tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post116256993172397391..comments2024-03-28T20:04:20.286-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: A Whole in One!Gagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162681318915719142006-11-04T15:01:00.000-08:002006-11-04T15:01:00.000-08:00"In so far as religion is gone, reason is going. F..."In so far as religion is gone, reason is going. For they are both of the same primary and authoritative kind. They are both methods of proof which cannot themselves be proved. And in the act of destroying the idea of Divine authority we have largely destroyed the idea of that human authority by which we do a long-division sum. With a long and sustained<BR/>tug we have attempted to pull the mitre off pontifical man; and his head has come off with it."<BR/><BR/>--G. K ChestertonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162654644309687002006-11-04T07:37:00.000-08:002006-11-04T07:37:00.000-08:00A Duoist"At a guess, how many tens (hundreds) of m...A Duoist<BR/>"At a guess, how many tens (hundreds) of millions of innocent humans have we humans slaughtered in the name of, 'the One'?"<BR/><BR/>I wrestled with all the killing done in 'G_d's' name too. Trying to look for a motivation from the creator to be a destroyer, and I couldn't fathom one.<BR/>Then i went with a different thought, taking it all at face value. Kind of like holding "Him" responsible for all of it, because his name was written all over it, even cursing G_d after Beslan. <BR/>Well i came away with a revelation that, to me, would make sense, given the evidence i,ve seen.<BR/><BR/>Get back to me if you're interested.<BR/>DougmanAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162642385425600612006-11-04T04:13:00.000-08:002006-11-04T04:13:00.000-08:00A Duoist-Be free? Liberty is far better than mere ...A Duoist-<BR/>Be free? <BR/>Liberty is far better than mere freedom.<BR/>Freedom without responsibiiy is simply anarchy.<BR/>Mere freedom isn't a classic liberal or conservative view, since anarchy inevitably inpunges on another's freedom.<BR/>Your reductivism bars you from learning the language that is spoken here.<BR/>AngloAmerican-<BR/>Likewise, you also fail to comprehend the language used here.<BR/>Naturally your language is limited to your atheistic paradigm, and you can make no sense of a language that doesn't communicate <BR/>in those terms.<BR/>Indeed, supernatural language cannot begin to be understood with those limitations. <BR/><BR/>I look forward to Cousin Dupree's commentary!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162618368714745292006-11-03T21:32:00.000-08:002006-11-03T21:32:00.000-08:00The 'One,' the "Neo" of the Matrix trilogy.At a gu...The 'One,' the "Neo" of the Matrix trilogy.<BR/><BR/>At a guess, how many tens (hundreds) of millions of innocent humans have we humans slaughtered in the name of, 'the One'? As an example, for the One God of Abraham? Or another example, for the One Truth?<BR/><BR/>How long will it take us before we on the Right finally recognize that the ontological Absolute, at its logical extreme, is homicidal? Perhaps such knowledge will take even longer than the awareness by the Left that the Relative, at its logical extreme, is suicidal.<BR/><BR/>As a political conservative, every time I hear the argument on behalf of the 'One,' I want to roar, "Murderer!" And when I hear the argument on behalf of the 'Many,' I shake my head and want to weap.<BR/><BR/>There's a third choice, a life-nurturing, anabolic option between the murdering absolutist who can not admit to the possibility of error and the suicidal relativist who can not make a choice, even in self-defense; but that third, anabolic choice is not to be found in this blog.<BR/><BR/>'Be free.'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162605543285027352006-11-03T17:59:00.000-08:002006-11-03T17:59:00.000-08:00I would say that a person with even the most remot...I would say that a person with even the most remote contact with their conscience is in some sort of dialog with God.<BR/>Even the most abusive alcohlic or violent head-sawing jihadist has that contact if they have even a slight, gnawing feeling that "somethin' just ain't right with this". <BR/>It's the place from which all revelation can grow and be revealed if given the chance.<BR/><BR/>----------------------------------<BR/>"Is that person happier, wealthier, more creative or healthier than average? Would it be possible to find such individuals and study them?"<BR/><BR/>Anglo,<BR/>Why would such a person wish to submit to a bunch of clueless morons studying him?<BR/>It's not all that complicated.<BR/>----------------------------------<BR/><BR/>And a BIG shout out to Cousin DuuPree. HEY CUZ!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162601894256832432006-11-03T16:58:00.000-08:002006-11-03T16:58:00.000-08:00Just when I was getting used to the liebensraum . ...Just when I was getting used to the liebensraum . . o well . . <BR/><BR/>I'm really just here to do some serious drinking with Cousin D.