okay we have a fundamental disagreement here bro. i also think i was on the wrong track with 'belief'
see i reckon ideas create reality. this is idealism. the MOQ is idealism. at the cosmic level ideation precedes manifestation. but!!! this has to be true at all levels. the macrocosm is the microcosm - otherwise we will have found ourselves another duality (and we don't want that now do we!) now the REAL nature and power of intellect can be seen. the intellect is not just about us trying to understand the nature of things. it is equally about us CREATING reality. the intellect allows us to be a god in the microcosm. our ideas literally create reality. emoto's work with water is one proof of this. where does faith fit in? faith fits in everywhere. it is a faithful assertion when we say that quality is the source; that good is a noun; that evolution is teleological and this teleology is the telelogy of the 'good'. it is a faithful assertion to say that 'god' is good. all these statements are statements that point beyond language towards an ineffable, transcendent source. only faith or whatever you want to call it can hold it up....faith in accord with reason if we have faith then it behooves us to *act upon it* by creating that reality which we believe is possible, desirable: the goal and source itself....we are pulled forward by this dim apprehension. this is creative evolution (bergson). this is how evolution works. failing to act on one's faith is 'bad faith' and we will judge ourselves accordingly....until we do act upon it. thankyou for listening amen --- david buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > gav said: > i think we need to use a different word. 'faith' > doesn't fit the bill. 'faith' is experiential > knowledge. 'belief' gets closer to what you are > talking about - every belief contains a lie. > > dmb says: > Faith is experiential knowledge? I don't think > you'll find much support for that definition. The > word can also mean loyalty, one's religion or > express a certain level of trust but nobody thinks > faith is experiential knowledge and the particular > dictionary definition I'm using says faith is the > very opposite of experiential knowledge. In any > case, the problem that I'm talking about is belief > in the absence of any such knowledge or even despite > evidence to the contrary. Examples include the > assertion that Jesus born of a virgin and died for > your sins, that God created the world in 6 days just > a few thousand years ago, and that communion wine > turns into blood when a believer drinks it. That's > the kind of faith I'm talking about, anyway. > > I think there is a much better way to refer to > experiential knowledge. Why not just call it > experiential knowledge? If that's what it is, > wouldn't it just confuse things to call it faith? > Aussie dictionaries and conventions can't be > different to that extent, can they? > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest > Loser! > http://biggestloser.msn.com/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Make the switch to the world's best email. Get the new Yahoo!7 Mail now. www.yahoo7.com.au/worldsbestemail Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
