Adam & Logic, 2nd Edition

[Bahman]

Yes, it was Aristotle and Ptolemy who put the earth in the middle of the universe and “concocted paths called epicycles that allowed the movement stars and planets to accommodate our central position in the cosmos”. While the Church had theological reasons for resisting a moving earth, there were also scientific reasons it shared with Tycho Brahe and the ancients; no observed stellar parallax.

Needless to say that the concept of soul also belongs to Plato.

 

[grannymh]

New Thought

Can we credit humankind as the first logical spiritual “product” on planet earth?

When we think about the first spiritual “product,” is it possible to talk about humankind in the singular mode or as a singular peerless species?

By the way, what is a spiritual “product?”

 

[simpleas]

New Thought

Can we credit humankind as the first logical spiritual “product” on planet earth?

When we think about the first spiritual “product,” is it possible to talk about humankind in the singular mode or as a singular peerless species?

By the way, what is a spiritual “product?”

I give up, what is a spiritual product?

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

New Thought

Can we credit humankind as the first logical spiritual “product” on planet earth?

When we think about the first spiritual “product,” is it possible to talk about humankind in the singular mode or as a singular peerless species?

By the way, what is a spiritual “product?”

Good Evening Granny: I think every species is peerless, and every member of every species is peerless. I also would offer the idea that every member of every species is an aperture through which God views itself. I do not perceive at least on an intuitive level that only humans are spiritual or that we are a spiritual product of anything. A product is something that is made or produced. We are part of the whole, and the whole is organic, growing in complexity and novelty, all pervasive and omnipresent. That which we perceive to be “ourselves” are simply branches of its expression. Therefore I would suggest the idea that no thing is greater than another. They are all holy. At least this is what I have seen glimpses of in the world around me - the intimation that all things are greater than I give them credit for.

All the best,
Gary

 

[Bahman]

Good Evening Granny: I think every species is peerless, and every member of every species is peerless. I also would offer the idea that every member of every species is an aperture through which God views itself. I do not perceive at least on an intuitive level that only humans are spiritual or that we are a spiritual product of anything. A product is something that is made or produced. We are part of the whole, and the whole is organic, growing in complexity and novelty, all pervasive and omnipresent. That which we perceive to be “ourselves” are simply branches of its expression. Therefore I would suggest the idea that no thing is greater than another. They are all holy. At least this is what I have seen glimpses of in the world around me - the intimation that all things are greater than I give them credit for.

All the best,
Gary

I like your picture and I was thinking about it a while ago. We could be manifestation of God reflection. I however don’t understand how the initial reflection has started? Unless it is eternal!

 

[simpleas]

Good Evening Granny: I think every species is peerless, and every member of every species is peerless. I also would offer the idea that every member of every species is an aperture through which God views itself. I do not perceive at least on an intuitive level that only humans are spiritual or that we are a spiritual product of anything. A product is something that is made or produced. We are part of the whole, and the whole is organic, growing in complexity and novelty, all pervasive and omnipresent. That which we perceive to be “ourselves” are simply branches of its expression. Therefore I would suggest the idea that no thing is greater than another. They are all holy. At least this is what I have seen glimpses of in the world around me - the intimation that all things are greater than I give them credit for.

All the best,
Gary

I would think along these lines also. While some of us don’t regard animals as having a spirit or a soul, a soul like that of us humans, I believe they have a spirit unique to them, like we have a soul that is unique to us. And as for all things are holy, I agree, it is said in gratitude to God during our Mass…you give life to all things and make them holy,
All things not just some!

Us humans maybe the first ever rational and spiritual beings, but we have a hard time with it!

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I like your picture and I was thinking about it a while ago. We could be manifestation of God reflection. I however don’t understand how the initial reflection has started? Unless it is eternal!

Thank you for the kind words Bahman. I enjoyed the videos too. I thought I’d share one too:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ll0qHhZYw5E

This reminds me a lot of what I think the universe is about. A sort of wanderlust or craving for experience. I have been thinking for a long time that these things are the only reason.

