[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Sudden death COVID vaccine paper published, then censored, by The Lancet now republished with peer review

Russian children returned from Syria

Donald Trump Indirectly Exposes the Jewish Neocons Behind Joe Biden's Nuclear War

Key European NATO Bases in Reach of Russia's Oreshnik Hypersonic Missile

Supervolcano Alert in Europe: Phlegraean Fields Activity Sparks Scientists Attention (Mass Starvation)

France reacted to the words of a US senator on sanctions against allies

Trump nominates former Soros executive for Treasury chief

SCOTUS asked to review if Illinois can keep counting mail-in ballots 2 weeks after election day

The Real Reason Government Workers Are Panicking About ElonÂ’s New Tracking System

THEY DON'T CARE ANYMORE!

Young Americans Are Turning Off The TV

Taxpayer Funded Censorship: How Government Is Using Your Tax Dollars To Silence Your Voice

"Terminator" Robot Dog Now Equipped With Amphibious Capabilities

Trump Plans To Use Impoundment To Cut Spending - What Is It?

Mass job losses as major factory owner moves business overseas

Israel kills IDF soldiers in Lebanon to prevent their kidnap

46% of those deaths were occurring on the day of vaccination or within two days

In 2002 the US signed the Hague Invasion Act into law

MUSK is going after WOKE DISNEY!!!

Bondi: Zuckerberg Colluded with Fauci So "They're Not Immune Anymore" from 1st Amendment Lawsuits

Ukrainian eyewitnesses claim factory was annihilated to dust by Putin's superweapon

FBI Director Wray and DHS Secretary Mayorkas have just refused to testify before the Senate...

Government adds 50K jobs monthly for two years. Half were Biden's attempt to mask a market collapse with debt.

You’ve Never Seen THIS Side Of Donald Trump

President Donald Trump Nominates Former Florida Rep. Dr. Dave Weldon as CDC Director

Joe Rogan Tells Josh Brolin His Recent Bell’s Palsy Diagnosis Could Be Linked to mRNA Vaccine

President-elect Donald Trump Nominates Brooke Rollins as Secretary of Agriculture

Trump Taps COVID-Contrarian, Staunch Public Health Critic Makary For FDA

F-35's Cooling Crisis: Design Flaws Fuel $2 Trillion Dilemma For Pentagon

Joe Rogan on Tucker Carlson and Ukraine Aid


Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Top Cardinal Blasts 'Da Vinci Code' as 'Cheap Lies'
Source: Netscape News
URL Source: http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news ... 2&dt=20050315130200&w=RTR&covi
Published: Mar 15, 2005
Author: Reuters
Post Date: 2005-03-15 17:59:13 by Mr Nuke Buzzcut
Keywords: Cardinal, Blasts, Cheap
Views: 8345
Comments: 568

Top Cardinal Blasts 'Da Vinci Code' as 'Cheap Lies'

ROME (Reuters) - A top Catholic cardinal has blasted "The Da Vinci Code" as a "gross and absurd" distortion of history and said Catholic bookstores should take the bestseller off their shelves because it is full of "cheap lies."

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, in an interview with the Milan newspaper Il Giornale, became the highest ranking Italian Churchman to speak out against the book, an international blockbuster that has sold millions of copies.

"(It) aims to discredit the Church and its history through gross and absurd manipulations," Bertone, the archbishop of the northern Italian city of Genoa and a close friend of Pope John Paul told the paper in its Monday edition.

"This seems like a throwback to the old anti-clerical pamphlets of the 1800s," he said.

The central claim of the book, written by American Dan Brown, is that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had children. The Bible says Jesus never married, was crucified and rose from the dead.

Bertone's comments were significant because until the Pope named him archbishop of Genoa in 2003 he was for years the number two man at the Vatican's most powerful department - the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

"You can find that book everywhere and the risk is that many people who read it believe that those fairy tales are real," he said. "I think I have the responsibility to clear things up to unmask the cheap lies contained in books like that."

HOLY GRAIL

A central storyline of the book is that the Holy Grail is not the cup which Christ is said to have used at the Last Supper but really the bloodline descended from Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Bertone calls this idea "a perversion."

