CAUTIONARY NOTE ON THE AFTERLIFE
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Speed of Time
Next: "The Einstein Hoax"
From: George Hammond on 3 Jan 2010 23:28 On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:24:02 +1300, "Geopelia" <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > >"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >news:gc62k5pdv90adjef980t1irs7vdl0iigri(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:24:50 +1300, "Geopelia" >> <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >> >>> >>>"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >>>news:73m1k5dnisic4jlcpk8j9qrejrvchulh6r(a)4ax.com... >>>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 08:38:29 -0600, purple >>>> <purple(a)colorme.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On 01/03/2010 05:37 AM, Geopelia wrote: >>>>>> "George Hammond"<Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:b550k55penugum558206bivkv92l4ihn3e(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 14:57:06 +1300, "Geopelia" >>>>>>> <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (Geopelia) >>>>>>>> But what's the point knowing it [heaven] exists, if we can't come >>>>>>>> back? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> [Hammond] >>>>>>> First of all, if there is a heaven there is also a hell. >>>>>>> And people who are sent to hell will not be ALLOWED to >>>>>>> leave. Secondly, heaven is basically this same world we >>>>>>> are in, you will just see it through different eyes and feel >>>>>>> it through a better body. >>>>>>> But don't for a moment underestimate how different this >>>>>>> world would look if you're resurrected body (a.k.a. >>>>>>> "spiritual body") had a zero growth deficit. Words like; >>>>>>> splendor, magnificence, grandeur don't even begin to >>>>>>> describe the experience of "eternal life" which as you >>>>>>> recall is a "bodily condition" not a "time duration". >>>>>>> As far as "coming back to this world" I have no doubt >>>>>>> that should you be elected to go to heaven you will probably >>>>>>> be making many sorties back to the world you knew. >>>>>>> In fact, while we're on the subject, it is interesting to >>>>>>> conjecture just exactly what heaven must be like. In the >>>>>>> first place my research indicates that it is somewhere >>>>>>> between the ordinary "reality" that we are all familiar >>>>>>> with, and a "dream" meaning a nocturnal dream (albeit one >>>>>>> involving all five senses). It is apt to be a mixture of >>>>>>> both and superimposed on it all are transitions in and out >>>>>>> of "pure heaven" (i.e. in and out of the perfect body). >>>>>>> Basically, our ordinary Hollywood movies are probably a >>>>>>> crude caricature of what this experience must be like. >>>>>>> I imagine that the afterlife begins with an unbelievable >>>>>>> assent directly into the full-blown splendor of seeing this >>>>>>> earthly reality through the eyes of "flat subjective >>>>>>> space-time" a.k.a. seeing reality through the "eyes of God" >>>>>>> through a perfect body. This initial phase probably last >>>>>>> for at least 10 or 15 minutes, and in and of itself it >>>>>>> constitutes complete and absolute salvation to eternal life. >>>>>>> This is part of a failsafe mechanism because the body has no >>>>>>> idea how long it is going to last back on Earth once the >>>>>>> neuronal system goes "flat line". In the case of an atomic >>>>>>> bomb blast the entire brain could disappear in 1 ns, and one >>>>>>> nano second dilated by the Frohlich's frequency/neuronal >>>>>>> frequency ratio works out to about 15 minutes in Heaven. >>>>>>> This means God has to provide complete salvation to eternal >>>>>>> life in the first 15 minutes of the afterlife dream. >>>>>>> Now assuming that you didn't get hit by an atomic bomb >>>>>>> blast and in fact died during sleep in your bed, the >>>>>>> afterlife movie will continue with other added attractions. >>>>>>> There may be "fades" and "zooms" and "cuts" and "dissolves" >>>>>>> (to use cinematic jargon) in which a "life review" is >>>>>>> experienced. There may even be a "purgatorial" phase. This >>>>>>> is doubtlessly organized according to some hierarchy of >>>>>>> priorities always with the view that it could end at any >>>>>>> moment because of the earthly condition of the brain >>>>>>> cytoskeleton after death. >>>>>>> At any rate, assuming that nothing drastic happens to the >>>>>>> corpse in the first microsecond after death you would >>>>>>> continue on in heaven basically in a condition of >>>>>>> splendorous exaltation for as long as maybe months or even >>>>>>> years in some cases. If one nano second dilates into 15 >>>>>>> minutes, then 1 micro second would dilate into 1.7 years. >>>>>>> which is probably in the ballpark for the average >>>>>>> run-of-the-mill human death. >>>>>>> Every wrong that was ever done you will be righted every >>>>>>> injustice rectified every evil undone. At the same time you >>>>>>> can plan to pay the price for all of those little vicious >>>>>>> insults your indulgent overprivileged habits led you into. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> (Geopelia) >>>>>> That sounds good, but there is no way of proving it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Wasn't Christianity thought to be a religion for slaves in the early >>>>>> days in >>>>>> Rome? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>As was Judaism in an earlier time. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> [Hammond] >>>> Na. Religion (even monotheism) began with the high >>>> priests and Pharohs of ancient Egypt, which is where Israel >>>> learned it. There is much speculation (Freud and others) >>>> that Moses was half Egyptian. >>>> Religion is as much an occupation of the rich as it is of >>>> the poor. One look at the Vatican will tell you that. >>> >>> >>>(Geopelia) >>>Moses was the son of a Hebrew woman. Who knows who his father was? >>>He was brought up by Pharaoah's daughter like an Egyptian prince. >>> >>> >> [Hammond] >> Even you should be old enough to see thru that typically >> female cover story. More likely the Egyptian princess >> herself had an illegitimate son by an Israeli retainer >> working for the Pharoh and she concocted the cover story so >> she could bring him up in the Pharohs court. Freud was of >> the same opinion by the way... see his _Moses and >> Monotheism_ 1939. Tradition has it that Moses was a >> Levite, meaning that probably his father was a Levite and >> his mother was an Egyptian. >>> >>> >>> >>>Abraham came from Ur many years before. He seems to have worshipped one >>>God. >>>Well that's the Bible version. >>> >>> >> [Hammond] >> The "Bible version" wasn't written until 800 BC during >> the Babylonian captivity 500 years after the fact and >> doublessly is only a fable. >> There were bazillions of local gods of small towns and >> tribes in the early days. Fact is the Hebrews didn't >> discover monotheism until they moved to Egypt and learned >> about Akhenaten's monotheistic "Aten" religion. Moses gave >> this "Aten" religion to his followers since he was half >> Egyptian and raised in Akhenaten 's court. >> However, on their way back to the promised land they >> passed through Midian and met up with another large group of >> Hebrews who were worshiping a Midianite volcano god named >> "Yahweh". According to Freud (and others) a tough political >> negotiation between Moses and the Midianite priests resulted >> in a compromise wherby (Egyptian) monotheism was retained >> but they agreed to rename the supreme God "Yahweh" which was >> the name of the Midianite volcano god. This event >> transpired in a place called Qades in Midian. >> Incidentally, the Jews also picked up circumcision in >> Egypt, since all Egyptians were circumcised, in fact the >> Egyptians invented the procedure early on to try and beat >> back VD epidemics. > >(Geopelia) >I Googled "Moses and Akhenaten." There seem to be many websites about them. >I'll follow those up. >But hasn't Freud now rather gone out of fashion? > > [Hammond] Only among the right-wing, the left wing still consider Freud to be gospel truth, including me. By the way the left wing has taken over again in the United States under Obama after a disastrous and fiscally corrupt Republican dynasty that lasted 30 years and nearly resulted in a Depression.. > > > > >When I was young it was thought Moses' Pharaoh was Ramses II. > [Hammond] They are still not sure of the date of Exodus. Most people seem to think it was shortly after Akhenaten's demise and probably during an interregnum period of disorder which provided an opportunity for the Jews to escape. > > >>> >>> >>>It's often said that the treasures of the Vatican should be sold and the >>>money given to the poor. >>> >>> >> [Hammond] >> The poor are already own them. The Vatican is the >> defender of the faith and therefore the defender of the >> poor. The Vatican's vast wealth is a weapon wielded against >> tyranny and oppression by millions, indeed billions. of >> impoverished followers of the Catholic faith. Your view of >> religious history appears to be rather banal. > >(Geopelia) >Very likely. I was brought up Church of England back in the thirties. >Good old King James Version and the Book of Common Prayer. >But I often refer to the Catholic Encyclopaedia for their official view. > > [Hammond] Same here pretty much. I was born a New England Congregationalists and like you consider the King James version "the" Bible. Of course I haven't set foot in a church in 50 years and probably never will again. Last time I was in church I was the best man at my buddy's wedding. We were 17 and his bride was 15 and six months pregnant and there we were standing in front of the altar in the church on Main Street Hyannis with 100 people watching while the minister married them. > ======================================== GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE Primary site http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond Mirror site http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 =======================================
