One of the Hardest Conepts for Me to Grasp...

[ed2276]

Our galaxy is gravitationally bound to other galaxies, but we aren't in anything we'd describe as an "orbit" like our planets orbit the sun.

Define universe.

My head hurts!

Universe to me is the great space which encompasses all existing things within it. I guess that would mean if our universe is encompassed by another universe , as our galaxy is encompassed by our universe , that our universe would have a boundary , as our galaxy has a boundary. I probably don't have a clue about what I'm taking about , not being educated in astronomy , physics , higher-level mathematics and such. I'm just kinda reasoning things out from the things I know in a limited way.

[ed2276]

Thus -> There will always be enough matter for a new world to be organized from.

That's a whole 'nother barrel of monkeys. I'd suggest we understand this first problem before opening that one.

ok.

[Mudcat]

You started out well, IMO, but then you veered off track by talking about a beginning to a being who never, ever, had a beginning.

God, as a being, didn't have to begin anywhere.

God has always been. God is eternal.

... and God, as a being, consists of persons who are God.

Edit: I re-read your post and now see that you said "if". Sorry. I failed to connect.

No, you had it right the 1st time. I should clarify...when I said "if" it had to begin somewhere. I was referring to the universe, the world, us...not God. He never had to begin...he always was and always will be.

BTW....what does IMO mean?

[urroner]

No, you had it right the 1st time. I should clarify...when I said "if" it had to begin somewhere. I was referring to the universe, the world, us...not God. He never had to begin...he always was and always will be.

BTW....what does IMO mean?

So, in the mainstream Christian world, why does God do what He does or is there any purpose at all?

[ed2276]

No, you had it right the 1st time. I should clarify...when I said "if" it had to begin somewhere. I was referring to the universe, the world, us...not God. He never had to begin...he always was and always will be.

BTW....what does IMO mean?

IMO = In My Opinion

[Mudcat]

But suppose this fifth dimension being has access to a sixth dimensional universe where there are an infinite number of fifth dimensional universes full of fourth dimensional papers. Plenty of room still.

If the 5th dimensional being has access to a 6th dimension..then in truth..he would be a 6th dimensional entity and we would just move to a different room with the paper meaning something else and the dots representing something else...however..that might be an extrapollated hypothesis that would fit in LDS theology that Gods also follow a progessional path upward... However,this eventually becomes a terminal situation at the 11th dimension.

[urroner]

If the 5th dimensional being has access to a 6th dimension..then in truth..he would be a 6th dimensional entity and we would just move to a different room with the paper meaning something else and the dots representing something else...however..that might be an extrapollated hypothesis that would fit in LDS theology that Gods also follow a progessional path upward... However,this eventually becomes a terminal situation at the 11th dimension.

This is true if the 11th dimension was the upper boundary. There is math out there that indicated that this 11 dimensional universe was once part of a 23 or 24 dimensional universe. But then again, there is some really advanced math showing that there is no limit on the number of dimensions. I got lost a long time ago.

[Paul Ray]

If the Big Bang Theory is correct would not God have had to be in another universe when this one came into existence?

That's a really BIG if, IMO, but yes.

I know the universe is infinitely vast and eternal, however, so I won't be relying on any such assumption.

[Paul Ray]

No, you had it right the 1st time. I should clarify...when I said "if" it had to begin somewhere. I was referring to the universe, the world, us...not God. He never had to begin...he always was and always will be.

Oh, okay.

I know the universe is infinitely vast and eternal, however, so that's one IF I will not be counting on.

BTW....what does IMO mean?

IMO is short for In My Opinion.

I think saying that helps the truth go down a little easier for some people.

[Mudcat]

So, in the mainstream Christian world, why does God do what He does or is there any purpose at all?

Well, urroner, I'd like to tell you...but...you'd have to sign up as an EV and go through the secret ram's blood ceremony

....just kidding.

I play in a rock band...and we practice tonight for some upcoming gigs so it may be tomorrow before I respond. I will get back to you on this...this is a great question...Im wondering where it will lead.

