+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 33 to 44 of 44

  1. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    [quote=GHOST DOG;1279303]I've been taught, and found it true for myself and many others, that real personal success is not allowing myself to be "ran" from outside events, but learning to take that which comes to me, internalize it, and take the reigns, running my life from the inside......keeping myself mostly free of the emotional bondage that most folks get caught up in.
    You just agreed with 2 Peter 2:19. Humans cannot really offer "authority". They merely offer collective internalized opin ion.

    Its kind of like learning to "allow" things to occur, and not "make it happen," which is the popular course of action taught to the masses.
    That mentality, "make it happen", serves the present economic paradigm well, but it contributes to excessive competition and vioence.

    When we set out to make things happen, we become extremely attached to an outcome.
    And when we must depend on the thinking of others, we tend to seek ways to manipulate that thin king, like our proesent religious, corporate government system is doing. However, as this process grows, it begins to take on a kind of compelling power of its own, and becomes indistinguishable from what we call "God". The present christian Zio nist movement is one example of a good idea gone haywire.


    BINGO! Your teacher had great insight, I'd be willing to bet.
    The value was that he got me to questio n the internal mechanisms I used to determine truth. His flaw was incomplete logic. If religion with its confusion and division was the result of a faulty idea of conscience, then government necessarily must follow the same pattern.


    Interestingly enough, both of these two, along with religion, are dictated to by philosophy.
    You might say philosophy is the "handmaiden" of religion and government, but philosophy is filled with the same inconsistencies, and cannot arrive at a com plet description, any more than religion or govement, which means there's no use in following religion, government, or philosophy as authorities.

    Philosophy can be found in just about anything that you can think of.

    Its like when you ask someone what they think of philosophy, and they state that they don't believe in it.
    Well....thats their philosophy.
    Yes, an interesting discussion on another forum attempts to call this "consciousness", which organizes a un ified universe. However, that consciousness is driven by a mathematical system which has been proven to be both incomplete and inconsistent. If our consciousness is driving us toward unity, our sysmbol system(math) by which we represent it, can NEVER lead us to that unity. Therefore, you have a corollary in regard to truth, as statred by Romans 8:7 in regard to God. You can't get "there" from "here". The symbol system itself blocks our path, or as Lao Tzu wrote, the way that can be named is not the true way.
    I get that long ago the leaders of tribes had their explanation of where lightning and thunder, and volcanoes came from....the gods.

    After a certain time passed, these leaders carried this idea out further by giving the impression, using fear and guilt, that the people must listen to them and behave in a certain manner, to appease the gods.

    The first law was then "discovered."
    The "law" was the symbolic representation of a non-contradictory concept, which Aristotle aided greatly by developi ng the rule of non-contradiction. However, Godel demonstrated that in eve n the most formal systems, the symbolic representation reached a point in which a statement emerged that was undecideable. The symbolic system simply had nothing to say on its truth or falsehood. I point this out because the human brain tends to work much the same way. Since there are many things we cannot prove, we accept the collective "authority" of groups. "This works, so I'm sticking to this".

    Christians who profess this and say "I won't be deceived", are in fact already deceived.

    A "moral compass" was created from outside events, and now dictates personal actions from the inside of a human being.
    The moral compass, is simple. James 1:27.

  2. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    That mentality, "make it happen", serves the present economic paradigm well, but it contributes to excessive competition and vioence.
    Raising my consciousness teaches me to stay in competition with myself.
    Competing against how I was yesterday, by improving the ways in which I show up in life today.

    "Making it happen" can be ok at times, if it isn't allowed to be carried to extremes, by not staying true to the work of remaining harmless to others.

    Most do not know how to accomplish this feat all of the time.

    IMHO, learning to stay harmless to others comes down to me learning that I'm casting either a "live vote" or a "die vote" for people, or against people.

    Making it happen can be a form of violence that we've been conditioned to accept and to ignore it's consequences, simply because of our mostly untrained way of being....a sort of "social norm."

    IOW, we feel that we can "advance" our personal agendas by taking a little "bite" out of someone else.

    Bottom line.....if it isn't accomplished with love, it becomes violence.