From: Geopelia on 4 Jan 2010 05:55 "George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message news:4sp2k5duehrtnbq1bjujhemjukijrbg44j(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:11:40 +1300, "Geopelia" > <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > >> >>"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >>news:8g92k5l7g7pcu2cvkd3d0crve4nhkc6fsq(a)4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 10:29:59 +1300, "Geopelia" >>> <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >>>>news:ndl1k590setpic5s2bor0u5lr5qfgu2tt3(a)4ax.com... >>>>> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 00:37:20 +1300, "Geopelia" >>>>> <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:b550k55penugum558206bivkv92l4ihn3e(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>> On Sun, 3 Jan 2010 14:57:06 +1300, "Geopelia" >>>>>>> <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>(Geopelia) >>>>>>>>But what's the point knowing it [heaven] exists, if we can't come >>>>>>>>back? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> [Hammond] >>>>>>> First of all, if there is a heaven there is also a hell. >>>>>>> And people who are sent to hell will not be ALLOWED to >>>>>>> leave. Secondly, heaven is basically this same world we >>>>>>> are in, you will just see it through different eyes and feel >>>>>>> it through a better body. >>>>>>> But don't for a moment underestimate how different this >>>>>>> world would look if you're resurrected body (a.k.a. >>>>>>> "spiritual body") had a zero growth deficit. Words like; >>>>>>> splendor, magnificence, grandeur don't even begin to >>>>>>> describe the experience of "eternal life" which as you >>>>>>> recall is a "bodily condition" not a "time duration". >>>>>>> As far as "coming back to this world" I have no doubt >>>>>>> that should you be elected to go to heaven you will probably >>>>>>> be making many sorties back to the world you knew. >>>>>>> In fact, while we're on the subject, it is interesting to >>>>>>> conjecture just exactly what heaven must be like. In the >>>>>>> first place my research indicates that it is somewhere >>>>>>> between the ordinary "reality" that we are all familiar >>>>>>> with, and a "dream" meaning a nocturnal dream (albeit one >>>>>>> involving all five senses). It is apt to be a mixture of >>>>>>> both and superimposed on it all are transitions in and out >>>>>>> of "pure heaven" (i.e. in and out of the perfect body). >>>>>>> Basically, our ordinary Hollywood movies are probably a >>>>>>> crude caricature of what this experience must be like. >>>>>>> I imagine that the afterlife begins with an unbelievable >>>>>>> assent directly into the full-blown splendor of seeing this >>>>>>> earthly reality through the eyes of "flat subjective >>>>>>> space-time" a.k.a. seeing reality through the "eyes of God" >>>>>>> through a perfect body. This initial phase probably last >>>>>>> for at least 10 or 15 minutes, and in and of itself it >>>>>>> constitutes complete and absolute salvation to eternal life. >>>>>>> This is part of a failsafe mechanism because the body has no >>>>>>> idea how long it is going to last back on Earth once the >>>>>>> neuronal system goes "flat line". In the case of an atomic >>>>>>> bomb blast the entire brain could disappear in 1 ns, and one >>>>>>> nano second dilated by the Frohlich's frequency/neuronal >>>>>>> frequency ratio works out to about 15 minutes in Heaven. >>>>>>> This means God has to provide complete salvation to eternal >>>>>>> life in the first 15 minutes of the afterlife dream. >>>>>>> Now assuming that you didn't get hit by an atomic bomb >>>>>>> blast and in fact died during sleep in your bed, the >>>>>>> afterlife movie will continue with other added attractions. >>>>>>> There may be "fades" and "zooms" and "cuts" and "dissolves" >>>>>>> (to use cinematic jargon) in which a "life review" is >>>>>>> experienced. There may even be a "purgatorial" phase. This >>>>>>> is doubtlessly organized according to some hierarchy of >>>>>>> priorities always with the view that it could end at any >>>>>>> moment because of the earthly condition of the brain >>>>>>> cytoskeleton after death. >>>>>>> At any rate, assuming that nothing drastic happens to the >>>>>>> corpse in the first microsecond after death you would >>>>>>> continue on in heaven basically in a condition of >>>>>>> splendorous exaltation for as long as maybe months or even >>>>>>> years in some cases. If one nano second dilates into 15 >>>>>>> minutes, then 1 micro second would dilate into 1.7 years. >>>>>>> which is probably in the ballpark for the average >>>>>>> run-of-the-mill human death. >>>>>>> Every wrong that was ever done you will be righted every >>>>>>> injustice rectified every evil undone. At the same time you >>>>>>> can plan to pay the price for all of those little vicious >>>>>>> insults your indulgent overprivileged habits led you into. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>(Geopelia) >>>>>>That sounds good, but there is no way of proving it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> [Hammond] >>>>> Says who; you? >>>>> The first step is to prove it's "possible". Science has >>>>> just done that. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Wasn't Christianity thought to be a religion for slaves in the early >>>>>>days >>>>>>in >>>>>>Rome? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> [Hammond] >>>>> So was Democracy. Now it's the law of the land. What's >>>>> your point? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>This could be considered the same sort of thing, couldn't it? >>>>>>Something for the poor and downtrodden to hope for after death? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> [Hammond] >>>>> Obviously. What's your point? >>>> >>>>(Geopelia) >>>>I suppose, that those who have had a raw deal in this world can hope for >>>>something better after death. >>>>Teach them that, and they may be more contented with their lot and not >>>>cause >>>>trouble for their superiors. >>>> >>>> >>> [Hammond] >>> Banalities and trite metaphors such as that belong in >>> Sunday school class jfor children, not in an advanced >>> scholarly discussion requiring an in depth knowlege of >>> Religion, History and Science. >> >>I'm just an ignorant agnostic who asks silly questions, and I don't claim >>to >>be anything else. >>But sometimes "out of the mouths of babes and sucklings.........." >> >> > [Hammond] > Anybody your age who considers themselves an "agnostic" > ought to be flogged or put in jail quite frankly. You're > old enough to know better. (Geopelia) When we are kids we believe what our elders tell us. In our late teens and twenties we think we know everything. That's the time for taking up various religions. But at my age, I realise not only that I know very little, but that it is impossible for a human mind to know everything. There may be a God, but if so it is something that can't be understood at our present level of evolution. I look at the pictures from the Hubble telescope, some of the space clouds etc are light years across, and wonder if some kind of intelligent being could create all that. Is there a mind behind it or not? But if you are right, perhaps we find out just after we die.
From: George Hammond on 4 Jan 2010 07:09 On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 23:55:31 +1300, "Geopelia" <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >>> >> [Hammond] >> Anybody your age who considers themselves an "agnostic" >> ought to be flogged or put in jail quite frankly. You're >> old enough to know better. > >(Geopelia) >When we are kids we believe what our elders tell us. In our late teens and >twenties we think we know everything. That's the time for taking up various >religions. > >But at my age, I realise not only that I know very little, but that it is >impossible for a human mind to know everything. >There may be a God, but if so it is something that can't be understood at >our present level of evolution. >I look at the pictures from the Hubble telescope, some of the space clouds >etc are light years across, and wonder if some kind of intelligent being >could create all that. Is there a mind behind it or not? > >But if you are right, perhaps we find out just after we die. > > [Hammond] I am of the opinion that it is never too late to teach an old dog new tricks. I believe this because old dogs have a very long history of Encyclopedia information, and the problem is that they simply have failed to interpret it all. At your age you must be aware that the most common topic of conversation is gossip about other people, mainly about the psychology of personality. thousands of expressions and anecdotes have been invented to describe other people's personalities and what makes them tick, and certainly you must be familiar with Miles and miles of the stuff at your age. When you have failed to realize is that this populardiscussion is all about God. God is not something that you look for in outer space, God is something that you look for in other people, and frankly a person of your age and social experience should've figured this out by now. When you hear people make remarks like George bush is called "Dubblya'", or Ronald Reagan fell on his "keester", or common nicknames like "MoJo", "Kitty", "Lefty", or common expressions like "enough to make a fox bark", "between the devil and the deep blue sea".... these are all COMMON EXPRESSIONS DESCRIBING THE PHENOMENON OF GOD. The reason there is so is because GOD IS A MAN, not a FORCE FIELD IN OUTER SPACE. How on earth you ever get to the age of 80 with our realizing this is beyond my imagination since the ENTIRE WORLD does nothing but jabber about it all day long 365 days a year. television sitcoms are ALL about it... in fact they actually have no plot, they are nothing but metaphorical descriptions of God and the human condition. So please try to wake up and stop talking about juvenile rubbish like looking for God in outer space through a telescope....... it does nothing but make you the butt of jokes. and realize that even in your old age there is still a fast revelation for you to uncover........ and that is the fact that the entire human race has been talking about God in metaphorical terms right in front of your face for last 80 years.... and you've never realized it. when she realized that, you'll realize what real humility is..... and not the tongue-in-cheek variety of humility that you think it is! Per usual, if you find any odd words in this post, be reminded that I am using voice recognition software and occasionally in this identifies the word, and I don't have time to proofread everything. ======================================== GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE Primary site http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond Mirror site http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 =======================================
From: Geopelia on 4 Jan 2010 08:23 "George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message news:97l3k5d7hisq8ve509501qqgbq2ggm5l3n(a)4ax.com... > On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 23:55:31 +1300, "Geopelia" > <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > > >>>> >>> [Hammond] >>> Anybody your age who considers themselves an "agnostic" >>> ought to be flogged or put in jail quite frankly. You're >>> old enough to know better. >> >>(Geopelia) >>When we are kids we believe what our elders tell us. In our late teens and >>twenties we think we know everything. That's the time for taking up >>various >>religions. >> >>But at my age, I realise not only that I know very little, but that it is >>impossible for a human mind to know everything. >>There may be a God, but if so it is something that can't be understood at >>our present level of evolution. >>I look at the pictures from the Hubble telescope, some of the space clouds >>etc are light years across, and wonder if some kind of intelligent being >>could create all that. Is there a mind behind it or not? >> >>But if you are right, perhaps we find out just after we die. >> >> > [Hammond] > I am of the opinion that it is never too late to teach an > old dog new tricks. I believe this because old dogs have a > very long history of Encyclopedia information, and the > problem is that they simply have failed to interpret it all. > At your age you must be aware that the most common topic > of conversation is gossip about other people, mainly about > the psychology of personality. thousands of expressions and > anecdotes have been invented to describe other people's > personalities and what makes them tick, and certainly you > must be familiar with Miles and miles of the stuff at your > age. > When you have failed to realize is that this > populardiscussion is all about God. God is not something > that you look for in outer space, God is something that you > look for in other people, and frankly a person of your age > and social experience should've figured this out by now. > When you hear people make remarks like George bush is > called "Dubblya'", or Ronald Reagan fell on his "keester", > or common nicknames like "MoJo", "Kitty", "Lefty", or common > expressions like "enough to make a fox bark", "between the > devil and the deep blue sea".... these are all COMMON > EXPRESSIONS DESCRIBING THE PHENOMENON OF GOD. > The reason there is so is because GOD IS A MAN, not a FORCE > FIELD IN OUTER SPACE. > How on earth you ever get to the age of 80 with our > realizing this is beyond my imagination since the ENTIRE > WORLD does nothing but jabber about it all day long 365 days > a year. television sitcoms are ALL about it... in fact they > actually have no plot, they are nothing but metaphorical > descriptions of God and the human condition. > So please try to wake up and stop talking about juvenile > rubbish like looking for God in outer space through a > telescope....... it does nothing but make you the butt of > jokes. and realize that even in your old age there is still > a fast revelation for you to uncover........ and that is the > fact that the entire human race has been talking about God > in metaphorical terms right in front of your face for last > 80 years.... and you've never realized it. when she > realized that, you'll realize what real humility is..... and > not the tongue-in-cheek variety of humility that you think > it is! > > Per usual, if you find any odd words in this post, be > reminded that I am using voice recognition software and > occasionally in this identifies the word, and I don't have > time to proofread everything. New Zealand is a secular country. People can believe anything they like, or nothing at all. I doubt if many people think much about God, unless some crank starts a weird cult. But do you seriously think that a rather advanced ape (us!) on one little planet of a very small star could possibly be the God that created everything?
