What is above scrutiny?

[chinu]

Isn't the point of questioning to receive answers? Has there ever been a day in your life when you had answers that were good answers, but then you discovered a better answer out there?

There's a big difference between an good-answer and a correct-answer. Yes, there can be more good answer than the good-answer that I previously got. But, correct, or a true satisfied answer doesn't further requires any more answer, ever.

Why does one need god to receive the best answers,

In the first place one Try to get correct (NOT best ) answers from all around. And when everything fails, and nothing satisfies the person, then automatically one start believing God to get the correct (NOT Best) answers.

and why does belief in god provide those best answers?

If, this may NOT have been the case, than God cannot be called as God.

 

[ppp]

But, correct, or a true satisfied answer doesn't further requires any more answer, ever.

Assuming that you are human, you have been convinced that you were correct many times over the course of your life. Only to find out days, months or years later, that you were incorrect. Before finding out that you were wrong, you felt like you had the true, satisfied answer.

 

[SigurdReginson]

Can you give an example?

Hmm... It's easy for people to accept something they were raised with as fact for much of their lives. If they don't question things, they just go about their lives without knowing any better. This can hinder their growth as a person, as this kind of behavior is perpetual and can dull a person's wits. This makes for a very gullible person who doesn't have the desire to learn much, really.

Once that person decides to start to question their beliefs, they begin to learn that things they thought were true might not be, which causes them to explore other things. In doing so, they learn to learn. Inquisitive minds are minds that grow.

Of course, I'm speaking of my own life experiences. Maybe you have different ones, but this is something I've learned for myself.

As for trust; take your favorite news source. It has earned your trust for the most part. How accurate do you think it is, though? Imagine it gets busted for releasing inaccurate information. Do you continue to trust it as much as you did? Imagine you discover another news source has a better track record, and seems more accurate. Do you switch to it? Maybe you utilize both, since they have different political biases, so now you have different perspectives to view.

Looking at things from more of a bird's eye view can render more knowledge. This can only be done through testing and judging based on the evidence, and through being honest with ourselves when we learn something we may not like. This testing with give you a clearer window into the nature of reality, IMO.

Why cease asking questions when they continue to paint a clearer picture? All answers are good enough to varying degrees, but there will always be better answers out there.

 

[chinu]

Assuming that you are human, you have been convinced that you were correct many times over the course of your life. Only to find out days, months or years later, that you were incorrect. Before finding out that you were wrong, you felt like you had the true, satisfied answer.

Correct answer is something that comes from a real experience. Hence, need NOT to be convinced for that.

 

[SigurdReginson]

There's a big difference between an good-answer and a correct-answer. Yes, there can be more good answer than the good-answer that I previously got. But, correct, or a true satisfied answer doesn't further requires any more answer, ever.

And what if you find out one day that the answer you thought was correct was in fact wrong? Wouldn't that make you wrong for not testing it?

In the first place one Try to get correct (NOT best ) answers from all around. And when everything fails, and nothing satisfies the person, then automatically one start believing God to get the correct (NOT Best) answers.

Automatically?... That is definitely not my experience at all. What is automatic about the experience? Especially when god is the thing that led to the innitial dissatisfaction?

If, this may NOT have been the case, than God cannot be called as God.

Then what makes your god stand out from the rest? They all seem man made to me.

 

[chinu]

And what if you find out one day that the answer you thought was correct was in fact wrong? Wouldn't that make you wrong for not testing it?

Correct answer is something that comes from real experience.

Automatically?... That is definitely not my experience at all. What is automatic about the experience? Especially when god is the thing that led to the innitial dissatisfaction?

Of course, this is definitely not your experience YET.

YET you search has NOT came to end.

Then what makes your god stand out from the rest? They all seem man made to me.

If God may show you some magic, will you believe then ?

 

[ppp]

Correct answer is something that comes from a real experience. Hence, need NOT to be convinced for that.

