What is Real?

[FIRESTORM314]

You believe that they actually need us to stay alive? That the relationship between our existence and theirs is somehow parasitic?

That implies a much more complicated process than simply one of "observer and observed". What do you think they take from us for sustenance?

Also, you need not quote scripture to me. I'm not sure that you can show that the idea of a demon in scripture is the same idea that you hold today. Even if you could show that, it would take a rather exhaustive analysis to determine if the same idea is consistent throughout scripture.

I mean, have you ever looked into the origins of the idea of Satan and how it differs from your idea of Satan now?

From scripture - Demons do indeed "seem" to need a host. Proof cannot be obtained from Myths or Stories so this explanation wouldn't prove anything and it is difficult to identify what sustenance they might need. The scripture quoted below says they simply need "Rest"

As as I said - God is self sustaining. We are not. I'd guess Demons are different from Satan just as cows are different from dogs. Should not a spiritual world consists of many different types of beings just as our Earth does ? Do I have any valid personal experience on this so I can verify it myself - nope.

Matthew 12
When an impure spirit comes out of a person, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. 44 Then it says, ‘I will return to the house I left.’

Matthew 8
When He came to the other side into the country of the Gadarenes, two men who were demon-possessed met Him as they were coming out of the tombs. They were so extremely violent that no one could pass by that way. 29 And they cried out, saying, “a]">[a]What business do we have with each other, Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before b]">[b]the time?” 30 Now there was a herd of many swine feeding at a distance from them. 31 The demons began to entreat Him, saying, “If You are going to cast us out, send us into the herd of swine.” 32 And He said to them, “Go!” And they came out and went into the swine,

 

[FIRESTORM314]

I appreciate that you're trying to share the story of how your faith came about...I think it's well intentioned. The thing is though, the story holds no meaning for me without those details you've withheld. I know this is a very personal experience for you to share....especially to someone who doesn't believe. I know because I've heard hundreds of versions of the story you just shared....and out of every hundred, maybe 1 is willing to share those personal details.

The story implied was not about how my faith came about - the story implied was about how I had a bit of a spiritual fall out with God quite some years later and go and do some things the way I thought they should be done.

The story is best not repeated. Other parties were involved and some would be offended.Others wouldn't want their little secrets revealing - it is a case of National Security. I'll put the story in my memoirs - maybe?

In a nutshell - you want evidence - I on the other hand have seen and experienced a little too much.

As the French Say
C’est la vie

 

[Ana the Ist]

The story implied was not about how my faith came about - the story implied was about how I had a bit of a spiritual fall out with God quite some years later and go and do some things the way I thought they should be done.

The story is best not repeated. Other parties were involved and some would be offended.Others wouldn't want their little secrets revealing - it is a case of National Security. I'll put the story in my memoirs - maybe?

In a nutshell - you want evidence - I on the other hand have seen and experienced a little too much.

As the French Say
C’est la vie

I'm not asking you to name names...simply describe what happened. You need not reveal anything which could compromise national security.

 

[FIRESTORM314]

I'm not asking you to name names...simply describe what happened. You need not reveal anything which could compromise national security.

Tempted but I won't. I'll just say that I got a warning & some spiritual discipline for my behaviour and I won't even go into details on what that was either. It is private.

Hebrews 12
My son, do not make light of the Lord’s discipline,
and do not lose heart when he rebukes you,
because the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and he chastens everyone he accepts as his son.

I'm sure I've got plenty other valuable things to share with you so let's continue on


Seeing is not believing......Evidence is often rejected.

Matthew 13:15
For this people’s heart has grown callous; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn, and I would heal them.

Jesus raised the dead, healed the sick, performed many other types of miracles and still many did not believe. Like I said earlier - our reasoning is flawed and biased to the self. We see only what we what to see.

So let stay on track with the OP question - what is real?

2 Corinthians 4:18
while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

What would scientist say about the temporary nature of the known visible world. I this truth or not.
Paul described the invisible as eternal. You said earlier you had not seen one truth in the entire Bible.

The eternal has no beginning and has no end - it can be "seen" otherwise we could not look at it. How do we see it?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Tempted but I won't. I'll just say that I got a warning & some spiritual discipline for my behaviour and I won't even go into details on what that was either. It is private.

Then why bring it up?

I'm sure I've got plenty other valuable things to share with you so let's continue on

Whenever you're ready.

 

[FIRESTORM314]

Then why bring it up?

I think it slipped out on the subject of Authority which was ,I suggested, the main thing that affects our reasoning about God. I must be oozing at the seams to let this one out of the bag but decided better of it - it would cause a whole lot of trouble. Some fires should be left to burn themselves out rather than be stoked up again.

Whenever you're ready.

I quoted 2 Corinthians 4:18 in the previous post and asked you your views.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think it slipped out...

Ok.

I quoted 2 Corinthians 4:18 in the previous post and asked you your views.

I think it's rather meaningless without context. When I say context, I'm not just talking about the whole of Corinthians 2 either...I'm talking about a basic understanding of who the Corinthians were (who is being preached to) and why they were receiving this sermon. Do you understand the context?

 

[FIRESTORM314]

I think it's rather meaningless without context. When I say context, I'm not just talking about the whole of Corinthians 2 either...I'm talking about a basic understanding of who the Corinthians were (who is being preached to) and why they were receiving this sermon. Do you understand the context?

Yes I do - I think you are trying to get out of Jail by complicating the issue

I BELIEVED, THEREFORE I HAVE SPOKEN
2 CORINTHIANS 4:13
​

Rene Descartes ( 1596 - 1650 ) is considered to be one of the founders of modern rationalism and reasoning. He was influenced by Aristotle and Plato and the Early Greek Philosophers. Also, a great mathematician and famous for the quote "I THINK THEREFORE I AM"

CORINTH​

Corinth was a main Greek City. It's main inhabitants were Roman, Greek and Jews. The Greeks had developed rational thinking and philosophy hundreds of years earlier with the teachings of Aristotle, Plato, etc. It was Sin City - anything went. A Tough place to start a church. Paul had previously been to Athens and mentions their philosophy and teaching where everyone discuses the latest Ideas. Paul had been well prepared for Corinth and Greek Culture from his trip to Athens. Under Guidance of the Holy Spirit he takes a very logical and philosophical approach with his audience. This, I suspect, is what they would be used to.

Corinth was a tough place and the Christians had a tough time there. 2 Corinthians chapter 4 gives us a clue they were hard pressed and persecuted.

2 CORINTHIANS 4:18
So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

In the context of present persecution the whole chapter is one of encouragement. Paul may be referring to the temporary nature of one's life passing by ( ie a human lifespan ) so tells them to think of life after death. I myself, think it means much more. Paul has written many letters and also heard the teachings of Jesus and had special revelations from God himself. We can find the true full meaning of what he wrote by other scripture found in the New Testament.

ISAIAH 51:6
The heavens will vanish like smoke, the earth will wear out like a garment

Matthew 24:35
Heaven and Earth will pass away but my words will never pass away

AND FINALLY

THE BIG BANG THEORY.​

2 Peter 3:10
The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be dissolved in the fire, and the earth and it's works will not be found.

So rational thinking is very much in action. This is long before the Dark Ages in Europe. Paul presents his arguments very very well - so well - that he possibly influences Rene Descartes many years later? Then again - behind Paul is the Holy spirit - so is the Holy Spirit himself influencing modern rational thinking and reasoning? ok - I'm speculating just a tad l

So - getting back on track

THE CRUNCH QUESTIONS

Is there Scientific Evidence that backs what Paul says - the World & the Universe is temporary? Is this true or not?

Did something exist before the Universe and will something exist after the Universe has ended
- is there something eternal?

​

 

[Neogaia777]

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you...

So far, I thought you were claiming that these "spiritual people" are detected by people here on earth....by means that we already possess.

If that isn't what you're saying, then please clarify what you meant.

Might have been confusing when I mentioned only some people "detecting" them right...? What I meant was only some few people get to hear from them or even fewer still actually get to ever see them, cause they apparently have a need to be very discreet, is what I meant...

Have you ever met someone in passing and you, only afterward, began to realize that they were not like the atypical, normal, average person or human... And afterward, you might be recalling some strange things that they might have been saying maybe, that you might not have caught onto at or in the moment, but only upon reflection, and after they passed basically, made you really, really wonder a lot about them, like maybe it was an angel or maybe even Christ himself in disguise or something like that, I've had that happen before, (and that's not nearly all that has happened to or with me either), but, anyway, I never saw them again...

Perhaps you and I have a different understanding of "possibility". For something to be a possibility, it has to exist within the realm of "what is possible". It cannot simply be something that someone imagined.

For example, life on other planets is a possibility....because we know life exists on this planet. However, the idea that the universe was created by a race of super intelligent magical slugs is not a "possibility".

So until this phasing idea fleshes out...it's not on the list of what I would call "possibilities".

Well, technically nothing is absolutely impossible right...? And God has a strange way of breaking or shattering our ideas of what we thought was impossible as a testament to himself, and proof of who he is, (and who we are in relation to him), but sadly, many reject that... Anyway, technically nothing is impossible...

