It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Revelation, the 'Thinker' & "Cock-a-Doodle-Do"

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
One of the fundamental assumptions of the consciousness of the ‘thinker’—that is, the consciousness which creates philosophy and metaphysics in the first place—is that the Revelation of Truth consists of nothing more than the Revelation of conceptual Truths or thoughts; an assumption which carries with it the implication that the consciousness of the ‘thinker’ is fully capable of translating Revealed Truths into meaningful concepts which can be easily understood by the ‘thinker’.

This is the reason why the Jewish, Christian and Muslim religious ‘authorities’ are paid to read their respective Revelations and then interpret their meaning and significance. And, in fact, the entire multi-billion dollar business, or enterprise, or cottage industry of theological interpretation is based quite directly upon the rigidly-held assumption that the Truths which have been Revealed to the prophets are fully commensurable with the thoughts of the ‘thinker’.

But the following example will clearly demonstrate how fatally unwarranted such an assumption really is:

Assume that you have heard with your own ears what a rooster sounds like; that you are well-acquainted with the term “cock-a-doodle-do”; and that you have been tasked with translating the term “cock-a-doodle-do” into Italian.

Now, instantaneously, you are aware that the phrase “cock-a-doodle-do” is not a thought. Rather, it is an attempt to represent in words the actual sound that a rooster makes; with words that, in fact, do not sound ANYTHING like what a rooster sounds like in reality.

In any case, you ask an Italian friend what the equivalent would be to “cock-a-doodle-do”; and she tells you “corri-co-co-ro”; words which, also, do not sound ANYTHING like what a rooster sounds like in reality. Rather, those words, too, are used as merely a representation of the reality of that sound.

Now, the relationship between the sound that a rooster actually makes in reality and the English or Italian representations of that sound, is similar to the relationship between the actual experience of the Revelation of Truth and the interpretations of those Revealed Truths by the ‘thinker’-theologians.

First of all, it must be understood that Genesis, the Book of Isaiah, the Book of Daniel, the Gospels, the Revelation of John and the Quran were all written to convey the Knowledge that had been Revealed to someone who had received the Vision of the “Son of man” and the Revelation of the “resurrection”. But what is not so widely known about these Revelations is that they are ‘Sensate’ Revelations: the Vision of the “Son of man” consisting primarily of both visual and auditory information; while the Revelation of the Memory of Creation and the revelation of the memories of previous lives consist primarily of information which is more ‘felt’ than either seen or heard.

Thus, the attempts by the ‘thinker’-theologians to explain either of these Revelations on the basis of human thought have about as much correspondence to the Truth of those Revelations as does the phrase “cock-a-doodle-do” to the actual sound that a rooster makes in reality.

But it is even several orders of magnitude WORSE than that:

Now assume that a person who has never heard with his own ears what a rooster actually sounds like—someone who, also, has no acquaintance at all with either the term “cock-a-doodle-do” or what it refers to—has been tasked with translating that term into Italian.

The very first assumption that such a person would make—in fact, the only possible assumption for him to make—would be that the term “cock-a-doodle-do” consists of a thought. He would then proceed to translate each of those words—“cock”, “a”, “doodle” and “do”—into their Italian equivalents. And, stringing all of those Italian words together, he would then claim to have succeeded in “translating” “cock-a-doodle-do” into Italian.

And this, approximately, is what the theologians are claiming when, for example, they attempt to interpret the Revelation of John; never having either seen or heard the Vision of the “Son of man”, or ‘felt’ the Revelation of the Memory of Creation or the revelation of the memories of previous lives.

That is, in reality, they are no different than people who have NEVER heard what a rooster sounds like; have NO acquaintance whatsoever with even the term “cock-a-doodle-do”; and, for that reason, can only assume that it consists of a thought.

In other words, in order to understand that a rooster does not speak the English words “cock-a-doodle-do”—and that those words are merely a representation of that sound—you would have to have heard that sound with your own ears.

So, the theologians can “cock-a-doodle-do”, or “corri-co-co-ro”, or do whatever else that they want to do for as long as they want to do it.

But that does NOT mean that they have ever heard ‘what a rooster sounds like’…

Or that they have ANY understanding of those Revelations at all.

Mi cha el

edit on 26-11-2010 by Michael Cecil because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   
about the only thing i get from this discourse is that Theologians are in the same field as Movie Critics...

both hack out opinions on mostly fictious stories



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Michael Cecil
 


i can see where you're going logically but like the poster above mentioned you are presupposing the original event actually happened.



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Michael Cecil
 


Nice illustration and explaination.
The question I now pose to you is.... if those prophets have the true experience of revelation, how are we non-prophets ever going to fully understand true revelation and differentiate it from from faulty interpretation?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by homeskillet i can see where you're going logically but like the poster above mentioned you are presupposing the original event actually happened.


Well, maybe you are presupposing that the original event actually happened.

But I'm not.

That's the whole point.

I have heard what the 'rooster sounds like' with my own ears. That is not any presupposition. It is something that I have actually heard. But the theologians have not heard it; or they would not say the things they are saying.

And the Revelation of John actually exists; it had to come from somewhere. And it did not come from human thought.

Those are not any presuppositions either.

Mi cha el



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Michael Cecil

Originally posted by homeskillet i can see where you're going logically but like the poster above mentioned you are presupposing the original event actually happened.


Well, maybe you are presupposing that the original event actually happened.

But I'm not.

That's the whole point.

I have heard what the 'rooster sounds like' with my own ears. That is not any presupposition. It is something that I have actually heard. But the theologians have not heard it; or they would not say the things they are saying.

And the Revelation of John actually exists; it had to come from somewhere. And it did not come from human thought.

Those are not any presuppositions either.

Mi cha el


if you have heard the "real rooster" then i guess you are saying it can't be explained to anyone. they just have to experience it themselves correct?



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Michael Cecil
 


I like to think that when you post, you are not searching for reactions.
Maybe you looking for questions?

Like perhaps, my gathering is that the only way to understand the word is to hear it for yourself.
As in, getting the vision through your eyes and ears.

Makes perfect sense.
Why there is money involved with religion is purely mans doing.
I think theres something about Rome and a beast that comes to mind.
Obviously everyones interpretation of someone else's vision, that was written down in different languages, could vary dramatically. Also, they could be manipulated to be beneficial, monetarily.
Plus the fact that peoples perception of times, things and ideas changes drastically throughout history.
So anything, to those that originally witnessed the visions, could be highly misinterpreted.





posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   
My Brother,

You have pointed out the dilemma most eloquently. Unless you have experienced it, the words used to describe it fail to convey the experience adequately. This is how it will always be. Hence, "forgive them father they know not what they do!".

Yes there is a rebirth with every death. Life is eternal and death is nothing to ever fear. No amount of explanation in words can reveal these truths to anyone. You either experience it or you do not. It is not up to us who experiences this truth. Many who claim to believe in eternal lives fear death despite their professed belief. Such is the nature of existence and growing up.

Keep on trying though my friend. Perhaps your post will spark a revelation within others. Revelations usually follow Gnosis ya know.

With Love,

Your Brother
edit on 26-11-2010 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by homeskillet
 





posted on Nov, 26 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
We each have our own truth to discover, I've found, no one can hand it over to another or lay something onto them, doesn't work that way, and believe you me I've tried as you may know.

Acceptance I think it key, to accept ourselves, one another, and the other guy as they are. At least it's a start.

We are just mysteries involved in a process of mutual exploration and re-discovery.

There must always be roosters, certainly, but the ears to hear them, belong to each person separately, and sometimes the roosters don't even know the first thing about what they are shouting, from the apex of their house, and we each have our own house from which to shout our own nonsense.

I think therefore, that it's good to be one's own rooster, while also being the ears to hear the other guy in the morning, from afar, and since it's then (in mutual acceptance) both a blessing to the crower and to the hearer of the crowing, it may be said that the hearer and the rooster both rejoice, together.

Cock-a-doodle-DOO!!!

As long as no one pulls a gun that is...


edit on 26-11-2010 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by homeskillet if you have heard the "real rooster" then i guess you are saying it can't be explained to anyone. they just have to experience it themselves correct?


Well, the problem is that there are tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people who have never 'heard the rooster', but who are being paid for their interpretations of what the rooster says AS IF they have 'heard the rooster'.

These people act like a "dog in a manger" to people who want to experience and understand the Revelations for themselves.

Or they are like venomous spiders which weave their webs only around the most beautiful and fragrant of flowers--in order to kill anyone that is attracted by their beauty and fragrance.

Mi cha el



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 04:37 AM
link   
i get it; but not to hamper your thread, time is being neglected as well as the implications time has on a "seeker".

if in the past a person caught a glimpse of the revelation by translation and interpreted; in this present if i "a seeker" read this translation it is everything the original revelation "is" by means of "time" and its "effects" pertaining the seeker.

but your jecture is proper and noted; but seems more akin to disgust and angst at the noted statement.?!



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by IAMIAM You have pointed out the dilemma most eloquently. Unless you have experienced it, the words used to describe it fail to convey the experience adequately. This is how it will always be. Hence, "forgive them father they know not what they do!".


To which I have to suppose that there was either one of two answers: 1) No; and, 2) HELL no.

Knowing what you are doing is what moral responsibility is all about.

This is one of the requiremnts of growing up.

This is what it means to be human: to KNOW what one is doing. And, on that basis, NOT to do the evil but to do the good.

That, in fact, is a characteristic of everyone who does evil: they do not really understand what they are doing; because, if they did understand, they would NOT do it in the first place.

Mi cha el



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Michael Cecil

Originally posted by IAMIAM You have pointed out the dilemma most eloquently. Unless you have experienced it, the words used to describe it fail to convey the experience adequately. This is how it will always be. Hence, "forgive them father they know not what they do!".


To which I have to suppose that there was either one of two answers: 1) No; and, 2) HELL no.

Knowing what you are doing is what moral responsibility is all about.

This is one of the requiremnts of growing up.

This is what it means to be human: to KNOW what one is doing. And, on that basis, NOT to do the evil but to do the good.

That, in fact, is a characteristic of everyone who does evil: they do not really understand what they are doing; because, if they did understand, they would NOT do it in the first place.

Mi cha el


I agree with you whole heartedly my friend. There is much evil running rampant in the world due to this ignorance. At one point in my life this knowledge caused me to despair. I no longer worry about the deaf ears of others. The time is near for a new dawn. When the sun peeks over the horizon the rooster will crow again like never before. When the rooster crows this go round, all will know it. There will be much lamentations from those who thought the rooster said "meow", "bow-wow-wow", and "ring-a-ding-ding". In the end all will hear and experience and perhaps be ashamed at their ignorance. Be prepared to forgive them their ignorance, they will need it. For some, even forgiveness will not be enough. "There will much weeping and gnashing of teeth".

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Nov, 27 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
the flowering of the Lord, it would be a wonderful thing to be a part of, in our dark world of hateful judgements, and of falsely percieved enemies, reviled.

what is truly wonderful about your revelation Michael, regarding the two thieves on either side of the Great Work of the Lord, is that it's true.

We must remember I think, within that context, that it was surely the self-theif, who moked the Lord and rejected him, and his crowing, while the thinker-theif, recognized the work occuring in his midst, and begged the Lord to remember him, to which Jessus replied - today, this very day, you will be with me in paradise.

I think the reason for this, or I should say I know, is that Gnosis is born, at least in part, from philosophy, in the same way that a mathematician knows that his proof is absolutely correct, and may be validated, but not falsified by objective observation from any POV. It will come to recoginze the great work in its midst and hear the crow of the Rooster (our Lord), and it, our thinker, is then transformed, from thinking interpreter, to KNOWER. It is an acceptible path to the Lord, and the Lord integrates it, while transforming it, into Gnosis.

I have wept at my own foolishness and at the utter foolishness and hurtfulness (Rooster Down) of my own brother, I have seen his gun pointed, felt the pierce of the bullet, but I too must forgive, we ALL have to, and accept our brothers, one and all.

Love of the Lord, the fragrance of the flower. Can you blame me Michael for wishing to get all over it? What an amazing FIND!

But it's just a discovery, never an attempt to kill or be hurtful God no.

Thank you Michael for your sharing and mutual grokking, makes the world just a little less dark, unless of course, you've already condemned me and mocked me, hurt me shot me, but that's ok, I love you too!


Jesus loves us, the whole of us. Since it's a family framework, in the final analysis, we, our WHOLE self, reintegrated, get's to find his place at the table. Since we cannot get rid of anything to begin with, we have no other choice but to opt for acceptance and reintegration.

The thinker can easily lead us to gnosis. Jesus wasn't a non thinking man, and logic, is the root of Logos. There is the perennial philosopphy, as a blooming field, at the heart of this thing, not just one flower, but an infinite sea of them.

There is nothing more powerful than an old-new idea who's time has come.

The rooster never confuses his own self, with the voice he's using.

And just for the record, I am not a dog in the manger Michael, I am the dog hanging out in the stable, waiting patiently for Christ to be re-born among us yet again, from above, and then hear the Rooster crowing, from atop many houses, proclaiming with great JOY the dawning of a new day and a new age, an age of reason and spirit re-joined with the Lord (the knower) in paradise, our rational faculties still in tact.


edit on 27-11-2010 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join