Elections Tuesday

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Afx: Yup, because Science has ALL the answers. Its going to be very interesting to watch further developments in UFT and String Theory and see the inevitable marriage between Science (through quantum mechanics and temporal relastics) and Spirituality.

“Saint” Sagan hosted a hilarious (unintentionally) convocation back in the 1980s, where he was literally humiliated by a pair of astrophysicists who shredded his “delusions” about Time/Space, Special Relativity and the Wheeler Effect.

He was ignorant in his own way and far too prideful to admit in his own biases and prejudices. Spend any time reading about quantum physics and you immediately discern the spiritual element that is present.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

I used to be more in Brian’s camp till one day, I decided to let Jesus speak for himself rather than letting the Kansan knuckledraggers speak for him, so I read the 4 Gospels.

Impressive, impressive guy. From his vantage point 2000 years ago he called most of the BS that people are pulling right today. I guess he was a keen observer and critic of human nature.

I’m with Carl Sagan. I’ve always sensed a Greater Power underneath the fabric of it all, but this Entity never felt to me like the lightning-snortin’, judgemental and often petty anthro-god of the Bible-thumpers. Rather, like something much larger and more sophisticated than ourselves.

So I think of Jesus as being rather the herald of this greater entity, taking on the mission to remind his people the Jews who they should look to. In fact his actions were quite in accord with his Jewish faith, as he set himself up to be that year’s Passover sacrifice, as a part of his multifaceted mission to redeem his people in the eyes of their God. Jewish or not, I find his teachings to be extremely germane and find myself living my life differently since having read them.

Interesting how many “civil Christians” came out of the woodwork once I became able to talk about Jesus and his teachings in a knowledgeable fashion. You are right, most Christians are quiet about it (just as Jesus taught them to be).

That said, I do not consider myself Christian, because my understanding is that to do so I would have to accept the rest of the Bible too– including all those verses the thumpers quote to justify oppressing women, gays, other races, etc etc. There are days I wonder if it’s really true that Jesus said he was not changing one “jot or tittle” of ‘The Word’. He sure flew in the face of it sometimes.

So now, when a self-styled “Christian” globally bashes some group, or when somebody else globally bashes “all Christians”, I tend to wince equally.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

I used to be more in Brian’s camp till one day, I decided to let Jesus speak for himself rather than letting the Kansan knuckledraggers speak for him, so I read the 4 Gospels.

Impressive, impressive guy. From his vantage point 2000 years ago he called most of the BS that people are pulling right today. I guess he was a keen observer and critic of human nature.

I’m with Carl Sagan. I’ve always sensed a Greater Power underneath the fabric of it all, but this Entity never felt to me like the lightning-snortin’, judgemental and often petty anthro-god of the Bible-thumpers. Rather, like something much larger and more sophisticated than ourselves.

So I think of Jesus as being rather the herald of this greater entity, taking on the mission to remind his people the Jews who they should look to. In fact his actions were quite in accord with his Jewish faith, as he set himself up to be that year’s Passover sacrifice, as a part of his multifaceted mission to redeem his people in the eyes of their God. Jewish or not, I find his teachings to be extremely germane and find myself living my life differently since having read them.

Interesting how many “civil Christians” came out of the woodwork once I became able to talk about Jesus and his teachings in a knowledgeable fashion. You are right, most Christians are quiet about it (just as Jesus taught them to be).

That said, I do not consider myself Christian, because my understanding is that to do so I would have to accept the rest of the Bible too– including all those verses the thumpers quote to justify oppressing women, gays, other races, etc etc. There are days I wonder if it’s really true that Jesus said he was not changing one “jot or tittle” of ‘The Word’. He sure flew in the face of it sometimes.

So now, when a self-styled “Christian” globally bashes some group, or when somebody else globally bashes “all Christians”, I tend to wince equally.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

I used to be more in Brian’s camp till one day, I decided to let Jesus speak for himself rather than letting the Kansan knuckledraggers speak for him, so I read the 4 Gospels.

Impressive, impressive guy. From his vantage point 2000 years ago he called most of the BS that people are pulling right today. I guess he was a keen observer and critic of human nature.

I’m with Carl Sagan. I’ve always sensed a Greater Power underneath the fabric of it all, but this Entity never felt to me like the lightning-snortin’, judgemental and often petty anthro-god of the Bible-thumpers. Rather, like something much larger and more sophisticated than ourselves.