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162601485566478282006-11-03T16:51:00.000-08:002006-11-03T16:51:00.000-08:00AngloAmer - I don't know how different the Biblica...AngloAmer - <BR/><BR/>I don't know how different the Biblical times and our times are with respect to the number of miraculous acts and such. None of the secular historians of Biblical times really picked up on the comings and goings and doings of Christ. You might say Christ's miracles were hidden in plain sight, that is, they weren't front-page news - the NY Times probably wouldn't have covered them. To the secular historians of the times, and to the NY Times, Christ would have been just another cult leader with a small following. <BR/><BR/>I doubt that the NY Times or any newspaper really did an investigative, in-depth probe of the "miracle of the sun" at Fatima in 1916 - which was, in many ways, an even more spectacular miracle than those you find in the Bible. <BR/><BR/>There's an old Zen ditty that goes something like: "Before Enlightenment, So and So chops wood, carries pails of water. After Enlightenment, So and So chops wood, carries pails of water." Meaning that spiritual transformation doesn't necessarily translate quantitaveley (though it can), but rather the emphasis is qualitative. If one has the spiritual eyes to see it, that qualitative change is VERY real as are its results. <BR/><BR/>Let's say one person is spiritually transformed from a self-pitying ego-freak into a mature, relatively selfless individual - think of the things that could be *avoided* for the rest of that person's life time: emotional/psychological entanglements that lead to such things as health problems, divorce, lawsuits, criminal behavior, etc., etc., maybe even wars, holocausts, and so forth. <BR/><BR/>Considering that most people are, sad to say, self-pitying ego-freaks to one degree or another, think of the effect on the planet should even a third of the world's population become spiritually transformed. Ah, the things that could be avoided.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162600880774104322006-11-03T16:41:00.000-08:002006-11-03T16:41:00.000-08:00May I quote from my own blog? (I apologize if it's...May I quote from my own blog? (I apologize if it's a no-no.) I think it's supportive of an aspect of your much more sophisticated argument (unless I'm muddled, which wouldn't be a novelty.) :P<BR/><BR/>"Lacking the sort of mind that can read an argument contemptuous of Christianity and then quickly lay out a sharp, analytical defense, I must rely on commonsense and the poetic. No doubt this makes me an idiot in the eyes of many a smart-alecky online atheist, but these things must be endured.<BR/><BR/>The commonsense comes in with this simple contemplation: I exist.<BR/><BR/>Plus this: the stars and the planets and the light-years are.<BR/><BR/>I exist and you - whoever you are reading these remarks – you exist. The two of us and the rest of mankind inhabit time and space. Time and space have to be somewhere. So where are they? Is there just one universe? Two, three, infinite universes? (Despite all that an astrophysicist or astronomer might argue, <I>infinite</I> universes are highly unlikely. In fact, the idea would seem to me to be a contradiction to the basic laws of physics, however relative.) What’s beyond that one or more universes?<BR/><BR/><I>Will there really be a morning?<BR/>Is there such a thing as Day?<BR/>Could I see it from the mountains<BR/>If I were tall as they?</I><BR/><BR/>Emily Dickinson might also have asked, “Is there an edge to the universe?”<BR/><BR/>Presumably it has one. It definitely had a beginning, despite any Mobius-strip theories to the contrary. But what was there before the universe started expanding in that there?<BR/><BR/>I’m supposed to believe that <I>poof!</I> one day, a subatomic particle just decided it was time to exist? (Though where it thought it was going to exist is rather mystifying. Not to mention when.) One particle isn’t enough, I don’t think, though my grasp of astrophysics is admittedly slight; it seems to me to require a great many subatomic particles to provide the mass necessary for the Big Bang to actually make enough of a <I>Bang!</I> to produce minor details such as stars and planets. (But then, as I said, I’m not an astrophysicist, so what do I know?)<BR/><BR/>But, Baillie, you moron, you can’t really believe that there’s some all-powerful “God” out there? That’s so Upper Paleolithic.<BR/><BR/>Well, it seems to me that we’ve got two choices. One, as noted above, is the secularist <I>Poof!</I> into existence of something out of nothing into nowhere. The other is that the subatomic particle went <I>Poof!</I> because Someone who inhabits eternity in a reality beyond our comprehension and even imagination made it go <I>Poof!</I> and lo and behold, there was Time and Space and Matter! Much smaller than a mustard seed and wanting considerable improvements, but perky and full of beans and eager for the excitements ahead.