Incorrect answers come from real experiences, too. Every time that you came to a wrong conclusion was from a real experience.

 

[chinu]

Incorrect answers come from real experiences, too. Every time that you came to a wrong conclusion was from a real experience.

Its you who made this conclusion. NOT me.

 

[ppp]

Its you who made this conclusion. NOT me.

Are you seriously trying to claim that you have never come to a wrong conclusion? rofl

 

[SigurdReginson]

Correct answer is something that comes from real experience

Like what?

Of course, this is definitely not your experience YET.

YET you search has NOT came to end.

You are a bit incorrect in that. My search had ended up until the age of 30. I spent most of my life as a die hard christian.

That comfort I felt was a false sense of security. It was damaging me, as a person, and keeping me from growing (the religious nature wasn't the cause, but it didn't help things for me).

You are mistaken in suggesting that I want an end to my curiosity. I've found that it's something I've discovered that I love. I enjoy finding new things every day, and expanding what I know of the world I live in. It gives me a drive to improve myself.

If God may show you some magic, will you believe then ?

Good question. There were times when I was a christian when I experienced things I thought were supernatural. In retrospect, I discovered those things had very mundane explanations. I'm not interested in magic in itself. I'm more interested in how the magic works.

 

[chinu]

You are a bit incorrect in that. My search had ended up until the age of 30. I spent most of my life as a die hard christian.

That comfort I felt was a false sense of security. It was damaging me, as a person, and keeping me from growing (the religious nature wasn't the cause, but it didn't help things for me).

You are mistaken in suggesting that I want an end to my curiosity. I've found that it's something I've discovered that I love. I enjoy finding new things every day, and expanding what I know of the world I live in. It gives me a drive to improve myself.

Whatever, this also search.

Good question. There were times when I was a christian when I experienced things I thought were supernatural. In retrospect, I discovered those things had very mundane explanations. I'm not interested in magic in itself. I'm more interested in how the magic works.

Okay you show me the magic and I'll try to answer how it works

 

[SigurdReginson]

Whatever, this also search.

That seems rather dismissive. Seems when I tell religious folks this, they always brush it aside like it doesn't matter. Why is that?

Okay you show me the magic and I'll try to answer how it works

Well, ok.

When I was a young teen, I saw a scary movie with my friends. We all felt too scared to sleep by ourselves, so we all slept in the living room of my friend's house. This house was very old, and it was very creepy. That night, everyone felt tired so they went to sleep. I couldn't sleep, so I stayed awake. As the night went on, I started to get the feeling like I was being watched.

I looked up, and instead of feeling relief when I saw nothing was there, the feeling only intensified. I could feel something looking in through the window at me. I couldn't see anything, though.

All night long I felt this thing walk back and forth up and down the porch. It was looking at me...

Now, the guy who owned this house was a pastor, and it felt to me like whatever it was was prevented from getting in, but I felt as though it was trying to get in. I prayed and prayed for god to keep it away, and the thing was never able to get in.

Eventually the sun slowly rose, and with it the feeling of that dark thing went away. I felt relief and told my friends about what happened. They all had weird dreams that night, and a couple of them even told me they had dreams of being chased down by a dark, shadowy figure.

I told my mom about what happened, as I've always known her as someone to have the spiritual gift of discernment. She told me that when we watched that movie, it drew in a demon. God had kept me safe that night.

What are your answers for that specific supernatural experience? Is it mundane, or is it truly supernatural?

 

[amorphous_constellation]

You know, I was looking for a Havamal stanza to have tattooed in runes, and this one has special significance for me. This might be the one... Thank you for that!

Awesome.

Yeah I got Jackson Crawford's poetic edda and saga of the volungs last week, along with his wanderer's havamal, on the kindle. The wanderer's havamal has the text side by side in old norse, so I suppose that would help me study the meanings a little deeper as well.. I really like his translations, very modern, not at all confusing for me.

