.

Dear AJ Philips,

.

Thank you for your comments and that interesting link. It certainly is spot on.

.

Dear One under God,

.

You indicate:

"... i for one have..BETTER_STUFF/TO BE READING..."

If the "better stuff" you have in mind is relative to the question of the existence of Jesus, I would be most grateful if you would post ir here.

Many thanks ...

.

Dear George,

You wrote: "Saying it goes against reason is an affront to legions of Christian - indirectly also religious Jewish and Muslim - thinkers, philosophers, scientists etc."

It does not have to be taken as an affront. There are things we assume on faith because of their seeming rightness. That goes against reason, but everything is not driven by reason. I certainly don’t think that all religious Christians, Jews and Muslims would claim their beliefs are justified by reason. Kant examined the proofs for the existence of God and concluded none of them could be justified yet retained religious belief.

When I was a child and heard the story about Abraham and Isaac I could not believe in the God of the story but rejected neither the religion nor God although I started to question.

During WW2 I was in the desert with my army unit and smelled the C ration cooking. The C ration was beef stew in a can and smelled wonderful. I had not eaten meat for almost a year as the army meat was not kosher. I ate my C ration, and God did not punish me. It was one of the most delicious meals I have ever had.

A number of years later I was sitting in a religious service and felt this was all nonsense. There was no God so I walked out. My feeling was a revelation, possibly, the way religious believers have revelations. There can be revelations which cause one either to accept or reject religious belief. Reason can play a part in the thought processes leading to the revelation.

Back to mathematics. Euclid’s formula for even perfect numbers is two to the n–1 power times two to the n power - 1 where n may be any positive integer such that two to the n power – 1 is prime. This is not true for all primes. It is easily expressed with the notation we have, but how did Euclid express it? How could the formula be developed with the tools and notations available at that time?

hi banjo...the best work from jesus i have come across..is..'the course in miracles''

which i first came across here
http://www.celestinevision.com/celestine/forum/viewforum.php?f=29&sid=ad5633a278d9f506fd96f791a11fa337

how it came to be/is via a woman..[unwillingly]..recieving the messages...[she was only passingly of jewish/belief...and was an athiest]..its just one of jesus jokes i guess

but the message is far from serious or humerous..yet reveals jesus can take and make a joke..but essentially..he is jesus...[in his own words..so to speak]...its a classic work..thus has been edited and revised a few times

it also briefly had a thesorus listing the revelations by topic..but that seems to have disappeared...however i used it extensivly at the earlier pages of the first link...[till i got banned]

anyhow its a matter of chosing a link
from the google search if you chose...or not..

we do have freewill...
as jesus reveals in his little course of miracles

thats where i got the atonement..[at one meant]..learning from

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=A+Course+in+Miracles&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

alkso i found the acopraphy usefull in learning of the christ jesus
like the thomas wrttings that remain which covers many of his earlier years

its anoying that jesus/words are scattered/about as much as they have been..and sad that those who claim to be acting in his name..havnt joioned them back to-gether again...

lol..to-gather..them to-gether again
but the christs house
is as divided as our fathers was
before he came...[to restore the fathers divided house]..

but he didnt come to build his own...'house'
one day the religious texts..might include all the prophets/messages
but

till that day its seek/find...
sorting the tares from the wheat...and the wheat from the chaff..

to feed to the goats...not the sheep..[or visa versa]..as sprouts..because rumnants dont eat grain

thanks/for reminding/me..banjo

from<<..MANUAL FOR TEACHERS/INTRODUCTION

The role of teaching/and learning..is actually reversed/in the thinking of the world.>>ie we Learn/by doing

<<The reversal is characteristic...It seems/as if..the teacher and the learner are separated,[the teacher..*giving something/to the learner..rather than to himself.>>lol

<<Further,..the act*/of teaching..is regarded/as a special-activity,..in which one engages/only a relatively small-proportion..of one's time.

<<The course,..on the other hand,..emphasizes/that to teach*..is to learn*,..so that teacher/and learner are the same.>..!

<<It/also..emphasizes/that teaching..is a constant process;>>IE LEARNING

<<..it goes on/every-moment..of the day,/
and continues..into sleeping-thoughts as well.

To teach..is to demonstrate.>>IE to do...!

<< There are/only two thought-systems,..and you..demonstrate*..that you believe*...one/or the other..is true...*all the time*.>>ie our deeds/works..are teaching/us...as we learn..to do..!

<<From/your demonstration..others learn,..and so do you.>>BY DOING

<<The question/is not..whether..you will/teach,
for..in that..there is no choice*.

