To show the difference, we only need to look at the word god; it is not a scientific word. The word god does not exist in the scientific dictionary and cannot exist in that dictionary. The basics of science are not the same as the basics of religions. As a result religion can capture science (but to do so it must sometimes adjust itself to fully capture the scientific outcomes); science cannot capture religion (for religion is a non-scientific perspective).
Religion and science are inherently different in their basics. The conflict occurs mainly because they both want to say something about what appears to be the same subject matter: the whole.
So where is the Conflict?? If we are all saying the same thing.
It's all the play of the ONE expressing as the many, No problem.
Relatively speaking yes religion and science are different in their basics.
Somebody is a Christian, somebody is a Hindu, somebody is a Mohammedan, somebody is a Buddhist, but all these are just superficial things, accidents of birth.
You are not a Christian, because Christ has not touched your heart yet. You are a Christian because you were born in a Christian home.
You are a Buddhist because it was just an accident of birth, co-incidence.
It happened that your father and mother were Buddhist, hence you are a Buddhist.
But Buddha has not yet happened to you yet.
Remember, this is very cheap. Drop Christianity, drop Islam, drop Buddhism,
drop that which has been given to you by the society, by birth, by association, by culture, by country.
All the misery self, the cause of all our suffering and hurting,
no need for all this, drop this non-sense.
Drop all that so that you can and find out who you really are.
These things will be taken away by death, death will burn your Persona. And then you will come face to face with your Being,
and you will not even be able to recognise it, because you never knew that this was your face.
We live very superficial lives.
__________________ “ Build a relationship with yourself now so that you will always be accompanied by your best friend.”
No, thank you, Drifter, for getting back to these points. I feel appreciated by you communicating about the arguments I delivered.
Indeed, an interesting aspect of science is that it cannot take itself out of the larger overall picture. Scientists investigating a field often become part of that field; tests in laboratories do not necessarily explain what will happen under real conditions.
Yet scientists know that science is limited, partly due to the availability of instruments, partly due to the limitations of the observer and/or the instruments, partly due to the very nature of science itself. In science, conclusions are based on repeatable actions, and humans can repeat lying on the couch watching TV quite well, even in a laboratory.
To show the difference, we only need to look at the word god; it is not a scientific word. The word god does not exist in the scientific dictionary and cannot exist in that dictionary. The basics of science are not the same as the basics of religions. As a result religion can capture science (but to do so it must sometimes adjust itself to fully capture the scientific outcomes); science cannot capture religion (for religion is a non-scientific perspective).
Religion and science are inherently different in their basics. The conflict occurs mainly because they both want to say something about what appears to be the same subject matter: the whole.
If I compare religion with bicycle parts, I'd have to conclude that the tires are often pumped up with too much air, and the bicycle bell is ordinarily set to such a volume it can scare away an elephant. But, really, Drifter, a bicycle is truly easy to stop. You cannot be seriously considering religions do the same? The microcosm functions differently from the macrocosm, for options are available at the microcosm that are not available at the macrocosm.
The Doh-nut, Melanie, is an excellent example of how funny it all is. Without the hole, the donut wouldn't be whole. In my first chapter I use the words god, whole, hole, and holy to come to an insight (which is up to the reader to consider true or not true) about the first speakers of the word god. Please, find it under the subhead near the end of the chapter: theory and belief. http://www.pentapublishing.com/FreeChapter.html
I guarantee you fredrick when you come to terms with that truth, you will be on the threshold of finding the answers to those three questions: Who am I? What is my purpose? What is my destiny? "You will know the truth, not ignore it." As an intelligent faith.
We've been given minds enabled by the Holy Spirit to know God, as well as hearts to love him and wills to choose him, I don't know about you but my heart can't rejoice in what my mind has rejected. My heart and mind were created to work in harmony together. Never has there been anyone called upon to commit intellectual suicide by trusting Christ as Savior and Lord.
One need not necessarily say yes emphatically, simply stop saying No!
Pehaps a miracle will come into your life even with such a seemingly slight window of possibility open, for it to do so.
Drift, I'm not standing in for Fredrick even if he's busy on vacation in the Amazon doing TOE research, for he will say what he will when he gets back.
A position of "We've been given minds enabled by the Holy Spirit to know God, as well as hearts to love him and wills to choose him…" is just the kind of arbitrary position that I think Fredrick is referring to.
Same with Mel's "It's all the play of the ONE expressing as the many…"
I believe Fredrick wishes some dialog on the philosophy of positioning.
I can talk about love to you, you can listen to me, you can even agree with me, but your agreement is not the point.
I may be logical and clever enough to persuade you to agree with me but that will not give you any taste of love.
To know love, you will have to fall in love.
To know love, you will have to travel the path of love.
To know love, you will have to take the dangerous journey.
Philosophy of positioning......What is that? What is a Theory of Everything?? And more to the point do we need one? and if so why? how will it serve us?
does it signify authority? and just who's authority will it be.
There's no teacher than can teach us anything new, he can just help us to remember the things we already knew.
Truth has nothing to do with authority, truth has nothing to do with tradition, truth has nothing to do with the past, truth is a radical, personal realization.
You have to come to it. Knowledge is certain, the search for personal Knowing is very, very hazardous. Nobody can guarantee it.
Danger will be there, sacrifice will be there, you will be moving every day into the unknown, into the uncharted, and there will be no map to follow, no guide to follow.
Yes, there are millions of dangers and you can go astray and you can get lost, but that is the only way one grows.
Insecurity is the only way to grow, to face danger is the only way to grow, to accept the challenge of the unknown is the only way to grow.
Truth is not cheap, Belief is very cheap. Truth is very costly, you will have to pay with your life.
