GENIUS FORUMS

Sounds like you should give up this attachment to scripture, grow out of it in fact. "Two errors: 1. Take everything literally. 2. Take everything spiritually." Pascal. What am I taking literally that should not be taken literally? I’m pretty sure I can map I-III pretty well to a lot of t...

It would be interesting to see why you are so certain that the translated Jesus did not speak like the translated version of Eckhart. Ok: But we shall speak better, taking poverty in a higher sense: a poor man is one who wants nothing, knows nothing and has nothing. The Lord’s Prayer would seem to ...

I think another inspiration for this definition of personality comes from subconscious (and now conscious) contemplation of Francis Schaeffer's discussion of a personal beginning of the universe in He is There and He is not Silent.

Matthew 10:16 has a clearer more direct meaning for me, which has little to do with any notions of childhood. Being sent "forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves" speaks more to the individual will, a reminder to remain concious of th...

The idea of personality also disappears. Do pronouns mean anything after one’s idea of will disappears? I cannot claim that my wisdom matches exactly that of anyone. I don't believe anyone can. All I can do is recognize, within myself, those moments of "aha", of a union of 'like minds' th...

Your condition of predictability vs. unpredictability seems insufficient on the face of it as being the sole criterion of which behavior indicates an underlying personality and which doesn't. You say you are not comfortable that humans must be the deciders of what has personality and what doesn't, ...

You can make it as hard as you like. A rational step would be to go back to Bible Camp, sort out the differences, get the story straight, then come at us with a sense of unity. It's too complicated watching you at each others throats. Too much fuss. What's needed is a project manager. Statements li...

The one where the religious types collectively trash the heathens then when that job is done, they turn on each other and fight about their differing concepts of scripture. Do you really think this pattern is unique, and that the words {religious, heathens, scripture} cannot be replaced by others, ...

Dennis Mahar wrote:The answer to that is : Religion.

How widely are you applying the term, “Religion”? For example, some would call many forms of atheism, “Religion”; do you?

No, I've never examined him or his works. When you said “totally free of all of one's false parental and societal conditioning”, that made me immediately think of Descarte’s epistemology , which is based in terms of doubt (that is, levels of doubt). I would highly suggest you read what I linked, or...

The keenly sensitive and awakened soul who has fully removed his rose-colored glasses finds to his horror, and of course acceptance - if he can stomach the scene, that everywhere on earth, just beneath all the false smiles, mutual exploitation, and fine-sounding words, people are essentially cold, ...

Harris' criticism was of those who make those interpretations and who come to certain conclusions, not of scripture itself. My point still stands: Harris does not well-understand what he is critiquing. If he did, his critique could have been at least ten times as poignant. Unfortunately, the “New A...

It sounds like an admirable oath, and I hope you are sticking with it not only in refraining from mistreating others in the way you were mistreated, but in any way. Ahhh, but I cannot know every single action that could be considered “mistreating”. That requires A) proper teaching, and B) a tight f...

Yes, creating a body of radically transformed men and women who will bring the Light of love, truth, and understanding into our dark and decaying world. This is a very high-level description. I could fill “Light of love”, “truth”, and “understanding” with my own definitions, but I don’t know if the...

I'm sorry Dennis Mahar, but your preconception of me seems too incorrect and intractable; I don't see any value in our continuing this conversation. My conditioning to expect reasoned, supported debate appears to be incompatible with how you think, or at least how you converse.

So far it appears safe to assume you do not see the truth in the statement “It is most reasonable to place the highest value on reason.” Your idea of truth seems wrapped up exclusively in the language of reason. I pray that you never experience emotions so power as to dash this idea in a damaging w...

You show no consistency in your understanding of the definition of "reason." You seem to assume that reason in itself can somehow contain some sort of aspect of it's opposite, a sort of false reasoning. Please demonstrate this inconsistency. It may be helpful to use formal argumentation. ...

something Sam Harris wrote: "Forty-four percent of the American population is convinced that Jesus will return to judge the living and the dead sometime in the next fifty years. According to the most common interpretation of biblical prophecy, Jesus will return only after things have gone horr...

@cousinbasil and Luke, both of you failed to understand the point I am making, because you are stuck with your own ideas on the issue. If I can perfectly represent your idea, whose idea is it? Perhaps you could be more accurate and say that I have not demonstrated the ability to properly manipulate...

you can't, there's nobody here. Are you aware of how some of your statements are incomprehensible? The fact that you don’t even bother to properly capitalize makes me think you just don’t care a whole lot. If you’re going to pull a Gnostic card and say that if I cannot understand what you are sayin...

If "winning" is positively correlated with gaining wisdom then yes sir, I want to win!

Yet you just can't see it. You've forgotten it's there. Instead of quoting only one thing and writing your own soliloquy, would you please quote several things I've said and explain how they all contribute to a justification for what you have said? You have a categorization scheme in your head whic...

The original post in this thread is about Eckhart's doctrine of poverty of spirit , wherein a man is stripped even of his idea of will, whether it be of his own, or of God's: There is a world of difference between having one’s own idea of “will” change , and having anything that could be called one...

Bob Michael wrote:And if the grand nuclear conflagration doesn't come in my time I shall still continue on with my part in the Master Plan.

Have you articulated, elsewhere, on what your part is?

A system has personality if it has infinite unique variables associated with it. Perfect knowledge of such an entity is impossible through induction. Emotions (and perception in general?) arise from interference patterns between expected systems and actual systems. Is that the gist of it? I think y...