So I think of Jesus as being rather the herald of this greater entity, taking on the mission to remind his people the Jews who they should look to. In fact his actions were quite in accord with his Jewish faith, as he set himself up to be that year’s Passover sacrifice, as a part of his multifaceted mission to redeem his people in the eyes of their God. Jewish or not, I find his teachings to be extremely germane and find myself living my life differently since having read them.

Interesting how many “civil Christians” came out of the woodwork once I became able to talk about Jesus and his teachings in a knowledgeable fashion. You are right, most Christians are quiet about it (just as Jesus taught them to be).

That said, I do not consider myself Christian, because my understanding is that to do so I would have to accept the rest of the Bible too– including all those verses the thumpers quote to justify oppressing women, gays, other races, etc etc. There are days I wonder if it’s really true that Jesus said he was not changing one “jot or tittle” of ‘The Word’. He sure flew in the face of it sometimes.

So now, when a self-styled “Christian” globally bashes some group, or when somebody else globally bashes “all Christians”, I tend to wince equally.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

I used to be more in Brian’s camp till one day, I decided to let Jesus speak for himself rather than letting the Kansan knuckledraggers speak for him, so I read the 4 Gospels.

Impressive, impressive guy. From his vantage point 2000 years ago he called most of the BS that people are pulling right today. I guess he was a keen observer and critic of human nature.

I’m with Carl Sagan. I’ve always sensed a Greater Power underneath the fabric of it all, but this Entity never felt to me like the lightning-snortin’, judgemental and often petty anthro-god of the Bible-thumpers. Rather, like something much larger and more sophisticated than ourselves.

So I think of Jesus as being rather the herald of this greater entity, taking on the mission to remind his people the Jews who they should look to. In fact his actions were quite in accord with his Jewish faith, as he set himself up to be that year’s Passover sacrifice, as a part of his multifaceted mission to redeem his people in the eyes of their God. Jewish or not, I find his teachings to be extremely germane and find myself living my life differently since having read them.

Interesting how many “civil Christians” came out of the woodwork once I became able to talk about Jesus and his teachings in a knowledgeable fashion. You are right, most Christians are quiet about it (just as Jesus taught them to be).

That said, I do not consider myself Christian, because my understanding is that to do so I would have to accept the rest of the Bible too– including all those verses the thumpers quote to justify oppressing women, gays, other races, etc etc. There are days I wonder if it’s really true that Jesus said he was not changing one “jot or tittle” of ‘The Word’. He sure flew in the face of it sometimes.

So now, when a self-styled “Christian” globally bashes some group, or when somebody else globally bashes “all Christians”, I tend to wince equally.

[CricketOnTheHearth]

I used to be more in Brian’s camp till one day, I decided to let Jesus speak for himself rather than letting the Kansan knuckledraggers speak for him, so I read the 4 Gospels.

Impressive, impressive guy. From his vantage point 2000 years ago he called most of the BS that people are pulling right today. I guess he was a keen observer and critic of human nature.

I’m with Carl Sagan. I’ve always sensed a Greater Power underneath the fabric of it all, but this Entity never felt to me like the lightning-snortin’, judgemental and often petty anthro-god of the Bible-thumpers. Rather, like something much larger and more sophisticated than ourselves.

So I think of Jesus as being rather the herald of this greater entity, taking on the mission to remind his people the Jews who they should look to. In fact his actions were quite in accord with his Jewish faith, as he set himself up to be that year’s Passover sacrifice, as a part of his multifaceted mission to redeem his people in the eyes of their God. Jewish or not, I find his teachings to be extremely germane and find myself living my life differently since having read them.

Interesting how many “civil Christians” came out of the woodwork once I became able to talk about Jesus and his teachings in a knowledgeable fashion. You are right, most Christians are quiet about it (just as Jesus taught them to be).

That said, I do not consider myself Christian, because my understanding is that to do so I would have to accept the rest of the Bible too– including all those verses the thumpers quote to justify oppressing women, gays, other races, etc etc. There are days I wonder if it’s really true that Jesus said he was not changing one “jot or tittle” of ‘The Word’. He sure flew in the face of it sometimes.

So now, when a self-styled “Christian” globally bashes some group, or when somebody else globally bashes “all Christians”, I tend to wince equally.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cricket: Excellent post. As a Catholic, I interpret the Bible contextually and not literally (meaning, I don’t believe Moses lived to be 900 years old; I believe that was simply a way of saying he lived a long time).

