A Defense of the Bible
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
Knowledge does not transform, only knowing transforms. One has to understand that most people live in their ’’heads’’; they are not living. To live in the head means, missing what is obvious, missing the isness of existence. How can one not miss? One is either wallowing in the past, or one is escaping into the future. The past the and future or not existential in nature, psycholigically they exist! Hence, I remarked knowing; knowing cannot happen in the past nor in the future.
I wonder if you are simply splitting hair here, knowing implies the knowledge of something, does it not? Anyway, people can be knowing things and still not be transformed. The point is that we should live out our beliefs. But false or wrong beliefs can have terrible consequences if they are lived out.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
I wonder if you are simply splitting hair here, knowing implies the knowledge of something, does it not? Anyway, people can be knowing things and still not be transformed. The point is that we should live out our beliefs. But false or wrong beliefs can have terrible consequences if they are lived out.
Sometimes its the pride issue....people will think that they'll lose face if being converted to other religions....so they may just live out their lives with their false beliefs....for others, religion is like a tradition eg. Taoism...burning of joss papers....
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
Sometimes its the pride issue....people will think that they'll lose face if being converted to other religions....so they may just live out their lives with their false beliefs....for others, religion is like a tradition eg. Taoism...burning of joss papers....
But some beliefs, when carried out to their logical ends, have fatal consequences.See http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/darwin-at-columbine-redux/
-
Parking one's mind no-where, one is in the process of knowing! It has nothing to do with knowledge. Does one need to have a belief that one has hands? One simply knows, cos one is experiencing it, one does not need a belief. Does one have to beleive in the sun? One simply knows it. If my grandfather eg, had told me that love is nothing but hurting oneself and without exploring it, without experiencing it - i am simply imbibing what could be true or untrue. The problem with oneself (in most instances) is that the lack of inner courage to admit that one does not know. One who admits that one does not know and is still open to exploring, to esquire with an ''open'' heart, there is a possibility of realizing what is existentially true or simply a psychological placebo Truth (what is true) can never be interpreted - truth can only be experienced. Instead of creating a possibility for for people to experience the ''truth', many started interpreting the truth. It is fine to have beliefs, but beliefs that allows for 'unlimiting' oneself makes all the difference. The former is a pond! , The latter is a river - flowing and ''alive'' Truth in quotes cos there is no absolute truth, it is always relative to the isness of living.
-
How do you explain when bad things happen to good people ? If its not past life Karma, then what is it ?
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
Parking one’s mind no-where, one is in the process of knowing! It has nothing to do with knowledge.
Does one need to have a belief that one has hands? One simply knows, cos one is experiencing it, one does not need a belief. Does one have to beleive in the sun? One simply knows it.
If my grandfather eg, had told me that love is nothing but hurting oneself and without exploring it, without experiencing it – i am simply imbibing what could be true or untrue.
The problem with oneself (in most instances) is that the lack of inner courage to admit that one does not know. One who admits that one does not know and is still open to exploring, to esquire with an ’’open’’ heart, there is a possibility of realizing what is existentially true or simply a psychological placebo
Truth (what is true) can never be interpreted – truth can only be experienced. Instead of creating a possibility for for people to experience the ’’truth’, many started interpreting the truth.
It is fine to have beliefs, but beliefs that allows for ‘unlimiting’ oneself makes all the difference. The former is a pond! , The latter is a river – flowing and ’’alive’‘Truth in quotes cos there is no absolute truth, it is always relative to the isness of living.
Truth can be known and be lived out. So I don't see why you need to dichotomise them as if they are somehow mutually exclusive. Jesus said, "I am the Truth..." In short, when we see Jesus we are looking at all that is true, for He is the Creator who made the universe. For Christians, not only can we know the truth, we are also to walk in the truth. And when we are in Christ, we are also in the Truth.
BTW, your last statement is self-refuting, which means it is a FALSE statement. To say there is NO absolute truth is already to make an absolute statement. And if you say that truth is relative, then you are also making an absolute statement here, that truth is relative. But this notion of relative truth is also self-refuting and self-defeating. Perhaps you are used to experiencing self-refuting truths???
