laOnce upon a time....

laOnce upon a time.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

rightwinghippie -> laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 6:28:49 PM)
Once upon a time in an isolated valley there was a town. In that town were 5 blind beggars who hung out by the center square, begging for food and such. There was a nice young boy who often gave the beggars food, and talked with them, as opposed to most people who just ignored them. One day the village square was abuzz with excitement. The boy came to visit the men, and they asked him what was happening. He told them that a circus was setting up outside the town by the river, and that they had brought an elephant. The blind men got caught up in the excitment, even though they had no idea what an elephant was. And the boy agreed to take them to experience the elephant. The next day he helped guide te blind men out to the circus, and took them to the elephant. He lined them up in a row 2 steps away from it. Told them to put their hands up in front of them, and take a step forward to touch the elephant. The men did, and each felt the elephant. There was of course a line of people paying to see the Elephant, so the blind men only got to feel for a moment. So the paying customers could get thier turn. The Men got back to thier Beging spot, and began to talk about it. They immediatly began argueing as to what the elephant was like. one had touched its trunk, and insisted the elephant was like a cobra. One had touched its leg and insisted it was like a mighty oak tree. Another touched its side, and insisted it was a wall. One touched its tail, and believed an elephant was like a switch. And the one who touched its tusk, insisted that an Elephant was an ivory spear.

Esinn -> RE: laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 7:35:12 PM)
They actually touched the elephant. The elephant actually presented itself for investigation and study. If the blind men were intelligent enough they could have killed it dissected it and found out how it worked. It did not require and preconceived notions they did not need special faith. They all could have touched the same part. The elephant was not invisible. It did not hide in the tent when people approached. Most likely it did not walk on water. However, I bet these sand strewn men did invent the story it did. Which is very typical in ancient sand strewn villages. Embellishment within the gospel as later texts borrowed from earlier is not really disputed. John is so far off the mark most modern day scholarship almost dismiss it. The fact the blind men were not unable to dissect it does not mean the boy could not have done so. I dig your story and could go on. Hopefully you see my point. If you have your god present herself or study, first I think we need to put her on trial for all of the evil things she has done or could have stopped, I am sure there are many people who will gladly study it like the blind men and the elephant. Even a photograph would be a start. This is an age old argument which usually changes with the imagination of the theist attempting to present as existence for their god or of a god.

rightwinghippie -> RE: laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 7:49:23 PM)
But's its not proof of God in any sort of way. There is a whole different meaning that has nothing to do with God, but with limited perception, and the nature of reality and symbolic attempts to describe it. Applies just as much to modern science as to theology. And what good would a photograph be to a blind man?

Rule -> RE: laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 8:13:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn They actually touched the elephant. The elephant actually presented itself for investigation and study. If the blind men were intelligent enough they could have killed it dissected it and found out how it worked. It did not require and preconceived notions they did not need special faith. They all could have touched the same part. The elephant was not invisible. It did not hide in the tent when people approached. You have a consciousness, a mind, I hope? It does not hide? Examine that. I once read this story, if I recall correctly, about a boy who was asked what was the largest object in the universe. "The pupil of my eye. It contains everything I see," he said. How is it possible that the whole universe can be perceived by 1.4 kilogrammes of brain tissue? quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn John is so far off the mark most modern day scholarship almost dismiss it. What issue or text specifically? quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn If you have your god present herself [f]or study, first I think we need to put her on trial for all of the evil things she has done or could have stopped, I am sure there are many people who will gladly study it like the blind men and the elephant. Your words are without meaning; they do not pertain. Are you going to put the mighty Thor on trial? Or Prometheus who gave all of mankind the gift of fire and suffered for it? Or Hercules? Or Satan? Or the Creator? Or the Divine, which never interferes except to comply? quote: ORIGINAL: Esinn Even a photograph would be a start. Will a photograph of my pillow do? (I once in some thread declared my pillow to be god.)

Termyn8or -> RE: laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 10:39:27 PM)
FR I think the OP meant something a bit less specific. The metaphor is simply lost on some. That little story was meant to point out how blind we actually are. I am not saying it proves the existence of God, and am not entirely sure that it set out to do so. I could be mistaken, it could well be an introduction to indoctrination, but I do not disbelieve because I cannot see, I disbelieve for logical reasons. Not that I do not believe that some sort of supreme being exists, I just do not believe that any human being has had any concious contact with it. I acknowledge the possibility, because it is also illogical to declare that something does not exist, unless of course one is onmipotent. A simple scientific fact can explain this. Consider all the vast EM spectrum to which are eyes are insensitive. We can only see a tiny fraction of something we know exists because certain things work. Inventions based on fact are usually the only ones that work. So how much do we know about the EM spectrum ? Well we can detect it up to a certain point, and nobody can say that nothing more (shorter wavelenthgs) exists. One would be foolish to make such a claim. Now let's go back to the time before the EM spectrum was discovered. Before radio and everything. People blissfully unknowing of it's existence. Who is to say that there is not a totally different spectrum, something we have not discovered yet ? Not me, and I wouldn't even go so far as to say that this unknown form of energy is similarly limited by the speed of light. I do believe that there is something out there, but I don't listen to anyone who claims to know what it is. T

Brain -> RE: laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 11:01:15 PM)
God doesn’t exist except in man’s imagination. It’s not possible to prove God exists because he doesn’t exist. Thus far there is no scientific evidence whatsoever of the existence of God and there never will be because it doesn’t exist. Like Max Bacchus says about the single-payer option, “It’s just not possible.” I’m not sure what you mean when you say it applies to modern science. There is all kinds of scientific evidence to describe an elephant. So when you say it applies to modern science just as much to theology in what way do you mean?

rightwinghippie -> RE: laOnce upon a time.... (8/27/2009 11:29:10 PM)
If you think the story is about an elephant, I can't help you brain. Perhaps there is a Utube video on it somewhere on the web.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02