Anyway, it’s a good question you ask about the initial reflection and how it started. Personally I wonder if there was a beginning and if there will be an end. I really don’t think so, but this is just how I’m thinking on the matter. It seems to me that beginnings and endings are just contexts that we have learned and we try to apply them to everything we see.

For instance, as a Catholic I have been taught that I came about at conception, but is that really the case? It’s hard to think so, because it’s hard to say when anything starts or ends. Did I start when the egg formed in my mother or the sperm in my father, or did I form when the plants or animals my parents ate were transmuted into eggs and sperm after being eaten? Or did I start when the plants they ate sprouted or when they were seeds, or did I start when these plants and seeds were nourished by a squirrel carcass? You see, there really is no start to any of this, all the way back to the big bang, which I’m thinking was probably part of a perennial process of big bangs that have always just happened. And the curious thing that I take to be my consciousness may only be one of an endless succession of sentient episodes that are being experienced by the one consciousness that we really are. Just one thing expressed as many, which means that God is never far. It means that you and I are the whole thing rather than something.

These are just my thoughts on the matter. It’s the best I can do. But maybe you’ll enjoy the video.

All the best,
Gary

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I would think along these lines also. While some of us don’t regard animals as having a spirit or a soul, a soul like that of us humans, I believe they have a spirit unique to them, like we have a soul that is unique to us. And as for all things are holy, I agree, it is said in gratitude to God during our Mass…you give life to all things and make them holy,
All things not just some!

Us humans maybe the first ever rational and spiritual beings, but we have a hard time with it!

Good Morning Simpleas: You say that you can see the spirit in other living things, and to me this means you are seeing a good deal more than most people ever pause to consider.

All the best,
Gary

 

[grannymh]

Good Evening Granny: I think every species is peerless, and every member of every species is peerless. I also would offer the idea that every member of every species is an aperture through which God views itself. I do not perceive at least on an intuitive level that only humans are spiritual or that we are a spiritual product of anything. A product is something that is made or produced. We are part of the whole, and the whole is organic, growing in complexity and novelty, all pervasive and omnipresent. That which we perceive to be “ourselves” are simply branches of its expression. Therefore I would suggest the idea that no thing is greater than another. They are all holy. At least this is what I have seen glimpses of in the world around me - the intimation that all things are greater than I give them credit for.

All the best,
Gary

I have a small confession. I was way back in my Inbox, re-opened a very short old e-mail and saw the words “spiritual product” without a real explanation. There was no time to search for some kind of a previous e-mail which would tell what exactly was being talked about. My memory bank is also clueless. Therefore, I decided to share this rather strange phrase to see what would pop up in discussion.

Like you, I see “spiritual” in other living beings, but not per se in strictly material things like mountains. On the other hand, from being in Alaska, those unequaled mountains did give rise to spiritual thoughts. Thus, when we are trying to understand the rather mysterious first two humans, we need to let our curiosity roam without conventional restrictions. Then, we can decide what fits in with reality and Catholic teachings and then discard the rest.

As you pointed out. “A product is something that is made or produced.” Would it be possible to consider that we are a spiritual product which is the work of the Creator’s “hands”? There is a song which says to God. “You are the Potter, I am the clay.”

There is definitely a major difference between the Potter and the clay. Using this difference as the base for an allegory, I would say that while the Potter can see a reflection of His holiness in our very nature, we are not a part of God. The Catholic Church teaches that God as Creator gives us existence and sustains us in existence. What is essential information is that God enables humans to choose their own thoughts and actions.
(Information source. Genesis 1: 26-28; Genesis 2: 15-17; CCC 301; CCC 1730-1732)

Using both the allegory and CCC teachings should lead us to the concept that we are in the spiritual image of God which means that we have the capability to share in God’s life; nonetheless, this not mean that we are a physical part of God.

Links to the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Please read CCC 20-21 for the explanation of small print.

 

[Bahman]

Thank you for the kind words Bahman. I enjoyed the videos too. I thought I’d share one too:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ll0qHhZYw5E

Here I will share three very interesting videos with you: this, this and this.

