Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 310 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 89 of 120 < 1 2 ... 87 88 89 90 91 ... 119 120 >
Topic Options
#42927 - 03/27/12 04:51 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Just got back from a 3-week vacation in Florida--Treasure Island, a very interesting community on the Gulf Of Mexico.

METHODIST-BASED CHURCH
http://pasadenacommunitychurch.org/ -- Serving the Whole Community
Seats 3,000 Great Music, preaching, teaching and service to people in need.

http://treasureislandflorida.org/whattodo.htm

http://treasureislandflorida.org/
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
.
#42930 - 03/27/12 05:44 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
Welcome back Rev- we missed you!

Florida would have been lovely at this time of year I would imagine. It looks wonderful.

Top
#42942 - 03/27/12 02:54 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Ellis]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Ellis
Welcome back Rev- we missed you!
We?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42946 - 03/27/12 07:00 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
We?


Go on, TT, admit it, you missed him. Who else has the patience to read your posts. smile
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#42952 - 03/28/12 12:54 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Bill S.]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Quote:
We?


Go on, TT, admit it, you missed him. Who else has the patience to read your posts. smile
As I recall, he has made a point of broadcasting the fact that he's put me on his ignore list, and he has more than once accused me of being verbose. I doubt his patience or attention span extends itself any further than his personal opinions, as seems to be the case for a lot of folks.

He's tried to get me to headline my statements and take on his writing style.. which reminds me of my grandmother..
My mother insisted I write her on occasion when I was a kid and what I got from granny for the effort was criticism for my penmanship.

On top of that most of his posts are repetitive statements about his past, his kids and his vacations. Not so much on the philosophy of religion, unless its his personal philosophy on his religion, or the latest book he's read that he might think could be a statement of his philosophy of life.

Nope can't say there is anything to miss. It's always refreshing when he takes a long vacation and others have a chance to bring something new to this thread.
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42955 - 03/28/12 02:59 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Thanks Ellis! Being missed by good friends is one of the joys of living. smile

The same is true for being missed by bullets and other things people throw at us, eh? (as we say in Canada). laugh

THE RIFLE SHOTS MISSED ME BY "---6---" inches"
But seriously, this reminds me to tell the story of what nearly happened to me one Saturday, in the Spring of 1942--I had turned 12 on Jan. 14 of that year.

By the way, in the days before confederation with Canada, which took place in 1949, Newfoundland (NL) was a colony, and it was run like a business--a prosperous one for the rich importers and fish merchants of Water Street, St. John's, especially the few who ran the corporation. They were the haves. But the vast majority--those who worked for low hourly wages, were among the have nots. Labourers who earned $5.00 for a ten-hour day were considered lucky. The chair of the corporation was the governor. He was from London, England.

HEALTH AND EDUCATION
The health system, such as it was, was a fee-for-service one. Naturally, most doctors were among the well-to-do. Hospitals, for the most part, were the responsibility of the Catholic and Protestant churches. So was the education system. I went to a school run by the United Church.

THE ROCK
The population of NL at the time was about 225,000 people. Most lived in the small towns and out ports--some along the rugged south coast had no roads, only boats. They were located, mostly near the ocean, along the three coasts. St. John's (then about 45,000) is the oldest incorporated city in North America. The merchants there controlled all businesses from there to the northern tip of Labrador (twice the area of the island of NL).

Most families lived in do-it-yourself homes. Being good carpenters and boat builders, they built everything they could with their own hands.

At 7, when we started to build our home, I was expected to be a go-for and a helper--a "master" smile at sawing and driving nails--for my father and three older brothers--who were also were miners, when there was work. They were also fishermen, carpenters and mechanics, as needed.

In summer of 1938--the year we moved, from and old and rented shack of building belonging to The Company, into the still-unfinished two-story house, the older brothers of my younger sister and I were 18, 20 and 25. An older sister, 22, had married. What fond memories of www.bellisland.net which was then about 10,000 people. 2,100 were iron ore miners! It is 9 miles from St. John's and was second in size to it. We even had two movie theatres and, of course, radio.

BTW, I also helped my brothers with the boat-building, fishing, tending the salmon net and hunting, especially for salt water ducks. Fresh meat was scarce. We even hunted young gulls.

Back to what nearly happened to me in the Spring of 1942--a bright and sunny, early Saturday afternoon.

In the late Spring, when it became warm enough, it was the custom for home owners to get ready for summer by fixing any winter-damaged roofs--commonly covered with rolled-roofing--only the rich could afford shingles. To make repairs easier to do, most roofs were designed to be relatively flat--this meant there we no cluttered attics. Very few homes had a full concrete basement. We started by digging a cellar. Invariably, in Spring the roofing had to be covered with a warm, nice-smelling pitch-black tar. I had the enjoyable job of tending the fire to heat the tar bucket.

