Re: Scientifically sound Bible...
Non-linear response time on this one.
It took awhile for my soul to process the reply.
Well, if that is all you can see in some of my posts, you might want to look deeper. I assure you that it many of my posts (esp. those relating correlations of the TOL to scientific knowledge and structures) there is a linear theme AND at least one non-linear theme that can be followed. Yet, non-obvious.
That applies to the both of us. Does that make us foolish people Ray?
Oh I've done foolish things in my life, as I am sure we all have. And yet, even in doing foolish things, we gain information (feedback) that serve us. There is no "wasted time" or "unuseful events" in life. All events have purpose.
But seriously. You haven't been teaching at all.
You really think that? Now, I am not only speaking of this thread (although I have been laying out scientific concepts in this thread, even if you with to reject them). In posts like Massive SpaceTime, and others that focus on the 3-D aspects of Time, I have certainly been teaching an expanded way of viewing physical reality. I've shown how the human body is an instantiation of the TOL network. Again, just because you wish to not accept it does not mean it is not so. There are a great many more things I could teach and reveal in this vein. For instance: Do you know that the governmental structure of the US is modeled after the TOL? Yes, several of the Founding Fathers were aware of Qabalah and practiced it in their creations. While textbooks do not teach it, I assure you that the US government was purposefully structured on the basis of balanced creations taught in Qabalistic circles. Consider the 3x3 Matrix of how the US government is structured:
3 Layers - Federal, State, Local
3 Components - Executive, Legislative, Judicial
There....that's a little more teaching for ya!
Teaching is not a matter of forcing your opinion upon people and laugh contemptuously at their "limited senses" and their "lesser state of awareness".
I force nothing on no one. You can refuse to believe the connections I am showing. If I were to force this belief on people, I would have to go to much greater lengths than simply posting on a net forum, now wouldn't I? /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif And as far as "laughing contemptuously", I am sorry if it offends you. However, the reason I laugh is because with all the "coincidences" that I have put forth, it is quite funny that not only do you refuse to see, but you also seem to refuse to even want to look deeper into what I present to find out that what I am describing is, indeed, true. I also laugh because I am hoping that some day you WILL see, and then we can all laugh about these discussions we had "way back when". Perhaps as more and more scientific establishments begin to reveal and confirm the links between Qabalah and the structure of reality, you will begin to take some of this a bit more seriously and look deeper.
If you have the feeling that you are teaching and learning at the same time, I'm curious after what you have learned so far.
A great many things. For one, I am learning just how willing people are to cling to their limiting beliefs even in the face of more and more evidence that science and spirituality share some very deep connections. I am also learning valuable lessons in how I present such material to hard-and-fast skeptics. I am also learning more connections between science and spirituality that I have not realized before. So yes, I am learning quite a bit.
If you aspire to be a teacher I only have one advise: don't give up the dayjob
I know you're just joking around. And I think you also know I have been a teacher of aerospace engineering for well over a decade now. So, it IS one of my dayjobs!
In fact, I have found that each time I take on teaching a course that I have not taught before, I learn even more about that topic and become more well-versed in it than I was before I taught the course. In the quarter just past I taught systems engineering for my 3rd time, and I have yet again learned new things about this form of systems science. Things that directly apply to some of the "evidence" I have given in this thread.
I think we share the same problem (or challenge if you wish):
You believe something that you think you know to be true and so far you've been unable to get it across.
I believe that some of the things you say are untrue, but just like you I haven't been able to get it across.
Yes, to some extent we share this challenge. However, as by your own admission, your challenge is greater than mine, for you cannot "prove a negative". On my side of the challenge, it is merely that you do not accept what myself (and others here) have provided as "evidence". (And remember that we cannot view "evidence" in the restrictive, linear model that we have previously viewed it if we are trying to "prove" that God exists).
In my opinion we were not "meant" to have this discussion. That's a fundemental difference between my thinking and yours.
And perhaps this might be because you do not yet understand, or believe, the connection between energy and information that I have been discussing. Our interaction in this discussion is an expression of energy that yields information. This information is useful to more than just you and me, and this information has also been yielded as a result of similar energy interactions in other (previous and future) closed-loop time cycles. This is the way energy works through physical entities to produce information.
