|
Post by maat on Mar 5, 2007 23:43:22 GMT
What would you accept as Truth, without needing proof? I have been working away with this question doing it's 'stuff' somewhere in the background of my mind. Was not really even thinking of it.. then whammo ... up come "'LOVE' is the Law". Can't prove it, but it is the one thing I would die for (rescuing someone etc) and it is the only thing which, if it were not true, where I would be (half way ) happy to face annihilation. We discussed this recently with the question which ran along the lines of 'what if God was not a God of Love?' - paraphrased it Maat
|
|
|
Post by wayseer on Mar 6, 2007 0:21:33 GMT
Nice point Maat - had not thought about it like that before - and was it not Paul who said Love is more important than any other 'spiritual gift' - so perhaps Love can trump the need for proof as well.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 6, 2007 0:35:19 GMT
What would you accept as Truth, without needing proof? I have been working away with this question doing it's 'stuff' somewhere in the background of my mind. Was not really even thinking of it.. then whammo ... up come "'LOVE' is the Law". Can't prove it, but it is the one thing I would die for (rescuing someone etc) and it is the only thing which, if it were not true, where I would be (half way ) happy to face annihilation. We discussed this recently with the question which ran along the lines of 'what if God was not a God of Love?' - paraphrased it Maat Indeed, if God was not a God of Love, I would stand before His throne (and in this context I mean to be gender specific) and defy 'Him'—Better, as you say, to be annihilated. So, I agree, the 'existence' of a God of love, is a Truth I must accept without proof. It is the premise on which all other meaning in life depends—Without 'Her', nothing else matters—Fortunately, I suggest there is sufficient evidence to justify that faith.
|
|
|
Post by moose on Mar 6, 2007 10:31:51 GMT
Thnx matt,
I agree on the love thing,I would never matyr myself because i hate some one like jumping in front of a bus to cause an accident to harm anyone on board but i would jump in front to save some one that sort of thing.
But I think it's a bit more that just a feeling. love in the airy fairy sence is something that people feel towards each other but when you talk about self sacrafice you open up a whole other definition, compassion. If we are to talk about a loving god I would expect that to mean compassionate but not willing to relieve us from certain things. We must still experiance some suffering. Not that I'm an anarchist but every thing is set (the laws). I think that human emotion is fairly primative in the sceme of things.
Look at Freemasonry we behave differently from the rest of the nautral world eg compassion. There are still rules to follow but we do it with compassion and obediance.
So I would add obediance to the list of laws as well. If you accept the first 2 then you would not need proof because you could ecpect truth. eg the rules can change but the others are still there if that means anything. Sean M
|
|
|
Post by moose on Mar 6, 2007 10:56:07 GMT
tamrim,
I noticed your frustration on page 5 of this thread. I like that there is someone like you on the forum willing to convers on these things (if thats the propper term) and my experiances that I'v mentioned have been dreams at least the vissual ones any way. It's kind of weired that freemasonry is illustrated by symbols (so are my dreams for the most) and russell mentioned that morayfield lodge meets in the same building as ours but ours is a scotish lodge so I chose that, didn't know the difference I just concidered it better for me than QC or EC for you english.
If I choose something I would like to learn about (actualy make a decission that ) then I usualy get some disturbing but informant dreams. the problem is stoping them. a decission is actualy a hard thing to make if you change your mind later on then you never actualy made one because you were still open for negotiation. And when you have dreams like mine then you'd better be sure cuse there not always good, some are very disturbing but still helpfull.