That done, my next job had to do with the fences. This meant white-washing the paling fence around our goodly-sized property. What with black roofs, bright-red trim, white or pale yellow clapboards and bright white paling fences many houses became proud things of beauty in the bright summer sun. Modern acrylic paint has sure improved on this.

In the Spring of 1942, as I was white washing the paling fence--the one facing the neighbour to the north of us, and across the lane from us, shots rang out. Zip!, Zip! Zip! Zip!...several bullets hit the fence just about six inches from my head.

Immediately, I turned around and there was Happy Jack, standing on his porch steps, shooting his rifle--like guards on stages coaches in the old movies. Even when he wasn't drinking, as long as he had a chew of tobacco, Jack appeared happy. This time, however, he was as drunk as G&# @#%$ fool--no skunks, or squirrels that I know of, in NL--as he brandished his trusty 22 repeating rifle. Immediately, I ducked and ran for the house.

I should mention that, when he wasn't drinking, Jack had a good-paying job as a time-keeper and paymaster with The Company, DOSCO--the iron-ore mining company. He was a happy-kind of drunk--one of the several well-known ones in the area.

Obviously, that day he was so drunk that he out of touch with reality and was oblivious to the fact that I was white washing our fence. He was actually aiming to shoot cats.

OBVIOUSLY THE CATS WERE NON-KOSHER ONES
In his drunken state of mind, Jack's shots were simply intended to get the cats--attracted by the blood dripping from a pig he had slaughter that AM and had hanging on a tri-pod in his yard. This was about 300 feet from our fence. But, there is a happy ending.

HAPPY ENDING
Thank G-0-D, Jack missed me. He also missed the cats. laugh

There is also an EPILOGUE--one tinged with sadness--in the next post
=============================================
BTW, In my last post, I forgot to include the following and VERY INTERESTING HISTORY OF THE CANADIAN CONNECTION with PCC:
===============================
http://pasadenacommunitychurch.org/beliefsfaqs/church-history/


Edited by Revlgking (03/28/12 03:18 AM)
Edit Reason: Always a good idea!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#42960 - 03/28/12 10:55 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TT: I always make a quick check of your comments. I especially look for any interesting or challenging comments, or questions. If I find any I will respond. For example, because I tend to think pneumatologically, I find the following--what I call pneumatological comments--interesting
Quote:
He's tried to get me to headline my statements and take on his writing style...which reminds me of my grandmother...

My mother insisted I write her on occasion when I was a kid and what I got from granny for the effort was criticism for my penmanship.
Did you reject what I consider to wise advice and directions from your elders simply because you thought your they were wrong? Or was it because you didn't like the attitude with which the advice and directions were given? Why?
Quote:
On top of that most of his posts are repetitive statements about his past, his kids and his vacations.
TT, I write pneumatologically because, IMO, ideas come from people (pneuma beings), not from robots. I want to know who you, and others, are. Or would being open about who you are be a problem for some people? Hmmm!


Edited by Revlgking (03/29/12 02:48 AM)
Edit Reason: Always a good idea!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#42963 - 03/29/12 01:46 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
TT: I always make a quick check of your comments. I especially look for any interesting or challenging comments, or questions. If I find any I will respond. For example, because I tend to think pneumatologically, I find the following--what I call pneumatological comment...
If we use the dictionary definition of pneuma: the vital spirit; the soul.
What would separate any comment from your idea of a pneumatological comment?
Is your idea of a pneumatological comment similar to others ideas of a pneumatological comment, or is your own opinion of what is pneumatological unique to you?

How would you separate that which is pneumatological (of the spirit or soul), and non-pneumatological (not of the spirit or soul)?


Originally Posted By: Revlgking

--interesting
Quote:
He's tried to get me to headline my statements and take on his writing style...which reminds me of my grandmother...

My mother insisted I write her on occasion when I was a kid and what I got from granny for the effort was criticism for my penmanship.


Did you reject what I consider to wise directions from your elders? Or, was it because you thought your elders were wrong? Or was it because of the attitude with which the directions were given? Why?


Are you suggesting that your comments toward my writing are wise directions from my elder?
What makes you think your style is a beneficial or a wise change for me to make? Is it something other than personal?
Why did you suggest the change?
Was it because of your own determination of what is pneumatological as a writing style?
Would making the change make me more pneumatological?

Would you be suggesting that my Grandmothers prejudice to have me live up to (her expectations of) the family name, and the pride she had for her name to be wisdom, or to be pneumatological?

Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Quote:
On top of that most of his posts are repetitive statements about his past, his kids and his vacations.