[ed2276]

Well, urroner, I'd like to tell you...but...you'd have to sign up as an EV and go through the secret ram's blood ceremony

....just kidding.

I play in a rock band...and we practice tonight for some upcoming gigs so it may be tomorrow before I respond. I will get back to you on this...this is a great question...Im wondering where it will lead.

Ahem , that's sacred ram's blood ceremony.

[Mudcat]

Ahem , that's sacred ram's blood ceremony.

Um sorry.. thanks for the heads up ed

I meant the secret, sacred ram's blood ceremony

BTW if you miss the ceremony, you can watch the film.

It is TOP SECRETLY being filmed secretly of course.

[urroner]

Um sorry.. thanks for the heads up ed

I meant the secret, sacred ram's blood ceremony

BTW if you miss the ceremony, you can watch the film.

It is TOP SECRETLY being filmed secretly of course.

mud, when you first came on, I thought you were going to be somebody who would run around, trying to poke us LDSers in the eye with a stick and just plain irritate us. I apologize for misjudging you.

[Mudcat]

mud, when you first came on, I thought you were going to be somebody who would run around, trying to poke us LDSers in the eye with a stick and just plain irritate us. I apologize for misjudging you.

Well, that was my original plan...but I read this book...How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie and it just ....changed me. just kidding.

Geez... your gonna get me all choked up...I think I might die of sugar poisoning or something.

Anyways..me too. If that makes you feel any better

So, in the mainstream Christian world, why does God do what He does or is there any purpose at all?

I told you Id get back to you on this...and this is a strictly my thoughts answer...as are all my answers. It's going to be a real shock to you ...so get ready...

....here it is...

I don't know

This is the part I always get stuck at...why did he do this, what is he really thinking..I try to put myself in the perspective...but obviously that doesn't help a thing. I mean we could say he did it out of love and possibly some desire to be loved by a people that chose to love him and serve him. Maybe he has bigger plans for us in the afterlife. Maybe the Earth is like an employment office and its just his way of creating applicants.

Its all speculation of course...I tend to go with the love thing...and I know its purposeful..at some point in any Christians beliefs, you come to this point where you just have to take things on faith. This is the point where my faith has to kick in...cause I don't have the answer yet.

I don't know if you ever read the Hobbit...but...the main anti-hero named Smaug, a dragon, had one weak place on his chest...the rest of him was fully armored. This is my weak place ...doctrinally speaking. All black arrows welcome.

[Son]

Well, that was my original plan...but I read this book...How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie and it just ....changed me. just kidding.

Geez... your gonna get me all choked up...I think I might die of sugar poisoning or something.

Anyways..me too. If that makes you feel any better

I told you Id get back to you on this...and this is a strictly my thoughts answer...as are all my answers. It's going to be a real shock to you ...so get ready...

....here it is...

I don't know

This is the part I always get stuck at...why did he do this, what is he really thinking..I try to put myself in the perspective...but obviously that doesn't help a thing. I mean we could say he did it out of love and possibly some desire to be loved by a people that chose to love him and serve him. Maybe he has bigger plans for us in the afterlife. Maybe the Earth is like an employment office and its just his way of creating applicants.

Its all speculation of course...I tend to go with the love thing...and I know its purposeful..at some point in any Christians beliefs, you come to this point where you just have to take things on faith. This is the point where my faith has to kick in...cause I don't have the answer yet.

I don't know if you ever read the Hobbit...but...the main anti-hero named Smaug, a dragon, had one weak place on his chest...the rest of him was fully armored. This is my weak place ...doctrinally speaking. All black arrows welcome.

God does what he does that we might have joy.

The whole thing is about the pursuit of happiness.

Because it is based on freedom, we must grow into this pure joy, through learning what takes it away and what brings it about.

Service to our fellow man/woman, sacrafice, giving and all the beatitudes are the foundation that brings us to the Eternal gift of power and joy.

son

[Honorentheos]

I had a few thougths that apply to this topic. Before I start, please recognize that my view is one of agnosticism. I am not christian, though I was raised LDS and was very active and faithful. I do not hate the church, and am rather grateful for many of the values and choices that that life has cultivated within myself. But basically I view most of the biblical/traditional evidence cited as being suspect. Anyway...