Bertone is so incensed about the novel that he will be the key speaker at a roundtable in Genoa Wednesday night attempting to dismantle the book, which also accuses the Church of covering up the female role in Christianity.

"I will try to clear things up and help form consciences," the cardinal said.

"I think that when faced with affirmations that are so shameful and unfounded, readers who have even a minimum of basic (Christian) formation should react," he said.

He said it was "sad" that even Catholic bookstores were selling The Da Vinci Code "for purely economic reasons."

One bookstore selling "The Da Vinci Code" is the one in the Gemelli Hospital, a Catholic institution where the Pope spent a total of 28 days in two stints in February and March.

In the interview, Bertone firmly rejected the book's claim that the feminine role in Christianity had been suppressed.

"This is one of the most vulgar of inventions. The feminine element is present in all the Gospels," Bertone said.

Bertone also strongly defended Opus Dei, the conservative Church organization that the book depicts as a ruthless, Machiavellian group that resorts even to murder in its attempt to keep the Church's secrets hidden.

The novel is going to reach an even wider audience next year with the release of a film based on the book staring Tom Hanks.

© Copyright Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of Reuters Ltd.

03/15/2005 13:02 RTR

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 412.

#1. To: All (#0)

"I think that when faced with affirmations that are so shameful and unfounded, readers who have even a minimum of basic (Christian) formation should react," he said.

How ironic that someone whose living is dependent upon pushing a fiction like the bible should react so defensively against another similar work.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-15   18:01:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#1)

How ironic that someone whose living is dependent upon pushing a fiction like the bible should react so defensively against another similar work.

ROFLMAO!!

EXACTLY RIGHT......

Aric2000  posted on  2005-03-15   18:03:30 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Aric2000, Samuel Gray (#2)

"You can find that book everywhere and the risk is that many people who read it believe that those fairy tales are real," he said.

He's talking about the bible, right?

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-15   18:07:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#3)

I think so. I mean, Da Vinci actually existed, but the guys who venerate the water walkin shepherd born of a virgin are offended because they say someone is making up stuff???

Rich.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-03-15   21:02:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Samuel Gray (#12)

I think so. I mean, Da Vinci actually existed, but the guys who venerate the water walkin shepherd born of a virgin are offended because they say someone is making up stuff???

have you read, the Da Vinci Code, The Bible, and down this thread in that order?

Continental Op  posted on  2005-03-15   21:08:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Continental Op (#15)

have you read, the Da Vinci Code, The Bible, and down this thread in that order?

yes, yes, yes, and so what?

When I read DVC and Angels and Demons, I laughed out loud because I knew the "Church of the Rock" would soil their vestments over it.

At least SOME of what Brown wrote was verifiable in the historical record. Find me a large buried boat, or some credible corroborative documentation concerning the life of Jesus written contemporaneously with his existence on earth, and we'll talk.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-03-15   21:12:50 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Samuel Gray (#16)

At least SOME of what Brown wrote was verifiable in the historical record. Find me a large buried boat, or some credible corroborative documentation concerning the life of Jesus written contemporaneously with his existence on earth, and we'll talk.

"At least SOME of what Brown wrote was verifiable in the historical record."

Yes, there was a Da Vinci...

"Find me a large buried boat, or some credible corroborative documentation concerning the life of Jesus written contemporaneously with his existence on earth, and we'll talk."

the archeological evidence in support ofthe Bible is staggering. Read up on it sometime.

Continental Op  posted on  2005-03-15   21:28:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Continental Op (#22)

Yeah, towns existed with the same names as some of those in the Bible.

Finding a reference to Loch Ness in an ancient document and producing Nessie are entirely different matters entirely.

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-03-15   21:30:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Samuel Gray (#24)

Finding a reference to Loch Ness in an ancient document and producing Nessie are entirely different matters entirely.

I suppose you're not old enough to remember when the ancestors of your ilk were claiming the Bible was surely false because it mentioned Hitites and there was absolutely no such thing as a Hittite. Then some more excavation was done and presto, the Hittite civilization was discovered! No one remembers that anymore though.

