mfbukowski Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) For those who think that science is about "truth" and is not about our perceptions, we need to go no farther than the "hard science" of astronomy, and look at a few astronomical terms. Due to formatting problems it is difficult to cut and paste them here, but I encourage you to go to the site and see for yourself.http://www.astrophys...om/AA/terms.htmOne of my favorites is "absolute magnitude". You would expect it to be "absolute" right??absolute magnitude the apparent brightness an object would have if it were 10 parsecs (32.6 light-years) from EarthWhat does this have to do with "hard reality" or anything "absolute"? Every word is based not on "reality" but our perceptions OF "reality"- in other words, human experience and the idiosyncratic we humans see things."Apparent brightness"- that an object "would have" IF it were an arbitrarily chosen distance (because we have 10 fingers and that is what metric measurements are based on) from where? Why Earth of course, our home.That's no better than measuring my little world in units of my paces from my front door.Every single definition of every word on this site is based not on "reality" but our idiosyncratic perception of it, relative to our little brains. Go see for yourself.So what does science describe? "Reality"?? NO! All it does is chronicle human experience in a human vocabulary invented by humans.THAT is what your precious "evidence" is! Edited July 16, 2012 by mfbukowski 1
Evangeline Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 ..."spirit to spirit" communication is not only possible, but it is the highest form of communication possible.I've been thinking a lot about this today and wanted to share an example of spirit to spirit communication. If as members of the human family we were able to share in this kind of spiritual communion more often, it would be like heaven on earth. It's unfortunate that it most often takes a tragedy for us to come together in this way. Note the date of the performance: Sept. 15, 2001. Can anyone fully describe the experience? I can't, yet the feeling is as tangible as the ground I walk on. 1
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Can anyone fully describe the experience? I can't, yet the feeling is as tangible as the ground I walk on.I agree. Of course the critics would see this as an emotional response which we as social beings feel sympathy for and react accordingly.But think about it. What is that characterization? A linguistic description designed to discount the entire notion of "spirit".I much prefer the characterization "spirit to spirit communication".That description works far better for me. They can choose their way of describing it and I will choose mine. The difference is only in the vocabulary we choose to use to organize our little human worlds, while God, the Human that he is, organizes our larger shared world by his Word. Edited July 17, 2012 by mfbukowski 3
Popular Post volgadon Posted July 17, 2012 Popular Post Posted July 17, 2012 Yet another from the rogue's gallery. R. Ben Zion Bokser on faith in the thought of R. Judah Loew of Prague (Maharal), famous for the role attributed him in later Golem folklore.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTEN9JL1A_gReligion may gain from the fruits of intellectual development, but it is not dependent on it. Religion is not a creation of our reason and its existence is not based on preliminary achievments in science and metaphysics. Religion has as its aim the deepening of our relations with God; it seeks to unite man with the divine source of his life. This aim it can pursue directly, without the mediation of science and metaphysics. It has its own source of truth- divine revelation or prophecy. It has its own path toward the goal it seeks- the study of the Torah and the performance of its precepts.Rabbi Judah discused the phenomenon of prophecy in only a sketchy fashion. It is clear, however, that he did not share the Maimonidean insistence that intellectual perfection is one of the prerequisites of prophecy. Prophecy is a "pouring in" upon the prophet as truth from its divine source. It is God's intervention in history, to offer man guidance toward his true destiny. In its highest form, prophecy is an intense, a mystical experience in which the prophet cleaves directly to God, and in this act of union there occurs the illumination by which the prophet sees the truth.-From the World of the Cabbalah, pg. 115-116.Science is important, it can be a force for the good. Science helps us live longer, healthier, more prosperously; it bridges nation and individuals, providing more opportunities for education. Just being able to learn more about the world we live in is holistic, a very positive thing. All this being said, faith is essential, irreplacable, beautiful. Faith (not slighting her two sisters) leads us to cleave to God, to follow his precepts and to recieve more and more of his light, until our intelligence reaches its full potential and fruition. We then are truly deified. We need no more stand in tears amid the alien corn. Faith and intelligence are not enemies. 5