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
How do you explain when bad things happen to good people ? If its not past life Karma, then what is it ?
In the Gospel of John, Jesus saw a man who had been blind from birth.“Rabbi,” his disciples asked him, “why was this man born blind? Was it because of his own sins or his parents’ sins?” “It was not because of his sins or his parents’ sins,” Jesus answered. “This happened so the power of God could be seen in him." And Jesus proceeded to heal the man.
Bad things happen not because we are reaping our past lives karma, bad things happen because we live in a fallen and cursed world, marred by sin. Bad things can happen to good people and good things can happen to bad people in this life. Also in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus taught that, "For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike." But in the end God is the one who will put all things right when we all stand before Him in judgement.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
In the Gospel of John, Jesus saw a man who had been blind from birth.“Rabbi,” his disciples asked him, “why was this man born blind? Was it because of his own sins or his parents’ sins?” “It was not because of his sins or his parents’ sins,” Jesus answered. “This happened so the power of God could be seen in him." And Jesus proceeded to heal the man.
Bad things happen not because we are reaping our past lives karma, bad things happen because we live in a fallen and cursed world, marred by sin. Bad things can happen to good people and good things can happen to bad people in this life. Also in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus taught that, "For he gives his sunlight to both the evil and the good, and he sends rain on the just and the unjust alike." But in the end God is the one who will put all things right when we all stand before Him in judgement.
OIC...that's something new to me...thanks for explaining....
-
When Jesus uttered that he is the truth - he was inviting the .. to partake of the eternal truth - and as it being eternal - how can it be absolute for ordinary human beings (for Jesus it was, cos he had ''dissappeared'' as a human form, he was emptiness), it can only be relative to another human being's perception, given his/her conditioning. When Jesus uttered this - blessed are the poor in spirit, for ....... of heaven - by that he was implying that one who does not accumulate or becomes identified with the the past (psychological baggage). Clouds come and go in the sky, Jesus was asking ... that one transcend these clouds to see the 'Truth". Clouds are temporal (conditioning, tradition, beliefs, religion,- psychological and social and limiting) whereas the sky is permanent (which transcend all religions, conditioning beleifs and even it is not transcended one is open to the possibility of recognizing that which has always been in one's being and unlimiting and open to what may ....) hence spiritual. religion is a mere spotlite - it narrows, it concentrates and it has to exclude Spirituality is flood lite, ti widens, it is all embracing and it is inclusive - BIG difference. Till this is not understood or experienced one is a squirrel in a cage Jesus did not exclude. Do Christians include others who are not Christians? It presuppose one who ethical as opposed to being principled to derive at an ans. Ethics is inner, intuitive, Principles are outer - commandments given by someone else to follow. Muse over this - can two emptiness(es) have a distance? What is the distance between the two?
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
When Jesus uttered that he is the truth – he was inviting the .. to partake of the eternal truth – and as it being eternal – how can it be absolute for ordinary human beings (for Jesus it was, cos he had ’’dissappeared’’ as a human form, he was emptiness), it can only be relative to another human being’s perception, given his/her conditioning. When Jesus uttered this – blessed are the poor in spirit, for ….... of heaven – by that he was implying that one who does not accumulate or becomes identified with the the past (psychological baggage).
Clouds come and go in the sky, Jesus was asking … that one transcend these clouds to see the ‘Truth”. Clouds are temporal (conditioning, tradition, beliefs, religion,- psychological and social and limiting) whereas the sky is permanent (which transcend all religions, conditioning beleifs and even it is not transcended one is open to the possibility of recognizing that which has always been in one’s being and unlimiting and open to what may ….) hence spiritual. religion is a mere spotlite – it narrows, it concentrates and it has to exclude Spirituality is flood lite, ti widens, it is all embracing and it is inclusive – BIG difference. Till this is not understood or experienced one is a squirrel in a cageJesus did not exclude. Do Christians include others who are not Christians? It presuppose one who ethical as opposed to being principled to derive at an ans. Ethics is inner, intuitive, Principles are outer – commandments given by someone else to follow.