As for the phasing thing, as I said, I don't think it's all that important, but I will try to find out if their is any actual real science behind it or not, or whether it's just "woo" basically, for you, if you think it's that important, K...? I only offered as one possible way beings that were once like us, became not very much like us anymore, except for in some very few ways, ways that have remained the same, ways that are important for us to understand about them...

But my point was, somehow, there are beings in another layer of reality, where the basic laws of physics, and laws and rules and definitions about reality, and even the atypical laws and rules of existence even, go right out the window, that are here with us, and are everywhere with us, and can be in everyone and everything (from there) with us, here with us... On this I have proof enough for me...

Have fun!

I did have fun, thanks... Got out of the city for awhile, and out among the trees in the wilderness, in the middle of nowhere basically, not a soul for miles, where my friend an I could get a little... well, intoxicated/inebriated, be as rowdy, loud, obnoxious, wild and crazy as we want, ect, we had music and fire, partied all night, weather cooperated, went down to the crystal clear creek and swam and did a little gold panning during the day, it was fun...

Thanks,

God Bless!

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yes I do - I think you are trying to get out of Jail by complicating the issue

I'm in jail? I don't think it's "complicating the issue" to ask if you understand the context of the words you're quoting. If one just pulls passages out of thin air and claims they apply to a topic...they could be using them in a manner that was never intended.

As to that passage in particular...it's a "deepism". The sort of saying one might find in any religion that initially sounds deep and insightful....but upon any critical examination, it's nonsense.

Take the very beginning of the passage...

"while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen..."

While we look at the things which are not seen? If they cannot be seen, how are we supposed to look at them? It's nonsense. The second half of the passage calls these "unseen" things "eternal"....but since it's meaningless, I'd argue that he could make any claim about these "unseen things" and it would make just as much sense. Instead of "eternal" he could've said "infinite" or "divine" or even "wonderous" and it wouldn't have any effect on the passage itself.

As for context, it's clear that the writer of these words is a religious professional of some kind...a teacher/scholar/monk...doesn't really matter. It's the use of such deepisms that gives this away (scholars don't actually believe Paul wrote it). You're correct that Corinth is Greek and under Roman occupation at the time of this church. The audience is most likely Greek...and the writer is speaking to them because of all the sexual "sin" they're engaged in. Why are they engaged in sexual sin? Because they're likely the dregs of the city....the poor, the homeless, the very bottom of the social ladder. In ancient Greece...they didn't have the sexual hang-ups that the Jewish people had, so there's all sorts of prostitution, brothels, and basically anything you could imagine. Under Roman occupation, one would figure these people had to increasingly turn to sex work to get by.

Obviously, this isn't the sort of behavior that the church founder wanted his flock engaging in....so the passage you've selected specifically is a sort of argument that they should consider that what they do with their bodies may have consequences for their souls. It's not a good argument....but it's not as if he's addressing a bunch of scholars.

That's my take on that particular passage.

THE CRUNCH QUESTIONS

Is there Scientific Evidence that backs what Paul says - the World & the Universe is temporary? Is this true or not?

Paul doesn't say anything about the universe in that passage.

Did something exist before the Universe and will something exist after the Universe has ended
- is there something eternal?

I don't know...I don't know if those questions are even answerable.

 

[durangodawood]

...I don't know...I don't know if those questions are even answerable.

They might not even be ask-able. I mean what does "before" and "after" even mean from a 'point of view' possibly beyond all time and space?

 

[Ana the Ist]

They might not even be ask-able. I mean what does "before" and "after" even mean from a 'point of view' possibly beyond all time and space?

Well said.

 

[FIRESTORM314]

As for context, it's clear that the writer of these words is a religious professional of some kind...a teacher/scholar/monk...doesn't really matter. It's the use of such deepisms that gives this away (scholars don't actually believe Paul wrote it). .

Scholars don't actually believe Paul wrote it?

Do I sense a bias in this statement? By Scholars do you mean all scholars or some scholars. Ok - I did that to make a point. I take the stance you mean more than one but not all ( ie some ). You didn't explicitly state that but i deduced it from the whole of your arguments we have had so far and what I have learned from you as a an individual. I conclude you expected me to know that you didn't mean all Scholars

In a similar way - Paul expects us to work it out from what we know as a whole. It is clear enough to one who knows the writings of Paul and early Christian concepts of the end of the world. Any book that has to explain each sentence to the nth degree would be a very painful and slow read. How long does it take you to read a book. Do you not get the whole story from reading the whole book?

while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

lets put this in perspective with

2 Peter 3:10
The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be dissolved in the fire, and the earth and it's works will not be found.

Heavens means the sky and the stars in this context. Again - even this verse can be further expanded by other scripture elsewhere in the bible. You fill in the bits with your existing knowledge and so on. If you focus on just one verse and say it does not make any sense then you need to re-think your approach to learning.

