No Smoking? Up Yours-- Take Heaven And Stuff It

[Meadow337]

I respectfully disagree with you. Science can not answer those questions. Religion takes up where science leaves off. I do agree however that religion has had a problem with allowing scientific exploration but that does not make science the only answer to all the questions in the universe. It can't even answer many of its own questions.

 

[Dov Ivry]

I respectfully disagree with you. Science can not answer those questions. Religion takes up where science leaves off. I do agree however that religion has had a problem with allowing scientific exploration but that does not make science the only answer to all the questions in the universe. It can't even answer many of its own questions.

Science is flawed as is every human endeavor. My point is that where something can be examined it should be rather than just jump to conclusions. An example is the plurality of consciousness. Ever since the ancient Egyptians religions have maintained there is a plurality of consciousness. The Egyptians called it the "soul" and that has come down to us. But it has never been demonstrated or proved. We do know that the singularity of consciousness, the "I," is embedded in an unconsciousness and that gives many human attributes such as memory and conscience. A second consciousness without an unconscious would be less than what the other large animals have. Religions put the cart before the horse on this and other mysteries. Why work at cross-purposes?

 

[Meadow337]

Science is flawed as is every human endeavor.

so then why grant it omniscient powers to answer all the questions in the universe?

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Shakespeare.

 

[canuck]

Science I believe is based on empirical data whereas faith (religion) is belief in non-empirical data. I'm not sure that you can say that religion takes up where science leaves off. Trying to make sense of everything is the human condition and where I think there seem to be no answers faith comes into play. It can't be proven (thus far) nor disproved.

 

[Dov Ivry]

so then why grant it omniscient powers to answer all the questions in the universe?

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." - Shakespeare.

I am not a scholar nor a scientist but a semi-educated journalist by background and I don't shill for anyone. I think Darwin for example is talking nonsense when he says humans originated in some kind of ape. The reason for that is that Darwinists cannot produce numbers showing how their system works. Anything that is true should produce numbers although you have to be careful there too.

The opposite is special creation. I've found numbers on that. Back in the 90s I saw in a newspaper that Madonna, the singer, was born on August 16, 1959 in Bay City. I took her number in English gematria, 62, added mine, 74, and "life" in this language, 17, for 153. Then I divided that into the speed of light in km, 299,793, and got 1959:4314.

The year 1959 is showing. To get the date itself I worked also with the spaces between 4314 which are 123; so 4 x 4 = 16, the day, and 3 + 1 + 1 + 3 = 8, the month. There is a 2 left over. And that gave me where she was born. The square root of 2 is 14 14 21 36. Those 14s add up to 28 which is “Bay” and the rest adds up to 57 “City.”

Later I found out that there was a typo, that she was born in 1958. That means that 1958 is what she became, the material girl, and 1959 is her pure self, like a virgin.

Because this is all found in the speed of light it means that the formula for Madonna existed at the moment of the Big Bang. Is that true for everyone else? Why shouldn't it be?

 

[canuck]

Whoa - now you are venturing into numerology which again is a rather unusual subject. I've known people change their names because of numerology and while it was perfectly acceptable for them to call themselves whatever they wanted, it still tended to put them on the fringe of normal behaviour. Is this in the teachings of the Torah and Judaism? I find it strange that you should use Madonna as an example, however, everyone to their own thinking.

 

[Dov Ivry]

Whoa - now you are venturing into numerology which again is a rather unusual subject. I've known people change their names because of numerology and while it was perfectly acceptable for them to call themselves whatever they wanted, it still tended to put them on the fringe of normal behaviour. Is this in the teachings of the Torah and Judaism? I find it strange that you should use Madonna as an example, however, everyone to their own thinking.

I know nothing about numerology but I can do stuff like that but only as a supplement after I've worked out a subject. I got into the subject of Madonna in another book. I just happened to find her birth date in the speed of light which strengthens a very rational assumption, that before you can build a house or make a human being, there has to be a blueprint. This negates what the Darwinists say. As for Judaism I keep my distance from all organized religion. As for the Torah it anticipates science because science says there is no such thing as past and future -- what goes around comes around. There is no past or future in the Torah either in the original Hebrew.