TT, I write pneumatologically because, IMO, ideas come from people (pneuma beings), not from robots. I want to know who you, and others, are. Or would that be a problem for some? Hmmm!

I've found that you place a person within a category of worthiness based on how you view yourself and your accomplishments, and what you value as pneumatologically correct (comparison).
Obviously you take some pride in all of the things that you list as your achievements and what you have participated in, in your lifetime.

In a conversation regarding your terms of success and ideas that are worthy of your consideration, or what is a good human idea I have witnessed your judgments (what you call your humble opinion) about what is good and what is God (in whatever current acronym is popular to your pneumatologocal belief).
Like anyone with an opinion, your judgment reflects your personal belief in whatever you call your experience of something or someone, no matter whether there is a brief experience or one that is made from an extended study of a process or a historical foundation of investment and study.

You like to say you are open to anything new, but in our conversations your openness has been subject to whether I or anyone else could impress upon you, a different point of view rather than you yourself actually taking the time to discover another experience of something you have previously judged as useless.

I'll just use the comment you made toward Maharishi Mahesh Yogi selling snake oil as an example.

I can understand anyone who has not spent any time studying Vedic philosophy or Eastern Meditative sciences to have little familiarity with one who speaks of their experience and study. And I would also expect one who is partial to western churchianity to be biased in their ideas of what is spiritual or of the spirit or soul, to make personal judgments as you have.

I find a disconnect though when you use eastern philosophical terms such as Brahman while pasting historical dates regarding Adviata Vedanta, without the knowledge that you have condemned these same ideas previously as the selling of snake oil. (ref. post #42120 & #27961)

Some of the ideas you have thrown out while skimming the internet for what you have claimed to be symbiotic with your definitions of unitheism reveal that you place your own ideas upon things that you have little experience in.

It would seem that those who identify themselves as elders form a rigid opinion of reality and would like all they meet to give credit to their beliefs, so they do not feel like they have wasted their life or that they have gone unrecognized in their personal efforts.

Once one reaches the age where mortality seems so real, people often hope that what is temporary may have some kind of lasting effect so that their personal ideas of themselves will not be lost when they leave the living.

BTW: Here's an oldy but goody
Originally Posted By: Revlgking


But seriously TT, except for your posts here, I do not know you all that well. But, pardon me for expressing what I think and how I feel about some of your posts:

Obviously I cannot tell you to your face what I think of you, so here I will simply ask: Would you please limit you comments here to your opinion on the topic--your philosophy of religion, your goals, dreams, ideals and the like.

the freedom to opine, does not give anyone the right to admonish and judge others; to tell anyone what they should and ought to be, fear and do. Let me, as I do you, deal with my ego in my own time.


Or, perhaps you would like to ask the moderators for an opinion.

The pneumatological resonance of the above is simply overwhelming, is it not?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42964 - 03/29/12 04:20 AM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Quote:
If we use the dictionary definition of pneuma: the vital spirit; the soul.

1. How would you separate that which is pneumatological (of the spirit or soul), and non-pneumatological (not of the spirit or soul)?

2. What would separate any comment from your idea of a pneumatological comment?

3. Is your idea of a pneumatological comment similar to others ideas of a pneumatological comment, or is your own opinion of what is pneumatological unique to you?
TT, take note: I have changed the order in which you asked some of your questions.
Also, I am not a fixed-position kind of thinker.
Anyone is free to tell me that I am wrong.
And I am more than willing to look at any evidence that demonstrates that I am wrong.
=========================
When I offer the following answers to your questions, I speak as an animal-lover and one who respects animal rights.
If I had my way, like my daughter, I would be a total vegetarian.
And let us not confuse the issue by talking about domesticated animals and ones in close contact with human beings.
Some animals seem to be quite capable being trained to be behave rationally and pneumatologically.
I also accept the idea that it is possible that our ancient ancestors and pre-historic ancestors were perhaps closer to being animals than being rational humans.

1. In my opinion, wild animals are strictly somatological and psychological beings.
They kill and eat other animals, without any sense of shame or guilt.
Unlike human, rational and pneumatological beings, they are incapable of sinning.
They are natural psychopaths and sociopaths.
Similarly, human-like psychopaths and sociopaths are incapable of sinning.

2. Rephrase the question. It make little sense to me.

3. Before he created the word 'psychology', Phillip Melanchthon--who assisted Martin Luther to translate Hebrew and Greek into German--created the word 'pneumatology'.
It was the early secular humanists who flogged the idea of 'psychology' so that it retired the common use of 'pneumatology'.