ERayR Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Yet another from the rogue's gallery. R. Ben Zion Bokser on faith in the thought of R. Judah Loew of Prague (Maharal), famous for the role attributed him in later Golem folklore.[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTEN9JL1A_gScience is important, it can be a force for the good. Science helps us live longer, healthier, more prosperously; it bridges nation and individuals, providing more opportunities for education. Just being able to learn more about the world we live in is holistic, a very positive thing. All this being said, faith is essential, irreplacable, beautiful. Faith (not slighting her two sisters) leads us to cleave to God, to follow his precepts and to recieve more and more of his light, until our intelligence reaches its full potential and fruition. We then are truly deified. We need no more stand in tears amid the alien corn. Faith and intelligence are not enemies.I would say you are correct but often adherents of both reach too far with what they have. But then again if nobody reached we wouldn't go far. Edited July 17, 2012 by ERayR 2
Evangeline Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Of course the critics would see this as an emotional response which we as social beings feel sympathy for and react accordingly.I have yet to see a good scientific explanation for why so many people would respond similarly to a series of vibrations on a set of strings. Also, how is it that all those musicians are able to join together and become a cohesive unit. If you notice, they don't even follow the conductor half the time and yet they are unified in their expression (and a very complex form of expression at that). Are they mind readers, or is something else at play here? Edited July 17, 2012 by Evangeline 1
volgadon Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 I would say you are correct but often adherents of both reach too far with what they have. But then again if nobody reached we wouldn't go far.You are right, hands are for reaching higher and higher to gain more knowledge and more faith, not for landing punches on each other. 2
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 I have yet to see a good scientific explanation for why so many people would respond similarly to a series of vibrations on a set of strings.I couldn't help it 2
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 You are right, hands are for reaching higher and higher to gain more knowledge and more faith, not for landing punches on each other.I recall a story from one of the "Forgotten Books of Eden" where, I think it was Adam, comes into the Bosom of Abraham, makes a sign, and takes the patriarchs by the hand in a grip they all make locking themselves together as one, and he raises them up to the Lord's presence.
Evangeline Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 I couldn't help itYou dare to show a video of the Beach Boys after my ethereal Samuel Barber???? I'm offended!!Just kidding.
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 You dare to show a video of the Beach Boys after my ethereal Samuel Barber???? I'm offended!!Just kidding. Oh yeah? You dare mention a barber after I show the Beach Boys??
Atomic Punk Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 This is proof positive McConkie is a false prophet. The science of evolution cannot be refuted by religion because it is fact, thoroughly established with overwhelming evidence. McConkie's speculation is just that, pure balderdash.Really? You disagree with McConkie's opinion? How about Joseph Fielding Smith? Most would probably view McConkie's theology in the same vein as JFS's. Hence, is he a false prophet, too? Personally, I choose to disregard Smith's book "Man, His Origin and Destiny." And I can choose to ignore some of the past teachings from some of the brethren that have been shown to be uninspired. That's the nature of opinions. But I still revere them, including McConkie, as prophets of God.I, too, look forward to your apologetic videos in the future. They should be fascinating.
Evangeline Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Oh yeah? You dare mention a barber after I show the Beach Boys?? Well, they could use a haircut, couldn't they? 1
ERayR Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 This is proof positive McConkie is a false prophet. The science of evolution cannot be refuted by religion because it is fact, thoroughly established with overwhelming evidence. McConkie's speculation is just that, pure balderdash.It's not the evolution I have a problem with but the interpretation of some of the evidence and what it points to.
