Jan F. Brouwer containment thread

[nek777]

Originally Posted by Splendour

Read God's claim in Ezekiel 36.

It's better than anything brain science will tell you.

I am a bit confused - I read it, didn't really get the relation to the OP. Would you elaborate?

[jon_midas]

Originally Posted by Splendour

Couldn't Life have a dual meaning?

The here and now one and the eternal one.

A lot of educated Christians say the safest place to be is in the center of God's will.

Yeah life could have a bunch of meanings. Being here and now with the universe could def be one of them.

My post, however, was meant to address this comment:

"What if there's an order to the pursuit?

What if love and joy (the bible uses joy not happiness) have to follow truth?"

Anyway, to actually answer the OP, I agree that you tend to find love and happiness when you stop looking/trying so hard...

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by jon_midas

Yeah life could have a bunch of meanings. Being here and now with the universe could def be one of them.

My post, however, was meant to address this comment:

"What if there's an order to the pursuit?

What if love and joy (the bible uses joy not happiness) have to follow truth?"

Anyway, to actually answer the OP, I agree that you tend to find love and happiness when you stop looking/trying so hard...

You might find this verse relevant:

James 1 (KJV)
18 "Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures."

These verses clarify:

19 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.

21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.

22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.


If you want to understand even better read all of James 1.

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by nek777

I am a bit confused - I read it, didn't really get the relation to the OP. Would you elaborate?

You didn't think verse 26 was a phenomenal claim? Ponder that one.

[nek777]

Originally Posted by Splendour

You didn't think verse 26 was a phenomenal claim? Ponder that one.

Well, like I said I read it and have read it again. I think you need to be a bit more explicit because I still not seeing how that passage is relevant to the conversation of the notions of "self."

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by nek777

Well, like I said I read it and have read it again. I think you need to be a bit more explicit because I still not seeing how that passage is relevant to the conversation of the notions of "self."

See that's the problem. Christians see God as the basis for everything. He's the basis for all knowledge.

You did read God claim that He can give people a new spirit and a new heart didn't you?

Wouldn't a new spirit and a new heart help us learn about our own soul/self?

[nek777]

Originally Posted by Splendour

See that's the problem. Christians see God as the basis for everything. He's the basis for all knowledge.

You did read God claim that He can give people a new spirit and a new heart didn't you?

Wouldn't a new spirit and a new heart help us learn about our own soul/self?

Yes, I did - and I agree, there is a problem, because I am not as knowledgeable about the Christian notions of identity. It would be a great help, and go a long way to solve the problem if you would participate in the discourse.

How do you think these claims relate to the Christian notion of the self, and especially as compared with the Indian and Buddhist notions of self as briefly expounded ITT.

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by nek777

Yes, I did - and I agree, there is a problem, because I am not as knowledgeable about the Christian notions of identity. It would be a great help, and go a long way to solve the problem if you would participate in the discourse.

How do you think these claims relate to the Christian notion of the self, and especially as compared with the Indian and Buddhist notions of self as briefly expounded ITT.

I actually switched from Christian hell doctrine to universalism when my notice was attracted to reincarnation by asking myself if everyone in every country has a realistic chance of being saved.

I started to wonder if reincarnation overlapped with Christianity. If it could have been an old system God had people on pre-Christ. It led me to Origen and the Christian universalists which let me re-consider hell doctrine and decide it was a philosophical/historical mistake perpetrated on Christianity.

When you compare reincarnation with resurrection I think resurrection is the superior system. Who'd want to go on the wheel of karma through many lifetimes of suffering when resurrection leads straight to heaven? Isn't that quite a detour? Resurrection gets salvation done.

[nek777]

Originally Posted by Splendour

I actually switched from Christian hell doctrine to universalism when my notice was attracted to reincarnation by asking myself if everyone in every country has a realistic chance of being saved.

I started to wonder if reincarnation overlapped with Christianity. If it could have been an old system God had people on pre-Christ. It led me to Origen and the Christian universalists which let me re-consider hell doctrine and decide it was a philosophical/historical mistake perpetrated on Christianity.

When you compare reincarnation with resurrection I think resurrection is the superior system. Who'd want to go on the wheel of karma through many lifetimes of suffering when resurrection leads straight to heaven? Isn't that quite a detour? Resurrection gets salvation done.

OK - that is quite a detour - a bit off topic no? How does this play into a christian notion of "self?"

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by nek777

OK - that is quite a detour - a bit off topic no? How does this play into a christian notion of "self?"

You wanted Indian/Buddhist.

How do you know some souls aren't more formed or complete in this world?

Maybe you don't relate to "self" ideas because your self is less fully formed? That's just a possibility to consider...

That still doesn't stop you from jumping from one system: Reincarnation unto the other system: Resurrection.

The only thing stopping you is what you know, believe and think about a topic. Though
the human will does have some affect on the direction in which it sends its' thoughts.

[nek777]

Originally Posted by Splendour

You wanted Indian/Buddhist.

How do you know some souls aren't more formed or complete in this world?

Maybe you don't relate to "self" ideas because your self is less fully formed? That's just a possibility to consider...

That still doesn't stop you from jumping from one system: Reincarnation unto the other system: Resurrection.

The only thing stopping you is what you know, believe and think about a topic.
The human will does have some affect on the direction in which it sends its' thoughts.

Perhaps it will be easier this way - how does your idea of resurrection explain the christian notion of "self?"

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by nek777

Perhaps it will be easier this way - how does your idea of resurrection explain the christian notion of "self?"

I don't think there is a Christian notion of "self" at least not identical to the way psychology could use it. We use the word soul and believe we are tripartite: body, soul and spirit.

I think almost all believers believe from the outset that they have souls.

You have to go through some deconstructive thinking to think you don't have a soul as a starting point.

It's natural for people to think they have selfs or souls.

[augie_]

Originally Posted by Splendour

Though the human will does have some affect on the direction in which it sends its' thoughts.

of course it doesn't. you can't author a thought. nobody can control their thoughts. thoughts come to us out of nowhere, as if "springing from the void."

if we could author our thoughts, it would mean we think them before we think them.

Karl Pilkington, the Onion, and the Problem of Free Will

[Splendour]

Originally Posted by augie_

of course it doesn't. you can't author a thought. nobody can control their thoughts. thoughts come to us out of nowhere, as if "springing from the void."

if we could author our thoughts, it would mean we think them before we think them.

Actually I think the ability to think is divine.

But people's wills actually do show a bias in the direction that they send their thoughts.

You have to learn new things to overcome a bias though and that could take a lot of time. It's part learning and part observation via experience and possibly other factors.


Why don't you start studying up on the process of domestication and compare it to human beings.

I think faith is the process by which God domesticates human beings. But we have really big brains so it could take a really long time for Him to domesticate us.

You can even see the domestication changes in human beings by studying human blood types.

We know who domesticates animals: humans.

But who domesticates people?

[augie_]

Originally Posted by Splendour

I think the ability to think is divine.

that's nice. let's examine where that thought came from.

your brain, of course.

where was this thought before it was in your brain?

it was nowhere.

and then, like magic, it was in your brain.

did you have the free will to not have that thought? thoughts just happen. you had no choice.

you did have the choice whether you would communicate that thought, or not. the choice whether to communicate a certain thought is itself a thought. where did that thought come from?

nowhere. thoughts simply emerge.