On Fri, 13 May 2005 22:36:57 -0400, Daniel Zimmerman <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "David Riddell" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Friday, May 13, 2005 1:50 PM
>Subject: Re: Cocooned in Dylanesque or is Albert Einstein indeed God?
>
>David Riddell wrote, in part:
>
>> . . . being singular in purpose and apparently
>> with no allies for support I seem to be fighting
>> a losing battle amongst formidable foes
>> from many sides.I don't know how long I can
>> fight the good fight against such overwhelming
>> odds but I will try and do the best I can.
>> I appear to be the pagan here
>> amongst the intellectual elite,my personal
>> viewpoint cast aside with distaste.
>>
>> Nevertheless I shall not wave the white flag.
>> I shall not surrender.I will not bow down and
>> worship the religion of individualism,a religion
>> whereupon man-kind worships itself.
>
>((Allow me to interject this view into the discussion:
>
>"Thou art a Man, God is no more,
>Thy own humanity learn to adore."
> --William Blake, mystic and Christian))
>
>> 'Knowledge' is worshipped as God.
>
>(( John 1:1-2 reaffirms God's creative role and declares that Jesus, the
>Logos, was fully involved in that creative process since "the Word was
God".
>http://www.credo.ndirect.co.uk/creation.html
>
>Non-believers no more worship 'knowledge' as God that believers worship the
>Bible,
>which they call "the Word of God," as God. You claim, David, that "man-kind
>worships itself" and that "'Knowledge' is worshipped as God." This appears
>to suggest that 'man-kind' "is" 'knowledge.' Could you clarify this
>conundrum?))
Certainly,Daniel.
Thankyou for showing genuine interest.
You being the first one to seriously acknowledge
a scripture reference,I feel obliged therefore
to reply the best I can.
there is no conundrum here.
I am not suggesting that Mankind "is" Knowledge 'per se'
more so the fact that every human-being by nature
of the case must 'worship' something.If we take
into consideration that there is actually a Creator
and that Man was created in the image of God as found
in the Genesis account,we must acknowledge that there
is something intrinsically spiritual within the depths
of every human-being.
Questions regarding the meaning of life,our very existence,
the purpose for living etc have always been and always
will be the great driving-force that makes every one of us
search for truth.
Every human-being,deep down in their soul has a need to
search for the answer,this being the focus for worship.
We need to worship something because we have been created
to worship.
Thus we find that Man-kind worships many different things.
Something has happened to make Man-kind worship itself
rather than worshipping the Creator.
The search for truth has been hindered.The search for
truth now takes on an inward looking search.Man-kind
mistakenly looks inward and begins to worship what
was created [itself] and therefore not the Creator.
Truth becomes something that Man-kind interprets pertaining
to itself,it becomes 'relative' it becomes meaningful
only to its own understanding and so it becomes worthy of worship.
One just needs to observe all the religions of the
World to understand exactly how this 'relative' truth
expresses itself.All religions fail to 'deliver' because
all religions are inward looking.
To begin to find the answer,we must stop worshipping
ourselves and begin to understand the true Creator.
I hope this helps,Dan.
all the best
dR
>
>> You will usually find these worshippers amongst
>> the highly educated in our society.
>> They are the ones who take pride in the fact
>> that they have been blessed with this knowledge
>> and therefore deserve our worship.
>>
>(Alison commented: >>Others have questioned your assumptions; I do not read
>that as intolerance.
>>>If you are not interested in debating your beliefs, why raise them here?
>>>
>>
>> not assumptions Alison.
>> my beliefs could never be construed
>> as assumptions.my beliefs are not pretentiousness.
>>
>((Beliefs necessarily qualify as assumptions; proofs alone, admittedly in
>limited ways, escape that characterization. Whether you believe it or not,
>in the plane geometry of the right triangle, a squared plus b squared
equals
>c squared. And no one these days 'worships' such knowledge. Beliefs concern
>probabilities or possibilities--or, indeed, impossibilities; proofs do not.
>You may correctly assert that your "beliefs are not pretentiousness," but
>only if you do not rank them as a species of certainty equivalent to that
of
>(proven) knowledge.))
>
>> If you indeed fail to see the
>> intolerance that has so far been displayed toward my
>> point of view,then there is nothing I can say that
>> will persuade you otherwise.
>>
>> As far as debating my beliefs is concerned, I have yet
>> to see any rational argument put forward by anyone
>> on this List that is worthy of any response from me.
>>
>((I'd venture you've confused intolerance with impatience.
>Would it surprise you if, reading your last sentence, some
>on this list might suffer a similar confusion? It does seem
>rather arch, dismissive, high-handed and sulky . . .))
>
>Best,
>
>Dan Zimmerman
|