BS: UFO's and the Bible

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: TIA
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 03:38 PM

Holy shit!

Starry Night...vapor trails!

Edvard Munch...that's no screamin' human, it's a Gray!

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Cluin
Date: 12 Feb 03 - 03:18 PM

Gawd in Betelgeuse!!! Now are we gonna play "Spot the Extraterrestrials in Art"?!!!

We're already up to friggin' near 300 posts.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: catspaw49
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 10:11 PM

Notice how fat Buddha is? Those "circles" are little clouds of methane emanating from his ass.........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:52 PM

Thanks Bill! The mandalas are wonderful! I just about lost myself in "Images of Sanity and Compassion in Tibetan Buddhism".

A most welcome - and timely - diversion indeed, especially after spending time with Mark Twains "The War Prayer" and revisions thereof today.   :-(

Good point about the circles, too. Several of the beautiful depictions of the Buddha also show small spherical objects 'hovering' nearby the seated figures. Hmmmmmmmmmmm

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Bill D
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:09 PM

with a little effort, I could make an entire argument that most 'disk' images were drawn from halos and hats and crowns and bowls and rocks and other 'naturally round and/or domed items'...even from the sun and moon...But that would be a much less interesting hypothesis, huh?

We see what we want to see....

I can wonder at those paintings, but statements in the page like this:
"Some people believe they may represent ET beings." really bemuse me. Of course "some people" believe that...some people really believe that fairies are real also. Perhaps they are...I can't 'prove' them wrong.

A WWW search in Google for mandala images will show how pervasive circles (of MANY sorts) are in the history of art.

(By the way...I am a science fiction fan who would LOVE to see a real alien or UFO....and I have no doubt that somewhere in the universe there MUST be life besides our own planet. It would please me a lot to have answers before I die...but I won't hold my breath, as I don't look good in blue...;>)"

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 09:05 PM

Thanks Rustic - just bookmarked Matthew Hurley's site too. Most intriguing! Can only absorb so much at once, but the paintings make the effort a pleasure.

I always wondered whether 'credible' evidence about a subject like UFO's really existed - especially for the habitually 'incredulous'. This collection of artwork, the record of events it reveals ... thought-provoking indeed!

Peace   :-)   daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 07:59 PM

Daylia, I thought this thread was on it's way out but since you 'revived' it again, you should check out that link I gave of Matthew Hurley's site. It has many beautiful painting and pictures of those petroglyphs I spoke about way back on this thread. I agree that they are thought provoking. I haven't checked out the search for the 10th planet. Interesting you say? I will have to go there.
Peace. Rustic

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 11 Feb 03 - 05:44 PM

GUEST the Insider - thanks for the links. The art is beautiful and thought-provoking, and the search for the 10th planet? Hmmmmmm .... fascinating!

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 06:30 PM

Twilight Zone theme song playing in backround.

Imagine this if you will...Keith (insider) and Rustic Rebel on the same wavelength.
Before coming here today I went to do some reading about the Raelian Revolution. (Taliesn mentioned them on another thread) I was sidetracked and found this place with historical artwork of UFO's! I thought if this thread was still going I would post the link. An interesting site. Matthew Hurley
That's not all Keith. I also went into some research on the Sumerian and Akkadian texts (inscribed in clay) and read a bit about this.This suggested that ET's were in our solar system 240,000 years ago- when kingship descended from heaven and founded 5 cities in the Mesopotamian plain.
I also read a story about the gods and the great flood (from the tablets) and it was very similar in ways to the Bible's flood.

Clinton your back and as amusing as ever! You too Cluin!
Peace. Rustic

PS. I went to a small blues fest this weekend where Canned Heat played. I met Fito de la Parra, the soul survivor of the band. It was also his birthday. I had e-mailed him earlier that week to bring me his book-Living the Blues-and he did it! I now have an autographed copy from Fito! (Just had to share that!)

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Cluin
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 03:35 PM

Are we there yet?

How much looooooooooongerrrrrrrr????

Are we there yet?

There better be a pool...