There is something mysterious about the Havamal, the more I read it, the more I feel this. I feel like I won't understand it fully until I see how each of the pieces fit together, and it feels like each of the proverbs offset one another in a special way, or fit together in a web. I don't know. Originally, the whole thing was probably supposed to be memorized, and pondered on from there

 

[Thief]

By definition, according to the Bible, it would be impossible for God to be a liar because He is the very definition of Truth.

at the top of the list......life form

you might feel safe.....that He is the source of reality

truth is something else

I do not believe God makes a practice of deception
but He is not forthcoming to every question

I would dare to ask....HOW....He was able to say
I AM!
in that moment before creation

I don't expect Him to reply

 

[Thief]

The Bible says they failed.

nay.....

the test was done to be sure the alteration of Man.....in mind and body
had taken hold

to live
you must renounce the flesh

Adam and Eve chose to know
even as death would be the pending consequence

they passed the test

 

[viole]

Is there anything on this earth or in heaven that is above scrutiny? Should it be? Why should we not question everything?

Is there even ever one time we shouldn't have doubts?

Maybe the claim that nothing is above scrutiny, is above scrutiny.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hmm... It's easy for people to accept something they were raised with as fact for much of their lives. If they don't question things, they just go about their lives without knowing any better. This can hinder their growth as a person, as this kind of behavior is perpetual and can dull a person's wits. This makes for a very gullible person who doesn't have the desire to learn much, really.

Once that person decides to start to question their beliefs, they begin to learn that things they thought were true might not be, which causes them to explore other things. In doing so, they learn to learn. Inquisitive minds are minds that grow.

Of course, I'm speaking of my own life experiences. Maybe you have different ones, but this is something I've learned for myself.

As for trust; take your favorite news source. It has earned your trust for the most part. How accurate do you think it is, though? Imagine it gets busted for releasing inaccurate information. Do you continue to trust it as much as you did? Imagine you discover another news source has a better track record, and seems more accurate. Do you switch to it? Maybe you utilize both, since they have different political biases, so now you have different perspectives to view.

Looking at things from more of a bird's eye view can render more knowledge. This can only be done through testing and judging based on the evidence, and through being honest with ourselves when we learn something we may not like. This testing with give you a clearer window into the nature of reality, IMO.

Why cease asking questions when they continue to paint a clearer picture? All answers are good enough to varying degrees, but there will always be better answers out there.

I see what you're saying, now. I think for person to branch out like you're talking about will often (not always) require personal pain such as a betrayal, loss or unacceptable boundaries -- something that makes them want to leave the expected path. Maybe they struggle to eat or lose a child or are in a prison or hospital bed or under some set of strictures that make them feel confined. Then they are provoked. Then they dream of other lands and send out shoots over fences.

Its possible to go through life satisfied without making inquiries and without wondering about other ways of thinking. What bliss!

 

[Quintessence]

Oh. You are talking about the folks that don't care whether about the truth of the situation. Meh.

Not really, no - I didn't have anything in particular in mind as I wanted to leave it open to one's own interpretations. It's interesting that you interpret it this way.

If you were making a point, I don't see it.

I'm not surprised. I'm not really trying to make "a point." I aim to prompting others to think about things from various perspectives. I suppose that is "the point" if one must make it about having one. That was "the point" of my original post too - just some observations to get people thinking, not "claims" that I expect others to believe or adopt. I expect others to be authentic to who they are and their values.

Intuition is a rapid sub-conscious assessment of a situation where pulls on ones knowledge, experience and analytical abilities. Sure, I value it. How much I trust it depends on the circumstance. I trust and use my intuition with cooking, baking and crafting machinery. I wouldn't give a plug nickel for my intuition on finding directions or selecting music appropriate to the situation.