Muse over this – can two emptiness(es) have a distance? What is the distance between the two?
It would really help if you could organise your words more intelligibly!
Anyway, your take on what Jesus meant is pretty bizarre and involves heavy metaphorising of what Jesus taught. But then again, that characterises much of your postings.
Yes, Jesus died for the whole world. In that sense He did not include. All humans are called to salvation. But Jesus does exclude also. He will separate the sheep from the goats, those who believe in Him from those who do not.
Musing over the space between empty space? It's just a meaningless statement. I wouldn't want to kill brain cells over it. Might as well ask what's the name of the bachelor's wife, ya? Or how a circular square looks like?
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
When Jesus uttered that he is the truth – he was inviting the .. to partake of the eternal truth – and as it being eternal – how can it be absolute for ordinary human beings (for Jesus it was, cos he had ’’dissappeared’’ as a human form, he was emptiness), it can only be relative to another human being’s perception, given his/her conditioning. When Jesus uttered this – blessed are the poor in spirit, for ….... of heaven – by that he was implying that one who does not accumulate or becomes identified with the the past (psychological baggage).
Clouds come and go in the sky, Jesus was asking … that one transcend these clouds to see the ‘Truth”. Clouds are temporal (conditioning, tradition, beliefs, religion,- psychological and social and limiting) whereas the sky is permanent (which transcend all religions, conditioning beleifs and even it is not transcended one is open to the possibility of recognizing that which has always been in one’s being and unlimiting and open to what may ….) hence spiritual. religion is a mere spotlite – it narrows, it concentrates and it has to exclude Spirituality is flood lite, ti widens, it is all embracing and it is inclusive – BIG difference. Till this is not understood or experienced one is a squirrel in a cageJesus did not exclude. Do Christians include others who are not Christians? It presuppose one who ethical as opposed to being principled to derive at an ans. Ethics is inner, intuitive, Principles are outer – commandments given by someone else to follow.
Muse over this – can two emptiness(es) have a distance? What is the distance between the two?
I have problems understanding your postings....
-
Deconstruct lah, ur conceptual skyscrapers and u will understand. Otherwise, stick to your beleifs and what-not and ... ignore, cos u seem to be always defending? Why? Fear or doubt about your beliefs
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
I have problems understanding your postings....
You are not the only one. Problem is that fuzzy blames us for having mental blocks and looking at finger and not moon when he should be learning to write better. -
So now it is my writing, what more is there to say!
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
So now it is my writing, what more is there to say!
You can say more, but say in such a way that people won't have problem understanding you. Even if you want to show how deep and profound you are also do it using simple to understand words mah. -
Muse over the postings n it may avail oneself to what is possible. Not just here, even in other forums, I can go on waxing lyrical about the taste of wine - the thirst can only be satiated if one is willing to partake of .... and is earnest about it. I cannot ask someone to be thirsty or be earnest -
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
Muse over the postings n it may avail oneself to what is possible. Not just here, even in other forums,
I can go on waxing lyrical about the taste of wine – the thirst can only be satiated if one is willing to partake of .... and is earnest about it. I cannot ask someone to be thirsty or be earnest -
Sure one can taste wine for himself. But how does one hold to self-refuting statements and still claim to be rational or know the truth? You said truth is relative and not absolute. Well, are you absolutely sure of that? -
-
What is permanent is truth (not dictionary meaning but existential truth). One is only experiencing relative truth and it will remain so as long as one is IDENTIFIED with one's mind and body. It has been erroneously assumed to be the absolute truth, there is no truth, only truth that is relative to what is perceived,. why so? When one walks on the road, and falls down on the pavement, only then is the pavement a reality to him/her. Before that. it did not exist. It was always there but only became a reality when it was perceived by the one who fell down. The pavement does not call out to say I exist. The one who fell down thru his/her perception gave it existence. Eg, stock market crashes, it has only relevance for someone in the banking