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 03:30 PM

"Satrie"? We don't need no steenkin' satrie, Clinton! :-)

Man, the view is just gorgeous from up here! See ya...

zzzzzzooooommm!

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 03:05 PM

Ya... that there are a lot of people in this thread, don't know satrie when they read it...

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 02:54 PM

OK, and the initial premise of this thread is that 'GOD=ALIENS'. Is there something you want to tell us Clinton?!?   :-)    daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 02:46 PM

No daylia

God told me...

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 02:44 PM

Hey Clinton did you think that 'evidence' up yourself?

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 12:46 PM

"Think for yourself."

"Ya... think about how dumb the average person is... Now what you have to remember is that half the people are dumber than that"

-George Carlin-

Is the human race a good candidate for 'thinking for itself'?

Again, so far the evidence is against it!

:-)

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Feb 03 - 12:37 PM

Thank you for the links, Insider. There is a phenomenon I have observed countless times, which is:

People with a preconceived prejudiced idea of "how things are" (and that includes just about everybody) have a strong tendency to discount or ignore any evidence that refutes or alters their established view of how things are. As a result, they seldom even encounter such evidence, except in passing, so to speak, and they do not dwell on it because they don't believe it in the first place. They do dwell on things which they do believe.

There are only 2 likely events which can cause them to change their minds...

1. A direct encounter with such radical new evidence, in a way which is undeniable.

2. A statement in favour of such new evidence by an authority in whom they place great trust. The authority can be said to be a "father" or "mother" figure. Most commonly that authority is the government, the news media, a church, the scientific community, the economic advisors, the medical community.

In cases where these authorities decide, for strong reasons of their own, to mislead the public, to lie, or to conceal information...then it is probable that they will succeed in fooling most of the people most of the time.

This has been demonstrated amply in every powerful dictatorship and every corrupt government since the dawn of civilization.

Unless confronted directly by stark reality most people simply go on believing whatever it is that they already believe, and all the more so if their "leaders" tell them to believe it.

"Don't follow leaders" - Bob Dylan   

Think for yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Feb 03 - 10:07 AM

You're probably right, Art, because I simply haven't got time for it right now. Have fun! I intend to.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Art Thieme
Date: 08 Feb 03 - 03:34 PM

238 posts in this thread,
238 posts,
If one of these posts just keels over dead,
There's 237 posts in this thread...

(continue---------and soon it'll be all gone)

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Penny S.
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 02:22 PM

The Immaculate Conception is not essential to the Biblical narrative, since it isn't there - see above, a long way above. It is about Mary's birth, not Jesus, and the Bible gives little information about Mary.

Thank you Nicole, for supplying information which I couldn't recall.

I didn't go into everything I could have said, being short of time, but only implied it. To be explicit, Jesus was either the result of a miracle, which does not need, and should not have, explanations placed on it which depend on physical states of extreme peculiarity (especially in this case, which I'll come back to), or of a normal sexual relationship.

The point of the Incarnation was that God became like us. (This is probably true of those other virgin stories which Little Hawk referred to.) The more odd the process of Jesus birth, the less true is the Incarnation. If it depended on Mary being a chimera or a hermaphrodite, Jesus is not like us. If God says, I will be born as a baby, and makes it so, not abhoring the Virgin's womb, he could be more like us than that. If God says, I will be born in the ordinary way, to a married couple who know each other in love, he would be most like us. I would prefer if it were that way.

When I was prepared for confirmation, the curate asked if anyone had a problem with the virgin birth. I kept quiet. He than explained that it was important because one of Joseph's ancestors had committed some offence to God and his descendants were hence barred from the Davidic throne. I still kept quiet. If that was his best argument, he had a very weak case.

I feel that those who want Jesus to have been the result of a miracle have a serious problem with human love and its expression. That some don't want his birth to have been painful and messy, is more understandable, but if God was going to use the "beam me out" method of emerging from the womb, why bother going in there in the first place. It defeats the object. If they want the birth to have been in the absence of midwives, there is another odd problem in their minds as well, about women. (What does it mean if God is brought into the world by normal women, and then seen out of it by them, as well?)

