Malala and Terrorism

For all other chat which isn't directly related to lucid dreaming and the world of sleep and dreams.
User avatar
Pilgrim
Posts: 608
Joined: 10 Apr 2016 10:24

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Pilgrim » 18 Jun 2016 09:49

Ok...no numinous experience for me to report. I was able to tell my wife and a nurse that I had good dreams, but coming out of the propofol I could not maintain recall.

Back to the issue of Christian Scriptures and women, you surely recall that I spoke well of female theologian, Eta Linneman, on the thread regarding Lucid Dreamers and God. Her elocution was plenty good for me, and I quite well remember her cadence, as she repeatedly spoke of "historical critical theology" with heavily accented English.

Church polity evolved in the period of the New Testament. There was a time when "deacons" (transliterated, not translated--"helpers") did not exist. They came to exist because of certain needs. I see no reason that the church cannot evolve its organization based on current needs.

However, the arguments for male leadership in certain shepherding roles and for husbands appear based on nature and not cultural whims.

You cite Paul. It is the same who also wrote Gal. 3:28 (NIV):
"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Ethnicity makes no difference. King, wealthy, poor, servant, or other status makes no difference. Gender makes no difference...in one's relation to Christ and right standing before God. This is the glorious gospel of constant theme in the New Testament.

Jesus described that there will be no marital relations for those who live after death, but will be spiritual beings like the Angels (Matt 22:30).

Christ himself is the urgent and predominate concern. The functional role of the male in the church or family as a leading shepherd, I understand might be a hinderance to some on the matter of the gospel itself. Then again, it might not be so bad. Here is my life's example.

I personally have never approached my wife and said this: "Alas! You must submit to me because the Scripture tells you to do so." Why? Because the Scripture tells me to love my wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it (Eph 5:24-25).

The roles that my wife and I take are natural to us, and the Scriptural mandate regarding roles is not remotely a challenge.

My wife is Asian. I am white guy. We have been together for almost 25 years, and married for 20 years. In recent years, we became aware of something that we found exceedingly humorous--"Yellow Fever".

We saw some internet articles by white feminist women, who were angered that potential mates among white men are being lost to Asian women. There is also a movie documentary on this subject.

My wife is about a month older than I, but she looks exceedingly younger than her age. I, on the other hand, look exceedingly old for my age. This Halloween, we joke of dressing her fashionably young, while I sport a long gray beard. My T-shirt will say "Mail Order", and hers will say "Bride".

About whether the environment or something innate causes difference in the sexes, I have an example for consideration.

I have been around cats all my life. In various locations I have observed kittens. The female kittens, who I first encounter at a few weeks old, are more cautious and more of a challenge to earn trust, relative to the male kittens. (Being cautious is not necessarily a bad thing. It might keep them alive!)

My wife and I have had two female cats for the last 14 years, with one passing away recently. My wife says that she is "so ready to have a man cat." (Others might desire to have female cats for a variety of traits.)

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 4162
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Summerlander » 18 Jun 2016 11:15

We all have our differences and potentials and sometimes choose our long-term partners according to certain traits that we desire.

I know you are not the kind of Christian who justifies chauvinism based on Biblical passages and you certainly see the good that the faith can inspired. Like me, I'm in no doubt that you believe everyone deserves a shot at something regardless of gender. Please don't think I was specifically referring to you when I mentioned fundamentalists and I am certainly aware that, unlike Islam, Christianity is demonstrably capable of reform. In any case, we need more theists like you in the world. We also need more people to recognise and take the problem of Islam more seriously---especially when it comes to preventing certain so-called parties of God from acquiring nuclear weapons (the ones with an eschatological love for the End Times concept); some people only care about their personal interests and are ignorant of potential consequences. And some are very much aware ... but they don't care. I'll provide a historically recent example ...

In the aftermath of 9/11, the corrupt president Jacques Chirac had refused to join the 'war on terrorism'. Despite knowing about Saddam Hussein's genocidal attacks on the Kurds and the Arab opposition, the French ex-leader had defended him at the United Nations. Why was this? Because Chirac and Hussein had an oil business symbiosis, and, to top it off, the former helped the latter build a nuclear reactor knowing fully well the sinister intentions behind it.

Hussein was always hard to get hold of and would pick the time for contact. His envoy, who was seen shaking hands with Chirac, was a puppet controlled by the most hideous blackmail: Saddam Hussein had his brothers tortured and one of them killed just to show him who's boss.

This is the man Chirac defended as he always went for the highest bidder (no matter how evil the bidder was). Once the Iraqi dictatorship fell, France had to chance their tactics and look elsewhere. And then we heard that France was invading Syria with America right behind ...

Still ... I wouldn't dare call the recent atrocities in France 'karma' or even 'poetic justice'. The populace should not be held accountable for their leader's actions. The main issue is this: There is a war going on between human civilisation and Islamism. :geek:
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Pilgrim
Posts: 608
Joined: 10 Apr 2016 10:24

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Pilgrim » 18 Jun 2016 22:10

Summerlander wrote:Christian fundamentalists, Pilgrim, would say that a woman is not even allowed to be a...

