God in our Image?

[Dario_M]

48 minutes ago, manol said:

In the beginning I had too much "interference".  I was thinking about the result of the previous trial, and had not learned how to get my mind really quiet so I could just wait for the answer (whether the number was "greater than" or "less than") to present itself.  The answer came as a feeling, not as a word. 

 

Must have been a really strong feeling then. Otherwise you wouldn't had so manny right answers. 👌

[manol]

44 minutes ago, Dario_M said:

Must have been a really strong feeling then. Otherwise you wouldn't had so manny right answers. 👌

Actually, no!  The feeling was very soft and subtle!   I had to get my own mind very quiet and my own feelings very quiet in order to feel it. 

And this is going to sound really weird, but when the answer came, it felt like love.

Edited January 12, 2023 by manol

[Dario_M]

1 hour ago, manol said:

Actually, no!  The feeling was very soft and subtle!   I had to get my own mind very quiet and my own feelings very quiet in order to feel it. 

And this is going to sound really weird, but when the answer came, it felt like love.

Maybe somebody had told you the answers. Somebody you couldn't see but whas there with you. 💗 Maybe it whas god. Or the holy ghost? ✝️  Or another type of spirit. 

Edited January 12, 2023 by Dario_M

[Dario_M]

Life is such i mysterie i realise. I wish i knew it all. 

[manol]

2 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Maybe somebody had told you the answers. Somebody you couldn't see but whas there with you. 💗 Maybe it whas god. Or the holy ghost? ✝️  Or another type of spirit. 

I don't know.   My paradigm at the time was more or less based on Rupert Sheldrake's ideas about fields.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOWTGX931Og&t=292s  (The most relevant section goes from where it's cued up to about 8:45.)

It is of course quite possible (or likely) that my paradigm at the time was incorrect, and I'm sure that at best it was incomplete.  But apparently it was not sufficiently incorrect for my experiment to be a failure.   So I do not think we need have a correct and complete paradigm at this stage of our development, but I DO think it helps to have a paradigm which embraces POSSIBILITIES.  In this sort of area, that which we are unwilling to believe is even possible is unlikely to happen.

2 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Life is such i mysterie i realise. I wish i knew it all. 

Life is like an Easter-egg hunt!

In a way maybe we are all like the blind men describing the elephant.  I think that when we die, we will no longer be blind and will see the entire elephant, so to speak.  And at that point I do not think it will matter which one of us came the closest with our incomplete description of the elephant. 

That being said, I DO think that how we treat our fellow blind men DOES matter. 

Edited January 12, 2023 by manol

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Life is such i mysterie i realise. I wish i knew it all. 

Might get boring if you did.   But I know the feeling. It was intense in my teens and 20s, but has faded as I get older. Maybe because I have less energy or maybe because I have more patience.

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, manol said:

In a way maybe we are all like the blind men describing the elephant.  I think that when we die, we will no longer be blind and will see the entire elephant, so to speak.  And at that point I do not think it will matter which one of us came the closest with our incomplete description of the elephant. 

I think you are right; This is still a correspondence theory presuming there IS a single way to see the causes of perception, but I don't think it will be that way

There will be no vision without eyes or sounds without air, we will SEE the air; the way we "see" every"thing" has it's own perspective requiring 3 dimensions- a pyramid is a triangle from the "side", and a "square" from above.

I think it will be like waves of energy, all dimensions at once?

It's all gonna be different, that much I can tell you!

[Dario_M]

11 hours ago, manol said:

I don't know.   My paradigm at the time was more or less based on Rupert Sheldrake's ideas about fields.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOWTGX931Og&t=292s  (The most relevant section goes from where it's cued up to about 8:45.)

It is of course quite possible (or likely) that my paradigm at the time was incorrect, and I'm sure that at best it was incomplete.  But apparently it was not sufficiently incorrect for my experiment to be a failure.   So I do not think we need have a correct and complete paradigm at this stage of our development, but I DO think it helps to have a paradigm which embraces POSSIBILITIES.  In this sort of area, that which we are unwilling to believe is even possible is unlikely to happen.

Life is like an Easter-egg hunt!

In a way maybe we are all like the blind men describing the elephant.  I think that when we die, we will no longer be blind and will see the entire elephant, so to speak.  And at that point I do not think it will matter which one of us came the closest with our incomplete description of the elephant. 

That being said, I DO think that how we treat our fellow blind men DOES matter. 

Yes it sure does matter. But i find that we are not good at it. If i look how people treat me aften outside. I find that we fail with that one. Even in the church (i see it a lot more less in the church though) but even in the church i sometimes see it. Or experience it. In the church, where people should suposse to know how to treat each other. 

[Dario_M]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

Might get boring if you did.   But I know the feeling. It was intense in my teens and 20s, but has faded as I get older. Maybe because I have less energy or maybe because I have more patience.

How interesting. 🧐With me it is the opposite. I whas a lot more bored when i whas a teenager. But now i am getting older i am more sensitive for these kind of things. I am 30 now. 

Edited January 13, 2023 by Dario_M

[mfbukowski]

Found a great academic article on this

It's all Augustine's fault this got messed up

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740

"Extract

It has been recognized by at least some scholars that many early Christians, and not only the simpliciores, believed God to be corporeal (materially embodied) or anthropomorphic (humanlike in form), as some biblical narratives portray him. Likewise certain trajectories of Christian mysticism, under the influence of Jewish kabod speculation, maintained that the pinnacle of mystic ascent was the contemplation of the body of God. Among theologians there was also a stoicizing school, prominently represented in Tertullian, who held that God was corpus, even if not anthropomorphic. All of this stands in stark contrast with that Christian theology which developed, primarily under the influence of Platonism, a nonanthropomorphic and incorporeal conception of God that has come to dominate all subsequent theology and philosophy. It is difficult for moderns to transcend these subsequent norms and recognize among early Christians some quite different theological conceptions, or to do so without dismissing them as crude and primitive notions and, hence, as isolated aberrations."

Edited January 14, 2023 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

Error 

Edited January 16, 2023 by mfbukowski