Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
I Also Read A Course In Miracles...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by J Raymond Redbourne on November 18, 2002 14:44:49 UTC

besides the Stranger In A Strange Land.

Re: ego, I like to think mine is reasonably strong and healthy. This tells me I am indeed a God-Child, and at the same time, not God. And it tells me to have respect for others as God's' Children. The double apostrophe says I don't know everything yet, like whether the God-Force is singular or plural.

The difference between argument and Direct Revelation is simply in the matter of discussion, that by formulating answers and vocalizing them, the concepts become clearer.
But if we have insufficient data, the case may become more confused and merely combative. So DR uses certain non-interference techniques to clarify the issues. By this we are left to make more enlightened decisions, but still using free will, and therefore assuming responsibility for our actions.

As to official standards: I feel that Shakespeare was wrong in "There is no right or wrong, but thinking makes it so". I think there are Absolute Truths. Technology would seem to indicate this. A thing works or it does not.

I disagree with Socrates' on his "right opinion is as valid as knowledge". Experiential knowledge possesses test-strength that mere opinion does not. His argument was the next thing to the disembodied: volume of angels on a pinhead.

The important thing is this: without our personal experiences, the Holy Spirit has nothing to work with in helping the individual to understand Truths of what works and what does not. That is: what produces happiness (or at least satisfaction) and what does not. We hope for bestowed joy in the afterlight. By this, we can actually work toward it.

For instance, one might think that feelings of superiority generate happiness. Truth is tho', that wealth, power and fame does not guarantee happiness. Such people are rife with alcoholism and suicides. Mind you, poverty does not guarantee virtuous behaviour or happiness either. So the answer appears not to lie in our environment and possessions, but rather within, assuming our physical needs are met.

So Life seems to be a course in attitude adjustment.

The characters in Stranger In A Strange Land were loving and certainly not egomaniacs. They simply recognized their godhood. I am a student-god. You may not see yourself in that light, but I see you that way. In fact your parents thought so highly of you, they named you after an Archangel.

It's entirely possible that anyone can create a universe, once you know how.

Did I have a typo along with Dima? Chances are he does not think his name is exotic. How about if Ray goes to India, or wherever, would my name be exotic? I suppose by the dictionary it would be.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins