Semantics

[PoetPhilosopher]

Codex Gigas | Information on Codex Gigas AKA "the Devil's Bible"

This is worth a quick look.

I don't think the Bible was a great deception .. Lots of writers and translators involved over time as political agendas changed. More like it was fiddled with rather than any sinister motivation.

And just so that we're clear, you also feel the same way about what Christianity has become? That it's pretty honest?

(I'm speaking in intellectual, rather emotionless, emotionally distant terms here in pursuit of the truth.)

 

[sooda]

And just so that we're clear, you also feel the same way about what Christianity has become? That it's pretty honest?

(I'm speaking in intellectual, rather emotionless, emotionally distant terms here in pursuit of the truth.)

I am certainly not an intellectual. I think the Bible as well as history and archaeology are very interesting.. and pared down to the basics are closer to the truth.

I think you have to start with acknowledging the borrowed myths and epic exaggerations in once upon a time.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Darkness is evil is a very narrow belief metaphor. In many if not most Eastern traditions as well as several pagan traditions have darkness essential as light, and represent the soft, nurturing feminine aspect of all the universe. Light without darkness is destructive, burning, controlling, raging and prideful.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Darkness is evil is a very narrow belief metaphor. In many if not most Eastern traditions as well as several pagan traditions have darkness essential as light, and represent the soft, nurturing feminine aspect of all the universe. Light without darkness is destructive, burning, controlling, raging and prideful.

I'd ask for some links on the subject such that I may learn more, but I also don't want to take advantage of your time.

 

[David T]

Me? I go by the dictionary definition of words so this one has me stumped

Darkness :
1/ the partial or total absence of light. (What i recognise is darkness)
2/ wickedness or evil. (I have a problem with this as in the 2 definitions do not remotely relate to each other)

I have the same problem with "truth"
Truth :
1/ that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
2/ a belief that is accepted as true.

To me these definitions are contradictory. There are a few other words that, over the years, been taken and bastardised to mean something different and have now become accepted. It dilutes language.

Indeed! Like aweful and intercourse. In the 1800's the term aweful meant full of awe. And intercourse meant a dialog or conversation. So if i said "i had an aweful intercourse last night with my friend" that meant something different than it does today!

So now we take morphogy of language that can change in a short duration extend that back 2,000 years, pass that up through 100 generations of interpretation (like passing through a whisper circle) . Whats the likelyhood of what was written 2,000 years early being remotely understood? Especially by most who arent even aware of what i just wrote? Zero.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'd ask for some links on the subject such that I may learn more, but I also don't want to take advantage of your time.

Our resident pagan members can probably give a lot more resource than me but what immediately springs to mind for me is yin yang theory which crosses most of the East kn terms of philosophy and in chinese medicine (the only aspect that I heavily studied) cutting out darkness to maintain light in a simple binary good vs evil would disastrously throw your health out of balance.

 

[David T]

What are the differences between "darkness" and "evil"?

Which day of the week? Creating an understanding of terms requires trying to figure out do you mean when it was written or how its defined? Morphology of language is extremely fluid. Its what bothers hyper OCD types. They tend to enjoy math better since 1+1=2 stays consistent over thousands of years. It feels more real to them thus safe. Although you wont see them writing poetry.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'd ask for some links on the subject such that I may learn more, but I also don't want to take advantage of your time.

Here is a super duper simple overview:

 

[Cooky]

Darkness is evil is a very narrow belief metaphor. In many if not most Eastern traditions as well as several pagan traditions have darkness essential as light, and represent the soft, nurturing feminine aspect of all the universe. Light without darkness is destructive, burning, controlling, raging and prideful.

Interesting that without the illumination of light, our eyes would not see. Worthless.. Our lives are so very dependent on the sun.

We have always known that we are dependent on things not of this world.

 

[David T]

Dictionaries report common usage. The words just happen to be commonly used in ways that contradict when they are taken out of context. As long as the word communicates meaning in context it's not a problem.