 

[canuck]

I think that in your book you use the Torah as your one immutable authority - or did I read that wrong? And isn't the Torah the basis for Judaism? Isn't Judaism a religion? I'm not at all familiar with gematria which according to Google is Hebrew numerology but you quoted English gematria - is that different?

 

[Dov Ivry]

I think that in your book you use the Torah as your one immutable authority - or did I read that wrong? And isn't the Torah the basis for Judaism? Isn't Judaism a religion? I'm not at all familiar with gematria which according to Google is Hebrew numerology but you quoted English gematria - is that different?

Torah is the basis for Judaism, yes. But I made the point that there is no religion in Israel. If you still have the book and are interested you can go back and read why. Just one aspect: the main manifestation of a religion are houses of prayer. There were no houses of prayer in Israel for 1,500 years. They picked up the idea from the Greeks. They needed a "Judaism" in exile. In Israel today 70 per cent of the people are secular with little contact with religion. There were no clerics in Israel and there are not supposed to be. The Torah is the early history and literature of the people.

Hebrew gematria is highly developed and rather complex. What I do with English is very simple. When I want to do a cross-check of something I will run it through both languages and if one doesn't pan out, I drop it.

 

[canuck]

Do they not have any religious observance in a kibbutz in Israel. Seems that many young Jewish people travel to Israel as part of their rite of passage? Do they get their religious instruction from home and then leave it be until they return?

I don't know anything at all about gematria except what I've read on Google and therefore cannot comment on its usefulness with regard to myself.

 

[Dov Ivry]

Do they not have any religious observance in a kibbutz in Israel. Seems that many young Jewish people travel to Israel as part of their rite of passage? Do they get their religious instruction from home and then leave it be until they return?

I don't know anything at all about gematria except what I've read on Google and therefore cannot comment on its usefulness with regard to myself.

I would guess that most kibbutzes have no religious observances although some may have at the important holidays, but even that is not sure. Outside Israel the identity of the Jew is as part of a religion and in Israel it is as a part of a nation. This leads to social consequences. To gain automatic citizenship under the Law of Return you have to be the offspring of a Jewish mother. But if someone formally converts to another religion, they are not regarded as Jews. On the other hand people such as a large group in Ethiopia who were converted forcibly or otherwise in the past are admitted and they sort it out here.

 

[Meadow337]

Anything that is true should produce numbers although you have to be careful there too.

What are the numbers on love and compassion and kindness and empathy? How do you prove their existence scientifically? You can't weigh or measure love so therefore by your definition it does not exist. It is this immeasurable quality of things of the soul that makes some scientists claim that animals just operate on instinct. That a dog does not feel love, or have emotion and other such patent nonsense. One needs to be careful when making definitive statements.

 

[Dov Ivry]

What are the numbers on love and compassion and kindness and empathy? How do you prove their existence scientifically? You can't weigh or measure love so therefore by your definition it does not exist. It is this immeasurable quality of things of the soul that makes some scientists claim that animals just operate on instinct. That a dog does not feel love, or have emotion and other such patent nonsense. One needs to be careful when making definitive statements.

My sentence taken out of context does sound stupid. I was referring to numbers as a tool to distinguish between fact and fantasy. I think that that way in the future physiological changes wrought by emotions will be measured. To think requires synapses to move and this requires consumption of energy. We see "red" because the electrons in the eye are vibrating at a precise number in accordance with this stimulus. Pierre Laplace, the great scientist, said if your stock of knowledge reached the level where you knew the position and movement of every atom in the universe, you would know all the past and all the future. But there probably will always be things that will fall under the heading of an art not a science. Laplace said this on his deathbed: "There is nothing real but love."

 

[Meadow337]

My sentence taken out of context does sound stupid. I was referring to numbers as a tool to distinguish between fact and fantasy. I think that that way in the future physiological changes wrought by emotions will be measured. To think requires synapses to move and this requires consumption of energy. We see "red" because the electrons in the eye are vibrating at a precise number in accordance with this stimulus. Pierre Laplace, the great scientist, said if your stock of knowledge reached the level where you knew the position and movement of every atom in the universe, you would know all the past and all the future. But there probably will always be things that will fall under the heading of an art not a science. Laplace said this on his deathbed: "There is nothing real but love."

with all due respect all those physiological responses are measurable now, and still do not prove the existence of an emotion which is immeasurable.