Integrating Psychology with the Bible - Theosophy.Net2024-03-28T18:47:48Zhttps://theosophy.net/forum/topics/integrating-psychology-with-the-bible?commentId=3055387%3AComment%3A140033&feed=yes&xn_auth=noI certainly agree Faith has a…tag:theosophy.net,2014-12-04:3055387:Comment:1401142014-12-04T01:48:20.924ZJohnhttps://theosophy.net/profile/JohnEMead
<p>I certainly agree Faith has a lot to do with most everything. Also, cooperation is always the way to advance a civilization.</p>
<p>Science is funny since you get cooperation from both scientists and also reality. Having another scientist agree gives faith that what you are doing and seeing is real. The physical gives faith in that repetition, and repetition of results from alternative, or similar, experiments, gives the cooperation and faith needed to believe in your…</p>
<p>I certainly agree Faith has a lot to do with most everything. Also, cooperation is always the way to advance a civilization.</p>
<p>Science is funny since you get cooperation from both scientists and also reality. Having another scientist agree gives faith that what you are doing and seeing is real. The physical gives faith in that repetition, and repetition of results from alternative, or similar, experiments, gives the cooperation and faith needed to believe in your experience.</p>
<p>Science <em>can</em> (note the emphasis) develop religious beliefs and sects as well <G>. Though the catch is you can discredit the others with the right experiments. In fact, reality corrects the scientific error. Both the wrong and right can be shown definitively and separated out. Correct ideas never change. Sometimes they just find areas of imperfection, where new ideas get intertwined with the old. The old is still right, just in a limited domain. So it goes. Bridges will still be built using Newton's mechanics of statics - despite string-theory and whatever. Newton was right for that realm of bridge-building and how it works.</p> Awesome! you beat me to my ow…tag:theosophy.net,2014-12-03:3055387:Comment:1399022014-12-03T05:30:48.154ZDavid Allenhttps://theosophy.net/profile/DavidAllen
<p>Awesome! you beat me to my own punchline.</p>
<p>looking back in history there are times when evolution moved slowly, and times when it moved quickly. When we start looking into the details of the accelerated times, what we find is cooperation. The pieces of a thing come together in cooperation and become the thing. Our very bodies are the product of all the individual cells cooperating (illness can be viewed as a breakdown in cooperation). If the breakdown is severe enough you cease to…</p>
<p>Awesome! you beat me to my own punchline.</p>
<p>looking back in history there are times when evolution moved slowly, and times when it moved quickly. When we start looking into the details of the accelerated times, what we find is cooperation. The pieces of a thing come together in cooperation and become the thing. Our very bodies are the product of all the individual cells cooperating (illness can be viewed as a breakdown in cooperation). If the breakdown is severe enough you cease to exist as a whole.</p>
<p>If this is the "pattern" of life (it certainly seems to hold up to us), then what are we preventing from manifesting because of our refusal to cooperate with each other? What is becoming ill?</p>
<p>If you look at the elements that cooperation requires, the key piece that allows it to work is faith. We must have faith in each other for cooperation to work, and by extension evolution (as determined). So we are playing "God" with our own evolution.</p>
<p>So we have every religion (that I know of) preaching faith.</p>
<p>Science (the ultimate atheist) is desperately searching for something to have faith in.</p>
<p>Even the physical nature of our universe is built on it (or it's equivalent).</p>
<p>What this would mean is, the ultimate understanding that our atheistic science can provide us is to have faith. (thats a hoot!)</p>
<p>I mentioned an equivalent because there is another way for cooperation to work. The cells that make up our bodies, my first thought was that somehow they did not seem to have enough consciousness for cooperation. Then I realized it isn't their consciousness, it was their connection to consciousness that is so limited. So up to some critical mass the only thing that gets through are the most rudimentary "messages", there is no choice, they are determined.</p>
<p>Through a more robust connection to consciousness, awareness or perception emerge, as awareness grows, choices emerge (freewill), through the experiences of bad choices we begin to have faith in determinism and cooperation emerges. Faith is the dividing line between living, or experiencing a slow agonizing death (as a species). Without faith, it isn't cooperation that emerges, faithless freewill creates competition.</p> I rather agree with you. Intu…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-30:3055387:Comment:1399652014-11-30T10:59:11.332ZJohnhttps://theosophy.net/profile/JohnEMead
<p>I rather agree with you. Intuitively - it passes the first big test for rightness.</p>
<p>However - whether it is a unified field theory or a unified religion, it is all just faith when you get right down to it. I have gotten so I think that they may all be false hopes. I also think that it does not matter at this (my) stage of development anyway <G>.</p>