Well you just bumped into the grelling-nelson paradox which contradicts you.

I certainly am fully trained in "contextual framing" words its called systematic theology. Its nonsense of course but hey thats college.

 

[David T]

Time for me to can of worms this thread up...

Christianity has a focus of light. On the internet, there are articles showing the Bible to be a great deception. In such articles, they show links between ancient evil practices and the book. If said deception were true, it may be possible those "protesters" of it have to act dark, and defy everything built up to be true, yet are moral in doing so. What if such protesters do act dark so as not to be a part of the Light system? What if light is a form of fakeness? What if the only way we find ourselves is in the process of flirting with our own dark side until we are cool with it, without actually being evil, disgusting, overly miscreant human beings? What if the path to human morality is acting our lower, morbid, raunchy self?

Oh i would put that logic at:

I live in the northwest and we have bigfoot on display. I dont see why people are so confused on this. Its an evil plot i tell you. The illuminati control science.

 

[Cooky]

Time for me to can of worms this thread up...

Christianity has a focus of light. On the internet, there are articles showing the Bible to be a great deception. In such articles, they show links between ancient evil practices and the book. If said deception were true, it may be possible those "protesters" of it have to act dark, and defy everything built up to be true, yet are moral in doing so. What if such protesters do act dark so as not to be a part of the Light system? What if light is a form of fakeness? What if the only way we find ourselves is in the process of flirting with our own dark side until we are cool with it, without actually being evil, disgusting, overly miscreant human beings? What if the path to human morality is acting our lower, morbid, raunchy self?

Comes a time when the blind man takes your hand
Says, "Don't you see"?
Gotta make it somehow on the dreams you still believe
Don't give it up, you got an empty cup
That only love can fill

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Oh i would put that logic at:

I live in the northwest and we have bigfoot on display. I dont see why people are so confused on this. Its an evil plot i tell you. The illuminati control science. View attachment 29833

True. But one has to describe their notions to reach constructive replies from others. The mind isn't perfect. And as far as I'm concerned, ADigitalArtist wins this thread.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Interesting that without the illumination of light, our eyes would not see. Worthless.. Our lives are so very dependent on the sun.

We have always known that we are dependent on things not of this world.

Seeing is only one sense and we often over rely and over trust it at the detriment of our other senses. And our eyes can and do fool us into believing things our other senses would know is not correct.
Besides, the sun is not the only source of light, and while the sun is important, a world where we only saw sun and never saw stars is a world without navigation, and soon to be a dead world cooked to ash by an unrelenting sun.

 

[Cooky]

Seeing is only one sense and we often over rely and over trust it at the detriment of our other senses. And our eyes can and do fool us into believing things our other senses would know is not correct.
Besides, the sun is not the only source of light, and while the sun is important, a world where we only saw sun and never saw stars is a world without navigation, and soon to be a dead world cooked to ash by an unrelenting sun.

Could you dream without light?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Could you dream without light?

Sure. I've had dreams with no visuals associated. Just sounds, like music or nature, smells of long ago foods or just simple feelings. Have you?

 

[David T]

True. But one has to describe their notions to reach constructive replies from others. The mind isn't perfect. And as far as I'm concerned, ADigitalArtist wins this thread.

At one time the bible in western culture was read as a science text. Not that it was written as a science text. My degree theology was the queen of science.

How we percieve effects what we see. So in modernity there is often a debate on the text. One says yes its a science text the other says yes its a science text but antiquated science myth.. They only are arguing details is all with a shared assumption, Yes the bible is a science text. The writers arent stupid its written for stupid "yes the bible is a science text" . The intellect is very absurd.

 

[Cooky]

Sure. I've had dreams with no visuals associated. Just sounds, like music or nature, smells of long ago foods or just simple feelings. Have you?

I suppose I have.

 

[sooda]

Interesting that without the illumination of light, our eyes would not see. Worthless.. Our lives are so very dependent on the sun.

We have always known that we are dependent on things not of this world.

Like what?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Like what?

Marco Rubio