Yup pretty much. What it amounts to is that we are trying to achieve an understanding of ourselves. Most never make it, but the closer you come then the easier it is to understand others. Operate within your own limitations.Now I've realized what I think is true: know your strengths and weaknesses. Don't be overly proud, don't be overly humble. Do your utmost to attain an objective perspective of where you stand amongst the other humans.
No, I don't. That is, I would have to take the first sentence to be tru for it to have any meaning or value, and I don't.MacZ,
As we grow up our eyes have more difficulty to see. That book is like glasses for us to see better. Yes, it is a filter, but it makes us see things in a clearer way. Only because our eyes see things blurry when we look at things closely and far away, that doesn't mean that things are the way we see them. That only means that our eyes our grew too fast and became too big, or they didn't grow enough. What we perceive is not necessarily what is true. Do you know what I'm saying? Do you understand the parable?
Wisdom is from undertanding the world, not using your own perspective, but the world's perspective, it is seeing the world's perspetive and actually overcoming it.
Those "hidden meanings" are called (by the general public) "metaphors". They are widely used in the Bible, mainly by Jesus. There are also parables (which is clearly stated in the Bible), allegories, etc. They don't distort the meaning of the words, but rather it is a way to explain something that cannot be understandable in the normal everyday language (mainly in those times...).It is, quite literally, distorting, even destroying the meaning of words so that they have a different meaning to the believer than the non-believer. By giving the believer an understanding of the meaning of words that the authors intend, rather than the generally understood meanings, the general impression of a religious experience (the first mind game) is reinforced. The believer is led to understand the a "hidden meaning" has been "revealed" by the "holy spirit." The New Testament is riddled with such double meanings. When one understands the hidden meanings, the phrase often has a meaning radically different than the one understood by a casual reader. Examples of words with hidden meanings:
Not necessarily. God gave us a Christ-like mind. Sometimes we use it. I used it in the post for MacZ, for example.Truth
Casual meaning ? That which is real, verifiable, reality apart from human understanding.
To the believer ? That which is revealed by the Holy Spirit.
That's completly wrong.Wisdom
Casual meaning ? Understandings that are shown to be correct.
To the believer ? the doctrines of the "Gospel" as revealed by the "holy spirit".
Totally wrong! It means to act like God, to live by God's way, to walk in Love."righteousness" (meaning being converted and living according to the doctrines)
Totally wrong again! Justice is the victory of Truth over the lies of the enemy. It has absolutly nothing to do with non-Christians."justice" (punishment dealt out to the unconverted)
No, it is just having his way, not to be controled..."bondage" (being controlled by "Satan")
That's almost al right. Love is a deep and meaningful, conscious connection with God. Is an awareness of His presence and an action in His ways."love" (a feeling of connection with God)
Completly wrong. Many times the will of a believer is completly different then the will of God."will" (the understanding that you no longer wish to do anything contrary to the will of God)
No. It is just telling the Truth when it is asked."witness" (being an agent for the teaching and spread of belief)
Far away from that. Word is the inerent power of God. It is the primary thing in the universe."word" (the collection of doctrines known as the Gospel)
"dispassionatly" is quite funny...As one does so, it becomes apparent how the verbiage means one thing to the casual reader and something quite different to the true believer. But what really stands out, when you examine it dispassionately, is how the new, hidden meaning is calculated to influence behavior.
That's wrong. That's avaiable for everyone. It is just a question of simply receiving it. You don't want to receive, you don't have it.The verbicide mind game is unrelenting in how it is designed to hook the believer into thinking he has a "special" understanding. The principal synergy of this mind game is with the first mind game to reinforce the warm and fuzzy feeling that the believer has, through divine "grace," been given access to something special and deeply meaningful, not available to the "unsaved."
You mean that my use of figures of language is extensive? Why, thanks...While you might use different variations of wordings you are nevertheless behaving exactly according to the pattern predicted by memetics. And in your case your use of verbicide is extensive.
No, I don't. That is, I would have to take the first sentence to be tru for it to have any meaning or value, and I don't.
When you argue within parameters of your own making, as you are here, and a truth of your own invention ("As we grow up our eyes have more difficulty to see") it may make sense to you, and seem right, but it would, wouldn't it?