Truth requires total sacrifice, nothing less will do.
If you are Believing scriptures, tradition of others, it is irrelevant if they are wrong or right, that is not the point.
They may be right, they may be wrong, but that is not the point to be considered at all.
Through them growth is not possible. Those who have written them were grown-up people, mature.
They have asserted something that they have known, but for them that was KNOWING, for you it will be Knowledge.
Belief is communal, knowledge is also communal.
Knowing is personal, Trust is personal.
You have to relate to God or to truth directly, immediately.
You have to come to truth.
And it is going to be arduous because each step will require tremendous changes in you.
You cannot go to truth as you are, you will have to drop many things and the first thing, is to drop borrowed Knowledge.
So the Original Sin is to become Knowledgeable,
We have completely lost the space, the inner purity, the inner Innocence that comes when one throws, renounces, one's Knowledge. Renounce your Knowledge.
Be like a little child.
The child has not yet eaten the Fobidden Fruit of Knowledge and this child is such that he is not going to eat the Fruit of Knowledge.
He is going to insist on remaining pure of Knowledge, he is not going to pollute his being, contaminate his being.
Something from the Beyond, something of the Divine has entered into the world of time.
Once you drop Knowledge you attain to clarity. Look at small children, let that be your ideal and become a child again.
Only children have eyes to see. Our eyes are too full of ideas. And Jesus says, Uless You become as these Little Children, You will not enter into My Kingdom of My God.
We go on collecting Knowledge, opinions, but deep down we remain the same, nothing changes.
We just go on painting our personality on the surface.
Everything that we go on doing on the surface will be just like changing a name. Inside you will remain the same.
Your Persona can never become more than skin deep, your Knowledge, your identity in the world is nothing but a Persona, a dressing.
Go deep, go beyond your Knowledge, go beyond your name and your form, go beyond that identity that the society has given to you.
Look into your original face, the face that you had before you were born. Now you have a false face, it has been given to you by the society, it is just a formality.
And if you think it is yours, you are in a very bad shape.
Look beyond the invisible.
__________________ “ Build a relationship with yourself now so that you will always be accompanied by your best friend.”
Drift, I'm not standing in for Fredrick even if he's busy on vacation in the Amazon doing TOE research, for he will say what he will when he gets back.
A position of "We've been given minds enabled by the Holy Spirit to know God, as well as hearts to love him and wills to choose him…" is just the kind of arbitrary position that I think Fredrick is referring to.
Same with Mel's "It's all the play of the ONE expressing as the many…"
I believe Fredrick wishes some dialog on the philosophy of positioning.
Caution: - digging for the truth may be hazardous to your anthropocentric vision!!
I believe that has been established.
Can you arbitrate apples and oranges?
Black and White?
Remember Fredrick's chairs? These are the positions taken, the truths of yours explained in your posts.
I have some trouble following your truths since they range from the not biblical Jesus/God back to it, with much else in between, from there being atoms to atoms being illusions.
Drift, I'm not standing in for Fredrick even if he's busy on vacation in the Amazon doing TOE research, for he will say what he will when he gets back.
A position of "We've been given minds enabled by the Holy Spirit to know God, as well as hearts to love him and wills to choose him…" is just the kind of arbitrary position that I think Fredrick is referring to.
Same with Mel's "It's all the play of the ONE expressing as the many…"
I believe Fredrick wishes some dialog on the philosophy of positioning.
Those words speak for themselves, I'm just the messenger delivering the mail.
If they get into your head or your heart, maybe your not who you think you are after all? only you can decide what is right or what is wrong for 'you'.
Let 'your' Conscience be your guide, you may have to listen nore attentively, So Be It.
pay attention to IT maybe that will help.
i define the
Soul as the ordinary functional senses ..eyes that see, ears that hear etc
THIS is all there IS ... Heaven-God ... the Surround.
i call THAT SEEing
The body-brain has extraordinary intelligence.
without the movement of thought( misery-self ) blocking the View.
Morph along with 'it' ....embrace the creation... thats what a mystic would do ....ride the waves.
Energy is found (t)here ....in that .... not in resistance.
Remember we live in a conceptual universe, so our words are limited, and useless,
all ''things'' in our lives we define are merely metaphors, labels, allegories pointing to heaven on earth for those that SEE it and WANT it.
we are what we have been waiting for.....this is our heaven, what are we doing with it????
that is what we should be addressing.
Simple.
__________________ “ Build a relationship with yourself now so that you will always be accompanied by your best friend.”
Drift, I'm not standing in for Fredrick even if he's busy on vacation in the Amazon doing TOE research, for he will say what he will when he gets back.
A position of "We've been given minds enabled by the Holy Spirit to know God, as well as hearts to love him and wills to choose him…" is just the kind of arbitrary position that I think Fredrick is referring to.
Same with Mel's "It's all the play of the ONE expressing as the many…"
I believe Fredrick wishes some dialog on the philosophy of positioning.
Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle: stopped at the first motel we passed, an arbitrary choice.
Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference: The diet imposes overall calorie limits, but daily menus are arbitrary.
Established by a court or judge rather than by a specific law or statute: an arbitrary penalty.
Not limited by law; despotic: the arbitrary rule of a dictator.
Which of these 'arbitrary' interpretations, are you implying, so I might apply it, to better understand 'you'?
I believe I have stated my 'position' quite succinctly, have I not?
Yet 'you' fail to grasp it.
Look within, there you will find the answers to all your questions, start with, "Who is it that wants to know!" Is that who you are? A Doubting Thomas?
“ Build a relationship with yourself now so that you will always be accompanied by your best friend.” 
Linear Mode
