Searching for GOD...

[bluehillside Retd.]

BR,

Interestingly I am also red green colour blind, but the image was in the proper colour

Must add a certain frisson to your driving experience when you get to the traffic lights?

[Gonnagle]

Dear Berational,

Very interesting but I suppose there must be different levels of red and green colour blindness.

Dear Blue,

That's how I discovered I was colour blind, I failed the colour blind test for a job with the railway, back in the days of steam they were very strict on knowing the signal colours, as for driving a car they don't give you a colour test, probably because the colours are illuminated.

Did any of you two chaps watch the experiment 33 minutes into the programme

Gonnagle.

[Gordon]

I have problem with, so I'm told, pale colours such as yellows, pale greens and beige (although I personally think this is a fictitious colour, since it looks the same as pale green to me). They found this out when I was at school and we had to look for alleged shapes amongst lots coloured dots and all I saw was lots of coloured dots.

Since the unfortunate episode of the green T-shirt in 1976 I'm not allowed to buy clothes unsupervised by either Mrs G or, in recent years, one of my adult daughters - not that I really care about clothes anyway, since I hate shopping unless it involves guitars, banjos or motorcycles. I find that if I whine enough they will buy whatever they think I need without me needing to be there.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gonners,

Dear Blue,

That's how I discovered I was colour blind, I failed the colour blind test for a job with the railway, back in the days of steam they were very strict on knowing the signal colours, as for driving a car they don't give you a colour test, probably because the colours are illuminated.

Did any of you two chaps watch the experiment 33 minutes into the programme

Come of it - I heard you failed the interview for walking in front of His Lordship's car because you kept picking up the green flag instead of the red one...

Sorry - haven't watched it yet. I'm not colour blind though, so might not work anyway? (That said, I am shortsighted so I've never managed to find an optician to get my colour perception tested in any case...)

[ippy]

Dear Rose and ippy,

I thought you might be interested in the little experiment in this programme on how the eye works, in reference to your discussion regarding colour blindness, for me, I am red and green colour blind, the image that remained was in black and white not red, white and blue.

The experiment is exactly 20 minutes into the programme, you also might be amused by the experiment 33 minutes into the programme, I was bloody amazed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01kptcr/blink-a-horizon-guide-to-the-senses

Gonnagle.

In the old days we had those lovely transparencies and they worked on a subtractive system where for instance when shining a white light through them they would subtract green and blue an allow the red wavelength shine through, thus the red colour was seen, etc etc what a muck up if you've to tend with colour blindness.

I've seen that series of programes about the senses, I knew about the lack of actual dye like colouring in butterflies wings, but wasn't quite sure how it worked, all to do with the differing wavelengths of the colours being reflected back to the eyes of others, amazing how evolution ended up apparently making their wings look as though they themselves were actually coloured, facinating subject anything to do with light, it's a particular interest of mine.

ippy

[floo]

Apparently red/green colour blindness would appear to be more common in  the male of the species. If a woman is colour blind she has difficulty with a wide range of colours. My late father told the tale of his great-grandmother who would darn socks with different colour wools as she couldn't pick out the correct colour.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Blue.

Sorry - haven't watched it yet. I'm not colour blind though, so might not work anyway?

No, not the one about colour blindness, 33 minutes in to the programme, I guarantee you will love it

Dear Gordon,

They found this out when I was at school and we had to look for alleged shapes amongst lots coloured dots and all I saw was lots of coloured dots.

Yes, that's the test, although it is numbers you look for in the dots, they still use it when you go for new specs.

Dear ippy,

Series of programmes, there's more!!?

Dear Floo,

Apparently red/green colour blindness would appear to be more common in  the male of the species.

Correct, a sign of true manliness it is why I never fret when choosing which pinny I wear when cooking, Daffy Duck or Donald, Daffy is macho, Donald is more floral, who cares, I am a man's man.

Gonnagle.

[ippy]

Gonners I saw a programe recently about various aspects of colour vision, this is one area of science that absolutly grabbs me and when it was mentioned by someone in one of these posts  that it was about the senses I assumed there would be more than one programe, I may well be wrong.

ippy

Trying to answer with Rugby on the TV thus the struggle to get it right S 6-E 15 at the mo.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Me,

It's called the Monkey business illusion but that kind of gives the game away

Gonnagle.

[Alan Burns]

Alan, you are to Christianity what a wasps nest is to a picnic but you are a nice guy.

Gonnagle.