I cannot prove that God exists - I can prove your reasoning is flawed in many areas because of self bias - we all have that problem and this is where the problem lies. It is very much about sovereignty. Politics also gets the same sort of reaction for the very same reason. People can't agree on that either. The fault can only be fixed by one person and that one person is God himself - the Creator.

I say the god of this world as blinded you and the god of this world is no other than yourself.

Well gents - this is where I bow out of this debate.
It's been interesting - it's nice to see things from other points of view.

Philosophy is an interesting subject so I'll leave you with a couple of clips from the cult movie Dark Star. In the Film - The Nuclear Bomb with AI has developed a fault. ( I think it was damaged in an electrical storm ). The crew have to try and talk some sense into it using Philosophy but fail to do so.

Scene 1 - I think therefore I am

Scene2 - Only I exist

Conclusion
Philosophy won't bring any revelation at all.

Hope you enjoyed those clips- It's a great movie - if you have never seen it.

 

[FIRESTORM314]

They might not even be ask-able. I mean what does "before" and "after" even mean from a 'point of view' possibly beyond all time and space?

I think you are quibbling over words

Very truly I tell you," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

For your benefit - I'll restate my words - has something always existed?

The bible says you can KNOW the answer to that question. You can KNOW God - that's a huge step further than just believing.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Scholars don't actually believe Paul wrote it?

Do I sense a bias in this statement? By Scholars do you mean all scholars or some scholars. Ok - I did that to make a point. I take the stance you mean more than one but not all ( ie some ). You didn't explicitly state that but i deduced it from the whole of your arguments we have had so far and what I have learned from you as a an individual. I conclude you expected me to know that you didn't mean all Scholars

Right. History isn't science, but there are methods and techniques that can be used to try and accurately determine things about history. The further into history one looks...the less clear things become. So yes, the general scholarly consensus is that Paul wasn't the author.

[QUOTE
In a similar way - Paul expects us to work it out from what we know as a whole. It is clear enough to one who knows the writings of Paul and early Christian concepts of the end of the world. Any book that has to explain each sentence to the nth degree would be a very painful and slow read.[/QUOTE]

Sure, but you asked me what I thought about a particular passage. In essence, you asked me for my analysis. Furthermore, you believe the bible is the word of god, right? Doesn't it make more sense then to look into each passage and figure out the truth of what's being said not not be concerned about whether or not its entertaining?

How long does it take you to read a book. Do you not get the whole story from reading the whole book?

Story? Sure. Plot? You betcha...

You asked me about meaning though...and that requires analysis.

while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.

lets put this in perspective with

2 Peter 3:10
The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be dissolved in the fire, and the earth and it's works will not be found.

I'm not seeing the connection between that and the Corinthians passage.

Heavens means the sky and the stars in this context. Again - even this verse can be further expanded by other scripture elsewhere in the bible. You fill in the bits with your existing knowledge and so on. If you focus on just one verse and say it does not make any sense then you need to re-think your approach to learning.

If you're filling in "the bits" with your own knowledge and perspective....then how would you know that what you end up with is even remotely close to what god intended?

I cannot prove that God exists - I can prove your reasoning is flawed in many areas because of self bias - we all have that problem and this is where the problem lies.

Feel free to show where my reasoning is flawed...but I think you'd do better to stay away from the "self-bias" angle. I'm actually trying to avoid any personal interpretation by considering the context of the passage, and then examining the words by their merits alone.

It is very much about sovereignty. Politics also gets the same sort of reaction for the very same reason. People can't agree on that either. The fault can only be fixed by one person and that one person is God himself - the Creator.

You'd think that since god knows us and our flaws regarding bias and subjective interpretation...he would have chosen a more effective/reliable method for delivering his message than appearing as an illiterate jewish teacher. Hw could've just as easily today when every word he says could be recorded for posterity.

I say the god of this world as blinded you and the god of this world is no other than yourself.

I'm the god of this world??? I doubt my wife would agree lol...but it would make a lot of stuff much easier if everyone agreed with you.

 

[durangodawood]

I think you are quibbling over words

Very truly I tell you," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"

For your benefit - I'll restate my words - has something always existed?

The bible says you can KNOW the answer to that question. You can KNOW God - that's a huge step further than just believing.

I'm not quibbling at all. I'm referring to the basic meanings of simple and common words.

The problem is that people think just because you can make a grammatically coherent sentence, that sentence must be sensible and intelligible. Its not so.

I do appreciate poetry, though.

As to your question: "Has something always existed?" I dont know. It really is beyond my scope of knowledge.