<<The purpose/of the course..might be said/to provide..you/with a means/of choosing..what..you want*..to teach..on the basis/of what you want/to learn.

<<You cannot give/to someone else,..but only to yourself,
and this/you learn..through teaching...IE DOING

<<Teaching/is but a call..to witnesses/to attest..to what you believe.>>

It is/a method of conversion...This is not done by words alone.>>lol...ie by our works/deeds

>>Any situation/must be..to you..a chance/to teach others..what you are,..and what they are/to you. ..No more than that,..but also/never less*...>>!

<<The curriculum/you set up..is therefore/determined exclusively..by what/you think you are,..and/..what you believe..the relationship/..of others is to you.>>*talk is cheap/only our works reveal/if we love...others

<<In the formal/teaching situation,..these questions/may be totally unrelated..to what you think*..you are teaching.

continues

Yet/it is impossible..not to use the content/of any situation..on behalf_of..what you really teach,..and therefore..what you/really learn.

<<To this the verbal-content..of your teaching/is quite irrelevant.>>.!

<<It may coincide/with it,..or it may not.

<<It is the teaching/underlying..what you say..that teaches you.

<<Teaching/but reinforces..what you believe about yourself.>>>!

<<Its fundamental-purpose..is to diminish self-doubt.>>by doing/loving FEARLESSLY

<<This/does not..mean..that/the self you are..trying to protect..is real...But it does mean/that the self..you think is real..is what you teach.>>>your works/..=your..life

<<This is inevitable...There is no escape from it.

<<How could it be otherwise?

<<Everyone who follows the world's-curriculum,
and everyone/here does follow it/until he changes his mind,..teaches solely to convince/himself..that he is/what he is not.

<<Herein/is the purpose..of the world.

<<What else/then,.would its curriculum be?

<<Into this hopeless/and closed learning situation,..which teaches nothing..but despair and death,..God sends His teachers.

<<And/as they..teach*..His lessons/of joy and hope,..their learning finally becomes complete.

<<Except for/God's teachers..there would be little hope/of salvation,..for the world of sin/would seem forever real.

<<The self-deceiving/must deceive,/for they must/teach..deception.

<<And what else is hell?

<<This/is a manual/for the teachers of God.

<<They are not perfect,..or they would not be here.
Yet it is their mission to become perfect here,
and so they teach perfection over and over,
in many,/many ways,..until they have learned it.

<<And then/they are seen no more,..>>>in the earthy/realm
<<although their thoughtswords/works..remain a source/of strength/or weakness..and truth forever.

Who are they?..How are they chosen? ..What do they do?
How can they/work out..their own*..salvation..and the salvation of the world?

This manual/attempts to answer these questions>>.

http://stobblehouse.com/text/ACIM.pdf

remember
this is from the christ
if not
it sure sounds like he would be saying..!

or at least what those claiming to work...
in his name...
SHOULD BE SAYING

Hi George,

Thanks.

To a skeptic doubt is a stable state of mind. I understand want you are saying agnosticism vis-a-vis atheism and agnosticism vis-a-vis theism. Here, I was not really talking about fence sitting, rather I suggesting that one should have an open mind and retain an open mind. With some reflection on Lakatos (with some modification)I hold that we do hold a "maze" postulates at the same time. Some hypotheses will appear superior based on evedience at the time, yet, should not throw "the baby out with bath water" when things go bad for the theory: e.g. Solid State Universe.

Normally, I would not cite wiki, yet, the Reasearch Programmes (below)section, the explanation does seem consistent with my memory of his apporach. With some (personal) modification to Lakatos' discourse, would might see we don't close minds to the old or alternative, rather regard their possibility given present knowledge (both you and david f have noted the difference been the knowledge of the contemporary era to ancient peoples). One should not have a fixed state of mind, alternative explanations must be allow to co-exist, even if diminitive in one's rationalisation. Fixed states of mind suggest infallibility.

I think some discussion on the current OLO thread has taken the discourse of God as revealed in the scriptures (which are easily challenged) to a non-scriptural creation agent versus a bounded univserse. We can hold the old theory of gods and heaven might have relevance is in being a template for non-classical, non-theistic realms; herein, concepts of other worlds(heaven) are to QM, as alchemy is to chemistry or astrology to astronomy.

The Theists has the challenge of defending scriptures as the word of God(s). Others look to explaining physical creration, life and consciousness. If humans are smart enough science might on day explain the latter three challenges.

Please refer under Reasearch Programmes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imre_Lakato

Regards.