You could ask yourself why something that - according to you - holds so much of the truth, is so difficult to understand. I've come to believe that the truth can be hard to find out sometimes
You have answered your own question in the same sentence! /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif The greatest truths can and do have the greatest impacts on your life. And anything that can have that great an impact on one's life is not going to be easy to ARRIVE at an understanding of. It takes work!
but in the end the solution always turns out to be simple.
And so it is that this is true. Yet you have simply shown that you are not willing to do the hard work to understand Sepher Yetzirah in order to be able to see that simple solution. I can give you the simple solution, and will in my next sentence; however, you will likely not accept it until you have done the hard work to see why this simple solution IS a powerful truth. Are you ready? The simple truth is the God = Life. They are the same. If you believe in Life, then you already believe in God, even if you do not wish to admit it. Another way to say it (which I have said before and you have not accepted) is God = Creation. This means that Life = Creation. This is the simplicity of our existence. Yet one will never accept it until they have walked the long, arduous, yet enlightening path of self-discovery.
I sincerely hope that the book gets better after this, because judging from this excerpt it's exactly the type of book that is most likely to induce my gag reflexes.
I think you should read it nonetheless. I do believe there is much in this book that you will agree with... for example, the author(s) belief that "mainstream religions" are what is leading our species to ruin. Indeed, I can confidently say that I know there are things in this book that you will agree with. But parts you might not agree with are that spirituality is still what is required to overcome our problems on this planet... just not the versions of spirituality enforced by mainstream religions, as they are based on fallacies about who/what God is.
There are two simple rules I always keep in mind when I try to solve a problem:
1) do not make the problem seem bigger or more complex than it is
2) do not look for big or complex solutions when dealing with small or simple problems
So this would mean you do not accept the premise of complexity theory? It would also imply that you do not yet accept that the universe is "complex" in that it is composed of fractally self-similar, embedded, non-linear systems. When viewed from a linear perception of life, our reality IS complex. However, once you can view reality in its natural, non-linear state, it becomes quite simple indeed. "We are all One".
Your ideas are sometimes close to brilliant and they sound very plausible to a certain extent.
And I always caveat that they are not, solely, my ideas. Most "new ideas" that people bring forth these days are really just re-stated ideas that have been around a VERY long time. And on their plausibility, I will let the universe be my evidence for how plausible these ideas are. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Yet I do not get the same feeling when you talk about divinity, the creator, god and all the other things we've been discussing in this thread. I think that, although you've accepted those things as a truth, somehow you're not as confident as you might think.
And you are free to think that. Yet I am quite comfortable with my level of confidence in who/what God is, and that God is a driving force in my life and the structure of our universe.
You might want to take a look at this.
Yes, I know all about it. Interesting work, and there may be something to it. Yet it is not my path. I wish all those doing Bible Codes research luck. While I accept that there may be codes in the first five books of the OT, I am focused solely on Genesis 1. I believe this is the "core truth" around which the rest of the Bible was built. It is the Bible's foundation. And again, you may not accept it as "truth", but I can assure you that Genesis 1 is very much a scientific treatise that describes the geometric reality of our universe, and how Creation propagates this reality at dimensions above and below ours.
Yes. I will even admit that science and spirituality are akin.
Then perhaps you might agree that by forcing them to be separate, unassociated disciplines (as we have done on this planet for at least the last 1800 years), we are not getting any closer to "true" answers about what our universe is like, and why we are here. If you agree that both of these disciplines are seeking the same thing, just with different methods, then perhaps you might agree that an
INTEGRATION of these two disciplines might bear more fruit than either of them have borne over the last 1800 years. In fact, I see this as inevitable Disparate things that we view as "opposites" must always be eventually integrated in order to reach the next level of evolution. A good example would be how we once thought eletricity and magnetism were totally separate phenomenon. Once we finally realized they are different aspects of the same thing, and viewed them as an integrated whole, we began to unearth significant truths about them that have lead to many of the advances we enjoy today. And we are not done on this count. My father, who worked for AT&T Bell Labs during the 40s-60s, has told me over and over again "the truth about magnetism and a full understanding of its usefulness is still not yet revealed to the world. But it will be, and soon."
Also, I think "spirituality" and "the divine" are not inextricably linked.
I'd be willing to bet that some data will be brought forth (in the not-too-distant future) that might cause you to review this belief. /ttiforum/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Take care,
RMT