Cobalt-70 Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 I realize that most see this as applying to humankind only and in a sense it might. However, whether it is God as the creator that all of his creations willingly follow without compulsory means or whether we want to posit that it is a principle that exceeds our typical application and applies to all of Gods creations within the boundaries of their capacity it is the same. Moses 7 for many is a figurative conversation with God and Enoch and his creations. However, I believe it to be more. At one level or another each of Gods creations will choose to fill the role they fill. And in no sense should anyone ever suppose that a man is superior to a women whether in people or planets or in any form, each is a perfect compliment to the other and of perfect necessity.Patriarchy is not the idea that women are inferior. Under patriarchy, in fact, they are superior. They are put up on a pedestal and thereby objectified like a prized trophy. They are honored for their homemaking skills, craftiness, and beauty, but never for their leadership qualities or business sense. They are praised for their nobler calling of private domesticity and child-rearing, while leaving the men to the baser and less noble roles of ruling the scary public world. Women, like the planets, have their "defined orbit," whereas, like the sun, everything revolves around the man. If the women are part of this patriarchy, no "compulsory means" are necessary. Women are confined to their "proper roles" because that is what patriarchal society expects of them.
CASteinman Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 They are honored for their homemaking skills, craftiness, and beauty, but never for their leadership qualities or business sense. This appears to be false based upon scriptures.
SamIam Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Patriarchy is not the idea that women are inferior. Under patriarchy, in fact, they are superior. They are put up on a pedestal and thereby objectified like a prized trophy. They are honored for their homemaking skills, craftiness, and beauty, but never for their leadership qualities or business sense. They are praised for their nobler calling of private domesticity and child-rearing, while leaving the men to the baser and less noble roles of ruling the scary public world. Women, like the planets, have their "defined orbit," whereas, like the sun, everything revolves around the man. If the women are part of this patriarchy, no "compulsory means" are necessary. Women are confined to their "proper roles" because that is what patriarchal society expects of them.I can't tell what you are saying form this. Your statements don't convey what you are agreeing with or disagreeing with and so I'm not sure where you are refuting or accepting. However, let's just by pass the whole enchilada and look at it differently. whenever you and I get to the point that we understand the doctrine of the priesthood and whenever we get to the point that we have a correct and proper understanding of male and female roles, Whenever we get to the point that we understand how worlds are created and sustained, whenever we get the correct understanding of how the priesthood is organized, we will note that we have more awareness of how all these things function simply by the microcosm of learning it is to the pattern of family and administration of the church. There is an eternal pattern that is throughout all of creation, from the atomic level to the creations of galaxies, that is replicated according to the the patterns found in the priesthood and the family. I think you are struggling to not see the scriptural allusions to such, but if you will accept it you will begin to see things much differently.
thesometimesaint Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Samlam: "There is an eternal pattern that is throughout all of creation, from the atomic level to the creations of galaxies, that is replicated according to the the patterns found in the priesthood and the family".Not too many of us would be happy if we and our galaxy came in and out of existence like atoms do.
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Samlam:"There is an eternal pattern that is throughout all of creation, from the atomic level to the creations of galaxies, that is replicated according to the the patterns found in the priesthood and the family".Not too many of us would be happy if we and our galaxy came in and out of existence like atoms do.Gosh I bet you were a lot of fun in poetry class. 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) dup Edited July 17, 2012 by thesometimesaint
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 There is an eternal pattern that is throughout all of creation, from the atomic level to the creations of galaxies, that is replicated according to the the patterns found in the priesthood and the family. I think you are struggling to not see the scriptural allusions to such, but if you will accept it you will begin to see things much differently.And of course you are right about this. The reason this pattern exists is because our Human God has defined it as such, and we as human gods in embryo have assisted in its organization. It exists as much as taxonomy and the order of the stars exist, because we create that order in matter once unorganized.And the evening and morning we call the "first day".
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Well, they could use a haircut, couldn't they? I get mine cut twice a year if it needs it or not.
thesometimesaint Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 mfbukowski:Gosh I bet you were a lot of fun in poetry class.Actually I believe there is an underlying poetry to the universe. But it has a musical background.I was big on iambic pentameter.
mfbukowski Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 mfbukowski:Actually I believe there is an underlying poetry to the universe. But it has a musical background.I was big on iambic pentameter. Hey- I saw that edit! You didn't fool me you sly devil!
thesometimesaint Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 That was my wife reminding me of the background music. I'm just not that smart to be sly let alone a devil.
Recommended Posts