Is Metaphysical Reality Empty of Potential Knowledge and Truth?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by The Kernel on February 4, 2010 at 7:15pm

Hello, what are you trying to say. What do you mean?

Roman Kozlowski said:

Hello
Is anybody out there?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Alison Parker on February 4, 2010 at 7:39pm

I am the I am

Roman Kozlowski said:

Hello
Is anybody out there?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Roman Kozlowski on February 5, 2010 at 1:52pm

The question is "Is Metaphysical Reality Empty of Potential Knowledge and Truth?"

No.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by The Kernel on February 5, 2010 at 3:07pm

DB: Thanks for the clarifications. Much appreciated. The focus of this discussion is on the metaphysical - is it empty of knowledge and truth? Does your personal point of view take into account a metaphysical reality, or does reality exist only on a physical plain? Your is would be appreciated.

If there is some kind of general agreement from participants that a metaphysical reality exists, and their seems to be - with the exception of Jim G, I'd like to open up the concept of metaphysical further - if people are willing.

. . . Any other comments out there from others?

David Bee said:

K,
Thank you for the feedback. I didn't know Adam was part of RG. Regardless, God was with Adam and Eve in the beginning, so they knew God as mortals from the start, before becoming subject to spiritual and physical death. With this pure knowledge they did not have to rely on faith, or belief, they already knew.

You took "RG will never succeed in redefining God" out of context by ignoring ", i.e., finding the God of reality". I will restate my thought more clearly. RG will never succeed in finding the God of reality because the God of reality will never reveal Himself to those who do not believe in Him.

If a particular belief (including aethism) really possesses the absolute truth about about something, would you expect the believers to express the truth with equivocation? If they did, would they not be lying about their belief?
The Kernel said:

Mr. Bell, Relax. Don't be presumptuous.

You say that,"God will never reveal Himself to those who do not believe." So belief is a precondition of knowing god? Therefore one must believe in God before one can experience god. Can one then say that the First Man (Adam) would have had to believed in God before god revealed Himself to Adam and, if so, how did Adam develop his initial belief in God if God could know reveal himself. Your position is arguable.

You also say, "RG will never succeed in redefining God." Mr. Bell, people redefine their definition of terms all the time. What makes you presume that people at RG cannot redefine their definitions of God? At one time people worshiped God in His plurality (or many manifest forms), then the concept was unified into a single God that judged and invoked pain & punished. More recently, God was defined as a loving God - agape. I know people who define Her in a variety of ways.

You can subjectively define God however you like. I too can do the same and even if we agreed with each others definition 100% we could still cannot even prove the objective existence of God. So continue to participate in RG as you are - for your input is appreciated and whether you want it to or not, you are helping the us Redefine God through Open Source Religion 2.0.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Bee on February 5, 2010 at 7:27pm

One definition I found:
Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the ultimate nature of reality, being, and the world. More recently, the term "metaphysics" has also been used more loosely to refer to "subjects that are beyond the physical world".

Yes, my point of view certainly does take into account a metaphysical reality as I understand the definition, "beyond the physical world", or the world we perceive with our physical bodies. I also believe that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter much finer that what we can perceive with our physical bodies, but matter none the less, which cannot be destroyed - maybe of a material like "dark" matter.

The Kernel said:

DB: Thanks for the clarifications. Much appreciated. The focus of this discussion is on the metaphysical - is it empty of knowledge and truth? Does your personal point of view take into account a metaphysical reality, or does reality exist only on a physical plain? Your is would be appreciated.
If there is some kind of general agreement from participants that a metaphysical reality exists, and their seems to be - with the exception of Jim G, I'd like to open up the concept of metaphysical further - if people are willing.
. . . Any other comments out there from others?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Alison Parker on February 5, 2010 at 8:25pm