This reminds me a lot of what I think the universe is about. A sort of wanderlust or craving for experience. I have been thinking for a long time that these things are the only reason.

Yes, me too. And it is more interesting when you try to face the reality as it is without any prejudice and the main door toward the reality opens through you.

Anyway, it’s a good question you ask about the initial reflection and how it started. Personally I wonder if there was a beginning and if there will be an end. I really don’t think so, but this is just how I’m thinking on the matter. It seems to me that beginnings and endings are just contexts that we have learned and we try to apply them to everything we see.

The is the problem we can never understand. Beginning is attached to the end like a cycle. We are running after our tails to my high opinion.

For instance, as a Catholic I have been taught that I came about at conception, but is that really the case? It’s hard to think so, because it’s hard to say when anything starts or ends. Did I start when the egg formed in my mother or the sperm in my father, or did I form when the plants or animals my parents ate were transmuted into eggs and sperm after being eaten? Or did I start when the plants they ate sprouted or when they were seeds, or did I start when these plants and seeds were nourished by a squirrel carcass? You see, there really is no start to any of this, all the way back to the big bang, which I’m thinking was probably part of a perennial process of big bangs that have always just happened. And the curious thing that I take to be my consciousness may only be one of an endless succession of sentient episodes that are being experienced by the one consciousness that we really are. Just one thing expressed as many, which means that God is never far. It means that you and I are the whole thing rather than something.

Lets put facts together:

1. You are a conscious being
2. You have an inside and outside and what lies between so called persona (soul or self)
3. We share a common sense of what we call objective reality. What is really it?

Lets discuss (1) and its implication first:

Consciousness has to be irreducible otherwise your Iness is subject to threat, since otherwise consciousness is by product of other things and the concept of Iness is a delusion. Hence we have two options in our hands, A) you are conscious being, hence you are necessary, hence you are God (including other spices) B) you are not conscious being, hence you are not necessary, hence you are not puppet.

1. Inside (subjective reality) and outside (objective reality) are subject to change as we observe but persona is not. We can understand persona.
2. This is what is left from us and we can neither know nor change its core sense directly.

These are just my thoughts on the matter. It’s the best I can do. But maybe you’ll enjoy the video.

All the best,
Gary

Thanks for sharing your thought with me. It was a kick inside my thoughts.

 

[simpleas]

Thank you for the kind words Bahman. I enjoyed the videos too. I thought I’d share one too:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ll0qHhZYw5E

This reminds me a lot of what I think the universe is about. A sort of wanderlust or craving for experience. I have been thinking for a long time that these things are the only reason.

Anyway, it’s a good question you ask about the initial reflection and how it started. Personally I wonder if there was a beginning and if there will be an end. I really don’t think so, but this is just how I’m thinking on the matter. It seems to me that beginnings and endings are just contexts that we have learned and we try to apply them to everything we see.

For instance, as a Catholic I have been taught that I came about at conception, but is that really the case? It’s hard to think so, because it’s hard to say when anything starts or ends. Did I start when the egg formed in my mother or the sperm in my father, or did I form when the plants or animals my parents ate were transmuted into eggs and sperm after being eaten? Or did I start when the plants they ate sprouted or when they were seeds, or did I start when these plants and seeds were nourished by a squirrel carcass? You see, there really is no start to any of this, all the way back to the big bang, which I’m thinking was probably part of a perennial process of big bangs that have always just happened. And the curious thing that I take to be my consciousness may only be one of an endless succession of sentient episodes that are being experienced by the one consciousness that we really are. Just one thing expressed as many, which means that God is never far. It means that you and I are the whole thing rather than something.

These are just my thoughts on the matter. It’s the best I can do. But maybe you’ll enjoy the video.

All the best,
Gary

Personally I wonder if there was a beginning and if there will be an end. I really don’t think so, but this is just how I’m thinking on the matter. It seems to me that beginnings and endings are just contexts that we have learned and we try to apply them to everything we see.