If it is necessary to postulate that Mary was 13, we need to look very carefully at the men concerned with that belief. Still carrying the purity of the child? Really? Like the children sought out in the belief that sex with a virgin cures AIDS? The way these men see women is profoundly flawed. (And if some who go along with this are women, maybe thay haven't thought it through very carefully.) I wouldn't want one in charge of any young girls in my care. If the Incarnation is about God becoming one with us, and he refuses to involve himself with a woman, as if he could not know that an older woman was still a virgin, if that were necessary, then the Incarnation is not for women. Mary has to be more of an adult than that. Yes, God could ensure that her poorly developed womb and bones could carry him safely, but why should he? If that is part of his message, then I know what sort of man he was, and I want nothing of him.

However, the small knowledge I have of God is not like that. God could be born of a rape victim, and still be God. God could be born of a prostitute, and still be God. Of a woman of any age, of a couple in any circumstances, and still be God. I think he would prefer to be conceived and carried in love, but if he can arrange a safe birth from a thirteen year old, he could probably get over that limitation, if necessary.

If you believe that God became one of us, the physical details shrink into insignificance beside that amazing event. Or should. If the physical details become vital to the belief, you need to look at the core again. God became man. Or he didn't. That's all that matters.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 02:13 PM

Sure, lets talk about crap! Ooops, that's crap. I MEAN C-R-A, no C-A-P, no ...

Forget it. Sounds fishy to me!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: catspaw49
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 01:56 PM

I think the drift is the best thing that could have happened to this sucker............Wanna' talk about carp? We had a nice carp discussion going on some other thread...........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 01:53 PM

Hee-haw! Hee-haw! Hee-haw!

Ooops, is that the right animal?

Neeeiiiiigggghhhhh ......   :-) thanks Bill!

PS you're right about the word "event". THAT'S what was bugging me when I re-read my post. Not all events are subjective (ie. the sunrise). It's the interpretation of them that is personal! "Experience" would have been a better choice, but I'd used it enough times already I thought!

Sorry bout the 'drift', Rustic.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 01:34 PM

joke:

a court jester somehow offended the king...The king, an unforgiving sort, sentenced him to death!

The jester, being a quick-witted sort, said,"But Sire, if you execute me, I won't be able to complete my surprise project for you!"

"And what is that supposed to be?", asked the king.

"Well, I am slowly teaching your favorite horse to sing! It will take about 10 years."......
So the king, who REALLY loved his horse, decided to allow the jester to try it.

As the jester was led out, one of the guards whispered to him.."That was fast thinking, but who are you kidding? No one has ever seen a singing horse." (not even Big Bill Broonzy)

"Well, I know what you mean," said the jester, " but in 10 years, a lot can happen; I may die anyway...the king may die...or, who knows, the horse may learn to sing!"

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 09:59 AM

Bill - regarding "the horse may learn to sing", have you seen this little gem that someone (I think Beccy) posted on another thread a while back? HE HE HE ... click on the horses to have some fun! And sure, what's the details of that old joke? Humour is SO divine ...

And regarding " No...there's no law agin' word games, or agin' folks getting together and doing it as a group, or in electing a leader of their group, or paying him a salary.....etc.....but I sure hate to see them come out of their meetings and presume to inform ME that the results of their discussions are binding on ME...but, that is basically what is happening a lot, and that a major reason why I enter these discussions."

I couldn't agree more. Whenever any person or group tries to influence me (unless I've invited them to do so), much less manipulate or control me by insisting that 'This is right and everything else is wrong', something inside me starts quietly chuckling (maybe it's that divine 'inner voice'!). Big warning lights start going off in my mind's eye, and I don't walk but RUN in the opposite direction.

Unfortunately that IS the track record of most religious institutions to date. Which is why I don't have much use for things 'religious'. I much prefer the spiritual, which in my understanding is PERSONAL, not social.

I've read that many ancient esoteric 'mystery schools' hung a sign over their door that read "KNOW THYSELF". That is, imo the only way to find what is truly 'spiritual' in the myriad of traditions/beliefs that claim to be 'spiritual' out there today. Joseph Campbell's work is also an excellent guide, IMO.

