Thanks for your input, which I welcome. I mentioned that some persons remain faithful to their belief, and grow stronger in their faith, so I appreciate your perspective. And yet, some persons who were deeply involved in practising their faith, who must have been very strong in the belief as children, and who even preached to others as ministers and missionaries, have moved away from those beliefs and openly declare themselves as atheists.
Some of them are: (1) Dan Barker (2) Jerry DeWitt (3) Teresa MacBain (4) Anthony Pinn (5) Andrew Johnson
Hi Johnny I recall the experience you mentioned, and which certainly can be said to have a spiritual perspective to it. I suggested a somewhat scientific perspective on it involving neurochemical activity and waves or vibrations transmission and reception. I do not view the two perspectives as being mutually exclusive of each other. The experience impacted on your consciousness in a unique way, exclusive to you alone, affecting your feelings and thoughts at a deeper level. It is unlikely that your attempt at a verbal description of the incident would permeate the consciousness of others at the deeper level that you experienced so it is no wonder that they simply view it as a story.
Yes, we are expected to develop our thinking as we grow older and become more open-minded. This may have an affect on how we viewed things in childhood.
Hi Glatlol When did you realise that it was all made up? Was it when you were still a young child? Or was it later when you had grown up? If you did not realise it as a young child, but only after you had grown up, what was responsible for the change in your view?
Hi Ummka If, as you say, children perceive supreme(I assume this refers to God), the question I am asking is why do some of them become atheists, agnostics, etc., later, as they grow up?
Hi nicefeet I agree we should have an open mind on these things. But if the young lady had a "health" problem as you suggested, when she saw Joe slam his books on the empty seat, couldn't she, at least, inform him then that she preferred to stand (even if she did not want to state a reason)? She must have realized that he reacted that way because he felt hurt. As I said, Joe was always well-groomed and impeccably dressed. He was a very well-cultured and approachable person.
Hi Bogart That's a nice way to look at it. I hope others can do the same. Probably, some psychic person can tell you about those "dead people" that you see.
With regards to their religion, some very dogmatic christians state openly:
"God said it. The Bible records it. I believe it. And That's it."
I have often wondered why many persons join a church, especially the evangelical type, attend for a few months and then cease their attendance. Statistics show that there is a general decline in Christian church attendance.
This blog seeks to explore a possible reason for this trend.
We are in a continuous state of becoming with our environment.
I am becoming that tree just as that tree is becoming me. It took in the carbon dioxide that I exhaled which became part of it, and through photosynthesis, converted it to oxygen, which I inhaled, becoming part of me. I am the tree and the tree is me.
I am becoming that insect, that bird, that animal and other persons. I breathe in the air they gave up. Air that was part of them is now part of me, just as the air that I exhaled is now part of them.
Earth is becoming me and I am becoming the earth. It becomes me through the food I eat which comes from the earth, directly or indirectly; I become the earth through matter that leaves my body, waste or otherwise, which returns to the earth to become the earth.
hi leahkathrine I agree with you that there should be a balance in the types of blogs posted. Just for your information, I responded to your request re my blog, "Direct Realization". Please view it. I hope it is helpful to you. Have a nice day!
Thank you for viewing my blog. I will try to elaborate on a portion of it for you. The latter part of the second paragraph states: "Words are like a map and experience is the territory. A map can only give knowledge about the territory; it can never give knowledge of the territory, which can only be obtained through direct experience."
From the information you posted in your profile, I see that you enjoy long walks and hiking. I assume this involves "Nature" areas which includes trees, vegetation, natural scenery, layout of the land, streams, lakes, etc.. Suppose you wanted to visit a new "Nature" area and someone got a map of it, or drew one and gave it to you. Then, sometime later, you visited the area. You observed a lot of interesting details that were not shown on the map and actually experienced the sensations, feelings and emotions generated by Nature due to your presence in the place. Do you think you could have such an experience from viewing and studying the map only? This is what the term "about" versus the term "of" indicates.
The use of words is merely an attempt to point to experience (like the function of a map); it can never give that immediate direct knowledge or realization that comes from one's experience (like your actually visiting the territory yourself).
This is the gist of the blog, hence the name "Direct Realization". I hope you find this information helpful.
I wish to restate the following: Re case(2), the statement "now of the hour between 9.00 am and 10.00 am, is ambiguous since there are many "nows", in fact, an infinite number of "nows" in that period of time.
as:
Re case (2), the statement "now of the hour between 9.00 am and 10.00 am , is ambiguous since there are many "nows" or moments in that period. This is sufficient to make my point.
The extension should have been: , in fact, the number of "nows" would be inversely proportional to the size or duration of a "now" or moment. The number of "nows" would tend to infinity as the duration of a "now" tends to zero.
I stand by what I have written otherwise.
The main question is "What is the nature of time?"
There appears to be a lot of ambiguity on this issue and this seems to be colouring your position.
Redex, Relax! I did not think you were mocking. I was simply puzzled. I am quite aware of your light-hearted view of things at times, and of your sense of humour which is good. Have a wonderful day!
Thank you for taking the time to comment on my blog. I value your input greatly.
"eternity - time without an end" "now - at the present time" (Merriam Webster)
Based on the above definitions, eternity consists of time (endless time). now is a point in time (the present)
Time is normally viewed as a continuum.
In everyday language, "time" is taken to be either: (1) a specific point in this continuum, e.g, 9.00 am, or (2) a portion(period) of this continuum, e.g., there is 1 hour of time between 9.00 am and 10.00 am.
"now" refers to a specific point in the continuum, i.e., the present moment.
Re case (1), i.e., 9.00 am, "now" refers specifically to that particular moment and there is only one "now". Re case (2), the statement "now of the hour between 9.00 am and 10.00 am, is ambiguous since there are may "nows", in fact, an infinite number of "nows" in that period of time.
The statement "the now of eternity" is an example of case (2), making it ambiguous so I am not clear what it means.
The term "eternal now", as I have used it, is not concerned with any quantity of time. It simply refers to a specific moment. The focus is on the moment. It is related to a practice in meditation to focus the mind.
It is interesting that the Taoists used the term "eternal now" thousands of years ago in China. It seems that modern science is now beginning to realise its validity. See the following for one such report entitled " Time may not exist":
Hi Redex I am glad that you enjoyed the Haiku. I agree with the points you made although I do not understand how (4) came in. I asked the question based on the position of modern science on the nature of time:
Hi Jarred It is your right to focus on whoever and whatever you choose. Thanks for your comment. I wonder why you do not allow others to comment on some of your blogs but you are very active in commenting on the blogs of others. Have a great day!
online today!socrates44 Blog Comments (1,088)
Belief in God 2
123 butterfliesThank you for your explanation re "god" in your blog.
I am sorry for the loss you suffered.