Last time God intervened in the World?

[Illyrius]

47 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

The only words I ever use or quote mean exactly what they say and need no explanation. If your mind shies away from the obvious, then you might want to ruminate on them, for a while.

The problem with verbal or textual expression is that it can and always will be interpretated as something "between the lines". Every sentence and statement we make means something sligtly different to anyone. Someone writes in deliberately more cryptic style, someone uses sarcasm too much etc. You have an excellent gift with words. I would say your style is sharp and deadly. Not cryptic - more sarcastic - but sometimes a bit rude without reason, just sometimes you use labeling without a reason, but other than that you are an excellent writer.

Edited November 30, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[+Liquid Gardens]

58 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Of course i am imposing a current human understanding of science physics chemistry etc on how i think  To do other wise would require faith and belief in the impossible and a form of magical thinking.

Okay, then where in the universe is heaven located?  I'm imposing my current human understanding too when I'm noting that it is rather presumptuous to think that a being who has the power to create natural laws is then confined by them and 'current human understanding'.  (if your god is not a supreme creator and doesn't love us or is not 'good', then obviously I'm not referring to your god)

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

yes while it is not 2017 in heaven right now because they dont all use our own dating system

Ha, then what dating system do they use in heaven?  Using your rather obtuse 'logic' here, I guess it's likewise not 1 degree Celsius right now where I live because we use don't use that temperature scale...

[+Hammerclaw]

31 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

That's cool, when I see references to capital-G 'God' I usually make assumptions that it is the general Abrahamic one we are referring to.  If your god is not loving and good then obviously there is no inconsistency with the way this world is.

I have no idea what creed the Creator aligns with--if any. Impressing human concepts of good and evil, Baptist or Catholic, Jewish or Moslem and such on something we attribute the origin of the Cosmos to, always seems rather trite, infantile and trivializing, to me. Culturally I am a Calvinist Christian, so using it's symbology comes naturally. It's what such symbols mean to an individual that is paramount.

[XenoFish]

I rather like the idea of an indifferent 'god'. Sure it might be the creator of all things, but that doesn't make us important. The whole of creation being a well put together machination with just enough chaos to keep it different. This is if I chose to believe. 

[Mr Walker]

17 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Okay, then where in the universe is heaven located?  I'm imposing my current human understanding too when I'm noting that it is rather presumptuous to think that a being who has the power to create natural laws is then confined by them and 'current human understanding'.  (if your god is not a supreme creator and doesn't love us or is not 'good', then obviously I'm not referring to your god)

Ha, then what dating system do they use in heaven?  Using your rather obtuse 'logic' here, I guess it's likewise not 1 degree Celsius right now where I live because we use don't use that temperature scale...

heaven is simply the word for the " galactic confederation of worlds" governed by god and the angels and responsible for the uplifting of new species such as humans   In other words heaven is "the heavens"   

it requires magical thinking to imagine a god who has always existed or who never needed to evolve its self aware intelligence via learning and interacting with the rest of the universe Eg how did a god come to be intelligent if it had no way of learning how to think or become aware  ?  You then have to imagine that somehow this being can exist outside a time line which actually  is not yet complete, and thus can see future events which do not yet even exist anywhere or in any form.

  Eg we know the universe is expanding and evolving This process has not yet been completed And so, how can any entity, even one outside the universe, see something which has not yet occurred ?  

but then to me such a god is impossible.  This is a problem for me, as i personally know a very real and powerful god, who teaches me, protects me, loves me and cares about me/

Thus i must, knowing that this god is real and physical,  be able to explain its reality in real physical terms i cant just imagine or fantasise about what it might be like. it is what it is 

There are many dating systems a cross all the inhabited planets and the species of beings in heaven. With instantaneous travel this can be a bit confusing but most travellers tend  to start with their local time and slowly adapt to the  time in the new destination just like we do when travelling around earth  ive never asked the cosmic consciousness what dating system it uses and I  probably wouldn't understand it if it tried to  explain it to me,  However i suspect it is  a mechanistic one based on something like the age of the universe or the rate of entropy in the system  but here is an interesting thought. On earth we see things form the distance though the limitations of the speed of light so that what we see occurring  now actually happened a long long time ago. However with instantaneous travel you get to a destination in real local time, and so, in a sense, move into the future of that planet or star you were observing from earth. It is not really the future of course but this is due to the relativistic nature of time and space.   

