenological Nature of Cultural Consciousness: Kant, Hegel, and Heidegger

Imaginos is certain that the metaphysical realm cannot affect or hurt us. Hmm.

Tap danced around the question again, I see. Interesting.

cthia wrote:Please do not strip the relevant part of my post. Do you not believe that man has a soul? Every other scientist does. Yet, nary an empirical experiment has measured it.

I'm not sure which fallacious argument you're using there, argumentum ad verecundiam or argumentum ad populum. ('appeal to authority' or 'appeal to popular opinion') Maybe it's a two-fer!

I am extremely dubious of your claim that 'every other scientist' believes in the existence of a soul. Even if they did, their belief would be irrelevant. Facts do not depend on how many people believe them, or do not. Facts do not even depend on whether anybody knows them or not. You claim that every human has a 'soul'. You claim that it is a fact. Very well, present some form of real, observable, verifiable evidence to support your claim. If you can't, it is no more valid than any other unsubstantiated claim, such as the existence of Baal, Set, Shiva or Kali.

cthia wrote:Imaginos is certain that the metaphysical realm cannot affect or hurt us. Hmm.

Tap danced around the question again, I see. Interesting.

Not at all. I simply require evidence before I will believe in anything. If there is no observable evidence of the existence or non-existence of what you call metaphysical phenomena, if they have no effect in the physical universe we all inhabit, I will not believe in them simply because some people want to believe. In addition, if these postulated entities are incapable of generating real, observable effects in our physical universe, it does not matter whether they exist or not. They can not affect us.
———————————
I used to live on a farm. I know what bullshit smells like.
———————————

It is not a difficult question at all Imaginos...

Do you want there to be a God or not? Yes or no.

cthia wrote:It is not a difficult question at all Imaginos...

Do you want there to be a God or not? Yes or no.

No, it's not difficult, it's merely irrelevant. The existence or non-existence of a god is not dependent on my opinion. Or on yours. Or anybody's. God is, or not, independent of what anybody thinks.

Problem is, there's no observable, verifiable evidence to base any opinion on. Without such evidence, it is foolish to assume that an entity with all those detailed characteristics you attribute to your god exists just because you want it to be so. Or because a lot of people want it to be so. Or to assume that your god, or some different god, or gods, don't exist. Without evidence, we can't know the answer. You and a lot of other people may harbor an unfounded belief, but that is not knowledge.

Imaginos1892 wrote:

cthia wrote:It is not a difficult question at all Imaginos...

Do you want there to be a God or not? Yes or no.

No, it's not difficult, it's merely irrelevant. The existence or non-existence of a god is not dependent on my opinion. Or on yours. Or anybody's. God is, or not, independent of what anybody thinks.

Problem is, there's no observable, verifiable evidence to base any opinion on. Without such evidence, it is foolish to assume that an entity with all those detailed characteristics you attribute to your god exists just because you want it to be so. Or because a lot of people want it to be so. Or to assume that your god, or some different god, or gods, don't exist. Without evidence, we can't know the answer. You and a lot of other people may harbor an unfounded belief, but that is not knowledge.

I want there to be a god. I want there to be an Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, Soul Mate, Mother Nature. Father Christmas.

Of course, I'm a Pagan Agnostic. So I want some block of evidence. Perhaps a convincing, cogent argument on when body is ensouled, satellite image of smoke drifting over the North Pole.

I'm willin gto bet that if there is any metaphysical realm, it will bear no resemblance to the Christian Paradigm.