Just one more post -
You may well be correct.  Being a Christian is not always a picnic.  In becoming a Christian, we can't just cherry pick the nice bits.  Perhaps I am being called to bear witness to the not so nice bits.

Two weeks ago, I was doing a reading at our Sunday Mass from 2 Corinthians 12:12-30.  It was about us all being parts of the body of Christ, but each being a different part with different gifts.  Everyone is different, and we all have unique gifts to offer to help this world be a better place, and to help people move on to an even better place.  So we should not be arguing about our differences and defending our own corner, but rejoicing in our differences and sharing them for the good of all.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

So we should not be arguing about our differences and defending our own corner, but rejoicing in our differences and sharing them for the good of all.

Very nice. Just out of interest though, where in your view are people who don't share your faith headed once we've shuffled off this mortal coil?

[Shaker]

Everyone is different, and we all have unique gifts to offer to help this world be a better place, and to help people move on to an even better place. So we should not be arguing about our differences and defending our own corner, but rejoicing in our differences and sharing them for the good of all.

An admirably humanistic sentiment 

[Alan Burns]

Just an observation:

It is a week since anyone posted on this thread, but during this week, the number of views has increased by over three thousand. 

Apparently the words of over ten thousand posts are all searchable from Google, hence the number of hits.  So I hope some of my posts will be read by a less sceptical audience. 

[Shaker]

Actively wanting a less sceptical audience?

Why, Alan?

[Alan Burns]

Actively wanting a less sceptical audience?

Why, Alan?

To enable them to discover the truth of course.

[Shaker]

To enable them to discover the truth of course.

But it isn't the truth. It's your belief that it is, but it's just a belief.

Interesting that you seem to equate discovering truth with turning off one's critical faculties, whereas in the real world it's the exact opposite.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

So I hope some of my posts will be read by a less sceptical audience.

You misunderstand scepticism. Scepticism is a good thing - it means we challenge and test the assertions we're given to help distinguish the more probably true from the more probably not true. You for example would be sceptical if I asserted that leprechauns leaves pots of gold at the ends of rainbows.

And that's what's happened here. You've attempted some very bad arguments for your theism, and your interlocutors have identified those very bad arguments. That's not to say necessarily that you don't have any good arguments for "God", but it is to say that you've yet to bring them to the table.

[ekim]

Just an observation:

It is a week since anyone posted on this thread, but during this week, the number of views has increased by over three thousand. 

Apparently the words of over ten thousand posts are all searchable from Google, hence the number of hits.  So I hope some of my posts will be read by a less sceptical audience. 

It is quite likely that your posts will have been read by believers as well as the sceptical.  The believers will likely look for what supports their view but you seem to have chosen to try and spread your belief to non believers in the hope of persuading them.  I don't think it is very likely that you will succeed using an intellectual approach. 

If I can paraphrase what is alleged to have been said by Jesus in Matt 13, you will see how he varied his approach between those who have been initiated into his method and those who haven't. ..... "You initiates have had the hidden Truth of God revealed to you but the general masses have not. Those who have received this special knowledge can be given more and more but those who have not would be in danger of losing what little understanding they do have. Therefore I speak to them in parables because they lack perception, comprehension and understanding.    It is as Isaiah said, that, by just listening you will only hear but not understand and by just looking you will only see not perceive.

The mind of the masses has become dense, their capacity for hearing the truth greatly diminished. They have closed their eyes to it even though they may have been converted or had their sins forgiven, but you initiates are blessed with the capacity to perceive and understand. Many prophets and righteous people have wanted to attain your vision but have failed.

Just as when seeds are sown, some are eaten by birds, some fall on infertile soil and fail to germinate, some fall among weeds and are choked and some fall on fertile soil and bear fruit.  Similarly, when the Truth is heard, there are those who do not understand and it is easily displaced in them by anyone malevolent; and there are those who immediately receive it with joy and it lasts for a while, but as soon as it creates problems for them they abandon it and it does not take root; also there are those who receive it, but because they are more concerned with the ways of the world and possessions it becomes choked and does not bear results; but for those who receive it and take it deeply into the good ground of their Being and are converted and healed and realise the Truth, it will multiply many times."
I would suggest that it is Jesus' method that needs to be emphasised in 'searching for God' or Heaven rather than confusing the issue with science, philosophy and theology.  However, I am not a Christian.

[bluehillside Retd.]

ekim,

It is quite likely that your posts will have been read by believers as well as the sceptical.  The believers will likely look for what supports their view but you seem to have chosen to try and spread your belief to non believers in the hope of persuading them.  I don't think it is very likely that you will succeed using an intellectual approach. 