<p>I rather agree with you. Intuitively - it passes the first big test for rightness.</p>
<p>However - whether it is a unified field theory or a unified religion, it is all just faith when you get right down to it. I have gotten so I think that they may all be false hopes. I also think that it does not matter at this (my) stage of development anyway <G>.</p> of course it may be wrong. I…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-29:3055387:Comment:1399642014-11-29T20:34:40.517ZDavid Allenhttps://theosophy.net/profile/DavidAllen
<p>of course it may be wrong. I would be completely surprised if it wasn't complete and total crap. I've never professed a special knowledge or anything like that.</p>
<p>it's just how the pieces seem to fit to me.</p>
<p>If I don't call as I see it, how will I ever see it differently (in this case differently represents more complete).</p>
<p>If I don't voice it and noone helps me to see where I'm misguided, I could live my whole life wasting the air I breath. My understanding of that, gives…</p>
<p>of course it may be wrong. I would be completely surprised if it wasn't complete and total crap. I've never professed a special knowledge or anything like that.</p>
<p>it's just how the pieces seem to fit to me.</p>
<p>If I don't call as I see it, how will I ever see it differently (in this case differently represents more complete).</p>
<p>If I don't voice it and noone helps me to see where I'm misguided, I could live my whole life wasting the air I breath. My understanding of that, gives hell, and sin, a whole new meaning.</p>
<p>I fully admit, likely as not, my perspective is full of circular references, and every other thinking error you can make.</p>
<p>None the less, here I am, searching the internet for those that even care to think about such things, let alone exert the effort and time needed to communicate them.</p>
<p>From where I stand, Theosophy represents for spirituality what the unified theory is to science. Given the way things seem to work to me, that unification will happen within us first. Then we will be able to recognize it everywhere else.</p> "Our universe (and everything…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-29:3055387:Comment:1398902014-11-29T18:34:10.926ZJohnhttps://theosophy.net/profile/JohnEMead
<p>"Our universe (and everything in it) came from 1 thing (exploring what 1 thing means can be very interesting)"</p>
<p></p>
<p>for the sake of argument, this may be wrong.</p>
<p>"Our universe (and everything in it) came from 1 thing (exploring what 1 thing means can be very interesting)"</p>
<p></p>
<p>for the sake of argument, this may be wrong.</p> You may be right that some re…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-29:3055387:Comment:1399632014-11-29T18:30:34.095ZJohnhttps://theosophy.net/profile/JohnEMead
<p>You may be right that some religions are reaching out to science.</p>
<p>Although - it is not an integration as much as an acknowledgement that both exist</p>
<p>see this article from the New York Times:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/29/health/more-pastors-embrace-talk-of-mental-ills.html?emc=edit_th_20141129&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=45641522&_r=0" target="_blank">More Pastors Embrace Talk of Mental Ills</a></p>
<p>You may be right that some religions are reaching out to science.</p>
<p>Although - it is not an integration as much as an acknowledgement that both exist</p>
<p>see this article from the New York Times:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/29/health/more-pastors-embrace-talk-of-mental-ills.html?emc=edit_th_20141129&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=45641522&_r=0" target="_blank">More Pastors Embrace Talk of Mental Ills</a></p> of course all this is my pers…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-28:3055387:Comment:1399612014-11-28T19:04:39.884ZDavid Allenhttps://theosophy.net/profile/DavidAllen
<p>of course all this is my perspective (my opinion), and none of it meets the "proof" bar established by science.</p>
<p></p>
<p>of course all this is my perspective (my opinion), and none of it meets the "proof" bar established by science.</p>
<p></p> I would have to disagree on w…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-28:3055387:Comment:1398872014-11-28T17:37:59.587ZDavid Allenhttps://theosophy.net/profile/DavidAllen
<p>I would have to disagree on who is avoiding who. I see the religious side moving to connect with the science. Didn't the Vatican announce recently a change in the church's view of the big bang theory?</p>
<p>Science however continues to set the bar of "proof" such that religion cannot even speak at an accepted level. So science isn't just avoiding religion, science ignores religion (things spiritual) almost entirely.</p>
<p>I will admit it is hard to blame them. The move that religion is…</p>
<p>I would have to disagree on who is avoiding who. I see the religious side moving to connect with the science. Didn't the Vatican announce recently a change in the church's view of the big bang theory?</p>