Bit off topic…

Just thinking on what you said above, we say God has no beginning/end as he is eternal, we can see death as the end, because we can only see a reality that is in front of us, yet we have a faith/belief that death is not an end, but a continuation.
Would you consider reincarnation, I understand as Catholic’s we don’t believe in reincarnation like some do, that we come back as a new person, but we do believe in the resurrection of the dead, that our souls with be “transformed” into a new body, our own body, but new, as Christ rose from the dead, and had his same appearance. So that is a sort of reincarnation.
Just curious, I had a video sent to me recently of a lady speaking about reincarnation, that we are reincarnated until we gain all the knowledge there is and then we are sent to another galaxy!! Went abit “far out there” for me…

 

[simpleas]

I have a small confession. I was way back in my Inbox, re-opened a very short old e-mail and saw the words “spiritual product” without a real explanation. There was no time to search for some kind of a previous e-mail which would tell what exactly was being talked about. My memory bank is also clueless. Therefore, I decided to share this rather strange phrase to see what would pop up in discussion.

Like you, I see “spiritual” in other living beings, but not per se in strictly material things like mountains. On the other hand, from being in Alaska, those unequaled mountains did give rise to spiritual thoughts. Thus, when we are trying to understand the rather mysterious first two humans, we need to let our curiosity roam without conventional restrictions. Then, we can decide what fits in with reality and Catholic teachings and then discard the rest.

As you pointed out. “A product is something that is made or produced.” Would it be possible to consider that we are a spiritual product which is the work of the Creator’s “hands”? There is a song which says to God. “You are the Potter, I am the clay.”

There is definitely a major difference between the Potter and the clay. Using this difference as the base for an allegory, I would say that while the Potter can see a reflection of His holiness in our very nature, we are not a part of God. The Catholic Church teaches that God as Creator gives us existence and sustains us in existence. What is essential information is that God enables humans to choose their own thoughts and actions.
(Information source. Genesis 1: 26-28; Genesis 2: 15-17; CCC 301; CCC 1730-1732)

Using both the allegory and CCC teachings should lead us to the concept that we are in the spiritual image of God which means that we have the capability to share in God’s life; nonetheless, this not mean that we are a physical part of God.

Links to the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Please read CCC 20-21 for the explanation of small print.

we are in the spiritual image of God which means that we have the capability to share in God’s life; nonetheless, this not mean that we are a physical part of God.

From what you wrote above.

We are not a physical part of God, I’m not sure, but this doesn’t sound right.

Christ is the vine and were are the branches, so we are apart of the whole. Spiritually we can feel we are apart of God because we have a soul given by God, apart of his life if you like, but we know God is not made of matter like us, but it is God who made the matter and then made us with the matter! And became the matter…

So if God makes everything, physically we could be apart of God, maybe in small, tiny way…No?

 

[davidv]

we are in the spiritual image of God which means that we have the capability to share in God’s life; nonetheless, this not mean that we are a physical part of God.

From what you wrote above.

We are not a physical part of God, I’m not sure, but this doesn’t sound right.

Christ is the vine and were are the branches, so we are apart of the whole. Spiritually we can feel we are apart of God because we have a soul given by God, apart of his life if you like, but we know God is not made of matter like us, but it is God who made the matter and then made us with the matter! And became the matter…

So if God makes everything, physically we could be apart of God, maybe in small, tiny way…No?

No. We are a creature. God is the creator. We are no more a part of God than a vase is a part of the potter.

 

[grannymh]

we are in the spiritual image of God which means that we have the capability to share in God’s life; nonetheless, this not mean that we are a physical part of God.

From what you wrote above.

We are not a physical part of God, I’m not sure, but this doesn’t sound right.

Christ is the vine and were are the branches, so we are apart of the whole. Spiritually we can feel we are apart of God because we have a soul given by God, apart of his life if you like, but we know God is not made of matter like us, but it is God who made the matter and then made us with the matter! And became the matter…

So if God makes everything, physically we could be apart of God, maybe in small, tiny way…No?

No. Because …

Our nature is an unique combination of the physical decomposing anatomy and the immortal spiritual soul. God’s nature is Pure Spirit. Pure Spirit means that there is no physical decomposing stuff in His nature.