Continental Op  posted on  2005-03-15   21:35:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Continental Op (#30)

At the end of the day, you can find all the Roman roads, dead civilizations, and mysterious parchments you want, yet the entire system is based on something that is NOT there in a tomb in Gethsemane??

Thomas was on the right track. Lest I see the nail prints and thrust my hand into his side...

Etc, etc...

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-03-15   21:38:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Samuel Gray (#33)

yet the entire system is based on something that is NOT there in a tomb in Gethsemane??

why should there be?

Continental Op  posted on  2005-03-15   21:39:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Continental Op (#36)

Most 2000 year old tombs are empty, is that it? Just that one is empty due to some other process than natural decay or grave robbery?

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-03-15   21:43:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Samuel Gray (#37)

Most 2000 year old tombs are empty, is that it? Just that one is empty due to some other process than natural decay or grave robbery?

where is the tomb?

Continental Op  posted on  2005-03-15   21:46:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: Continental Op (#39)

It's your fairy tale, you tell me.

Back on the subject of the thread, why does the prospect of Jesus having a wife bother the Catholics so much? The Gnostic gospel of Phillip said he kissed her on the mouth many times, and loved her more than the disciples...

Samuel Gray  posted on  2005-03-15   21:48:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: Samuel Gray (#41)

...why does the prospect of Jesus having a wife bother the Catholics so much? The Gnostic gospel of Phillip said he kissed her on the mouth many times, and loved her more than the disciples...

Because it would confirm the fact that Jesus wasn't divine. And we can't have that type of info floating around.

2Trievers  posted on  2005-03-15   22:12:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: 2Trievers, All (#51)

Because it would confirm the fact that Jesus wasn't divine. And we can't have that type of info floating around.

Ok, guys, you have been having your fun. Those of us who do accept the Holy Bible as fact have the opposite opinion. We think we are right. You say that we are silly, etc for believing these things. You say that we can't prove that He was divine. But, the truth is you can't prove that He wasn't. So, you have your opinion. So, we have two sides of this dividing line. One side can't prove anything to the other side. You do not believe in His divinity, so be it. We do, so be it.

Don  posted on  2005-03-16   8:15:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#128. To: Don (#64)

You say that we can't prove that He was divine. But, the truth is you can't prove that He wasn't.

But, if one is to subscribe to logic, then the burden of proof is squarely upon the one making the affirmation of existence. The logically default position with respect to claims of existence is one of disbelief -- until such time as actual verifiable, substantiable evidence can be entered into the record and evaluated as concrete fact.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-16   11:48:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#150. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut, All (#128)

the burden of proof is squarely upon the one making the affirmation of existence.

Counselor, this isn't a court of law. It's your decision to believe or not.

In the meantime, we have the First Amendment in this country. Freedom of Religion and all that? I can start a religion worshipping my right, big toe and I don't have to prove a thing.

Christianity and belief in Christ is much more established than my pretend church. Prove something? Yeah, right. In your dreams. Christianity is here and it will stay here. Sorry 'bout that. No, I'm not.

Don  posted on  2005-03-16   13:55:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#342. To: Don (#150)

Counselor, this isn't a court of law. It's your decision to believe or not.

My comments have no relevance to the shenanigans that go on in a court of law. I was speaking to reason, reality and logic. But, if you wish to set reason, reality and logic aside, that indeed is your choice.

In the meantime, we have the First Amendment in this country. Freedom of Religion and all that? I can start a religion worshipping my right, big toe and I don't have to prove a thing.
I've in no way indicated that you should be prevented from worshiping as you please - provided you violate the rights of no person in the process. Have at it. Believe what you will.

Christianity and belief in Christ is much more established than my pretend church. Prove something? Yeah, right. In your dreams. Christianity is here and it will stay here. Sorry 'bout that. No, I'm not.
Lots of religions are here. Some are more populous than christianity. But, popularity is not proof. And, if the cardinal wishes to make accusations against the written works of other, he best look in the mirror first, else he stands to be laughed at for the fool that he makes himself.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-16   22:01:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#350. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#342)

"I was speaking to reason, reality and logic. But, if you wish to set reason, reality and logic aside, that indeed is your choice."

Reason, reality, and logic. Ok, those things will do for a start. How do you prove the existence of God? A better question would be how do you disprove the existence of God when you can look up and see the stars and other bodies there or look here on earth and see the things that have been created here?

Is it reasonable, real, or logical to think all of these things just popped into existence one morning. Where did they come from? There has to be a beginning to physical things. There has to be as Plato might put it the real or original from which all other similar things are copies.

If there is a God, would He abandon his creation or get bored with it? Lets consider the case of a father and a son for a moment. Would most human fathers abandon his son. A son is a copy of the father. We are told that God made man in His image in the Bible. You don't believe in the Bible? Use your own human experience. Would you abandon a child made in your image? Most men wouldn't.

Oh, I forgot. You don't believe in the Bible so how do we know that man is made in God's image? Well, something was made in God's image. You don't create something out of a vacuum. Lets consider just the animals are made in God's image. Or just the earth itself is made from God's image. Well, God created all of those things. If most men would not abandon their creation, why would God? It isn't reasonable, real, or logical to think that everything was just created without a supreme maker or that the supreme maker would just abandon His creation.

What about Christ? We still don't believe in the Holy Bible so lets toss it out for the moment. The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus has some comments in his history that might be of interest to you.

The Holy Bible, of course, is still the main source of information about Christ and Christianity. Paul never met Christ, but he knew Peter and other disciples who did know Christ. Paul got his information from the people who personally knew Christ and were with him from the beginning of his ministry to the end of his time on earth. If there are books that were left out of the Holy Bible, still Paul knew those people who knew Christ. So, his version of what happened must be true.

Wait a minute. You say that Paul's writings were filtered and even changed to make the man Jesus into Christ, the son of God? The true story is that Jesus died as a man and never rose on that third day. And, that the Jews are right in still awaiting their king. There comes that dividing line between faith and disbelief, right? The smart people are on the side of disbelief. The other side...well...they should know better to put it charitably.

Ok, is the Bible correct in simple facts like the existence of long dead cities? Archeologists are constantly coming up with their findings. So, if the Bible is right in one thing maybe other things are also true. Biblical prophecy is an interesting area. It even talks about the rebirth of Israel some 2,000 years later. Gee, it was just a lucky guess, I suppose.

"provided you violate the rights of no person in the process. Have at it. Believe what you will. "

Thank you for your courtesy. I appreciate you allowing me to do that. I would also appreciate it if you don't violate any rights that Christians might have such as being allowed to obey what they think is the will of God in certain matters such as preaching the gospel.

"if the cardinal wishes to make accusations against the written works of other, he best look in the mirror first, else he stands to be laughed at for the fool that he makes himself. "

You can send the Pope a letter and advise him of that if you wish. He might even take the time to read it. I am not a Catholic so I don't take great exception to you calling him a fool, but I am sure that many Roman Catholics would take exception with you on that statement.

Don  posted on  2005-03-16   22:34:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#352. To: Don (#350)

How do you prove the existence of God?

It would be a simple exercise - if he in fact existed. But, since he does not, you are forced to play word games and delve into logical fallacy in order to obfuscate an appearance of proof.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-16   22:39:55 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#357. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#352)

How do you prove the existence of God? It would be a simple exercise -

Then please do so sir, I (among others) would like to see said proof.

CAPPSMADNESS  posted on  2005-03-16   22:42:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#358. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#357)

Then please do so sir, I (among others) would like to see said proof.

I am not the one asserting his existence, so I am not the one in a position to be challenged to prove his existence. You should have posted that challenge to Don.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-16   22:44:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#364. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#358)

But you were the one who said it would be a simple exercise, right?

CAPPSMADNESS  posted on  2005-03-16   22:46:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#366. To: CAPPSMADNESS (#364)

But you were the one who said it would be a simple exercise, right?

Indeed it would be simple -- IF SUCH A THING AS A god EXISTED. It is a simple matter to prove existence of things that exist. Something as significant as a god would be the easiest of all -- if it existed.

