Why yes, I can agree with the ruler analogy, but it seems that the scientific ruler or measuring tool has a set way of measuring. It's ruler seems to use consecutive numbers and equal spaces between the number. It measures along the lines of one inch, two inches three inches, four inches, five inches, etc...
But the religious ruler seems to have a hodge podge of different symbols, not in any particular order or pattern, with different spaces between the symbols. They seem to measure more along the lines of duck, coffee, bookcase, pinata, duck-teen, etc... Not only that but there are multiple rulers with religion, and the results garnered from religion doesn't seem to match up with the results of another and themselves.
The reason people who use investigation and observation to understand the world is because, for the most part, it works every single time! And if not, they have to change their investigations and experimentations to account for the new observation. If the moon suddenly reversed direction, scientists wouldn't declare "Oh, we don't understand why this happened, so it must be be god!" no, they investigate it and observe and compile what they thought knew before to see why it fails now. They essentially have to discredit themselves in order to progress on to the truth.
Religion seems to work by completely ignoring new observation that goes against their belief, and by compiling things from their imagination (which count as theory) and not investigating, researching, or experimenting to discover why they believe so (which offer no evidence).
The reason scientists depend on the scientific method (for a quick overview
The Scientific Method | Introduction) because it works. But religion stops halfway through the process and doesn't continue on. They observe, they hypothesize, but they don't investigate, and they can't recreate or demonstrate or their results. With science they can predict results with almost complete accuracy almost everytime. You can't with religion, there is not consistency one can depend on.
Just because you don't understand a different ruler, does not make it less valid.
Of course there is a difference between the esoteric and exoteric. The esoteric does everythign you say, observe, recreate, demonstrate, predict..... but I understand that is beyond your scope of understanding
But I offer the following, even though I know it is probably like trying to teach a mouse how to split an atom.
For example a certain well known modern alchemist recently stated:
There is a prevailing notion, that an identity exists between what
are called Initiatory states, and the mystical states.
These “mystical” states, incorrectly identified with the Grades of
Initiation, include such things as “ecstasy”-and the proponents of these
theories thereafter insist that these things are all availble to
visualizations, such as PET and MRI. Moreover, they argue that the
Initiatory Grades, being in their minds, equivalent to the states of
mysticism, can never be truly occupied permanemtly by the being, but
are merely fleeting “experiences”.
While we would agree that the states encountered by “mysticism” are
fleeting, and even that since they are psychic experineces, that they
can be observed via imagery techniques, we can not see how they are to be
identified with the Initiatory Grades, which speak of diverse other things.
Moreover, every traditional Initiatory doctrine notes not only an
ascent(”Realization”, and “Escape from the cosmos”
, but a redescent, in which,
although the original individual being is
changed, nothing is lost of the Gnosis in the redescent (unlike
mysticism, where the experineces are but “memories”
.
Doctrinaly, these differences are noted in many ways, but one way
of explaining it is in the Sufistic distinction bewteen “Hal”, and
“Maqqam”. Ibn Arabi, for example, goes to great lengths to explain the
distinction between temporary “states” (Hal), and totally aquired “Stations”
(Maqqam)–which are the objectives of the
Initiatory path.
Another illustration, is derived from geometry.
All of the states of being can be envisioned as points along some
indefinite verticle axis, which have, independently, their own
circumference (conceived of in the horizontal plane, or
intersecting the vertical plane, at specific given points).
Initiation involves something of a reversal…as opposed to
seeing independent concentric circles staked on one another,
along a verticle axis, the “circumference” (of what is really
sphereical), presents itself as a circle in the horizontal
plane, uniting all states in simultaniety and succesion.
There is thus an ascending path (the lowest point to the highest
point), and and a descending path (the highest point returning to the
lowest point)…occuring without interuption and continuity.
This is a partial explanation of the Cross, that forms the
emblem of “Rosicrucianism”.
In the Hermetic (Alchemical) symbolism, that Rosicrucianism
originated from, there are many similar examples of this
“return to earth”, invloving things such as birds having their
wings removed, among other symbols.