From: George Hammond on 4 Jan 2010 11:45
On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 02:23:09 +1300, "Geopelia" <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: > >"George Hammond" <Nowhere1(a)notspam.com> wrote in message >news:97l3k5d7hisq8ve509501qqgbq2ggm5l3n(a)4ax.com... >> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 23:55:31 +1300, "Geopelia" >> <phildoran(a)xtra.co.nz> wrote: >> >> >>>>> >>>> [Hammond] >>>> Anybody your age who considers themselves an "agnostic" >>>> ought to be flogged or put in jail quite frankly. You're >>>> old enough to know better. >>> >>>(Geopelia) >>>When we are kids we believe what our elders tell us. In our late teens and >>>twenties we think we know everything. That's the time for taking up >>>various >>>religions. >>> >>>But at my age, I realise not only that I know very little, but that it is >>>impossible for a human mind to know everything. >>>There may be a God, but if so it is something that can't be understood at >>>our present level of evolution. >>>I look at the pictures from the Hubble telescope, some of the space clouds >>>etc are light years across, and wonder if some kind of intelligent being >>>could create all that. Is there a mind behind it or not? >>> >>>But if you are right, perhaps we find out just after we die. >>> >>> >> [Hammond] >> I am of the opinion that it is never too late to teach an >> old dog new tricks. I believe this because old dogs have a >> very long history of Encyclopedia information, and the >> problem is that they simply have failed to interpret it all. >> At your age you must be aware that the most common topic >> of conversation is gossip about other people, mainly about >> the psychology of personality. thousands of expressions and >> anecdotes have been invented to describe other people's >> personalities and what makes them tick, and certainly you >> must be familiar with Miles and miles of the stuff at your >> age. >> When you have failed to realize is that this >> populardiscussion is all about God. God is not something >> that you look for in outer space, God is something that you >> look for in other people, and frankly a person of your age >> and social experience should've figured this out by now. >> When you hear people make remarks like George bush is >> called "Dubblya'", or Ronald Reagan fell on his "keester", >> or common nicknames like "MoJo", "Kitty", "Lefty", or common >> expressions like "enough to make a fox bark", "between the >> devil and the deep blue sea".... these are all COMMON >> EXPRESSIONS DESCRIBING THE PHENOMENON OF GOD. >> The reason there is so is because GOD IS A MAN, not a FORCE >> FIELD IN OUTER SPACE. >> How on earth you ever get to the age of 80 with our >> realizing this is beyond my imagination since the ENTIRE >> WORLD does nothing but jabber about it all day long 365 days >> a year. television sitcoms are ALL about it... in fact they >> actually have no plot, they are nothing but metaphorical >> descriptions of God and the human condition. >> So please try to wake up and stop talking about juvenile >> rubbish like looking for God in outer space through a >> telescope....... it does nothing but make you the butt of >> jokes. and realize that even in your old age there is still >> a fast revelation for you to uncover........ and that is the >> fact that the entire human race has been talking about God >> in metaphorical terms right in front of your face for last >> 80 years.... and you've never realized it. when she >> realized that, you'll realize what real humility is..... and >> not the tongue-in-cheek variety of humility that you think >> it is! >> >> Per usual, if you find any odd words in this post, be >> reminded that I am using voice recognition software and >> occasionally in this identifies the word, and I don't have >> time to proofread everything. > >New Zealand is a secular country. People can believe anything they like, or >nothing at all. > > [Hammond] So is the US, by constitutional law. > > >I doubt if many people think much about God, unless some crank starts a >weird cult. > [Hammond] All gall is divided into three parts (no that is not a misquote, it is an original statement by me). it means that all of human society is divided into three classes depending on their understanding of God. THE FIRST WORLD: Actually knows what God is and has for thousands of years. they know that God is a perfect man who has no growth deficit and that no such person has ever walked the face of the Earth, so therefore he is the invisible man within us. all of the peculiarities, foibles and idiosyncrasies in people are caused by the 20% of us that is missing, particularly of our brain. the nobility, the aristocracy, the elite and the leadership of world history have always known this andhave transmitted it from generation to generation for thousands of years. The first class talks almost exclusively in metaphorical terms about people, politics, society and history. in other words they talk almost exclusively about "God". THE SECOND WORLD: Consists of professionals, bureaucrats, business people, and most of the middle class; are generally aware of the shortcomings of human awareness due to the vicissitudes of human growth. however they are not explicitly aware that this phenomenon is what people are talking about when they say "God'. the second class talks almost exclusively about "ideas", plans, schemes and activities. THE THIRD WORLD: Consists of people who almost exclusively talk about "facts"... dates, names, events, amounts, prices, times and places etc. These people have an almost totally na�ve idea about God, believing perhaps that is an invisible man living in the sky floating on a cloud etc. As for you Geopelia, you are somewhere in the Second World, as are all people who refer to themselves as "agnostics" or "atheists" or say that they believe in an unknown "higher power" and have literally no realistic comprehension of what the phenomenon of God actually is. > > > >But do you seriously think that a rather advanced ape (us!) on one little >planet of a very small star could possibly be the God that created >everything? > [Hammond] This is the kind of question typically asked by people hovering between the second and third worlds. a person belonging to the first world considers such a question ludicrously pathetic. only a person belonging to the Third World would think the question is deep and intellectual. a person like yourself in the Second World of course thinks the question is "erudite" and "profound". ======================================== GEORGE HAMMOND'S PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE Primary site http://webspace.webring.com/people/eg/george_hammond Mirror site http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com HAMMOND FOLK SONG by Casey Bennetto http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3 ======================================= |