    And when we must depend on the thinking of others, we tend to seek ways to manipulate that thin king, like our proesent religious, corporate government system is doing.
    Subtlety is the key player in this, as these two establishments are the "roll models" that most of the unconscious masses follow....

    Persons who allow most anything past their mind's "Gatekeeper," without a struggle, will be open to anything that they feel will advance their personal "violent" (making it happen) agendas.

    That is, they may do something to their neighbor that they wouldn't want to happen to themselves, and depending on their internal sensitivity, either ignore the event, or find a way to justify it to their inner self.

    His flaw was incomplete logic.
    He may of just rationalized his premises based on his past experiences, without a serious search of those areas.

    If religion with its confusion and division was the result of a faulty idea of conscience, then government necessarily must follow the same pattern.
    Both are products of human being's faulty, biased thoughts, emotions, and conjecture which always have been, and always will remain mostly unconscious of their real effect on the human race.

    IOW, you simply cannot have a ruling party which depends mainly on it's ruler's human emotions and bias to run humanity, and have it be efficient.

    This is the main reason that life is not fair, and was never meant to be fair.

    Their combined excuse is that "humanity needed something in place to run it, and we've always been the path of least resistance."

    To me, this makes my inner work of going against the path of least resistance most important to me....

    "The path less traveled" is an individual, and a serious choice.

    but philosophy is filled with the same inconsistencies, and cannot arrive at a com plet description, any more than religion or govement, which means there's no use in following religion, government, or philosophy as authorities.
    I have found that a person's philosophical "inconsistencies" are dictated to by the uncontrolled, un-researched human emotions.

    Each person has their own philosophy. It is like any other subject.....are it's underpinnings pure, and free of corruption?

    Is it's source found at the top of the mountain, in the purest snow....there at the summit, or is it's source at the foothills...in the muddiest snow-melt?

    In the end when everything has been tabulated, emotionally-biased answers help no one, and truly inhibit any growth, as far as human beings go.

    If our consciousness is driving us toward unity, our sysmbol system(math) by which we represent it, can NEVER lead us to that unity.
    I think that this is true for a collective, not the individual consciousness.

    I believe that the impetus for raising one's individual consciousness is driven by a demand to be different than the ways one used to be.
    Inviting a different outcome, so to say.

    The collective is many different consciousnesses, run by the majority, which seem to be the unaware, emotionally-driven ones, up to this point in time.

    Teilhard-Chardin called this collective "consciousness field" the "Noosphere."

    The symbol system itself blocks our path, or as Lao Tzu wrote, the way that can be named is not the true way.
    In reality, all roads lead to the inside.....for some, they are longer ways than for others.

    The symbolic system simply had nothing to say on its truth or falsehood. I point this out because the human brain tends to work much the same way. Since there are many things we cannot prove, we accept the collective "authority" of groups. "This works, so I'm sticking to this".
    Symbols can be very powerful "dis-organizers" to the human brain, if unaccounted for.

    "Dis-organizers" because they bring emotions to the surface, and can "disorganize" our thought processes, if they remain largely unchecked by our logical, and more stable proof-seeking side.

    IOW, a little emotion goes a long way as a motivator, and not as a destination.

    Christians who profess this and say "I won't be deceived", are in fact already deceived.
    Because they are looking for "The Simple Answer" in a world of complexity.

    In reality, the simple answer was inside of all of us, all of the time, and is still there, establishing itself at the time of our physical birth.

    By our living in an unconscious state, we allowed emotional fantasy, and "making it happen" to take us over, and lead us off-track.

    Allowing life to dictate to us this unconscious state of being, (being caught up in the acts and struggles of living our daily lives) we were dislocated, and estranged from this very first and most powerful inner state of being.

    Maybe some of you don't believe this.

    The next time you go to the hospital, go down to the maternity ward and view those newborns, and see if those clean, pure little faces don't rule your heart!

    They have The Simple Answer.
    Last edited by GHOST DOG; 11-19-2012 at 01:19 PM.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  3. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    Quote:If our consciousness is driving us toward unity, our sysmbol system(math) by which we represent it, can NEVER lead us to that unity.
    If our consciousness is driving us toward unity, our sysmbol system(math) by which we represent it, can NEVER lead us to that unity.

