God, truth, us and the rest.

[A4Ever]

Truth is an idea, an image. Pick up a handful of dirt. Analyse it. You'll never find truth.

Reality, by which I mean the world we can perceive, is made of 'realia': stuff. Not ideas, but matter. Matter mixed with time.

The result of this is that we can never know 'the truth'. We can only make abstractions and call the derived principals 'truth'. Science is good at this. "Apples fall down", as a statement, does not appear in reality. There are only individual apples. Falling down. Most of the time.

What this science has stumbled upon, is that everything is in essence energy. I don't mean New Age crap. I mean that all matter is in essence energy. Energy has always been. Although that is not entirely correct, cause before our universe, and probably a bunch of others, there was no time. The concept 'Before' was meaningless.

That energy formed our reality. Energy explores the possibilities. Probably by chance. I don't mean like an intelligent God. Big bang, evolution, man. Evolution.

In man, and probably in animal also, energy becomes self conscious. It can think about itself. It can know.

The error that is often made, is making a distinction between all sorts of things: pepper and salt, black and white, spirit and matter. Spirit and matter are the same thing. Just different form. There is no soul in us. We are soul. Just as much as we are body. It is the same thing.

Everything we know is composed of this energy. The energy is the source. Not like our throat is the source of words, but like the chair that is made of the three.

If something anywhere has value, it is this energy. Because there is nothing else. If the energy is valuable, everything we know is valuable. Like the chair from the three.

We are this energy, this God, in the same way as a chair is a three. The chair is made of the same stuff. It has the same qualities.

Jezus Christ was probably someone who transcended the notion that body and spirit are two different things. He saw that it is one and the same. He knew that this energy was his Father. He called it his Father.

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by A4Ever
Truth is an idea, an image. Pick up a handful of dirt. Analyse it. You'll never find truth.

Reality, by which I mean the world we can perceive, is made of 'realia': stuff. Not ideas, but matter. Matter mixed with time.

The result of this is that we can never know 'the truth'. We can only make abstractions and call the derived principals 'truth'. Science is good at this. "Apples fall down", as a statement, does not appear in reality. There are only individual apples. Falling down. Most of the time.

What this science has stumbled upon, is that everything is in essence energy. I don't mean New Age crap. I mean that all matter is in essence energy. Energy has always been. Although that is not entirely correct, cause before our universe, and probably a bunch of others, there was no time. The concept 'Before' was meaningless.

That energy formed our reality. Energy explores the possibilities. Probably by chance. I don't mean like an intelligent God. Big bang, evolution, man. Evolution.

In man, and probably in animal also, energy becomes self conscious. It can think about itself. It can know.

The error that is often made, is making a distinction between all sorts of things: pepper and salt, black and white, spirit and matter. Spirit and matter are the same thing. Just different form. There is no soul in us. We are soul. Just as much as we are body. It is the same thing.

Everything we know is composed of this energy. The energy is the source. Not like our throat is the source of words, but like the chair that is made of the three.

If something anywhere has value, it is this energy. Because there is nothing else. If the energy is valuable, everything we know is valuable. Like the chair from the three.

We are this energy, this God, in the same way as a chair is a three. The chair is made of the same stuff. It has the same qualities.

Jezus Christ was probably someone who transcended the notion that body and spirit are two different things. He saw that it is one and the same. He knew that this energy was his Father. He called it his Father.

M*W: Beautiful! Absolutely beautiful!

 

[Cris]

A4Ever,

Reality is that which is independent of subjective perception and truths are the facts that comprise reality. And it is premature to say that we can never know all of either.

Yet energy alone has no value unless it has substance to act upon. And if there was a point where time was absent then how could time have ever begun? So there can never have been a beginning since there would always be a need for something to cause a beginning, i.e. there must have always been a before.

In man, and probably in animal also, energy becomes self conscious. It can think about itself. It can know.

I suspect you mean consciousness and self-awareness, but these things have substance where energy is just a component.

There is no soul in us. We are soul. Just as much as we are body. It is the same thing.

Then we can eliminate the concept of the difference and simply realize we are.

And we ‘are’ because we are a mixture of energy and substance. Perhaps one day we might eliminate the substance but that does not seem very close yet.

