Moderator: Dan~
WendyDarling wrote:I like care better. Care for yourself and for others, including God. Care is more directive, less ambiguous.
Care for all that lives.
Show me.James S Saint wrote: For example, the Second "Law" of Thermodynamics has been proven wrong for over a century...
Pandora wrote:Show me.James S Saint wrote: For example, the Second "Law" of Thermodynamics has been proven wrong for over a century...
NT ... LOVE
Good thing that Jesus was a bit more verbose.I like care better. Care for yourself and for others, including God. Care is more directive, less ambiguous.
Care for all that lives.
Organizations attract people with authoritarian personalities. That's not going to change.In a word ... "arrogance"
Attempts to usurp the authority ... superiority of God.
phyllo wrote:NT ... LOVEGood thing that Jesus was a bit more verbose.I like care better. Care for yourself and for others, including God. Care is more directive, less ambiguous.
Care for all that lives.
pilgrim_tom wrote:In a word ... "arrogance"
Attempts to usurp the authority ... superiority of God.
phyllo wrote:Organizations attract people with authoritarian personalities.
phyllo wrote:That's not going to change.
Ever heard of domineering mothers?Probably explains why the Hebrews are still waiting for a "messiah" ... they have always expected an "authoritarian personality" ... seems to be a natural outcome of patriarchal society(s).
What? You think that even Jesus should have kept his mouth shut?Really?
2,000 years of the "ping pong" of verbosity has literally killed the story of Jesus. Simple fatigue and frustration ... the absence of a clear and credible critical mass to the story ... seems to have driven the most pious of believers away.
What is the alternative?
Silence!
In todays' world silence is about as attractive as a shit sandwich for lunch.
phyllo wrote:What? You think that even Jesus should have kept his mouth shut?Really?
2,000 years of the "ping pong" of verbosity has literally killed the story of Jesus. Simple fatigue and frustration ... the absence of a clear and credible critical mass to the story ... seems to have driven the most pious of believers away.
What is the alternative?
Silence!
In todays' world silence is about as attractive as a shit sandwich for lunch.
phyllo wrote:Don't worry.
If the sky is falling, you can still use Newtonian mechanics to calculate when it will hit you. Newtons laws are suitable for 99.9% of the problems that you will encounter on Earth.
phyllo wrote:Engineers will still calculate entropy, in spite of what James says.
I can't believe that theories of black holes carry that much weight.
WendyDarling wrote:I'll bet all of humanity on God for a gazillion in Spanish Galleon gold coins. Hey, I'm part Jew.
I'll check it out. 1867 eh?James S Saint wrote:But first, prepare and read up on Maxwell's Demon (1867).
What you describe is the limitation of human knowledge. As one discovers more, one gets closer to "what actually is". But that's true of all human knowledge ... history, philosophy, economics, etc.In a previous post I wrote ... the 'god" of science is malleable"
I probably should explain my meaning ...
True Science is not malleable ... man's science is malleable ... ergo ... as man increases his knowledge of True Science he revises his story.
Paraphrasing ... True Science is "Immutable".
Then they are wrong. Knowledge of God is just as limited as scientific knowledge. Therefore, God is "malleable" in exactly the same sense as "the 'god' of science". Sure, there is a "True God" out there, but humans don't know that True God.Some religious/spiritual people argue that God is "Immutable".
If spirit is substance, then where is this substance?pilgrim_tom wrote:Spiritualist: Spirit is substance ... though invisible.
Scientist: Provide me with a flask filled with spirit ... I will examine it through the prism of known science and share my
results.
Spiritualist: Spirit can not be harnessed ... therefore I can not provide you with a flask full of spirit.
Scientist: Awe! ... then the conclusion is simple ... spirit does not exist. Furthermore, since God is spirit ... God does not exist.
Place your bets folks.
pilgrim_tom wrote:In a previous post I wrote ... the 'god" of science is malleable"
I probably should explain my meaning ...
True Science is not malleable ... man's science is malleable ... ergo ... as man increases his knowledge of True Science he revises his story.
Paraphrasing ... True Science is "Immutable".
phyllo wrote:What you describe is the limitation of human knowledge. As one discovers more, one gets closer to "what actually is". But that's true of all human knowledge ... history, philosophy, economics, etc.
pilgrim_tom wrote:Some religious/spiritual people argue that God is "Immutable".
phyllo wrote:Then they are wrong. Knowledge of God is just as limited as scientific knowledge. Therefore, God is "malleable" in exactly the same sense as "the 'god' of science". Sure, there is a "True God" out there, but humans don't know that True God.
pilgrim_tom wrote:Spiritualist: Spirit is substance ... though invisible.
Scientist: Provide me with a flask filled with spirit ... I will examine it through the prism of known science and share my
results.
Spiritualist: Spirit can not be harnessed ... therefore I can not provide you with a flask full of spirit.
Scientist: Awe! ... then the conclusion is simple ... spirit does not exist. Furthermore, since God is spirit ... God does not exist.
Place your bets folks.
phyllo wrote:If spirit is substance, then where is this substance?
If spirit is substance, then why can't it be "grabbed" or harnessed?
Energy is not substance but one can see it in the motion of physical objects. Can one see the workings of spirit in any consistent way?
I see a benefit from having a diversity of approaches so I don't think that convergence is necessarily good.Agreed ... yet wouldn't it be nice if Science, Philosophy and Religion could converge ... all else is subordinate to these three (insert here).
Then you have to clarify what you and those other people mean by the word 'substance'.Within the ILP audience ... at least most of the ILP audience ... the notion of "spirit as substance" is gobbly gook.
Yet within the larger community ... across time and space ... there are countless individuals ... in all cultures and geographies ... that testify ... by their life or by their words ... that spirit is substance ... spirit is omnipresent ... Spirit is God.
substance :
1 A particular kind of matter with uniform properties.
2 The real physical matter of which a person or thing consists and which has a tangible, solid presence.
Return to Religion and Spirituality
Users browsing this forum: No registered users