The True Nature of Darkness

Originally posted by Isaiah 24:21
You are observing the universe that now is.
The universe that was, wasn't 95% darkness.

These are personal recollections you are sharing? Or, if not, then what?

Both assume death is normal.

It IS. On an organic level it is not only normal but NECESSARY for the continued life of the macro-cosmic food-chain.

Aside that monumentally erroneous assumption, science cannot by observing the state of the physical world as now is (including light and its speed and what have you) reveal the state of the universe preceding a past singularity.

Well, if that ONE singularity is GOD, then what COULD precede same?

This universe now is cursed, and populated by devilish powers, and hence darkness is rightly viewed negatively.

Dualism is something to overcome, not be overcome by. We have two choices:
Blessings
Curses

If you choose curse, so be it. I chose blessing.

I've got a couple of verses for you since you mentioned the Bible

Here are a few more:

Isaiah 45:
3 And I will give you the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that you may know that it is I, the LORD, who calls you by your name, the God of Israel.
4 For Jacob My servant's sake, and Israel My elect, I have even entitled you. I have named you, though you have not known me.
5 I, the LORD, and there is none else, no God besides Me; I clothed you, though you have not known Me;
6 that they may know from the rising of the sun, and to the sunset, that there is none besides Me. I, the LORD, and there is none else;
7 forming the light and creating darkness; making peace and creating evil. I, the LORD do all these things.

My my my....isn't that book amazing...it's almost like the God of the Bible knew what people would be thinking years down the line...that verse was written 2700 years ago.

INDEED.
A literal masterpiece of allegorical trans-mutated multi-dimensional reality.

GOD lives outside time; why is it so amazing that GOD would know the thoughts of that which was created in the image of their likeness?

Another deadly assumption is that if something is spiritual, it must necessarily be therefore good. Of course, people forget that the devil is a spirit himself.

Do you mean a 'daemon?'
Or 'pneuma?'

Luke 11:35 Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness.

BUT what does it say before that?

The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.
~Luke 11:34

If your eye be SINGLE. Not DOUBLE but SINGLE.

I will instruct thee and teach thee in the way which thou shalt go: I will guide thee with mine eye.
~Psalms 32:8

A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways. (James 1:8)

See?

Ok, I can see it's my fault, I wasn't clear.

Concerning death: yes, it plays a role; now.

Here's what I'm trying to say

A religious book, say for example the Qur'an, will take a look at this universe, and notice that there is death, all living organisms eventually die.

Because at the time it was written it perceived death, and because it perceived death as far back as it could look back into history and because it perceived that death would continue to reign as far forward as it could see into the future, it assumed that death was part of the original order of God, and went about discussing it as a normality.

Ditto science. You see death fits the picture, now.
This is what you observe as the order of things, now.

But religion and science assume that such has always been the case.

You get to the Bible however, and it says: wait a minute.
Death was not part of God's original order. Adam and Eve were created immortal. Nature did not decay and perish. Animals did not devour each other.
All these things came later as a result of sin against God, a physical consequence of a spiritual problem.

There have been 2 major judgments so far. The first one completely changed the nature of the universe. That judgment was carried out against Satan in his rebellion. God then collapsed the entire universe.
The other one was a judgment dealing with earth only: Noah's flood.

Those are 2 shifts, the first dealing with the universe and the second dealing with earth, beyond which science cannot look
if it ignores them.
Ditto religion. See the Bible is primarily a history book.

The singularity I was referring to was God collapsing the universe in Genesis 1:2.

I'm sorry I realize I wasn't clear at all in my previous post.

Now concerning darkness.

So there are treasures that were hid in darkness that God gave Cyrus.
So what?

As for the eye being single, this is the king's english. It doesn't mean "one" as is evident by the fact that he contrasts it with "evil" and never says "eyes".

All I meant to show you is that God warns about a light which some people may have which is in fact darkness.
In fact that very verse you quoted proves the negative connotation of darkness in the Bible. He just finished equating evil with darkness.

Luke 11:34 The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.

The Bible is always literal, except where it tells you it is not.
It is its own dictionary.