I think I am one of the few who, unaware of the work of Melanchthon, resurrected the term and has introduced it into common use, for example, in Wikipedia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumatology?oldid=0

SINNER? Of course I am. It simply describes who I am
I am thankful to know that I am a pneumatological being, capable of sinning. Therefore, capable of feeling shame and guilt.
Therefore, ready to do something about it.
It is what makes me want to be human and more humane.
If I were lost in the deep forest, or in slavery, and did not know that I was, I would remain lost, and a slave.
Being aware that I am ignorant is the first step to getting knowledge.
Thank G~0~D--note the use of Tildes
Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilde
The tilde (play /&#712;t&#618;ld&#601;/, play /&#712;t&#618;ldi/; or ~ ) is a grapheme with several uses. The name of the character comes from Spanish, from the Latin titulus meaning "title" or "superscription", though the term "tilde" has evolved and now has a different meaning in linguistics.
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#42968 - 03/29/12 02:47 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
The way I see it, the definition of pneuma didn't change with your personal applications. It still references the spirit and soul within a (human) being. I'll rephrase the questions you decided to answer using some of your ideas in your answers, and we'll revisit the ones you avoided.
If we use the dictionary definition of pneuma: the vital spirit; the soul.

1. How would you separate that which is pneumatological (of the spirit or soul), and non-pneumatological (not of the spirit or soul) when it comes to postings on this website made by me, or anyone else for that matter?

2. What would separate any comment from your idea of a pneumatological comment? Or said another way. What constitutes a pneumatological comment made by any human capable of sinning. Or what comments define one who is not capable of sinning, feeling shame or guilt and incapable of self correction, and what is it that enables you to make this determination?

3. Is your idea of a pneumatological comment similar to others ideas of a pneumatological comment, or is your own opinion of what is pneumatological unique to you?

To clarify this question I will ask it this way. Do you believe you think the same as another in every way or do you think each individual personality is unique in their approach to thinking and living life?
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
I am not a fixed-position kind of thinker.
If you're saying you change your beliefs as easily as you change your socks, I would have to say that is sometimes true when it comes to defining yourself and your God. You seem to mirror religion in the way it bends with the changing tides of the majority, to appeal to the basic instincts of others just to get their attention. When the subject doesn't accrue interest, you change the subject.


Originally Posted By: Revlgking

--interesting
Quote:
He's tried to get me to headline my statements and take on his writing style...which reminds me of my grandmother...

My mother insisted I write her on occasion when I was a kid and what I got from granny for the effort was criticism for my penmanship.


Did you reject what I consider to wise directions from your elders? Or, was it because you thought your elders were wrong? Or was it because of the attitude with which the directions were given? Why?


Are you suggesting that your comments toward my writing are wise directions from my elder?
What makes you think your style is a beneficial or a wise change for me to make? Is it something other than personal?
Why did you suggest the change?
Was it because of your own determination of what is pneumatological as a writing style?
Would making the change make me more pneumatological?

Would you be suggesting that my Grandmothers prejudice to have me live up to (her expectations of) the family name, and the pride she had for her name to be wisdom, or to be pneumatological?

The rest is a repeat, strictly in the interest of your claims to always write pneumatologically. I would like to use it as your example to pnuematological diatribe as you see fit.
Quote:

Originally Posted By: Revlgking
Quote:
On top of that most of his posts are repetitive statements about his past, his kids and his vacations.

TT, I write pneumatologically because, IMO, ideas come from people (pneuma beings), not from robots. I want to know who you, and others, are. Or would that be a problem for some? Hmmm!

I've found that you place a person within a category of worthiness based on how you view yourself and your accomplishments, and what you value as pneumatologically correct (comparison).
Obviously you take some pride in all of the things that you list as your achievements and what you have participated in, in your lifetime.

In a conversation regarding your terms of success and ideas that are worthy of your consideration, or what is a good human idea I have witnessed your judgments (what you call your humble opinion) about what is good and what is God (in whatever current acronym is popular to your pneumatologocal belief).
Like anyone with an opinion, your judgment reflects your personal belief in whatever you call your experience of something or someone, no matter whether there is a brief experience or one that is made from an extended study of a process or a historical foundation of investment and study.

You like to say you are open to anything new, but in our conversations your openness has been subject to whether I or anyone else could impress upon you, a different point of view rather than you yourself actually taking the time to discover another experience of something you have previously judged as useless.

I'll just use the comment you made toward Maharishi Mahesh Yogi selling snake oil as an example.

I can understand anyone who has not spent any time studying Vedic philosophy or Eastern Meditative sciences to have little familiarity with one who speaks of their experience and study. And I would also expect one who is partial to western churchianity to be biased in their ideas of what is spiritual or of the spirit or soul, to make personal judgments as you have.