And regarding rituals, ceremonies and other institutionalized methods of "knowing God", I really like this old Buddhist saying:

"I chop wood. I carry water. This is the way to enlightenment."

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: GUEST,Magpie
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 02:34 AM

LH-

I confess i am confused by your response to my post. You seem to be picking and choosing - placing credence in the teachings of Jesus ("spiritual truths") while discounting key elements of the saga - in particular, the Immaculate Conception, which is sort of a vital aspect.

Moreover, how does your handwaving away of the miraculous differ significantly from the dismissal of UFO evidence that you were criticizing earlier?

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Feb 03 - 12:22 AM

"ReKant!" bah!, HumeBug! (VERY in joke among philosophers)

Boy, I am so far behind, I dare not try to comment on all the pieces of this...but you asked, daylia....so, regarding "is there any balderdash"? (I have enuf, thanks...ain't buying no mo')...no, no balderdash in your post, but there is a LOT buried in this:

"The recognition and interpretation of any event is entirely up to the one who experiences it."

...including, presumably, the 'event' of reading that sentence. Are you sure you want to claim that all 'events' are entirely subjective? That's what Hume (David) claimed, in contradiction to Kant...(well, at least he claimed you couldn't prove otherwise). Both of them made statements to the effect that "all knowlege begins with experience"...and then proceeded to head in totally different directions ..*grin* Hume went so far as to argue that no one could 'prove' that anything existed outside their own subjective experience.

Now, after making this claim, Hume noted in a footnote that although he was convinced of the tightness of his argument, he sometimes had emotional problems dealing with it...he just couldn't ACT as though it were all subjective.....And I suspect that's at the core of some of the differences between the posters here--they have convinced themselves of things that they can't wrap their minds around.

People use 'words' to talk of Gods, inner conciousness, souls, Nirvana, ghosts, etc., etc......when they often have little idea what they mean themselves. They like thinking they have said something about something, but like an old woman once said of some current "navel gazing" pop songs, "why, he's singin' about air!"

I have often made remarks about 'proof'...and my point is not that I can dis-prove claims people make, but rather that they have not proved them, and **IF** they do not have the kind of proof that one can show others, then their experience IS only subjective, and discussing it is only word games!

No...there's no law agin' word games, or agin' folks getting together and doing it as a group, or in electing a leader of their group, or paying him a salary.....etc.....but I sure hate to see them come out of their meetings and presume to inform ME that the results of their discussions are binding on ME...but, that is basically what is happening a lot, and that a major reason why I enter these discussions.

Rustic Rebel noted "The Urantia Book", which I have mentioned before..(as well as "Oahspe" and others)...what if I managed to get a majority of the Congress to accept the details and teachings of EITHER of those and we started to see laws, wars, taxes, etc....based on the concept "that earth is an experimental planet" placed here by strange aliens?...you see? I cannot prove they are wrong!

ah, well...I keep returning to one point, don't I? *big, silly smile*

I just maintain that we can have love, beauty, art, songs, deep emotion and human creativity...even literature ABOUT mysticism, religion, ESP and aliens, without buying into the idea that any of them are literally true fact.

But, as I have said, I suspect that many would find it boring to see things from my curmudgeonly point of view...*grin*...in any case, I sure don't expect to change many minds. I do, however, hope to make a few work harder...and, who knows?, "...the horse may learn to sing."

(old joke ...details on request)

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 11:13 PM

Pardon me, Nicole, I was really in a bad mood. What you say is well reasoned. Any direct experience provides only some knowledge, certainly not all knowledge about what is being experienced, and yes, it is subjective.

Still though, I find direct experience to be the most powerful teacher possible...far better than books and other people's opinions. That is all I was saying.

Regarding "knowing" God, you have to talk to someone who actually does...which is not me...I just believe in and know various stuff about God (as I define the word "God", which may not be someone else's definition of it). I do know God is there...but I can't prove it to anyone in their terms. That doesn't mean I know God...that's a whole further experience. If you don't believe there is such a thing as "God" (again, this depends on your definition of what you think the word "God" means, doesn't it?...), then you would not be open to fair consideration of someone else's experience of knowing God, even if they did genuinely know God, would you?