[Mr Walker]

43 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Okay, then where in the universe is heaven located?  I'm imposing my current human understanding too when I'm noting that it is rather presumptuous to think that a being who has the power to create natural laws is then confined by them and 'current human understanding'.  (if your god is not a supreme creator and doesn't love us or is not 'good', then obviously I'm not referring to your god)

Ha, then what dating system do they use in heaven?  Using your rather obtuse 'logic' here, I guess it's likewise not 1 degree Celsius right now where I live because we use don't use that temperature scale...

And yes indeed the temp you give is not only given through the measurement you use but the language you use  i was brought up in imperial measurements and we now use  metric so i have some abilty to interchange  them but temperatures are the most confusing being a more complex  translation  I can accurately  mentally convert almost anything, but temps are only approximate   1 degree c would be 33/ 34 Fahrenheit i guess    I am even worse with grams and imperial  equivalents but  ok on kilograms and lbs .  I am so old that i grew up knowing celcius as centigrade, as it was referred to a t school.

A second reason for the change in name was that the Conference General de Pois et Measures decided that “All common temperature scales would have their units named after someone closely associated with them; namely, Kelvin, Celsius, Fahrenheit, Réaumur andRankine.”

The change in elementary-school textbooks began to take place around 1968, and during the 1970s, as districts began to replace their former textbooks.  In the meantime, parents, scientists, and college professors continued to use the name they had grown up with.  Only students born in the 1970s and later would have grown up calling the scale “Celsius.”  (I continue to catch myself saying “centigrade” to my own students.)

In England, the BBC Weather did not begin using the term Celsiusuntil 1985, and the word centigrade continues to to be commonly used in England, according to some sources

.https://expattutor.wordpress.com/2013/02/14/what-happened-to-centigrade-confusion-over-the-celsius-temperature-scale/ 

I've never really listened closely, but from casual observation i would say centigrade is still used as much as Celsius  in Australian conversations. 

 

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr Walker

[Mr Walker]

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

The only words I ever use or quote mean exactly what they say and need no explanation. If your mind shies away from the obvious, then you might want to ruminate on them, for a while.

That is untrue Words don't work like that. they might reflect  what is in your mind and be clear to you, but this does not mean the same words are clear to another person with a different mind knowledge understanding or  world view  Take that verse again there are MANY difernt ways it could be interpreted and unless you wrote the original, you cannot know what the writer had in their mind, just a s i cannot know what you had in your mind.  It has nothing to do with the proclivities of my mind, nor my abilty to ruminate.

i can see not one but half a dozen difernt meanings moralities and messages in that piece of verse. What i cant tell is which one YOU can see. 

here is the verse again.  now tell me theer is only ONE  possible meaning in this complex passage. . The surface one is clear and in two parts but there are deeper layers to it all.  including knowing and understanding the symbolic/ metaphorical attachments to words like white raiments,  and the fire/crucible  in which the gold (what is this representing) is purified    

 

evelations 3: I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth.

17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

 

I gave oyu my interpretation but you haven't made an intelligible comment on that  . 

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr Walker

[+Sherapy]

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

If you explained what you were talking about i could make a sensible reply to this  I began by actually writing in support of what i THOUGHT you were saying.   If you chose to write in deliberately unclear verses etc  then you can't call me a fool for not being able to determine which of many potential messages existed within your mind.   Be clearm and  people will not misunderstand what you are trying to say.  (Or are you deliberately doing this as  part of game play?)  Eg if you write something obtuse enough , then you can be critical of ANY response to it 

I don't think there is a poster clearer than Hammer. Why do you try and respond anyways, why not just ask for clarity? 

[Mr Walker]

5 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

I don't think there is a poster clearer than Hammer. Why do you try and respond anyways, why not just ask for clarity? 

I did and he told me he was being deliberately obtuse, in order to teach me a lesson.