In regards to the sceptics on the forum I have tried to find other ways of interpreting them the closest thing to descibing the way it hapens is in a quantum phisics paper I stumbled upon but even thats hard for me to grasp. Cheers Sean
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 6, 2007 19:54:08 GMT
Bro. Seana decision is actually a hard thing to make if you change your mind later on then you never actually made one because you were still open for negotiation. This is a very wise observation. Often we think we have made a decision, yet at the point of putting it into action, we change our minds and do something else. Consider the mundane example of intending to withdraw money from an ATM and how often we change our minds as to the amount just as we push the buttons. In reality, while we had thought we had previously decided what to do, we were in a state of ambivalence until we had to act. Where this situation becomes significant is when we seek to retrospectively rationalize our choices: Sometimes we manage to rationalize some very unwise split-second decisions, giving them a false aura of deliberation and purpose. Moving on, I suggest you value your dreams but please do not obsess over them. I have read that some South American tribes have nurtured the facility of recalling their dreams in great detail and treat them with reverence during their morning discussion: Importantly, they then move on to the more mundane aspects of their daily routine. Neither, I suggest, be too prescriptive in your interpretation of dreams. I have little patience with books which bluntly declare that to dream of x means y. The meaning varies not only from person to person and day to day but also within each dream. While dreams may arise from within or beyond, what is important is what they suggest to you. In looking for meaning, to salvage a phrase from the hypocrisy of politics, "Be alert but not alarmed."
|
|
|
Post by moose on Mar 7, 2007 11:23:28 GMT
Just puting this in here cus I just now came acros it. I was going over the website I mentioned witht the family DNA test this was included >"worlds' only "Cohanim" test, which will identify those people who share this set of markers with the family of the Biblical character Aaron" How would they have his DNA to start with. This is the site for any one that might be intersted I think I read somewere that they do other names aswell I'm just tooo tired to find it. www.ftdna.com/faq.html#q1.1
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 7, 2007 22:34:05 GMT
Jolly good question Moose...
reminded me of another favourite... if God has spoken to so many people, how come no-one can describe what He looks like?
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Mar 7, 2007 22:58:47 GMT
>if God has spoken to so many people, how come no-one can describe what He looks like?
Maat
I seem to recall a jewish/islamic ban on images of their god(s) (Elohah/Al-lah). It makes me wonder how off-putting is/was the appearance of that god
And I recall long ago in deep meditation God spoke to me. It was perfectly clear it was God - like the sun is clear on a cloudless day. And I was so deep in meditation that I do not recall what He said
Such is life
Cheers
Russell
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Mar 8, 2007 4:30:15 GMT
I would suggest no more off-putting than the un-remembered voice.
In any case, there are sufficient 'descriptions' within the Jewish corpus to sense into the absolute divine outpouring radiance to see that the 'awfulness' was truly awe-some.
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on Mar 9, 2007 16:08:50 GMT
There's a saying in Chinese: three men make a tiger. They say a philosopher-courtier once asked the king if he would believe the testimony of a man who said there was a tiger walking about in the marketplace. Not the testimony of one man, replied the king. Well, how about if two men said so? I'd still have my doubts, replied the king. What if three people came gaving the same account? The king nodded, that he might be prepared to give the idea some credence if three people came out with the same story. The reason this philosopher-courtier asked such a question in the first place was because, having to go away on other business, he knew his enemies would tell lies about him to the king. This discussion was meant to dissuade the king from believing such rumours. Sure enough, when he returned from business, the king snubbed him, having believed the malicious lies of the courtier's enemies. And the moral of the story? Kings will believe any old crap if three liars tell the story often enough, even if it's about a maneater in a supermarket, or an unicorn for that matter. But I don't
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Mar 9, 2007 20:18:40 GMT
>But I don't
Ruff
That is just what I would expect from you.
But would you actively investigate the hidden mysteries of nature and science?
Or would you just make a ruff judgement?
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 9, 2007 21:07:01 GMT
> But would you actively investigate the hidden mysteries of nature and science? Or would you turn your back on these and search for unicorns?