How can I talk to someone usefully about something which they are certain is completely imaginary? It would be like the alien in Amos's post above talking to the other alien about "sentient meat". A futile, and downright laughable exercise.

This is why it gets people not too far, generally, discussing these matters with people whose basic beliefs are radically different.

Basic beliefs shape everyone's reality. As you believe, so it appears...to you.

Daylia's explanation of the practical applications of believing in spiritual things is most apt, and offers up 3 useful examples of what might happen, given a certain experience and how the person interpreted it.

If your spirituality is based on positive notions such as: I am valuable, so are other people, we all have equal rights, I should treat others as kindly and fairly as I would want them to treat me, I will strive to assist others and improve myself, and so on...

Then that could be quite helpful in life, couldn't it?

If, on the other hand, it's based on bigoted notions such as: My religion is the one only true religion, it's the only way, it's the best, anyone who isn't in it is damned, I must convert others to my religion, those who aren't like me are the enemy, and so on...

Then we've seen the disasters that leads to.

I'm inclined to live and let live, and I identify with religions and groups that feel that way as well.

I agree with Bobert. You can throw out most of the Old Testament, at least as a literal guide to human conduct. It's vicious and bigoted in the extreme by modern standards. It gives me the feeling that the 12 tribes of Israel were a very cruel and violent bunch of people on the whole. The New Testament has many good teachings to offer (although I find some of the apostle Paul's stuff quite unpleasant). So do the Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Muslim, and Native American religions. There are certain sects in almost every religion that are fanatical, exclusivist, and extremely dangerous (like the Wahabbis in Islam)...but then, you could say that about political factions too, couldn't you?

As for debating...no, I don't really like debating much, because it becomes an ego game. I like discussing. A discussion is a cooperative effort involving mutual exploration of a subject. A debate is a competition in search of verbal victory.

Sometimes the two get mixed up together. That's troublesome. In politics, debating is outright war by means of words. I don't consider that healthy. It brings out the worst in people, and it's one of the reasons why our political system has become so corrupt. Victory is more important than truth or brotherhood in such a system. In fact, victory is all that matters. And that's war.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 08:45 PM

Nevermind....

Ahhh, sorry, I thought I'd stick my head in to see what's so intersting and unless I want to be up in til reading every post since the last I was here, I don't have a clue.

With that said, can I just throw a few things into the mix.

First of all I confessed to having seen a real live UFO so I ought to get 3 or 4 points for that and second, Iz a Christain which I reckon ougtta give me another 3 or 4 so I'z somewhere between 6 and 8 points and if we're talking a 10 poihnt system here, I'z got between an F and a B.

Well, now, I don't know about heartburn. Well, yes I do, but it ain't got nuthin to do with hearing the Holy Spririt.

Second, take the Old Testament (save the Psalms and a parts Proverbs, Isiah, Jeremiah, Deuteronomy and Job) and throw it in the river. Get you into the New Testament anfd the story begins to make a lot of sense and provides great road map for a spiritual life.
\
Well, that's my contribution for now. Just thought I'd jump this speeding run away train, say hey, and get the heck off so...

Hey.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 08:25 PM

Yup Nicole we're agreeing! :-)

Bill on second thought you can have all of my balderdash for free, as long as I get my much anticipated and complimentary copy of the Critique. And hey, just because Kant had it easy doesn't mean you Kant too! ReKant! ReKant!

Rustic I'll check out Urantia later - thanks for posting the link. Saw something about the Raelian (sp?) clones on the news today too ...

Meanwhile I've just experienced a 'direct divine revelation' in the form of a fuzzy feelin in the noggin and a kindly inner voice intoning "Get Ye Off-line ... Get Ye Offline ... Get Ye Offline ..." I'll interpret it as a loving warning that my eyes are getting square and I might get confused with an alien tomorrow if I don't log off now ... I CHOOSE TO ACT UPON THAT WISDOM! AND SO REAP MOST BENEFICIAL REWARDS!!!