Christ is the vine and we are the branches is an allegory. This means that when we look at ourselves in the mirror, we do not see vine branches. We do not see a vine on the Crucifix.

The very beautiful allegory “Christ is the vine, we are the branches” refers to the Mystical Body of Christ. Personally, I like reading St. Paul’s description in 1 Corinthians 12: 12-31
From CCC 779.

**779 **The Church is both visible and spiritual, a hierarchical society and the Mystical Body of Christ. She is one, yet formed of two components, human and divine. That is her mystery, which only faith can accept.

 

[Bahman]

Personally I wonder if there was a beginning and if there will be an end. I really don’t think so, but this is just how I’m thinking on the matter. It seems to me that beginnings and endings are just contexts that we have learned and we try to apply them to everything we see.

Bit off topic…

Just thinking on what you said above, we say God has no beginning/end as he is eternal, we can see death as the end, because we can only see a reality that is in front of us, yet we have a faith/belief that death is not an end, but a continuation.
Would you consider reincarnation, I understand as Catholic’s we don’t believe in reincarnation like some do, that we come back as a new person, but we do believe in the resurrection of the dead, that our souls with be “transformed” into a new body, our own body, but new, as Christ rose from the dead, and had his same appearance. So that is a sort of reincarnation.
Just curious, I had a video sent to me recently of a lady speaking about reincarnation, that we are reincarnated until we gain all the knowledge there is and then we are sent to another galaxy!! Went abit “far out there” for me…

Reincarnation is false. How divine justice could be fulfilled without a divine being who is conscious? You open up like a rose endlessly.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

From Simpleas:

Bit off topic…

Just thinking on what you said above, we say God has no beginning/end as he is eternal, we can see death as the end, because we can only see a reality that is in front of us, yet we have a faith/belief that death is not an end, but a continuation.

Good Morning Simpleas: I agree. It seems to me at least at an intuitive level that life is a continuation. Now, I am very sure that Gary Sheldrake will die and that there will never be another me. I think I will return to the earth and my physical elements will be part of the process like they are now. Every cell in my body except some in my brain change out completely every few years, and these are transmuted from elements borrowed from the world around me. A temporary form that is never static in its nature. I am not a thing, but an event really. As for my memories and sense of self, well, I think the latter is an illusion. This is why I think the greatest imperative is to get in touch with that which we really are, which is not what we take ourselves to be.

Would you consider reincarnation, I understand as Catholic’s we don’t believe in reincarnation like some do, that we come back as a new person, but we do believe in the resurrection of the dead, that our souls with be “transformed” into a new body, our own body, but new, as Christ rose from the dead, and had his same appearance. So that is a sort of reincarnation.

Reincarnation is certainly a possibility. As for being transformed into a new body, well, I think that had a simpler meaning really. All I think he was saying is that you don’t really die because you are part of the whole, and the whole does in fact keep making new things from old things, doesn’t it? This is why I think we have to die to the idea of having our own “selves” in order to find eternity. If we hold on to a sense of “self” the only outcome is death. Maybe the way to live forever is to let that go.

Just curious, I had a video sent to me recently of a lady speaking about reincarnation, that we are reincarnated until we gain all the knowledge there is and then we are sent to another galaxy!! Went abit “far out there” for me…

I suppose that’s a possibility. I have run into some very “far out there” experiences in my travels through life. I don’t discount the possibility of anything. Now, this thing about going to other galaxies for instance. We know there are other galaxies out there, because we can see them with telescopes. I happen to believe (at this point at least) that wherever there is anything, we are there as well. Only we can only experience it one thing at a time, because we are simply apertures through which the universe experiences itself, and that means that at the core of our being, we are in fact the universe or God if you would. Right now I am experiencing it through the aperture of a middle aged human on Earth, and the problem is that rather than seeing Gary Sheldrake as an instrument through which I am experiencing a given saga, I have made the all too common mistake of identifying with Gary Sheldrake as if Gary Sheldrake had some existence of his own.