Further, there are significant amounts of extant and apocryphal writings that the Nicene Council never saw fit to include in the Bible, which takes a great deal away from the claim of complete inerrancy. The Council, like all human committees, was riddled with problems and the “final” Bible is a testament (pun intended) to that.

Which means, if one’s faith is to be complete, one has to consider the oral traditions of the Church in the centuries that proceeded the Bible, as well as all of the writings that support the mission of the early Church. Baruch Spinoza provides an excellent criticism of the Bible and his words are compelling.

For me, where evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity breaks down (like fundamentalist Islam) is the slavish adherence to a literal translation that has been debunked to a great degree and the use of the Bible as a weapon, not a tool.

When I was in high school (Catholic), I received an assignment in Comparative Religions to study Sufism and the poems of Rumi. To say that the assignment was enlightening was to damn it with faint praise. It was incredible and I realized that the path to God and spirituality does not know one denomination or religion or path. Enlightenment comes from acceptance that true knowledge, regardless of source, is pure and to embrace that.

To me, Faith and Reason do support each other. They are the “two wings of enlightenment” and BOTH are necessary.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cricket: Excellent post. As a Catholic, I interpret the Bible contextually and not literally (meaning, I don’t believe Moses lived to be 900 years old; I believe that was simply a way of saying he lived a long time).

Further, there are significant amounts of extant and apocryphal writings that the Nicene Council never saw fit to include in the Bible, which takes a great deal away from the claim of complete inerrancy. The Council, like all human committees, was riddled with problems and the “final” Bible is a testament (pun intended) to that.

Which means, if one’s faith is to be complete, one has to consider the oral traditions of the Church in the centuries that proceeded the Bible, as well as all of the writings that support the mission of the early Church. Baruch Spinoza provides an excellent criticism of the Bible and his words are compelling.

For me, where evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity breaks down (like fundamentalist Islam) is the slavish adherence to a literal translation that has been debunked to a great degree and the use of the Bible as a weapon, not a tool.

When I was in high school (Catholic), I received an assignment in Comparative Religions to study Sufism and the poems of Rumi. To say that the assignment was enlightening was to damn it with faint praise. It was incredible and I realized that the path to God and spirituality does not know one denomination or religion or path. Enlightenment comes from acceptance that true knowledge, regardless of source, is pure and to embrace that.

To me, Faith and Reason do support each other. They are the “two wings of enlightenment” and BOTH are necessary.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cricket: Excellent post. As a Catholic, I interpret the Bible contextually and not literally (meaning, I don’t believe Moses lived to be 900 years old; I believe that was simply a way of saying he lived a long time).

Further, there are significant amounts of extant and apocryphal writings that the Nicene Council never saw fit to include in the Bible, which takes a great deal away from the claim of complete inerrancy. The Council, like all human committees, was riddled with problems and the “final” Bible is a testament (pun intended) to that.

Which means, if one’s faith is to be complete, one has to consider the oral traditions of the Church in the centuries that proceeded the Bible, as well as all of the writings that support the mission of the early Church. Baruch Spinoza provides an excellent criticism of the Bible and his words are compelling.

For me, where evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity breaks down (like fundamentalist Islam) is the slavish adherence to a literal translation that has been debunked to a great degree and the use of the Bible as a weapon, not a tool.

When I was in high school (Catholic), I received an assignment in Comparative Religions to study Sufism and the poems of Rumi. To say that the assignment was enlightening was to damn it with faint praise. It was incredible and I realized that the path to God and spirituality does not know one denomination or religion or path. Enlightenment comes from acceptance that true knowledge, regardless of source, is pure and to embrace that.

To me, Faith and Reason do support each other. They are the “two wings of enlightenment” and BOTH are necessary.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cricket: Excellent post. As a Catholic, I interpret the Bible contextually and not literally (meaning, I don’t believe Moses lived to be 900 years old; I believe that was simply a way of saying he lived a long time).

Further, there are significant amounts of extant and apocryphal writings that the Nicene Council never saw fit to include in the Bible, which takes a great deal away from the claim of complete inerrancy. The Council, like all human committees, was riddled with problems and the “final” Bible is a testament (pun intended) to that.

Which means, if one’s faith is to be complete, one has to consider the oral traditions of the Church in the centuries that proceeded the Bible, as well as all of the writings that support the mission of the early Church. Baruch Spinoza provides an excellent criticism of the Bible and his words are compelling.

For me, where evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity breaks down (like fundamentalist Islam) is the slavish adherence to a literal translation that has been debunked to a great degree and the use of the Bible as a weapon, not a tool.

When I was in high school (Catholic), I received an assignment in Comparative Religions to study Sufism and the poems of Rumi. To say that the assignment was enlightening was to damn it with faint praise. It was incredible and I realized that the path to God and spirituality does not know one denomination or religion or path. Enlightenment comes from acceptance that true knowledge, regardless of source, is pure and to embrace that.

To me, Faith and Reason do support each other. They are the “two wings of enlightenment” and BOTH are necessary.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Cricket: Excellent post. As a Catholic, I interpret the Bible contextually and not literally (meaning, I don’t believe Moses lived to be 900 years old; I believe that was simply a way of saying he lived a long time).

Further, there are significant amounts of extant and apocryphal writings that the Nicene Council never saw fit to include in the Bible, which takes a great deal away from the claim of complete inerrancy. The Council, like all human committees, was riddled with problems and the “final” Bible is a testament (pun intended) to that.

Which means, if one’s faith is to be complete, one has to consider the oral traditions of the Church in the centuries that proceeded the Bible, as well as all of the writings that support the mission of the early Church. Baruch Spinoza provides an excellent criticism of the Bible and his words are compelling.

For me, where evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity breaks down (like fundamentalist Islam) is the slavish adherence to a literal translation that has been debunked to a great degree and the use of the Bible as a weapon, not a tool.

When I was in high school (Catholic), I received an assignment in Comparative Religions to study Sufism and the poems of Rumi. To say that the assignment was enlightening was to damn it with faint praise. It was incredible and I realized that the path to God and spirituality does not know one denomination or religion or path. Enlightenment comes from acceptance that true knowledge, regardless of source, is pure and to embrace that.

To me, Faith and Reason do support each other. They are the “two wings of enlightenment” and BOTH are necessary.

[afx114]

Of course science doesn’t provide all the answers — science is the process of finding them. A never-ending process. There isn’t some magical “science” that we eventually arrive at the has all the answers. Science is a continual, never-ending process.

Allan, what is your definition of spirituality? It sounds to me as if you can assign the term to any arbitrary thing that we don’t know much about or we can’t yet explain.

The moon was spiritual for millennia, but now that we know that it’s simply a big hunk of rock floating around our planet, the moon isn’t so exciting in the spiritual sense any more, is it? Bummer for the moon.

Ditto for the sun and the stars. Now that we know what stars really are, what say you about astrologists who use their “spirituality” to tell your fortune based on what animal shape some stars make in the sky? How is their spirituality any different than yours, or mine, or Pat Robertson’s or the Pope’s?

Did atoms and electrons and protons and DNA all fall within the realm of “spiritual” before we had them figured out? Probably. Now we see them as nothing more than cogs in our understanding of how the world and the universe works. My hunch is that string theory will eventually suffer the same fate. And then there will be another unknown that the spiritualists cling to as proof of a higher being until it too gets cast aside as a simple rule inherent to the operation of our universe.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to knock your or anyone else’s personal beliefs. I believe that religion plays a purpose (both good and bad) for humanity. My grandma goes to church every Sunday and it brings her a sense of purpose and peace, and that’s all that really matters. But in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it all ends up being a veil over the truths that people are either too lazy or scared to find out. The truth that we could be wiped out at any moment by an asteroid, gamma ray, galaxy collision, or a million other ways and all of our beliefs and spirituality will be wiped off the face of the universe along with us. Poof – back into the primordial space dust from which we all came.

Wait a minute… ashes to ashes, dust to dust. HOLY SHIT! Now I get it!!! 🙂

[afx114]

Of course science doesn’t provide all the answers — science is the process of finding them. A never-ending process. There isn’t some magical “science” that we eventually arrive at the has all the answers. Science is a continual, never-ending process.

Allan, what is your definition of spirituality? It sounds to me as if you can assign the term to any arbitrary thing that we don’t know much about or we can’t yet explain.

The moon was spiritual for millennia, but now that we know that it’s simply a big hunk of rock floating around our planet, the moon isn’t so exciting in the spiritual sense any more, is it? Bummer for the moon.

Ditto for the sun and the stars. Now that we know what stars really are, what say you about astrologists who use their “spirituality” to tell your fortune based on what animal shape some stars make in the sky? How is their spirituality any different than yours, or mine, or Pat Robertson’s or the Pope’s?