First regarding time as it relates to dimensions-

Rather than being a continuity or even the same animal as a spacial dimension as is sometimes implied, time is merely a way of defining the relationships of objects within the dimensions that are knowable or observable by a being. Put one way, all time does is define the exact condition of things as they exist in space. November 11, 2007, 0131 AM MST is empirically understood as a relation of the earth, the sun, the other solar bodies, etc., to one another and all other observable objects in our universe. Because our biological make-up is such that we observe the world through eyes that are capable of seeing in 2D and a brain that can create a stereographic interpretation of the 3rd dimension, for us as humans the observable universe is a 3 dimensional one with time or the relationships of things adding a fourth. But it is different than a 4D spatial dimension. A being who can observe the universe in 4 dimensions would also have time as a fifth, rather than having time be the fourth and their fifth being something else.

As individuals, we relate to time better or understand it best as a relationship of our person to something else, such as the commute to work, our pillow, the gym, or what have you. I remember this point in time as what I was doing, with what other objects or people were around me, atleast as this information is interpreted by my brain/mind. It is a point in 3D space-time, defined by the relationship of all the objects that are interrelating. Time for an individual, relative to the cosmic order of things, can fly or grind slowly by for this reason.

For me this creates a problem for the LDS view of God. For something to be truely eternal (as opposed to existing for infinity) it would have to be the only "thing" in existance. It could not have any other thing to relate to. Once it did there would be time, regardless of how many spatial dimensions that being was capable of observing.

To be honest, though I do not personally believe in the christian view of the trinity, I think that it is actually more intelligible now given modern physics than the LDS view. If God were in fact outside of our realm of understanding and did not have a physical body- the creedal God of unfathomable everywhere etc, etc, that entity called God could concievable be eternal. Christ, as the physical relational embodyment of that entity, could simply be a manefestation of God "in the flesh". For men to be able to experinece God within time, or have a relationship with God, something along these lines would be required anyway. In effect, Christ would be something "different" that the above eternal entity but the same. And the holy spirit would be something akin to the experinece of this entity in a non-physical manner for men that, because it is relational falls within time and therefore would also be the same and yet not the same.

The LDS view of God being a resureected being with a physical, eternal body worked better under a steady-state universe and using newtonian physics with time being a seperate entity independant of matter and energy rather than a relative property or description of what we are observing in space-time. In that model, God could exist at any point on the infinite continum of this non-relational time in any form as we all could.

Currently the evidence is against a steady state universe, or one where an infinite regression of gods could be possible. Not impossible given that we don't know. But our current understanding of physics makes the LDS view difficult at best, and impossible to my mind.

[Honorentheos]

On dimensions-

I think it is too difficult for us as 3D beings to realistically discuss anything outside of our observable dimensions and it have anything beyond pleasure value. It makes for good sci-fi and interesting hypothtical discussion, but since it is impossible for us to comprehend, outside of the mathmatical predictions that define them and the reality that modern theories predict that the universe as it "exists" outside of our ability to observe it is multi-dimensional, any idea that uses it as a solution to a problem will probably be untestable. Which is fine. It just means that its value is limited to the few persons who concieve of that particular theory.

And regarding matter-

Einstein and others today suspect that our concept of matter is an illusion. They speculate that the universe in fact is our observation of waves that we interprete as 3D material information. Kind of like how our mind interpretes movie stills to actually be a continuous sequence. It is really abstract, but interesting. And the end result is somewhat akin to the buddhist or taoist notion that anything out side of this universal singularity is illusion. But again, it really isn't proveable or satisfying to most people, especially ones raised today with our western modes of thinking. But it makes the poetry of D&C 93 have value to someone like me. The notion already mentioned that "spirit is matter" could be also reversed mathmatically to say that matter is spirit. Or, in effect, that matter and spirit are the same thing, refined or otherwise.