Cool! Intuition is a tough thing to put one's finger on sometimes, I think. It is often something that happens to us and we're along for the ride like a passenger. Trusting it in many respects reflects how much we trust ourselves, perhaps? If we trust ourselves a lot or trust our intuition, is that a path to avoiding the need for scrutiny? This is why I bring up the topic, as I think it has some interesting intersections with the idea of things being "beyond scrutiny." Perhaps intuition doesn't mean something is "beyond scrutiny" in an absolute sense, but more in a soft sense of the moment. After all, when stuff is happening right now we really don't have the time to be asking lots of questions. We've gotta act. Come to think of it, heuristics relate a lot to this too...

I don't see that it does. Having doubts does not stop me from acting quickly and decisively when I need to.

I wager most folks are like that. Sometimes the opposite happens and folks get stuck in what I sometimes like to call "analysis paralysis." It's something I felt was worth bringing up in the context of the OP since it is about things that are "above scrutiny." Sometimes, there isn't time to scrutinize and analyze or doing so is a bad idea for a particular situation. That is how I see things like intuition relating to the OP. And heuristics too. The luxury of pontification is not always available or necessarily desirable, so it's good that we have other ways of thinking as a species to use for those other cases even though it sometimes causes problems too.

 

[ppp]

Not really, no - I didn't have anything in particular in mind as I wanted to leave it open to one's own interpretations. It's interesting that you interpret it this way.

Meh.

I'm not surprised. I'm not really trying to make "a point."

Ok.

just some observations to get people thinking, not "claims" that I expect others to believe or adopt.

There is no rational basis for your differentiation. Statements about what you observe are still claims. You made seven claims that were also observations. My three sentences were observations and claims, as is this one. I don't understand the fuss.

Cool! Intuition is a tough thing to put one's finger on sometimes, I think. It is often something that happens to us and we're along for the ride like a passenger.

I would say that we are the vehicle, the passenger, the road and the bugs on the windshield. So, I see it more as just being a person thinking.

Trusting it in many respects reflects how much we trust ourselves, perhaps?

If you recall, I gave situations where I trust my intuition, and where I do not. So it is safe to say that I agree with that.

If we trust ourselves a lot or trust our intuition, is that a path to avoiding the need for scrutiny? This is why I bring up the topic, as I think it has some interesting intersections with the idea of things being "beyond scrutiny." Perhaps intuition doesn't mean something is "beyond scrutiny" in an absolute sense, but more in a soft sense of the moment.

I don't think so. Intuition just seems to be rapid analysis that does not take place at the conscious level. There is always part of my brain that is constantly monitoring and checking that activity; and which throws a flag when confidence drops beneath a certain point. And, of course, I check my work on a conscious level afterwards. So, there is always scrutiny.

I wager most folks are like that. Sometimes the opposite happens and folks get stuck in what I sometimes like to call "analysis paralysis."

I would wager the same.

It's something I felt was worth bringing up in the context of the OP since it is about things that are "above scrutiny." Sometimes, there isn't time to scrutinize and analyze or doing so is a bad idea for a particular situation. That is how I see things like intuition relating to the OP. And heuristics too. The luxury of pontification is not always available or necessarily desirable, so it's good that we have other ways of thinking as a species to use for those other cases even though it sometimes causes problems too.

Sure. But that doesn't make it above scrutiny. It just means that there is an emergency.
If it is ten below zero outside, I don't normally go out in a tshirt and shorts. But if my house is burning down around my ears, I certainly will. It doesn't mean that I am above heavy winter gear. I will still die without it.

 

[Rise]

. Neither does yours.
So what?

I never stated that I simply doubted something is true and then said nothing else of substance about why I thought I had reason or evidence to doubt it.

Your personal expression of doubt, unqualified by supporting reasons or evidence, doesn't mean anything as far as debate goes and does nothing to advance debate.

It would be pointless and improper for you to go around to debate threads simply proclaiming "I doubt this" and say nothing else of substance, because you have failed to offer any argumentation or evidence in support of your belief or in contrary to what you doubt.