Just some thoughts.

All the best.

 

[Bahman]

From Simpleas:

Bit off topic…

Good Morning Simpleas: I agree. It seems to me at least at an intuitive level that life is a continuation. Now, I am very sure that Gary Sheldrake will die and that there will never be another me. I think I will return to the earth and my physical elements will be part of the process like they are now. Every cell in my body except some in my brain change out completely every few years, and these are transmuted from elements borrowed from the world around me. A temporary form that is never static in its nature. I am not a thing, but an event really. As for my memories and sense of self, well, I think the latter is an illusion. This is why I think the greatest imperative is to get in touch with that which we really are, which is not what we take ourselves to be.

Reincarnation is certainly a possibility. As for being transformed into a new body, well, I think that had a simpler meaning really. All I think he was saying is that you don’t really die because you are part of the whole, and the whole does in fact keep making new things from old things, doesn’t it? This is why I think we have to die to the idea of having our own “selves” in order to find eternity. If we hold on to a sense of “self” the only outcome is death. Maybe the way to live forever is to let that go.

I suppose that’s a possibility. I have run into some very “far out there” experiences in my travels through life. I don’t discount the possibility of anything. Now, this thing about going to other galaxies for instance. We know there are other galaxies out there, because we can see them with telescopes. I happen to believe (at this point at least) that wherever there is anything, we are there as well. Only we can only experience it one thing at a time, because we are simply apertures through which the universe experiences itself, and that means that at the core of our being, we are in fact the universe or God if you would. Right now I am experiencing it through the aperture of a middle aged human on Earth, and the problem is that rather than seeing Gary Sheldrake as an instrument through which I am experiencing a given saga, I have made the all too common mistake of identifying with Gary Sheldrake as if Gary Sheldrake had some existence of his own.

Just some thoughts.

All the best.

So you believe in epiphenomalism?

 

[simpleas]

No. Because …

Our nature is an unique combination of the physical decomposing anatomy and the immortal spiritual soul. God’s nature is Pure Spirit. Pure Spirit means that there is no physical decomposing stuff in His nature.

Christ is the vine and we are the branches is an allegory. This means that when we look at ourselves in the mirror, we do not see vine branches. We do not see a vine on the Crucifix.

The very beautiful allegory “Christ is the vine, we are the branches” refers to the Mystical Body of Christ. Personally, I like reading St. Paul’s description in 1 Corinthians 12: 12-31
From CCC 779.

**779 **The Church is both visible and spiritual, a hierarchical society and the Mystical Body of Christ. She is one, yet formed of two components, human and divine. That is her mystery, which only faith can accept.

I just used the vine and branches to explain what I meant by being a part of the whole (Christ).
I don’t mean because we are matter that God is matter also, and therefore we are a part of God, because that would be making God into man’s image. We were made in God’s image, regardless of the fall, we still are, we still exist and are a part of God through the image and likeness. That is what I was thinking.

 

[grannymh]

I just used the vine and branches to explain what I meant by being a part of the whole (Christ).
I don’t mean because we are matter that God is matter also, and therefore we are a part of God, because that would be making God into man’s image. We were made in God’s image, regardless of the fall, we still are, we still exist and are a part of God through the image and likeness. That is what I was thinking.

Being in one’s image and likeness does not elevate a human person to being a part of a Pure Spirit. We share in God’s nature, but that does not make us a part of God. Please recall that we are finite beings. God is infinite so He could not have a finite part. God is complete without human parts. It is God Who shares His life with us. We do not share our life with God because that would be giving a human life/part to the Pure Spirit.

 

[simpleas]

Being in one’s image and likeness does not elevate a human person to being a part of a Pure Spirit. We share in God’s nature, but that does not make us a part of God. Please recall that we are finite beings. God is infinite so He could not have a finite part. God is complete without human parts. It is God Who shares His life with us. We do not share our life with God because that would be giving a human life/part to the Pure Spirit.

Yes God is complete with out humans parts, but we are not complete without God.
If I am not a part of God, I have no idea what I am a part of…