 

[A4Ever]

M*W: Beautiful! Absolutely beautiful!

You think so? Thanks!

Reality is that which is independent of subjective perception and truths are the facts that comprise reality

When the Wiener Kreiss got together somewhere in the beginning of the twentieth century, they tried to find a rock solid base for science. They, the brilliant scientists they were, could not find one. I don't know if you are familiar with this. It was Carnap who wrote two books, twice failing his goal.

By your definition, reality does not exist, cause everything is subjective. Think about the value of the story told by a witness during crime investgiation. Think about altered states of consciousness. Think about ultra violet and infra red. The only thing we experience, is what our senses trick us into.

And it is premature to say that we can never know all of either.

Of course. I make no claims about the truth

I suspect you mean consciousness and self-awareness, but these things have substance where energy is just a component.

I don't understand this point. Energy and matter are interchangeable. I used to call matter slowed down energy, but that's not correct.

I understand it like this: energy-> electrons -> matter. Or the other way around.

Then we can eliminate the concept of the difference and simply realize we are.

Maybe it is good to keep the difference in mind, cause otherwise you might forget about the fact that matter and energy are sides of the same coin. The difference makes you remember that we are not one side of said coin.

Perhaps one day we might eliminate the substance but that does not seem very close yet.

Are you talking about a person consciously transcending the illusion of there only being meat?

 

[Cris]

A4Ever,

But you are seeing reality as something relative to your senses in which case of course you would see it as subjective. But reality is the state of being real. And something real will exist no matter how we choose to describe or perceive it. You are confusing human perceptions of reality with actual reality that perhaps we might have difficulty perceiving.

Science perceives what it can within the current boundaries of its perception. Until we know everything we can never be sure that what science has shown is reality, partial reality, or only illusion – perhaps we really exist within a huge computer matrix.

If matter is said to be present then clearly not everything is entirely energy, which your poetry states.

Are you talking about a person consciously transcending the illusion of there only being meat?

What illusion?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

Originally posted by Cris
A4Ever, But you are seeing reality as something relative to your senses in which case of course you would see it as subjective. But reality is the state of being real. And something real will exist no matter how we choose to describe or perceive it. You are confusing human perceptions of reality with actual reality that perhaps we might have difficulty perceiving.

Science perceives what it can within the current boundaries of its perception. Until we know everything we can never be sure that what science has shown is reality, partial reality, or only illusion – perhaps we really exist within a huge computer matrix.

If matter is said to be present then clearly not everything is entirely energy, which your poetry states.

What illusion?

What is reality if it is not an illusion? No one's senses are the same. Reality is an illusion. So xianity must be far removed from reality.

 

[Cris]

M*W,

What is reality if it is not an illusion?

The definition of reality is such that it is distinct from illusion. You like A4Ever seem to be confusing a perception of reality with reality itself.

No one's senses are the same.

How do you know? Have you ever experienced anyone else’s senses?

Reality is an illusion.

The definition says otherwise.

 

[A4Ever]

Cris,

I'll quote your answers to Medicine*Woman, cause they are shorter

The definition of reality is such that it is distinct from illusion. You like A4Ever seem to be confusing a perception of reality with reality itself.

I agree that what you say is the definition of reality. Of course it is. But my point is that this is the same thing as defining Santa Clause as a man living at the North Pole. Fortunately we have this definition. Now we know what to do with the thousands of copies that swarm us every year.

We can only see these copies. Yet we feel assured by the fact that we at least know that the real Santa is out there, being happy in the snow.

So: same thing with reality. We can define it, but we will not experience it in that way. Subjective perception (which is the only thing possible) keeps us from ever seeing the 'reality' (I doubt if it is even there, when I think about how I see Bell's experiments with electrons)

[Bell: let two separate devices, with enough space beween them, shoot out electrons. They should have random behaviour, but they haven't. There is a significant corelation with the electrons shot from the oter device. One possible explanation: distance is an illusion. That pretty much folds up time/matter as we perceive it]

The idea of reality is wrong. It is a workable concept. It is good to know that there is a pretty good chance an apple will fall down. We can fly now. There are helicopters. There's disease control. I love science.