    Ghost Dog:"I think that this is true for a collective, not the individual consciousness."

    Doojie: Individual consciousness may discover unity, but the problem arises with communication. If I know someting to be true, I should be able to translate it into language. If I can do that, I can then get it translated to algorithms. if so, the n it is computale, and all can see it and understand it. This means that all brain processes are derive from a computable substrate. If you know it anc cannot communicate it, there is a possi bility that it pertains to something neither physical nor provable, and yet it will still be true. But how will you know it is true if not by axiomatic method? And iof true by axiom atic method, there is no reason to believe it cannot be known by another. This is where we get cults, and "secret societies". Are these people 'elect" before God? And if so, God would not be trying to save everyone, since not everyone can have "saving" knowledge.

    Obviously, then there must be an element of grace, and if by grace, then it would apply equally to all, but not by choice, since choices are basically algorithms, and algorithms are derived to come to a conclusion. If "salvation" is dependent on "works" done in this life, here and now, then yu arrive at those who are "damned" because they cannot arive at correct understanding. OTOH, how do we know those 'elect' a ctually DO have correct understanding? We don't, which is why it makes far more sense to believe that God is selecting certain people now for understanding, to train the rest later. The dilemma is then solved. We don't have to worry if somebody's "truth" may be correct, since we can simply wait and see.

  4. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    Individual consciousness may discover unity
    One individual consciousness might discover what is most important for that single consciousness to grow individually.
    IOW, it is accomplished by one doing their own work towards this different level.
    Or, depending on the person's prior training or agendas, this personal knowledge may be lost to stagnation and victimization.

    This all depends on the payoff that the person expects, as no one does anything without one.

    The term unity as you use it, to me, implies a single realization, or experience happening altogether identical, among the many.

    Example:
    Yes, we all have a vision together as humans of being happy, but there are many differing roads traveling through this common term.....many things make us happy, plus many different levels of it, and many opinions of what it is, making happiness a relative term among us all.

    The only single, common realization that would be common to all humans, would be the experience of death. (zero)

    But we all experience death equally, though dying from the differing mechanisms causing it are not equal experiences.
    If I know someting to be true,
    It may always be true to you, and you alone, no matter how efficiently you've conveyed the thought.

    I should be able to translate it into language.
    Regardless whether or not you can, and do convert it into the language efficient enough to convey the idea, it may not be received in the same manner that you meant for it, for this portion of the equation depends on the reception faculties, pre-conceived ideas, and experiences that reign true to the receiver, therefore the recipient could miss your postulation's (your personal) truth.

    The most efficient way that I know of, in which to convey a personal truth to everyone, equally, without a specific "language," is to live it....model it, and be an example of it.

    There is only "unity" in an individual's realm of beliefs......formed by the internal work performed, or the lack of it, and it may be different than what is observed in reality.
    And it may constantly change with new information. (Experiences count as information.)

    Ask any true religious believer, and they'll tell you that they have "The Truth," and not "A Truth."

    Therefore, they have only a universally-accepted, personal truth.....all of them differing slightly, or greatly.

    Due to the untestable nature of their beliefs, trusting in the blind belief systems that are accorded to this subject, the only authentic "unity" that they experience is in their collective stagnation, and there are different levels of that, even.
    And these levels of unity are readily accepted as popular "truth," simply because of the illusion of it fitting us all so "comfortably."
    Last edited by GHOST DOG; 11-19-2012 at 04:37 PM.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  5. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    That's whny you have Matthew 24:23 and Romans 8:7. We know mathematically it is impossible to get all truth in one package. It's a proven theorem. Therefore, "call no man ra bi, master, or father"(Matthew 23).

    The only possible correct choice is individual freedom.

  6. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    That's whny you have Matthew 24:23 and Romans 8:7. We know mathematically it is impossible to get all truth in one package. It's a proven theorem. Therefore, "call no man ra bi, master, or father"(Matthew 23).
    And in a lot of cases, these verses will be rationalized away, or misread, or purposefully mis-understood due to the prior training of the "faithful."

    The only possible correct choice is individual freedom.
    Yes...of course, doojie.

    Each person is as free as his level of dedication to his training will allow him to be.

    But, as my teacher liked to state, "You and I are only free enough to the point of wandering around on the boat, out in the middle of the ocean."
    Last edited by GHOST DOG; 11-20-2012 at 11:20 AM.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  7. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    Quote Originally Posted by GHOST DOG View Post
    And in a lot of cases, these verses will be rationalized away, or misread, or purposefully mis-understood due to the prior training of the "faithful."

    Yes...of course, doojie.

    Each person is as free as his level of dedication to his training will allow him to be.

    But, as my teacher liked to state, "You and I are only free enough to the point of wandering around on the boat, out in the middle of the ocean."
    That's why I've always defined freedom as the absence of absolute knowledge. If you look at mathematics regarding Cantor, Godel Freige, Turing, Chaitin, Tarski, etc, you see there is a continuum that demonstrates not on ly in finity, but an infinity of infinities, as in Many Worlds Theory, or Inflation Theory, always and forever subject to change. If there is a God that intervenes, that intervention would most likely be at a point in which sufficient social development has occurred to further promote the next "quantum leap". The bible talks about this stuff. In fact, I'm worki ng on parallels between biological and social evolution that correspnds exactly to what the bible actually tells us in both the OT and NT.

  8. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    That's why I've always defined freedom as the absence of absolute knowledge.
    I see that this line of yours resonates with my thoughts about newborn babies....knowing The Simple Answer.

    They are like a blank, white sheet of paper, to me.
    If there is a God that intervenes, that intervention would most likely be at a point in which sufficient social development has occurred to further promote the next "quantum leap".
    Or, as Teilhard De Chardin called it "The Omega Point."

    I read his book "The Phenomenon Of Man" about fifteen years ago, and it is an interesting read.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  9. #41
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,715

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    Quote Originally Posted by GHOST DOG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GHOST DOG
    I see that this line of yours resonates with my thoughts about newborn babies....knowing The Simple Answer.

    They are like a blank, white sheet of paper, to me.


    The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count...

    The problem is that the blank, white sheet of paper fills up fast, and even divorcing oneself from the delusions of others, self-delusion is ever present, isn't it?

    Since ultimate truth is out of reach, we are left with nothing BUT our objective truth. Without it, we would be nothing but that blank white sheet of paper.

    Our truths/delusions and our actions define us, don't they?

  10. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    Since ultimate truth is out of reach, we are left with nothing BUT our objective truth. Without it, we would be nothing but that blank white sheet of paper.

    Our truths/delusions and our actions define us, don't they?
    As do our lies, deceits, with-holdings, and our in-actions, my friend. The ancient thinkers knew all about training.

    I like the line from the movie "Man On Fire," where the little girl named Pita is practicing her swimming techniques under the watchful eye of "Creasy," Denzel Washington's character.

    She tells him that she just needs to get tougher, in order to win the contest.
    And his response:

    "There is no such thing as tough. There is trained and untrained. Now which are you?"
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  11. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    3,715

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    Very good thoughts.











    .

  12. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,333

    Re: Paul and Christianity

    The problem with our objective truths is that the only medium we have for communication with God is this reality around us. We can communicate by no other method. Therefore if we define truth or God, it is inescapable that our definitions will reflect what we can know about reality, and what we know about reality is in complete and inconsistent. Therefore, any choices made are necessarily made by Gd, assuming God exists. The o nly thing we choose MUST be associated with this universe, this reality. There are no "works" that can get you anywhere else.

Similar Threads

  1. Ron Paul's Son Rand Paul To Run For Senator
    By rogerbovee in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-11-2010, 08:21 PM
  2. Christianity Explained
    By Yeah Well Fine Then in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 11-18-2007, 02:55 AM
  3. Christianity
    By djbombsquad in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: 07-19-2007, 08:58 AM
  4. Before Christianity
    By Qi123 in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-09-2007, 04:34 AM
  5. Where Christianity came from
    By lisan23 in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 12-31-2006, 12:22 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •