The Importance of Knowledge Causing a Spiritual Experience.

I am going to make a turn around argument about Astrophysicist Neil Degrasse Tyson's video link below about how God has slowed the progress of science. here - Progress and Discovery

I am going to use his video to argue that it is the love of science that puts us in a total awe of understanding, completion and vastness that makes us feel something so unexplainable we relate it to God.

Neil will discuss the absolute brilliancy of human understanding by discussing arguably the second most influential person human history Sir Isaac Newton.

Isaac Newton viewed God as the "The masterful creator" - perfecting the universe with mathematical proofs that could be used by his children for good. It is still argued today whether math is something that exist as a concept separate yet accessible from human understanding. The video argues that religion basically puts a major halt on human progression and discovery, especially in the sciences. Yet both sides advocate "the truth" and yet both have validation through different mediums.

- Scientific validation of truth comes from observation and methodologically adding rules for verification
- Religion's validation of truth comes from faith in the observation of what is told is true, from the historic transgressions of spirituality from The Indus Valley of India to the Palaces of the Middle East - the reason - by attempting to methodologically create rules for verification

Now if you needed to read the wiki on Newton, you will have noticed that this man accomplished some of the most remarkable concepts in the last 300 years that is literally fundamental to how we view ourselves in space.

Newton himself and his own religious views would have him been known as a heretic. He was very well known for advocating the occult wisdom of the ancients as well as having an alternate view of interpreting the bible.
He is interconnected with the ideas behind the "philosopher's stone" as well as his views and collections on Alchemy.

This man was a genius and yet still didn't rule out the idea of God? What was it that made him so remarkable in his studies? He had little distractions and was thought to be asexual and has a very spiritual alternative to religious apocalypse.

So then the time times & half a time are 42 months or 1260 days or three years & an half, recconing twelve months to a yeare & 30 days to a month as was done in the Calendar of the primitive year. And the days of short lived Beasts being put for the years of lived [sic for “long lived”] kingdoms, the period of 1260 days, if dated from the complete conquest of the three kings A.C. 800, will end A.C. 2060. It may end later, but I see no reason for its ending sooner. This I mention not to assert when the time of the end shall be, but to put a stop to the rash conjectures of fancifull men who are frequently predicting the time of the end, & by doing so bring the sacred prophesies into discredit as often as their predictions fail. Christ comes as a thief in the night, & it is not for us to know the times & seasons wch God hath put into his own breast

continued...

Newton may not have been referring to the post 2060 event as a destructive act resulting in the annihilation of the globe and its inhabitants, but rather one in which he believed the world, as he saw it, was to be replaced with a new one based upon a transition to an era of divinely inspired peace. In Christian and Islamic theology this concept is often referred to as The Second Coming of Jesus Christ and the establishment of The Kingdom of God on Earth. In a separate manuscript[17], Isaac Newton paraphrases Revelation 21 and 22 and relates the post 2060 events by writing:

- Isaac Newton's occult studies

He also had interesting inquiries in human history in the "Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms" even implying a mysterious land called Atlantis as well as his interest in in "The Original of Monarchs" tracing back family lines in antiquity through the time of the first Patriarchs.

A man who wasn't afraid to correlate the network of the divine and the scientific, yet a man that modern science owes a great thanks to. Recognizing our ability to know and understand the universe creates such a magnificent reverence to its complexity, relating our totality of understanding to something greater that knows even more. Such a thought takes us full circle to the revelation of the mind that many ancient mystics sought to experience through the full acknowledgment of self and being to understand the universal revelation of simplicity rather than complexity.

Thank you.

It wasn't that Newton gave up as it looks to believe. Newton could have easily attributed the force of gravity as something divine by even offering the suggestion for it to be instated in the church if he wanted to - but he didn't. His motivation was the relevant truth of mathematics, and the truth is independent of our subjectivity. The concept of a interconnectedness over vast space through calculable variances simply fits into his pre-existing idea of creation so that the assertion can be made that God is the Master creator. The point is, regardless of Newton's personal definition of God, he stood before a Universe full of rules and laws that warranted everything, seeing this in such a revealing manner could leave one rather overwhelmed.

Ok just also wanted to clear up any distinction between what I mean about what I said in the OP that - " Religion's validation of truth comes from faith in the observation of what is told is true, from the historic transgressions of spirituality from The Indus Valley of India to the Palaces of the Middle East - the reason - by attempting to methodologically create rules for verification" -

There is an obvious alternative for the validation of truth by devoting ones self completely to the rules within the scripture of their belief - This cannot be disproved, and yet many of it does not fit with how the world works.

Science is no different than this, yet it is the opposite.

It can be proved, validated, testified and will probably hold in the court of law, it is true by observation and real by verification. However, it does not have all the answers, it is confusing, some rules contradict, it is always changing.

I'm still surpised no one has really decided to comment on this thread besides myself This thread is about knowledge and spirituality people!

essentially what I am saying is that our understanding can sometimes reveal conflicting truths that can either put one into a state of madness or Godliness.

not sure about the early histories, but for today religion isn't the cause of holding science back, it is contributed to the compartmentalization of these groups, the specialized groupings/no variety within each sector of such and the money hungry p.t.b that enforce the programs that are undertaken. wether these p.t.b include certain heads of religious sects or not, it still all comes down to the money figures in motion and nothing to do with belief of self.

Here is a video about the dangers
of removing faith from creativity.
It's from a TED talk. Also
she gets some laughs.


David Grouchy

Originally posted by redgy
not sure about the early histories, but for today religion isn't the cause of holding science back, it is contributed to the compartmentalization of these groups, the specialized groupings/no variety within each sector of such and the money hungry p.t.b that enforce the programs that are undertaken. wether these p.t.b include certain heads of religious sects or not, it still all comes down to the money figures in motion and nothing to do with belief of self.

Religion became corrupted once it tried to use the authority of God to enforce man. Not that hard of feat, considering how meek man was so long ago. But lets look at the relation of science and religion as both holding some form of truth, so they can't really fight each other, at the same time neither one wants to give up their affirmation of reality.

Religion is simply institutionalized spirituality with its own significant arrangement of evidence just like the Scientific community is institutionalized rationality with its own significant evidence.

The hardest thing is that you cannot warrant intuition, even if you did, even if a psychoanalyst broke down your thoughts and behavior, systematically narrowed them down to various cause and effects and told you why you are feeling the way you are, nothing says that you will magically believe what you hear. It is as if we as our selves alone are the only true dictators of our reality, where the evidence and rationality are separate from how we truly feel. But this maybe because of things like the interpretation from the psychoanalysts, where evidence is impersonal and subject to your very own interpretation.

This leaves science on the shakiest of grounds determining and factually exploiting what we truly believe about the world, and even then we still are so uncertain of what we feel that the majority of new scientific discovery is built around theory and not perfect truths. A scientist must conform to his or her intuitive approach to what should be questioned, accurately defined, and personal notion of doubt that no calculations are going to provide for - Which is probably why the brain is the most interesting organ we have,it acts like a computer and at the same time it acts like an animal.

even though spirituality may hold the lesser reach in facts as equations or physics of what science can provide, it is still a truth within self that some may experience through connection and core meaning of why the reality of spirit truely exists. science does not know every answer but it does also question the inner knowing of self, and holds these views in disreguard of personal belief or the guidance through self that one may deem to be truth.

both need to coexist as truth, for it is found in each and does at times overlap one more than the other, for the truth of one is not the whole answer that is to be questioned as fact.

science in part also seems to hold a view in that if no qualification or degree in these limited individual sectors cannot be provided, then all others without, cannot question or understand the answers that are sought for but need only accept the views given as facts.

it is similar in view for religions or its many branches, but the core of mind in a spirituality sense of what is percieved is still within one and all and does play a part in life as a truth that needs to be learned.

maybe spirituality is only a form of brain washing, or things that have been taught from beginning of life but can science or it's many answers truely prove such as truth or why these thoughts manefest as same or similar in design even from as child before the knowledge of oneself is fully even known.

Originally posted by redgy
maybe spirituality is only a form of brain washing, or things that have been taught from beginning of life but can science or it's many answers truely prove such as truth or why these thoughts manefest as same or similar in design even from as child before the knowledge of oneself is fully even known.

edit on 8-10-2010 by redgy because: added line

We have a much more accurate view of how the world works in so much as that we don't fundamentally accept mystery as divine. Cause and effect rules the natural world. It is now the complexity of that effect that is mysterious.

To say spirituality is only a form of brain washing, especially proposing it was taught or experienced in childhood, and is simply "brought back" or remembered - wouldn't be too farfetched of an idea.

But is science going to "weigh" the importance of that experience or thought? This dwells into where science tries to affirm our values in life. And although science can provide a robust amount of evidence to establish what is good and bad for us, many people still are capable of imagining what they aren't capable of. Science does provide a great deal of use and application, but concerns remain with the idea of what is beyond. Beyond your capability of understanding and experiencing - what is beyond death, beyond life. It's kind of cool, because our imagination is so powerful, even if you didn't believe of any personal or impersonal God, the capabilities of what you can imagine become God like.

I like the Ted talks on creativity. Because many of them always refer to the creativity of a child, and until we learned how to rationally understand our world, the imagination flourished creativity with little fear of correctness.
and yet we envy a child's innocence and joy.

It's funny how what we know is based off what we already know, simply re-arranged and tested for new memories that teach us even more. And yet we are intuitive, we can sense what we can't put into words or expression. It makes you wonder if whether we explain out of necessity as well as not explaining out of necessity.

reply to post by juveous


Love this quote, very related to the thread.

The rational action is incapable of knowing what is, it only knows what appears to be, it has no plummet by which it can sound the depths of being, it can only survey the field of becoming

~ Sri Aurobindo The Life Divine

Knowledge cannot be found in a magical sentence or a book. Long before words and civilization existed all that existed were experiences, events, and emotions. And the only boundary between life and death was your ability to kill and how resourceful you were. Who do you think survived back in those days? The anxious/paranoid or the confident and brave?

It's the same concept today. All language has done is add a certain charm to peoples character. You believe you can trust someone based off what they say, but that isn't always the case and rarely is. Can you really trust a psychopathic murder who says they won't kill you if you cooperate with them in helping them rob a bank? Can you really trust a man who says he can talk to the all seeing man in the sky?

The fact is you have to take a step back and realize the only ones who can be trusted are the ones who have experienced the most throughout their life. The ones who are grateful and loving no matter what they experience or what you do to them. If you can trust someones actions completely then you can trust what they say without consequence.

Belief is just a choice and it knows no right or wrong. And spirituality can be equated to positivity in most cases...if you can trust and love everything around you than how could you ever be dissatisfied? Next time your in an altercation or having a depressive or anxious thought all you have to do is step back, take deep breaths, and concentrate on something positive. Because believe it or not, beliefs do have an impact on reality. The stronger you believe in something no matter how irrational or crude the more things will fall into place around you. As scary as that sounds and even though I'm not sure how it works it is the truth. Millions of people believe in loving deity's all over the world because something about that mindset made it so they could connect to any thought or object around them. Hitler killed 6 million Jews because he never once doubted the morality of his decisions and beliefs.

Hopefully that makes sense. You don't have to connect thousands of ideas and phrases around in your head to finally "understand" something. You just have to know how to open up and trust things around you that you couldn't before.

Originally posted by NostradumbassThe fact is you have to take a step back and realize the only ones who can be trusted are the ones who have experienced the most throughout their life. The ones who are grateful and loving no matter what they experience or what you do to them. If you can trust someones actions completely then you can trust what they say without consequence.

I'm not sure I entirely agree on what you say about trusting someone's actions. In fact I think that is the whole point of deception - to offer evidence that they can be trust worthy - such as smiling, making you laugh, showing compassion - these can be scam artist, they do it all the time. So I disagree that they are the only ones that can be trusted. To trust someone is a matter of expectation, faith if you will. You don't need evidence, because the whole point is to give up the security of the relationship and allow a free consequence, because it is that freedom that allows things like love and graciousness to enter.

Hopefully that makes sense. You don't have to connect thousands of ideas and phrases around in your head to finally "understand" something. You just have to know how to open up and trust things around you that you couldn't before.

Even though I disagree that knowledge can't be found in a book, I think what you are implying is the difference between Rationality and Reason. I think you can connect all those ideas to finally understand something like most people usually do in their pursuit of knowledge - but it is whether it is right or wrong knowledge. Do we search for facts for fact's sake, or our sake?

Although, I do agree about trust and the strength of belief. Equally that strong desire to believe is used all the time in medicine as Placebos. Like you said concentrating on something positive, it may be unrealistic, but not necessarily counterproductive.

To know that God exists, that is the natural thing with humans.

To deny that God exists, that is the unnatural thing with humans.


That is why people who deny that God exists, they have to closet their hearts and minds against intelligent thinking.

I am not talking about the Christian or Islamic or Judaic God but the God creator of heaven and earth and everything that has a beginning.


Think about this idea, if you program a computer to come to the existence of God, it is easier to do the program, than if you program a computer to come to the non-existence of God.

See which program is genuinely founded on rationality and logic and reality.




Pachomius