Jump to navigation
I have been studying it for over forty years. And if pressed at this point in my investigation, with the question, "What have I learned?" I would begin by saying, "Human life, can perhaps best be understood as something a-kin-to reading and writing. A person's interaction with the material world, many see that it can be recorded in history after it has taken place. But few see that the events can be recorded in the form of words, after they occur, as they occur, and before they occur.
The records of people, which meet the criteria for eternal preservation, become the forming image God would see, at any given time.
As individuals, and as groups, we have the freedom to study and learn, and then imagine the best possible world, write it down, and have it come true through reading it, by agreeing with it".
I would most likely end by pointing out, "Human life is mainly an effort to better the lives of others not here yet. Our lives can become a song that God will play over and over, through the generations to come".
Monkeys see, monkeys do
A reason to recognize
After living for many, many, years, up off the ground, they came down. What brought them down?
Each member of the tribe watched for danger. In fact, if one was to see danger and not sound an alarm, an example was made that this behavior was not acceptable. Each member of the tribe watched for danger, as a rule. The young of the tribe, were expected to be learning through observation, things that, if noticed, should be brought to the attention of the group. In the trees, lesson No. 1, down is bad - up is good.
The primate watched the snake. It had seen the snake many times. This primate noticed, it was the very same snake. It remembered, watching as this very same snake left the trees, went down on to the ground, and away into the land without trees. This primate noticed, the snake had come back. It had come back from a place, seen, yet unknown. Was it important? Enough to tell others? This primate knew from experience, the elders of the tribe avoided recognition of the world without trees. If one would listen, it would tell. Attention was being paid to this primate, by another member of the group, more so than any other member of the group. He began to listen. He had little choice. It took awhile, but eventually, he realized she was implying that perhaps the snake could be followed. If the snake could live, and return, from the land without trees, perhaps they could too. He also realized these thoughts were blasphemous to the other members of the tribe. The force of loyalty within him, he found divided.
The history of the tribe, brought to the attention of the tribe, periodically by the elders of the tribe, implied that one would surely die if you were to leave the trees and go into the land without trees. He had come to understand that. And then again, through the eyes of another, the snake implied one would not surely die.
At the time, it would have been hard to noticed the conflict in knowledge. You see, both arguments are correct, unto themselves. The snake implies that life can leave the trees and live in a land without trees, and the snake can. But the primate cannot. For if the primate were to leave the environment of the trees and go into the land without trees, he would come to find that he had been dying for a very long period of time, simply due to the fact that he now lacked many things his body had become accustomed to while living in the trees for many, many, years. The snake didn't really live in the trees. He just hunted there.
Why are you spamming babble with your nonsense?
You've already got your own website. Is that not enough of an exposure for your crazy religious ideas?
I don't think this belongs in rabble writer's circle, so I am going to move it. I don't see anything too problematic with this post as of yet, but maybe instead of opening multiple threads, alan, you can try and keep your discussion designated to one of them.
Just sharing some philosophical writings. Getting dizzy from being moved around, but my writings are influenced by the research I am doing at the time.
MOVIN A MOUNTAIN
The understanding of, leads to the use of, the concept of "EVOLUTION".
Hay, if you don't believe me, let me show you. Follow me for a bit, and we will end up in a place were the concept of evolution, being known, will save the lives of many people. And change the lives of everyone, for the better.
With a understanding of evolution, comes the understanding that, "IF" you had a time machine, you could go back to a time when life is just beginning to come out of the water. Some life forms are trying to live outside the water, just out side the window. You can see that they are having a hard time, newly out of their long growth cycle in the water. Their new environment is much different. The place is dry. And gravity is different, much harder to move. Many things are different now, for this life form. Much is being asked of it's body, all at once, by the drastic change.
Now, still there, still out the window is that life form. You may begin to feel sorry for the little thing. You may think that if you got out of your time machine, you could help the little creature. Maybe by putting it back in the water, or just keeping it wet would seem to help it. But anything you would do would change what we are today.
Well, here we are. And I don't see how you can go back to thinking evolution is not true, in principle.
For look behind you, see when you were born. You came out of the water too. Now we can see, that you would have been helped, if someone would have "WEANED YOU FROM THE WATER". But those around you, when you were born, didn't have as good, an understanding of life.
Yes, I'm proposing that from now on, each person born, be afforded a better start in life. This line of reasoning dictates it. It will be a big step for mankind. A big step away from the other life forms around us.
We have not been weaning the infant from the water environment, letting the infant take a month or so before being completely out of the water, because we just thought of it, didn't we? Now we can. Animals, still will not.Humans will. Its the law of reason.
PS And is this the reason why some creatures have moved back into the water, to make life easier/better for their young? For the next generation?
Thank you for the time, Alan
HUH? That post absolutely makes no sense.