I find a disconnect though when you use eastern philosophical terms such as Brahman while pasting historical dates regarding Adviata Vedanta, without the knowledge that you have condemned these same ideas previously as the selling of snake oil. (ref. post #42120 & #27961)

Some of the ideas you have thrown out while skimming the internet for what you have claimed to be symbiotic with your definitions of unitheism reveal that you place your own ideas upon things that you have little experience in.

It would seem that those who identify themselves as elders form a rigid opinion of reality and would like all they meet to give credit to their beliefs, so they do not feel like they have wasted their life or that they have gone unrecognized in their personal efforts.

Once one reaches the age where mortality seems so real, people often hope that what is temporary may have some kind of lasting effect so that their personal ideas of themselves will not be lost when they leave the living.

BTW: Here's an oldy but goody
Originally Posted By: Revlgking


But seriously TT, except for your posts here, I do not know you all that well. But, pardon me for expressing what I think and how I feel about some of your posts:

Obviously I cannot tell you to your face what I think of you, so here I will simply ask: Would you please limit you comments here to your opinion on the topic--your philosophy of religion, your goals, dreams, ideals and the like.

the freedom to opine, does not give anyone the right to admonish and judge others; to tell anyone what they should and ought to be, fear and do. Let me, as I do you, deal with my ego in my own time.


Or, perhaps you would like to ask the moderators for an opinion.

The pneumatological resonance of the above is simply overwhelming, is it not?
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42969 - 03/29/12 03:08 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Yogic flying = snake oil.

People in cults never think they're in cults. People spewing nonsense don't think they're spewing nonsense.

Top
#42973 - 03/29/12 09:50 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
TT: PNEUMATOLOGICALLY SPEAKING, MY SOMA THANKS YOU; MY PSYCHE THANKS YOU & MY ALL-INCLUSIVE PNEUMA THANKS YOU--HOLISTICALLY AND SINCERELY! In brief, I thank you! I thank you especially for the way you have recently responded to my request to rephrase certain questions.

I find the three re-phrased questions, in your recent comment following, very stimulating.

THE ART OF TM?
Like our FF, I have serious questions which I would like to ask anyone about the claims that I, personally, heard the Maharishi of TM make--in Toronto in 1964. If he was talking, metaphorically, why did he not say so? I love good metaphors--the Bible is filled with them. smile BTW, I know the art of TM. One of my assistant ministers was an expert.

Before I say more: In my responses I will abbreviate the word, 'pneumatological' and words having to do with 'pneumatology'--study, or science, of the Spirit (divine and human) as PNT. If you find anything I say, PNT-wise, offensive, I have no objection to having a moderator remove it.

If--as I have done in my comments to you--you find anything that I write unclear, simply ask me to clarify.
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
The way I see it, the definition of pneuma didn't change with your personal applications. It still references the spirit and soul within a (human) being.
Not true! Does the following make my meaning clear? When I was a young theological student (1947-1955) I studied at
http://www.mta.ca
http://astheology.ns.ca/
http://www.bu.edu/sth/about-sth/
We were taught to believe the following:
As human and rational beings, we are free to accept--if we so choose--that we are really spiritual (PNT) beings who--for any number of reasons--are now having a somatological (physical) and psychological (mental) experience.

We were taught: What you do with the philosophy and theology you get here is your choice. In my opinion, in the light, grace and love of G~0~D (as ALL-Being) there can be no compulsion.

Is the above clear. Any questions?
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
I'll rephrase the questions you decided to answer using some of your ideas in your answers, and we'll re-visit the ones you avoided. If we use the dictionary definition of pneuma: the vital spirit; the soul.

1. How would you separate that which is pneumatological (of the spirit, or soul), and non-pneumatological (not of the spirit or soul) when it comes to postings on this website made by me, or anyone else for that matter?

2. What would separate any comment from your idea of a pneumatological comment? Or said another way. What constitutes a pneumatological comment made by any human capable of sinning. Or what comments define one who is not capable of sinning, feeling shame or guilt and incapable of self correction, and what is it that enables you to make this determination?

3. Is your idea of a pneumatological comment similar to others ideas of a pneumatological comment, or is your own opinion of what is pneumatological unique to you?

To clarify this question I will ask it this way:
Do you believe you think the same as another in every way or do you think each individual personality is unique in their approach to thinking and living life?
1. Pneumatologically thinking
It is my personal--PNT-SPEAKING--opinion that, like snowflakes and grains of sand, each of us is, like any work of art, individually unique. Therefore, I like to think that we are G~0~D~like beings. Also, we live and move and have our being within G~0~D--who is not just a being, but Being itself.

G~0~D~like grains of sand:
http://sandgrains.com/Sand-Grains-Gallery.html

http://theuniblog.evilspacerobot.com/?p=6557
================================
G~0~D~like snowflakes:
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~atomic/snowcrystals/alike/alike.htm
http://pinterest.com/golddstwmn/each-one-is-unique/

You seem to think that I focus on being "separate".

Not true! As a PNT-thinker--that is, one who has been given the great gift to be able to say "I am, I will, I choose, I think, I learn, I know, I do and I take action"--I am, with the new physicists like Stephen Hawking, I am more interested in understanding what integrates me with you and others, with mother earth, the solar system, the billions of galaxies and, ultimately, with G~0~D~~the infinity of time and space, within and beyond.

Obviously, there there are more questions to be asked and explored about this, and more for all of us to say.

CONCLUDING THIS COMMUNICATION
Anyone, including creative atheists, agnostics and skeptics: Using clearly-outlined and brief paragraphs, feel free to join in. Any beefs? If you want to keep them private, feel free to send me a private message.

It is always helpful to know: What sciences are of personal interest you, especially those in which you happen to have some expertise. My interest is in the philosophy of psychology and in the art of painting. Here, I am trying to learn how to write.

What are your hobbies? Your favourite philosophies and arts? Questions are always welcomed.



Edited by Revlgking (03/29/12 10:02 PM)
Edit Reason: Always a good idea!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#42979 - 03/30/12 03:29 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Revlgking]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
TT: PNEUMATOLOGICALLY SPEAKING, MY SOMA THANKS YOU; MY PSYCHE THANKS YOU & MY ALL-INCLUSIVE PNEUMA THANKS YOU--HOLISTICALLY AND SINCERELY! In brief, I thank you! I thank you especially for the way you have recently responded to my request to rephrase certain questions.

So when you weren't thanking me holistically or sincerely and writing the moderators to oust me from this forum, you weren't writing or speaking pneumatologically?
For example:
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
WITH A COPY TO ELLIS
Without going to the moderators, here is what I would like to suggest you do:

1. Stop answering questions and comments which I put to other posters. If I want your opinion I will ask for it. If you insist on interfering, I will ignore what you write and, perhaps, ask the moderators to moderate.

2. And, please, stop those long-winded posts in which you give the impression that you believe you have an inside-track advantage with Tolle and a non-egoic god-like wisdom only geniuses posses.

Yes, in my last post I did about you, as you did, later, about me, infer that you could be a sociopath--one who knows it is wrong to admonish others but really doesn't care and does it anyway. I agree, I should not have made the inference. But I do care enough to want to put a stop to this fruitless-kind of posting back and forth.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
TT:I always make a quick check of your comments.
From a previous interchange:
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
TT, thanks for your response. Here is what it taught me: Ignore all TT's posts, period.
And another.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
I am not a fixed-position kind of thinker.

Originally Posted By: Revlgking
I especially look for any interesting or challenging comments, or questions. I tend to think pneumatologically, I write pneumatologically.

I am not a fixed-position kind of thinker.

I would assume since you aren't a fixed position kind of thinker that the references to what you are or do are only on a part time basis.

Originally Posted By: Revlgking


THE ART OF TM?
Like our FF, I have serious questions which I would like to ask anyone about the claims that I, personally, heard the Maharishi of TM make--in Toronto in 1964.

None of those questions seem to have been aired, only your judgments and ideas.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

If he was talking, metaphorically, why did he not say so? I love good metaphors--the Bible is filled with them. smile

How would you know unless you got to know what he was talking about and not making assumptions?
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
BTW, I know the art of TM. One of my assistant ministers was an expert.

You know what you friend told you and you believe he is an expert. Like a preacher who preaches what he has been told, an experience of God or the art of any teaching is only as good as what you have heard without the actual experience.
C'est la vie..

Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Yogic flying = snake oil.

Snake oil is snake oil. Yogic Flying is a mental and physical exercise. Any reference to the two being the same, is going to be relative to someones belief and most probably a lack of experience and understanding.

Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend

People in cults never think they're in cults.

I can agree with that statement. Its usually someone outside of the activity that's labeled as a cult, and so the cultists are the last to know they have been labeled a cult. After all who would willingly label themselves as a cultist if it has any bad connotations..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
The definitions and descriptions of what most people would like to apply to the idea of cult fits the profile of:
The armies of any country,
The post office
The boy scouts of America
The Girls Scouts
All Churches
The Elks club
Large corporations
Etc. etc.

Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
People spewing nonsense don't think they're spewing nonsense.
Obviously..
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Before I say more: In my responses I will abbreviate the word, 'pneumatological' and words having to do with 'pneumatology'--study, or science, of the Spirit (divine and human) as PNT. If you find anything I say, PNT-wise, offensive, I have no objection to having a moderator remove it.