But the claims they make at truth are wrong. They have no rock solid base of knowledge. Cause there isn't any. (repeat ad infinitum )

How do you know? Have you ever experienced anyone else’s senses?

If you start from "grass is green" and that is what everyone should call what they perceive when looking at healty grass, then you can never be sure about the basic facts. You just STATE them as being equal for everybody. This is what happens now.

If you start from: 'grass is green', but this could mean something completely different for you than it does for me, then you have something resembling a solid base of facts, but then there can never be intersubjective theories.

Wiener Kreiss could not get out of this one. Nobody can. Das ding an sich is not knowable for man. (And maybe it is not even there).

The definition says otherwise.

[about reality being an illusion]

Yes, the definition says otherwise. But again, a definition is just an idea. Ideas have no root in reality. They are constructs.

If matter is said to be present then clearly not everything is entirely energy, which your poetry states.

I'll take that 'poetry' as a compliment

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by A4Ever
Truth is an idea, an image.

Then show it to me, or tell me where i can find it.

Reality, by which I mean the world we can perceive, is made of 'realia': stuff. Not ideas, but matter. Matter mixed with time.

How did these things get started?

The result of this is that we can never know 'the truth'.

But you said truth is an idea or image.
Please make your mind up.

We can only make abstractions and call the derived principals 'truth'.

So there is no relation between our selves and the truth?

What this science has stumbled upon, is that everything is in essence energy.

Doesn't mean much on its own unless we know the source of said energy.

The concept 'Before' was meaningless.

When and how did 'meaning' start?

In man, and probably in animal also, energy becomes self conscious. It can think about itself. It can know.

So energy is conscious?
Then my car should be able to drive itself.

Spirit and matter are the same thing.

Please explain.

Jezus Christ was probably someone who transcended the notion that body and spirit are two different things. He saw that it is one and the same. He knew that this energy was his Father. He called it his Father.

Please read the teachings carefully and you will find that is not the case.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by Cris
If matter is said to be present then clearly not everything is entirely energy, which your poetry states.

Actually, in this A4Ever is close to being correct. What we commonly conceive of as 'matter' is an emergent property of the probabilities of interaction of energy and force. Quantum theory has revealed that there is no atomic substance that we might call matter. Indeed, it may be that time and space are likewise only emergent properties of this interaction. While it's often convenient to conceive of interactions in terms of material particles within time and space, under experimentation these conceptions break down at the quantum level.

Originally posted by Jan Ardena
Doesn't mean much on its own unless we know the source of said energy.

Energy is eternal as near as we can tell. It is neither created nor destroyed. It merely changes form.

So energy is conscious?
Then my car should be able to drive itself.

Straw man argument there. He didn't say that all patterns of energy are conscious only that certain ones are. Consciousness seems to be yet another emergent property of certain patterns of energy.

Originally posted by A4Ever
But the claims they make at truth are wrong. They have no rock solid base of knowledge.

This is only true in an absolute sense. We have greater and lesser conditions of truth and reality that are dependant upon the convergence of data.

If you start from "grass is green" and that is what everyone should call what they perceive when looking at healty grass, then you can never be sure about the basic facts. You just STATE them as being equal for everybody. This is what happens now.

The problem here is one of definition and over generalization. If we define green as electromagnetic radiation in the wavelength of 510 nm and refer to a specific object and specific conditions one can indeed demonstrate the truth of the observation. Repeated measurements are consistent.

~Raithere

 

[A4Ever]

Then show it to me, or tell me where i can find it.

Truth is an image, an idea, with no roots in reality. I can't show it to you. I can't show you the three legged bearded lady I'm thinking of righ now either. That's the point.

How did these things get started?

Energy transforming into matter. Maybe by random behaviour. Maybe because this energy wanted to. Don't ask me, I'm not a scientist

Although I do think that this universe is not unique, and that there are many, many others, which we can't even imagine and... oh well, wait for my novel

But you said truth is an idea or image. Please make your mind up.

Since it is only an idea, you can not grasp it, study it, sell it. It is an abstract concept, which has no roots in the realia. Apples have no reason to fall down all the time.