User avatar
Pilgrim
Posts: 608
Joined: 10 Apr 2016 10:24

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Pilgrim » 18 Jun 2016 22:15

I am sorry that I completely misread you earlier. I thought you were talking to females and presummed to know what Christian "fundamentalist" Pilgrim believes. :o Sorry! Anyway, it made for some good discussion.

You are correct on your fears for civilzation with respect to Islam.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 4162
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Summerlander » 18 Jun 2016 22:52

Sorry if I wasn't clearer earlier. I wasn't specifically referring to you there---just pointing out that Christianity requires tidying, too. Having said that, as an anti-theist, I concede that it's not as threatening as Islam and Islamism or Islamic theocracy.
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Pilgrim
Posts: 608
Joined: 10 Apr 2016 10:24

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Pilgrim » 19 Jun 2016 05:27

Okay, I will also concede that the submissive role of women is a plausible difficulty to Scripture. The readers should understand the context for Paul's harshness growing out of the chaos that he had observed in certain churches.

The church at Corinth, as an example, had disorderly spiritual orgies with everyone speaking at once. Visitors would have said they were crazy, with the pressure for everyone to speak in unknown languages (saying "banana" backwards), missing edification for the group. Sexual immorality was rampant (worse than among outsiders) and tolerated. Orderliness, quiet reverence, and attention to the speaker were concerns.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 4162
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Summerlander » 19 Jun 2016 18:02

In other words, Corinthians promote hedonism regardless of future consequences.

I'm going to describe a slightly more plausible version of God than Yahweh and I'd like you to tell me if this is what you subscribe to as a theist ...

God loves us so much that He picked a possible world for us with the least amount of restrictions for spiritual opportunities. He wanted to strengthen our minds by presenting us with certain quandaries. Forget free will, of course, because, as we both agree, we simply don't have it. The cosmos is already laid out in time and space. (In fact, the former is an illusion and its passage can only be experienced within the universe.)

God, in this hypothesis, transcends everything and is not limited by emotions. The soul is real. We existed before we were born but were somewhat devoid of experience, just pure awareness and, therefore, a real tabula rasa.

The pure awareness of our souls craved experience and understanding---the kind of understanding that God possesses for it is in His ineffable nature to pervade all---something to fill our innate void. So God proposed a solution: if one wants, one gets, so here is an array of temporo-spatial worlds (of which our universe is one), intricate cosmic pills that the souls can take for personal growth.

In our tabula rasa state, we didn't care that such worlds entailed both experiential happiness and unhappiness---we simply wanted to learn about all the existential nuances! Therefore, seeing someone in trouble is an opportunity to help from a scrupulous and ethical perspective, or, if you were handed the psychopathic card, so to speak, an opportunity to revel in another's misery. Evil must also exist if we are to know good and vice versa.

Everything is allowed, because ultimately nothing really matters apart from experience. A god-like mind---which we aspire to---must withstand all that is possible in terms of experience: the overwhelming ecstasy as well as the truly terrifying. It is a lesson in the ultimate epistemology. Even the restrictions within contextual worlds can provide spiritually practical insights.

So here is a good, albeit hypothetical, reason for God allowing it all to be. Because He is infinite and truly transcendental. This, as far as I can tell, the perfect theodicy to use against atheists and doubting Thomases in general. But for this to have any feasible weight, the notion of God that we typically hold must be made redundant. He is not, and can never be, what we think He is. He is beyond all that and He is, indeed, us---if one must insist upon this limiting concept of God.

Jesus Christ, in one form or another (be it a myth or a real man) was part of God's plan, as it were, and, like us, God Himself incarnate. He was to be a controversial figure whose claims would induct us into countless debates all for the sake of experience and, in this world, anthropic conceptionalism. He was born to inspire religious as well as irreligious literature. He was born to speed up our spiritual intellect. He was, in this sense, a real saviour.

To demand proof of the Father is to demand the inconceivable from our limited perspective and would defeat the purpose of undergoing this process of living as a mortal. In fact, part of that proof that atheists and agnostics demand is ongoing right now. It is not a celestial dictatorship---there is no divine Mafia---for we were never dictated upon. The experience we requested from God was simply given to us as a wish fulfilment---and this divine contract entailed not remembering our tabula rasa states, also for the sake of advancement as we take steps closer to ... erm ... God.

The goal is not to show submissiveness to God and worship Him in this humble state. Rather we desire His status as we cannot help the spiritual Übermensch concept from arising within us. We want to be Supermen; we want to be much more than what we currently perceive ourselves to be; we are willing to use this Nietzschean vessel until we reach the state of the One who wants absolutely nothing.

