Actually I was just asking a question.
Correct, forgive me. I was rather rushed when I wrote my response. I doubt I need to prove I am also quite human, lol.
Why do you assume that because some words are in a book, there is no direct experience also?
Actually, again,it is simply my experience, Booko. If yourself and Scott (as well as others) have had deeply personal experiences, I for one, would LOVE to hear about them. I mean that quite sincerely. In my view it certainly does not hurt to add the two cents of one's experience to deepen the message conveyed. I suppose another reason, for me at least, is that given people's words, it is not easy to grasp their level of understanding, especially if they rely on quotations to make their point. Prefaces such as, "My experience tells me the following is true..." would add volumes to such quotes. Granted there is wiggle room there, but nonetheless it would personalize the message more, and depending on how I judge a person, and I do, it could add considerable weight to what they are saying rather than just trumpeting the words. I hope that makes sense.
And here's where you make the mistake, Ymir. You are assuming that the book is being used first and the experience afterwards.
That is a valid criticism Lady Booko, however it is not the entirely the truth. I am quite aware of the fact that people have their own experiences and then "hit on" someone who "speaks their language" so to speak. Again, if folks would just say so when they are making use of scriptures. I don't know Sharon, little things like, "This scripture has always seemed to ring true for me..." rather than trotting out quotes as de facto truth when in fact they are only conjecture.
I don't like to use the trump card per se, but we are talking about a being that has never been proven to exist. Leave aside all the religious babble for a sec and think about it pragmatically, as I am sure you do anyway. To say outright that such and such is SO about an entity that may or may NOT actually exist is ... unreasonable. At best, even with deep personal experience, it is a "best guess" scenario and I just wish that people would crop their enthusiam for their so-called "revealed" scriptures and stick to things they personally know as fact instead of rambling on about what they think they know.
Another side of this multidimensional coin is that I openly claim to have "met" god in the form of Vishnu. It certainly rocked my little world, lol. The thing is, based on my first hand experience, when I read things that are allegedly from "god" I just tend to blink and wonder... "Hmmm. Oddly, the big fellah didn't say anything about that."
I clearly recognize that I could be the "odd man out" and am totally deluded, however I am fairly certain that I am not. Would it be more impressive if I used quotations from so-called "scriptures" and kept my perceptions to myself? Would that validate my understanding to you?
That's the unwarranted assumption.
It could be in some cases, for sure and in those cases I offer heartfelt apologies. In the cases where it is not I will stand by my words.
Nevermind Scott. I made the point regarding myself. Just because some of us do not mention personal experience in the way you do does not mean we don't have them.
I recognize that Booko. Further to this it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the experiences of others is far greater than my own, though to be quite honest, it is rather unlikely.
Also, I see no need to assume that my experience would be anything like yours just because I am not you.
Forgive my own enthusiam Booko. I am a bit more intelligent than to suggest that. You are unique in your feathered regalia as I am in my own soothing ice. By the way, did I say that we would have identical perspectives? Sharon, we all perceive reality from the nexus of the moment through our own individualized sense of being. I would never suggest any other thing, and if I stray from that thought I would hope you have the continued temerity to smack me back into my senses. I expect nothing less really.
Having said that, Oneness is a peculiar beast that will strike the individual in very similar ways. It is my opinion that there are only so many ways TO describe that Oneness and so there SHOULD be distinct similarities from account to account. When I do not sense that in a person it most definitely affects my view of them. Of that I am certainly quilty. Well, I am only 51, so I am still young.
I can say I personally verified the Earth is Flat and Creation occured in 6 24-hour days, and you should give that no more credence than any other claim I make to having verified anything.
That is not what I mean Sharon and I am sure you are clever enough to know that. What I am really meaning is that one should be able to describe, to an extent, the viewpoints they have accrued so that they are meaningful to others. Insisting that the Earth is flat or that so-called "creation" occured in 6 24-hour days does not fit that bill as they cannot be verified, via direct experience by anyone else.
Parroting assumes the mere repitition of words with no thought behind them or prior reflection on the meaning or truth of said words.
Nods. Exactly. That is why I asked Scott if he had verified the quote he used with the full knowledge that he cannot say "yes". It is not possible... well, not to my thinking. If "god" was being that direct with anyone, I would suggest that they needed counselling.
Again, an unwarranted assumption.
Forgive me if I politely disagree with you on this one my dear mother hen. It is definitely true that I could possibly be underestimating the "depth" of others experience however, I read their word, cypher their meaning and go from there. Sorry, but I can only use my experience as a yardstick. I'm far from perfect Sharon whatever "perfect" is exactly.
Well you are at the horses mouth or perhaps another aspect, so I will try to clarify what I mean. It would be so much simpler over a cool lemonaid sitting in deck chairs and watching the sunset. Interent forum discussions are not exactly natural and errors crop up so easily in comparrison to ordinary communication modes.
First, you are just assuming he has no verification. He has not said either way, unless I missed a post (possible).
He did not in fact say he did or did not, however he did give the impression, conscious or not, that his quote was from "on high" as it were. Trust me, I know it when I see it, as I am guilty of it too.
Then there is this problem...
On the one hand, you decry organized religions because the believers tend to engage in groupthink. Well, that's a valid criticism at times to be sure.
On the other hand, you criticize Scott (and indirectly me as well) because we believe people should think for themselves. It's something of a Baha'i habit to just quote directly and people can make of it what they will.
Well, dear Poulet girl, I just learned something. I did not know that. Now I understand Scott a bit better. You, however, rarely use quotations of any kind. I guess that is part of my point. You and I or Scott and I can interact with each other. It is hard to "interact" the same way with a book.
The alternative would be for us to push a possibly errorneous interpretation on the meaning. Better you think for yourself.
Personally, I think that is superb, but to those of us who are not all that familiar with Bahai "terms of usage" perhaps members of the Bahai faith should simply say so... then drop the quote. It would make all the difference in the world to this silly mortal. Frankly that is one of the things I detest about Islam in that one the one hand we are told to read the Qur'an and then on the other hand we are told to read "this" interpretation. *sigh* I hope you understand what I am saying now.
So if you would please clarify whether you would like groupthink or avoidance of groupthink, maybe Scott and I can proceed from there.
I would VASTLY prefer your own personal points of view. Following your comment above, I can read for myself, lol. I can do that anytime. I would much rather have real discussions about the things that fire your imagination and makes your hearts skip a beat. You could just say, this is my own viewpoint, the way I understand it and that would be good enough for me.
Am I getting clearer?