Did atoms and electrons and protons and DNA all fall within the realm of “spiritual” before we had them figured out? Probably. Now we see them as nothing more than cogs in our understanding of how the world and the universe works. My hunch is that string theory will eventually suffer the same fate. And then there will be another unknown that the spiritualists cling to as proof of a higher being until it too gets cast aside as a simple rule inherent to the operation of our universe.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to knock your or anyone else’s personal beliefs. I believe that religion plays a purpose (both good and bad) for humanity. My grandma goes to church every Sunday and it brings her a sense of purpose and peace, and that’s all that really matters. But in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it all ends up being a veil over the truths that people are either too lazy or scared to find out. The truth that we could be wiped out at any moment by an asteroid, gamma ray, galaxy collision, or a million other ways and all of our beliefs and spirituality will be wiped off the face of the universe along with us. Poof – back into the primordial space dust from which we all came.

Wait a minute… ashes to ashes, dust to dust. HOLY SHIT! Now I get it!!! 🙂

[afx114]

Of course science doesn’t provide all the answers — science is the process of finding them. A never-ending process. There isn’t some magical “science” that we eventually arrive at the has all the answers. Science is a continual, never-ending process.

Allan, what is your definition of spirituality? It sounds to me as if you can assign the term to any arbitrary thing that we don’t know much about or we can’t yet explain.

The moon was spiritual for millennia, but now that we know that it’s simply a big hunk of rock floating around our planet, the moon isn’t so exciting in the spiritual sense any more, is it? Bummer for the moon.

Ditto for the sun and the stars. Now that we know what stars really are, what say you about astrologists who use their “spirituality” to tell your fortune based on what animal shape some stars make in the sky? How is their spirituality any different than yours, or mine, or Pat Robertson’s or the Pope’s?

Did atoms and electrons and protons and DNA all fall within the realm of “spiritual” before we had them figured out? Probably. Now we see them as nothing more than cogs in our understanding of how the world and the universe works. My hunch is that string theory will eventually suffer the same fate. And then there will be another unknown that the spiritualists cling to as proof of a higher being until it too gets cast aside as a simple rule inherent to the operation of our universe.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to knock your or anyone else’s personal beliefs. I believe that religion plays a purpose (both good and bad) for humanity. My grandma goes to church every Sunday and it brings her a sense of purpose and peace, and that’s all that really matters. But in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it all ends up being a veil over the truths that people are either too lazy or scared to find out. The truth that we could be wiped out at any moment by an asteroid, gamma ray, galaxy collision, or a million other ways and all of our beliefs and spirituality will be wiped off the face of the universe along with us. Poof – back into the primordial space dust from which we all came.

Wait a minute… ashes to ashes, dust to dust. HOLY SHIT! Now I get it!!! 🙂

[afx114]

Of course science doesn’t provide all the answers — science is the process of finding them. A never-ending process. There isn’t some magical “science” that we eventually arrive at the has all the answers. Science is a continual, never-ending process.

Allan, what is your definition of spirituality? It sounds to me as if you can assign the term to any arbitrary thing that we don’t know much about or we can’t yet explain.

The moon was spiritual for millennia, but now that we know that it’s simply a big hunk of rock floating around our planet, the moon isn’t so exciting in the spiritual sense any more, is it? Bummer for the moon.

Ditto for the sun and the stars. Now that we know what stars really are, what say you about astrologists who use their “spirituality” to tell your fortune based on what animal shape some stars make in the sky? How is their spirituality any different than yours, or mine, or Pat Robertson’s or the Pope’s?

Did atoms and electrons and protons and DNA all fall within the realm of “spiritual” before we had them figured out? Probably. Now we see them as nothing more than cogs in our understanding of how the world and the universe works. My hunch is that string theory will eventually suffer the same fate. And then there will be another unknown that the spiritualists cling to as proof of a higher being until it too gets cast aside as a simple rule inherent to the operation of our universe.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to knock your or anyone else’s personal beliefs. I believe that religion plays a purpose (both good and bad) for humanity. My grandma goes to church every Sunday and it brings her a sense of purpose and peace, and that’s all that really matters. But in the grand scheme of things, I believe that it all ends up being a veil over the truths that people are either too lazy or scared to find out. The truth that we could be wiped out at any moment by an asteroid, gamma ray, galaxy collision, or a million other ways and all of our beliefs and spirituality will be wiped off the face of the universe along with us. Poof – back into the primordial space dust from which we all came.

Wait a minute… ashes to ashes, dust to dust. HOLY SHIT! Now I get it!!! 🙂

[Author]

Posts