sorry gw - I always just post at the end - it's the general emotional exchange around 'sacred text' that worries me. I'd cite specific material, as I hardly ever reply to an individual post.
On 5 Oct, 01:23, [email protected] wrote: > Would you care to clarify exactly what it is that you that worries you about > the message you quoted? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: archytas <[email protected]> > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sun, Oct 4, 2009 7:41 pm > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: The Role of Emotion > > always worry about this kind of emotional exchange. > On 4 Oct, 18:07, [email protected] wrote: > or Molly - Is the message indicating that the same data may be viewed from > ifferent perspectives. The views implied are a close up of details (i.e.in the > idst of forest viewing the closest tree) contrasted with a wide angle view ( > .e. observing from the vantage point of being on the edge of the forest.) This > dea could be expanded to include other dimensions (i.e. observing the forest > rom the vantage point of an airplane.) > > Or - again - I wonder if what is implied is the different meanings of > xperience when viewed from the vantage point of linear logic contrasted with > ntuition. Or once more the difference in perspectives if one views the raw > ata of experience from the vantage point of linear logic contrasted with "pure > eelings' and both contrasted with what I like to call experiential logic (a > ombination of all sources of information including thoughts, feelings, > ensations, and intuitions). > > -----Original Message----- > From: Molly Brogan <[email protected]> > To: "Minds Eye" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sun, Oct 4, 2009 12:17 pm > Subject: [Mind's Eye] Re: The Role of Emotio > n > > have really been mulling over the "Lord has seen" translation in > elation to the "Lord provides," given the 20th century christian > ystical interpretation of the manifestation of experience. > While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things > hich are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but > he things which are not seen are eternal. > Corinthians 4:18 > I think there i > s something to the seeing, that is also providing, or > ringing the infinite into the moment (the temporal.) There must be > omething to so many translations using provide, and others seen. > Thanks for the pointers. > On Sep 30, 7:49 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 29 Sep, 17:39, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > >http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2022&version=NASB > > > It is in the New American Standard translation > > The New Living Translation > > English Standard Version > > > and maybe others... > > Unfortunately, it's not the best translation of the Hebrew. The > Hebrew has YHVH-YRAH (YHVH-Yirah) or 'The Lord has seen (to it)'. > Loosely, it's similar in that, if the Lord has seen to it, he provided > for it, but the root of the word YRAH is YRH, which is the verb > meaning 'to see' in its metaphorical sense of 'see what I mean' and > similar. So, to translate it as a derivation of 'to provide' isn't > exactly the truest translation. Rats!! > > > This is a nice site that allows the comparison of translations. > > > On Sep 29, 12:09 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 29 Sep, 15:51, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Exactly. It is just a diagram for getting out of the way and allowing > > > > grace in our experience. I watched the movie "The Legend of Bagger > > > > Vance" the other day, and while I am not really a fan of Will Smith or > > > > Matt Damon, the screenplay=2 > 0in this movie, I think, is terrific. > > > > Especially when the golfer's caddy instructs him "most golfers are > > > > looking for the perfect swing. But what they don't understand is, you > > > > don't find the swing, the swing finds you." And that's it. Just get > > > > out of the way, and that swing will find you. Same story. > > > > Question Molly: Where did you read that about the name of the > > > mountain being 'The Lord Provides'? As far as I am aware, that > > > 'mountain' was the Temple Mount and the rock on which the sacrifice > > > was to take place was the rock that is, now, under 'The Dome of the > > > Rock'. I.e., the mountain is currently called 'Zion'. If it was > > > called 'The Lord Provides' then that lends credence to my theory that > > > there is enough room on it NOW for a third building between the two > >=2 > 0> that are there now, i.e., the Third Temple. Thus, the mountain STILL > > > has the potential to provide for the means towards future > > > reconciliation between Isaac and Ishmael. At which translation were > > > you looking? Because I'm going to go home and check out the actual > > > Hebrew and see for myself. This could be the basis for a very > > > powerful argument towards peace and reconciliation, as I see it. > > > > > On Sep 29, 10:35 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 29 Sep, 14:39, Molly Brogan <[email