Blinded by Belief - A Great Paradox

[cyberpi]

I find that it is not the validity of any words that are being guessed here. The question presented here is whether paranoia or commitment are prudent... particularly with something unseen. It is hard for the majority of people to believe and be committed to an unseen God (swt) or another soul. This thread asks why people see something and don't keep an open mind to see the things yet unseen... but the 'belief' is in something unseen to begin with.

Consider any relationship: Is it prudent to not consider the motives of another individual? Is it prudent to receive a rose and not question the person's intent? Is it prudent to not rationally calculate whether someone really Loves you? Is it prudent to get committed when you don't truly know a person? Is it prudent to not consider other options? Is it prudent to stop looking at the menu when you are still hungry?

I'm not saying anything is prudent or not, but consider that it is impossible to prove someone's motives, intent, love, etc... no matter how much evidence there is. I can't even prove the sun is going to rise tomorrow no matter how powerful the evidence is. It certainly might not. Should I be out looking for evidence of whether it will or not? Should I be making no commitments for fear that it won't?

Another example: Strong, powerful, visual evidence exists that I am going to die. Someone comes along and says... nope, not if you follow me. Am I blind to the evidence if I believe him? I still know what I see, and yet I believe in what I don't see. Does that make me blind?

When it comes to any book, including the Bible or Qur'an... I find that a book has no soul. It itself is a corpse left behind by someone else. I would rather read and see what someone left behind than to be blind and NOT read it.

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I find that it is not the validity of any words that are being guessed here. The question presented here is whether paranoia or commitment are prudent... particularly with something unseen. It is hard for the majority of people to believe and be committed to an unseen God (swt) or another soul. This thread asks why people see something and don't keep an open mind to see the things yet unseen... but the 'belief' is in something unseen to begin with.

I'm sorry cyberpi. I do not understand your point here or you do not understand mine or both. The people are seeing nothing but words concerning the unseen. All I am proposing is that they neither accept or reject the words 100% so not to shut themselves off to truth which can be subjectively experienced.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Consider any relationship: Is it prudent to not consider the motives of another individual? Is it prudent to receive a rose and not question the person's intent? Is it prudent to not rationally calculate whether someone really Loves you? Is it prudent to get committed when you don't truly know a person? Is it prudent to not consider other options? Is it prudent to stop looking at the menu when you are still hungry?

I'm not saying anything is prudent or not, but consider that it is impossible to prove someone's motives, intent, love, etc... no matter how much evidence there is. I can't even prove the sun is going to rise tomorrow no matter how powerful the evidence is. It certainly might not. Should I be out looking for evidence of whether it will or not? Should I be making no commitments for fear that it won't?

Of course I am not saying don't make any commitments. My premise is just don't be blind to other possibilities by the choice of mind that fixes your belief in stone based on words or a book.

Originally Posted by Cyberpi

Another example: Strong, powerful, visual evidence exists that I am going to die. Someone comes along and says... nope, not if you follow me. Am I blind to the evidence if I believe him? I still know what I see, and yet I believe in what I don't see. Does that make me blind?

Again, you need not choose to unconditionally believe anything unless of course you want to. Perhaps you miss the point of the first post and would care to re-read it because I perceive your understanding of my words are different than what I perceive they say.

Love in Christ,
JM

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I find that it is not the validity of any words that are being guessed here. The question presented here is whether paranoia or commitment are prudent... particularly with something unseen. It is hard for the majority of people to believe and be committed to an unseen God (swt) or another soul. This thread asks why people see something and don't keep an open mind to see the things yet unseen... but the 'belief' is in something unseen to begin with.

Consider any relationship: Is it prudent to not consider the motives of another individual? Is it prudent to receive a rose and not question the person's intent? Is it prudent to not rationally calculate whether someone really Loves you? Is it prudent to get committed when you don't truly know a person? Is it prudent to not consider other options? Is it prudent to stop looking at the menu when you are still hungry?

I'm not saying anything is prudent or not, but consider that it is impossible to prove someone's motives, intent, love, etc... no matter how much evidence there is. I can't even prove the sun is going to rise tomorrow no matter how powerful the evidence is. It certainly might not. Should I be out looking for evidence of whether it will or not? Should I be making no commitments for fear that it won't?

Another example: Strong, powerful, visual evidence exists that I am going to die. Someone comes along and says... nope, not if you follow me. Am I blind to the evidence if I believe him? I still know what I see, and yet I believe in what I don't see. Does that make me blind?

When it comes to any book, including the Bible or Qur'an... I find that a book has no soul. It itself is a corpse left behind by someone else. I would rather read and see what someone left behind than to be blind and NOT read it.

then I suspect the constitution is a corpse...that is, a joke, if we watch the argument that is happening in the world today. But it isn't. Neither is the Bible (I could not answer for the Qu'ran).

v/r

Joshua

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

then I suspect the constitution is a corpse...that is, a joke, if we watch the argument that is happening in the world today. But it isn't. Neither is the Bible (I could not answer for the Qu'ran).

v/r

Joshua

The constitution and the Qur'an are good examples of corpses... anything printed on a dead tree is a corpse. Every bit saved on a computer is a corpse. Thermodynamics 101. It is energy in a pattern that is decaying. The energy itself is NOT alive. People are alive. God is alive. The flesh is a decaying corpse from day one.

I suggest that any constitution written by corpses should be re-evaluated, re-written, and re-rattified by the people who are living.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by JosephM

I'm sorry cyberpi. I do not understand your point here or you do not understand mine or both. The people are seeing nothing but words concerning the unseen. All I am proposing is that they neither accept or reject the words 100% so not to shut themselves off to truth which can be subjectively experienced.

Of course I am not saying don't make any commitments. My premise is just don't be blind to other possibilities by the choice of mind that fixes your belief in stone based on words or a book.

Again, you need not choose to unconditionally believe anything unless of course you want to. Perhaps you miss the point of the first post and would care to re-read it because I perceive your understanding of my words are different than what I perceive they say.

Love in Christ,
JM

I re-read your original post and I saw the word 'faith' and 'belief' in relation to blindness. That is what I responded to. I do not know what a subjective truth or experience is, and I do not recognize what you said the bible says in your original post. I further did not see you referring to the 100% extremism or debating the authorship of the bible... but I agree with you here on that aspect. In my eyes the bible is clearly written by multiple authors, one of which is God. The same goes for my life... for which I know I only author a portion of it. I have been calling it Faith the portion of actions that I author in accordance with another's will... a definition I read it in the gospels.

I see and agree with you that there are some (like me) who sometimes see only words... and only the words they choose to look at... and with the definitions of words they have learned, chosen or deduced. It is my strong belief though that the bulk of understanding anything really comes from somewhere else. Not the book. Call it God, the Holy Spirit, a hidden repository of liquid knowledge, or an evolving guess. For what little I do know... it was not all in the genes, not all in a book, and I sincerely hope it was not in the drink I had with dinner.

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I re-read your original post and I saw the word 'faith' and 'belief' in relation to blindness. That is what I responded to. I do not know what a subjective truth or experience is, and I do not recognize what you said the bible says in your original post. I further did not see you referring to the 100% extremism or debating the authorship of the bible... but I agree with you here on that aspect. In my eyes the bible is clearly written by multiple authors, one of which is God. The same goes for my life... for which I know I only author a portion of it. I have been calling it Faith the portion of actions that I author in accordance with another's will... a definition I read it in the gospels.

I see and agree with you that there are some (like me) who sometimes see only words... and only the words they choose to look at... and with the definitions of words they have learned, chosen or deduced. It is my strong belief though that the bulk of understanding anything really comes from somewhere else. Not the book. Call it God, the Holy Spirit, a hidden repository of liquid knowledge, or an evolving guess. For what little I do know... it was not all in the genes, not all in a book, and I sincerely hope it was not in the drink I had with dinner.

From reading your post here I believe we are now closer to being on the same wavelength.

In my post I wrote "Not having all the answers, in his impatience he searches the data of his mind and recall teachings about a book (the Bible) of answers to his questions whose author he was taught is God. And if that knowledge was missing he shares his experience with others having had the same experience and is passed on to this same conclusion. His focus now is placed on a book. In it he seeks to find more of his experience and inevitably makes a decision of mind to accept this conclusion as a fact and through it he continues his search.

Though many things in this book neither go well with his mind nor reason he makes a decision to believe the book by a concept he is told is faith. He then uses his intellect to make it fit within that concept and puts the reason and mind as inferior to the book itself. After all, he has made a conscious decision to believe the author is God. In essence he gives up his right to doubt, question or otherwise disagree with the book whose words reinforces his decision as being correct. He believes he is in the process of learning yet his learning is always made subject to the premises of the book he has made a decision to believe in. His thinking process must always be made limited to the revelations of the book which he no longer separates from God."