If--as I have done in my comments to you--you find anything that I write unclear, simply ask me to clarify.
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
The way I see it, the definition of pneuma didn't change with your personal applications. It still references the spirit and soul within a (human) being.
Not true! Does the following make my meaning clear? When I was a young theological student (1947-1955) I studied at
http://www.mta.ca
http://astheology.ns.ca/
http://www.bu.edu/sth/about-sth/
We were taught to believe the following:
As human and rational beings, we are free to accept--if we so choose--that we are really spiritual (PNT) beings who--for any number of reasons--are now having a somatological (physical) and psychological (mental) experience.

We were taught: What you do with the philosophy and theology you get here is your choice. In my opinion, in the light, grace and love of G~0~D (as ALL-Being) there can be no compulsion.

Is the above clear. Any questions?

What is clear, is that you learned we are spiritual beings and that if one is cognizant of the spirit within, they accept they are acting spiritually. But if they are not cognizant or aware thru their choice to be aware of this, then they are ignoring the spirit within and directing the senses in other directions and are not acting PNT'ly.
This would then define one who wishes to give attention to what you were told or taught about the spirit in themselves and others, to be what you describe as PNT thought and action.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
I'll rephrase the questions you decided to answer using some of your ideas in your answers, and we'll re-visit the ones you avoided. If we use the dictionary definition of pneuma: the vital spirit; the soul.

1. How would you separate that which is pneumatological (of the spirit, or soul), and non-pneumatological (not of the spirit or soul) when it comes to postings on this website made by me, or anyone else for that matter?

2. What would separate any comment from your idea of a pneumatological comment? Or said another way. What constitutes a pneumatological comment made by any human capable of sinning. Or what comments define one who is not capable of sinning, feeling shame or guilt and incapable of self correction, and what is it that enables you to make this determination?

3. Is your idea of a pneumatological comment similar to others ideas of a pneumatological comment, or is your own opinion of what is pneumatological unique to you?

To clarify this question I will ask it this way:
Do you believe you think the same as another in every way or do you think each individual personality is unique in their approach to thinking and living life?
1. Pneumatologically thinking
It is my personal--PNT-SPEAKING--opinion that, like snowflakes and grains of sand, each of us is, like any work of art, individually unique. Therefore, I like to think that we are G~0~D~like beings. Also, we live and move and have our being within G~0~D--who is not just a being, but Being itself.

Then this sort of reinforces what I said about your education and belief in PNT thought and belief. All are spiritual beings and similar to the dictionary definition: being of the vital spirit; the soul.

Originally Posted By: Revlgking

You seem to think that I focus on being "separate".

No. I think your idea of God and unity changes with your changing perspectives and your self identification with not being a fixed-position kind of thinker.
My Experience of God is that IT or "all that is," Is a constant, regardless of changing perspectives of ones self and the world around ones self. All that is, is within all the changes that are created, and are created by those who perceive reality whether they can perceive all that is in themselves and others.
In that sense, everything is of God whether one decides to believe in it (God) or not.
Once one establishes a permanent relationship with all that is (within themselves and others), Unity exists in that relationship. What is described as "Godly" does not then pertain to ones idea of what one wants God to look like or ones changing beliefs about what they think about God. It is and always will be, what All that is, is.

So What I hear you say, is that when something lives up to your expectations or you decide to be all loving and God like, you label yourself and what you perceive as being pneumatological.

I don't think you really know God, but instead know about what you think is God and the attention you put on your belief, and that is constantly changing thru your use of changing acronyms.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking
As a PNT-thinker--that is, one who has been given the great gift to be able to say "I am, I will, I choose, I think, I learn, I know, I do and I take action"--I am, with the new physicists like Stephen Hawking, I am more interested in understanding what integrates me with you and others, with mother earth, the solar system, the billions of galaxies and, ultimately, with G~0~D~~the infinity of time and space, within and beyond.

An enthusiastic interest is nice, and many have the same interests. Science also has an interest in what integrates everything together, but they have a less spiritual point of view when it comes to spirit or the soul.
Originally Posted By: Revlgking

Obviously, there there are more questions to be asked and explored about this, and more for all of us to say.

Obviously, but then there is a lot of resistance to what is said and how it is said when one decides what dialogue should look like and whether it is God like or pneumatologically correct. Also if one is not pneumatologically focused on the spirit within ones self or another then what ensues is a stress related expression like the one I placed as an example above:
Quote:

1. Stop answering questions and comments which I put to other posters. If I want your opinion I will ask for it. If you insist on interfering, I will ignore what you write and, perhaps, ask the moderators to moderate.