or .. Would it have relevance for a village peasant? Will the mountain goats be affected by the stock market crash? As such, 'reality' remains a mere psychological experience for many, it is only existential when it really happens to that person in a given situation and is always relative to one's conditioning and so on so forth. One has to reconcile or at least understand that one could be confused or simply not know. Also, many assume that they exist in the mind or the body. The mind and the body exist in the source. The source cannot be found outside of onself. It is an inward journey and as long as there is no longing in one's heart (love) to merge with the source (eg God, jesus, Mohd, Buddha heart soul or ..) one has settled for mediocrity. The mind cannot use logic to get inside - cos the mind is a limitation, it does not exist. it is a bundle of thoughts. can one find one's mind? To know God, to know Jesus to know Krishna - one has to 'die' - by that is meant die to the roles and be empty of .... By that 'dying' to roles, it is not meant that someone has to reject roles; accept and fulfil the roles but dont bring it home. By home is meant source (aka God, Jesus, Mohd, Buddha heart, soul or ...) and one is always a clean slate. It is always open to possibilities. However, the human mind cannot accept uncertainty and hence it is content with certainty and thus unwilling to risk enquiring, exploring.
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
What is permanent is truth (not dictionary meaning but existential truth). One is only experiencing relative truth and it will remain so as long as one is IDENTIFIED with one’s mind and body. It has been erroneously assumed to be the absolute truth, there is no truth, only truth that is relative to what is perceived,. why so? When one walks on the road, and falls down on the pavement, only then is the pavement a reality to him/her. Before that. it did not exist. It was always there but only became a reality when it was perceived by the one who fell down. The pavement does not call out to say I exist. The one who fell down thru his/her perception gave it existence. Eg, stock market crashes, it has only relevance for someone in the banking or .. Would it have relevance for a village peasant? Will the mountain goats be affected by the stock market crash? As such, ‘reality’ remains a mere psychological experience for many, it is only existential when it really happens to that person in a given situation and is always relative to one’s conditioning and so on so forth. One has to reconcile or at least understand that one could be confused or simply not know.
Also, many assume that they exist in the mind or the body. The mind and the body exist in the source.
The source cannot be found outside of onself. It is an inward journey and as long as there is no longing in one’s heart (love) to merge with the source (eg God, jesus, Mohd, Buddha heart soul or ..) one has settled for mediocrity. The mind cannot use logic to get inside – cos the mind is a limitation, it does not exist. it is a bundle of thoughts. can one find one’s mind?To know God, to know Jesus to know Krishna – one has to ‘die’ – by that is meant die to the roles and be empty of …. By that ‘dying’ to roles, it is not meant that someone has to reject roles; accept and fulfil the roles but dont bring it home. By home is meant source (aka God, Jesus, Mohd, Buddha heart, soul or …
and one is
always a clean slate. It is always open to possibilities. However,
the human mind cannot accept uncertainty and hence it is content
with certainty and thus unwilling to risk enquiring, exploring.Thanks for sharing ! I had read your points with some difficulty....Hahaha!
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
What is permanent is truth (not dictionary meaning but existential truth). One is only experiencing relative truth and it will remain so as long as one is IDENTIFIED with one’s mind and body. It has been erroneously assumed to be the absolute truth, there is no truth, only truth that is relative to what is perceived,. why so? When one walks on the road, and falls down on the pavement, only then is the pavement a reality to him/her. Before that. it did not exist. It was always there but only became a reality when it was perceived by the one who fell down. The pavement does not call out to say I exist. The one who fell down thru his/her perception gave it existence. Eg, stock market crashes, it has only relevance for someone in the banking or .. Would it have relevance for a village peasant? Will the mountain goats be affected by the stock market crash? As such, ‘reality’ remains a mere psychological experience for many, it is only existential when it really happens to that person in a given situation and is always relative to one’s conditioning and so on so forth. One has to reconcile or at least understand that one could be confused or simply not know.