<BR/><BR/>That second choice is far-fetched, I agree. But as a scientist somewhere once said, it ain’t nearly as far-fetched as the alternative."Bailliehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08938067714148996447noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162587740439667632006-11-03T13:02:00.000-08:002006-11-03T13:02:00.000-08:00That Dr. Sanity posting was a real jewel - Bob, I ...That Dr. Sanity posting was a real jewel - Bob, I think you’re starting to rub off on her (no inappropriate entendres intended). Postmodernists have us all on the mental dissecting table, ready to lobotomize our collective God-consciousness into a neurotamatic nano-state. <BR/><BR/>I commented thusly on The Doc’s site; it’s worth repeating here:<BR/><BR/>The obsessive micro-granulation of all wholes into little pieces-parts that Postmodernists engage in reminds me of two things:<BR/><BR/>1. That annoying, nerdy cousin with an IQ of 170 with no social skills or sense of how to engage in normal conversation, who makes it his mission in life to contradict everything everyone says and point out all the exceptions, the result being that the conversation is trashed. And he wonders why he has no friends….<BR/><BR/>2. Monty Python - the TV series and the movies:<BR/>A. From the TV series, the Argument Clinic, where a person can walk into a room and engage in a pointless series of contradictions for 10 minutes, then walk down the hall and be abused, then hit on the head in the next room;<BR/>B. The Holy Grail, where Arthur’s attempt to gain entrance to a castle degenerates into an argument about the air speed velocities of African swallows laden with coconuts;<BR/>C. Life of Brian, where a Roman Centurian catches Brian writing anti-Roman graffiti, and proceeds to argue about the grammar of the graffiti.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162582518473932262006-11-03T11:35:00.000-08:002006-11-03T11:35:00.000-08:00Well, AngloAmerican, there is no guarantee that he...Well, AngloAmerican, there is no guarantee that health, wealth, etc. accrue visibly to the diligent adherent to transcendence for kibitzers to evaluate. I myself believe that virtue, handily defined in the Ten Commandments and the Buddhist precepts, is closely correlated to a human life of integrity, beauty, and happiness; but this is not the final word on transcendence. The Eastern Church believes virtue and the resultant success is far from a sufficient condition to the elemental transformation into holiness. Though lack of it usually proves a serious distraction.<BR/><BR/>The metaphor I like is "source code," particularly in the context of the Christian schisms. I was just reading that Open Source is about the source code being accessible, but that there is a gentleman's agreement to pass it on unchanged. At some point the source code -- via the Fall, whatever that is -- was corrupted. It could be said that with <EM>The Messiah Intervention</EM>, the source code was lined out again, by example, precept, and energy infusion. [I've made my own best guess as to the best custodians of the Code, and so far, well, hold tight and check the seat belts...] <BR/><BR/>Revelation and faith are intrinsic to working with these ideas. Both are available in the familiar wrappers. A passive and fastidious "I'm not convinced" may be a statement of fact, but it's not a helpful menthodology to reify.<BR/><BR/>I'm really just here to see the Cousin.... "<EM>DuPrEEEEEEEE?!!?</EM>"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162580201638607622006-11-03T10:56:00.000-08:002006-11-03T10:56:00.000-08:00Good points all. I will address them later today,...Good points all. I will address them later today, when I'm not so busy. However, it does sadden Petey that you don't see him as super-human.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1162579529959231912006-11-03T10:45:00.000-08:002006-11-03T10:45:00.000-08:00Is a person who can truly “intuit that ultimate wh...Is a person who can truly “intuit that ultimate wholeness known as God” significantly any different from the average man on the street? Is that person happier, wealthier, more creative or healthier than average? Would it be possible to find such individuals and study them?<BR/><BR/>You would perhaps expect those individuals to be above average in all the above categories but would that be as a result of incidental activity such as eating right, avoiding self abuse and the like?<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that for transcendence to be truly transformational, rather than just ‘feel good’ emotions, the effects of it would translate into the ‘real world’ somehow. Transcendental individuals would exhibit behavior that was noticeably beneficial or even remarkable if not miraculous. Otherwise it could be merely described as a technique for living or a technique for coping with the thought and reality of someday not living.<BR/><BR/>If no practical difference in an individual can be seen that cannot be easily explained by more ‘down to earth’ reasons it casts into doubt the theory that feelings of transcendence are anything other than just feelings. Feelings are powerful but good feelings are no guarantee of truth.<BR/><BR/>The Bible and other scriptures have many tales of individuals performing remarkable feats as a result of their closeness to God. Yet today we see nothing like this level of miraculous activity. Many Individuals I personally have come across who say they are chosen by God have exhibited and continue to exhibit personality characteristics that I rate as somewhat average. So, to me, transcendence hasn’t even produced an above average worker let alone revealed the inner secrets of the Cosmos. This is a hurdle I have found difficult to leap over.AngloAmerikanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02002362092073890146noreply@blogger.com