Far from that... I simply use simple figures of language since I'm limited by words and my subject lacks words in English (or any other languageCris has hit the nail on the head in this, by pointing out how you have attempted to do a lateral shift on the meaning of the words involved here in an obvious attempt to draw everyone in to a debate within your parameters.
The "hidden meaning" is the interpretation of the metaphor. It usually has more than one interpretation, but all of them are true. It is nothing "mtstica" or whatever, it is simply language. We need to use those tools to communicate (or try to communicateAs he points out, this shift is away from "generally understood meanings", hinting that there is a truer, or hidden meaning - and that you know what it is, that you are closer to it.
One only needs to loo to be able to see. If you refuxe to look, then you will not see at all. Do you understand? No? Why? Because you can't understand a simple metaphor??You also do this by stating that experience, knowlege and time have nothing to with wisdom, leaving what? Again, you're attempting to suggest, in throwing out all the commonly discussed possibilities, that you are harbouring a secret. And, as the void you leave is so blank, one could only assume (even without your having mentioned your book) that wisdom is somehow divinely supplied.
If you are like the world, how better are you then the world itself? If you cannot transcend yourself, how strong you are? If your wisdom is no greater then this world's wisdom, how different you are from this world? For the wisdom you have is no greater or different then that of a killer, thus making you no much different then a killer. For you are separate from a killer, just by actions and intentions and no more then that. You share the same wisdom, you share the same understanding. You are only greater then him in intent and action, but not in knowledge. For he knows no more than you do, and so you know no more than he does. To make a real difference and to be really wise is to be wiser then this world and different then this world. To be a rebel against the system is no crime, but an accomplishment. It is to be stronger than this world, to overcome this world's agenda. From that you get true wisdom: from being different, from being yourself.You're an elitist. What, for example, is this all about?
Wisdom is from undertanding the world, not using your own perspective, but the world's perspective, it is seeing the world's perspetive and actually overcoming it.
Rather than repeating your parable, you might like to expand on your premise by offering some hypothetical example to support it, something more substantive that what you’ve offered so far.As we grow up our eyes have more difficulty to see
How else are we to discover this, if not through experience?If a Jew is bad, it doesn't mean that all Jews are bad. If your family is loving, it doesn't mean all families are loving. If a nazy is gentle, it doesn't mean all nazies are gentle!
Most people explain their ideas using plain language and then support those explanations, if they are complex, by using metaphors and analogies, etc. The metaphors and analogies have little meaning on their own without the plain language explanation first.I simply use simple figures of language since I'm limited by words and my subject lacks words in English (or any other language ) to be expressed. Language is limited by our knowledge.
Don't interpret it literally, and then if you think about it, you will understand...There? no need to explain your parable. I get it; I understand it ?in the literal sense. I took it that you were asking if I understood it in the sense of ?oes it deliver something of meaning, of value??No, it doesn?.
I'm saying that it is more important to know things in deph then to know a lot of things. For example, it is more important to know chess really well then to know chess, Physics, Math, Biology, etc and not being in deph in any of those things. What I'm actually saying, is that as we experience things, we have more and more things to look after and we don't and can't understand all of them in the same deph as if we would understand only one. Do you get? It's the difference between quality and quantity.Rather than repeating your parable, you might like to expand on your premise by offering some hypothetical example to support it, something more substantive that what you?e offered so far.
What I said is as our eyes grow (as we have more experiences), then we can see less, cause everything becomes blurry (it's like not having enough memory for the graphics, in a computer). The blurriness is to compensate the amount of information. The mind is limited. If it is too crowded, there will be confusion, and it will lack deph.You see, I can? see how we ?ee less?by seeing more - by having more experiences. You suggest that that subsequent experiences reinforce ?reaffirm ?mistaken notions gained from earlier experiences, mistaken (in your opinion) because our experiences have been filtered though our minds and are therefore too individualistic, too much of an ?llusion? to represent anything of the ?ruth?