To me, in the end, the thing that matters is not what God is made of or what God one believes in. It is about what one does with whatever light, matter, spirit, knowledge, etc., one has in the observable world that they CAN know about. I suspect that some here will see this as evidence of my rejecting a higher degree of light or knowledge. What can I say? I thought that way once as well.

[Mudcat]

You trully have a dizzing intelect.

To be honest, though I do not personally believe in the christian view of the trinity, I think that it is actually more intelligible now given modern physics than the LDS view. If God were in fact outside of our realm of understanding and did not have a physical body- the creedal God of unfathomable everywhere etc, etc, that entity called God could concievable be eternal. Christ, as the physical relational embodyment of that entity, could simply be a manefestation of God "in the flesh". For men to be able to experinece God within time, or have a relationship with God, something along these lines would be required anyway. In effect, Christ would be something "different" that the above eternal entity but the same. And the holy spirit would be something akin to the experinece of this entity in a non-physical manner for men that, because it is relational falls within time and therefore would also be the same and yet not the same.

I cant think of the book...it was short..or the author...but I read it years ago. It was about a 2 dimensional species that existed on a plane. It was a difficult concept to create but I thought the guy did and ok job of it. However, there was a character that would appear from time to time. He was always the same character but had a different shape...they all thought he was magic or something. In truth, he was just a 3 dimensional being that was interesecting their plane of existence. I think your theory makes a lot of sense...I share it (I understand you dont seem to support trinitarian thought, however, you've articulated how I think it works, really well). I also agree with your thoughts on time not being 4D, or at least that quantum mechanics does not recognize it as such.

To me, in the end, the thing that matters is not what God is made of or what God one believes in. It is about what one does with whatever light, matter, spirit, knowledge, etc., one has in the observable world that they CAN know about. I suspect that some here will see this as evidence of my rejecting a higher degree of light or knowledge. What can I say? I thought that way once as well.

So, do you believe that our existence ends here? Do you believe in some form of afterlife, if so, could you give me The Readers Digest - Condensed version of what you think.

Last question, why did you depart from LDS theology?

[Neighbor]

I think we can all agree that we are in one level now. Being in one, we hear there is another. We see the evidence of this one plain enough, but upon what evidence do we rely for knowledge of others? Who do we trust regarding the matter? God has said we cannot find the matter out, that it is beyond us. So this God we speak of, if He is eternal and all knowing and His claim that all things are because of Him, seen and unseen, to include all that is, was or ever has been or ever will be... if He has said so, who are we to question Him?, to doubt what He has said?, or to think we are capable to find things out which He has hidden from us?

If He says there is no God beside Him, then why the musing that there are?

The angels, by record of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, say only God is to be worshiped. Jesus came that we might have eternal life and be with Him where He is, for that is why He went to prepare a place for us, that we might be with Him and share in His inheritance of His Father, that all He has is ours if we do as He says because of our love in doing His will because we are His children, brought to Him in adoptions of Sons by the blood of Jesus Christ.

If we are not satisfied with what He has promised and desire even more, and all there is more is to be a God yourself, is this not the very heresy that caused Satan to rebel and fall from heaven and which caused the deception in heaven by which a third has fallen to be cast into hell?

Life comes from God. It is His to give to whom He wills. God is a jealous God. So do you really think He is going to make you a God as He is God? or do you really think yourself to be a God by right of keeping to the laws of eternal progression - that it is a thing to be earned? Do you think you know? Do you have the mind of Christ by your set of laws or do we gain the mind of Christ by His gifting it to us as we grow in divine knowledge as the Teacher dispenses it to us throughout life and keeping to the matters of God as God has already given us in the Holy Scriptures?

Eternal life is a gift granted to those who are faithful to God.

What man has been shown to be faithful to God by doubting His promises or commandments, or even what He has said of Himself? If there be such a man, for what evidence of his life do you believe what he said is true?

[Honorentheos]

Mudcat,

I've appreciated the question and the respectful manner in which you have managed this thread. It says a lot about your character.