I do agree with you that the bulk of understanding does indeed come from somewhere else other than the book. What I was saying above is that when one makes a decision of mind to accept a complete book as "the Word of God" then by that decision he must reject all contrary data. That is the nature of the mind and what I mean by blinded by belief. Which belief? The one that says this is God's word and it is absolutly true and anything contrary must be wrong. Keeping ones options open with a belief system that says "this is only my present understanding" is in my view the wiser choice to one on a spiritual journey.

Thanks for your input and patience cyberpi,

Love in Christ,
JM

PS The subjective experience that I was referring to is a personal experience where 'knowing' is dropped into ones consciousness without effort and reveals truth that is exclusive of doubt as if it were already known and you are waking up to the realization of it. That is the best I can do with words at this time.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

The constitution and the Qur'an are good examples of corpses... anything printed on a dead tree is a corpse. Every bit saved on a computer is a corpse. Thermodynamics 101. It is energy in a pattern that is decaying. The energy itself is NOT alive. People are alive. God is alive. The flesh is a decaying corpse from day one.

I suggest that any constitution written by corpses should be re-evaluated, re-written, and re-rattified by the people who are living.

lol. Then by your own volition, everything you've said is dead. But some how, I doubt that is what you wish of your own thoughts to be considered...

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

lol. Then by your own volition, everything you've said is dead. But some how, I doubt that is what you wish of your own thoughts to be considered...

Words are meaningless without people. They serve no purpose without people for the simple reason that words were ordained by Man to serve Man. Man, in turn, was ordained by God to serve God.

The point is, words are lifeless entities that have no purpose without Man. Man has no purpose without God. Man has "life" without God, but he is not "truly alive" unless he has God.

Where there are words without Man and God those words can mean anything because Man and God are not there to put them in context. Where there are men (and women) without God their lives can mean anything because God is not there to put their lives into context.

The Bible is, in a sense, a dead book. Its only purpose is to lead us to God. If we don't discover God in the process of reading the Bible, then the words are dead to us. The Bible was written by people who are long dead. They are not here to tell us what their words meant.

The Bible is like a Mystical Door that only opens when you answer the riddles correctly. If you're not searching deeper and seeking to get to know God better through the Bible, the Mystical Door doesn't open. So the Mystical Door is open to some people at times when they are seeking God, but closed to those who aren't really open to God but are more interested in the words than their ultimate meaning.

But God gave us a mind to think. What we need is some imagination, and then to believe in whatever insights we've gained from our imagination. This means that some thinking "outside the Bible" is necessary, using whatever experiences we've gained in life. There is nothing special about the Bible, the water of baptism, the Sabbath, the Tabernacle the Israelites built, their Temple in Jerusalem, etc. except what it means to God and Man.

The goal is to discover God for ourselves, not babble and fight over the words and interpretations of words. Finding God is more important than finding the "absolutes" in the words. That's because the "true meaning" comes from an experience of God (or an experience of the author -- seeing things through the author's eyes), not the technical semantics of words. Perceptions and experiences are more important than absolutes because they're immediately accessible. At least they have meaning.

Believing doesn't mean you're blind. I have beliefs, yet my mind is open.

I am driven and inspired to believe in my chosen beliefs. As life goes on, the beliefs taken on a different meaning. I've changed as a person, and likewise my relationship with God will change too. The passions that drive those beliefs also change. You could say that the identity of those beliefs don't change (the abstraction). It's just your approach to those beliefs that changes (context and application).

That fact that I allow my beliefs to evolve, even if their abstract meaning doesn't change, is reason enough to say I am not blind.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

lol. Then by your own volition, everything you've said is dead. But some how, I doubt that is what you wish of your own thoughts to be considered...

What I have said is dead. It is spent energy. There is no life in them except in whatever life someone living provides them. The words don't reproduce themselves or repent for misleading you. The words are not a virus that propagate without your choosing. Someone who is alive has the choice to pick up the words, make copies, and do something with them, but the words themselves are a corpse just as the neurons in my brain are a corpse. People are living. When I eat food it is killed, cooked, and even then I choose. When I hear words with the ears or see them with the eyes it is the same. The words are a few spent bits on a hard-drive, and maybe a few spent neurons in your brain since you chose to read them... when they go they are gone. Never gone from this world... but committed to spirit where the eyes can no longer see them.

