Someone said Darkwins tackled the saying scripture is allegory, although pre-4th century this was a commonly understandable saying, which can be proved through many things. Could it be that Darkwins can't see patterns within scriptures and that he is devoid of logic? numeral patterns exist throughout the whole bible and basically all the scriptures. 3, 12, 7, and etc. Ouranos had 12 Children, Mohammad had 12 wives, Yeshua/Jesus had 12 apostles, in the Torah there is 12 tribes, in the revelation it says their is 12 fruits on the tree of life and it was commonly understood through Jewish mysticism that it was historically noted that the tree of life was allegoric for the complete mind.
Basically Mr Darkwins doesn't know that the point of scriptures is to be a catalyst to connect to ones own inner spiritual resources and that scriptures are not necessary once one begins to draw upon the inner source and gain gnosis. Why is it that reason stops when it comes to scriptures?
2007-01-07 16:03:48 · 11 answers · asked by Automaton 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The right interpretation is when you turn the scriptures within. It is never a thought that people will perceive the same things, although if you take a look at the movements they have from their own inner resources. Why? Because certain patterns are ingrained upon the mind, since it is our natural constitution through which we perceive all phenomena. There is no person that perceives reality generally in the same manner, the mind of the experimenter always affects the experiment, everyone views through a filter of beliefs and reality is our interpretation of vibrations/frequencies of the field. So what does our interpretation say that life is an allegory and its images being only concrete by minds construction, what we see is mind everywhere. The interpreter is the interpreted. So what is the aim? To know thy self. Dawkins wouldn’t know this, to busy setting forth his narrow-minded agenda. That’s the right metaphor. Btw I do not like religion either, but I try to be kind.
2007-01-07 16:04:56 · update #1
Dwarkins rather! sorry about that typo.
2007-01-07 16:05:30 · update #2
I'm a believer in God. I am just now beginning to expose myself to Richard Dawkins' views. I can see validity in his criticism of so-called fundamentalist religions composed of 'true' believers who basically are ignorant and intolerant. But it seems to me laughable to join with Dawkins in a quixotic campaign to rid the world of this 'virus' of religion. In fact, with all the ballyhoo of scientific 'achievement' there still is the poor fallible human species which seems to manage to step its feet into excrement, befouling self and planet. And, if Dawkins is right, who cares or, in fact, who will care for all will be gone some 'day' without any remembrance of the concern Dawkins emotes for the human race. I don't know what 'reason negated by agenda' means. Just wanted to say something about Dawkins.
2007-01-07 16:17:08 · answer #1 · answered by Xpi 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I'm sure Dr. Dawkins, and other rationalists, will say, "oh, well, if there were a lot of 12's in the Bible..."
What Harris and Dawkins do is the same as what MOST theists do -- take the Bible at its word. If the Bible says God killed a bunch of Egyptian children in Exodus, that's what it says.
Moreover, if the Bible is "emotionally true" or "psychologically true", I have to ask WHAT STORY ISN'T emotionally true? What about Disney's SEVEN dwarfs?
2007-01-08 00:07:55 · answer #2 · answered by STFU Dude 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Richard Dawkins is the Messiah and is to save the world!
2007-01-08 00:21:55 · answer #3 · answered by Barabas 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So what you're saying is that everyone interprets the scriptures differently, because our minds work differently? So how is Dawkins' interpretation any less valid, just because it's different from yours? From what you've said here, you appear to be as narrow-minded as you accuse him of being.
2007-01-08 00:12:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Peace!
Richard Dawkins is a good example of an Atheist who has silenced his conscience by blatant unbelief.
God bless!
2007-01-08 00:14:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He gives too much credit trying to give the benefit of the doubt as it is often put but I think there is too little doubt to leave room for such an intelligent gift as to make the lest than smart seem so intelligent
2007-01-08 00:08:56 · answer #6 · answered by dogpatch USA 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's Richard Dawkins. Have you actually read any of his books or watched any of his videos?
No... didn't think so.
2007-01-08 00:09:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Dawkins is just a money grubbing dude....who knows what people want.
How is that different than a crooked televangelist again?
2007-01-08 00:08:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Dawkins is a godless, miserable english bastardo who thinks the general world population are idiots and believes he is more worthwhile than god. not true, because he is ugly, and we all know prettyness is what matters
2007-01-08 00:07:20 · answer #9 · answered by NONAME 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Ever since DAWKINS agreed with HITLER, I thought him to be a WACKO!
See article here: Left hand column www.beginningingenesis.com
2007-01-08 00:06:51 · answer #10 · answered by musingaloud 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