I know for a certainty one thing about people who claim the Bible is just some metaphor for something

They either

a) don't believe what they're reading
b) don't understand what they're reading
c) both don't believe and don't understand what they're reading

darkness is a relative experience.. not to contradict anyone just throw out some neat stuff.. what is darkness to man is simply outside of our processing range on purpose... i usually tell it like this."can a fish see water?" for the most part no.. why? because its little brain excludes certain received wavelengths otherwise water would appear as a solid wall and the fish would be blind. the concept of sight is the concept of limited exclusion. the human brain being more advanced still operates in the same manner except it departmentalizes all the wavelengths it can receive through the senses and then throws it together as a virtual product. some of that product creates the color you may see in a dream just as much as when you are awake. the other half is non visual or simply the interpretive awareness you still have with you eyes shut or asleep but not "dreaming" visually. this is why in the bible the use of light and darkness are associated with intelligence. God sees everything [not necessarily visually] because he understands all.... possible precesses. now how do you make this cool? each star has a unique frequency wavelength that people at research stations listen to as radio waves. but if you could or would listen to on its natural spectrum not through an electron based machine the galaxy would sound like the ultimate symphony. right here in our own little solar system.. if your mind processor received the composite wavelengths off our sun.. there would be no darkness.. it would appear as a well lit room! and you could hear or see that ultimate symphony. a "black hole" to our perception is a completely differently animal on that spectrum and actually coexists with the core stars and acts as the otherwise impossible zero-point between galaxies. using Polaris and the core stars as a filter..or sluice gate one could literally tap the entire energy of the universe and thus be all powerful ( for any looking for proof of the existence of God) and so at that spectrum the entire universe; not just the galaxy is a well lit room.. hell or "outer darkness" is a state of the opposite or degrading intelligence were these things can never be enjoyed, no matter were you go which is why it is described as having no walls... not to replace the bible or any college text book just something to think about.

Originally posted by Isaiah 24:21
Ok, I can see it's my fault, I wasn't clear.

You were very clear, actually. It isn't that I don't understand what you are saying.

Ditto science. You see death fits the picture, now.
This is what you observe as the order of things, now.

There is more than one LAYER to the 'picture,' as you call it. There is flesh, soul, and spirit.

Flesh is subject to death - it is a natural event and is even life-giving to the larger frame in which it fits.

Spirit is eternal and therefore never dies.

The soul can go either way - many are dead and some are truly alive - living souls like Adam was before he slept.

But ALL flesh is like the grass - it fades and goes back into the dust.

Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern.
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
Ecclesiastes 12:6-7

The question is, where will one's self/soul go? Into the dust or into GOD?

But religion and science assume that such has always been the case.

Perhaps not. But then again, nature makes TOO MUCH SENSE as currently operating not be a direct intentional process set in place by GOD.

Seed time and harvest - summer and winter. Flora dies in the winter and is reborn in the spring.

While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.
Genesis 8:22

You get to the Bible however, and it says: wait a minute.
Death was not part of God's original order. Adam and Eve were created immortal. Nature did not decay and perish. Animals did not devour each other.
All these things came later as a result of sin against God, a physical consequence of a spiritual problem.

I don't find that in the bible. Never have. No where is it implied that carnivores did not exist. There would be no need for seeds if nature did not decay and perish, as you say. Yet, even before Adam, GOD created plants which had their seeds within themselves.

That judgment was carried out against Satan in his rebellion.

Who is 'satan?'
Only man rebels against GOD. And then points fingers elsewhere.

The other one was a judgment dealing with earth only: Noah's flood.

GOD didn't judge the earth! It was because of the rampant violence committed by man against man!

See the Bible is primarily a history book.

What a waste. :shk:

So there are treasures that were hid in darkness that God gave Cyrus.
So what?

Nevermind. Obviously that wasn't meant for you.

As for the eye being single, this is the king's english. It doesn't mean "one" as is evident by the fact that he contrasts it with "evil" and never says "eyes".

Not so. The NT was written in Greek, remember?

The word 'eye' in Matthew 6:22 is noun-nominative-singular-masculine. And the word 'eyes' in Matthew 9:29 is noun-genitive-plural-masculine.