I cant think of the book...it was short..or the author...but I read it years ago. It was about a 2 dimensional species that existed on a plane. It was a difficult concept to create but I thought the guy did and ok job of it. However, there was a character that would appear from time to time. He was always the same character but had a different shape...they all thought he was magic or something. In truth, he was just a 3 dimensional being that was interesecting their plane of existence.

Are you thinking of "Flatland"? It's a great book with interesting concepts. I read it as a kid and still come back to it from time to time. It's a good reminder to me that we all are, in effect, flatlanders.

So, do you believe that our existence ends here? Do you believe in some form of afterlife, if so, could you give me The Readers Digest - Condensed version of what you think.

It's a tough question to answer accurately and I know it will not be satisfying to anyone else. But I guess that is not the point, for me anyway.

Somewhere earlier in this thread someone stated that we in effect know that the universe is infinite. I found that statement difficult, because to me it is a good example of not knowing how ignorant we really are.

We can not know the limits of the universe. It is impossible, because of two things: the speed of light and the observed fact that the universe is expanding. There is, in effect, an event horizon beyond which we cannot observe because we gain all of our scientific information about the universe from light. In the end, it leaves us uncertain about many things.

That is how I feel about the afterlife. I know that most people here look to spiritual or religious sources as being more reliable than the information that we gain scientifically. And I do not discredit non-scientific knowledge either. But my experience in life is that we are flatlanders when it comes to religion. Christians, LDS, buddhists, jews, muslims, taoists, pagans- each have some things that seem to be similar to the flatlanders trying to describe the cube in the flatland book. Whatever God may be, IMO, he/she/it does not seem to be as partial to giving what could be called "TRUTH!" to any one group as is often portrayed. The more I observe, the more it seems to me that most of what we have as religion is the work of men, sprinkled in with some very good insights. If that is what the reality is rather than one where there is a single, true, path back to god, then I am best benefited by looking for the truth within each. Not easy, but it has become very inspiriational for me.

The end result, as far as the afterlife goes, is that I do not know what comes next. It is on the other side of the event horizon we call death. And I am pretty sure that, despite what most claim, no one knows. One can have faith, hope, belief, etc... but I like the words of Paul in this case.

In the end, the greatest of these is charity. Why? Because it applies to the here and now. It is part of this reality. And until it comes time to work within the next reality, whatever it may be or if it even is, I am busy enough with doing good, seeking the beautiful, and pursuing the true here.

Last question, why did you depart from LDS theology?

Because I came to a point where I either had to sacrifice my integrity to stay and pretend to be something that I was not, or be true. I chose to be true. And I do not regret that choice. In short, in the LDS worldview it is tantamount to heresy to say, "I/we don't know". Yet after a long period of reflection this is what I came to.

[Son]

Mudcat,

I've appreciated the question and the respectful manner in which you have managed this thread. It says a lot about your character.

Are you thinking of "Flatland"? It's a great book with interesting concepts. I read it as a kid and still come back to it from time to time. It's a good reminder to me that we all are, in effect, flatlanders.

It's a tough question to answer accurately and I know it will not be satisfying to anyone else. But I guess that is not the point, for me anyway.

Somewhere earlier in this thread someone stated that we in effect know that the universe is infinite. I found that statement difficult, because to me it is a good example of not knowing how ignorant we really are.

We can not know the limits of the universe. It is impossible, because of two things: the speed of light and the observed fact that the universe is expanding. There is, in effect, an event horizon beyond which we cannot observe because we gain all of our scientific information about the universe from light. In the end, it leaves us uncertain about many things.

That is how I feel about the afterlife. I know that most people here look to spiritual or religious sources as being more reliable than the information that we gain scientifically. And I do not discredit non-scientific knowledge either. But my experience in life is that we are flatlanders when it comes to religion. Christians, LDS, buddhists, jews, muslims, taoists, pagans- each have some things that seem to be similar to the flatlanders trying to describe the cube in the flatland book. Whatever God may be, IMO, he/she/it does not seem to be as partial to giving what could be called "TRUTH!" to any one group as is often portrayed. The more I observe, the more it seems to me that most of what we have as religion is the work of men, sprinkled in with some very good insights. If that is what the reality is rather than one where there is a single, true, path back to god, then I am best benefited by looking for the truth within each. Not easy, but it has become very inspiriational for me.