If I can paraphrase what is alleged to have been said by Jesus in Matt 13, you will see how he varied his approach between those who have been initiated into his method and those who haven't. ..... "You initiates have had the hidden Truth of God revealed to you but the general masses have not. Those who have received this special knowledge can be given more and more but those who have not would be in danger of losing what little understanding they do have. Therefore I speak to them in parables because they lack perception, comprehension and understanding.    It is as Isaiah said, that, by just listening you will only hear but not understand and by just looking you will only see not perceive.

The mind of the masses has become dense, their capacity for hearing the truth greatly diminished. They have closed their eyes to it even though they may have been converted or had their sins forgiven, but you initiates are blessed with the capacity to perceive and understand. Many prophets and righteous people have wanted to attain your vision but have failed.

Just as when seeds are sown, some are eaten by birds, some fall on infertile soil and fail to germinate, some fall among weeds and are choked and some fall on fertile soil and bear fruit.  Similarly, when the Truth is heard, there are those who do not understand and it is easily displaced in them by anyone malevolent; and there are those who immediately receive it with joy and it lasts for a while, but as soon as it creates problems for them they abandon it and it does not take root; also there are those who receive it, but because they are more concerned with the ways of the world and possessions it becomes choked and does not bear results; but for those who receive it and take it deeply into the good ground of their Being and are converted and healed and realise the Truth, it will multiply many times."

I would suggest that it is Jesus' method that needs to be emphasised in 'searching for God' or Heaven rather than confusing the issue with science, philosophy and theology.  However, I am not a Christian.

Thats interesting. It's content free - essentially "the truth is the truth because I says it's the truth, and anyone who doesn't agree just doesn't get it" - and it's pretty much what Alan falls back on in any case when his attempts at reason crash and burn. His (and Jesus's) problem though remains that anyone can assert anything to be true - they still have all their work ahead of them to explain why anyone else should agree with them (though Jesus it seems argues from consequences - "just think of the prize to come if I'm right").

For what it's worth, my best guess is that there was a Jesus only he was a sort of David Koresh figure - genuinely convinced of his divine status but hopelessly wrong about that nonetheless, hence the "why have you forsaken me?" on the cross when perhaps it dawned on him that he'd backed the wrong horse.     

[Enki]

Just an observation:

It is a week since anyone posted on this thread, but during this week, the number of views has increased by over three thousand. 

Apparently the words of over ten thousand posts are all searchable from Google, hence the number of hits.  So I hope some of my posts will be read by a less sceptical audience. 

Of course this works both ways, Alan. It is just as possible that your less sceptical audience will also have read the many posts which challenged your assertions. 

[Rhiannon]

For what it's worth, my best guess is that there was a Jesus only he was a sort of David Koresh figure - genuinely convinced of his divine status but hopelessly wrong about that nonetheless, hence the "why have you forsaken me?" on the cross when perhaps it dawned on him that he'd backed the wrong horse.   

I'm with the likes of Geza Vermes and Howard Jacobson - Jesus was a radical Jewish prophet moulded in his thought by John the Baptist. There's evidence that he was an apocalyptic prophet, thinking he was in the end times and trying to prepare as many of his people as possible. I don't think for a minute he claimed divine status for himself - that seems to have come out of the Hellenic thinking of St Paul.

As for his cry on the cross, makes sense if you find yourself unable to find consolation when you most need it. You would feel forsaken.

I think if Jesus the man did exist - and I think it's fair to say that he did - then he never intended for the teachings that he passed on to have spawned the monster that is Christianity. It's like the religion followed by the cat people in Red Dwarf - based entirely on misunderstanding.

[Shaker]

I think if Jesus the man did exist - and I think it's fair to say that he did - then he never intended for the teachings that he passed on to have spawned the monster that is Christianity. It's like the religion followed by the cat people in Red Dwarf - based entirely on misunderstanding.

Isn't there are a passage somewhere attributed to Jesus where he explicitly says that his teachings are for Jews and Jews exclusively?

[Rhiannon]

Isn't there are a passage somewhere attributed to Jesus where he explicitly says that his teachings are for Jews and Jews exclusively?

Matthew 15:24.

[SusanDoris]

AB

I'm no fan of your posts as you know! However, thank you for starting this thread up again - I've missed it!

[Shaker]

Matthew 15:24.

Merci beaucoup