But, it does not. That's why believers have never been able to produce him.

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-16   22:49:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#368. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#366)

You want God to prove His existence to you say...in a courtroom? Or, maybe in your living room would be a better place for your immediate comfort? God is all around you and you can't see him because you believe He is there. I point out the heavens and everything here on earth as created things from a source, and you blow right past it. You don't want to face that issue. It might cause you to think, and in time it might even cause you to doubt your doubt. We couldn't have that, could we?

Don  posted on  2005-03-16   22:52:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#374. To: Don (#368)

You want God to prove His existence to you say...in a courtroom? Or, maybe in your living room would be a better place for your immediate comfort? God is all around you and you can't see him because you believe He is there. I point out the heavens and everything here on earth as created things from a source, and you blow right past it. You don't want to face that issue. It might cause you to think, and in time it might even cause you to doubt your doubt. We couldn't have that, could we?

What is it with this courtroom fetish of yours?

You point to everything EXCEPT your god. If you want to prove the existence of something, then you have to actually present proof of THAT THING! You can't prove that the planet Venus exists by pointing to your Ford Pinto. But hey, if that's all you've got...

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-16   22:55:29 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#391. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#374)

All human speech, (verbal or written), that does not concern factual physical matters, and that is not mere social lubricant, is about a -- “Search For The Truth.” Men may call their particular activity the study of: History, Anthropology, Psychology, Philosophy, Theology, Sociology, Political Science, The Liberal Arts, etc, but the underlying reality is and has always been the same thing: A search for -- “THE TRUTH.”

You do not have to be an academic, or even know how to speel, “philosophy” to be so engaged for every time a man talks about the kinda guy he is, or comments on one football team’s superiority, or denounces some other person’s opinions on any subject, the man is engaged in -- A Search For “The Truth.”

Note that I put, “The Truth” in quotation marks, since even though, everybody believes it exists, there is no common agreement as to how it can be objectively recognized.

A man telling you about the kinda guy he is, is searching for the TRUTH about what he is via his endless, self-centered palaver, yet there is no pre-established standard set by which he will be able to ultimately recognize the truth about what he is as separate from all that he has said about himself that is not. And men debating the relative merits of different sports teams have no final, impartial model by which to make a conclusive determination of, “The Truth” about which is the better team. And verbal tug-of-battles in all other second reality areas such as: politics, religion, economics, morality, are in the same situation. The cellular activity in men’s brains called, the mind, is in a relentless search for, “The Truth,” but will admit to having no advance notion as to how it is to be correctly recognized -- if found. (The popularity of religions is based on their claims of having such knowledge from extrinsic, suprahuman sources; brain cells pointing their little fingers away from themselves as they insist that the image they just made up ACTUALLY EXISTS! -- “just over there somewhere.”)

Those of a more metaphysically wired mind of course, profess it to BE, “Metaphysical,” perhaps being SO removed from everyday life as to be beyond human comprehension, (but fun to think about anyway), but as is always the case, (if not the sixpack), to a clear channel eye -- the matter is not nearly so uncertain -- it’s just a matter of the mind being a creature of a reality of which it was also the creator -- which, pragmatically, results in a situation wherein, (as should be a surprise to no one), an eyeball in a Dali painting cannot, even with its very best efforts, ever see itself in context, or perceive its origin. The Little Mermaid can never recognize Christian Anderson as, “The Truth.”

The “Truth” is what happens.

There it is, and there is nothing else to say. The first word said after that is useless, and any after that -- misdirective.

But note: even after hearing the truth about, “The Truth,” your mind is probably not instantly Enlightened, and satisfied -- it still wants to argue and debate the issue; pick holes in the sentence; accuse it of gross “materialism,” (Ooooooo! the mystic’s ultimate insult & dismissal!)

But there it is and there it remains: The “Truth” is what happens.

The instinct mind of the brain knows this full well, always has, ‘s’never been in question; the entire life of your body operates by the principle; it is your hand selecting; your mouth opening; your throat swallowing; your stomach accepting, your bowels boweling so that life in your case – goes on, all based on this simple reality:

The truth is what happens.

…(and of course if you somehow ate poison -- you died, and that was the “truth” of what happened in that particular instance.)

The routine cellular activity that produces thought in our brains is not arranged in such a manner as to act like a mouth that can swallow itself…. ….which is about what it takes to, “Wake up”; ordinary thought cannot take in completely the reality of those five words: ”The truth is what happens” in that it is immediately unable to see that what EVER comment it may have in reaction thereto IS now a part of “what happened” -- that every time your thought denies the truth of the statement, your denial becomes part OF the truth of the statement.

Trying to shake your brain’s cellular activity of consciousness into a new mode of operating is truly akin to a mouth attempting to swallow itself, and staying frustrated, and unable to accomplish this is due simply to your failure to recognize how things are in your own neural headquarters.

Your heart, lungs and all the rest of your body know that -- “The Truth” is what happens, but the thoughts that normally occupy your mind never will -- they never can. The job of thoughts is to think about what happens in life in ways OTHER THAN it is, for only by so operating is man able to change the natural conditions of this planet to better accommodate his particular needs, and while neural activity is a boon to his physical life, it seems disinclined to do anything beneficial for itself, in the sense of self-scrutiny & revelation, the very stuff of specific interest to those men already being driven by their own neurons urging to, ”Search for The Truth” – (which in truth IS): a search for the truth about thought.

…and in this -- you get no natural help from your own thoughts. What a game! -- what a sport, the reality of which, few -- even among, “The Few” -- ever come to realize.

The simplicity of it completely confuses the mind; the brain does not produce thoughts for the purpose of dealing with simplicities -- Nay, on the contrary, thought is specifically constructed to work with the physical complexities that are the conditions of life, and to break them down into simpler, mentally manageable pieces, but thought, as now constructed, is not built nor intended for the contemplation of the simple and obvious,and is not programmed to have an interest in how thing ARE, but rather, as they COULD be; not interested in the “Truth” of what happens, but an open-ended, “Truth” that is forever arguable.

The “Truth” about things, to a man’s ordinary thinking, is whatever his thinking can momentarily imagine they COULD be, while the truth to superheated thinking is:

What ever happens -

-- not whatever the thoughts in your brain SAY happened; not whatever they say COULD have happened, and not anything they say SHOULD have happened; this is what makes up "the truth" of ordinary reality, but is not the one perceived by a man who can see-to-the-bottom-of-things; he takes into account only what happens, both -- “out there" (in life), and, ”in here” -- in what is apparently -- him.

Nothing that will ever naturally pass through your mind will ever reveal to you, “the truth” about things; only the things themselves can do that -- and they do so -- relentlessly! Life is revealing to you, "the Truth" at every moment, by letting you witness what actually -- happens.

It is then up to you whether you see it or not, and recognize that what you see happening is the long sought-for “Truth" -- and that there IS no other.

….simple, huh?! and neater’an the curl in a pig’s tail.

Oink! -- galahad -- oink.

2Trievers  posted on  2005-03-17   5:20:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#399. To: 2Trievers (#391)

Nothing that will ever naturally pass through your mind will ever reveal to you, “the truth” about things; only the things themselves can do that -- and they do so -- relentlessly! Life is revealing to you, "the Truth" at every moment, by letting you witness what actually -- happens.

I just knew Santa Claus was real since I saw him once at the shopping mall.

(Wow, that was a long post and I guess if it saves Santa Claus it was worth it).

noone222  posted on  2005-03-17   8:14:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#412. To: noone222, Continental Op, Don, All (#399)

Capps asked very politely if we would drop this subject for the time being before permanent hard feelings were created. I agreed to her request. I'm sure the topic will come up again and we'll have the opportunity to jump back in with both feet. But, until then -- be well. :-)

Mr Nuke Buzzcut  posted on  2005-03-17   12:06:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 412.

#420. To: Mr Nuke Buzzcut (#412)

Ok, citizen...be well. Joy, Joy.

Don  posted on  2005-03-17 16:02:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 412.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]