They do, of course. But that is because in small subsystems, patterns emerge

That make your mind up thing sounds bad in my ears: I don't have to make up my mind. I am allowed to entertain ideas. Since everything is ever changing, it is a valid option not to stiffen up by making up your mind about these matters.

So there is no relation between our selves and the truth?

The relation is that the concept of truth is made in our heads. Plus, what we call truth is often a pattern in a subsystem. Yes, apples fall down.

Doesn't mean much on its own unless we know the source of said energy.

I disagree. I flew from Europe to America once. It was magnificent. I didn't miss out on a thing by not asking questions about the source of all the used energy.

When and how did 'meaning' start?

The meaningfulness of the concept 'before' started when there was time.

Please read the teachings carefully and you will find that is not the case.

Is there a definitive Bible interpretation? Jezus was just a man. Then he made contact with the invisible. He transcended matter. That's what I read.

So energy is conscious?

Energy becomes conscious in man. Not in car. Maybe in yours, I don't know

Please explain.

Raithere explains it better in his post. Energy and matter are interchangeable.

Actually, in this A4Ever is close to being correct. What we commonly conceive of as 'matter' is an emergent property of the probabilities of interaction of energy and force. Quantum theory has revealed that there is no atomic substance that we might call matter. Indeed, it may be that time and space are likewise only emergent properties of this interaction. While it's often convenient to conceive of interactions in terms of material particles within time and space, under experimentation these conceptions break down at the quantum level.

In the future, I will call you up when I need things formulated. Thanks.

Energy is eternal as near as we can tell. It is neither created nor destroyed. It merely changes form.

Yes. So questions about before and after are meaningless in this context.

Consciousness seems to be yet another emergent property of certain patterns of energy.

Ah yes, so it seems

We have greater and lesser conditions of truth and reality that are dependant upon the convergence of data.

Exactly. Convergence of data is what happens. But that is far from 'the truth', as some would wish it to be. Of course apples will fall down. It's nice that they do. Gives a sense of security. Patterns emerge in the energy. Within the patterns, the rules of the game can be known. This is not the same thing as 'truth'!

If we define green as electromagnetic radiation in the wavelength of 510 nm and refer to a specific object and specific conditions one can indeed demonstrate the truth of the observation. Repeated measurements are consistent.

Yes, within the boundaries of a pattern of energy, a very local and limited patern.

And you do the same as I describe: you say: green has this wavelength. Everybody agrees. But we don't start from rock solid ground of knowledge here. We start from agreements. Let's call that green.

I know that science works. I love the advantages it brings. But peole forget that something's wrong in the big picture. Science does not make it all fit. It is a subsystem, a set of ideas.

 

[Cris]

A4Ever,

I'll take that 'poetry' as a compliment

Yes indeed. I found your text had a 'visionary' feel, as opposed to factual.

 

[Raithere]

Originally posted by A4Ever
Exactly. Convergence of data is what happens. But that is far from 'the truth', as some would wish it to be. Of course apples will fall down. It's nice that they do. Gives a sense of security. Patterns emerge in the energy. Within the patterns, the rules of the game can be known. This is not the same thing as 'truth'!

I suppose so, yes. The point for me is that the notions of certainty and absolute truths are forever just out of our grasp. Personally, I find this to be a rather comforting thought. Presumed absolutes tend to have rather hard edges that can be uncomfortable. Additionally, it reminds me to be open minded in regards to that which challenges what I think I know.

And you do the same as I describe: you say: green has this wavelength. Everybody agrees. But we don't start from rock solid ground of knowledge here. We start from agreements. Let's call that green.

Indeed, that is the nature of language. The question is which definition is more fundamental; the notion of the perception of 'green' or the measurement of a specific wavelength.

But peole forget that something's wrong in the big picture. Science does not make it all fit. It is a subsystem, a set of ideas.

It's getting there; if they can get string theory or another U.T. to work we may make it all fit. However, it still may not make sense from our perspective. But you hit upon what I find to be a crucial point; all explanations are merely models of 'reality' and are not 'reality' itself. Energy is merely a label and the laws of thermodynamics are mathematical and conceptual models of what happens. Happily, they are very exact models but they are models none-the-less.