At best I think you could say a word is like a seed. Reminds me of a parable. A seed only lives if you give it water, energy, and nutrients.

My thoughts, guided or misguided.

[Ciel]

Originally Posted by JosephM

PS The subjective experience that I was referring to is a personal experience where 'knowing' is dropped into ones consciousness without effort and reveals truth that is exclusive of doubt as if it were already known and you are waking up to the realization of it. That is the best I can do with words at this time.

Joseph, Yes, beyond words.

I am reading such extraordinary things here from every one's contribution
We do indeed live in extraordinary times. It always interests me, the reason behind the words, the inner knowing composing the outer, the reason why certain subject matter is brought forward, why so much talk of lifelessness from some for example, yet not in a negative sense. I find myself aware of life in a phase of transition as never before. I am seeing life reborn with new eyes. And wonder how much life it's self knows

- c -

[JosephM]

Originally Posted by Ciel

Joseph, Yes, beyond words.

I am reading such extraordinary things here from every one's contribution
We do indeed live in extraordinary times. It always interests me, the reason behind the words, the inner knowing composing the outer, the reason why certain subject matter is brought forward, why so much talk of lifelessness from some for example, yet not in a negative sense. I find myself aware of life in a phase of transition as never before. I am seeing life reborn with new eyes. And wonder how much life it's self knows

- c -

Yes, Ciel myself also.

Saltmeister,
Super post. You are indeed not blind nor blinded by belief.

Love in Christ.
JM

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

What I have said is dead. It is spent energy. There is no life in them except in whatever life someone living provides them. The words don't reproduce themselves or repent for misleading you. The words are not a virus that propagate without your choosing. Someone who is alive has the choice to pick up the words, make copies, and do something with them, but the words themselves are a corpse just as the neurons in my brain are a corpse. People are living. When I eat food it is killed, cooked, and even then I choose. When I hear words with the ears or see them with the eyes it is the same. The words are a few spent bits on a hard-drive, and maybe a few spent neurons in your brain since you chose to read them... when they go they are gone. Never gone from this world... but committed to spirit where the eyes can no longer see them.

At best I think you could say a word is like a seed. Reminds me of a parable. A seed only lives if you give it water, energy, and nutrients.

My thoughts, guided or misguided.

Since energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changed, then I submit a word uttered is never defunct. Like the pebble in the pond, the ripples created never disappear. They may be affected by other such ripples from other pebbles thrown in, but then they combine to form a different ripple, or to add to the strength of another.

Likewise, words written. They are never dead, but lie in potential, waiting to be read, then their power is once again released, changed and carried on in other forms (words stimulate thought with helps develope character, which is impressed upon others, who develop thought, and so on), and never really disappears, nor stops affecting the existence of all.

I don't think you thoughts are mis-guided. I just like to carry the point out as many decimal points as possible, to show the big picture.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Since energy is neither created nor destroyed, only changed, then I submit a word uttered is never defunct. Like the pebble in the pond, the ripples created never disappear. They may be affected by other such ripples from other pebbles thrown in, but then they combine to form a different ripple, or to add to the strength of another.

Likewise, words written. They are never dead, but lie in potential, waiting to be read, then their power is once again released, changed and carried on in other forms (words stimulate thought with helps develope character, which is impressed upon others, who develop thought, and so on), and never really disappears, nor stops affecting the existence of all.

I don't think you thoughts are mis-guided. I just like to carry the point out as many decimal points as possible, to show the big picture.

I will carry the decimal point beyond where I can see it... everything here is being recorded in absolute perfect detail. Any accoustic ripples or electron paths eventually find themselves as long wave radiation that leaves the planet. My physical eyes don't see long wave radiation and they can not see the light leaving the planet, but I know that its there. All of the information to perfectly recreate history exists in a dispersed state... in spirit.

If you recognize that energy changes state then you should realize that energy is changing state in one direction. It is not being recycled. I consider the word 'living' to be on the edge of that conversion. Furthermore I do not consider a hurricane or any uncontrolled release of energy to be living.

As I have also said in these forums, realizing this definition of spirit as spoken in the gospels, a solution to global warming is found in the gospels and can be summed up in a single word.

[streetbob2006]

how do I get a picture under my name?

[JosephM]

Streetbob,

Go to user CP and then edit avatar on left side

JM