Blessings to all - (aliens too!) - daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Rustic Rebel
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 07:36 PM

Ah, Terry Bisson the Master of science fiction and fantasy quill. Funny Amos!

Nicole- I also thought your explaination of self insemination was very interesting. I suppose that could have been something that happened. Worth the consideration.

Daylia- I believe life on earth started way before the people of the Bible started writing their stories. We do have scientific proof of that. I also think we were visited long before the people of the bible.
They weren't Gods, only percieved as Gods. When I said messing with people, well what's this all about-burning meat so they can smell the aroma (the sacrifices),killing a man (I can't remember who that was right now) because he spilled his semen on the ground, hanging out in the mountains and giving Moses the commandments that people are to follow, saving some people and letting many die, being a jealous God and who were they jealous of? Anyway the list goes on with my interpretation of this book.

We have talked about another religion that deals with this on another thread. It is called Urantia and they don't hesitate to explain about aliens in this religion. As a matter of fact aliens are the basis of this religion. It is actually an interesting read. In it - there are claims that earth is an experimental planet.
One can judge for themselves-Urantia, the book

Spaw I get a good laugh every time I come here!

Peace. Rustic
P.S. Yes Daylia, I am a woman.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: NicoleC
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 07:06 PM

Nope, I gotcha Daylia, and definately not offended in anyway from you sayin' those nice things. Your last post makes perfect sense to me. Or at least I think so... we're agreeing, right? :)

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: NicoleC
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 07:02 PM

"Subterfuge?" Well, at least I'm not resorting to insults again. I do enjoy debating because I enjoy debating. As I have said a couple of times here today, there are no answers or "winning" when you are talking about personal beliefs and truths. I'm simply telling it like I see it.

Throw however many examples at me which get broader and broader in terms that you may, I do not think a single person's experience equals knowledge. I think a single person's experience is one person's experience. Period. One does not "know" all about sex merely by having had it. All sorts of animals have sex without having the vaguest comprehension of what it's for. Some do fine without sex at all. Experience is merely an aspect of knowledge.

You latest example:

1. From hearing about apples, seeing pictures of them, hearing other people's opinions about them, reading books about them, OR..

2. From picking them, smelling them, tasting them, eating them, and growing apple trees through the whole four seasons?

Is that supposed to only be two choices? I can count hundreds of experiences within those examples. Each one of those contributes ultimately to knowledge. If one grows apples within one's own orchard, one may gain much knowledge about growing apples within one's own orchard, i.e. within only your own experience. That is hardly the tip of the iceberg when it comes to knowing about apples. However, reading books about growing apples will also impart the experiences of others -- fighting diseases and pests you may not have seem, growing in other climates, growing other species of apple trees, understanding the life cycle of the trees even if you haven't experienced one yet, etc.

Neither is superior -- each experience contributes to knowledge in different ways. One's own experience is not necessarily superior to the experiences of others, save in your own mind.

Which brings us back to my original point about "experience" being subjective and biased. If someone has never seen an apple and I give them a crabapple and say it's an apple, does their experience of eating an "apple" equal knowing about apples? If instead I give them a Granny Smith, do they "know" apples are all tart and small and green? What if they go out and pick an "apple," but mistake a pear for an apple? Or get one that is underripe or wormy? Do they then "know" what apples taste like?

Or does knowledge come when one compares one's experiences with others?

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:53 PM

Y'know, I still don't like how that came out! There's holes in it somewhere dammit ... Hmmmmm. There's much wisdom in silence...

Oh, Bill's back! Maybe he can figure it out! Do you see anything that qualifies as 'balderdash' in my last post Bill? Some material for your Critique perhaps? Hey, maybe I could copyright my balderdash and sell it to you! Whaddayathink? :-)

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:32 PM

"Neither condition is something that one person can judge for another. If one genuinely believes that their heartburn is God talking to them, they are as unlikely to accept your dismissal as you are to accept their divine revelation."

Right. The recognition and interpretation of any event is entirely up to the one who experiences it. So if one person experienced a 'warmth' and a kindly inner voice while praying for example, and interpreted it as heartburn accompanied by perhaps an overactive imagination, that person would be unlikely to make significant changes in their lives because of it (other than perhaps taking some Tums). Nothing 'spiritual' happening there, according to the person's choice.