~Raithere

 

[A4Ever]

The point for me is that the notions of certainty and absolute truths are forever just out of our grasp. Personally, I find this to be a rather comforting thought. Presumed absolutes tend to have rather hard edges that can be uncomfortable.

To me, it is comforting too.

Imagine that the universe has a fixed purpose *shiver*. It would make us all drones to achieve a goal.

The question is which definition is more fundamental; the notion of the perception of 'green' or the measurement of a specific wavelength.

The second is more fundamental of course. But the object of the Wiener Kreiss was to be able to start from what we perceive. That is impossible. So we start from agreements. The nature of language, indeed. With the first word spoken, we leave reality.

I don't criticize that. I just note it.

But you hit upon what I find to be a crucial point; all explanations are merely models of 'reality' and are not 'reality' itself. Energy is merely a label and the laws of thermodynamics are mathematical and conceptual models of what happens. Happily, they are very exact models but they are models none-the-less.

A-men.

 

[Mucker]

Imagine that the universe has a fixed purpose *shiver*. It would make us all drones to achieve a goal.

Imagine. Imagine. Imagine. We are capable of imagining anything, but that doesn't make it true.

 

[A4Ever]

We are capable of imagining anything, but that doesn't make it true.

I used 'imagine' in the sense of the result of the imagined hopefuly not being true.

So yes...yes indeed.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by A4Ever
Truth is an image, an idea, with no roots in reality.

What nonsense.

I can't show it to you. I can't show you the three legged bearded lady I'm thinking of righ now either. That's the point.

That is not a point, it is again, nonsense.

Energy transforming into matter. Maybe by random behaviour. Maybe because this energy wanted to. Don't ask me, I'm not a scientist.

Then why make such bold claims?

That make your mind up thing sounds bad in my ears: I don't have to make up my mind. I am allowed to entertain ideas. Since everything is ever changing, it is a valid option not to stiffen up by making up your mind about these matters.

You are in a religion forum, you have made claims like matter and spirit are the same, and truth does not really exist. At least offer some kind of explanation.

The relation is that the concept of truth is made in our heads. Plus, what we call truth is often a pattern in a subsystem. Yes, apples fall down.

Then maybe we've lost the plot and don't know what truth is anymore. The apple falling down is just and effect, the tree is just an effect, the sun, moon and rain is an effect, maybe the "truth" is the cause?

I disagree. I flew from Europe to America once. It was magnificent. I didn't miss out on a thing by not asking questions about the source of all the used energy.

Then what is the point of this thread?
Do you want us all to sit round a camp fire singing songs of togetherness with flowers in our hair?

Is there a definitive Bible interpretation?

"Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself" i think is pretty definitive. Don't you?

Jezus was just a man. Then he made contact with the invisible. He transcended matter. That's what I read.

How, in the book you read, did he transcend matter?

Energy becomes conscious in man. Not in car. Maybe in yours, I don't know

Energy becomes conscious in car, when man is at the control, just as energy becomes conscious in mans body when soul/consciousness is at the control. When the man leaves the car it has no use, when the soul leaves the body, guess what...... it has no use.

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[A4Ever]

What nonsense.

That is not a point, it is again, nonsense.

But you hit upon what I find to be a crucial point; all explanations are merely models of 'reality' and are not 'reality' itself.

(quote from Raithere, who we all know, is a smart man)

Then why make such bold claims?

I don't make bold claims. That's why this is in the religion forum. It's freestyle. But I'm not joking around or anything.

You are in a religion forum, you have made claims like matter and spirit are the same, and truth does not really exist. At least offer some kind of explanation

I, with the help of Raithere, have explained that matter is energy. Then we (or maybe I was back at my own there ) have explained that by definition we work in a system, an abstraction. This is necessary, cause there is no rock solid base to build knowledge upon. We improvise. We are brave humans.

The rest is speculation at best. Hence, post in the religion forum. My speculations are of course in line with my believes. Or what I would like to believe.

Then maybe we've lost the plot and don't know what truth is anymore. The apple falling down is just and effect, the tree is just an effect, the sun, moon and rain is an effect, maybe the "truth" is the cause?

