I Have a Question

Israel

BANNED
I didn't mean to make it sound as though anything is referenced by my own consciousness.
 

Israel

BANNED
This guy??? I feel so minimalized. ��

Ha!

It was a great comment. And you are a great commenter.
But seriously, are we in the same chapter if not close to some sort of being on the same page at least in regards to this?

WE assign the significance of a thing appearing a certain way, especially if we have had some experience with it...even to the point, like you say of "naming it".

Is it even possible to consider that a familiarity in "the naming", makes it so we don't even really recognize it anymore for what is, at fundamental level, a tangle. Useful, yes, a form repeatable and learnable? Yes.

I am learning this about things I think I know, especially people, like my wife. She contains worlds, but how often she just appears to me, well, as wife. To see what's there, not some conveniently labeled thing made of a utility that in its convenience, is also blinding.

I think that Ambush also "touched this" when saying that the words we apply to concepts almost give us the impression that somehow their reality is summed in them...but upon closer inspection, the terms almost become useless, for there's far more to it than we realize in the glossing.

And "some other guy" wisely wrote something like "I think there's a lot more contained in the held concept of omniscience and omnipotence beyond just knowing what's going to happen next"...or something like that.
 

WaltL1

Senior Member
Ha!

It was a great comment. And you are a great commenter.
But seriously, are we in the same chapter if not close to some sort of being on the same page at least in regards to this?

WE assign the significance of a thing appearing a certain way, especially if we have had some experience with it...even to the point, like you say of "naming it".

Is it even possible to consider that a familiarity in "the naming", makes it so we don't even really recognize it anymore for what is, at fundamental level, a tangle. Useful, yes, a form repeatable and learnable? Yes.

I am learning this about things I think I know, especially people, like my wife. She contains worlds, but how often she just appears to me, well, as wife. To see what's there, not some conveniently labeled thing made of a utility that in its convenience, is also blinding.

I think that Ambush also "touched this" when saying that the words we apply to concepts almost give us the impression that somehow their reality is summed in them...but upon closer inspection, the terms almost become useless, for there's far more to it than we realize in the glossing.

And "some other guy" wisely wrote something like "I think there's a lot more contained in the held concept of omniscience and omnipotence beyond just knowing what's going to happen next"...or something like that.
That guy sounds dang near genius.
And handsome too. :D
 

StriperrHunterr

Senior Member
I didn't mean to make it sound as though anything is referenced by my own consciousness.

That's not much for clarification, or maybe I'm just not picking up what you're putting down. If it's consciousness in general then it would still apply to you, that statement anyway.

My stand point is that the knot exists whether we as individuals are conscious of it or not. Not to mix metaphors, but it's like the history of the universe, no matter which story you believe, in that it existed before conscious humans were aware of it. Adam and Eve were subsequent to Creation of the Earth, and homo erectus came long after the Big Bang and the earth cooled, followed by the autotrophs drooling, we created tools and built the pyramids, math, science, history... I think my point is made. ::gone:
 

Israel

BANNED
That's not much for clarification, or maybe I'm just not picking up what you're putting down. If it's consciousness in general then it would still apply to you, that statement anyway.

My stand point is that the knot exists whether we as individuals are conscious of it or not. Not to mix metaphors, but it's like the history of the universe, no matter which story you believe, in that it existed before conscious humans were aware of it. Adam and Eve were subsequent to Creation of the Earth, and homo erectus came long after the Big Bang and the earth cooled, followed by the autotrophs drooling, we created tools and built the pyramids, math, science, history... I think my point is made. ::gone:


LOL.

Not laughing at you, but with you...

That's a marvelous description of stuff...first this, then this, then this...then...

But, you and I are stuck together...in quite greater measure than maybe even we know. (Me at least, as to the unknowing part) And I mean "stuck" in the sense of what gets introduced into my consciousness has now some compelling to "deal" with it...(it may be seeking to understand/ a sense it is "best" jettisoned {Claudia in the mini skirt...and my wife's name is not Claudia}/ that scuffling in the woods...is it a deer? person? just a squirrel...better leave the safety on and WAIT) So many things "enter" my consciousness! What to do with...or about each...or any?



When you were writing...was what was "happening inside you" similar at all to what was happening in me, as I read? Did you kinda see the "big bang" in your mind...some kinda framing of what I think they call (am I wrong in this term...a 'singularity"?) like everything of the universe contracted to a point...and BOOM! All this stuff thrown out in a moment...then the stars are there as fragments from this spoonful of "everything" expanding...eons eons eons...planets forming and cooling...eons eons eons, life on at least one, "drooling", eons, then standing, then finally composing Hamlet, Symphony No. 40 in g minor, A Brief History of Time, E=MC2...and all along the way I had to "insert" my consciousness as though I am watching...there ...beholding...seeing Mozart, Einstein, Shakespeare, drooling proto hominids...a very BIG explosion!
If I see it, if I can "put" my consciousness there, I tend to believe it.

But I am stuck. Oh, how I am stuck!...and it is in all and every way (at least to me and for me, perfect!)


Because One has told my "Go ahead, put your consciousness here...in everything you can't see...believe...and behold what happens!" Look, I can't explain the mechanics of that at all, of how in me (least likely to all my measurements) He attained a place of primacy, how I was brought to do it. I could try to talk about things "I have read" that might endorse it, by other men...but I also know that even in their writings they equally are stuck trying to approach what they say:

Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

You could ask..."how can you believe that?" I would say "how can I not believe what I believe?"
For if, as I follow what kinda looks like a trail in your post...somewhere on that eons of the timeline, man developed "consciousness"...(I would be compelled to say...somewhere a thing gave it to another)...but either way...if man "developed it" and it is now in man as part and parcel to "every man"...then every man is no more nor less free than any other to kinda "put it" where he does. I have no compulsion over anyone...anymore than I do...over myself to "decide" where consciousness "should go"...at least if it is only my own. How can I direct...the very thing...that directs me? No matter how we argue "its" origin?

There are things in this that would, I think, be way to lengthy to explore (as my friend Bullet often reminds me), here...I would appear probably, very much as I am...a tedious man. But suffice it to say that for me, long before I began to see (what is to me) the perfect sense of Jesus Christ, he appeared as friend..."inserting" something by his friendliness that is so far beyond my own understanding...at this point further words are useless.
 
Last edited:

atlashunter

Senior Member
Hmmm...
"Like best" or "based on evidence"?
1. unknotted rope in back of truck
2. wind whipping around in back of moving truck
3. rope now in a knot

I like the explanation that Sandra Bullock was hiding in the back of my truck and tied the rope in knots the best but..... no evidence of Sandra, just the unknotted rope, wind and then a knotted rope.
As opposed to... even if you believe in God, believe he has the ability to invisibly tie the rope in a knot.. whats the evidence that he actually did it?

Odds are far greater it was Sandra Bullock. At least she is known to exist.
 
Top