Also, many assume that they exist in the mind or the body. The mind and the body exist in the source.
The source cannot be found outside of onself. It is an inward journey and as long as there is no longing in one’s heart (love) to merge with the source (eg God, jesus, Mohd, Buddha heart soul or ..) one has settled for mediocrity. The mind cannot use logic to get inside – cos the mind is a limitation, it does not exist. it is a bundle of thoughts. can one find one’s mind?To know God, to know Jesus to know Krishna – one has to ‘die’ – by that is meant die to the roles and be empty of …. By that ‘dying’ to roles, it is not meant that someone has to reject roles; accept and fulfil the roles but dont bring it home. By home is meant source (aka God, Jesus, Mohd, Buddha heart, soul or …
and one is
always a clean slate. It is always open to possibilities. However,
the human mind cannot accept uncertainty and hence it is content
with certainty and thus unwilling to risk enquiring, exploring.
So the door does not exist until you run into it or the cars on the highway do not exist until you got run over by them and become road kill? Seems like you have serious problem with reality that is existing right now. -
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
So the door does not exist until you run into it or the cars on the highway do not exist until you got run over by them and become road kill? Seems like you have serious problem with reality that is existing right now.
U are free to spout all that comes to you - it is you and u are being u what u type here. To reject outrightly, what one knows not or lacks insight is the highest form of ignorance. I only sense fear and doubts - i m guessing, i could be wrong, i could be rite, but it is for u to know or not know. By judging - u are not defining what another is (in this instance, me) or . .. but defining what you are. When one's mirror that is thick with the dust of the past, onecannot see clearly what is. One only sees what one wants to see, hence one misses! One cannot respond to what is. One merely reacts and all one does is use the past. Of course, the past is dead, it is only alive in the mind. The wise knows and accepts that the illusion of certainty cannot co-exist with existential uncertainty. At the most, one is clutching at straws of certainty! My labelling or making another wrong does not make me rite. What I am not is what I am - that is the same for u. Like i mentioned before, i offer my views, opinions n what have u. u are free to be u just as others are. If it does not resonate of u or does not with u - lump it. -
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
U are free to spout all that comes to you - it is you and u are being u what u type here. To reject outrightly, what one knows not or lacks insight is the highest form of ignorance. I only sense fear and doubts - i m guessing, i could be wrong, i could be rite, but it is for u to know or not know. By judging - u are not defining what another is (in this instance, me) or . .. but defining what you are. When one's mirror that is thick with the dust of the past, onecannot see clearly what is. One only sees what one wants to see, hence one misses! One cannot respond to what is. One merely reacts and all one does is use the past. Of course, the past is dead, it is only alive in the mind. The wise knows and accepts that the illusion of certainty cannot co-exist with existential uncertainty. At the most, one is clutching at straws of certainty! My labelling or making another wrong does not make me rite. What I am not is what I am - that is the same for u. Like i mentioned before, i offer my views, opinions n what have u. u are free to be u just as others are. If it does not resonate of u or does not with u - lump it.
You talked about perception, so in what way are you perceiving reality such that you are not subject to the same perception errors that you think we are bound to? Your views certainly do not resonate with me, and I suspect it do not resonate with many here too. I have pointed out the flaws in your worldview and how it is self refuting. If you think logic and reason does not resonate with you then you can also lump it. -
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
You talked about perception, so in what way are you perceiving reality such that you are not subject to the same perception errors that you think we are bound to? Your views certainly do not resonate with me, and I suspect it do not resonate with many here too. I have pointed out the flaws in your worldview and how it is self refuting. If you think logic and reason does not resonate with you then you can also lump it.If science can explain and prove everything, there won't be any religions anymore....
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
If science can explain and prove everything, there won't be any religions anymore....
The belief that science can explain and prove everything is itself a religion, known as scientism, or scientific materialism, or naturalism.
Science itself cannot prove a worldview because a worldview is required in order to interpret science.