<p>Science however continues to set the bar of "proof" such that religion cannot even speak at an accepted level. So science isn't just avoiding religion, science ignores religion (things spiritual) almost entirely.</p>
<p>I will admit it is hard to blame them. The move that religion is making toward science may just be a business decision to protect those balances.</p>
<p>The examples you mentioned are not accepted as spiritual techniques, they are accepted as physical techniques. Science can see the benefit of controlled heart rate, breathing techniques, and the like. Don't be confused, science still outright ignores any spiritual references.</p>
<p>I also have to disagree with the idea of specialization as you applied it to psychology. My reason for this is relatively simple. We are any of these things at any given time, we are any combination of these things, we are all these things at any given time. So when we turn to "outside" console they would need to be able to untangle all these things, not specialized in a few.</p>
<p>The physical exist through determination, a sequence of events that had to happen to remain consistent with the "truth". Our universe did not appear from nothing as our science says (even though science itself is based on the concept "you can't get something from nothing"). Our universe (and everything in it) came from 1 thing (exploring what 1 thing means can be very interesting). True to what I keep saying (ad-nauseam), if 1 thing exist it is a singular perspective. In order for second thing to exist "space" has to be created for it. So as soon as the (non-physical) concept of a second thing appeared, our universe is the determined result.</p>
<p>That makes our universe the product of choice, and choice (apparently) is the "gift" "god" has given us above all other animals. We are the consciousness of what we call "god" (from whatever perspective) expressing itself in the language of the other choice, the physical.</p>
<p></p> We are both physical and spir…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-28:3055387:Comment:1398002014-11-28T16:32:13.379ZJohnhttps://theosophy.net/profile/JohnEMead
<p>We are both physical and spiritual beings. Each side of the coin has its own professional. Certainly they can learn from each other, but to combine all of the spiritual sides into one person is impossible as I see it (let alone with psychology). So I would see separate disciplines with a multitude of spiritual professionals, Mahayana Buddhist, fundamentalist Christian, fundamentalist Islam, ecclesiastical Christian etc., to fill those niches and then the existing subsets of Psychologists for…</p>
<p>We are both physical and spiritual beings. Each side of the coin has its own professional. Certainly they can learn from each other, but to combine all of the spiritual sides into one person is impossible as I see it (let alone with psychology). So I would see separate disciplines with a multitude of spiritual professionals, Mahayana Buddhist, fundamentalist Christian, fundamentalist Islam, ecclesiastical Christian etc., to fill those niches and then the existing subsets of Psychologists for the more scientific side.</p>
<p>It is interesting to note that many metaphysical concepts/techniques, such as meditation, are already currently in standard scientific psychology.</p>
<p>I think maybe the religious side is avoiding the Science side rather than the other way around.</p> If we recognize that "God" (w…tag:theosophy.net,2014-11-27:3055387:Comment:1400332014-11-27T20:18:56.928ZDavid Allenhttps://theosophy.net/profile/DavidAllen
<p>If we recognize that "God" (whatever that is) exist within each of us, then psychology would have a future in religion. Then you can even recognize the "god" within your doctor and still be placing yourself in "God"'s hands when you seek a doctors counsel.</p>
<p>Of course this "spreads" "God"'s "power" equally among us, and the business of religion suffers.</p>
<p>So your not likely to hear a message like that.</p>
<p>Consider that within every formal religion is a fortune, each of them…</p>
<p>If we recognize that "God" (whatever that is) exist within each of us, then psychology would have a future in religion. Then you can even recognize the "god" within your doctor and still be placing yourself in "God"'s hands when you seek a doctors counsel.</p>
<p>Of course this "spreads" "God"'s "power" equally among us, and the business of religion suffers.</p>
<p>So your not likely to hear a message like that.</p>
<p>Consider that within every formal religion is a fortune, each of them with massive bank accounts. They profess to help, but there's never enough money to help much. Yet the religions maintain these huge balances.</p>
<p>The psychology behind that alone is mind boggling.</p>
<p>If the religion itself followed the guidelines it professes, then they should all be broke.</p>
<p>If you continue this and add the understanding that money is created in debt. So every dollar in my pocket represents at least 9 (by my meager calculative ability) dollars worth of other peoples suffering. I personally don't want to be responsible for any more than I absolutely have to have. Even that assaults me every day. So the concept of sitting on all that money (allowing it to influence my perspective) is abhorrent, and certainly the work of the "devil" should such a thing exist.</p>
<p></p>