2. And, please, stop those long-winded posts in which you give the impression that you believe you have an inside-track advantage with Tolle and a non-egoic god-like wisdom only geniuses posses.

Yes, in my last post I did about you, as you did, later, about me, infer that you could be a sociopath...
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42981 - 03/30/12 05:47 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Poor reasoning and inappropriate analogies are hallmarks of cultish behavior. Yogic flying is an example of bovine feces.

Top
#42982 - 03/30/12 07:53 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Revlgking Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/17/07
Posts: 2311
Loc: markham (Thornhill), Ontario, ...
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Poor reasoning and inappropriate analogies are hallmarks of cultish behavior. Yogic flying is an example of bovine feces.
FF, You mean BS? laugh FF, while I don't promise to agree with your assessment, unquestioningly, if you catch me blatantly using what you sincerely feel are, "Poor reasoning and inappropriate analogies", what you call, "hallmarks of cultish behavior", feel free to point this out to me.

IMO, there is such a thing as a sighted and a rational faith. But we also need the courage to walk in the light that we have. However, I choose to avoid, like the plague, any cult--no matter how many Revs and PhDs are involved--that requires people to blindly believe that what is taught IS, without question, The "Truth".

BTW, TM--founder of the Natural Law Party--MAY BE A GOOD WAY TO MAKE MONEY, BUT IT DOESN'T WIN ELECTIONS--Take a look at what happened in 1993, and 1997, in Canada. TM and politics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil__Paterson__(politician)
... there is a whiff of fraud, here. HMMM!
=============
You may have to do your own search to find info at the following sites.

Natural_Law_Party_of_Canada_candidates,_1993_Canadian_federal_election

https://www.google.ca/search?q=transcendental+meditation+party%2C+Canadian+elections%2C+1997&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mageia:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
=============================


Edited by Revlgking (03/30/12 08:40 PM)
Edit Reason: Always a good idea!
_________________________
G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org

Top
#42983 - 03/30/12 08:59 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Poor reasoning and inappropriate analogies are hallmarks of cultish behavior.


I've taken that into consideration when reading your remarks
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42984 - 03/30/12 09:03 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Tutor Turtle]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Originally Posted By: Tutor Turtle
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Poor reasoning and inappropriate analogies are hallmarks of cultish behavior.


I've taken that into consideration when reading your remarks


As a victim and examplar of the Dunning-Kruger effect, you no doubt have.

Top
#42995 - 03/31/12 03:41 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Tutor Turtle Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/19/08
Posts: 1249
Loc: Everywhere and nowhere
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend

As a victim and examplar of the Dunning-Kruger effect, you no doubt have.
I have, and I've also recognized the example of authoritativeness in your passion to preach scientific fact and the need for moral cleansing. It's usually a psychological condition created by the need to fend off anything that might oppose the personal point of view, due to a fear of being measured by an idea of what is worthy and what isn't.
At least you've brought it forward and can do something about it. wink

I've found that the belief in victimization comes from a lack of understanding in the nature of reality, and the reality of ones ineffable spirit (which is connected to all people and all things).
You (or anyone for that matter), can rise above that idea and be free from the fear of being victimized by understanding how each and everyone draws to themselves the very experience of life, by the choices one makes at all levels of consciousness.

If and when you (or anyone who feels they are an exemplar of victimization), decides to look inside themselves for the emotional patterns of stress and illusions of belief in fear and victimization, you will see that all ideas of self measure where an individual becomes superior or unworthy came from the acceptance of conditioning, not from who or what you are.

You were most likely taught to believe in victims and to grade yourself and others by your parents and the educational system that taught you that people are valued by achieving results that are complementary to the tasks and values of the system creating the tasks and the rules.

To believe that some are superior, or less than others is based on social values of prejudice, greed and fear, not on human potential or the nature of all things and all ideas.

Unfortunately those like you, who believe in this self measure will teach their children that they will be victims to others, who will be either superior or less than them, prompting them (like you) to want to eradicate all that is offensive to your sense of belief and personal reality.

I'll bet you can see things differently if you were to want to make a change. smile
_________________________
I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!





Top
#42997 - 03/31/12 04:24 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Turner]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
TFF, you really handed the home field advantage to TT there!
He's even more adept at that sort of tactic than Rev.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#42999 - 03/31/12 06:31 PM Re: Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including, [Re: Bill S.]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
TFF, you really handed the home field advantage to TT there!
He's even more adept at that sort of tactic than Rev.


The home court advantage being the ability to relentlessly sputter nonsense? Yogic flying is bullcrap. Poor reasoning from false facts does not make it true; nor does it compensate for intellectual inadequacy.

Top
Page 89 of 120 < 1 2 ... 87 88 89 90 91 ... 119 120 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.