Taking into account the physical world appears to disappear (dissolve?...) on a micro level (Roman you can do this with erudition so please step forward...), one is tempted to reverse the question to; Is physical reality empty of potential knowledge and truth?' It takes me back to the Emerald Tablet, "As within so without..." I believe the Hindi word for the physical world is Maya, as in illusion. Yet it is the world we live - move - and have our being in, the one we most identify with.
Alchemy instructs the physical is a manifestation of consciousness - or subconsciousness actually, and the illusion is that the physical realm is solid, fixed. Equally an illusion is that there are 2 realms, the physical and spiritual (if you like) or metaphysical/consciousness.
So then we're back to - subconsciousness of - what? I do agree the answer is beyond definition. We always end up with - can 'god' be defined. Jim G spoke of Tao. Even there it is said, the Tao that can be defined is not Tao.


David Bee said:

One definition I found:
Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the ultimate nature of reality, being, and the world. More recently, the term "metaphysics" has also been used more loosely to refer to "subjects that are beyond the physical world".

Yes, my point of view certainly does take into account a metaphysical reality as I understand the definition, "beyond the physical world", or the world we perceive with our physical bodies. I also believe that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter much finer that what we can perceive with our physical bodies, but matter none the less, which cannot be destroyed - maybe of a material like "dark" matter.

The Kernel said:

DB: Thanks for the clarifications. Much appreciated. The focus of this discussion is on the metaphysical - is it empty of knowledge and truth? Does your personal point of view take into account a metaphysical reality, or does reality exist only on a physical plain? Your is would be appreciated.
If there is some kind of general agreement from participants that a metaphysical reality exists, and their seems to be - with the exception of Jim G, I'd like to open up the concept of metaphysical further - if people are willing.
. . . Any other comments out there from others?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Bee on February 6, 2010 at 9:42am

Alison Parker said:"So then we're back to - subconsciousness of - what? I do agree the answer is beyond definition. We always end up with - can 'god' be defined. Jim G spoke of Tao. Even there it is said, the Tao that can be defined is not Tao."
Comment:
Then, if there is a god of reality, of whatever form reality is, that god would have to reveal himself to us, before we can know of him. Otherwise, why bother trying to define or redefine God? What purpose does defining or redefining God serve? Let's rely on science to explain our environment. Historically men have used religion primarily to exert control over others and to sooth the masses into complacency. Anytime a religion has gained favor with a large segment of a population, those in power use that religion as a tool to strengthen their power, and use the religion as their justification to cause much suffering among their subjects and those who aren't "converted". For example, history is full of atrocities committed in the name of "god" by "christians" against both nonbelievers and those of different sects; by muslims against both nonbelievers and those of different sects. The ancient Roman caesars claimed to be Gods, to enhance their control. Etc. etc, etc.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Roman Kozlowski on February 6, 2010 at 12:18pm

David Bee. Personally, as once a theologiacal academic that has moved into the fields of science. May I say that I admire your own personal ability as a modernday christian in being able to stand back and open mindedly take part in these discussions regarding some of the most groundbreaking new thoughts in science. Ones like yourself give hope to the fusion of what RG is all about.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by The Kernel on February 6, 2010 at 4:07pm

I also believe that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter much finer that what we can perceive with our physical bodies, but matter none the less, which cannot be destroyed - maybe of a material like "dark" matter.
DB, you suggest that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter that is finer than we can perceive with our physical senses. Let me see if I understand.

When you refer to, “our spiritual selves”, would this be in contrast to our physical or material selves?

When you say we are not able to physically perceive this subtle form of matter, are you saying human kind will never be able to detect it or that we have not yet devised an instrument to detect it?

If our “spiritual self” is made of matter, where did we originate – from the singularity along with all other forms of matter?

If my spiritual self is physical – as you suggest, and if I am made in the image of God – as I am told, is God also essentially a physical entity?

David, your input is appreciated.I also believe that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter much finer that what we can perceive with our physical bodies, but matter none the less, which cannot be destroyed - maybe of a material like "dark" matter.
DB, you suggest that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter that is finer than we can perceive with our physical senses. Let me see if I understand.

When you refer to, “our spiritual selves”, would this be in contrast to our physical or material selves?