Well, that's exactly what I'm saying that is not. Our own experiences are not the defining ones, since everyone has their own personal experiences. It changes from person to person. It's like someone that said here some time ago that there is no single Truth, that it differs from person to person. What I'm saying now is that there IS a single Truth that is beyond what we define as truth, to ourselves.It? my feeling that quite the opposite is true. The more experiences we have, the more we encounter something that knocks the stuffing out of earlier ideas. We become less likely to assume anything at all, least of all the idea that we?e right, that our view, our experience is the defining one.
We cannot judge someone or something through what it appears to be. We cannot judge even someone's action. One's action doesn't express one's intention. We all make mistakes. What is a mistake? A mistake is when our actions doesn't satisfy our intentions. Then, how can we judge someone by his/her actions, if we don't know their intentions?? To really "judge" someone (or something) you must overcome your own mind, your own limitations.How else are we to discover this, if not through experience?
I'm far away from the limited view of language itself. What I'm talking about here transcend language itself. I try to put it into language, but I'm extremely limited. Since my knowledge doesn't come from my mind, it is quite complex to try to explain it through my mind.Most people explain their ideas using plain language and then support those explanations, if they are complex, by using metaphors and analogies, etc. The metaphors and analogies have little meaning on their own without the plain language explanation first.
What you tend to do is entirely skip the plain language attempt and go straight to metaphors and analogies. The result is meaningless gibberish to everyone except you.
Really? There is a very common misunderstanding when I use the word "you" here... Many people take it really personally. However, I usually use "you" as a general thing, meaning everybody. Why the misunderstanding? Simply because...The English language is incredibly rich in its ability to portray complex ideas and concepts. There are millions of examples across the world of books written by authors who have accomplished such things.
You judge my maturity by my age... Now THAT is immature...:bugeye:Your claim that your implied deeper understanding of your subject is so advanced that there is no appropriate language to express it lacks all credibility. Given your age and immaturity a far more credible explanation is that you simply lack the basic understanding of philosophical foundations and are desperately trying to express your fantasy ideas without the appropriate vocabulary, something that is commonly available to all average philosophers and above.
Says who? Where did you get this idea?What I'm actually saying, is that as we experience things, we have more and more things to look after and we don't and can't understand all of them in the same deph as if we would understand only one.
Again, you know this how?What I said is as our eyes grow (as we have more experiences), then we can see less, cause everything becomes blurry (it's like not having enough memory for the graphics, in a computer). The blurriness is to compensate the amount of information. The mind is limited. If it is too crowded, there will be confusion, and it will lack deph.
I think you need to step back and look at yourself from a distance.I'm far away from the limited view of language itself. What I'm talking about here transcend language itself. I try to put it into language, but I'm extremely limited. Since my knowledge doesn't come from my mind, it is quite complex to try to explain it through my mind.
I said ” Given your age and immaturity”. Low age implies inexperience. Immaturity stands on its own.You judge my maturity by my age... Now THAT is immature...
Eastern Philosophy...:bugeye:Says who? Where did you get this idea?
Same as above...:bugeye:Again, you know this how?
You said both, everyone connects both...:bugeye:I said ?Given your age and immaturity? Low age implies inexperience. Immaturity stands on its own.
Originally posted by TruthSeeker
As my views differ form this world's view I get persecution:
The world doesn’t have a view. The world is full of individuals like us. And it is people like us who choose to think and debate that sets us apart from the rest of the world, because most people do not think, they simply believe what they are told.As my views differ form this world's view I get persecution.
I know.And actually, those things doesn't come from God, they come from me.
You’ll figure it out in time. Just keep thinking.And it seems that He doesn't care wheter I'm sayingthose things or not, cause He hasn't been of any help lately...
I tend not to be everyone.You said both, everyone connects both...
No. Most people do think a lot more than just believe. And most of those are mislead by their own thoughs, as they make a lot of assumptions and take everything personaly... :bugeye:The world doesn? have a view. The world is full of individuals like us. And it is people like us who choose to think and debate that sets us apart from the rest of the world, because most people do not think, they simply believe what they are told.
How many people smoke, drink and use drugs just to be accepted by their peers? :bugeye:How many people think that?
Originally posted by TruthSeeker
How many people smoke, drink and use drugs just to be accepted by their peers? :bugeye:![]()