When Jesus said 'eye' he meant one and when he said 'eyes' he meant more than one.

He also said: see what you hear in Mark 4:24, but since that somehow didn't make sense (or so it seems) to ANY translator, it is NEVER written in English to properly reflect what the original Greek intended. But nevertheless, that is what Mark wrote that he said.

In fact that very verse you quoted proves the negative connotation of darkness in the Bible. He just finished equating evil with darkness.

Actually I think it only proves the vantage point of individual perception; in this case yours and mine. GOD said that HE creates evil AND makes peace. GOD created BOTH darkness and light. What's to misunderstand?

The Bible is always literal, except where it tells you it is not.
It is its own dictionary.

Well, then, what is the problem with the idea of darkness?

They either

a) don't believe what they're reading
b) don't understand what they're reading
c) both don't believe and don't understand what they're reading

OR

d) have their own ideas and so suit the words to fit their understanding (and reading between the lines whenever necessary)

Of course, that is just human nature. Created by GOD. So be it.

OR
d) have their own ideas and so suit the words to fit their understanding (and reading between the lines whenever necessary)

because they either

a) don't believe what they read
b) don't understand what they read
c) both don't believe and understand what they read.

I never read through the whole thread but I do know what darkness is or rather what it is not anyway. So if this has been said I apologize.

Darkness in regards to say space when you look up at the night sky for example is simply an absence of light. You see darkness actually really does not exist only light exists. I look at darkness the same way I would cold, cold does not really exist either it is simply the absence of heat.

There is no "darkness".

There is only light, whether positive or negative.

What we know as "darkness" is merely just a shadow.

reply to post by ForceMaster


Great post!

So if darkness is the vessel through which light travels then what is the opposite of light?

I would guess gravity.

Originally posted by JimmyBlonde
reply to post by ForceMaster

 

Great post!

So if darkness is the vessel through which light travels then what is the opposite of light?

I would guess gravity.

The only thing that could be an opposite to light would be some type of anti-light. But since there is no evidence of an anti-light etc light is a positive only. Gravity while it can affect light is it's own beast all together.

Again though darkness is not a 'vessel' it is simply an absence of light thus non-existent.

Here's some quotes from an article by Robert Roy Britt,that i thought some of you might be interestd in.


""""Recent Hubble Space Telescope images of distant exploding stars add further confirmation to the permanence of a mysterious, repulsive force called dark energy that appears to dominate the universe.
While scientists are not ready to close the case, they said today that dark energy, which is thought to permeate the cosmos and work in opposition to gravity, does appear to be a constant presence as predicted....

Dark energy was conjured to explain a phenomenal discovery in 1998: Nearly all galaxies in the universe are receding from each other at an ever-faster pace.
Gravity is losing some unknown battle, cosmologists admit. They theorize that about 70 percent of the universe is made up of dark energy, while most of the rest is another mysterious thing called dark matter and only a small fraction is real matter like stars, planets and living entities.
Albert Einstein was the first to consider something similar, which he called a cosmological constant. He said even the emptiest space would have some of this strange stuff in it.....

There are two main ideas for the source of dark energy. It might percolate from empty space, as Einstein theorized, and is unchanging and of a fixed strength. The other holds that dark energy is associated with a changing energy field called "quintessence," something akin to a magnetic field. In that scenario, the field causes the current acceleration of the universe.
Another research team recently theorized that if the repulsion from dark energy gets stronger than Einstein's prediction, the universe could expand so incredibly that it would end in a Big Rip. All matter — galaxies, then stars, then planets, and everything right down to the atomic level — would be torn apart.
If dark energy can change, it might also one day reverse course and pull the universe back together in a Big Crunch....

There are two initial questions scientists are trying to answer: What is the strength of dark energy today, and does it grow or decay with time?
....There is a lot of work ahead.

"Determining these two properties still leaves us very, very far from understanding what dark energy is," said Mario Livio, a theorist who heads the science division at the STScI. But until these first two parameters are determined, a fundamental understanding of the cosmos will remain elusive. It remains possible, for example, that our understanding of gravity "is completely lacking," Livio said.""""