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Mar 9, 2007 21:29:43 GMT
What if unicorns were on the map you were using?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 9, 2007 21:59:02 GMT
What if unicorns were on the map you were using? In the sense that this discussion is part of that map, I would do as I have done and seek to determine if they led toward or away from the path. Indeed, 'unicorns' on the map may represent a cautionary lesson about the 'glamour' of imagination (both personal and collective). I suspect (hope) that deep down, many of the aluminium clad, card carrying members of the crystal crowd know their preposterous yet professed ideas are false. However, some appear to really think they can, for instance, fly or handle vipers with impunity (sadly not immunity).
|
|
|
Post by a on Mar 9, 2007 22:23:44 GMT
But would you actively investigate the hidden mysteries of nature and science? Took me ages to acccept that many Freemasons don't do this, even though they are instructed/encouraged to do so in their second. I would imagine that those lodges that do actively encourage this, and those Masons who do, probably find taking steps up the old ladder much easier. And the wisdom and beauty that is being missed by those who don't is really sad. Still their choice at the end of the day. Saddeneing to watch when those who don't ridicule those that do though. Sort of debases the Craft in my opinion. Good job that I am not a Masonic power that is, for I would be coming down rather hard on this, enabling all of those who are properly prepared and who wish to take steps take them.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 9, 2007 22:47:38 GMT
But would you actively investigate the hidden mysteries of nature and science? Took me ages to acccept that many Freemasons don't do this, even though they are instructed/encouraged to do so in their second. I would imagine that those lodges that do actively encourage this, and those Masons who do, probably find taking steps up the old ladder much easier. And the wisdom and beauty that is being missed by those who don't is really sad. Still their choice at the end of the day. Saddeneing to watch when those who don't ridicule those that do though. Sort of debases the Craft in my opinion. Good job that I am not a Masonic power that is, for I would be coming down rather hard on this, enabling all of those who are properly prepared and who wish to take steps take them. Would you come down hard on me? Would you prohibit the exercise of reason, discernment or intellectual discrimination? Would everyone simply have to accept any fancy that another may care to make, with error being added to error until the Craft becomes a bedlam? Please remember, Freemasonry was at the forefont of the Age of Englightenment. I think it was Kant who used the analogy of a white dove which strove to free itself from the 'limitations' of the atmosphere, only to find, without air to cleave through, it was helpless. There is a cosmos of difference between 'hidden' and 'non-existent' and there are more than enough genuine mysteries to investigate for many lifetimes, without adding further layers of illusion.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Mar 9, 2007 23:30:25 GMT
" Now I a fourfold vision see, And a fourfold vision is given to me; 'Tis fourfold in my supreme delight, And threefold in soft Beulah's night, And twofold always. -- May God us keep From single vision, and Newton's sleep!"
Cheers
Russell
|
|
imakegarb
Member
One wee, sleeket, cowran, tim'rous beastie
Posts: 3,573
|
Post by imakegarb on Mar 9, 2007 23:44:04 GMT
Philip, I don't think *anyone* is at all suggesting we give up the exercise of reason, discernment or intellectual discrimination. Russell, I don't think anyone is suggesting we exercise "single vision". I've seen brethren who use only reason, discernment or intellectual discrimination often demand that those Freemasons who don't give up their ideas about how to proceed. And vice versa. This is, by both parties, I believe, a practice of intolerance. Then there are brethren, like me, who take the middle way and see value in both. I do use the tools that Philip describes but I find the mystic ideas, such as those expressed by Russell, also to be of great value. And I see no contradiction. All of these are simply more tools in my chest. All of them help me in my journey. And, as someone along the middle way, I become most uneasy when my brothers of either extreme call out against each other. For I love all my brothers and would rather they not fight.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 9, 2007 23:57:20 GMT
Bro. Russell, Thank you for the quote from the deservedly famous, visionary poet and artist William Blake. The empirical philosopher John Lock provides a 'masonic' context: In his Essay Concerning Human Understanding ( Epistle to the Reader, Bk. IV Ch.II, 29), he speaks of the role of the philosopher as an underlabourer, whose task is to clear the ground by removing 'some of the rubbish that lies in the way of knowledge.'
|
|