When you say we are not able to physically perceive this subtle form of matter, are you saying human kind will never be able to detect it or that we have not yet devised an instrument to detect it?

If our “spiritual self” is made of matter, where did we originate – from the singularity along with all other forms of matter?

If my spiritual self is physical – as you suggest, and if I am made in the image of God – as I am told, is God also essentially a physical entity?

David, your input is appreciated.

David Bee said:

One definition I found:
Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the ultimate nature of reality, being, and the world. More recently, the term "metaphysics" has also been used more loosely to refer to "subjects that are beyond the physical world".

Yes, my point of view certainly does take into account a metaphysical reality as I understand the definition, "beyond the physical world", or the world we perceive with our physical bodies. I also believe that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter much finer that what we can perceive with our physical bodies, but matter none the less, which cannot be destroyed - maybe of a material like "dark" matter.

The Kernel said:

DB: Thanks for the clarifications. Much appreciated. The focus of this discussion is on the metaphysical - is it empty of knowledge and truth? Does your personal point of view take into account a metaphysical reality, or does reality exist only on a physical plain? Your is would be appreciated.
If there is some kind of general agreement from participants that a metaphysical reality exists, and their seems to be - with the exception of Jim G, I'd like to open up the concept of metaphysical further - if people are willing.
. . . Any other comments out there from others?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Bee on February 7, 2010 at 5:24pm

I have been taught, and believe, that it is only with an open mind can one find the truth. I do not believe that there will be any conflict between scientific fact/truth and religious fact/truth, when all is known. Theories are not fact, but are part of the process used to gain knowledge. A hot stove will burn me if I touch it is a fact. Just as certainly, I know that God has revealed Himself. You moved into the fields of science from being a theological academic. I do not wonder why, given what I understand of the mainstream Christian teachings of creation ex nihilo and the Nicean trinity.
Roman Kozlowski said:

David Bee. Personally, as once a theologiacal academic that has moved into the fields of science. May I say that I admire your own personal ability as a modernday christian in being able to stand back and open mindedly take part in these discussions regarding some of the most groundbreaking new thoughts in science. Ones like yourself give hope to the fusion of what RG is all about.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by David Bee on February 7, 2010 at 6:13pm

Here is how I see it.
We are spiritual beings having a mortal experience. Currently our physical body and our spirit body are inseparably connected until our physical body dies, when we will leave our physical body.

I am unable to physically detect the spirits that I believe are all around. Maybe some people can. Maybe some instruments can, but I think most are hoaxes. As far as "unorganized spirit matter" being detectable - if it is "dark matter", science has apparently detected it somewhat. Sometime in the eternities, I'm sure we will be able to personally fully detect spirit matter.

You ask, "did we originate – from the singularity along with all other forms of matter?" If that singularity were a fact, it would seem so, yes. For an informative discussion of the "Big Bang" and singularity theories, as they relate to the God of my understanding, read http://www.fairlds.org/New_Mormon_Challenge/TNMC05.html It will also provide my answer to your question, "If my spiritual self is physical – as you suggest, and if I am made in the image of God – as I am told, is God also essentially a physical entity?" I would copy the article here, but that would violate the copyright.
The Kernel said:

I also believe that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter much finer that what we can perceive with our physical bodies, but matter none the less, which cannot be destroyed - maybe of a material like "dark" matter.
DB, you suggest that our spiritual selves are made up of a form of matter that is finer than we can perceive with our physical senses. Let me see if I understand. When you refer to, “our spiritual selves”, would this be in contrast to our physical or material selves?
When you say we are not able to physically perceive this subtle form of matter, are you saying human kind will never be able to detect it or that we have not yet devised an instrument to detect it?

If our “spiritual self” is made of matter, where did we originate – from the singularity along with all other forms of matter?

If my spiritual self is physical – as you suggest, and if I am made in the image of God – as I am told, is God also essentially a physical entity?

David, your input is appreciated.

▶ Reply to This

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page