On the contrary, I think you are a gifted eccentric, in the uncomfortable position of having the tables turned on you

  As i said, i don't play games with people Now he is arguing that his words should have been perfectly clear, despite him choosing them  to try and trick me or bait me by making them UNCLEAR .  

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr Walker

[Illyrius]

Sentences can't be clear. Everything is subject to personal subjective interpretation.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[Illyrius]

You may get the basic info or point of something. But everyting is colored by the spirit of person who writes and the person who reads.

And then prejudices come into play. And all sort of other emotional cloudings of meaning.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[+Hammerclaw]

There once was a man who was idolized by someone he cared deeply for, his every word, pearls of wisdom in their eyes. His vanity seduced by their worship, he began to believe it himself. He tried to be the all-wise and all-knowing sage they believed him to be. The problem with being a hero, placed on a pedestal, is that heroes fail just as often as ordinary folk. So, of course, he failed too, as would be expected and fell hard, shattering their trust--and in the process--he was taught a well-deserved lesson and reacquaintance with humility. It's a lesson certain others need to learn. 

[+Sherapy]

9 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

You may get the basic info or point of something. But everyting is colored by the spirit of person who writes and the person who reads.

And then prejudices come into play. And all sort of other emotional cloudings of meaning.

Argon, there is tone, diction, theme, syntax and style all used to get the writers perspective across. I think one can get a really good idea of ones intended meaning with these elements. MW often complains of being misunderstood or misunderstanding no offense to him but this is a common theme in his posts. 

[Illyrius]

4 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Argon, there is tone, diction, theme, syntax and style all used to get the writers perspective across. I think one can get a really good idea of ones intended meaning with these elements. MW often complains of being misunderstood or misunderstanding no offense to him but this is a common theme in his posts. 

Yes, but essentialy we all sense where is someone coming from so to speak, we either like that position or not. So we can't be objective about sentences. We tend to distort, to be biased, everyone. It is the way i look at the problem. You may or may not agree.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[+Sherapy]

17 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

There once was a man who was idolized by someone he cared deeply for, his every word, pearls of wisdom in their eyes. His vanity seduced by their worship, he began to believe it himself. He tried to be the all-wise and all-knowing sage they believed him to be. The problem with being a hero, placed on a pedestal, is that heroes fail just as often as ordinary folk. So, of course, he failed too, as would be expected and fell hard, shattering their trust--and in the process--he was taught a well-deserved lesson and reacquaintance with humility. It's a lesson certain others need to learn. 

I am thinking you are forgiven, perhaps the friend was going through a emotionally rough time, and was seeking the understanding and compassion of a fellow caregiver and the friend in his zeal to help, even though well meaning wasn't what the moment needed. So in all fairness to the friendship  time away, time to heal and a whole new life was the healing agent. I bet if you reached out to your friend the door is open, if you choose to move on I have a hunch you will always be thought of fondly.

[Illyrius]

38 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

There once was a man who was idolized by someone he cared deeply for, his every word, pearls of wisdom in their eyes. His vanity seduced by their worship, he began to believe it himself. He tried to be the all-wise and all-knowing sage they believed him to be. The problem with being a hero, placed on a pedestal, is that heroes fail just as often as ordinary folk. So, of course, he failed too, as would be expected and fell hard, shattering their trust--and in the process--he was taught a well-deserved lesson and reacquaintance with humility. It's a lesson certain others need to learn. 

This is all well and romantic, but if i am not too rude, are you showing humility when you characterise my points of view as "esoteric doggerel"? i am being kind with you, are you showing that humility you speak about to me?

[+Hammerclaw]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

This is all well and romantic, but if i am not too rude, are you showing humility when you characterise my points of view as "esoteric doggerel"? i am being kind with you, are you showing that humility you speak about to me?

Comparatively speaking, yes. As others can attest, I'm honest to a fault--and I have many.  I've said nothing ill about you, just what you write, sometimes. You can't judge a person by what they write. Some of the kindest, gentlest souls write horrible things as fiction, or in text conversations. On the other hand, some of the most inspiring literature was written by the most despicable people. Take Charles Dickens, for instance. From his work one might envision a saintly soul; instead, he was a wretched individual who disparaged and divorced his wife of many years and forbade their children from seeing her on pain of being left out of his will. He did this so he could indulge his Lolita fantasies with younger women. What a "ponderous chain"  he forged for himself!

[Illyrius]

22 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Comparatively speaking, yes. As others can attest, I'm honest to a fault--and I have many.  I've said nothing ill about you, just what you write, sometimes. You can't judge a person by what they write. Some of the kindest, gentlest souls write horrible things as fiction, or in text conversations. On the other hand, some of the most inspiring literature was written by the most despicable people. Take Charles Dickens, for instance. From his work one might envision a saintly soul; instead, he was a wretched individual who disparaged and divorced his wife of many years and forbade their children from seeing her on pain of being left out of his will. He did this so he could indulge his Lolita fantasies with younger women. What a "ponderous chain"  he forged for himself!

To label something as you labeled my writings, if you are really humble person and not a hero you speak about, then you should at least point to logical inconsistencies in my writing and not label them in that manner without a reason. *Snip*

Edited December 1, 2017 by kmt_sesh
Avoid personal attacks

[+Hammerclaw]

20 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

I am thinking you are forgiven, perhaps the friend was going through a emotionally rough time, and was seeking the understanding and compassion of a fellow caregiver and the friend in his zeal to help, even though well meaning wasn't what the moment needed. So in all fairness to the friendship  time away, time to heal and a whole new life was the healing agent. I bet if you reached out to your friend the door is open, if you choose to move on I have a hunch you will always be thought of fondly.

Run the line of French below my posts through a translator. Thank you.

[+Sherapy]

32 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

Yes, but essentialy we all sense where is someone coming from so to speak, we either like that position or not. So we can't be objective about sentences. We tend to distort, to be biased, everyone. It is the way i look at the problem. You may or may not agree.

 I think we strive to be objective and in doing so part of interpretation is accounting for bias too. Subjectivity plays a part in interpretation, but it isn't the whole picture or impossible to account for as is being argued. 

[+Hammerclaw]

Just now, Mr. Argon said:

To label something as you labeled my writings, if you are really humble person and not a hero you speak about, then you should at least point to logical inconsistencies in my writing and not label them in that manner without a reason. I see xenofish likes this post of yours already. Another humble person. At least you have the logic he sorely lacks - but humility. Please don't make me laugh.

If I give all reasons which you've heard many times from others, it wouldn't make a bit of difference. I choose to take it easy on you and give you space. I just won't be drawn into lengthy discussions with inevitable, unpleasant outcomes. Others here won't be so charitable, so your plate will be full, none-the-less.

[Illyrius]

25 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

If I give all reasons which you've heard many times from others, it wouldn't make a bit of difference. I choose to take it easy on you and give you space. I just won't be drawn into lengthy discussions with inevitable, unpleasant outcomes. Others here won't be so charitable, so your plate will be full, none-the-less.

Go ahead i can't wait a for debate with a humble hero.I choose to be easy on you, but if you are continuing with your humble attitude it will be a pleasure to lift your spirit.

By the way all i had from others is just an empty labeling like yours, but as a difference from them i find you a worthy opponent, so it would be fun.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Mr. Argon

[+Sherapy]

20 minutes ago, Mr. Argon said:

This is all well and romantic, but if i am not too rude, are you showing humility when you characterise my points of view as "esoteric doggerel"? i am being kind with you, are you showing that humility you speak about to me?

Lol, he is accurate he is not known for humility, he is known for an acerbic, honest, brazen tongue. He said he was reacquainted with humility a much needed lesson in the context of his narrative, but it was contextual humility, not a strong characteristic, it is one he is rediscovering. He is being honest, this is a quailty of his and he is known for it. He wasn't saying he is humble so don't be offended when he isn't. 

[+Sherapy]

13 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Run the line of French below my posts through a translator. Thank you.

Line of French? 

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

Line of French? 

"Je suis toujours la` pour toi, si jamais tu as besoin de moi."