The end result, as far as the afterlife goes, is that I do not know what comes next. It is on the other side of the event horizon we call death. And I am pretty sure that, despite what most claim, no one knows. One can have faith, hope, belief, etc... but I like the words of Paul in this case.

In the end, the greatest of these is charity. Why? Because it applies to the here and now. It is part of this reality. And until it comes time to work within the next reality, whatever it may be or if it even is, I am busy enough with doing good, seeking the beautiful, and pursuing the true here.

Because I came to a point where I either had to sacrifice my integrity to stay and pretend to be something that I was not, or be true. I chose to be true. And I do not regret that choice. In short, in the LDS worldview it is tantamount to heresy to say, "I/we don't know". Yet after a long period of reflection this is what I came to.

Correct me if I am amiss, but it appears that you hold to the attributes and be attitudes that the Scriptures contain. Yet are not joined with those that hold the scriptures to be true, even if unlived by you, us, or them (ie; a member of a religion)?

The Scriptures are filled with attitudes and attributes and concepts that I feel even in time (given our nature), we would not have come to on our own. Do you feel the scriptures to be divinely given, or devised by man through trial and error?

son

[Honorentheos]

Correct me if I am amiss, but it appears that you hold to the attributes and be attitudes that the Scriptures contain. Yet are not joined with those that hold the scriptures to be true, even if unlived by you, us, or them (ie; a member of a religion)?

I do not consider myself a member of any religion other than that of humanity. I'm not sure what you meant by the attitudes of the scriptures so I can not say. Could you give an example of what you meant perhaps?

I would not capitalize the word "scripture" myself for any reason. But I do feel that there is a lot to learn from the wisdom contained in various culture's scripture, just as there is a lot to learn in reading many other documents. But just as in reading other documents, I try my best to apply critical thinking skills while looking for the valueable lessons. The LDS concept contained in the Book of Mormon of likening the scriptures unto one's self is an example of how I might read scripture, be it LDS, christian, the koran, the tao or any other similar book. Scripture of all types seems to me to be of varied historical value. Some contain information about the parent culture that is very valuable, others are purely fanciful. But just as the mythological story of Troy led to the modern field of archeology, I think that nothing should be tossed out just out of hand. It should be thought through and evaluated carefully and with as unbiased a mind as possible.

The Scriptures are filled with attitudes and attributes and concepts that I feel even in time (given our nature), we would not have come to on our own. Do you feel the scriptures to be divinely given, or devised by man through trial and error?

This is a great question, really. There are many things that fall into this idea of divine inspiration. Many great musicians and artists have described experiences where the notes/image for a particular piece were "given" to them. I know that there have been many times where I have had a very clear "spark" of intelligence as it is described in LDS theology, that did not originate through a rational process. There was a recent article in scientific america- the mind about this sort of thing. Very interesting.

My honest answer is I don't know whether these inspirational moments, including those that lead to the scriptural insights we have among us today, are from "God" or perhaps from some not-yet-understood mental process. As stated in the physics portion of my original post in this thread, there is a solid body of evidence from many different disciplines that suggest that we are not capable of processing "reality" any more so than a dolphin can understand special relativity or theoritical mathmatics. The biology of the brain may be it's own "event horizon" in some ways.

To me, it is a personal and difficult decision of how to deal with scripture. There are many fundimentalists within all traditions out there who see things as black and white. My impression of the members of this board is that most are willing to accept the value of scripture while accepting that the literal reading of some books may be more based on myth than reality, or are allegrorical rather than literal though this is different for different people vis a vis different books. For example, most LDS will accept the "value" of the bible while compromising on it's literal interpretation. Christians and LDS frequently have value shifts over content in the hebrew bible, or old testiment. Most western traditions view eastern one's as being little more than fables, accepting the values that meets their needs and letting the rest go. It's an equally interesting idea to consider what makes one accept some fantastical claims and reject others within these books. The dialogue here about the Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon, etc., and the varied views within the LDS culture is always informative for me.

