that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
Imagine in the future being next to an android or a sophisticated hologram. You would hope that you have the skill to distinguish human from mechanical. Many people (let's hope so) would be able to know the difference. It's the same when one is sowing with a view to the spirit. We know.
What the feck?
Do you vote, NDrew?
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
SBC: Religion/spirituality does not, but is based on feelings.
SAB: This is very incorrect SBC. Religion and spirituality are based upon human experience.
Okay, religion/spirituality are based on experience,... as in perception and memories of perception, both of which are subject to feeble psyches, biases, fallacious thinking, etc... I rank that alongside feelings. Not that I'm poo-pooing feelings, mind you, but I think it's important to distinguish that science relies on a more consistent standard of judgment to understand the universe.
All systems of religion and spirituality, that stuck in culture, are based off of revelation, not feelings.
And how does one distinguish real revelation from a mental episode? What method is used?
We are talking about the 5 senses here which are fundemental to the scientific method.
Observation is important to scientific method. But without the REST of the scientific method, all you have are untestable, unverifiable, immeasurable anecdotes, none of which qualify as science.
Tell me, Sab, which of your five senses have never been deceived? Mine trick me all the time.
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
For the most part secularists use their tools in an attempt to disprove spirituality for a variety of personal reasons.
What I see, when boiled down, is that most secularists I know are interested in TRUTH as much as any religionist. In fact, many scientists are worried that misinformation is being passed on as TRUTH. So they are attempting to keep religionists from asserting AS TRUTH that which cannot be proven using a consistent standard of judgment.
If the unexplained is somehow "explained" 300 different ways, based on different cultures, anecdotes, upbringings, customs, etc.... is it really explained? Have your way with spirituality - that's fine. But you can't all be right and none of you are offering a method that is consistent and unbiased like the scientific method so, until then, everything else is "feelings."
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
Hey, Sab, all's well. Hope life's treating you right.
Scientific method adheres to a specific standard for understanding the universe and unlocking its secrets. Religion/spirituality does not, but is based on feelings. That's fine. There are existing realm(s)/event horizons which lie outside the grasp of the current tools/methods of science. There's so much we don't know and can't know right now. And I'm good with that.
But those who turn their noses up at science as 'foolishness of the world', such as NDrew and the WTBTS have done...
Ndrew: The "world" that Jesus warned us to be no part of is what determins what "factual" is. You know by now that I don't care what the world determines.
...if being consistent in that judgment, should refuse to use a modern Bible or any information/tools produced with the assistance of science that supports Bible accounts, translation, etc. Some folks climb the boughs of science to 'determine what is factual' corroborate or learn things about the Bible, but then shout down science as foolishness.
In discrediting science, we should ensure that no methods of science were intertwined in the production of any Bible we use. Of course, without corroboration, why would anyone take the Bible over Aesop's fables as more or less factual? Or the the Quran?
So get busy, Nance. Might as well trash that Bible you're reading and go out looking for original manuscripts. Just be sure not to use the scientific method in your search for those manuscripts, because that's how the "world determines" "what factual is" and you don't care about that.
"If you want to build a pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." - Sagan
1. if you say that reducing harm is a valid standard because that is what people want, then how are you not committing the logical fallacy of begging the question by saying that what people want, is what makes something morally right?.
2. if you say that reducing harm is a valid standard of morality because that is what people want, then how are you not promoting an arbitrary standard since it is based on peoples subjective feelings and desires which change?
3. if reducing overall harm is the standard of morality, then should a nation that is being attacked by another nation not practice self-defense, since by defending itself it may very well increase overall harm to both nations?.
The pillars of morals - empathy and reciprocity - as displayed by Perry's first cousins:
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
The "world" that Jesus warned us to be no part of is what determins what "factual" is. You know by now that I don't care what the world determines.
NDrew, in order to corroborate ANYTHING in the Bible, you first have to rely on the expertise of secularly educated minds... the archaeologists, anthropologists, linguists, astronomers, historians, and other scholars. That is the "WORLD" of which you speak.
Without them, there would be no reliable basis from which to derive knowledge of scripture, Jesus, etc. None whatsoever. Forget about even the parts of the Bible that ARE historically accurate. Those accounts would be no more verifiable than stories of Atlantis.
So when you turn around and reject science - the method used to unlock secrets of the past - as you have in the above quote, you are sawing off the very branch upon which you sit, clutching your cherished beliefs.
Go ahead, though... saw away like the WTBTS.
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
Is it not obvious yet that getting knocked out is the least of my concerns?
Yup, "getting knocked out" is way down there near "being factual."
So obviously the scripture has deeper meaning than what is written.
Obviously. Evidently. Apparently.
sooo i was a ministerial servant (omg a ministerial servant on this site!?
you apostate!!!
) yea yea i just wanted to see what other people think and whatever, coz i had a few questions myself, (butttt its not like i was about to start throwing them with rocks and stuff, they arent that bad).
When I stepped down in 2005, I was pissed because they didn't make it known I'd stepped down of my own volition. They announced, "[SweetBabyCheezits] is no longer a Minsterial Servant." So, of course, that left the audience to interpret it however they wished.
This reminded me of the fact that the announcement is exactly the same whether you are DF'd or you DA yourself. Damn irritating. To me, it's just another way for them to obscure the facts to avoid blemishes.
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
Ndrew: A person does not need faith to do decent research.
That's the second-freshest idea I've heard today. Here's the first:
that is what i heard last night at my yoga class.
she said for something to be fixed first it must become known what needs fixing.
it is true for the physical, but also for the spiritual i believe.
Yes, but according to my understanding "uncertain reality" has become certain by means of the written word about the Christ.
Yes, but according to my understanding, your take on reality is f'ed up. And my uncertainty isn't yours to tamper with, Ndrew. You can't declare my uncertainty as 'having become certain.' You just dabble in your magic, and I'll dabble in my science - how about that?
It is certain that people will beat "themselves in lamentation".NWT Is that something you want to be proud of?
It is certain that NDrew will be dogmatic about things "without knowing what the hell she's talking about." (-SBC) Is that something you want to be proud of?
"wail" I beat my breast or head in lamentation, lament, mourn, sometimes
Color me completely unsurprised. But carry on.
BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him;
and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen.
Behold, perhaps He needs a woman so He doesn't have to come with the clouds. And every mind that "saw Him" and put faith in him will eventually go the way of the worshipers of Zeus. And even the tribes of the earth will go "yeah, that's such bullshit." So it is to be. Ramen.