protected] > > wrote: > > > > > > > Very interesting, Slip. This is the passage of the bible I have > een > > > > > > contemplating for several weeks. The meaning wasn't clear to me > ntil > > > > > > I read a translation of the bible that had Abraham naming the > ountain > > > > > > where he took Isaac to sacrifice "The Lord Provides." I don't > hink > > > > > > this is really a passage about killing our children, although > there > > > > > > are plenty of opinions in that vein to be found. I think it is > the > > > > > > passage that explains to us the process of the manifestation of > our > > > > > > experience, and the necessity to let go of our own goals or > reations, > > > > > > and sacrifice our suffering (the ram in the thorns) so that it is > ut > > > > > > of the > way and the our highest potential can become manifest. I > ind > > > > > > hope in this passage, and instruction. > > > > > > And, as Jesus said in Gethsemene, 'not my will, but Thine be > done.' > > > > > I.e., He was asking for the Lord's provision. > > > > > > > On Sep 29, 8:18 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes of course, communicate with God alone, happened the other > ay, > > > > > > > then he told me to kill my son, said like Abraham, said not to > orry > > > > > > > that he wont die, I said 'wont that be attempted murder'? God > aid > > > > > > > "yes, but don't worry,20I'm God and I'll have you out in 5-10 > ith > ood > > > > > > > behavior and if you read my book that will be easy!" > > > > > > > > On Sep 29, 6:31 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 28 Sep, 17:39, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Emotions can be expressed in isolation. > > > > > > > > > Absolutely. In that way, we communicate our feelings to God > lone. > > > > > > > > Not that God doesn't receive the messages when we are NOT > lone, > ut > > > > > > > > He is the only receiver when we ARE alone. > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 28, 11:05 am, Pat <[email protected]> > rote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 27 Sep, 17:13, Molly > Brogan <[email protected]> > rote: > > > > > > > > > > > > What role does emotion play in our everyday lives? How > oes emotion > > > > > > > > > > > affect our experience and being? These are questions > ddressed by > > > > > > > > > > > some of the finest minds of our era. > > > > > > > > > > > > For Piaget, emotion is the motivating force of action > manating from > > > > > > > > > > > outside the individual in the form of sensations emitted > y objects. > > > > > > > > > > > His view is rooted in the Newtonian conception of a > niverse comprised > > > > > > > > > > > in isolated objects requiring an emotive force to > nitiate > series of > > > > > > > > >20> > mechanistic interactions between objects. Piaget > educes > ll > > > > > > > > > > > conscious human experience to a cognitive formulation of > hese causal > > > > > > > > > > > relations. His abstract concept of emotion as force > ails to > > > > > > > > > > > explain the relationship between bodily feelings, > motions, and higher > > > > > > > > > > > forms of consciousness in human beings. > > > > > > > > > > > > Alfred North Whitehead indicates the factors in human > ature which go > > > > > > > > > > > to make up the particular emotions, arise from our > pprehension of > > > > > > > > > > > these permanent fea > tures of order in the world. His > oncrete concept > > > > > > > > > > > of emotion gives insight into the experience of bodily > eelings and > > > > > > > > > > > their relationship to the growth and learning of human > eings. He > > > > > > > > > > > explains the emotions are the crucial mediating factors > etween the > > > > > > > > > > > welter of awareness of these feelings in higher > rganisms. > “We > > > > > > > > > > > perceive other things which are in the world of > ctualities in the > > > > > > > > > > > same sense as we are. So our emotions are directed > oward other > > > > > > > > > > > things, including of course, our bodily organs . . . the > orld for me > > > > > > > > > > > is nothing else than ho > w the functioning of my body > resent it for my > > > > > > > > > > > experience.” > > > > > > > > > > > > Jean Paul Sartre sees it differently in his book, The > motions, > > > > > > > > > > > Outline of a Theory. He sees our emotion as an “abrupt > rop of > > > > > > > > > > > consciousness into the magical.” He believes: “emotion > s not > > > > > > > > > > > accidental modification of a subject which would > therwise > e plunged > > > > > > > > > > > into an unchanged world. It is easy to see that every > motional > > > > > > > > > > > > apprehension of an object which frightens, irritates, > adness, etc., > > > > > > > > > > > can be made only on the basis of a total alteration of > he > orld. In > > > > > > > > > > > order that an object may in reality appear terrible, it > ust realize > > > > > > > > > > > itself as an immediate and magical presence face to face > ith > > > > > > > > > > > consciousness.“ In other words, we > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