Maybe, but the truth can not be known. Unless you make a leap of faith.

Then what is the point of this thread?

Explaining what's in my head. Hearing from others what has ground in science, what not. Looking to refine my ideas (like with the wavelength thing by Raithere). Having a good time. Not asking 'where is God?' for the fiftieth time on this forum...

Do you want us all to sit round a camp fire singing songs of togetherness with flowers in our hair?

...hearing your ideas about truth and the implementation of vedic literature.

Or...wait... I sense sarcasm in that last quote. You're still ready to talk and exchange thoughts, are you not?

"Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself" i think is pretty definitive. Don't you?

So The Matrix is about virtual reality? You miss a lot of the plot!

How, in the book you read, did he transcend matter?

He talked to an invisible entity. He died and appeared to several people on several occasions after that. He generaly rocked

Energy becomes conscious in car, when man is at the control

nonsense!

 

[Jan Ardena]

Originally posted by A4Ever
(quote from Raithere, who we all know, is a smart man)

He's alright.

I don't make bold claims. That's why this is in the religion forum. It's freestyle. But I'm not joking around or anything.

Religion is not freestyle, i think you've been hanging with the athiests for too long. Religion deals with the real meaning of life, life beyond this snapshot of the temporal material energy.

I, with the help of Raithere, have explained that matter is energy.

We know that matter is energy but consciousness is not material. There is nothing in material energy which modern science can say this is consciousness. So to state that matter and spirit are the same thing isn't even based on science whatospeak of religion. In religion, everything is considered "energy" even the soul. But the spiritual energy is different to that of the material energy. I suggest before you rest your case, try and understand the difference regardless of your belief.

Maybe, but the truth can not be known. Unless you make a leap of faith.

Are you afraid to make a leap of faith?

Or...wait... I sense sarcasm in that last quote. You're still ready to talk and exchange thoughts, are you not?

Of course, with pleasure. I'm just rattling your cage a little because you seemed to have become complacent in an area what can only be described as neverland.

So The Matrix is about virtual reality? You miss a lot of the plot!

He talked to an invisible entity.

Invisible to whom?

He died and appeared to several people on several occasions after that.

How could he have died?

He generaly rocked

Especially when he kicked the rascals out of the synogogue.

nonsense!

Are you saying that a car can operate without a human being involved?

Love

Jan Ardena.

 

[A4Ever]

Jan (or is it miss Ardena), thank you for saving my thread from disappearing on the second page, never to be heard from again. I sure as hell wasn't going to save it myself

Religion is not freestyle, i think you've been hanging with the athiests for too long. Religion deals with the real meaning of life, life beyond this snapshot of the temporal material energy.

I do believe in the beyond. It's just that it doesn't seem to be knowable.

I know Arjuna and his pal, but why would this story be covering any truth, any beyond? Especialy when there are so many other stories. There is no ground to choose.

But the spiritual energy is different to that of the material energy. I suggest before you rest your case, try and understand the difference regardless of your belief.

I read this stuff once. It is from the Hindu tradition. You can believe this, but you can not proof this. Ah, I feel another quote coming on, a crucial one

Are you afraid to make a leap of faith?

Of course. Raithere, Cris et les autres sound very, very reasonable. What is placed opposit to this, is religion. Believing. In a book. In a story. A story which can be traced back, by antropology, to fear of nature and fear of death.

Know that African tribe which still worships warplanes they saw flying over during world war? People make their own gods. How can you pick one? Why is it all so clear to you?

I mean: there's more in the bible than love your neighbour.

Invisible to whom?

To all the people. And since Jezus was basicly human, I believe to him as well.

It is considered good grammar to know when to use "whom', isn't it? Expecialy Brits are good at it. Never mind though

I'm just rattling your cage a little because you seemed to have become complacent in an area what can only be described as neverland.

Good description.

How could he have died?

He was a human. He just died. I am almost certain that hard copies are kept somewhere though.

Are you saying that a car can operate without a human being involved?

No, but the car is not self conscious. The human operating it, is. The energy knows itself in the man, not in the car. (for the feminist readers: the energy knows itself in the woman, not in the car)

Love

As long as it is strictly platonic