If the next person interpreted the same experience as a 'divine revelation', and then stopped yelling at their kids or stealing from their neighbours because of it, that would be a beneficial change based on what is, to them, a direct spiritual experience with God. Through action, the 'spiritual experience' becomes physical reality.

And if the next person, with the same experience, also decided that it was a direct experience with God and that they were now 'enlightened' and should therefore get up on a soapbox and start preaching their divinity far and wide to 'save the world', they'd probably end up very lonely or very looney. Or both.

What's really important is not the experience, but the choices made based on the interpretation of that experience. The ability to discern physical/emotional/mental/social experiences from spiritual ones developes with time and effort, for anyone who chooses to spend their time and energy in this fashion. The ability to make wise choices about what to do with experiences interpreted as 'spiritual' also developes, through trial and error.

BTW I didn't mean to offend, Nicole, if you took any offense to my presumptions about you.

Happy ponderings, daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:28 PM

LOL! I love it. Yes, I remember that one, Amos. Thanks for contributing it to the spiritual firing line discussion. I am going to go out now and commit suicide by stuffing grafefruits in my ears whilst humming the theme to Gilligan's island. I can't take this meatbound existence any longer...

If I fail, expect me back sometime after my headache goes away.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Amos
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:12 PM

From Terry Bisson's timeless article on the day they discovered earth (the whole thing can be found at Terry Bisson's web site):

..."They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made the machines."

"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to believe in sentient meat."

"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they're made out of meat."

"Maybe they're like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage."

"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn't take long. Do you have any idea what's the life span of meat?"

"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside."

"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through."

"No brain?"

"Oh, there's a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of meat! That's what I've been trying to tell you."

"So ... what does the thinking?"

"You're not understanding, are you? You're refusing to deal with what I'm telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat."

"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!"

"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?"

"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat."

"Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they've been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years."

"Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?"

"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual."

"We're supposed to talk to meat."

"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello. Anyone out there. Anybody home.' That sort of thing."

"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?"
"Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat."

"I thought you just told me they used radio."

"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat."

"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?"....

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:11 PM

Could you elaborate on that a little, Spaw?

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: catspaw49
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:09 PM

As I recall, they do have a nice word for "fire insurance company"....what is that one Wolfgang?

And Bill, Kant had it easy but chose to take a different route as he found it impossible to say clearly in ten words what could best be completely obscured in a thousand!

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:09 PM

You're absolutely right, Amos. When I get angry, as occasionally happens, I can get negative too. As I said, I'm not enlightened. I repeat, I'm not enlightened. I'm angry, Amos, and disgusted.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Amos
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:04 PM

LH:

Faith is sure a higher order of knowing (in its best form) than having a mind full of certain data structures. But it is often used to describe nothing more than a blind insistence on certain data structures. So as with most aspects of this wild-ass topic, you can easily get pronged by semantic ambiguities the size of Godzilla.

But you have no call to act superior and condescending, Big Boy. It gives the lie to the very enlightenment to which you usually aspire and occasionally pretend...

A

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 06:03 PM

Hey, Nicole, you have such a lively mind...I bet you could talk yourself into your own execution by the guillotine if it appealed to your sense of winning the argument. :-)

Here's another example. From what do you gain more knowledge of what is an apple?

1. From hearing about apples, seeing pictures of them, hearing other people's opinions about them, reading books about them, OR..

2. From picking them, smelling them, tasting them, eating them, and growing apple trees through the whole four seasons?

Hmmmm...?

That's what I'm talking about, Nicole. Direct experience imparts knowledge. Indirect, secondhand experience imparts information, and I don't consider information to be knowledge, because information can so easily be incorrect, incomplete, or even totally false.

And if you think one doesn't gain knowledge about sex from having sex, then you are seriously at sea.

I think you're just fond of "winning" verbal debates, that's what I think...by any subterfuge possible. Doing so does not impart knowledge, but it feels absolutely great, eh?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:53 PM

Interesting point, Wolfgang. I agree. A good experiment beats any amount of faith. However, one may first need some faith in a certain direction...and some expertise...to be both willing and able to make the experiment. The pioneering scientists were people who had faith that their way of seeking knowledge would yield valuable results, and they were often opposed bitterly by the clergy who had faith in different propositions entirely.

I would love to be in a better position to actually test out the more interesting theories that intrigue me the most.

Every language has its own fascinating ways of expressing things. I don't know much French, but it strikes me as very expressive in its own way. I have always liked the Spanish word "simpatico", because it says a lot in one word. Do you have any German phrases or expressions that can't easily be matched in another language? How about "weltschmertz"? (I hope I spelled it correctly).

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:52 PM

why, *daylia*, I didn't say nozzing, your points are safe...so far...*grin*...if you want, I'll reserve you a copy of "Critique of Pure Balderdash"...

(it's hard to do, as there is SO much balderdash that needs to be critiqued...Kant had it easy with "Critique of Pure Reason")

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:48 PM

Une experience c'est une experience, n'est-ce pas Wolfgang? :-)

French is such a DIVINE language ... and I 'defile' it regularly I must confess! (Had to check with my mom for the spelling!)

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: NicoleC
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:42 PM

Daylia, you are assuming first:

That there is such a thing as a "true experience with God."

And second, that every perception of an experience with God would necessarily be "true."

Neither condition is something that one person can judge for another. If one genuinely believes that their heartburn is God talking to them, they are as unlikely to accept your dismissal as you are to accept their divine revelation.

"But you will agree, I hope, that actually having sex (for example) gives one more knowledge of it than being told the facts of life by your mom or dad when you're 14 years old or reading a book about it?"

I would say it merely gives you an experience; maybe bad, maybe good, maybe mediocre. In and of itself, it is not knowledge since every experience can be different and even the same experience can be viewed differently within one's own mental framework. If one says, "sex is boring,' does that mean they KNOW sex is boring, or does that mean their EXPERIENCE of sex is boring? Because you or I or someone else may have an entirely different viewpoint based on our own interpretation.

I would define knowledge as the collection of reproducable experiences of the self and others. When you add the individual viewpoints together, you can start to form a framework that can be accepted as knowledge.

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Wolfgang
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:35 PM

I find direct experience beats any amount of faith or theorizing. (Little Hawk)

Sometimes I regret you are not a French Canadian. In French, there is only one word for experience and experiment: une experience. And in that sense I can agree with that sentence:

A good experiment can beat any amount of faith or theorising (and, I add: of subjective experience as well).

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:28 PM

Sorry, what I said above wasn't quite right Nicole - it is a 'inner experience' - a subjective one like you said. But like the story of Mary's visit with the angel, such experiences ARE accompanied by outer 'confirmations' which are meaningful to you personally, so that you can understand them and know that they are real. THEN you choose an interpretation, and to act upon it or not.

Guess that makes it 3 cents worth now.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: *daylia*
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:17 PM

Believe me Nicole, you'd know the difference between a true "experience with God" and heartburn. There is no comparison. You're a real smart cookie, open-minded and thoughtful and compassionate, if I may presume those things from reading your posts, not knowing you personally. I'm sure you'd have NO PROBLEM knowing the difference.

It's not like a UFO at all. Not an outer experience, but an inner one - which then manifests in the outer only if and when you recognize it and then choose to act upon it. And if that happens, your life changes permanently, in highly beneficial ways both for yourself and for everyone you touch.

That's my 2 cents worth, anyway.

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: UFO's and the Bible
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Feb 03 - 05:12 PM

Absolutely, Nicole. That is why no one else can decide for you or for me what is real. We each must decide for ourselves in each and every case.

Some experiences contribute a little to knowledge, some a lot. Some experiences (given individual interpretation) may even obfuscate knowledge. As far as that goes, we again must each decide for ourselves.

But you will agree, I hope, that actually having sex (for example) gives one more knowledge of it than being told the facts of life by your mom or dad when you're 14 years old or reading a book about it?

That's just one possible example of acquiring knowledge through experience. I find direct experience beats any amount of faith or theorizing.