Anyway, I am not sure if this is derailing this thread. I would hope not and that we may be able to use this to continue with the ideas regarding the original thoughts on physics and the nature of God. Perhaps we should start a different thread to continue this discussion or you can pm me.

[Son]

I do not consider myself a member of any religion other than that of humanity. I'm not sure what you meant by the attitudes of the scriptures so I can not say. Could you give an example of what you meant perhaps?

I would not capitalize the word "scripture" myself for any reason. But I do feel that there is a lot to learn from the wisdom contained in various culture's scripture, just as there is a lot to learn in reading many other documents. But just as in reading other documents, I try my best to apply critical thinking skills while looking for the valueable lessons. The LDS concept contained in the Book of Mormon of likening the scriptures unto one's self is an example of how I might read scripture, be it LDS, christian, the koran, the tao or any other similar book. Scripture of all types seems to me to be of varied historical value. Some contain information about the parent culture that is very valuable, others are purely fanciful. But just as the mythological story of Troy led to the modern field of archeology, I think that nothing should be tossed out just out of hand. It should be thought through and evaluated carefully and with as unbiased a mind as possible.

And yet? you did.... I point this out, not to be petty, but funny... We have scripture or thoughts on paper or electronic devices that inspire us to be either better or worse people, rarely do we stay neutral or stagnant for very long. We attribute these concepts to a source, sometimes known, sometimes not, sometimes debatable, yet the thought, or concept stands on its own to be contemplated and accepted or rejected. I point this out in line with this thread in only that these new to the reader ideas are above the understanding at the time. THe reason to be good or bad, and the consenquences of our choice to me prove the higher to be such, and the leap that it has always been, in a place without time. With out a start or finish, it just is.

This is a great question, really. There are many things that fall into this idea of divine inspiration. Many great musicians and artists have described experiences where the notes/image for a particular piece were "given" to them. I know that there have been many times where I have had a very clear "spark" of intelligence as it is described in LDS theology, that did not originate through a rational process. There was a recent article in scientific america- the mind about this sort of thing. Very interesting.

My honest answer is I don't know whether these inspirational moments, including those that lead to the scriptural insights we have among us today, are from "God" or perhaps from some not-yet-understood mental process. As stated in the physics portion of my original post in this thread, there is a solid body of evidence from many different disciplines that suggest that we are not capable of processing "reality" any more so than a dolphin can understand special relativity or theoritical mathmatics. The biology of the brain may be it's own "event horizon" in some ways.

To me, it is a personal and difficult decision of how to deal with scripture. There are many fundimentalists within all traditions out there who see things as black and white. My impression of the members of this board is that most are willing to accept the value of scripture while accepting that the literal reading of some books may be more based on myth than reality, or are allegrorical rather than literal though this is different for different people vis a vis different books. For example, most LDS will accept the "value" of the bible while compromising on it's literal interpretation. Christians and LDS frequently have value shifts over content in the hebrew bible, or old testiment. Most western traditions view eastern one's as being little more than fables, accepting the values that meets their needs and letting the rest go. It's an equally interesting idea to consider what makes one accept some fantastical claims and reject others within these books. The dialogue here about the Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon, etc., and the varied views within the LDS culture is always informative for me.

Anyway, I am not sure if this is derailing this thread. I would hope not and that we may be able to use this to continue with the ideas regarding the original thoughts on physics and the nature of God. Perhaps we should start a different thread to continue this discussion or you can pm me.

Interpretation has always been the maker and breaker of actions. Understanding seems to be doled out on a curve, primarily due to applying oneself to desire it. Which is why we are so different from dolphins I imagine. If you have any ideas on what type of thread this discussion would fit, I would love to see it posted.

son

[Honorentheos]

And yet? you did.... I point this out, not to be petty, but funny...

Ok, you caught me. Let me requalify that with, "except as typically required under the rules of writing." Or my frequent issues with thinking faster than I type. Anyway...

We have scripture or thoughts on paper or electronic devices that inspire us to be either better or worse people, rarely do we stay neutral or stagnant for very long. We attribute these concepts to a source, sometimes known, sometimes not, sometimes debatable, yet the thought, or concept stands on its own to be contemplated and accepted or rejected.

Well said.

I point this out in line with this thread in only that these new to the reader ideas are above the understanding at the time. THe reason to be good or bad, and the consenquences of our choice to me prove the higher to be such, and the leap that it has always been, in a place without time. With out a start or finish, it just is.

I didn't quite follow your thought here very well, and I apologize. So please correct any misunderstanding that follows. I think you are refering to the idea that scriptural insight comes from a higher source, and that they frequently surpass the limit of knowledge that the author had prior to recieving or penning this insight. Which I can agree with. But I bolded the sentance regarding "the reason to be good or bad" because I am not sure that these flashes of insight speak to a universal source of good, such as God, or may be tied to some brain process that is not based on divinity. Ethics seems to be an evolving concept, and one that is entirely anachronistic when applied to anything outside of the here and now. This, more than anything, seems to suggest that we are atleast in part responsible for how the notion of good and bad is understood. In LDS theology, the idea is that God only gives us the knowledge that we are ready for, which explains many contradtions between how people in the past may have lived a god-fearing life and held slaves for example, but a person who lived such a life today would be a criminal or atleast unsavory to do business with. But to me, this seems to leave a big question mark out there about whether this is really God, us, or something else entirely.

Interpretation has always been the maker and breaker of actions. Understanding seems to be doled out on a curve, primarily due to applying oneself to desire it. Which is why we are so different from dolphins I imagine. If you have any ideas on what type of thread this discussion would fit, I would love to see it posted.

son

Perhaps we start a thread on divine inspiration?

[Son]

I didn't quite follow your thought here very well, and I apologize. So please correct any misunderstanding that follows. I think you are refering to the idea that scriptural insight comes from a higher source, and that they frequently surpass the limit of knowledge that the author had prior to recieving or penning this insight. Which I can agree with. But I bolded the sentance regarding "the reason to be good or bad" because I am not sure that these flashes of insight speak to a universal source of good, such as God, or may be tied to some brain process that is not based on divinity. Ethics seems to be an evolving concept, and one that is entirely anachronistic when applied to anything outside of the here and now. This, more than anything, seems to suggest that we are atleast in part responsible for how the notion of good and bad is understood. In LDS theology, the idea is that God only gives us the knowledge that we are ready for, which explains many contradtions between how people in the past may have lived a god-fearing life and held slaves for example, but a person who lived such a life today would be a criminal or atleast unsavory to do business with. But to me, this seems to leave a big question mark out there about whether this is really God, us, or something else entirely.

Yes I agree there is a brain process, so a choosing or decision regarding the information at hand will come about depending on the interest of the one receiving the information. Defining the information into categories of good and bad are what I seem to do unless I have no opinion. I attribute all good to thee good, and all bad to thee bad, or the originator of the attitude- "the first mover". In this sphere of influence we have infinite examples of cause and effect, thought and fruition, action and reaction. It appears something (which I call Father) wants us to explore and decide what we value, and if there is a decision to be made, there are joys and pains attached to these decisions. It is such an "organized chaos" filled with patterns and rhythms, rewards and punishment, it must mean something.

As to the errors of man regarding the whole discovery and learning process, when we throw ego and control into the mix then now we have what we have in religions.... a mess... Which is why being led directly through the asking and seeking process is the best way in my opinion, I have to take full responsibility for my actions and beliefs and not look to organizations for affirmation.

You commented on the flashes of insight or knowledge that we receive, this I believe to be a skill (gift) that we can nurture and enhance until the great light of wisdom is our constant companion (becoming scripture). That infinite source of all truth is how I believe the eternities operate, and we are here to use it in the physical cumbersome world in order to perceive it, handle it and explore its mysteries until we become it, one with it.

Perhaps we start a thread on divine inspiration?

okay.

son