How do you like it so far? :mrgreen:
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Pilgrim
Posts: 608
Joined: 10 Apr 2016 10:24

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Pilgrim » 19 Jun 2016 23:11

Summerlander, I will read again after while to understsnd better. Initially, I think your last paragraph more resembles pantheistic thought. I am happy with submissiveness and to tremble before God. I view myself as the created being and God as totally separate. Reconciliation to God, wherein it is like we never sinned and lived a perfect life, is by provision of God through Christ. Even with this standing, in which we are reckoned as righteous and can stand blamelessly before God, we are not God.

Very profound writing you submitted! Good job.

User avatar
Summerlander
Posts: 4162
Joined: 22 Sep 2011 19:52

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Summerlander » 19 Jun 2016 23:36

I guess I was hoping for you to turn around and say that you really posit a technologically super-advanced being or beings to have created the universe as some sort of virtual simulation, a bit like the reality-dream world of The Matrix. In which case, we don't really exist physically---we are nothing but computer codes. The chances of that scenario being true are actually pretty good. In fact, given Moore's Law, the chances of us not being in a virtual reality are like one in the billions. I wanted you to confess to being a cyber-creationist. And then, rationally, you could still recognise that there is no tangible evidence to believe in such intelligent creator. You would only acknowledge that the chances of its existence make it quite probable. So you'd logically be an agnostic on the subject. How would you describe your notion of a probable creator? I'm interested ... :mrgreen:

Imagine that this reality is nothing but a simulation, a game, even, and we are its characters. And there is no way for us to communicate with our creator or creators because they are outside this world. When you play a game, you cannot communicate with the characters directly either, you need an avatar---the character you control---in order to do that. In reality, Jesus could have been our creator's avatar. You see? Christianity could be reformed further and salvaged if such were proved to be true. It would explain why we would just have to take Christ's word for it. But then the question would surely cross your mind: Is our creator eternal or was he also created? Perhaps he/she/it is also living in a simulated world and his creator also created in the same manner ad infinitum ... :-P

Anyway, Would our creator be worthy of adulating veneration? I'll leave to think about that ... ;-)

Are we departing from the main topic here? What do you think?
"Empty cognizance of one taste, suffused with knowing, is your unmistaken nature, the uncontrived original state. when not altering what is, allow it to be as it is, and the awakened state is right now spontaneously present."

- Padmasambhava

User avatar
Pilgrim
Posts: 608
Joined: 10 Apr 2016 10:24

Re: Malala and Terrorism

Postby Pilgrim » 21 Jun 2016 02:24

Summerlander, great contribution and amazing depth! Departing from the topic does not bother me. If it bothers any, they can stop reading. ;) Yes, I got that you were thinking about the Matrix. You probably know me well enough by now to know that my bias is for Sola Scriptura. I assume relevance to the Scriptures but do not mind saying where the concepts are difficult for me.

I found value in your hypothesis in that it provides a logically possible explanation for Creator from a deterministic perspective. (Recall, Alvin Plantinga has tried to demonstrate logical possibility from free will.)

So, your hypothesis provides you rational basis for more capacity for faith in seeking God?

I am not familiar with Moore's law. If I read of it, I forgot. Regardless of the nature of reality, the experience with short falling for all people is rather simple. Here is an example.

Hedge Fund manager, X, regularly appears on CNBC to convince the public that a given stock should go up or down. Manager X coordinates with Fund Manager Y, such that Y is able to position in advance for actions by X that would otherwise appear unethical. Manager Y reciprocates the same favors for Manager X. The public loses money to the gain of X (and Y) based on false hype.

Manager X also is hiding a two affairs that he is having, kept secret from his wife. Manager X suspects some risk of STD, yet still has relations with his wife.

Manager X has discovered certain techniques that allow him effectively to control emotional negativity from his patterns.

Regarding your statement: "It is a lesson in the ultimate epistemology."
Your idea appears similar to what I mentioned before in the Lucid Dreamer's and God thread. There are certain good reasons to the experience of evil. Angels can only long to know about redemption from sin, for example.

I do realize that your model is hypothetical, but I might mention, as you know, I am happy with submission to God. The nature of the oneness that I have felt and desire is different. (I do not think it is core to your argument whether the experience is more pantheistic or theistic.)

Think of it this way. The path to peace in mediation verses my kind of experience by prayer have polar opposite approaches. Mediation casts aside negative thoughts, say of feelings of guilt. Another path is to seek to shine bright light on faults, which I experience initially as profound conviction, followed by ecstatic reconciliation.

Instead of the goal to eliminate desires (want nothing), I eagerly desire certain things within the context of my union. It makes me happy. Similarly, desiring food, sex, major accomplishment, etc. builds anticipation that makes the fulfillment wonderful in many cases.

A note about YHWH. Vowels were not present in those days, but it is probably built on the word for expressing being. Regardless, it is defined to Moses at the burning bush--I AM. This does remind me of your concept of "awareness".


Return to “Off-Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest